Lip Man 1

And regarding the salary cap issue. As long as the MLBPA is among the strongest unions in the world MLB will NEVER have a salary cap. I've very confident making that statement. So either you learn to live with it, adapt, spend money and succeed or you swim against the current, consistently lose and alienate your fan base. It's simply a matter of choice although I understand there are many more factors, stadium lease, concession / parking revenue, MLB as a whole almost literally printing money today with all the revenue streams. Frankly the desire to actually win among some owners may not be all that strong anymore. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 8, 2016 -> 12:08 PM) So what you're saying is that the 8th highest 25 man roster isn't good enough to compete? If the salary money isn't allocated properly, it really isn't. Part of it is the money is and has been spent on players who weren't that good. Dunn, LaRoche and Danks come to mind. How about the money paid to Jeff Keppinger a guy the Sox signed and paid with a bum shoulder? Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 8, 2016 -> 12:02 PM) Because of the awful imbalance in the salary structure with no salary cap that makes it difficult for teams to compete with the "richest" owners. JR has said many times that it's mostly who spends the most money has the best chance of winning. He has fought against that for decades. For what its worth, I have been told by a few folks who have worked for the Sox that money is actually the least concern. They are making it...a lot of it. JR's business philosophy has always been and he's never hid this, he's said it publicly, that he refuses to pay top dollar for managers / head coaches and he refuses to pay for unproven talent. (Which is perhaps why the Sox minor league system has been poor for at least 15 years.) You can agree or disagree with that attitude. What I'm saying is, if JR actually wanted to he could have a 140-150 million dollar payroll with no trouble. It's a matter of choice. MLB operates one way, JR another. That's his right...but its clearly not working that well. This comes back to something I and others have noted. JR wants to win, but he wants to win, HIS WAY. Mark

QUOTE (CB2.0 @ Jun 8, 2016 -> 12:46 PM) Wasn't Morneau the Twin who was burning Sox hats before a series 7-8 years ago? My how times have changed. Yes among other things (in commercials he referred to the Sox as well...) Mark

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Jun 8, 2016 -> 09:29 AM) Maybe Gonzalez or Putnam (though Gonzalez is scheduled to start tomorrow). Albers was awesome last year and for the first five or so weeks of this season. So while he may have been over-worked last month, his track record doesn't suggest that he's going to suck for the rest of the season. I read today where Robin said Putnam has a sore elbow again. I don't know what his status is or will be moving forward. Mark

QUOTE (LVSoxFan @ Jun 8, 2016 -> 10:10 AM) As we enter another week of it's the players!/It's the manager! arguing, I keep flashing back to something on the 2005 World Series DVD. In the beginning, as they're setting up the whole 88 years "curse" thing, somebody (I can't remember who) said "There wasn't any curse, just a lot of bad baseball teams." I LOL'd at that for its truth. I think the reality here is that we've got the perfect storm: a lacking team AND a manager who's not up to it--even though everybody keeps arguing it's one or the other. And when you look at it that way, whose doing is that? Yup, KW (with the approval of JR). I've said it before, I'll say it again and I've been saying it for years: as long as KW is running this team, expect more losing seasons. Even getting rid of him isn't a guarantee if JR's simply going to hire another yes-man. But this problem starts at the top, people. I was shocked to look at our record against the central in just the Ventura era--not to put it on Ventura, but for senior management to not feel any sort of urgency, because if we can't even win the central, duh, we aren't going to the Series or anywhere else. Now for my total arm-chair conspiracy theory: I read something by chance about White Sox attendance that startled me. I could never figure out how JR could keep fielding losers when it kills attendance and... doesn't that mean less money for him? What this thing said, if I read it right, was that certain taxes kick in when the Sox hit a minimum attendance for the season. If they do NOT hit that minimum, there is no tax, and it's a substantial break. I'm sure somebody here can present this much better than me. So, in this scenario (if I'm correct), perhaps the reason JR's okay with the non-stop losing is that he has a financial incentive to not win--or not make a serious stab at it financially, instead coming up with these KW-engineered experiments that if they win, great--and if they fail, tax break! Again, I could have misread that but usually when somebody keeps doing something that makes no sense, it's because they're making money doing it that way. Even tossing that theory aside, though: this organization needs a Cubs/Hawks-like housecleaning. This season is going to be brutal. It already is. With no end in sight. You are correct on the stadium agreement. If the Sox fail to meet certain attendance figures certain clauses do kick in. But I think it refers to them having to pay rent or give funds to the Illinois Sports Stadium Authority or pay upkeep expenses. The point is though, that in a way, the Sox do have an "incentive" financially to not draw a lot of fans (which is one thing they do VERY well!) Last summer the Tribune had a long and thorough story on all this. Mark

