Dick Allen

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:58 AM) No, and I elaborated what I did and didn't mean, very clearly, at least three times in that thread. If you read that, you're being dense on purpose (business as usual), and if you didn't read it, you shouldn't put words in others mouths. For the final time (although no one seems to be confused about this except you at this point), I said track record should be a component of what is used to predict future performance, but that the important factor in a GMs decision to value or acquire a player is, and should be, exclusively what that player will do going forward. Projections are mostly based on track record, and similar players' track record.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 11:05 AM) He could certainly be traded in 2018, he could certainly be up in 2018, or he might not be contributing until then but if he's good enough, he'll likely be on the 40 man and we'll have a pretty good idea as fans if he is going to be a significant contributor. Many of us lauded the Nevin Griffith pick and signing in the 2nd, and he completely flopped. We had a pretty good idea that was going to happen too based on numbers and scouting reports within 4 years of drafting him. However, it's hard to know exactly what will happen 5 years from now. If you can tell me exactly, I would appreciate it. I'll write you up a TPS Report and you can let me know what more we can do at that point. EDIT: Either way, I see nothing that this has to do with my original point. Please try and get back on topic. But the point was I didn't think the 2nd round pick was as valuable as a lot of people and pointed out the draft was said to be HS heavy, so they player wouldn't contribute for 5 or 6 years making the pick less valuable, which you argued with. Now you say they will have a good idea within that timeframe. Great. We should have a good idea of Matt Davidson. What is he going to be? And when? You try to have it both ways. If you are going to say something, and it is wrong, don't just start calling me names and try to change the subject. Own up to it.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:54 AM) I merely said you will likely have an idea after 4 years about whether or not someone will be contributing. Matt Davidson did within 4 years (and he was actualy up from August 11th on, so there goes your September call-up theory). If Hawkins is in AA/AAA in the next year or two, we'll have a pretty good idea with him too. That's entirely beside my point, which is the trolling aspect of it, bringing in previous arguments to fit round pegs into square holes. Either way, I'm not wrong on that - if you don't have a pretty good idea about whether a guy is going to be on the MLB roster or have a shot at contributing value to the MLB team either directly or indirectly by the time he has to be added to the 40-man, then odds are pretty good he's not going to contribute. That argument isn't flawed whatsoever, is perfectly reasonable, and is not on topic anyways. You have done a perfect job of fitting the exact definition of the White Sox fan I'm describing though. Thank you for that. Then why did you use your argument against me when I said if a HS player was picked in the second round in 2014, he probably wouldn't contribute to winning until 2019 or 2020?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:37 AM) Addison Reed would be the 4th or 5th best right handed reliever in the Sox pen this year. Do you think that there was perhaps a reason they were shopping him? According to reports last winter, the Sox had a couple of untouchables, Abreu and Sale, and the reports were Reed was next to untouchable. They obviously thought a lot of Davidson, and I seriously doubt the were shopping Reed.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:30 AM) Except that Matt Davidson DID contribute at the MLB level, so even with my misguided and out of context quote, you're still wrong, and either way, it has nothign to do with this argument, yet somehow in your trolling ways, you've attempted to direct the argument to this point. I'm done with it on this point: White Sox fans wanted Rick Hahn and upper management to go out and get high upside talent. They did that by trading Addison Reed for Matt Davidson. White Sox fans are upset. Rick Hahn is in a no-win proposition because he can't make White Sox fans happy. September call ups on a team out of contention isn't contributing to winning. Sorry to call you out on your foolishness. I hope Davidson is a stud, but he strikes out way to much against inferior pitching. I have been told by the saber guys Viciedo swung at too many bad pitches and couldn't improve. Either Davidson is swinging at too many bad pitches or he is swinging at good pitches and cannot make contact. Personally, I hope he is swinging at bad pitches, because I believe that is correctable. Not being able to hit AAA strikes doesn't bode well for his future. It is funny when you get called out for your foolishness, and no , it wasn't taken out of context. Your defense is someone is trolling. How was it taken out of context? Did you not say what I claimed you said? It was in reference to the Sox 2nd round pick. I said I read the draft wasn't very strong, better than last year, but HS heavy. Chances were the Sox second round pick would be a HS player and wouldn't contribute to winning for at least 5 or 6 years. You argued with me about that. Even said Hawkins will be contributing to winning in Chicago in 2016.