Dick Allen

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 03:22 PM) It is possible someone comes in and makes an offer for Smith that seems worthwhile and they take it. But barring that, it is almost assuredly going to be Phegley. First, look at the signals the team has sent. Phegley has been, multiple times now, sent to minor league camp early (spring training), benched for undisclosed behavioral reasons (twice during last season), and the team has multiple times had quotes out in articles talking about his shortcomings. On the other hand with Smith, they haven't said much of anything, but the did invite him to the special pre-spring hitter prospect camp last year, did send him to AFL, and did just add him to the 40. All the signals say they prefer Smith for value. Second, they are actually similar as prospects in many ways. Both are bat-first guys with some power, both are seen as weaker defensively, but both have a strong arm. It's just the "other catching stuff" that is key here, and Smith gets better grades for pitcher handling. Third, simply put, Phegley has had two shots. Smith none. So unless a team offers a significant prospect for Smith, which isn't likely, I am quite confident Phegley is the one who will be gone. Unless Smith is part of a trade, and the other team really likes him.

If Gillaspie didn't hit like he hit the first 3 or 4 months and Beckham didn't start the season injured, Semien would probably be considered a 3B right now. I don't think the White Sox think much of him defensively.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 03:20 PM) People keep claiming that 2B is one that is the least impactful or least important. Why? I'd like to understand the reasoning behind that because I sure don't understand it. And then I'd point out that Robinson Cano signed a 10 year, $240 million deal. I believe the Mariners overpaid, but that was a franchise that surely felt that 2B was not the least important position on the field and they almost clinched a Wild Card spot last year and are in great position to do so this year. IMO, every position is important. 2B happens to be where the Sox have some depth.

QUOTE (bear_brian @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 02:22 PM) Has there be any discussion that we may not actually be the "leader" in all of this, but may actually be behind Boston, who is waiting on a Lester decision? They probably have more tradeable pieces to throw at Beane than we do. I only mention that because it would seem that, if not Boston, what is Beane waiting for?? There is no leader IMO in a trade until the trade happens. Anyone can slide in at the last minute.

Bill James 2015 handbook ranks John Danks the #111 starter. A guy the Sox supposedly need to pay to get rid of at just about any cost. Justin Masterson is ranked #105.

Probably means Phegley is about to go or maybe Nieto.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 12:51 PM) I need to go home. Everything I've said agrees with Phil Rogers. I'm in a deep state of depression. The thing that scares me is the Sox are said to be in love with Micah Johnson at 2B. Get a new questionable defensive SS with him, and that up the middle defense, the one decent thing about the White Sox defensively, will become pretty bad. Do you blow off your defense 162 games for the 31 or 32 games Samardjia pitches? They would really need to get a SS who was a plus defensively.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 09:31 AM) MLBTR needs to step up their game. They haven't put up anything in two hours. The meetings are in SD. These guys are just getting to breakfast.

Was KW thinking about resigning so he could interview for that job, or was he thinking about it because he was upset JR wouldn't let him? JR is a loyal guy, but loyalty is a 2 way street. I wonder if KW's comments damaged that in any way in JR's mind.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 08:51 AM) De Lo Santos was our #2 pitching prospect - he was a washout but he had high value; so did Sweeney, who is still in the majors.. It was a bad value trade. Williams made 3 bad value trades that one could say won the WS - the stars collided and Cotts had a career year. He sent Lee away for a salary dump + 2 middling players to give salary room to sign others; we gave a top 5 prospect in baseball plus a prospect named Michael Morse, plus our staring catcher for 1/2 year of Freddie Garcia. Yea, it worked. But that's once in a lifetime fortune. I think the Sox knew Garcia would sign an extension. He had the relationship with Ozzie. No doubt there was some tampering going on there. As for Sweeney and De Lo Santos? Who cares? They weren't going to help the Sox win. At the time Swisher was signed to a team friendly contract if he had the production he had in Oakland and NY. KW trading prospects for the most part worked out. If he had hung on to them, the team would have been a lot worse off.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 08:21 AM) Oh, yea, we work well together. Give them Durham for free. Trade Foulke for Koch. Trade 3/5 to prospects for that elite bat, Swisher. Sure, Williams was always willing to pile on prospects, and that worked very well for Beane. The White Sox might have won the WS in 2003 if they didn't do the Koch/Foulke trade. The Durham trade was ridiculous. The Sox picked up all his money except the pro-rated minimum so Beane would give them the great Jon Adkins. As for the Swisher trade, if that thread was ever dug up, most here loved it, and other than Gio Gonzalez, the prospects weren't much.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 08:36 AM) Which is exactly why this entire concept makes no sense unless we're getting a solid discount on his next contract. It's going to take someone solid to get him, there's a reason why Tim Anderson's name has come up. Tim Anderson would be a fair return for Samardzija and if the White Sox had won 87 games last year that would be a perfectly reasonable gamble for the team to take, that extra pitcher could put us over the top in 2015. Since the White Sox have won 75 games the last 2 years, that deal suddenly makes no sense for us because even if everything goes right, making a 15 win jump is hard. The only way that would make sense is if we could look beyond 2015 and expect the pitcher to be present at a continuing discount. I personally wouldn't give up Anderson. I think if they absolutely must have this guy, waiting a year, or even until June or July makes more sense.

