The Worst Owner in Sports? The case for Jerry Reinsdorf

[WhiteSox2023]

2 hours ago, WestEddy said:

I'm not embarrassed. 

Reinsdorf is not a good baseball team owner. There are worse owners in baseball. His situation is unique, in that he's burned bridges with his attitude, and has made some bad business decisions that have run out the clock on his ownership. He's also made bad baseball decisions which are too numerous to list out. 

A new owner will run the business differently. It would not surprise me for Ishbia to take over, do some fan-friendly stuff, pour money into player payroll, win, then suddenly realize he needs to tighten the belt on player salaries. And either Ishbia or Reinsdorf, I'm going to guess the White Sox will suddenly be in a stadium crisis where the city and state need to stuff his pockets with free money, land, infrastructure, zoning changes, and labor law waivers. 

Jerry knows and laughs every time he checks his bank statements.

[77 Hitmen]

10 hours ago, kwolf said:

No argument exists to put Jerry or anyone ahead of the Owner of the Pirates as worst owner. The Pirates are an organization with fewer World Series titles, fewer division titles than the White Sox since that man took over. An organization who releases players a merely few PAs or IPS before having to give the player a measly 50K bonus, an organization who removed a Clemente tribute for an advertisement, who sent fan purchased bricks to a landfill, a franchise run by a moron General Manager who has no clue as to how to value the few salable assets the Pirates have. I am a White Sox fan living in Pittsburgh and maybe seeing it first hand is more impactful, but when I see the chicanery going on here I always think, "at least the White Sox are not this."

One thing that I really feel bad about for Pirates fans is that Bob Nutting (the team owner you are referring to) is only 63 years old.   He could be the team owner for the next 20 years.

At least we have an end to JR's ownership in sight with the plan to sell to the Ishbias between 2029 to 2034.  Still not soon enough, but at least it's in the foreseeable future.  

[kwolf]

13 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

One thing that I really feel bad about for Pirates fans is that Bob Nutting (the team owner you are referring to) is only 63 years old.   He could be the team owner for the next 20 years.

At least we have an end to JR's ownership in sight with the plan to sell to the Ishbias between 2029 to 2034.  Still not soon enough, but at least it's in the foreseeable future.  

 

Yea that's a really great point. I think he has also said he plans on leaving the Pirates to his daughters. So the Nutting family will likely own that team when the next ice age appears. People here are so over this franchise. I wonder if Nutting is gonna try to kill fan interest and then take some sort of payout from some other city to move the team. It's unconscionable to think the Pirates would cease to exist in Pittsburgh, but with this owner I don't put ANYTHING past him (outside of spending money to make the team better).  

I am way more confident that the White Sox will figure it out first. Both teams are similar, neither can hit. LOL. 

 

 

 

Edited October 28 by kwolf

[caulfield12]

29 minutes ago, kwolf said:

 

Yea that's a really great point. I think he has also said he plans on leaving the Pirates to his daughters. So the Nutting family will likely own that team when the next ice age appears. People here are so over this franchise. I wonder if Nutting is gonna try to kill fan interest and then take some sort of payout from some other city to move the team. It's unconscionable to think the Pirates would cease to exist in Pittsburgh, but with this owner I don't put ANYTHING past him (outside of spending money to make the team better).  

I am way more confident that the White Sox will figure it out first. Both teams are similar, neither can hit. LOL. 

 

 

 

The Pirates at least have the makings of a dominant young rotation...Skenes Chandler J.Jones Ashcraft Keller etc.

Edited October 28 by caulfield12

[WBWSF]

12 hours ago, kwolf said:

 

Yea that's a really great point. I think he has also said he plans on leaving the Pirates to his daughters. So the Nutting family will likely own that team when the next ice age appears. People here are so over this franchise. I wonder if Nutting is gonna try to kill fan interest and then take some sort of payout from some other city to move the team. It's unconscionable to think the Pirates would cease to exist in Pittsburgh, but with this owner I don't put ANYTHING past him (outside of spending money to make the team better).  

I am way more confident that the White Sox will figure it out first. Both teams are similar, neither can hit. LOL. 

 

 

 

I wouldn't think the Pirates are moving anywhere. They pay only $500,000 a year for their stadium lease.

[77 Hitmen]

17 hours ago, kwolf said:

 

Yea that's a really great point. I think he has also said he plans on leaving the Pirates to his daughters. So the Nutting family will likely own that team when the next ice age appears. People here are so over this franchise. I wonder if Nutting is gonna try to kill fan interest and then take some sort of payout from some other city to move the team. It's unconscionable to think the Pirates would cease to exist in Pittsburgh, but with this owner I don't put ANYTHING past him (outside of spending money to make the team better).  

I am way more confident that the White Sox will figure it out first. Both teams are similar, neither can hit. LOL. 

The one thing that probably makes the Pirates future in Pittsburgh secure is their jewel of a ballpark.  A number of critics rank it the best stadium in the league...and it's certainly in the top 3 for many people.  During that short period about 10 years ago when the Pirates were good and made the playoffs, they averaged 30k per game.  So, fan support is potentially there.

