JR potentially selling the White Sox

[Am2626]

There’s never been any indication that Reinsdorf wants out of owning the Bulls. I think he even told his kids that if he dies they should sell the Sox and keep the Bulls. Unfortunately I think we will be stuck with the Reinsdorf’s for a very long time.

I agree with that, was just talking in hypotheticals. Reinsdorf alone doesn't own a controlling interest which complicates things too. Only Reinsdorf selling doesn't grant the new owner decision making power necessarily.

He’s the chairman. Doesn’t that mean that he has taken on the responsibility of making the Bulls operational decisions. I think the other owners are silent owners.

[dougthonus]

He’s the chairman. Doesn’t that mean that he has taken on the responsibility of making the Bulls operational decisions. I think the other owners are silent owners.

He is right now, but if he sells that responsibility doesn't necessarily transfer with him. It could, but it doesn't have to. The silent owners probably all love the idea that Reinsdorf makes them a ton of money. Say he sells to a new owner but only his non majority share and that dude wants to spend 100M in luxury tax money and cut everyone's profits to nothing. How long do you think those silent partners will remain silent? They have enough voting power to come together and elect a different chairman.

[SalmonsSuperfan]

He’s the chairman. Doesn’t that mean that he has taken on the responsibility of making the Bulls operational decisions. I think the other owners are silent owners.

He is right now, but if he sells that responsibility doesn't necessarily transfer with him. It could, but it doesn't have to. The silent owners probably all love the idea that Reinsdorf makes them a ton of money. Say he sells to a new owner but only his non majority share and that dude wants to spend 100M in luxury tax money and cut everyone's profits to nothing. How long do you think those silent partners will remain silent? They have enough voting power to come together and elect a different chairman.

I think the current conspiracy is that Ishbia has a path to majority ownership when/if the Reinsdorfs sell their stakes, currently owning 35% of the team compared to Jerry's 20% and the kids' 30% (supposedly*). I don't think there are too many 'silent owners' left and they certainly don't control much of the team. Seems likely that Ishbia will be the new owner, it also seems likely that he operates the team exactly the same way and could logically move the team.
Is he gonna be a better sport mind than JR or will he hire more competent people? Will he spend a bunch of money? The Suns "spent" on players but the franchise is valued at, what, double what the White Sox are? What does it do for a team's valuation if the bet pays off and Durant, Beal, etc are a perennial contender like us dummies might have expected? There's revenue to waste on a guy like Bradley Beal, teams are compelled to spend money in the NBA, and paying the luxury tax in various contexts probably has a financial payoff (unless you're the Bulls and you sell out every game anyway and the most popular athlete of all time just so happened to play for you). Acquiring Durant n 'em was 'expensive', but the money literally had to be spent somewhere and the potential moneymaking opportunity was, I'm sure, too much to pass up if the players clicked and they produced a dynasty (or even a playoff team lol).The Sox are also one of the top spenders over the last two decades and what has it produced? Why sign one star for $300mil when you can sign 10 relievers for $30mil each? financial flexibility! Don't think the grass is always greener when it comes to an owner, seems like Ishbia took a good team and micromanaged a contender into NBA hell. It can always get worse than JR.

My point is (gone off topic, don't ban me a 10th time for derailing), plenty of fans are heralding Ishbia as the Sox Savior but I'm not so optimistic. The Suns are a terrible team and seemingly as poorly run as they were under Sarver, can we assume that Ishbia is any more competent or less profit-motivated than Reinsdorf is? Furthermore, I think any new owner is more likely to move the team out of Chicago than a Reinsdorf is. 1, a move could reflect negatively and be bad publicity for the cashcow Bulls, an asset the family will never sell; 2, I speculate the ego boost and desire not-to-be-hated locally is stronger in Michael R than it is in some mortgage moron whose only connection to the city is that he owns a house in Winnetka and went to a university 100 miles away. I bet the nepo baby has less of a desire to achieve even more wealth that he doesn't need, but what do I know?


* https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/04/16/breakdown-shows-ishbia-brothers-hold-35-of-white-sox-to-reinsdorfs-20-but-reinsdorf-has-the-power/ (who knows how accurate this information is)

[dougthonus]

He’s the chairman. Doesn’t that mean that he has taken on the responsibility of making the Bulls operational decisions. I think the other owners are silent owners.

