Dick Allen

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 06:50 PM) Except we're going to be limited to around $9-10-11 million next year, in that area. (Unless it's the rare exception like that Cuban pitcher, Miguel Gonzalez, who was a free agent available to any club...but the White Sox aren't the type of organization that TYPICALLY goes out and bids $30-40-50 million on the Puigs, Solers and Cespedes of the world. Viciedo was a big exception, along with Joe Borchard back in the day.) We can't just go around throwing money at Viva (Micker) Zapata's, because there are a limited number of them, and fewer "hidden gems" than in the days when scouting wasn't collectivized and there was no internet with everyone becoming an amateur scout/talent agent/buscone. Dumping Rios gives the Sox more cash to bid for the next Puig. The White Sox historically haven't bid on these types because historically they haven't had the flexibility to do so.

QUOTE (Baron @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:54 PM) Good post....doesnt make sense at all what some people are suggesting. Just have to wait for tomorrow. What kind of prospect do you think would be the Sox minimum price to let Rios go?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:51 PM) In the end, we'll get a very good idea in the next 24-48 hours how serious Mr. Daniels is about getting back to the playoffs THIS season versus preparing/reloading with a healthier starting staff for 2014. I don't know, it isn't like it's Rios or bust at this point. Maybe it eventually will be, but I would have to think he will have another shot at a bat in the coming weeks, especially since they will take on money.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:49 PM) It means value in the trade market, at the very least. Just because Garcia is available and he's being paid well doesn't mean we should give up something of value for nothing. Rios is being paid fairly for his level of production, we should be compensated in prospects to let that production leave our ball club, period. Its not for nothing. Its for financial flexibility. For some reason, I don't think the Blue Jays are kicking themselves for letting Rios go for nothing. Have the Rangers throw in a couple of their lesser prospects maybe one with real good stats so people can get excited and call it a deal.

QUOTE (Baron @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:36 PM) The clubhouse thing was debunked by Jon Heyman about 2 weeks ago. Just people continue to ignore it. I don't think he is a bad guy. He is probably liked in the clubhouse. I just don't know if you want his inconsistent effort as a veteran around a young team. Stone was on a radio show last week which got no pub, but they asked him about Rios getting benched for loafing, and he said Alex was probably surprised because he hasn't hustled since he's been here and for the most part, gotten away with it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:29 PM) That $17 million is unlikely to give the White Sox better performance than Rios if it is spent on the FA market in the next offseason or two. And if the Sox are genuinely in a pinch for having too many outfielders, fine, move Viciedo to 1b next season and it's not the worst thing in the world. They aren't forced to do this if the Rangers won't give up something useful. I don't know about that. Are we all looking at the same Alex Rios?

QUOTE (Baron @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:26 PM) That would be fine if the player we were giving up was playing poorly and contributing very little. As much as I want to see Garcia up on this team...I'm going to be displeased if its just because we did a salary dump. The last couple months, Rios hasn't been all that productive. I think if it is a dump, it would be very similar to the time the got rid of Carlos Lee. You have to count what they do with the freed up funds as part of the return. Best case scenerio, what does Rios net you this winter or at the next deadline? For a team that probably won't comtend next year, is that better than the added financial flexibility?

QUOTE (Baron @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:19 PM) Remember when Hahn said we dont need to make anymore trades unless it makes sense and improves the team. Does that sound like letting Rios go for salary relief? Sure. They have his replacement in AAA, and that is $17 million that could be spent on other players. I wonder if Hahn tried setting teams up before the deadline, knowing all along they would take salary relief but asking for the moon so teams would think he wouldn't give him up without a huge return.

The Sox should take Manny back.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 03:34 PM) The Rangers will face pressure from their fan base if they know they could have had Rios and didn't get him. It's a good bet the "leak" originated from Chicago. A fanbase irate Alex Rios wasn't acquired?

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 27, 2013 -> 10:31 PM) Dick Allen, I guess samardzija is back to being hot garbage again... Yes he is.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:32 PM) I would be livid, as you should be, if we just dumped him for salary relief. Everything the Sox have said and indicated through these moves are that we are "reloading" not "rebuilding." Rios has value, we might have to eat some salary to get a premium prospect, but it can be done. Dumping salary would be a cop out, especially after we didn't pay any of Peavy's outgoing contract. No. They can always reallocate those funds during the offseason. Its not like they wouldn't get anything.