It would be a major embarrassment to MLB if they let the Pirates leave and the league abandoned such a great ballpark.  Stadium-wise, it's pretty much the exact opposite of the situation with the A's and Expos when they moved.  And I hate to say it Sox fans, but if the Sox somehow ended up moving out of town (which I am NOT predicting is going to happen), nobody outside our fanbase is going to shed a tear over losing Rate Field and nobody is going to wonder why the team couldn't succeed there.  

Too bad the league can't just force a sale of teams like the Pirates, A's and the White Sox where the owner refuses to invest properly in the franchise.

Edited October 28 by 77 Hitmen

[Snopek]

16 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

The Pirates at least have the makings of a dominant young rotation...Skenes Chandler J.Jones Ashcraft Keller etc.

Looking forward to seeing them build around that core with key additions like Gio Urshela and Randal Grichuk.

[Bob Sacamano]

16 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

The Pirates at least have the makings of a dominant young rotation...Skenes Chandler J.Jones Ashcraft Keller etc.

And Paul Skenes went 10-10 with an era under 2. Need to score more runs.

5 minutes ago, Snopek said:

Looking forward to seeing them build around that core with key additions like Gio Urshela and Randal Grichuk.

This

[Lip Man 1]

4 hours ago, Bob Sacamano said:

And Paul Skenes went 10-10 with an era under 2. Need to score more runs.

This

Welcome to the White Sox pitchers in the 1960's.

[Bob Sacamano]

10 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Welcome to the White Sox pitchers in the 1960's.

Not sure what that has to do with Pirates horrible offense that they will not add to this offseason but ok.

[chitownsportsfan]

27 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Not sure what that has to do with Pirates horrible offense that they will not add to this offseason but ok.

If god willing and the creek don't rise in 30 years if I'm 70 and posting here I will DEF be reminding people I was alive for a period 60 years earlier. I'll be making every Sammy Sosa was once a White Sox post possible.

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Not sure what that has to do with Pirates horrible offense that they will not add to this offseason but ok.

I read it as, "The White Sox where horribly run in the early 60's and wouldn't get better until Bill Veeck sold the team to a rich owner."

[caulfield12]

32 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

I read it as, "The White Sox where horribly run in the early 60's and wouldn't get better until Bill Veeck sold the team to a rich owner."

Wrong.

The White Sox had a great run in the 50s and 60s, but just didn't have enough offense to compete with the Yankees during that stretch.

1959 the lone exception.

 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHW/index.shtml

See team records in 1963/64/65.

Edited October 29 by caulfield12

[WestEddy]

26 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Wrong.

The White Sox had a great run in the 50s and 60s, but just didn't have enough offense to compete with the Yankees during that stretch.

1959 the lone exception.

 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHW/index.shtml

See team records in 1963/64/65.

lol

Edited October 29 by WestEddy

[kwolf]

22 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

The Pirates at least have the makings of a dominant young rotation...Skenes Chandler J.Jones Ashcraft Keller etc.

 

Barco as well who also looks legit, Burrows looked good last year too and they could get a rebound from Harrington who went from great in 2024 to bluh in 2025. That said, the Sox have Smith. Schultz, McDougal and Taylor could end up back starting at some point. So it's not baren in Chicago as far as arms, but they have to get there. 

[kwolf]

6 hours ago, Snopek said:

Looking forward to seeing them build around that core with key additions like Gio Urshela and Randal Grichuk.

HAHA. Snopek must work in the Pirates front office. 

[kwolf]

8 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

The one thing that probably makes the Pirates future in Pittsburgh secure is their jewel of a ballpark.  A number of critics rank it the best stadium in the league...and it's certainly in the top 3 for many people.  During that short period about 10 years ago when the Pirates were good and made the playoffs, they averaged 30k per game.  So, fan support is potentially there.

It would be a major embarrassment to MLB if they let the Pirates leave and the league abandoned such a great ballpark.  Stadium-wise, it's pretty much the exact opposite of the situation with the A's and Expos when they moved.  And I hate to say it Sox fans, but if the Sox somehow ended up moving out of town (which I am NOT predicting is going to happen), nobody outside our fanbase is going to shed a tear over losing Rate Field and nobody is going to wonder why the team couldn't succeed there.  

Too bad the league can't just force a sale of teams like the Pirates, A's and the White Sox where the owner refuses to invest properly in the franchise.

 

You are right, that ballpark is legit. I think the #1 park is up between Pittsburgh and Frisco. I mean basically the Pacific Ocean is hard to beat. I was half being melodramatic about the Pirates moving. As a Sox fan we've seen actual legit worries they'd leave Chicago. There is zero evidence or move for Bob Nothing to move the team, but with that guy who would turn over your sofa cushions looking for loose change if he ever visited you I don't put anything past him. He's among the world's worst owners in sports history. 

The Bidwells were pretty horrible in St. Louis for 100 years with their football team, but even they eventually figured it out on some level. I'd have to give it some thought as to the worst owners ever, there may be some worse than Nothing, but it's a very exclusive club. 

 

[caulfield12]

24 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Do you mean to tell me that everybody's lying when they talk about the White Sox' culture of losing, then? 

