White Sox Won’t Be In On Pujols

If Cardinals slugger Albert Pujols hits free agency after the 2011 season, most of the major market teams are expected to jump into the fray for his services.  However, White Sox GM Kenny Williams says that his club won't be one of them, writes Chuck Garfien of CSNChicago.com.

If [Jerry Reinsdorf] gave me $30MM dollars right now, I’m not going to spend it on one guy. Sorry White Sox fans,” the GM said. “But I tell you what, I’m going to take that $30 million and I’m going to distribute it around. My team is going to be better as a whole than it is with one player who might get hurt. Then you’re done. Sorry, that’s just me. And that’s no disrespect to a future Hall of Famer, first ballot, one of the greatest players in history.

Even though the White Sox currently have a $125MM payroll, Williams says that he and Reinsdorf agree that there should be a salary cap in baseball in order to level out the field.  The GM says that a contract that would give one player $30MM per season would be bad for baseball, to the point where he'd be okay with the game being "shut down" in order to correct the issue.  After getting all of this off of his chest, Williams immediately tried to downplay his comments:

Wait a minute, didn’t I say I wanted it quiet, I wanted peace? Let me shut the hell up already. I was hoping no one would ask me that this entire spring training.


Leave a Reply

297 Comments on "White Sox Won’t Be In On Pujols"


baseballdude
4 years 5 months ago

That is good the white sox would have been al central champs and maybe even world series champions

nats2012
4 years 5 months ago

I think thats a ploy and the White Sox would be one of the first teams to throw money at Pujols. The owner loves Pujols.

4 years 5 months ago

saying that owners love pujols is like saying priests like the bible. I mean really? Its all about the $$$ any team would take him for a decent price.

MadmanTX
4 years 5 months ago

Then why weren’t they?

alxn
4 years 5 months ago

I think having Adam Dunn trotting around in LF would probably negate most of the value Pujols would bring anyways.

Palehose
4 years 5 months ago

It’s too bad that Adam Dunn is going to be the DH for the White Sox and not the LF’er….. Better luck next time.

alxn
4 years 5 months ago

And where would he play if they signed Pujols? Use your brain

Palehose
4 years 5 months ago

If Kenny had any intention in signing Pujols, he never would have re-signed Konerko. That’s the knowledge my brain is supplying, sir. The possibility that Konerko, Dunn, and Pujols would be in the same lineup is so improbable that it isn’t even worth hypothetically speculating.

Redsoxn8tion
4 years 5 months ago

He wants to stay in St Louis so the Cardinals will likely be outbidding themselves until he gets the amount he’s looking for from them

The_Silver_Stacker
4 years 5 months ago

outbidding? Going by last week, St Louis was and most likely still low ball Pujols

Redsoxn8tion
4 years 5 months ago

St Louis low balled him? Please, these guys play a childs game

Redsoxn8tion
4 years 5 months ago

St Louis low balled him? Please, these guys play a childs game. The fact that any player thinks they are worth 20 million a year is a slap in the face to ever person that posts on this site

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Econ 101 …

4 years 5 months ago

It’s called supply and demand. Sure a teacher or a firefighter might do more good for society, but there’s a lot more qualified teachers then there are guys who are the greatest hitters of their generation. And that’s aside from the fact that a guy like Pujols would become an instant cottage industry in whatever city he ends up playing. Successful sports franchises create all sorts of jobs in the communities they reside in.

But more to the point, he’s worth what someone with the money to spend is willing to pay him. You can’t blame a player for taking the best offer available to him just like “every person that posts on this site” would.

Redsoxn8tion
4 years 5 months ago

I’m not blaming anyone. If a team is stupid enough to pay a guy $30 million a year, obviously he’s going to take it. I’m sure everyone would. I’m just making the point that these guys already get paid a rediculous amount of money per year.

What ever happened to players that meant it when they say “I want to finish my career with this team”. What they really mean is I want to finish my career here but only if they pay me TOP DOLLAR.

4 years 5 months ago

Free agency happened and guys have a choice now. Before that, changing teams meant that you got traded to a place that you had no control over, often because you weren’t as good as your reputation any more and your team wanted to move on.

4 years 5 months ago

Are you his agent? Were you there at the private negotiations?

Rumor has it the cardinals offered 350 mil and busch stadium, pujols wants 400 mil and stake in busch beer. So ive heard anyways from drew rosenhaus.

4 years 5 months ago

Are you his agent? Were you there at the private negotiations?

Rumor has it the cardinals offered 350 mil and busch stadium, pujols wants 400 mil and stake in busch beer. So ive heard anyways from drew rosenhaus.

4 years 5 months ago

Exactly like they did with Holliday

4 years 5 months ago

kenny williams is a smart man. there should be a salary cap in baseball, indeed!

4 years 5 months ago

No there shouldn’t!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4 years 5 months ago

spoken like a real yankee fan.

4 years 5 months ago

Even as a fan of a smaller payroll team, I think a salary cap is a bad idea

FriedCalamari
4 years 5 months ago

why? just wondering what some arguments are for it

4 years 5 months ago

Where do you set it? 200 mil? 100 mil? oh by making the salary cap 100 mil that will cause the pirates to spend 100 mil. Hell no. The owners spend whatever they want based on their market, tampa doesnt get a lot of fans so they sustain a lower payroll its how it is in baseball. Also teams dont buy championships look at the mets/dodgers/cubs and the giants who had a payroll of 100 mil but 20 mil of that(zito) wasnt even on their ws roster.

So in conclusion the owners are going to spend what they want to spend, unless you make the salary cap 60 mil you wont see all the teams spend the same amount.

I like it the way it is, the offseason is entertaining as hell and by far the best offseason in sports and I dont think it would be that way with the cap, also I like seeing small market teams build up a group of young guys then add a few free agents and go with that and teams like the rockies/brewers locking up good young talent for awhile.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

A cap doesn’t have to be one in which all teams struggle to be under it. It could simply be one that prevents one team from spending multiple times what other teams could afford to spend.

4 years 5 months ago

Please read my post, I feel like I addressed this.

Whats the difference if you set the cap at 150, when the rays can only sustain a 50 mil one? Oh dang now the red sox can only spend 3 times as much as the rays instead of 3.2 or whatever.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Well the difference comes as you adjust that number lower and closer to what an average or above market can feasibly afford. Cutting the Red Sox down to 150 million may not change the competitive balance for the Rays all that much, but these are only two teams with a very arbitrary cap number.

What might a 140 million cap do for teams like Baltimore and Toronto? We’ll it’d increase their chances of being competitive. If they’re competitive, perhaps they could afford to spend closer to that of the large market teams.

