They can shoot as high as they want, its a matter of what they can afford. With the amount of payroll they already have on the 2008 teams, they are going to have to have two to three guys in the starting line up making close to league minimum to make their budget work. They also are going to have to deal at least one of Contreras or Garland to make things work. Get used to seeing guys like Owens, Richar, and Fields, because they are going to be a necesity for the Sox in 2008, not matter what people want.

 

Interesting.

 

What is their budget for 2008?

Interesting.

 

What is their budget for 2008?

From what we have seen for years, the budget is based on profits, driven in large part by season ticket sales, on a post-facto basis. 2007 season ticket sales were a small bit below 2006, from what I understand. So it seems unlikely the team would be willing to increase payroll in any significant way. That is the assumption I am going on... but if your information says that is incorrect, that they are willing to go up, then that's great.

 

They can shoot as high as they want, its a matter of what they can afford. With the amount of payroll they already have on the 2008 teams, they are going to have to have two to three guys in the starting line up making close to league minimum to make their budget work. They also are going to have to deal at least one of Contreras or Garland to make things work. Get used to seeing guys like Owens, Richar, and Fields, because they are going to be a necesity for the Sox in 2008, not matter what people want.

If you're right then they'll be among the bottom feeders of baseball again.

 

If someone is getting on base at a high clip, the K's are not all that important.

 

I agree with you by the way, they should be shooting higher. But... its all about budget. If the choices for SS and CF are, for example:

 

Eckstein and DeJesus

 

or

 

Furcal and Owens

 

I'll take the latter. I would of course like to upgrade both, but if getting Furcal means having Owens in CF, I don't think that's such a huge sacrifice.

 

Assuming David Eckstein gets 2/$10 (and that's a very high number), you are still looking at $7.5 mill in the top combo and $13.5 mill in the second combo; that either allows the Sox to add more money either in the pen, in the rotation, or to the rest of the lineup.

 

There are way too many variables to be playing with to leave it at those two; those are obviously just examples, but you are using two players without taking into consideration the 23 other players on the roster too. Furcal and Owens may mean the pitching staff is absolute garbage, while Eckstein and Dejesus may mean the Sox can afford to make another splash on the trade market, bringing in a guy in his 5th or 6th year in the league (thus, signed relatively cheaply, relatively young, but good at the same time).

 

 

From what we have seen for years, the budget is based on profits, driven in large part by season ticket sales, on a post-facto basis. 2007 season ticket sales were a small bit below 2006, from what I understand. So it seems unlikely the team would be willing to increase payroll in any significant way. That is the assumption I am going on... but if your information says that is incorrect, that they are willing to go up, then that's great.

 

That's where I am looking. Without seeing the final revenue and profit numbers until April or March of next year, I am not going to pretend to be for sure of what the total will be. Knowing from experience that the Sox are a break even organization, and seeing that attendence is going to be down this year, I would guess we are going to see about $100 million if we are lucky.

Assuming David Eckstein gets 2/$10 (and that's a very high number), you are still looking at $7.5 mill in the top combo and $13.5 mill in the second combo; that either allows the Sox to add more money either in the pen, in the rotation, or to the rest of the lineup.

 

There are way too many variables to be playing with to leave it at those two; those are obviously just examples, but you are using two players without taking into consideration the 23 other players on the roster too. Furcal and Owens may mean the pitching staff is absolute garbage, while Eckstein and Dejesus may mean the Sox can afford to make another splash on the trade market, bringing in a guy in his 5th or 6th year in the league (thus, signed relatively cheaply, relatively young, but good at the same time).

That could be true. As you noted, I was really just trying to make a point about choices, and that was the example that sprung to mind.

 

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/sports/ladew...141LAD1.article

 

And we are at $95 million right now without signing Joe Crede, correct? For those looking for a new SS, CF, and relievers, it doesn't look good.

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/sports/ladew...141LAD1.article

Well that is good news at least. But the team still would need to move some current salary in order to make big splashes at both CF and SS.

 

Well that is good news at least. But the team still would need to move some current salary in order to make big splashes at both CF and SS.

Which of course is why I think that JO is our starting CF next year...and why I think Garland will be moved, at the worst to bring back a Furcal...but hopefully someone a little younger and cheaper.

And we are at $95 million right now without signing Joe Crede, correct? For those looking for a new SS, CF, and relievers, it doesn't look good.

Get me a new ss and a new cf, but I honestly have no problem going into next season with most of this bullpen back. As crazy as that sounds, it wouldn't bother me one bit to have: Jenks, Thornton, Mac, Wasserman, and Logan all back.

