Dick Allen

Iowa has to take the ball to start the second half, but if I'm Wisconsin, I would let them have the wind so you have it in the 4th quarter. It is going to take a takeaway or 2 to get more than one score in a quarter against the wind. If you hold on in the 3rd, you are golden. If you are down a score or even 2, you have the wind in the 4th.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 10:24 PM) Nice spin. Your the one that is doing the spinning. One of the saddest things I read when looking for Crawford stuff was a thread about Keith Laws top 25 a few years ago. The poster was pissed because Mike Trout was ranked #3. The poster said it upset him because Trout was heavily linked to the White Sox, and many mock drafts had the Sox selecting Trout.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 10:16 PM) You are pulling stuff out of your ass. Put up or shut up. There is a Sox targeting Carl Crawford thread. A few people didn't want him at the money he was apparently going to get, most realized it wasn't realistic, but there was only one poster who seemed to not want him at any price. Now if you want, you should bring that thread front and center, since you always make these little comments that people just post things out of their ass, and show everyone how you came up with no one wanted him at any free agent price.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 03:26 PM) No one wanted him at anywhere near the price he was going to get in free agency. I don't remember seeing a single post advocating signing him as a free agent. Not one. I think you are just making stuff up here. No making stuff up is saying no one wanted Carl Crawford at any free agent price, you made that one up today.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 02:46 PM) No one really wanted Carl Crawford at any free agent price. Do you have some posts that state otherwise, because that sure isn't how I remember it. I'm not going to go back for specifics, but he was a very popular player here. One poster even said he asked him at a game if he would like to play in Chicago and he supposedly said yes, and there were some hopeful follow up posts that it would happen. I think everyone figured Boston really overpaid, but to say no one wanted Crawford at any price is silly and wrong. He won a Gold Glove, Silver Slugger and was 7th in the MVP vote, and the Sox could always use a CF who could lead off. He was an excellent player in Tampa, and was 28 or 29 when he became a free agent. You knew the production at some point would drop. but he fell off the charts almost immediately.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 07:01 PM) No one here wanted him at anywhere near the money he was going to get. No one. He would have been a bust at the price anyone here thought was reasonable for him to actually sign.

He looked like a bust when they acquired him, and he didn't dissappoint.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 10:14 PM) He's a little more insulated than the thin Alexei . We can start throwing around excuses for him already if we want. Adjust to ML pitching, cold weather, longer season but hopefully that bonus he got will motivate him to stay in peak physical condition and wear his hitting shoes from the get go. I think cold weather is a pretty legit excuse if you never have hit in it.

A lot of people on here really wanted Carl Crawford. I read an article where Cashman and the Yankees took Crawford out to dinner. They knew they wouldn't sign him, they just did it to get Theo to give up more cash.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 05:29 PM) Clearly no one is suggesting he deserves a roster spot. Most of us are following ptatc's statement that his rehab will take longer than the usual TJS and expecting that when January rolls around, the best he might get is a minor league deal with an expectation he could be ready later in the season. A veteran on a minor league deal for very little money who might be able to either contribute if a young guy struggles, fill in late in the season for someone who is injured, or be trade-bait if he can prove effective...sounds like it would be a great fit for the White Sox. I don' t understand how a guy who may or may not pitch in the majors next year, and most likely will struggle for a couple months if he does, is a great fit for anyone.