Cards_Fanboy
4 years 5 months ago

maybe I’m missing the point of having a salary cap in baseball, but I’m pretty sure the Rays won the AL East last year… with the lowest salaries in the AL East… so doesn’t that mean a salary cap wouldn’t even the playing field as much as some think it would?

top_prospect_aw
4 years 5 months ago

Let’s see how the Rays do this year with half their players walking to the big names and their big name player signings who are 5 years removed from their prime. The only way for teams like the Rays to compete is to be patient with their farm system, then put their eggs in a basket for a couple years and hope they catch lightning in a bottle – which they did for three years. Now back to the rebuild…

4 years 5 months ago

Lets see how the yankees do this year with the highest payroll and no sp. I think the yankees would kill for the rays starters.

PujolsHollidayWestbrook
4 years 5 months ago

Just because a particular team is good at “playing the game” in the current system (Look at Tampa, Minnesota, Florida’s 2 WS, Oakland in the early 2000’s etc.), doesn’t mean the system isn’t flawed. There are a whole bunch of teams that are the rule, and not the exception to it.

That being said, a salary cap doesn’t necessarily fix these issues. Look at the NBA. Players have max salaries, teams have salary caps, but things like endorsements, taxable income, marketing, etc., still has players grouping together in large markets, allowing a select few to have the ability to win a championship.

The truth is that there is no correct answer, at least not a clear cut one.

Honestly, until the fans quit attending games, paying for over-priced beer, watching their teams on TV, and buying jerseys, the large-markets in any system will have a higher chance to compete…oh that reminds me, I need to buy my season tickets!

4 years 5 months ago

exactly.

4 years 5 months ago

Right, when only what 7 teams in baseball have a cap of over 140 and most teams have self imposed caps(like the white sox at 125).

If the blue jays and orioles need incentive to run a successful organization they need to get the hell out of baseball, the incentive should be to the fans. Furthermore the giants/rangers both had payrolls at around 100 mil right? Giants number is inflated because zito didnt even pitch for them in the ws so you can take out 20 mil. Poinnt is these lower market teams can compete just as much and teams can field a competitive team for around 100 mil, or hell even less as with the rays. You just have to do good scouting. Name 1 100 million dollar free agent pitcher that has panned out successfully, you cant. Point is the top spenders go out and get a few good years or just a complete bust out of free agents because they are older when they hit free agency.

If I ran an orginzation I would more or less ignore the big market free agents and just focus on my group and get some filler veterans and sign my players to extensions(reds/rockies)

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

It’s funny that you keep mentioning Zito’s payroll doesn’t count.

Many, many other teams wouldn’t be able to afford such an albatross contract and still field a competitive team. Score another point for the large market teams.

4 years 5 months ago

Many other teams? Alot of the teams with 100 mil could support it and win the ws. I actually think thats proof more for the mid market teams that ok you can screw up and sitll succeed.

MrSativa
4 years 5 months ago

OK – here’s how baseball executes a ‘fair’ salary cap. Revenues are tabbed the year before for MLB – expenses and profit margin are tabbed for each team. Each team is assigned a players salary number that’s based solely on MLB profit margin.

No player can sign for more than 2 years. Rookies can only sign for a max of 1M. Teams only have player control for 2 years. Minimum salary for players will be 500K.

No ticket will cost more than 500.

Each team will have it’s own TV network.

Players can earn extra money based on incentives which are standard across the board.

OK – I have to go – time to ride this bomb.

Dr.Strangelove

Jaime Pearson
4 years 5 months ago

In my mind the reason you do it is then teams can’t go out and spend a ton of money on one guy, and when he fails just spend more. It’s more or less to even out the playing field with the Yankees. No other team in baseball, except maybe Boston can afford to make the mistake of signing a high priced player. Also not all the teams have the money from the YES network either like the Yankees do, they make more money a year on that than many teams spend a year.

4 years 5 months ago

Giants and Zito? Dodgers/mets/cubs/phillies all can as well, although the mets/cubs just hand out a lot of bad contracts.

So what you are saying is we should punish teams for signing players that dont pan out and make them pay twice as much for their mistake and make the fans suffer? Yea!

jb226
4 years 5 months ago

A cap is a top-limit; there doesn’t necessarily need to be a bottom limit to go with it.

The problem in baseball is that there are a couple teams simply running away from the pack. When the top teams have something like a $60MM/yr advantage over the OTHER high payroll teams, you know you have an issue. Everybody doesn’t need to spend exactly the same, but there comes a point where there is TOO much disparity.

Some of the owners on the bottom need to step it up. That’s for sure. But some of the owners on the top need to dial it back too. They need to compete on the field, not in the accounting books, and they need to have tough decisions and consequences just like every other team in baseball does.

A successful cap is one that most teams don’t need to worry about, and yet one that most teams also have a chance of attaining. A $200MM cap is worthless because even the teams it would affect, it affects only slightly. $100MM is low enough that it affects too many teams in baseball. In my opinion, if a cap affects more than 20% of teams it’s far too low. It’s not about punishing all teams in healthy markets for their success, it’s about capping the advantage we think that should confer them.

Where would I put the cap? I’d be comfortable around $130MM, and of course adjusting slightly for inflation in the same way that league minimum salaries do. $130MM would clip the wings on about 6 teams (based on projection payrolls from baseball reference), which is on my high end but it does get in. It should be noted that of those six, it would affect two by less than $5MM and one more by less than $10MM — in other words, this is a level even the Top 20% of big spenders tends only to hover around, which I think is exactly what a cap should be. It’s also a figure that is immediately obtainable (within $10MM) by two teams with another three or so hovering about $10MM behind that.

It’s also a big enough payroll to make mistakes but survive them–the 2010 Giants, for example, had Barry Zito basically warming the bench for $20MM in the playoffs and still won, and nobody in the world is going to suggest their franchise is horribly crippled by it. At the same time, more than one or two bad contracts DOES hurt quite a bit, as Cubs fans can tell you watching Soriano and Zambrano hurt the teams’ competitiveness for at least the past two years. (Okay, okay — Soriano wasn’t THAT bad last year but his salary was still a big reason they didn’t spend more to improve.)

If the top payroll teams want to complain that the $90 million dollar advantage they have over the bottom payroll teams isn’t fair to them, well, then can do that but it will fall on deaf ears, at least for me. What I definitely don’t think is competitive or good for the game is to have a $90MM difference between the bottom teams and the high payroll teams and then another $70MM difference between the high payroll teams and the “lulz” teams.

4 years 5 months ago

So, I feel as if I already answered your points.

So the red sox who are at what 170 will cut 40 mil and instead of spending 130 mill mor then the pirates will only spend 100 mill more? Yay?