Get me a new ss and a new cf, but I honestly have no problem going into next season with most of this bullpen back. As crazy as that sounds, it wouldn't bother me one bit to have: Jenks, Thornton, Mac, Wasserman, and Logan all back.

I agree with you on that bullpen...but 1 problem...that still leaves us wanting another righty. If MMac and Thor could put up 06 type performances and stay healthy, then maybe a Masset or Aardsma would be able to fill that role just throwing junk innings, but can anyone guarantee me that they won't wind up repeating their 07 performances?

Edited September 18, 200718 yr by Balta1701

Get me a new ss and a new cf, but I honestly have no problem going into next season with most of this bullpen back. As crazy as that sounds, it wouldn't bother me one bit to have: Jenks, Thornton, Mac, Wasserman, and Logan all back.

Agreed. If it happens the team can acquire one reliever that will be reliable and experienced, for not much money, great. But I think those 5 you list are likely to be pretty decent in 2008.

 

I agree with you on that bullpen...but 1 problem...that still leaves us wanting another righty. If MMac and Thor could put up 06 type performances and stay healthy, then maybe a Masset or Aardsma would be able to fill that role just throwing junk innings, but can anyone guarantee me that they won't wind up repeating their 07 performances?

I think that Broadway could make a push for that spot

4. I think it's a given Garland/Contreras is gone, and I with seemingly no one interested in taking Count, Garland and his 12 million looks to be coming off the books, as well as 2 million for Cintron, 750K for Erstad, 2.9 for Pods, 2.75 for Mackowiak. If the team really thinks they can compete, and still maintain a reasonable payroll, they are going to have to take some chances with guys like Bourgeois and Gonzo.

 

That really is quite a bit of money; however, the money for Pods and Cintron has already gone back into Dye's 2008 salary, so the Sox are looking about probably $3.5 more or so coming off along with whomever they trade.

 

However, I really would not be surprised in the least if both Garland and Contreras wind up in different uniforms next year; it's a risky move, but I imagine another starting pitcher would be coming back the Sox way - probably in the form of a prospect - and then the rotation is shaping up to be something along the lines of Buehrle, Vazquez, Danks/Egbert/Gio/Floyd/Haeger/prospect/NRI's. Probably a terrible rotation, but it's worth a shot, and it saves a ton of money.

 

Getting rid of both Contreras and Garland brings the overall payroll down to about $75-80 mill...if the Sox are willing to go up to $105-110, that's a ton of money they can spend. Whether that's a good thing or not, I'm not sure, but it's a lot of money.

From what we have seen for years, the budget is based on profits, driven in large part by season ticket sales, on a post-facto basis. 2007 season ticket sales were a small bit below 2006, from what I understand. So it seems unlikely the team would be willing to increase payroll in any significant way. That is the assumption I am going on... but if your information says that is incorrect, that they are willing to go up, then that's great.

 

NorthSide,

 

Yes I agree with your statements and I should have been clearer on my point.

 

Southsider commented that the Sox will "have to" do this and that, and further we should get used to seeing league minimum players like Richar, Owens, etc. in the lineup, ostensibly due to payroll constraints.

 

My point, and I should have made it directly, is no one knows what their budget will come in at, but I will address a few budget variables in a moment.

 

I agree with Southsider that several players will be moved, but not necessarily for salary reasons. They have said and are saying now they plan to be competitive and Williams has also said that payroll will not be an issue. I interpret that to mean they won't "have to" dump players who are making money just for the sake of clearing payroll. They will move any player ... any player ... if it makes baseball sense to do so (unless there is a no trade barrier in the contract).

 

Yes paid attendance will come in somewhat lower but we cannot forget other streams of revenue have opened up. What about those scout seats and what about the Jim Beam Club which used to be the pressbox? Those are substantial shots in the arm to revenue. That is just one example.

 

As Southsider correctly states, none of us know what the payroll will be, or frankly what they may or may not be forced into doing personnel-wise.

 

I do see them continuing to build around pitching and I expect a few unexpected trades to revamp the pitching. I also see them dipping into the Japanese market.

 

Further, they are heavily evaluating their own young players and giving them a chance. Results have been mixed but none of us can say what the front office is thinking on these guys. Guillen tipped his hand by saying last week they cannot carry all these young guys or they will be in last place.

NorthSide,

 

Yes I agree with your statements and I should have been clearer on my point.