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 8, 2016 -> 07:43 AM) You're forgetting Cox, Torre, Leyland, etc. Baseball is a business. It used to be results-oriented. Let's not act like the 2011/12 and 2015 and 2016 teams were completely lacking in talent or expectations. It's easy to say that after the fact, with hindsight. We have had a losing record against all four AL Central teams since 2009. I can understand that with the Tigers and Detroit, but not with the Indians and a rebuilding Twins' organization as well. What I can't understand is the disparity in records head-to-head, and the fact we can almost never win key ALCD games in August and September (which goes back to the Guillen years, too). They've changed almost all of the players other than Sale and Quintana from 4 years ago and are still making the same sorts of mistakes and suffering from the same issues that plagued the team every month except for April, 2016. Right now, that one month seems more like an anomaly than a sea-change or progression in Ventura's managerial ability. We've also had the fifth worse record in the major leagues during his tenure, and almost all of the teams in the bottom 10-12 have changed managers/GM's at least once if not twice during that time. What is it that the White Sox see in Robin Ventura that nobody else does? In the end, it doesn't matter how much the organization believes in him if it's not backed up with results...with another 3rd or 4th place finish comes even less revenue to work with next season, and the downward cycle continues until there is no choice left but to trade Eaton/Sale/Q/Robertson and possibly Rodon. I'm pretty sure very few White Sox fans at that point would continue to support the manager and GM that put them in that position in the first place. JR can do what he likes, it's his team after all, but cutting off your nose to spite your face probably isn't the hallmark of most good businessmen. VERY well said. Kudos. Mark

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 10:14 PM) If they don't do it soon, the natives are going to wise up and turn on Hahn, KW and JR. Or Hahn/KW will turn on each other to blame the other for this current predicament. Somehow, Don Cooper will survive it all. Caul: Ironic that two years ago tonight the Sox announced Robin Ventura had been extended. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 01:51 PM) not only that but players are coming to the MLB with less games in the MILB in many cases. The learning in the MILB hasn't occurred. Very, VERY true...the days when guys like Joe Horlen and Gary Peters would spend five, six years in the minor leagues actually learing their craft are long gone. Another important reason to have a manager and a coaching staff that have the ability to instruct in these areas and get it through to the players, even if they have to almost literally hit them on the head to get it into them. Mark

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 02:32 PM) Even before I got married and had kids, I found it important to have at least one other hobby besides sports. It's much easier to stay sane that way. Good for you, different strokes for different folks as the old saying goes. Mark

This is a positive move. Sands brought very little if anything to the table. Was basically a waste of a roster spot. Mark

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 01:50 PM) You don't have many problems/issues. That's me. Mark

QUOTE (captain54 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 11:47 AM) Here's an idea.. .just throwing it out there.. how about the Sox acquire players who already possess those skills, or develop players to acquire those skills? Unfortunately in baseball as in many other sports, fundamental skills have gone by the wayside in favor of an attitude of "what will get me on ESPN highlights?" Mark