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:20 AM) No Yes. You specifically told me a few months ago, guys not contributing at the major league level 4 years after being drafted are afterthoughts. Matt Davidson was drafted 5 years ago. And I know, he was drafted from HS, but I specifically mentioned the Sox second round pick would probably be a HS player, and probably would be at least 5 or 6 years away from contributing to winning. In fact, when I replied you really expect Courtney Hawkins to be contributing in 2 and a half years to the White Sox, you said yes.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:17 AM) Giancarlo Stanton had major contact issues all the way up, too. Sometimes they get it, sometimes they don't. Given their recent track record, I think it's reasonable to question the White Sox' ability to either develop these guys or correctly identify the ones that have a real shot. But, on the other hand, it's also probable that Davidson was the biggest package of talent that could be had for a reliever like Reed. I think it's a legitimate debate: should the White Sox shy away from poor contact prospects even when they represent the best available talent? Is the answer to just avoid them, or to continue to get better at developing them? You mentioned track record. Didn't you tell Marty something along the lines of track record meaning nothing? And Stanton's contact problems were at 18 and 19 and his other numbers were spectacular. There is no comparison to Stanton and any White Sox strike out machine in the minors.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 09:44 AM) Talented players are better than untalented players. By your own definition, Matt Davidson is an afterthought.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 09:39 AM) Strikeouts have gone up over the past 5 to 10 years. Mike Trout has struck out at 21% rate in the majors and he's at 26% this year. I don't care about those numbers. I don't particularly like Davidson, FWIW, but anybody denying his talent is acting foolish. Talent doesn't mean a whole lot if you can't take advantage of it. It really doesn't matter how far you can hit a ball if you make contact, if you can't make contact.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 09:28 AM) Matt Davidson has been a BA top 100 prospect 4 years in a row and was in every major publication's top 100. Are denying that Matt Davidson is talented? Because then you're wrong. I don't care about anything else, I'm not making a big stand or anything else, but you are kind of proving my point here. Sox fans wanted Hahn to go out and get high upside talent. He did. It's not as if it's without risk. Yet here you are complaining about it because he's high upside, low contact kind of guy. Guess how many big-time power hitters in the majors feature those exact tools? Josh Fields was a top 100 prospect. So was Brent Morel. So was Joe Borchard. If you cannot make contact at the lower levels, you most likely will suck in the major leagues. Adam Dunn never struck out at those rates in the minors. Neither did Jim Thome or Reggie Jackson. 3 of the most prolific strike out machines at the major league level. Bo Jackson did, but I think we would all agree he is a little different from anyone in the Sox system. Defend Davidson all you want, he's still young, he will probably get to Chicago, but chances are he isn't going to be this talent you think. He cannot hit the ball often enough.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 09:03 AM) Sometimes it doesn't work out. Sometimes you get Carlos Quentin. Either way, it's hypocritical to lambast the Sox for not bringing in the high upside offensive players and to then criticize them when said players don't work out (again, for 2 months thus far, and Reed has not been that good either). Carlos Quentin was a top 20 prospect. Davidson nowhere near. The White Sox seem to blow off contact issues throughout the minors. Maybe they think it will improve. But so far, the guys they have touted in their system who had trouble making contact at each level, either never made it to the major leagues or made little or even negative impact. Striking out at these rates in the minor leagues for more than a season or sol IMO shows a lack of ability to make contact with professional-level pitching. When they get to the elite arms with more sophisticated scouting reports, to think it will get much better is a dream. Hopefully, it's some mechanical issue with Davidson. There just aren't a lot of players who have been big contributors that fanned as much as White Sox prospects fan at the minor league levels. If your BABIP is .300 but you fan 175 times, unless you are walking at Thomas, Thome or Dunn rates, your overall numbers are going to probably suck.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ May 27, 2014 -> 09:04 AM) POTY