Also the pirates wont spend more and the only thing you will accomplish successfully is to cut players salaries and keep the competitive balance the same.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

It’s this simple:

Do larger market teams have a competitive advantage because of their finanical resources?
– Yes, of course they do. If spending big didn’t offer a huge advantage, NY wouldn’t spend 200 million a year.
Would placing a high cap help other teams?
– Yes, it would. Removing, or limiting, the competitive advantage the Yankees currently enjoy would give other teams a more reasonable shot.

4 years 5 months ago

You say that but please tell me where the pirates/rays/padres have said “oh well if it wasnt for the yankees we would spend way more and be up there at 100 mil”.

Again, is the competitive balance that would be gained from the red sox payroll being 130 mill more to 100 mill more really do anything else except for cut players salaries? I doubt it. Also mid market teams win the ws all the time. And you can say the yankees buy championships but look at their dynasty in the late 90s, mostly homegrown players! Same wiht the red sox this time around, home grown and a few key free agents.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Why are you against a salary cap? Does your team have a significant advantage that you don’t want to give up?

4 years 5 months ago

Again, please prove to me where the pirates and lower market teams said if it was 100 mil they would spend 100 mil and decrease the competitive imbalance. Please do. And I am a fan of the tigers, a few years ago we were one of the highest salaried teams in baseball but have now dropped a lot of payroll but can absorb some contracts.

The fans give their teams the advantage, how many rays fans would show up if htey charged yankees prices? yankees fans PAY for a 200 mill team rays fans umm dont.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Are you really this dense?

If the Yankees can’t spend 200 million anymore, they lose some of their competitive advantage.

If the Yankees lose some of their immense advantage, it will be easier for teams like the Orioles, Rays and Jay to compete with them.

I’ve never once said a cap would encourage teams to spend 100 million … I don’t know where you’re getting that or what that has to do with my point.

Again, why are you against a top cap of some sort? What is wrong with a more level playing field?

4 years 5 months ago

And again I will say, what is the difference between the red sox spending 100 million more then the pirates as opposed to 130 million more? THAT 30 MILLION HOLY POOP THE PIRATES COULD SIGN A TOP FREE AGENT THEN! Ya no, again it would only cut down player salaries and hurt teams when they try to sign young talent long term.

But ok, its that extra 30 millino that will make it a level playing field, you are absolutely right. lol really dude.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Well, for the Pirates, cutting the Redsox payroll by 30 million likely wouldn’t mean much. You’ll be surprised to learn that they play in a different division and an entirely different league. They’ll play each other a handful of times over the next 5 years, if that. So, I have no clue why you keep bring these two teams up …

However, if the Redsox only had 130 million to spend, instead of the 170 million they’ll spend this year, it would make a huge difference for the teams in their division like the Rays, Jays and Orioles. That difference in spending would mean no Carl Crawford and no Adrian Gonzalez.

And stop pretending teams couldn’t keep their own talent with a 130 million dollar cap … It’s just stupid.

4 years 5 months ago

Fine, red sox and rays. Really, can the orioles/blue jays afford a 130 mil cap? Oh no Carl crawford or adrian gonzalez? Really? How about they just wouldnt have picked up ortiz’s option and this year they are only paying 6.5 mil for agon. All it would have meant is cc would have signed for less money.

I didnt say they couldnt keep them, I said it would effect extensions because they would have to take it into account.

You are just crying because yoru team doesnt spend as much money so instead of paying higher ticket prices(like sox/yankees do) you want to cry foul and cut players salaries to try and “level” the compeition but I dont know if you realized this but teams with the highest salaries dont always win, home grown players etc wait I feel as if I said this before. Sorry, if your orioles were better with their farm system and spent their money better maybe they would be in the running like the rangers/giants and other teams with half the payroll of the yankees.

IF a team has the committed fan base to spend 200 mil let em.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

The Orioles, Jays, Rays don’t spend 200 million because they can’t. There are media markets, a city of 8 million people, etc that other teams can’t create over night.

You still can’t debate that taking away some of the Yankees spending capacity wouldn’t help level the playing field in the division … because it would and you keep ducking the question….

I think you’d be on my side of the argument (although doing it poorly) if the Tigers were at the bottom of the spending and had NY and Boston in their division.

4 years 5 months ago

Yep, just as I thought you are just complaining because your team doesnt have the fan base to support it. Quit crying your division is tough get over it.

And actually I wouldnt, I would want the tigers to develop prospects better then they are beat them that way(as the rays have proven) and sign some guys to long extensions who perform

I am not ducking the question. Moving on. Ok that was a joke. But really, the blue jays have a payroll of 60 mil. Salary cap at 130 mil means the red sox will spend less, however the players will start want top dollar, so would hte blue jays really want to papy for crawford or stick with what they are doing and keep doing it with young players andsign people to extensions. The players will still demand high salaries because someone will eventually give them the contract. Oh now you are just happy “then the red sox wouldnt get him” The red sox would have offered craword the same as the angles and been able to sign him.

If a teams fans are willing to pay that much for tckets and show up more power to the team for utilizing that resource, but making a salary cap wont have that much of an effect on anything other then cutting player salaries.

So answer my question, whats the difference betweent eh red sox payroll being 100 mill more then the blue jays instead of 70 million more? Does it really make THAT big of a deal? That is drew/dice k/cameron fine take em.

Keep crying, I didnt cry foul when the twins farm system was and still is 1000 times better then ours I didnt say “WE NEED MORE OF A SCOUTING CAP ITS UNFAIR YOU SEE THAT TALENT” Each team uses the resources at their disposal, I am sorry your orioles just suck at both.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

I’ll reply to this with a new comment at bottom on the page. On my computer, all of these conversations are difficult to read with this many replies …

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Key difference for the Rangers and Giants … They don’t play 89 games against the AL east.

top_prospect_aw
4 years 5 months ago

Paul, I agree with you that under the current business-revenue model, a flat limit on payrolls wouldn’t quite work for baseball. The reason why it works in other sports like the NFL is because of shared TV revenue. Ultimately, the Rays aren’t penalized by the number of fans they attract at their games as much as the city they happen to be located and the revenue their market brings in; even if they Rays sold out every game, they still wouldn’t be able to compete with the larger market teams. In addition, it’s also not fair that even when there is a nationally televised game, it usually includes the Yankees or Red Sox, or both.
With that being said, there has to be a way to give the smaller market teams a better advantage and I think it starts with sharing the big ticket items (merchandise, advertising and TV) like the NFL. If they were to accomplish this, I think the Yankees would spend less and the Rays would spend more. I think it’s also more feasible because the player’s union would be more receptive because the amount of total money spent would be the same, just distributed differently. But the Yankees and Red Sox have just amount as much influence as the big time oil tycoons and fat cats on wall street toward government initiatives. :)

4 years 5 months ago

I would be for sharing revenue more from merchandise because that would help give the smaller market teams more money to play with, although the pirates have been accused of holding onto revenue sharing money and not spending it.