Floyd is a notoriously slow starter. His April and May career splits are Axelrod-esque, and that was when he was relatively healthy. Missing a year and coming back, he might even be worse. He seems like a good guy, but there are better ways to fill a roster spot.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 04:31 PM) That's 4 to 5 questions marks And Floyd is a bigger question mark than them all. If he will take a minor league deal, fine. There is no point wasting money on him.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 11:29 AM) Over/Under on the date of the first "Fire Steverson" thread? Usually there is a little time before that starts. I'll say game 2 next season.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 08:43 AM) Skill vs. Will. In the normal everyday world, I'll take Will over Skill. If somone is willing to try and tries their hardest, you can usually give them the skills. In the MLB world, however, the Skill is so damn important. The percentage of baseball players (from little league on up) who make it to the big leagues is so tiny, it shows you how important skill is. Now, if some shlub gets in the bigs based on skill and under performs because of a lack of will, that usually gets taken care of by coaches and teammates. Now to contribute something related to this thread: Congrats to Jake and Matt. Peavy is a very good example of someone who has the skill and a s***load of will to go along with it. It takes skill and performance to win. There is definitely a place for sabermetrics, a big place, but there are also things you can't just throw into a computer program and have it spit out that gives you a total worth of a player. Intangibles do exist. You have to be able to look at it both ways.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 10:13 AM) He is NOT clearly better the 2nd time. Did you not look at his career numbers? 1st time - .222/.285/.327/.612, 537 PAs 2nd time - .231/.278/.352/.630, 530 PAs 3rd time - .243/.294/.411/.705, 464 PAs 4th time - .245/.297/.372/.669, 101 PAs There they are again, his career numbers. He is clearly worse. This is more indicative of Chris Sale than his splits this year, unless you believe that Chris Sale was a different and much better pitcher this year compared to last year and that there was a clear shift upwards in his talent. I don't believe there was; therefore I'm using the larger sample size, which paints a clearer picture. I've argued this point enough. -In retrospect, I think Ozzie should have taken Garcia out in game 4. He didn't. It didn't matter. Nobody should care. I certainly don't. -Hurrah, the Sox threw 4 complete games in a row. That in itself is lucky. It certainly didn't revolutionize the game. -The numbers indicate that Chris Sale gets worse the more hitters see him, except the 4th time, which is not a signficant amount of plate appearances to begin with and can be explained away using fairly safe assumptions. This is true of about 99% of pitchers. -There is no black and white in baseball. Except the White Sox uniforms. Except when they aren't. And why would it be considered lucky if Sale got guys out their 3rd and 4th crack against them? Seems to me the odds of them not making an out or less than 3 in 10.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 05:27 PM) One thing that hasn't been stated in this thread is that if the white sox are willing to dump Danks rather than giving his value a chance to recover...it could be because they don't believe his value will recover based on what they may know of him. Not necessarily. Obviously if he fully recovers, he is probably worth the contract. But if he were a free agent right now no one, including the Sox,would give him what he is currently owed. They may think he will be fine, but they don't know he will be fine. No team is going to take him unless the Sox eat a lot of money. He will be a White Sox next season.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 02:45 PM) I agree with you. Why are they looking for pitching when they have those 2 on the horizon? Maybe he doesn't believe their as good as prospects? Maybe he just wants to win this year and Beckham and Danks/Santiago fit that bill? Given the history of AA (Jays GM), I can see the aggressive side while Hahn restocks the farm with close to ready major league talent. Just like what he has said he's targeting the whole time. Do you see where I think this deal is possible? The article said they were interested in Beckham. Then it said the MAY have interest in Santiago or Danks. Now all the crazy trade proposals heavily slanted in the White Sox favor start pouring in. There is no way the Sox are getting Lawrie for Beckham and Danks.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 02:26 PM) I never said htat all runs are created equal, but when your team is horrendous at both offense and defense, getting them on either side helps the same. He was a part time player the past couple seasons because of roster, not injury EDIT: The reason you look at WAR at this point is because you cannot possibly predict event sequencing going into the season. A run saved is absolutely equal to a run scored -- it's the context that makes it true that not all runs are created equal. That's an entirely different thing. But even the most locked in saberheads admit defensive WAR at the very least, is a work in progress. So that measurement can be off. I just wonder why the Angels don't seem to like this guy very much if he is destined to be so good. They paid big money to keep him off the field.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 02:36 PM) I didn't think it made sense to give up 2 top prospects for a 38 year old knuckle ball Cy Young winner. If Beckham and Danks/Santiago is what they think is best available or a better fit for their team, then I can definitely see this happening. If Hahn has been offered Lawrie and something else for Beckham and Danks, he better agree to the trade before the Molly wears off. And again, why pay John Danks $15 million a year when you have one of the better pitching prospects in the game almost ready to go?

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 02:19 PM) I would definitely be on board with a Beckham and Danks for Lawrie +. I wouldn't know what the plus would be. Lesser prospects? The problem with that trade is Toronto wouldn't be on board with it. Let's all get serious here. We all hope and most think Danks will be better next season, but he was getting lit up and is owed a ton of money. Beckham has been having almost identical problems as Lawrie, but he costs more. A trade like this makes no sense for Toronto. And if Toronto needs pitching, why are they looking to move Sanchez? None of this makes sense other than Beckham interests them, and maybe the Sox make it work for Lawrie or maybe it's for some minor leaguer Paddy likes.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 08:52 PM) That was earlier in the season. I saw something for around June or July that had him throwing out 38% which isn't too bad. He finished throwing out 24%. If he can keep getting balls called strikes, he has defensive value. If not, he is not a positive defensive player.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 08:34 PM) http://www.detroittigertales.com/2013/10/t...n-baseball.html This guy tries to rate catchers on runs saved and has Conger 10th among all catchers and that's with only 92 games played. Catcher's are probably the hardest player defensively to quantify. Even that guy had him negative in everything but pitch framing. He had him as the worst throwing catcher. I don't think his arm is that bad, but he has a big issue with accuracy, and it could be mental.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 08:42 PM) Joakim better be hurt. Because he's awful right now. Did he play any preseason games? I am thinking he'll be OK once he gets up to speed. How long before he gets hurt again is the big question.

Rose is clearly not 110%.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 08:37 PM) We still don't have a plan on offense Thibs needs to go.