If the Sox do trade for him, they are going to have to give up value. Whether it is one year or not, you theoretically get a frontline pitcher for a discount, and if you can't sign him, you get a supplemental pick. So for the year of service, the 9 or 10 months of exclusive negotiation rights, and the insurance of a decent draft pick, it isn't like you are going to be able to get him for someone who doesn't have a really good chance of succeeding.

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 08:25 AM) I wouldn't have a problem with paying him $12.5 mill. That's what the Sox paid LaRoche and I think Robertson would have a bigger impact than him. Bullpen pieces are starting to get paid. The record for a non closer was 3 years $18 million before Miller. Miller may close. But Zach Duke came close to the highest of all time before Miller signed. Once they start getting paid, there is no going back. The days of cheap bullpens are endangered. I think ultimately the Yankees re-sign Robertson. That would give them the best back end of the bullpen in baseball, assuming Betances, Miller and Robertson maintain their current levels.

This guy is pretty good. I think Rivera taught him his cutter and he strikes out a lot of guys. That said, I don't see the White Sox spending the cash needed to get him. I think this may be a plant to get action elsewhere.

Brian Kenny, MLB Network"s resident saber geek, wants Minnie in. Apparently during his 10 year peak, Minnie averaged a 5 WAR. He also wants Dick Allen in. During his 10 year peak, his OPS+ was better than 11 contemporaries who are now HoFers, including Willie Mays and Hank Aaron.