But I would like it to be tied more to the nfl when it comes to revenue sharing.

I dont think the yankees/red sox woudl spend less, I think they would just raise ticket prices and still sell out personally 😛 But it wouldl help out hte rays.

$1519287
4 years 5 months ago

all merchandise sales are already shared by the teams, the yanks sell the most but get an equal share in the end.

4 years 5 months ago

Ah ok I thought there was some revenue sharing with merchandise already but wasnt 100% sure and he posted that so I was like oh alright. Do they share TV revnue and whatnot though? I dont think they do, which would really help. I could be wrong though.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

No, they don’t and the YES is a cash cow for the Yankees as if they didn’t get enough through the gates.

4 years 5 months ago

Well that would fix it better then the worthless salary cap.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

It’s hard to have a conversation about the economics of the league when you aren’t familiar with the basics …

4 years 5 months ago

lol dude it was brought up by someone else and I wasnt 100% sure, I meant to say tv deals and whatnot which I was pretty sure wasnt shared.

Still, its hard to argue with someone that thinks the red sox spending 140 million and the pirates still spending 30 million will help make them more competitive. Do you really think the pirates would be all GIMME FREE AGENTS. hell naw.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

It’s hard (or impossible) to have an intelligent discussion with you when:

1. You don’t under the basics of the MLB economic system. If you didn’t know merchandise sales were shared, and weren’t sure how the TV deals worked, what do you really know?

2. You ignore everything I say and keep repeating an ignorant statement about the Red Sox and Pirates as though their relationship applies to the entire league.

4 years 5 months ago

1. I fail to see how that applies to any argument about the cap, quit nit picking I know luxury tax is shared and merchandise I was pretty sure on, and tv deals I didnt think were. So um yea…

2. ITS ABOUT LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD!!! how much would it level it, please answer it. 100 mill more instead of 120 mil more.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Because if you don’t under the basics, what business do you have discussing a cap system?

You weren’t sure what happens to merchandise sales (as you suggest sharing would be a good idea) and you had to ask someone else how the TV deals work.

You just don’t know what you’re talking about when it comes to MLB economics.

4 years 5 months ago

I wanted to make sure I was right? Cap is a cap, revenue sharing is revenue sharinng, and again continue to talk about something while avoiding my main question.

I can pick you apart as well,t he red sox payroll is 160 not 170, how can I talk to you when you dont even nkow baseball payrolls!!!!@#@#@

See? quit dodging.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

“I would be for sharing revenue more from merchandise because that would help give the smaller market teams more money to play with, although the pirates have been accused of holding onto revenue sharing money and not spending it.”

That tells me you don’t have a clue, not just weren’t sure.

And if you want to nit-pick, the Red Sox’s payroll was at 168 million last year and currently sits at 162.5 million plus the salaries of a few pre arbitration players who will likely make the team but aren’t included yet.

Google “Cot’s baseball contracts” if you need more information.

What am I dodging?

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Yeah, but judging by your name, you’re clearly one of the delusional small market fans …

Redsoxn8tion
4 years 5 months ago

Yes there should!!!!!

Joey Doughnuts
4 years 5 months ago

It’s great to see an exec of a large market team say that even HE thinks it’s unfair that he can spend more money than other teams.

The_Silver_Stacker
4 years 5 months ago

So we can have mediocrity just like the nfl and nhl?

Taskmaster75
4 years 5 months ago

If you haven’t noticed, NFL is getting MORE money from ESPN to air it, whereas MLB is projected to get LESS money. I don’t think anyone cares about mediocrity, but they do care about other teams having an advantage over others.

Encarnacion's Parrot
4 years 5 months ago

The NHL has really taken off too. If I’m not mistaken, the NBA has a salary cap also.

vonhayesdays
4 years 5 months ago

their should be a salary minimum(florida Marlins) and if their is to be a max id put it pretty high(New York Yankees)

bomberj11
4 years 5 months ago

If anything there needs to be a salary floor.

4 years 5 months ago

A bunch of swear words comes to mind, that shouldn’t been said on these threads.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

I’m probably one of the few people who DOESN’T want a salary-cap in baseball.

The thing is that having bloated payrolls creates fierce hatreds of evil-empires, rivalries, and underdogs. I hate built-in-equality. You wouldn’t have the whole massive loathing of the Yankees and Red Sox without a salary-cap, and I think that this dynamic is healthy and good for baseball.

It also makes it that much sweeter when an impoverished team like the Pirates or Padres can actually pull one out.

Whenever anyone tries to make anything “equal,” all they really do is make everything and everyone the same.

(As a Cardinals fan,) I wouldn’t mind Pujols signing with the Red Sox or Cubs for 30 mil. That will just make the hatred and drama that much sweeter. For me, that kind of intensity is perfectly healthy. I’d love to go against Pujols as much as I like to support him currently.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

I don’t know, I think the hatred has built up enough that a salary cap wouldn’t erase it overnight.

I don’t have kids yet, but they’ll hate NY and Boston or I haven’t raised them right.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

Handicapped sports just isn’t exciting or fun.

Levelling the playing-field feels like those corny and rigged PC “participation trophies” on a massive scale.

Socialism and American competitive sports don’t mix.

Even the whole fun of winning a World Series would be watered down knowing that your team, and no other team would have the financial room to keep their players together for a dynasty run. The constant reshuffling would be infinitely pointless and directionless. It would be almost impossible for a team to retain all of its developed stars knowig their budget limitations.

I’d rather force teams like Pittsburg and Florida to be more inventive and resourceful, and up their own ante, rather then those teams get ahead by dragging the top teams down.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

I think the popularity and success of the NFL would disagree.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

Is the NFL necessarily more popular with the salary cap?

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

I think it’s safe to say the NFL is as, if not more, popular today as it’s ever been. Perhaps that’s in spite of the cap, perhaps it’s because of the cap.

But the cap is in place and the league has risen to heights never seen before.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

I would put the NFL’s popularity more on the quality of 21st century media and advertising prowess.

I see nothing to suggest the NFL would be any less popular without a salary cap tbh, but you may be right though.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

I’m not going to get into a drawn out argument on popularity of the NFL, how and why it’s happening, etc … My point is that much of what you said about how “communism and American sports don’t mix” flies in the face of what the NFL is doing.

I just think any time you can have your season decided on the field instead of by budgets, attendance and media markets, it’s a good thing for us a fans.

