clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

A look around the net

Vivaelbirdos takes a look on the Sox:

about a month ago, citing a post at South Side Sox, i noted the similarity between the white sox's position and the cardinals'. SSS is back at it; read this screed and tell me if it doesn't sound familiar. he decries the sox's unwillingness to pay over slot in the amateur draft; their reluctance to offer arbitration to departing free agents; and their refusal to lay out big bucks for big-name free agents. he also complains of inactivity in the international talent market, a complaint that until a few years ago would have applied to the cardinals. . . . taken in isolation these critiques all seem to stand up, but they don't fare so well when placed into the context of the standings. you could levy the same criticisms against three of the last five champions (marlins, white sox, cards). and all but one of last year's four lcs participants (dbacks, rockies, indians) are slotniks in the draft and non-factors in the free-agent market. in the end, it's still about talent evaluation, not about money. spending exorbitantly in the draft and/or free-agent markets can yield an advantage, but it's exaggerated; it's not a prerequisite for being competitive.
What do you think [about this diagnosis]?
In other news,