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 12:49 PM) Hmmm, hard to tell reading your posts. The Sox are also one of the more prominent parts of my life, always have been and likely always will be, but I take such a different approach to things than you. But as you said, everyone is different. Just don't think pointing out every single negative thing helps the picture, really, and certainly sucks out the enjoyment (at least would for me). Which is why, as I told an earlier poster, I'll let the results on the field and the front office moves do the talking from that perspective from now on. That should make a segment of the readers happy. So it's win / win for all! Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 12:35 PM) It isn't gospel for sure. But in terms of it being a third priority in life, I will never understand that at all. Seeing something like that just blows my mind. As Kenny Williams would say "it is what it is..." I've got a comfortable life, doing what I want to do broadcasting-wise and I'm very content save for the way the Sox are performing. I don't know what more someone could want out of life. I'll be 61 this August and have been "exposed" to many different ways of thinking over the years. I do those folks the courtesy of hearing them out and listening to their point of view but in the end I'll do what I think works best for me. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 12:21 PM) I can see that. I think working for so many different pro and amateur sports teams has taken some of the intensity out of my "must win" attitude. For years it was just keep them on the field or get them back ASAP. After awhile it becomes, is the one more win really worth all of this? I understand it it from the athletes and management point of view but from a long term health position it can be very different. It almost sounds like you were a team doctor or a team physical therapist. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 12:08 PM) That's fine. Everyone has their own point of view. I was just joking about the response to your post. I love the game of baseball. i don't like to see the Sox lose but I can still enjoy a game if they lose unless the play is really awful. Understood and I respect that view. Sometimes I wish I could be more like that but I'm not. As I explained to South I happened to grow up perhaps in the only time in franchise history where if they lost (i.e. at the end of the season they actually had a losing record) it was inconceivable. That tends to color how you view things. And given the success the Sox had in that time period that view wasn't necessarily a bad thing in my opinion. I go back to late May 1961 when the Sox lost a DH to Baltimore and for a day or so dropped into last place for the first time since 1950. They'd finish the year in fourth place with another winning record. This actually happened. Some aldermen in a Chicago city council meeting brought up the fact the Sox were losing, in last place and thought the city should allocate some "disaster funds" for them. (Now I'm sure they were joking) That really reflected the overall attitude of the city though about what was expected from the Sox. The 'motion' by the way was defeated with the alderman from the Cubs ward saying it wasn't fair, that the Cubs were a disaster for decades. LOL (Wonder what would happen if they said something like that today? LOL) Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 11:50 AM) Bingo. The games are entertainment, not life, death, or any of life's other problems. It is an escape from that. If it stresses you out, or angers you for any real period of time, you aren't getting out of it, what you should be getting out of it. South: With respect that's your opinion. Your thinking isn't gospel and isn't set in stone from Moses. It depends on the individual. Again no offense, people are different, they have certain values and approach things differently. To me my passion for the White Sox is, was and always will be the third most important / prominent part of my life behind my wife and my son and his family. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 11:42 AM) I guess this is the difference. I still love the game of baseball. Win or lose I still enjoy watching and going to games. The games are more enjoyable when they win but really just love to watch baseball. I think the best way to sum up my feelings PTATC is to say I like baseball but I love the White Sox. And when the Sox are doing poorly baseball has very little appeal for me. I don't care to watch other successful teams and wonder why it is the Sox can't do the same thing. Just the way I'm wired. Winning means more to me personally that the sport itself. Not saying you are right or wrong just that we take different approaches to this. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 11:36 AM) I will if you stop posting every single negative thought you can come up with about the team. Done and done. I'll let the on field and front office actions speak for themselves. I'm serious about this. You get your wish. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) I remember how common that line of thought was in the early 2000's. You are quite literally the first person I have seen bring it up and say they might have been wrong about. Everyone else just pretends it never was said. South: Again I've always placed a lot of weight towards having a winning season. Some might say to much and that my thought process limits expectations. They say attitudes are shaped as a child and you have to remember I was born in 1955. I was vagely a where of the 59 World Series but remember nothing specific. I do start to remember things about the Sox in 1960 for example and from there on out. Went to my first game in 1963. Remember for me, growing up, I never even experienced a 'losing' season until 1968. That summer I was 12 about to be 13 that August. That's an amazingly long time to grow up without the Sox ever having a bad team. I submit that simply because that probably has a lot to do with why I'd have to consider 'giving up the World Series win' if it meant another "Golden Age" for wont of a better word. Mark