Plus, there’s already plenty of “communism” is baseball. Revenue sharing, luxury tax, etc. Is that ruining the game? No, it’s just keeping the small market owners happy as they’re still able to make a profit.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

It is helping (the NFL) season off the field by determining that no team will ever be “too unequal” in a financial sense.

I don’t want the wins to come for my small-market team, knowing that they only won because their big-market opponent was hamstrung from putting out their maximum financial potential on the field. I want my small-market team to go try and pull off a massive upset, not get a cheap and predictable victory against an emasculated paper-tiger.

I don’t like the idea of “knowing” that my team’s success will come in predictable cycles. It feels like a fabricated mirage.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

I understand the underdog mentality, but I’m not really buying all of that …

I don’t think you’ll find any Giants fan saying, “Well, we just won the World Series and all, but it feels a little cheap and predictable because we spent more than San Diego and Arizona.”

Or Packer fans saying “Well, it was nice to beat Pittsburgh and all, I just wish they could have spent more on their team. Then it’d be real.”

A small market team can still “upset” the Yankees if they had a cap at say, 160 million. I guess I should have stated earlier that I’m not for a cap that every team struggles to stay under. Just perhaps one that majority of teams couldn’t hit if they doubled what they could feasibly spend.

4 years 5 months ago

NFL didnt have a cap this season and had record numbers!!!

Note I am not saying that the salary cap and the nfls popularity go hand in hand like you are, but merely pointing out how foolish what you are saying is.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Yes, it was an uncapped year, but the league still operated under the assumption that a cap would return next year. You didn’t see any one team spending 5 times what another team could afford to do. So it’s just as foolish to pretend, or assert, that the lack of a salary cap increased the popularity of the league.

4 years 5 months ago

Is it as foolish to pretend as a joke? Personally I think that the person that asserts salary cap will help ratings and ignores the biggest contract for a qb ever handed out is the fool. Still uncapped year. No salary cap, teams did spend hell you saw the biggest contract for a qb handed out!

Salary cap is not what makes the nfl popular, football is. So the whole “SALARY CAP WILL INCREASE RATINGS AND GETS US MORE FROM ESPN” is just ridiculous on every facet.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

… but the league wasn’t operating as though a cap didn’t exist because they knew it’d be coming back. And no, you didn’t see one NFL team sign the top 3 or 4 free agents because they outbid everyone else.

I’ve never said a cap in baseball would create higher ESPN ratings for MLB. I’ve said the NFL goes against all the “communist” points Kaiser made because it has thrived under a cap system.

What I said about baseball is that a cap system would increase the competitive balance of the year by helping to limit the huge financial advantage a few teams enjoy. You can’t begin to argue that point because you know it does give teams a huge advantage, otherwise they’d save their money.

4 years 5 months ago

umm pretty sure i did in my other posts…

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

So you’re setting up you own arguments and then knocking them down? I don’t get your point …

4 years 5 months ago

When did I knock them down?

I guess I just will knock down every argument you make just to further embarass you, even the irrelevant ones.

What top free agents were out there for hte teams to go after? I mean really, there werent any big names seeking big money and the largest deal in history was signed.

“I think the popularity and success of the NFL would disagree. ” umm right there you said it was popular in a response to the salary cap.

And yet you continue saying a point I have refuted time and time again and you refuse to answer, read holliday/pujols/westrbook, his post essentially says what I am saying only nicer. Obviously at this point you are just straw manning me.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

You’re not embarrassed because you don’t know any better …

Like I’ve said, just because the league wasn’t capped THIS year, it still acted as though a cap would return because it will.

No, I didn’t say the NFL was popular because of a salary cap. Kaiser said caps (communism, whatever) kill American sports. I said the NFL would disagree as they have flourished under a cap system, not failed. Start reading my comments in context rather than just looking for something to disagree with.

4 years 5 months ago

Good job! “They didnt spend money, because their werent any good FA out there worthy of it, but they still operated as if there was a cap despite brady getting a record deal and draft picks signing record deals!” is your argument. Lol.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Those deals were signed with intention of them being within next year’s cap … and record deals will be signed next year WITH a cap. You have no point here … try again.

4 years 5 months ago

Where is your proof?

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Because everyone knows the cap will return when the new CBA is worked out? And “record” deals are signed all the time as time goes on … You really, really are this dense, I don’t need to ask.

4 years 5 months ago

So again let me restate your argument

“no free agents were worthy of big contracts so there was no need to spend last offseason, but they still operated in a cap, and record deals will happen again eventually because they always do therefore I am right.”

lolz

lug
4 years 5 months ago

I am not meaning to pick on you but, you got it wrong my friend. I am a republican and feel that socialism is extremely evil. These organizations are individually ran teams that need to make a profit to survive. There has been talk of contraction in recent years. The avg. price to go to a game is skyrocketing. Baseball is a business and needs to compete across the board.

To level payroll is not apples to apples when comparing to socialism. Another thing the constant reshuffling I do not get. I mean yeah I see it in the NBA but lets face it the NBA needs a lot of help. The NFL has so many teams that keeps theur core together. I mean you see a lot of movement but the NFL is just so brutal you do not see the long careers like you do in baseball.

I think baseball has gotten a long just fine for a long time but over the last 20 years you can see things slowly turning to where the money markets are becoming more pronounced and the organizations that you say need to be more “inventive” are dealing with markets that cannot be grown by I guess a inventive marketing campaign or Elvis nights.

I’ll just say this it is gonna get a whole lot worse before it gets better and the “hatred” you speak fondly of many fans will just turn towards the MLB and not certain teams and then the pooh will really hit the fan.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

The reason many fans will turn on the MLB is because the “inventive” marketing strategies equate to the snowballing demand for instant gratification and instant on-field success.

Its a problem with the fans, not baseball when some people can’t even be patient for 2 or 3 years to rebuild, and instead have to be distracted with shiny toys or vent their anger on the Evil-Empires.

I agree that Bill-Veeck style Grocery-giveaways and midget-nights won’t capture the attention of the fans like it worked 50 years ago.

So then the answer is to artificially level-the-field and guarantee success in cycles to keep everyone attuned and happy indefinitely? That’s ok. I’d rather not pander to the instant-gratification generation

jrogowski
4 years 5 months ago

Uh, instant gratification? Sure, there are some feel-good rags-to-riches (or worst-to-first, if you will) in baseball. But those are the exceptions. Tell fans of the Royals they just need to be patient. Tell it to Pirates fans. Or the Nationals, or the Mariners. You can claim that the Padres and the Indians and the A’s are exceptions. But really they just prove the rule — these teams put together storybook seasons here and there and then are awful to watch most of the rest of the time. They can’t compete on an annual basis because they can’t keep pace with the amount other teams — like the Yankees and Red Sox — are able to spend.