If they traded Alexei, it would make sense to give him a look. Boras being his agent doesn't mean much, he iwould still be controlled through arb. He has some talent, but hasn't been the same simce he hurt IIRC a hammy. PED, DUI isn't a great mix. I read somewhere he also had a domestic battery. If that is true, you probably would have to pass.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:00 AM) Look, im not absolving Cutler of blame here. He has not had a good season. But the Bears frittered away the Buffalo game by trying to pass all over the place and didnt run at all in the second half to control the score and the clock. Im sorry you feel that Jay is the only one who deserves blame in that loss, and he certainly deserves some, but not all. I have thought the running the ball thing is overblown. They weren't getting anywhere running the ball vs. Detroit anyway. Last night was interesting. There were complaints that Cutler has checked out of runs into passes previously, but when Forte took a 6 yard loss on a carry, it was interesting that Phil Simms said it was a play that Cutler needed to but failed to check out of. I think maybe Cutler's biggest issue isn't that he can come off as pretty unlikeable, maybe he just doesn't understand the chess game football is very well.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:11 AM) Thanks for the responses, and hope there are many more to come. Do you guys honestly think that asking nothing more than that starters throw their current "side sessions" in the game, would jeopardize their health? I reject that notion. This system does not require pitchers to throw more pitches, or more often. It simply utilizes the pitches thrown in the bullpen side session, in the game. Again, there is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to the issue of limiting a pitcher's work load. Too little work equals inadequate conditioning. Even high intensity weight training does not require 5, or even 4 days of rest, in between sessions. If today's relievers can throw as frequently as they do, and often with considerable intensity, then the frequency which this demands, is not unreasonable. The question becomes; how many pitches? That is debatable, but I don't see the problem with 2 appearances, within a 5 day span. 100 pitches in one appearance, and 45 in the other, does not seen like a terribly burdensome work load, providing that a pitcher is conditioned for it. I would be interested to know how much intensity is actually applied, during side session days. Does anyone know much about how they are conducted? I have been in the park for side sessions. Sometimes they are pretty intense, other times, they seem to be just getting loose. I think a lot of it depends on how a guy is feeling. They always say most pitchers pitch with pain in many starts. I think another problem with your scenerio (and I would have no problem if they did it for a short time like a World Series) is it may make them more sore. That causes pitchers to compensate, which could lead to disaster. I do think if they were conditioned for it for a few years, it would probably be fine. But you would pretty much have to get the entire industry on board with it for it to really work. Besides, thinking of it, you aren't going to get much financial savings if the plan did work. These guys would all expect even larger paychecks.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:38 AM) Cause again being back in home area and playing for a contender might help him decide to sign extension. He's already said if he were to become a free agent in 2015 he would definitely like to talk about coming back to Chicago. Being that the cubs are still in rebuild mode that's leaves a possible spot to the sox. Plus it gives a chance to see what we have in semien, sanchez , saladino plus. We haven't hardly seen any of them play ss cause alexei is there about every day Then, instead of giving up value, why don't the Sox wait until next year to sign him.?Swapping out Alexei for him doesn't make the White Sox any better in 2015 IMO.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:30 AM) Here is a hypothetical trade idea. 3 team trade with dodgers, white sox and Oakland. Based of trade would be alexei going to dodgers, Erisbel Arruebarruena going to Oakland and Samardzija going to white sox. Maybe other lower level pieces involved. Oakland gets a controlled defensive shortstop tho his offense still needs work. White sox swap the 10 million would be paid to alexei turns over to samardzija with out raising payroll and still have enough to get say melky and bullpen pieces. Dodgers get Alexei who helps them now. I don't understand wanting to downgrade your average at best defense every day, to acquire a guy who might be able to help you 1 every 5 days for one season.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:25 AM) Dave Cameron has written a ton about this type of system, and is on record claiming that a tandem/multi-use system is where pitching will go in the long run. That said, he also clearly brings up the point that moving to this sort of system is a massive undertaking that has to take place from the bottom of the minors up to the Majors, and represents a severe issue when trading or acquiring players that are changing systems. Several years ago, Nolan Ryan wanted the Rangers to go to a 4 man rotation permanently. The problem with that is, you can train your guys in the minors to do this, but during the season, even in the offseason, you acquire pitchers that aren't physically trained for it, and it will blow up in your face. Same with this idea. Just about every team would have adopt this philosophy for it to really work.