9 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Were the Jesse White Tumblers already booked somewhere else?  I thought that used to be the Bulls go to performance.

When Quick change passed away they just gave up trying to replace him I guess 

7 hours ago, greg775 said:

I wish you or somebody could write an essay telling me exactly how the Sox make money. Awful TV ratings, tiny crowds, I'd assume very few jackets and hats and uniform tops sold. How in the bleep can this team make money? Does parking dollars matter that much to the bottom line? Shared TV money?

You wouldn’t read the essay to understand the problem that we describe.  Nobody needs to be led by the nose here but you, everyone knows the stakes here because we have been talking about them for years 

1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

BamTech?

https://www.nbcsports.com/mlb/news/each-owner-will-get-at-least-50-million-in-early-2018-from-he-sale-of-bamtech

Yes, it was BAMTech, which was sold by the MLB to Disney.  Each team received $50 million.  But that was still chump change compared to what MLB teams get annually through revenue sharing — ~$200+ million.  Just owning a team pays for itself and earns money.  There’s reasons why teams maintain such low payrolls and it wasn’t always to tank for draft picks.

Edited November 25, 20241 yr by WhiteSox2023

6 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Yes, it was BAMTech, which was sold by the MLB to Disney.  Each team received $50 million.  But that was still chump change compared to what MLB teams get annually through revenue sharing — ~$200+ million.  Just owning a team pays for itself and earns money.  There’s reasons why teams maintain such low payrolls and it wasn’t always to tank for draft picks.

With revenue sharing the teams that are trying to win should be mad at the Sox and want them contracted. Cause the Sox's ineptness affected the race. The Sox for instance were solely responsible for the Royals being over .500 during the regular season. The Sox actually were key factors in some teams making the playoffs cause they beat up the Sox so badly. No question Chicago refused to field a big league team this season. That unit was bush league, independent league baseball.

25 minutes ago, greg775 said:

With revenue sharing the teams that are trying to win should be mad at the Sox and want them contracted. Cause the Sox's ineptness affected the race. The Sox for instance were solely responsible for the Royals being over .500 during the regular season. The Sox actually were key factors in some teams making the playoffs cause they beat up the Sox so badly. No question Chicago refused to field a big league team this season. That unit was bush league, independent league baseball.

The teams trying to compete make more local money and also get the same revenue sharing money.  The Sox and other teams not trying to win are just another easy opponent for the teams trying to win.

48 minutes ago, greg775 said:

With revenue sharing the teams that are trying to win should be mad at the Sox and want them contracted. Cause the Sox's ineptness affected the race. The Sox for instance were solely responsible for the Royals being over .500 during the regular season. The Sox actually were key factors in some teams making the playoffs cause they beat up the Sox so badly. No question Chicago refused to field a big league team this season. That unit was bush league, independent league baseball.

Funny all those years when Tampa Bay was a joke I never saw or read anything about how that was unfair the Yankees and Red Sox were taking advantage of that situation to pad their win totals and make the playoffs every year. 

15 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Funny all those years when Tampa Bay was a joke I never saw or read anything about how that was unfair the Yankees and Red Sox were taking advantage of that situation to pad their win totals and make the playoffs every year. 

The Yankees are getting $15 million to let the Rays play in their spring training facility this year.

1 hour ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

The teams trying to compete make more local money and also get the same revenue sharing money.  The Sox and other teams not trying to win are just another easy opponent for the teams trying to win.

True dat. ... You can only imagine my frustration that the Royals, located in a city way smaller than Chicago, and a market way smaller than Chicago, actually try to win. They made a trade this week that they think gives them a true leadoff man (we shall see) and some other guy. They have a surplus in pitching so they dealt Singer to the Reds, who similarly appear to be trying to improve their team. Meanwhile the Sox have the nerve to apparently have nothing in mind except signing some guys with the upside of a Pham and 'maybe' dealing Crochet and Robert for guys who won't help the team for 3-4 years. Sad. ... And the Sox in a hiding in the basement way of trying to do business won't even have a Soxfest where fans can vent? Hell in theory getting fans together in one setting 2-3 days 'might' sell some season tickets. What a paper bag organization. Keep losing, White Sox.

Edited November 25, 20241 yr by greg775

4 hours ago, greg775 said:

With revenue sharing the teams that are trying to win should be mad at the Sox and want them contracted. Cause the Sox's ineptness affected the race. The Sox for instance were solely responsible for the Royals being over .500 during the regular season. The Sox actually were key factors in some teams making the playoffs cause they beat up the Sox so badly. No question Chicago refused to field a big league team this season. That unit was bush league, independent league baseball.

No Independent League team could have won 40 games vs an MLB schedule.

2 hours ago, oldsox said:

No Independent League team could have won 40 games vs an MLB schedule.

I dunno. Maybe an Indy could nab 25 wins then. I think a AA team could win 40 for sure. I hear you though.

On 11/26/2024 at 8:08 AM, oldsox said:

No Independent League team could have won 40 games vs an MLB schedule.

https://www.milb.com/st-paul/news/boushley-baffles-storm-chasers-saints-take-down-minor-leagues-best-team-6-2

Maybe the Saint Paul Saints could have the 2024 White Sox a run for their money...

That would have been more interesting to watch than the actual season.