The problem *isn’t* that baseball fans desire instant gratification. It’s that owners are out to make a profit, and in some cities they are able to spend a great deal more than in other cities. A salary cap wouldn’t make Jeffrey Loria spend money if he doesn’t want to do so. Instead, it would reduce the extent to which a small group of teams are able to dominate year after year, both financially and in the standings.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

I don’t think any fans of any team, even the Royals and Pirates, are entitled to anything. The Yankees were a league joke for decades until they were handed Babe Ruth.

It takes time to rebuild a good club on a solid foundation, instead of just trying to buy success with mega-deals for transient mercenary free-agents, and miracle trades that fans seem to expect and demand. Success that comes that artificially leaves you as quickly as it comes. They Yankees and Red-Sox can get away with this inefficient model because they do have deep pockets. More power to them.

Every team has had periods of futility, and many of these periods have lasted for several decades. Its a matter of taking time for the Orioles, Pirates, and Royals to find new workable models, not dither and whine about the inequity of the system. If their fans don’t have the patience to wait 5 or 6 years, than they are as low as the entitled fans of the Sox and Yankees. Victory that comes annually is cheap and worthless.

Teams like the Indians, Red Sox, and White Sox all had decades and decades of futility in their own logs……… You can find a similar period for pretty much every team. There are only so many wins to go around per-league every year. For every team win, some other team will take a loss. It artificially feels good to have lots of rags-to-riches stories, but over time, it just gets common and trite.

Winning itself becomes monotonous and unexciting without being counterbalanced by the lows and losing. When the Royals and Pirates finally do figure it out and win, they will appreciate it exponentially greater, than the would if it was just handed to them by an artificial construct designed to virtually guarantee cycles of success.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

When is the last time the salary cap handed the Lions a championship?

inleylandwetrust
4 years 5 months ago

Don’t bring the Lions into it…next year is our year!

4 years 5 months ago

“I don’t have kids yet, but they’ll hate NY and Boston or I haven’t raised them right.”

I’m a Red Sox fan, and I love this. Baseball is such a wonderful thing. And I’m not being sarcastic, I just love how passionate people are.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

… and I’d hate you guys just as much as an Orioles fan even if you couldn’t spend more than 150 million on payroll.

Why? Because you win, we lose, and that sucks.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

“I’m a Red Sox fan”

did not know this about you

do you wanna do karate in the garage?

Redsoxn8tion
4 years 5 months ago

Whoa, I think you can only hate either the Yankees or the Red Sox, not both. Ha ha ha

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

No, there’s enough hate in Baltimore to go around.

AJCBE
4 years 5 months ago

I’m with you. I enjoy that baseball is both a competition on and off the field. I mean, if we’re trying to make everything equal, why not just go through a series of coin tosses to decide the World Champions every year.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Is that all the NFL has become with their cap? Because they manage to capture a lot of attention for a bunch of coin flips …

AJCBE
4 years 5 months ago

The point is, what is wrong with the competition as it stands? If it’s not broken don’t fix it.

And don’t say Albert Pujols hitting the market is a sign that there needs to be a cap because a cap would actually make it that much harder to keep a star player for their entire career. Every extension then would be completely dependent on cap space and would have nothing to do with how much income the player generates.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

What is wrong with it? Well, you see the advantages the large markets have each year in the standings. The Rays can’t afford a 60 million dollar payroll while the Yankees are spending in excess of 200 million? No problems there?

And not all caps needs to follow the model the NFL is using. It could be a high cap that prevents teams like the Yankees from spending 4 or 5 times as much as other organizations. Spending 3 times as much should suffice, no?

inleylandwetrust
4 years 5 months ago

Don’t you think that has something to do with the 13 fans who are in attendance at Ray’s games?

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Regardless of what the Rays do, they’ll never have the financial advantage that the Yankees have. At least not in my lifetime.

lug
4 years 5 months ago

Are the Lakers the same as the Pacers? Are the Patriots the same as the Lions? Better run organizations still find themselves at the top. There will still be drafts, free agency and minor league development.

I do not think this statement “Whenever anyone tries to make anything “equal,” all they really do is make everything and everyone the same.” is correct. Baseball would be just as competitive the major difference is instead of the Prates developing and losing players they might be able to stick around developing some consistency for the fan base.

I hope it happens but I hope it is done well. I just do not see as much value in the build up of “hatred” as I do for example in the Indians being able to keep Manny home for his career and his prime and not these players leaving causing the fans to feel vacated or deserted. That really hurts the game, I am sorry but it does. The borderline fan tends to lose interest and do other things. There are a lot of things competing in the summertime for that entertainment dollar.

I think you are wrong and have been spoiled by an organization that can open the checkbook not as much as others but I think you need to rethink alot of those statements.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

The thing is that I see a huge value in “losing.” i don’t mind at all having the formative character and team-building experiences that come from decades of futility and trial-and-error.

I am honestly the kind of fan who cares more about how the victory comes about and the contrast from the highs to the lows, as opposed to bought victories and the idea of a crass amount of winning.

I don’t feel especiallly entitled to Pujols and Holliday, or any other big contracts the Cardinals have handed out. I would be fine trying to win without them if the circumstances called for it. I’m not interested in pandering to borderline fans who are only interested in casual victores but won’t develop that deep-seated loyalty and stick out the bad times.

The best victories only come after the ultimate lows, and I’m fine with going through those down periods to get that high. Mabye other people just want to be guaranteed constant success, or at least competitiveness. That’s fine, but i don’t need it. I just feel like I know the value of hitting rock-bottom and what it means to come back from that, and mabye not even having the guarantee of ever finding success again.

I don’t like the idea of just “passing the buck” indefinitely. It just seems pointless to me TBH.

The_BiRDS
4 years 5 months ago

Hey guys, they only give us so many comments for each article. Can we just be equal and share the amount of comments?

Im just stirring the pot thats all

4 years 5 months ago

I think there is a pretty fierce shared hatred of the Lakers and Patriots, and both of them operate under a salary cap. Good teams get hated on no matter the money spent.

Craig Cutler
4 years 5 months ago

You’re not a real Cardinals fan if you can stomach Pujols signing with the Cubs.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

I wouldn’t like it, but it would be that kind of stunning blow that makes you feel alive.

While I think he is a great player, I really don’t worship the guy or put him on a pedastal. In fact, I get tired of TLR playing to pad Pujols’s stats with boneheaded moves like batting the pitcher 8th.

The Cardinals have been weak on team depth since 2004, largely thanks to concentration of team resources in Pujols.

Its not a matter of “stomaching” Pujols going elsewhere, but I can see the potential in it to reinvent the team. The Cardinals have been static and haven’t won a playoff game since 2006, thanks to the static TLR regime and the over-doting on Pujols.