See 1968-1982 ('77 the exception)...1984-1989...1994-1999...2013-2019, 2022-2025.

The culture wasn't one of losing until the last two decades.

But now also identified with the very worst record, knocking off the 1962 expansion Mets.

 

Somehow I have my doubts you're singlehandedly going to turn the tide back with your current crusade.

Edited October 29 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

3 minutes ago, kwolf said:

 

You are right, that ballpark is legit. I think the #1 park is up between Pittsburgh and Frisco. I mean basically the Pacific Ocean is hard to beat. I was half being melodramatic about the Pirates moving. As a Sox fan we've seen actual legit worries they'd leave Chicago. There is zero evidence or move for Bob Nothing to move the team, but with that guy who would turn over your sofa cushions looking for loose change if he ever visited you I don't put anything past him. He's among the world's worst owners in sports history. 

The Bidwells were pretty horrible in St. Louis for 100 years with their football team, but even they eventually figured it out on some level. I'd have to give it some thought as to the worst owners ever, there may be some worse than Nothing, but it's a very exclusive club. 

 

Pitt with the better overall stadium, SF with the better surrounding environment.

Although it's hard to beat all the bridges in Pitt, especially the Clemente Bridge.

[kwolf]

2 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Pitt with the better overall stadium, SF with the better surrounding environment.

Although it's hard to beat all the bridges in Pitt, especially the Clemente Bridge.

 

Surprised they didn't sell rights to the Clemente bridge and rename it. lol. I kid, the bridge is not property of Bob Nothing. Still, shocked he isn't trying to gain some sort of monetary advantage for it being named after a Pirates player.  

Mark Cuban buying this team would have been golden for this city. He's from Pittsburgh and while I don't think he'd have spent like Los Angeles, Inc., you can bet your ass he'd have removed incompetent hacks like the current GM and would have NOT pulled some of the s%*# saving 50K like the current mass of morons have done, multiple times. 

[Lip Man 1]

4 hours ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Not sure what that has to do with Pirates horrible offense that they will not add to this offseason but ok.

Just the fact that the Sox had by far the best pitching at least in the A.L. and maybe MLB with the exception of the Dodgers for a number of years and had good, solid, competitive seasons but simply couldn't get over the hump because they were always a hitter or two lacking. I was comparing that to your post about the Pirates having good pitching but little hitting.

Sorry that offended you.

By the way the Sox made serious legit efforts during that time period to get Frank Robinson, Carl Yaztremski and Hawk Harrelson to no avail.

Edited October 29 by Lip Man 1

[Lip Man 1]

15 hours ago, WestEddy said:

I read it as, "The White Sox where horribly run in the early 60's and wouldn't get better until Bill Veeck sold the team to a rich owner."

Ah Westy...at it again I see, going off the deep end again.

Considering the current state of the franchise no Sox fan of any age who knows anything about the history of the organization should be complaining about the time period from 1951-1967. That was truly a "Golden Age" for the team.

But you do you 🤡

Edited October 29 by Lip Man 1

[WestEddy]

56 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Ah Westy...add it again I see, going off the deep again.

Considering the current state of the franchise no Sox fan of any age who knows anything about the history of the organization should be complaining about the time period from 1951-1967. That was truly a "Golden Age" for the team.

But you do you 🤡

I was told that the goal posts should move, and real sports fans should expect more and more from their team. Seems like all the old guys loved missing the World Series every year after '59. Is that emoji the clown who gave you balloons in the stands instead of World Series Championships?

And hey, a quick search tells me that guys like Seaver and Carlton were 16 around 1960. Why wasn't Veeck scouting and signing them? Was he too busy at the circus scouting the next year's distraction from him missing the World Series again? 

Edited October 29 by WestEddy

[Lip Man 1]

25 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

I was told that the goal posts should move, and real sports fans should expect more and more from their team. Seems like all the old guys loved missing the World Series every year after '59. Is that emoji the clown who gave you balloons in the stands instead of World Series Championships?

And hey, a quick search tells me that guys like Seaver and Carlton were 16 around 1960. Why wasn't Veeck scouting and signing them? Was he too busy at the circus scouting the next year's distraction from him missing the World Series again? 

Westy: During the time period I was referring to Veeck owned the team for a grand total of 2 1/2 years.

You'll have to try again my friend.

Veeck had little to do with the time period overall from 51-67.

I wasn't referring to him or bringing him up at all so I don't see how you could connect the two.

But you do you! 😆

[77 Hitmen]

4 hours ago, WestEddy said:

I read it as, "The White Sox where horribly run in the early 60's and wouldn't get better until Bill Veeck sold the team to a rich owner."

White Sox W-L records in the early 60s:

1960:  87-67 (equivalent to 91 wins in a 162-game schedule)
1961:  86-76
1962:  85-77
1963:  94-68
1964:  98-64
1965:  95-67

That doesn't look horribly run to me.  If there were divisions back then, some of those teams almost certainly would have made the post-season.  If we see a half-decade stretch like that any time soon, Sox fans will think we've died and gone to heaven.