israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Dude ... Twins made the playoffs, their payroll was less than ours. It's not all about payroll, deep down I think you know this, but the payroll issue is something convenient for you to hang your hat on. Maybe research the revenues as well for a fair comparison. Ya think maybe the Yankees/Red Sox/Cardinals have higher revenues? Cardinals were generally picked for 3rd place, they hit lightning in a bottle this year. Cardinal fans support that team no matter what ... unlike lots of White Sox fans. Who said anything about "blind faith"? I laid out a scenario of what I expect from the franchise ... clearly, logically, and specifically. How does that equate to blind faith? Because you say it does?? I'll answer your other post here too. Core young players: Carlos Lee. Paul Konerko. Mark Buehrle. Aaron Rowand. I'll even add Fred Garcia to this. Damaso Marte. Maybe Joe Crede. Developed from the farm system: Carlos Lee. Mark Buehrle. Aaron Rowand. Joe Crede. They picked up several other good players from other team's farm systems, which in fairness should be mentioned: Paul Konerko. Damaso Marte. The two young relievers who did a decent job this year. I'm not defending their scouting and drafting, they need to do better. That's where I want them to spend more money. Twins made the playoffs, cuz the Sox sucked. The Cards and Astros play in much smaller markets than the Sox do. And while the 'Stros were busy signing Pettitte and Clemens and trading for Beltran, we are "busy" NOT signing our #1 starter from the prior year, NOT getting a #5 starter, and trading for CARL EVERETT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Not losing Maggs by choice.. and last time I checked Lee was still a member of the Sox. Why don't you give your "the sky is falling" sermon a rest. :sleep If you don't like it, ignore it!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 If you don't like it, ignore it!!! Not a chance. It's way more fun to call out the silliness and draw attention to the constant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Twins made the playoffs, cuz the Sox sucked. The Cards and Astros play in much smaller markets than the Sox do. And while the 'Stros were busy signing Pettitte and Clemens and trading for Beltran, we are "busy" NOT signing our #1 starter from the prior year, NOT getting a #5 starter, and trading for CARL EVERETT! "Twins made the playoffs, cuz the Sox sucked." Your comment was on payroll, I answered it in terms of payroll. Let's talk about the Mets then. "The Cards and Astros play in much smaller markets than the Sox do. And while the 'Stros were busy signing Pettitte and Clemens and trading for Beltran, we are "busy" NOT signing our #1 starter from the prior year, NOT getting a #5 starter, and trading for CARL EVERETT!" Not so sure that St. Louis doesn't have comparable revenues to the Sox, don't know for certain though. I do know there's no way anyone expected them to win 105 games and play in the NLCS. They spent less than the Cubs. They also had career years from some guys ... they hit lightining in a bottle. Astros ... do you honestly think the Sox could have gotten ANY of those three? Pettite has a Houston connection and his wife wanted badly to go there. He's also got a bum elbow. Their farm system is a big reason why they're in the playoffs. Clemens would only play for Houston. Beltran ... when was the last time KC traded with the White Sox? Not long after you were a vendor, about 1987 or so. Like I said before, it's real easy to throw out names of guys the "Sox should have gotten if JR weren't so cheap". Reality is another matter. Did you b**** about getting Everett? So now, not only is it imperative they improve during the year to try and win, but they also have to meet your standards on the "name value" of the players they acquire? Do you recognize your expectations don't match reality, even if the Sox had a $125M payroll? Edit: In fairness, there is no defending not coming up with a better 5th starter option. They ran into some bad luck but there is still no excuse. That issue is one I blame on KW. He needed to do a better job with that, it's been a bad scene for 2-3 years running now. Just having a capable 1-4 staff is not enough. They wanted to give young guys a shot but they aren't ready or talented enough. That needs to be fixed before 4/1, no doubt about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Not a chance. It's way more fun to call out the silliness and draw attention to the constant I am trying to be nicer today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I am trying to be nicer today. And I am so proud of you Jim.. Regarding the PM I sent you last week (this week..? I can't remember) ... I did LMAO at that post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 "Twins made the playoffs, cuz the Sox sucked." Your comment was on payroll, I answered it in terms of payroll. Let's talk about the Mets then. "The Cards and Astros play in much smaller markets than the Sox do. And while the 'Stros were busy signing Pettitte and Clemens and trading for Beltran, we are "busy" NOT signing our #1 starter from the prior year, NOT getting a #5 starter, and trading for CARL EVERETT!" Not so sure that St. Louis doesn't have comparable revenues to the Sox, don't know for certain though. I do know there's no way anyone expected them to win 105 games and play in the NLCS. They spent less than the Cubs. They also had career years from some guys ... they hit lightining in a bottle. Astros ... do you honestly think the Sox could have gotten ANY of those three? Pettite has a Houston connection and his wife wanted badly to go there. He's also got a bum elbow. Their farm system is a big reason why they're in the playoffs. Clemens would only play for Houston. Beltran ... when was the last time KC traded with the White Sox? Not long after you were a vendor, about 1987 or so. Like I said before, it's real easy to throw out names of guys the "Sox should have gotten if JR weren't so cheap". Reality is another matter. Did you b**** about getting Everett? So now, not