I’m fine with Pujols going and saddling the Cubs with a massive untradeable contract for a player who doesn’t play a premium defensive position. I’m 50/50 on getting ready for the Cards just to get past the Pujols era, instead of paying him 30 million or so a year and letting the rest of the team continue to age and erode around him.

I think he is a great guy and all, but its not all about Pujols. The lineup has been Pujols and the 7-midgets for too long.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

“I wouldn’t like it, but it would be that kind of stunning blow that makes you feel alive. ”

If you need to see your star player playing for your rival to feel alive, you’re not doing it right.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

lol………..

I don’t “need” to see Pujols playing for the Cubs……….. I just don’t buy in to the whole pathetic group-think worship of the guy.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

That comment was only for my amusement … there was no point to be made. I just thought you got a little far out there in trying to display your underdog mentality.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

Yeah, I know…….. I’m just not one of those Cardinals fans who literally think the world will end in 2012 if Pujols goes elsewhere.

MadmanTX
4 years 5 months ago

And when in recent memory did the Pirates and Padres make it big on their fixed budgets? Having bloated budgets like Boston and NY doesn’t benefit the rest of MLB–it just benefits those teams.

Kaiser_Wilhelm_II
4 years 5 months ago

didn’t the Padres win 90 games last year, or something like that?

BoSoxSam
4 years 5 months ago

Kenny Williams is becoming nearly as goofy a public presence as his nutty manager is.

Soxman17
4 years 5 months ago

How is he goofy? (Not saying I necessarily disagree, or that it’s bad). Just interested in what you mean here.

4 years 5 months ago

Think he means by how he conducts himself to the media. The things he says are often ridiculous, and total B.S. That does not make him a bad GM, however, though I do disagree with what he said.

BoSoxSam
4 years 5 months ago

What Baba said. I just think he “speaks his mind” WAY too much for a guy in his kind of position. He’s not as outlandish as Ozzie, sure, but he definitely says too much sometimes.

jeffbrown
4 years 5 months ago

Newsflash: The Pirates are out too.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

“he’d be okay with the game being “shut down” in order to correct the issue.”

Ok, we’re not talking about giving Juan Pierre or Mark Burhele $30M, we’re talking about giving it to a guy who’s probably already a first ballot HOFer. But no, let’s have a lockout. I’ve never really minded Kenny Williams before, never thought he was a great GM, but now I just think the guy is moron.

disgustedcubfan
4 years 5 months ago

Kenny would give his left nut to have Pujols at 1st base for the White Sox. He would hit 75 home runs a year at the bandbox that is US Cellular.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

Ok, really. I need to wait to get my comment approved because I called Kenny Williams a word that starts with m and rhymes with oron?

thejerkstore
4 years 5 months ago

a McMoron?
I like Kenny as a GM but he is at his best when he is M.I.A.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
4 years 5 months ago

Well it doesn’t look like my comment will be approved so I’ll say this: If Kenny Williams thinks a lockout is the best response to giving $30M a year to a guy who’s pretty much already a first ballot HOFer then he’s ******* *****. See I didn’t say it this time.

Seriously though, shutting down the game is the best answer? Oh yes, I recall how the last strike did wonders for the game, players and owners alike.

thejerkstore
4 years 5 months ago

apparently spending 120m dollars this offseason is his solution.

As i said, i think his is a good gm but the microphone is not his friend.

4 years 5 months ago

Didn’t think I’d find myself agreeing with “start_wearing_purple” but he’s right, saying you are okay with a lockout/strike says a lot about your intelligence, and what it says would be pending approval on this thread.

4 years 5 months ago

I don’t wanna overstep my boundaries, but the language/content filter is pretty “word that starts with i and rhymes with fidiotic”.

HerbertAnchovy
4 years 5 months ago

The filter is ridiculous on here, and the mods don’t approve a lot. I posted a response to a story about Dustin McGowan that said that the writer had basically stolen an article from MLB’s Jays beat writer with a link to the story, and they never approved it.

Ridiculous.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

i dunno you guys, i haven’t noticed much in the way of harsh or arbitrary comment policing =D

4 years 5 months ago

I blame the difference in DH rule between the leagues here- when the Yanks signed ARod to the big extension they had to think the DH would be a nice fallback position and security blanket. It’s just not fair that the Cards (or Cubs) have to play by different rules but yet still be expected to pay the player an equal contract. Forget 40 yr old, how many 38,36 yr old 1B’s are chugging along at an elite level …

syphercx
4 years 5 months ago

I agree with this.

4 years 5 months ago

I’ve never thought about that, but it’s a really good point.

4 years 5 months ago

sounds a lot like david sampson and larry beinfest when they spoke about it. i totally agree.

4 years 5 months ago

Let’s all watch Albert Pujols slowly turn into Todd Helton before our eyes, and talk endlessly about what to do with the money coming off the books in 2021.

4 years 5 months ago

2 problems with Pujols to the Sox:

1. They can’t afford him. Not enough people show up to the park.
2. Why the hell would he want to go to the South Side lol?

shysox
4 years 5 months ago

I agree with #1, but if he doesn’t want to go to the White Sox he sure as hell wouldn’t want to go to the cubs!

soxxy
4 years 5 months ago

What a stupid comment! You must be from the north side, did you ever think maybe Albert would want to go to to go a contender instead of a loser 103 years and counting? and in case you haven’t noticed last year there were a lot of empty seats in that crumbling old smelly ball park!
Quit using that lame excuse..get a life, at least our team puts a contender on the field, doesn’t cheat their fans! LOL

Twinkilling61
4 years 5 months ago

That’s mighty strong talk from a team that had an 87 year losing streak only 6 years ago.

FrankTheFunkasaurusRex
4 years 5 months ago

he’s a white sox fan

Twinkilling61
4 years 5 months ago

I know, and I’m a Twins fan. I was going to question how much they’ve been contending the last 10 years, but they do have a couple of division titles and a ring while the Twins keep getting bounced in the first round of the playoffs.

lug
4 years 5 months ago

To the victors go the spoils. Wouldn’t you agree?

4 years 5 months ago

Its more of the White Sox competing vs. Cubs attendance argument. Over the last 21 years, the White Sox have competed (finished 1st or 2nd in their division) 15 times. The Cubs have (1st or 2nd) 5 times. 15/21 (71%) > 5/21 (24%). In fact, the Cubs have finished dead last 5 times as well, White Sox 0.

disgustedcubfan
4 years 5 months ago

This is beating a dead horse, but why do White Sox fans always come up with the “Cubs suck, Cubs haven’t won in a hundred years” argument when discussing your own team.
Until you can get over the inferiority complex you put on yourself, the Sox will always take a back seat to the Cubs in interest, attendance, etc..
I lived in N.Y. for a short time, but never once did I hear a Yankee fan defend his team by saying “Oh yea, well the Mets suck”.