Or the Savannah Banana Slugs simply for entertainment/marketing/sideshows.

BA's JJ Cooper published his Rule 5 preview today. https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/2024-rule-5-draft-preview-top-players-to-know/

There are no Sox listed, so it would be a surprise if they lose someone, but who knows?

On 11/25/2024 at 1:55 PM, greg775 said:

With revenue sharing the teams that are trying to win should be mad at the Sox and want them contracted. Cause the Sox's ineptness affected the race. The Sox for instance were solely responsible for the Royals being over .500 during the regular season. The Sox actually were key factors in some teams making the playoffs cause they beat up the Sox so badly. No question Chicago refused to field a big league team this season. That unit was bush league, independent league baseball.

no they weren't. amusingly enough, the Royals were over .500 because they want a new ballpark. Their dumb ownership just did it a year too late (dumb for even letting it go in front of voters). 

30 minutes ago, nrockway said:

no they weren't. amusingly enough, the Royals were over .500 because they want a new ballpark. Their dumb ownership just did it a year too late (dumb for even letting it go in front of voters). 

The White Sox want a new park and  they weren’t over .260 let alone .500.

4 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

The White Sox want a new park and  they weren’t over .260 let alone .500.

Sure, but if the Sox ever get public money, it’s not going in front of the voters. Illinois is different than Missouri that way. The team will figure something out with the legislature. I might start advocating to my state rep about what I want that to look like. Thus far, my plea that the state or city take over the failing team has fallen on deaf ears. We did it with General Motors, we’re talking about doing it with ComEd, why not the White Sox?

58 minutes ago, nrockway said:

no they weren't. amusingly enough, the Royals were over .500 because they want a new ballpark. Their dumb ownership just did it a year too late (dumb for even letting it go in front of voters). 

The Royals were 86-76 last year. They were 12-1 against the White Sox.

Without their games against the White Sox, they were 74-75. So they were definitely under .500 without the White Sox.

Had the White Sox not been the worst team in recent baseball history, the Royals are a .500 team. While I want to admire them for the fact that they actually got better by spending in FA, and .500 is a big jump over their 2023 team, it is unavoidable that they were an average team that looked a lot better because one of their opponents was among the worst teams in baseball history.

8 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

The Royals were 86-76 last year. They were 12-1 against the White Sox.

Without their games against the White Sox, they were 74-75. So they were definitely under .500 without the White Sox.

Had the White Sox not been the worst team in recent baseball history, the Royals are a .500 team. While I want to admire them for the fact that they actually got better by spending in FA, and .500 is a big jump over their 2023 team, it is unavoidable that they were an average team that looked a lot better because one of their opponents was among the worst teams in baseball history.

So if the White Sox are an average to good team, they are reversing that record and going 12-1 against the Royals? That seems atypical and unlikely. Looks like like they could've gone 3-10 against the Sox and been above .500. I figured the Royals offseason decisions were going to be stupid and amount to nothing, and I was wrong. They were actually a good team. They are probably still making the postseason, they especially are if you take the worst team out of every other division like we apparently are doing only for the AL Central in this thought experiment.

Credit where credit is due, I think, my point is you don't need to poopoo another team in order to trash the Sox. They make it easy enough. I don't think the Royals are actually that good outside of Witt, but the AL Central is not that competitive and I tend to think they lucked into some wins, as opposed to the Sox simply handed them 12 free wins in games they otherwise would have lost.

I think we take precedence a little too seriously. I blame our legal system. You can't really predict these things based on last year's data or even three years of data. There are too many compounding factors. A lot of fans didn't think Crochet would pitch 100+ innings solely because it's typically uncommon for a guy to go from 54, 0, 12 innings pitched to 146. Of course, your elbow doesn't know how many times you threw a baseball or what the arbitrary limits are, it's context dependent.

This is to say, the Royals made a big leap and went from a bottom-feeder to a playoff team. They did it in an unprecedented way, but I think it's underselling their team to say the Sox are the reason why they were a surprisingly good team. I think they got lucky and won't be as good next year. Cleveland continually proves to be the only team worth worrying about.

9 minutes ago, nrockway said:

So if the White Sox are an average to good team, they are reversing that record and going 12-1 against the Royals? That seems atypical and unlikely.

No, you should check your math. Had they gone 7-6 against the White Sox, they would have finished .500. A normal average white Sox team and most of the AL Central is more average.

If the White Sox went 12-1 against them, they would have finished 75-87.

12 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

No, you should check your math. Had they gone 7-6 against the White Sox, they would have finished .500. A normal average white Sox team and most of the AL Central is more average.

If the White Sox went 12-1 against them, they would have finished 75-87.

You got me, whoops, but you missed the forest for the trees. Why even write a couple paragraphs if you just pick out one 'gotcha' thing? Because I'm bored and a little under the weather, I guess. You did get me though. Still, you could reply to the actual point being made. If you're going to make this sort of analysis, you need to do it for every team and do it over multiple seasons. There are bad teams every season, I bet you could find a World Series champion that had a lousy opponent or two in their division. Bad teams will always 'help' their opponents, but it's not really fair to single out one team. I'm calling on someone to check 1962 box scores: did the Dodgers have a better record than the Giants against the Mets? Maybe the Dodgers win that World Series and change the history books...

Frankly, this logic holds even less weight since the scheduling changes.