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 27, 2014 -> 08:54 AM) Congratulations. You have just won the Olympics of lame. What the f*** are you talking about? Yes, at the end of the day, it's about titles. But you know what, can't win the title without getting to the finals. You're implying that 4 straight trips to the finals isn't a remarkable accomplishment because they lost that first year? Only a dumb, homer, try-hard Bulls fans would even suggest that. And who cares what MJ would do with this team? I didn't say a damn thing about MJ vs LeBron or how 4 straight trip to the finals makes him better or the Heat better than the Bulls. God you guys are so scared. Y'all (for your benefit) are the one trying to egg people on saying 4 finals appearances in a row beats MJ. Will Perdue has more Finals appearances in a row than Hakeem Olajawon. So, I guess that really doesn't mean a whole bunch. Especially if you are about titles. MJ 6 LeBron 2 and counting. No MJ fan is nervous LeBron is going to overtake him.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 27, 2014 -> 08:48 AM) It's amazing that people make this kind of argument. He's got an ERA over 4 and doesn't throw any ground balls whatsoever. His K/9, BB/9, and K/BB are nice and indicate that he's gotten a little unlucky, but if you're throwing only 29% ground balls, you're going to give up the long ball especially when you're only topping out at 93. Meanwhile, people have asked Sox management for years to trade for players with Davidson's talent for years, and when he comes out and has a rough first two months, people immediately want him lynched. Hypocrisy, thy name is White Sox fans. The problem is the White Sox have had a long line of players with Davidson's "talents". Weak defensively, with a problem making contact.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 27, 2014 -> 06:35 AM) Fact: The Bulls never went to the finals 4 times in a row Fact: Shaq/Kobe never went to the finals 4 times in a row Soon to be fact: The Heat will have went to the finals 4 times in a row That's all I said. You can throw out as many hypothetical what ifs as you want. Y'all must be scared out of your minds that LeBron might just eclipse MJ. What's with the y'all? Are you in Texas? Don't say you are about titles and then count losing in the Finals as an accomplishment. Didn't the Bills play in 4 Super Bowls in a row? If anyone here pointed out Bulls losses in the Finals as success, you would say how embarrassing that was. And if you don't think a younger than 38 Mike substituded for LeBron doesn't get this current Heat roster to the finals, you're just being a hater.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 26, 2014 -> 07:50 PM) I remember saying .240. That was for your bet. Before that you said .210-.215. Even.240 is below his career numbers. What did you bet anyway?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 26, 2014 -> 09:48 PM) And that's a wrap. Heat about to do something Jordan's Bulls and Shaq/Kobe Lakers never did: 4 straight trips to the finals. I can't believe I fell for the, "well, it's just too damn hard to get to the finals 4 times in a row" bulls***. What is the big deal about going to the finals and losing. i thought you were only about titles? MJ never lost in the finals. And if he didn't "retire", the superfans actually were correct, a minimum 8 peat my friend.

Games are too damn long.

Don't get to ball 3 Downs

QUOTE (ChrisLikesBaseball @ May 26, 2014 -> 03:49 PM) It looks like he pulls up lame every time he runs to first hard. Yes . He was extra gimpy this time

Looks like Eaton will stay in the game

Eaton hurt again

Petricka

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 26, 2014 -> 03:21 PM) He's got to have these numbers consistently for at least 250 at-bats before he has much of any value. Unless another team's just completely desperate and overpays. .310/.348/.429 That is his slash line after about 250 plate appearances last year and you didn't think he could hit better than .215 this year.

.178/.270/.290 Carlton Fisk's slash line on May 27th 1983. I think he wound up 2nd or 3rd in MVP voting that year. Those writing off De Aza might wind up surprised.