He is right now, but if he sells that responsibility doesn't necessarily transfer with him. It could, but it doesn't have to. The silent owners probably all love the idea that Reinsdorf makes them a ton of money. Say he sells to a new owner but only his non majority share and that dude wants to spend 100M in luxury tax money and cut everyone's profits to nothing. How long do you think those silent partners will remain silent? They have enough voting power to come together and elect a different chairman.

I think the current conspiracy is that Ishbia has a path to majority ownership when/if the Reinsdorfs sell their stakes, currently owning 35% of the team compared to Jerry's 20% and the kids' 30% (supposedly*). I don't think there are too many 'silent owners' left and they certainly don't control much of the team. Seems likely that Ishbia will be the new owner, it also seems likely that he operates the team exactly the same way and could logically move the team.
Is he gonna be a better sport mind than JR or will he hire more competent people? Will he spend a bunch of money? The Suns "spent" on players but the franchise is valued at, what, double what the White Sox are? What does it do for a team's valuation if the bet pays off and Durant, Beal, etc are a perennial contender like us dummies might have expected? There's revenue to waste on a guy like Bradley Beal, teams are compelled to spend money in the NBA, and paying the luxury tax in various contexts probably has a financial payoff (unless you're the Bulls and you sell out every game anyway and the most popular athlete of all time just so happened to play for you). Acquiring Durant n 'em was 'expensive', but the money literally had to be spent somewhere and the potential moneymaking opportunity was, I'm sure, too much to pass up if the players clicked and they produced a dynasty (or even a playoff team lol).The Sox are also one of the top spenders over the last two decades and what has it produced? Why sign one star for $300mil when you can sign 10 relievers for $30mil each? financial flexibility! Don't think the grass is always greener when it comes to an owner, seems like Ishbia took a good team and micromanaged a contender into NBA hell. It can always get worse than JR.

My point is (gone off topic, don't ban me a 10th time for derailing), plenty of fans are heralding Ishbia as the Sox Savior but I'm not so optimistic. The Suns are a terrible team and seemingly as poorly run as they were under Sarver, can we assume that Ishbia is any more competent or less profit-motivated than Reinsdorf is? Furthermore, I think any new owner is more likely to move the team out of Chicago than a Reinsdorf is. 1, a move could reflect negatively and be bad publicity for the cashcow Bulls, an asset the family will never sell; 2, I speculate the ego boost and desire not-to-be-hated locally is stronger in Michael R than it is in some mortgage moron whose only connection to the city is that he owns a house in Winnetka and went to a university 100 miles away. I bet the nepo baby has less of a desire to achieve even more wealth that he doesn't need, but what do I know?


* https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/04/16/breakdown-shows-ishbia-brothers-hold-35-of-white-sox-to-reinsdorfs-20-but-reinsdorf-has-the-power/ (who knows how accurate this information is)

We were talking about the Bulls (despite the thread being about selling the Sox), but I think all these points for the Sox are also about the same and generally agree with all your comments about just being willing to spend doesn't equate to anything necessarily.

[SalmonsSuperfan]

He is right now, but if he sells that responsibility doesn't necessarily transfer with him. It could, but it doesn't have to. The silent owners probably all love the idea that Reinsdorf makes them a ton of money. Say he sells to a new owner but only his non majority share and that dude wants to spend 100M in luxury tax money and cut everyone's profits to nothing. How long do you think those silent partners will remain silent? They have enough voting power to come together and elect a different chairman.

I think the current conspiracy is that Ishbia has a path to majority ownership when/if the Reinsdorfs sell their stakes, currently owning 35% of the team compared to Jerry's 20% and the kids' 30% (supposedly*). I don't think there are too many 'silent owners' left and they certainly don't control much of the team. Seems likely that Ishbia will be the new owner, it also seems likely that he operates the team exactly the same way and could logically move the team.
Is he gonna be a better sport mind than JR or will he hire more competent people? Will he spend a bunch of money? The Suns "spent" on players but the franchise is valued at, what, double what the White Sox are? What does it do for a team's valuation if the bet pays off and Durant, Beal, etc are a perennial contender like us dummies might have expected? There's revenue to waste on a guy like Bradley Beal, teams are compelled to spend money in the NBA, and paying the luxury tax in various contexts probably has a financial payoff (unless you're the Bulls and you sell out every game anyway and the most popular athlete of all time just so happened to play for you). Acquiring Durant n 'em was 'expensive', but the money literally had to be spent somewhere and the potential moneymaking opportunity was, I'm sure, too much to pass up if the players clicked and they produced a dynasty (or even a playoff team lol).The Sox are also one of the top spenders over the last two decades and what has it produced? Why sign one star for $300mil when you can sign 10 relievers for $30mil each? financial flexibility! Don't think the grass is always greener when it comes to an owner, seems like Ishbia took a good team and micromanaged a contender into NBA hell. It can always get worse than JR.