only is it imperative they improve during the year to try and win, but they also have to meet your standards on the "name value" of the players they acquire? Do you recognize your expectations don't match reality, even if the Sox had a $125M payroll? Edit: In fairness, there is no defending not coming up with a better 5th starter option. They ran into some bad luck but there is still no excuse. That issue is one I blame on KW. He needed to do a better job with that, it's been a bad scene for 2-3 years running now. Just having a capable 1-4 staff is not enough. They wanted to give young guys a shot but they aren't ready or talented enough. That needs to be fixed before 4/1, no doubt about it. The point is...good teams (contenders) are always trying to get better, while we are always trying to lower payroll and play .500 ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 The point is...good teams (contenders) are always trying to get better, while we are always trying to lower payroll and play .500 ball. You just totally shot your credibility there. The payroll has gone up the last couple of years. Further, you don't lock up guys like Mark Buehrle, Garcia, Konerko, Lee, Thomas and trade for other guys mid season if your goal is only to finish .500 . They need to do a lot of things better, but appealing to fans who won't support the team unless things are done on that fan's terms aren't one of those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 The point is...good teams (contenders) are always trying to get better, while we are always trying to lower payroll and play .500 ball. Hu... The Sox payroll has increased every year. And '03's profit of $12 million went into '04's payroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 The point is...good teams (contenders) are always trying to get better, while we are always trying to lower payroll and play .500 ball. When is the last time the Sox lowered payroll?? Hell, after the 2000 season, they more than DOUBLED payroll and it got them nowhere. Were you at every game in 2001, thanking the Sox for their commitment?? You are on an island that is sinking. If you want to be pissed at the whole world for all your problems, go right ahead. But your position here is laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 When is the last time the Sox lowered payroll?? Hell, after the 2000 season, they more than DOUBLED payroll and it got them nowhere. Were you at every game in 2001, thanking the Sox for their commitment?? You are on an island that is sinking. If you want to be pissed at the whole world for all your problems, go right ahead. But your position here is laughable. Rex...if you want to argue that the Sox are committed to winning a World Series, then, I'd like some of the crack you are smoking. Current management ONLY cares about the "bottom line", that's it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I think this smilie desribes this thread best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I think this smilie desribes this thread best. That's the first thing you've said that I agree with in a long time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Current management ONLY cares about the "bottom line", that's it! That's just off the wall. Why would two guys who are multi millionaires in their own right, totally outside of baseball, want to run a baseball team? They didn't need the money in 1980 and they don't need it now. The bottom line is a factor in how they run the business. It is not why they run the business. You keep pulling these statements out of the air like "they only want to lower payroll" - and then when three posters state that payroll has in fact gone up consistently, you ignore that and go back to your same blow-off-steam statements. If you're simply blowing off steam, just say so, so those of us who want to have some serious and fact based discussion can ignore your contributions and do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 That's just off the wall. Why would two guys who are multi millionaires in their own right, totally outside of baseball, want to run a baseball team? They didn't need the money in 1980 and they don't need it now. The bottom line is a factor in how they run the business. It is not why they run the business. You keep pulling these statements out of the air like "they only want to lower payroll" - and then when three posters state that payroll has in fact gone up consistently, you ignore that and go back to your same blow-off-steam statements. If you're simply blowing off steam, just say so, so those of us who want to have some serious and fact based discussion can ignore your contributions and do so. I admit I was wrong re. lowering payroll. Actions speak louder than words, ownership can say that they are committed to winning until they're blue in the face. Until they actually do something about it, their words mena nothing. For example, the Sox went into the 2004 season needing a #5 starter, did we get one? Nope. (If we could have gotten a .500 record from our #5 slot, we'd probably have won the division!). When Frank and Mags went down, who dod they get to replace them? Everett and Alomar? Gimme a break! (I know we supposedly went after Larry Walker, but he wouldn't waive his no-trade clause...but he did waive it for the Cards...I wonder why....could it have been that HE DIDN'T THINK THE SOX COULD MAKE THEPLAYOFFS???) Perception becomes reality! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I admit I was wrong re. lowering payroll. Actions speak louder than words, ownership can say that they are committed to winning until they're blue in the face. Until they actually do something about it, their words mena nothing. For example, the Sox went into the 2004 season needing a #5 starter, did we get one? Nope. (If we could have gotten a .500 record from our #5 slot, we'd probably have won the division!). When Frank and Mags went down, who dod they get to replace them? Everett and Alomar? Gimme a break! (I know we supposedly went after Larry Walker, but he wouldn't waive his no-trade clause...but he did waive it for the Cards...I wonder why....could it have been that HE DIDN'T THINK THE SOX COULD MAKE THEPLAYOFFS???) Perception becomes reality! Actually, from what I understand Walker wanted to stay in the NL. I have some relatives in Denver who said that's what they'd heard and read. On the payroll thing, fine, but are you going to remember it, or two weeks from now are we going to read the same rant? Actions speak louder than words: Signing all these guys to long term deals - Konerko, Garcia, Lee, Thomas, Marte, getting Takatsu, etc. etc. etc. You can't say they haven't signed name players, they have. Maybe not the name players you want, but they've signed name players. Some were their own. I mean, they can't win with you. You won't support the team, yet you criticize whomever they bring in (Alomar/Everett) to help try to win, because they don't meet your personal standards. Why should they try to please a supposed fan like yourself? Seems to me you'd complain no matter what. Would you rather they'd have not bothered to inquire about Larry Walker or Carlos Delgado, would that have made it easier to accept? Or would you have been one of those complaining about the prospects they gave up? You want all those free agents signed, but you're apparantly not worried about losing all the draft choices. Like I said, they can't win with you. But like I said, you're not supporting the team in any fashion, so I don't know why they should care. I think they care about the fans who support the team whether they live here or not, but I really think they dismiss those who have a giant chip on their shoulders with a conspiracy theory as to why everything happens the way it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 The guys they brought in (everett/Alomar) are washed up! We need players, not has-beens! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Rex...if you want to argue that the Sox are committed to winning a World Series, then, I'd like some of the crack you are smoking. Current management ONLY cares about the "bottom line", that's it! Do you realize the Reinsdorf group bought the Sox for roughly $20 million. It is now valued somewhere in the $230-$250 million range. What do you think a World Series would do to the value? It would do nothing but go up. So caring only the bottom line and not about getting to a World Series is contradictory. Like JimH, said, they are already very rich men. They will be even richer when the Sox sell. There is no motivation for them to try and siphon another $5 million+ in profit each year, forsaking even bigger gains. Your logic just doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Do you realize the Reinsdorf group bought the Sox for roughly $20 million. It is now valued somewhere in the $230-$250 million range. What do you think a World Series would do to the value? It would do nothing but go up. So caring only the bottom line and not about getting to a World Series is contradictory. Like JimH, said, they are already very rich men. They will be even richer when the Sox sell. There is no motivation for them to try and siphon another $5 million+ in profit each year, forsaking even bigger gains. Your logic just doesn't work. That's exactly my point...if they'd only put enough (more) money into getting the players they need to win a WS, it would pay off for them BIG TIME! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 That's exactly my point...if they'd only put enough (more) money into getting the players they need to win a WS, it would pay off for them BIG TIME! What part of "huge payroll doesn't guarantee a World Series" are you not getting? What part of adhering to a budget are you not getting? What part of they spend what they bring in are you not getting? Do you think the baseball player market place is like going to Jewel and picking what you want off the shelves? It's not that simple. You are one of those fans whom I'd love to see be GM for a couple of weeks, just to see the look on your face when you go "Oh ... so it really isn't like I thought it was!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 What part of "huge payroll doesn't guarantee a World Series" are you not getting? What part of adhering to a budget are you not getting? What part of they spend what they bring in are you not getting? Do you think the baseball player market place is like going to Jewel and picking what you want off the shelves? It's not that simple. You are one of those fans whom I'd love to see be GM for a couple of weeks, just to see the look on your face when you go "Oh ... so it really isn't like I thought it was!" AGAIN, WHAT IS THE PAYROLL OF THE 4 REMAINING TEAMS IN THE PLAYOFFS? I understand that spending money does not guarantee a WS...but not spending $ guarantees we'll never even contend for one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 AGAIN, WHAT IS THE PAYROLL OF THE 4 REMAINING TEAMS IN THE PLAYOFFS? What was the Marlins payroll last year..? What was the Angels payroll the year before? And what is the Red Sox (who will likely be eliminated next) payroll...? How about the Mets? And Baltimore..? And the Cubs...? So payroll, big or little, doesn't mean s***. The talent on the field wins games. And please stop SCREAMING.. we read you just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I understand that spending money does not guarantee a WS...but not spending $ guarantees we'll never even contend for one! Bulls***. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 What was the Marlins payroll last year..? What was the Angels payroll the year before? And what is the Red Sox (who will likely be eliminated next) payroll...? How about the Mets? And Baltimore..? And the Cubs...? So payroll, big or little, doesn't mean s***. The talent on the field wins games. And please stop SCREAMING.. we read you just fine. And how do we get the talent, if we have nothing to trade for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Or, take it from another perspective...how would signing Carl Pavano and Carlos Beltran (for example) hurt the Sox' chances of contending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts