PipeDream: If you could take back one move . . . ?

[TommyJohn]

I do not mourn the losses of Sosa or McLain. Sure, Sammy would have belted all those home runs for the White Sox, but at what cost? He’s now so disgraced that the team and media who helped build him into an international icon want nothing to do with him. And let’s not forget that he did become an international icon partly because he was with our Cubbies and he had the help of the local media to build him up. He would NOT have received the same treatment had he been with the White Sox. For proof just look at the way Paul Sullivan adored Sammy while at the same time doing what he could to annihilate Frank Thomas. He wasn’t the only one.

Also, our Cubbies could survive the Sammy Scandal because they’re our beloved Teflon Cubbies. Had Sosa been exposed as a cheat with the White Sox, we would still be seeing articles with titles like Sosa Steroid Scandal Hangs Like Dark Cloud Over White Sox ( We’re Making Sure of that). And I am sure more than one poster here would be upset that Reinsdorf turned a blind eye to the rampant cheating in the name of the bottom line.

Same thing with McLain. Yes, he went on to win 30 games in a season, but he also had gambling debts and seedy connections that got him suspended from baseball by Bowie Kuhn. His career flamed out soon after. Again, not sure it would be worth the aggravation.

[TomBradley72]

Trading Norm Cash after the 1959 season was not a good move.

[rdivaldi]

2004, the hiring of Dave Wilder. That signing led to the destruction of the already subpar White Sox international operations.

[longtimefan]

Originally Posted by TomBradley72

Trading Norm Cash after the 1959 season was not a good move.

I wish you hadn't reminded me of that blunder. My nightmares will be starting again.

[TheVulture]

Originally Posted by TomBradley72

Trading Norm Cash after the 1959 season was not a good move.

At least they were trying to win a World Series with an AL champion team. Some of these horse **** moves don't have that excuse.

[TDog]

Originally Posted by TheVulture

At least they were trying to win a World Series with an AL champion team. Some of these horse **** moves don't have that excuse.

It wasn't so much that Bill Veeck was trying to win a World Series with an AL champion team. Veeck took control of the White Sox midway through the 1959 season and reshape the team more than go for a championship with what was there. He didn't get the opportunity until the offseason. He gained control of a team that was at the top of the American League and wanted to make it into something else.

He sold his controlling shares in the White Sox in 1961 to the Allyn brothers, who actually had a moment or two, though short of a championship, in the 1960s before the the team bottomed out. He left the exploding scoreboard, names on the backs of the uniforms and grist for stories, and not just from the promotions. When I was in grade school in Munster in 1969, a Cubs-fan classmate told me, as 11- and 12-year-olds sometimes do, that the White Sox didn't play fair because they moved the fences in when they were at bat. Ridiculous of course, but that came from something Bill Veeck said he would like to do. Cubs fans saved it up in the White Sox-hatred bank and distorted it through future generations of Cubs fans.

Giving Veeck a pass on the post-1959 trades because his intent was to win is no different from giving Rick Hahn a pass for the Shields trade because he was trying to win, his intent obviously not being to give up a great prospect for (fill in your own synonym for James Shields).

But at least the give-Hahn-a-break defense for the Shields trade is better than denying he had anything to do with it.

[shingo10]

I'd take back the decision to make the 83 uni's an alternate. So many cool looks/throwbacks that could be done but we're stuck with "winning ugly." 2020 could have been a perfect time to bring back the vests as a 15 year reminder of our ALDS dethroning of Boston. I digress.

[TheVulture]

Not sure how you can't see the difference between adding good players like Minoso and Seivers to a championship team, and adding a garbage player to a team with no chance from the beginning, making it even worse.

They were in fact the primary reason the Sox went from 6th in the league in offense to 2nd, so Veeck achieved what he set out to do with those trades. The starting pitching simply didn't hold up. On the other hand, acquiring Shields accomplished absolutely nothing.

[I_Liked_Manuel]

Seems like a lot of people are focused on giving up Tatis, who hasn't accomplished anything, vs acquiring a pitcher that would've lost 20 games if the Sox didn't shut him down. Tatis may be a player in the future but one thing we know for certain is that Shields was terrible that year. This entire board knew it before the sox acquired him

[LITTLE NELL]

Originally Posted by I_Liked_Manuel

Seems like a lot of people are focused on giving up Tatis, who hasn't accomplished anything, vs acquiring a pitcher that would've lost 20 games if the Sox didn't shut him down. Tatis may be a player in the future but one thing we know for certain is that Shields was terrible that year. This entire board knew it before the sox acquired him

Even JR knew it but still let Hahn go through with the trade.

[fusillirob1983]

Originally Posted by Rocky Soprano

Basically? That man flat out quit on the team.

Frank should have been on the 05 playoff roster and he should have only played for the Sox.

Objectively speaking, Frank on the playoff roster for any playoff series that year would've been a waste of a roster spot.

[Frater Perdurabo]

Originally Posted by fusillirob1983

Objectively speaking, Frank on the playoff roster for any playoff series that year would've been a waste of a roster spot.

You are completely correct with regards to the facts.

My use of the word “should” was an expression of regret that circumstances - his injury - robbed all of us of the opportunity to see him hit in the 2005 postseason.