My point is (gone off topic, don't ban me a 10th time for derailing), plenty of fans are heralding Ishbia as the Sox Savior but I'm not so optimistic. The Suns are a terrible team and seemingly as poorly run as they were under Sarver, can we assume that Ishbia is any more competent or less profit-motivated than Reinsdorf is? Furthermore, I think any new owner is more likely to move the team out of Chicago than a Reinsdorf is. 1, a move could reflect negatively and be bad publicity for the cashcow Bulls, an asset the family will never sell; 2, I speculate the ego boost and desire not-to-be-hated locally is stronger in Michael R than it is in some mortgage moron whose only connection to the city is that he owns a house in Winnetka and went to a university 100 miles away. I bet the nepo baby has less of a desire to achieve even more wealth that he doesn't need, but what do I know?


* https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/04/16/breakdown-shows-ishbia-brothers-hold-35-of-white-sox-to-reinsdorfs-20-but-reinsdorf-has-the-power/ (who knows how accurate this information is)

We were talking about the Bulls (despite the thread being about selling the Sox), but I think all these points for the Sox are also about the same and generally agree with all your comments about just being willing to spend doesn't equate to anything necessarily.

I think you should be more polite to people.

[dougthonus]

We were talking about the Bulls (despite the thread being about selling the Sox), but I think all these points for the Sox are also about the same and generally agree with all your comments about just being willing to spend doesn't equate to anything necessarily.

I think you should be more polite to people.

I honestly have no idea what you think was impolite.

[Michael Jackson]

He’s the chairman. Doesn’t that mean that he has taken on the responsibility of making the Bulls operational decisions. I think the other owners are silent owners.

He is right now, but if he sells that responsibility doesn't necessarily transfer with him. It could, but it doesn't have to. The silent owners probably all love the idea that Reinsdorf makes them a ton of money. Say he sells to a new owner but only his non majority share and that dude wants to spend 100M in luxury tax money and cut everyone's profits to nothing. How long do you think those silent partners will remain silent? They have enough voting power to come together and elect a different chairman.

This for sure. He has been voted the chairman. It was not his by ownership share. Lamar Hunt IIRC was majority shareholder initially. The hunts have no ownership in the Bulls currently I believe or at the very least not a majority share. I do believe over time that Jerry has majority share in the Bulls. Regardless it still isn't "majority" in the sense it is say 35%, the other 65% is not happy be it 20 investors etc... can vote him off the being the chairman. The same would apply to the next in line. This really was PE before PE was really involved in sports though so of course as long as the business is tunring a profit all owners are happy. The issue of selling is that it is almost assuredly going to be run similarly by another PE or similar style. Or it could be UAE money which would clearly spend but I would hate the sports washing aspect. Jerry sucks but the alternatives are likely more of the same thats why I don't get excited over it. I just want an owner that invests more in the FO etc... It is not the spending on the players that is the issue it is the people running the operations.

[Michael Jackson]

We were talking about the Bulls (despite the thread being about selling the Sox), but I think all these points for the Sox are also about the same and generally agree with all your comments about just being willing to spend doesn't equate to anything necessarily.

I think you should be more polite to people.

I honestly have no idea what you think was impolite.

I read that as green font

[dougthonus]

I think you should be more polite to people.

I honestly have no idea what you think was impolite.

I read that as green font

It was not green font, I have no idea what was rude in that response. I said we were talking about different things but I agreed.

[Michael Jackson]

I honestly have no idea what you think was impolite.

I read that as green font

It was not green font, I have no idea what was rude in that response. I said we were talking about different things but I agreed.

That is what I mean I think he was being sarcastic in that comment, you were agreeing.

[dougthonus]

I read that as green font

It was not green font, I have no idea what was rude in that response. I said we were talking about different things but I agreed.