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) If the White Sox had the advantage of the current playoff format, they definitely would have won at least one World Series title over that time period LIP is referring to. Heck, they SHOULD have by all rights won the 1994 World Series, the one that never happened. (Thanks, JR!) But as usual, we should still be loyal 11 years later, because, "2005!" And yet for some strange reason, ALMOST everyone here supports the idea of getting rid of Williams to let Rick Hahn run things, the same Rick Hahn who has shown us what exactly in terms of talent evaluation (other than the Adam Eaton trade) over his tenure? But logically, without KW to meddle/interfere like the villain in a Scooby Doo cartoon, we would have made the playoffs numerous times if Williams and JR just got out of the way and let Hahn do his job. It's hard for me to place a lot of blame on Rick yet because fairly or unfairly I simply don't know if he has a free hand to run things the way he wishes to. Hahn has talked about rebuilding the minor leagues and having "sustained" success and he did a very good job of beginning to cut out the dead weight in 2013-14. It appeared that his plan was taking shape. But then you have the almost 180 degree rotation to what the Sox did the off season before 2015 and it just makes you wonder. Those moves seemed to be a disconnect between what history showed he was doing and what he wanted to do to what actually happened. So honestly I don't know what to think right now. The only way to know for sure would be for Kenny to be completely cut out of the organization and then see what history shows after Hahn had complete control. Since that isn't in play, I think its reasonable to say the jury is still out on him. Mark

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 10:57 AM) The Braves really were failures. Yankees, too, since that run in the mid to late 90's. Mid to late 90's Indians. All those great Mariners' teams. Twins making the playoffs 6 out of 9 seasons as a small market team that was almost relocated by MLB. We basically have had the same degree of success, if not more. Kenny Williams deserves another promotion, just for 2005. Well played sir! Mark

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 10:51 AM) Ok, but again the Indians havent won in like 60 plus years, Twins havent won since 91, Detroit since what, 84? Dont come in stumping success for these teams when they havent even grabbed the brass ring in decades. We all want consistent success. Can you read that? WE ALL WANT CONSISTENT SUCCESS. As white sox fans, we all know consistent success has been nonexistent and want it to change. But thanks for pointing out every chance you get that they dont have consistent success. Without you telling me every chance you get, I dont think i would know. Kyle Very happy to provide that service to you. We all do what we can! Mark

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jun 7, 2016 -> 10:50 AM) Nobody's talking about the Marlins or the past hundred years. You are acting as if the Twins of the '00s, the Tigers of the '00s and '10s and the Indians of the '90s were much more successful than the Sox since the '90s. And the fact of the matter is none of those teams won a World Series. Making the playoffs doesn't mean s*** unless you win it all. Winning a World Series trumps everything. Would you trade the '05 World Series for the Tigers 2 appearances and a couple additional playoff appearances? I highly doubt it. Your last point is very interesting. At the time I was among those who felt that if the Sox won the World Series and then sucked for the next ten years it would be worth it. Having (ironically) basically gone through that exact scenario, now I really wonder. The Sox from 1951-1967 were one of the best, most stable franchises in all of MLB. 17 straight winning seasons, seven of them with 90+ wins yet they only made the World Series once and lost it. To be perfectly honest with you if the devil offered me that scenario today I might very well take it...at least I'd see very good baseball and know that more than likely when the season was done the team was going to win a lot more games then they lost. I'd have to think hard about that one. And one final point, you're chances of winning the World Series are zero if you don't even make the playoffs. Those teams you mentioned at least had a shot to do so by making it. I'd gladly take my chances of the Sox not winning it if at least they could get there to try. Mark