Twinkilling61
4 years 5 months ago

I think the Yankees 27 championships may have something to do with that.

disgustedcubfan
4 years 5 months ago

Having the Indians and Royals in the division helps. Essentially, your finishing 1st or 2nd in a 3 team race.

whitesoxfan424
4 years 5 months ago

And the NL Central is that much more strong? In 7 of the last 11 years, both the AL and NL Central have had the majority of the division finish .500 or below. Neither division is a power house.

And to say that the Indians (four .500+ seasons in last 10, powerhouse in 90’s) and Royals (one .500+ season in last 10) organizations are worlds below the Pirates (18 consecutive sub .500 seasons), Reds (one .500+ season’s in last 10), and Brewers (three .500+ seasons in last 10) is ridiculous.

disgustedcubfan
4 years 5 months ago

Once again, I’m not comparing the White Sox to the Cubs or the AL Central to the NL Central.
Please educate me. I do not understand why “the Cubs suck” obsession is so important to White Sox fans.
The Cubs are not the Sox problem. The Twins are the Sox problem. 10,000 empty seats a game at US Cellular during a pennant chase is also the Sox problem.

whitesoxfan424
4 years 5 months ago

Honestly, there is just as much “the Sox suck” as “the Cubs suck” obsession. And I only say there is more “the Sox suck” out there because there are entirely many more Cubs fans out there. I absolutely do not think all Cubs fans are like that, but I do feel that there is the same percentage of sox fans as cubs fans that only care about how the other does. I agree with you in the sense where 6 games against the cubs per year is less than a third as important (to me) as the 19 each we play vs the twins and tigers. However, please don’t be ignorant in thinking that only the sox fans obsess in complaining about the cubs. Cubs fans easily do just as much.

soxxy
4 years 5 months ago

Yes and let’s talk about the Twins vs Yankees losing streak in the post season, What’s that at now?

Twinkilling61
4 years 5 months ago

I don’t remember the last time the White Sox beat the Yankees in a series… maybe because they haven’t had enough post-season opprotunities.

soxxy
4 years 5 months ago

Well it’s going to be an exciting year in 2011, we’ll just have to wait and see what happens won’t we?
Good Luck, hope Jim Thome hits his 600th home run, but of course not against the White Sox.

4 years 5 months ago

i don’t think i mentioned that excuse once. Read before you decide to talk big man.

4 years 5 months ago

doesn’t cheat their fans? Your GM just said he wouldn’t mind work stoppage in order to get a salary cap, talk about cheating fans… that mentality cheats all fans.

Cosmo3
4 years 5 months ago

Wrigley isn’t crumbling as fast as the South Side of Chicago. I’m very sorry to say it, but it’s true, and anyone who lives here knows what I’m talking about. I’m a born and raised Southsider, but I’m looking to get the h*ll out. And the handful of times that I’ve made it up to the Northside, it’s like a breath of fresh air that you don’t have to be uneasy about walking around the neighborhoods after dark up there.

soxxy
4 years 5 months ago

Agree with you about walking around the neighborhood at night wouldn’t want to do that. You go to the south side to watch baseball, the park is beautiful and the food is good, gets a bad rap because of location. Never had any problems ever, very safe and well patrolled.
Saw the Bears play the Lions last year in Detroit, you don’t want to hang around that neighborhood for sure, worse than the south side.

whitesoxfan424
4 years 5 months ago

Stop living in a fantasy world. Everywhere in the world there are bad neighborhoods here and there. Chicago is FILLED with richy neighborhoods a block away from the projects. That’s real life. Back in the day, before the North Side got so hipster, that whole area was a h*ll hole, too.

The_BiRDS
4 years 5 months ago

1 Problem with Pujols to the Sox:

1. Your GM publicly stated he wont be on the Sox

4 years 5 months ago

Yes, because sports executives are honest about everything they say.

The_BiRDS
4 years 5 months ago

“Dream weaver
I’ve just closed my eyes again
Climbed aboard the dream weaver train
Driver take away my worries of today
And leave tomorrow behind
Ooh dream weaver”

4 years 5 months ago

Definitely a Cubs fan.

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

that is so surprising that baseball owners and execs want to cap player salaries. i wonder why they feel so strongly about that

FrankTheFunkasaurusRex
4 years 5 months ago

strange, it’s like they have to pay them or something.

4 years 5 months ago

Why do you keep getting banned and then unbanned?

notsureifsrs
4 years 5 months ago

superhero powers. in both cases

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Some drunk idiot just knocked out the power on his street with his car 😉 No big deal …

4 years 5 months ago

I think Williams is making an obvious point, but what I don’t get is how he thinks you shouldn’t pay $30 million for players. Using the semi-arbitrary $5 Million/ WAR model, Pujols was worth over $35 million in a down year. And that was all at one position. As long as you don’t put negative-value players at other positions, is it not money well spent if you get 7-8 WAR at one position instead of 2-3 at three?

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Because if he gets hurt, or drops off to human like production, you’re overpaying in a huge way.

gursk1989
4 years 5 months ago

where were all of these people when rodriguez signed his contract?

Tko11
4 years 5 months ago

I dont think they realized the consequences before

The_BiRDS
4 years 5 months ago

I could definitely see Prince Fielder in a White Sox uniform next year though.

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

Is someone getting traded?

Where are Dunn, Konerko and Prince going to play?

4 years 5 months ago

Just throw Prince at shortstop, why the f not? /sarcasm

The_BiRDS
4 years 5 months ago

How about a Paul Konerko trade… Send Prince Fielder over for a package. Then an extension.

4 years 5 months ago

yeah lets trade him after we just signed him to a 3 yr deal. Let’s alienate our best and most well known white sox in the last decade. Makes a lot of sense i guess. Oh and why would Prince want to play for the White Sox haha

The_BiRDS
4 years 5 months ago

you use words like “lets”, “we”, and “our”
Then say why would he want to play for the Sox?
Whos side are you on?

OrangeCards
4 years 5 months ago

How about a realistic idea …

4 years 5 months ago

I wonder how many of the people who think Pujols is worth the money will be the first ones whining when hes 5 years older, not putting up the huge numbers anymore, is hurting the team in the field and still constitutes about 25% of his teams payroll.

Unless youre the Cubs and are hoping Pujols can FINALLY get you to a WS in the next few years, hes not worth 10 years at 30 mil per.

4 years 5 months ago

Pujols is the best player of the game and one of the best of all time. Now Arod gets 27 per. howard gets 25 and a bunch of other player getting their duce. Pujols deserves better than anybody right now.
who is kenny williams anyways?