That is what I mean I think he was being sarcastic in that comment, you were agreeing.

So I'm the one that is too dense. My wife agrees.

[Peelboy]

We were talking about the Bulls (despite the thread being about selling the Sox), but I think all these points for the Sox are also about the same and generally agree with all your comments about just being willing to spend doesn't equate to anything necessarily.

Absolutely 1000% true that willingness to spend doesn't in and of itself mean success is around the corner. But unwillingness to a fault to spend ala JR is a massive inhibitor. Willingness is necessary but not sufficient.

The other thing about JR is that he seems incredibly proud of his stubbornness, going as far as to say even if he's mismanaging the Sox, he enjoys it and doesn't have other hobbies at this age so he'll keep it up. The hope would be that a younger owner would at least be open to things like analytics, revamping the org philosophy, etc. Additionally, you'll almost automatically get less of the organizational inertia, if only because Ishbia has fewer connections than JR inside the org to stay "loyal" to.

None of it means guaranteed success. But JR is guaranteed failure, so eliminating that is a huge step forward. We can only hope that Justin is one of those "I'm going to hire smart guys and then give them resources and get out of their way except for intermittent performance reviews of the org based on bottom line success" guys. And that with the Bears moving to AH and a de-JR-ing of the Sox, that there's a chance for a downtown stadium (Soldier would be great if you tear down the spaceship and fit a baseball stadium in with the columns).

[dougthonus]

Absolutely 1000% true that willingness to spend doesn't in and of itself mean success is around the corner. But unwillingness to a fault to spend ala JR is a massive inhibitor. Willingness is necessary but not sufficient.

The other thing about JR is that he seems incredibly proud of his stubbornness, going as far as to say even if he's mismanaging the Sox, he enjoys it and doesn't have other hobbies at this age so he'll keep it up. The hope would be that a younger owner would at least be open to things like analytics, revamping the org philosophy, etc. Additionally, you'll almost automatically get less of the organizational inertia, if only because Ishbia has fewer connections than JR inside the org to stay "loyal" to.

None of it means guaranteed success. But JR is guaranteed failure, so eliminating that is a huge step forward. We can only hope that Justin is one of those "I'm going to hire smart guys and then give them resources and get out of their way except for intermittent performance reviews of the org based on bottom line success" guys. And that with the Bears moving to AH and a de-JR-ing of the Sox, that there's a chance for a downtown stadium (Soldier would be great if you tear down the spaceship and fit a baseball stadium in with the columns).

Overall, the owner has two main responsibilities:
1: Open the checkbook
2: Pick the right basketball people / realize you aren't one of them

I think our willingness to do #1 is absolutely in the bottom half of the league and probably the bottom 3rd. Our ability to do #2 is sort of interesting, he's generally good about staying out of the way, but I question the picking the right people part.

In the end, I think luck plays the biggest factor in all of these things, so swapping owners (like GMs or coaches) won't have all that outsized an impact, but I would put Jerry as bottom half in terms of owners I'd want for my team.

[nomorezorro]

he's too good at staying out of the way!

[nomorezorro]

also i'm not super up to date on what the bulls front office looks like below the ak/me level, but i know historically one of the biggest knocks against both reinsdorf teams is that he hasn't been willing to hire enough people to keep up with the direction the sport has headed in.

obviously having an owner that's willing to spend doesn't automatically mean you're going to be good, but at least it usually means that other franchises aren't going to have a competitive advantage over you when it comes to investing in stuff like analytics/player development/facilities etc.

[Peelboy]

Absolutely 1000% true that willingness to spend doesn't in and of itself mean success is around the corner. But unwillingness to a fault to spend ala JR is a massive inhibitor. Willingness is necessary but not sufficient.

The other thing about JR is that he seems incredibly proud of his stubbornness, going as far as to say even if he's mismanaging the Sox, he enjoys it and doesn't have other hobbies at this age so he'll keep it up. The hope would be that a younger owner would at least be open to things like analytics, revamping the org philosophy, etc. Additionally, you'll almost automatically get less of the organizational inertia, if only because Ishbia has fewer connections than JR inside the org to stay "loyal" to.

None of it means guaranteed success. But JR is guaranteed failure, so eliminating that is a huge step forward. We can only hope that Justin is one of those "I'm going to hire smart guys and then give them resources and get out of their way except for intermittent performance reviews of the org based on bottom line success" guys. And that with the Bears moving to AH and a de-JR-ing of the Sox, that there's a chance for a downtown stadium (Soldier would be great if you tear down the spaceship and fit a baseball stadium in with the columns).

Overall, the owner has two main responsibilities:
1: Open the checkbook
2: Pick the right basketball people / realize you aren't one of them

I think our willingness to do #1 is absolutely in the bottom half of the league and probably the bottom 3rd. Our ability to do #2 is sort of interesting, he's generally good about staying out of the way, but I question the picking the right people part.

In the end, I think luck plays the biggest factor in all of these things, so swapping owners (like GMs or coaches) won't have all that outsized an impact, but I would put Jerry as bottom half in terms of owners I'd want for my team.

I had historically thought that about JR, and been pissed about his penny pinching but generally positive on staying out of the way. Read a lot the last few years about how that's not really been the case, the most recent/glaring examples being TLR and Getz, but apparently he's had a hand in a bunch of other decisions over the years, not just "big ticket" (or what the Sox considered big) FAs, but also organizational decisions. I'll have to find the article, but some insiders who left the org basically said he was constantly interposing himself and his baseball sensibilities.

I actually think he used to be better at hiring, Schueler was a good move back in the day, Himes, and I thought Hahn was pretty good at the beginning of the rebuild in 2016. KW was a flop only rescued by a fluke 2005 season, and allowed to stick around far far too long. And I do believe that the AJ Hinch/TLR debacle was a huge part of the flop of the rebuild. But on the flipside, Hahn was apparently enamored of Grifol so WTF does he know......

But pairing good moves (cleaning house) with absolute trash moves (Getz instead of an actual search and finding more qualified/proven organizational builders like Kim Ng) has been the JR way at least of late. Almost any change would be at least marginally positive.

[dougthonus]

I had historically thought that about JR, and been pissed about his penny pinching but generally positive on staying out of the way. Read a lot the last few years about how that's not really been the case, the most recent/glaring examples being TLR and Getz, but apparently he's had a hand in a bunch of other decisions over the years, not just "big ticket" (or what the Sox considered big) FAs, but also organizational decisions. I'll have to find the article, but some insiders who left the org basically said he was constantly interposing himself and his baseball sensibilities.

I actually think he used to be better at hiring, Schueler was a good move back in the day, Himes, and I thought Hahn was pretty good at the beginning of the rebuild in 2016. KW was a flop only rescued by a fluke 2005 season, and allowed to stick around far far too long. And I do believe that the AJ Hinch/TLR debacle was a huge part of the flop of the rebuild. But on the flipside, Hahn was apparently enamored of Grifol so WTF does he know......

But pairing good moves (cleaning house) with absolute trash moves (Getz instead of an actual search and finding more qualified/proven organizational builders like Kim Ng) has been the JR way at least of late. Almost any change would be at least marginally positive.

Should say my comments are related only to the Bulls. I've got no idea what's going on with the Sox.

[Stratmaster]

I'm just shocked that there are people who care about the White Sox. go Cubs!

OK, I know that is trolling but it's a hometown trolling.

[Michael Jackson]

also i'm not super up to date on what the bulls front office looks like below the ak/me level, but i know historically one of the biggest knocks against both reinsdorf teams is that he hasn't been willing to hire enough people to keep up with the direction the sport has headed in.

obviously having an owner that's willing to spend doesn't automatically mean you're going to be good, but at least it usually means that other franchises aren't going to have a competitive advantage over you when it comes to investing in stuff like analytics/player development/facilities etc.

This is where the "cheapness" grates me! Hire the best staffs, soend the money there. Be elite there. It has no effect on the salary cap at all, or even teh profits yiou can share in by staying below the tax. HIRE there. That is where the lack of spending gets me. I get spending on players is often counter productive but spend on the backend where we can have the best scouting, medical, analytics etc... so when you do spend on players it is of good value.

[Michael Jackson]

It was not green font, I have no idea what was rude in that response. I said we were talking about different things but I agreed.

That is what I mean I think he was being sarcastic in that comment, you were agreeing.

So I'm the one that is too dense. My wife agrees.

Not dense at all it is just the way I read it. I think that fits the poster being a little tongue in cheek.