 

Southsider commented that the Sox will "have to" do this and that, and further we should get used to seeing league minimum players like Richar, Owens, etc. in the lineup, ostensibly due to payroll constraints.

 

My point, and I should have made it directly, is no one knows what their budget will come in at, but I will address a few budget variables in a moment.

 

I agree with Southsider that several players will be moved, but not necessarily for salary reasons. They have said and are saying now they plan to be competitive and Williams has also said that payroll will not be an issue. I interpret that to mean they won't "have to" dump players who are making money just for the sake of clearing payroll. They will move any player ... any player ... if it makes baseball sense to do so (unless there is a no trade barrier in the contract).

 

Yes paid attendance will come in somewhat lower but we cannot forget other streams of revenue have opened up. What about those scout seats and what about the Jim Beam Club which used to be the pressbox? Those are substantial shots in the arm to revenue. That is just one example.

 

As Southsider correctly states, none of us know what the payroll will be, or frankly what they may or may not be forced into doing personnel-wise.

 

I do see them continuing to build around pitching and I expect a few unexpected trades to revamp the pitching. I also see them dipping into the Japanese market.

 

Further, they are heavily evaluating their own young players and giving them a chance. Results have been mixed but none of us can say what the front office is thinking on these guys. Guillen tipped his hand by saying last week they cannot carry all these young guys or they will be in last place.

I also don't think they were maxed out payroll-wise this season. KW chose not to use his entire budget probably for some flexibility later on, and the fact that the team wasn't in contention made picking up a big contract a mute point. At least they know at this point that if they put a team that can win on the field, people will show up. They haven't always had that .

backup LF/CF and pinch runner... that would be the perfect role for him.

I agree with you on that bullpen...but 1 problem...that still leaves us wanting another righty. If MMac and Thor could put up 06 type performances and stay healthy, then maybe a Masset or Aardsma would be able to fill that role just throwing junk innings, but can anyone guarantee me that they won't wind up repeating their 07 performances?

well, I really don't think Masset would be good in the pen. From what I have seen, he is much better as the game goes on. However, I really don't want us to lose him but he is out of options. I think Broadway could very well be the 6th man in the pen as the mop up guy and spot starter. I would have no problem with a pen of: Jenks, Thornton, MacDougal, Wasserman, Logan, and Broadway.

 

However, if Mac, Thornton, and the rest of the pen continue their struggles next season, hopefully one of Oneli Perez, Dewon Day, Carlos Vasquez, or even Sisco could come up not suck.

I think its time to come to terms with the fact that many of our minor league top arms are due for the pen. Why not get them started now?

well, I really don't think Masset would be good in the pen. From what I have seen, he is much better as the game goes on. However, I really don't want us to lose him but he is out of options. I think Broadway could very well be the 6th man in the pen as the mop up guy and spot starter. I would have no problem with a pen of: Jenks, Thornton, MacDougal, Wasserman, Logan, and Broadway.

 

However, if Mac, Thornton, and the rest of the pen continue their struggles next season, hopefully one of Oneli Perez, Dewon Day, Carlos Vasquez, or even Sisco could come up not suck.

 

Lance Broadway will not be a reliever for the Sox next year. If he doesn't make the team as as starter, he will be in Charlotte. There are too many guys with no options who would be in front of him for the pen, such as Sisco and Floyd.

Lance Broadway will not be a reliever for the Sox next year. If he doesn't make the team as as starter, he will be in Charlotte. There are too many guys with no options who would be in front of him for the pen, such as Sisco and Floyd.

I have Floyd pinned as the 5th starter next season with hopefully Contreras gone. And I don't care if players are out of options or not, you need to put the best product on the field. Aardsma is likely traded in the offseason, and IIRC, Sisco still has another option. So, if you ask me, the final spot in the bullpen will likely come down to between Massett and Broadway.

Jerry Owens is on a bit of a post All Star Game tear.

 

Including tonight (so far) he is hitting .267 post mid-Season with a .341OBP.

 

At a full season clip for MLB rankings that would put him at #16 for CF for average and #12 for OBP.

 

 

 

to update, jerry is now hitting .276 post All Star Break with a .342OBP.

5/5, I love it.

Jerry is not about to fool my ass into thinking he's a legitimate everyday player. They're better be another plan in place.

I went to the game today, it was awesome to see how well Owens did today. Most of the White Sox fans were booing once he got out in the final at bat, there were even some Twins fans booing. It's not every day that you see someone go 6 for 6. Too bad it didn't happen.