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:09 AM) A few years ago, I wrote a paper, in which I advocated a different use of Professional baseball, pitching staffs. This year’s final game of the World Series reminded me of the hypothesis, which I put forth then. The Giants used their Ace starter, Madison Bumgarner, in long relief, on his normal bullpen, side session day. We all know the results, and they were quite impressive. The impetus for my hypothesis is that today’s starting pitchers are used so little, and yet make so much, that there should be a better way to utilize them. When a pitcher is only asked to pitch in one out of every 5 games, and then only expected to go 6 innings, or around 110 pitches, which ever comes first, it should be obvious that teams are not getting much for their money. This present day modus operendi requires 5 very expense starters, which is problematic, in itself. However, when you then consider all of the vitally important relievers, which are required to provide effective late inning pitching, the whole system is just about as cost inefficient as one could possibly imagine. Explaining that to an analyst, not steeped in baseball, would surely elicit a response of “head scratching” incredulity. It all begs the question; isn’t there a better way? Well, that takes us back to the 7TH game of this year’s World Series. The Giants had a plan to use Bumgarner, in relief to close out the final game. They executed that plan to perfection. He threw 68 pitches just two days after throwing 117, pitches in his previous start. This is precisely the way I assert that teams should manage their pitching staffs. Pitchers routinely throw around 45 or 50 pitches, during their side session day, which comes a couple of days after their regular starts. My contention is that instead of throwing those pitches in the bullpen, let them throw them in the game. Now, I know that someone is going to object on the basis that those pitches, thrown in a game situation, might put to much stress on the pitcher’s arm. To that, I can only reply, “oh poor pitcher”. Tell that to the old timer hurlers, who routinely threw close to double the amount of pitches, thrown by today's pitchers, every start, and did it every 3 days. Over protecting a pitcher’s arm, can be just as detrimental as over taxing it. There is a point where too little work results in insufficient conditioning. It’s the very reason that a reliever, has to work up to being able to start. He must develop the stamina, necessary to enable him to throw the additional pitches required. If a starter were only asked to throw 50 pitches in a game, that would probably be about all you could extract from him, without risking injury. This principle is best expressed by the strength and fitness creed; “Use it, or lose it”. So, how would this system of employing the current bullpen, “side session” pitches in game situations work? Teams would use two pitchers per game. That day’s “starter” would be expected to throw around his usual 100 - 110 pitches. He would exit the game, and another pitcher would take his place, and throw what would be the equivilent of a “side session” 45, or 50 pitches. The following day, you would repeat the same process, with two more starters. At that point, you would have used all 4 of the starters, required for this system, and you may or may not have needed to use any bullpen pitchers. The third game begins to utilize the pen. They would divide the workload, and pitch the entire game. The 4TH game, returns to the first two pitchers, who shared the first game’s work load, only this time the roles are reversed. Pitcher A, who threw 100 pitches the first game will now be asked to “relieve” pitcher B, who will start this game, and be expected to throw 100 pitches. Pitcher B is able to throw 100 pitches, as his previous appearance was the equivilant of a “side session,” of merely 45 pitches. The 5Th game repeats the same system, this time with pitchers C and D, who worked in tandem, in game 2. They would reverse their respective roles, just as pitchers A and B did. This system enables a team to use 4 starters, instead of 5, and requires fewer relievers. Moreover, the relievers do not have to be of the same quality, as they are not asked to pitch in virtually every close game, unlike today’s method of depending upon the bullpen to pitch the final 3 innings. Therefore, they would not be key to every game’s outcome. How many great starts from Sale and Quintana, did the Sox waste, because the bullpen couldn't preserve the lead? The amount of money that could be saved by this method of managing a pitching staff, is tremendous, and could afford teams the payroll flexibility to upgrade other roster spots. Applying this principle to the current situation, the front office could forget about looking for another starter, and more bullpen help. They could then use the money to acquire another outfielder, and be ready to compete in 2015. Although, ideally the Sox would have 4 top starters, and it appears that they only have 3, at best. A staff of Sale, Quintana, Rodon and one solid RH starter, might work. Of course, agents and the Players Union might object and attempt to thwart any such revolutionary idea, which might threaten the existing system, but that does not diminish the validity of the idea. What do you gentlemen think of the concept and its feasibility? I don't think it is feasable. In a World Series, it is worth the risk of what the stress, and pitching in a game is very different from a side session, will do to your pitcher moving forward. And it probably could work for a week or 2, but 162 games is a long time, and pitchers aren't as good as Baumgarner. The results wouldn't be the same. IMO, you are just asking for trouble. The payroll flexibility created would soon dissappear as you would probably be paying guys to rehab.

There have been pitchers who lost it suddenly and refound it. Halladay, Black Jack McDowell are a couple. So Johnson, there is still a chance. With Davidson, most players fail that badly because they just can't do it. His contact rate is atrocious. Many on this board have already written off Baez of the Cubs because of his contact rate as a 21 year old. Davidson was 23, in his second year of AAA, and he was worse at the AAA level. If you can't hit the ball in the minors, you aren't going to be able to hit the ball against better pitchers.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 02:40 PM) That's terribly flawed logic. Because the White Sox didn't give their biggest offer possible to Chris Sale before he signed an extension, they won't sign Scherzer? The logic is flawed. The conclusion is correct.