How does it work with what is coming back? If what the Sox want is on the 40 man, wouldn't they have to clear waivers as well? I think the Sox will try to buy a prospect, but if that fails will just let him go.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 10:06 AM) In the NBA more often a team will exchange bad contracts (like the Bulls sending Ben Wallace to the Cavs and taking Larry Hughes or the Raptors trying to trade Bargnani to the Bulls for Boozer. But I can't think of an example like what Bernstein is talking about here. Bulls will trade, say, Jimmy Butler but you've got to take Deng? Teams have sent draft picks to teams for picking up cash in the NBA to get them under the salary cap and/or luxury tax. The Bulls sent a draft pick to Atlanta with Hinrich several years ago? The luxury tax in baseball affects very few teams. Its not like the NBA where almost every team is at the salary cap and several are paying luxury tax. But it hasn't happened in MLB, and with the new TV money seems very unlikely to start any time soon.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 08:00 AM) Again, no one is saying that. What people have said to you, repeatedly, that you keep ignoring, is that the testing is BETTER, and they are confident in that. No one has said that "no one" is using. The tests may be better but the results are the same. If a small Miami paper hadn't come out with this last year, no one would have been busted this season. Either no one is using or the testing isn't working. What is the purpose of having a better test if it isn't going to catch anyone? Maybe it is impossible, but to me being confident in a test and all its procedures would mean you are confident if someone isn't playing by the rules, they are going to get caught. MLB is not anywhere near there yet.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 09:12 PM) The problem is finding guys with bad contracts who have trade value. If the Sox were to do something like this, I'd limit it to 2 years and $60M. So smart organizations eat $60 million for a teams#5 prospect. Using one of your lines.......rotflmao

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 07:28 PM) More teams involved in the bidding for Cliff Lee during the offseason would mean better prospects in return than for Peavy. Cliff Lee is owed at minimum $62.5 million after this year. Maybe over $80 million. The Sox would have to get a team's entire top 30 and maybe more to make it worth it.

How bad and expensive does a player have to be that a team will just give you a top prospect to take him off their hands? It really is unrealistic the way Bernstein describes it. Marty's scenerio makes more sense, but there is no way the Sox are going to eat $20 million to $150 million just for another team's #5 prospect, nor should they.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:44 PM) huh? Who said no one is using anymore? You will get better discussion from people if you stay away from hyperbole. Its not hyperbole. If you are confident about the current testing and no one is testing positive, that suggests no one or very few are using.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:56 PM) Now THAT would be interesting and equally unprecedented. That's not what Bernstein is suggesting, though. And anyone thinking the Sox would pay that kind of money for a couple of prospects make Charlie Sheen seem sane.

QUOTE (Special K @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:38 PM) I think he was referring to luxury tax when he said "salary cap threshold". Even then, there is no chance the Sox would even be close to the luxury tax. The White Sox flirting with the luxury tax taking on bad contracts for prospects? There is no need to even mention those words in an article about the White Sox. He wrote a baseball article about NBA rules.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:36 PM) Of course you can, it is definitively a better program. Not perfect or impenetrable, but better. A lot. There is more testing, more random testing, more chemicals tested, adding blood tests, etc. It will catch more people as a percentage, and it will cause more fear of being caught. The Biogenesis things were going on before the new testing regimen, by the way. Has anyone been caught with the new tests? You can't really think no one is using anymore.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:35 PM) Everyone suspended this week was suspended for drugs they were taking prior to the beginning of blood testing and regular monitoring of testosterone levels which started with the new CBA and should be in place right now. And also take note...they did catch 3 guys from the biogenesis clinic with the previous tests. Braun, Colon, and Melky Cabrera were all caught by the urine tests with the remnants of the biogenesis drugs in their system, so even with the primitive previous test it was still able to catch some of the guys some of the time. Braun got off on a technicality but all 3 of them were caught by the previous tests. Still a rather small percentage and their were allegedly several more names that didn't get suspended because of lack of evidence. While I think juicing is down, I'm still confident there are more than a couple players on every team knowingly using some banned substance.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:22 PM) That's the annoying thing about this entire drug testing mess...all of that can make sense easily. Guys do get stronger. Guys who are in their early 20's build muscle mass all the time. Guys who are in their early 20's and go from "A-ball level trainers" to "I just earned $500k and I'm on a major league roster and now I have access to their weight room and nutritional information" could readily be expected to put on some serious mass and strength during offseason conditioning. Guys who are having a huge jump in innings, like Q was last year, could readily be expected to lose some velocity and then have it come back the next year. Colon of course was already suspended once for steroids directly linked to the Biogenesis clinic, so no it's already established he didn't recover naturally. But that's the real annoying thing here; guys can legitimately get stronger and better and that's exactly what you should expect in a guy's early to mid 20's. That's why I'm hoping I can finally have confidence in the testing program, because if it is finally olympic-quality it's going to be very tough to beat long-term and we can stop having this discussion. You can't have confidence in the testing program. Everyone suspended this week didn't fail a test. And previous failures do cause more suspicion. Maybe Quintana did this clean. Maybe he did not.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:21 PM) FWIW, Bernstein did mention that he talked to a few people that presented him with this concept. So it wasn't just "some idea" he came up with. Bernstein has a solo show on Friday and Hahn will join him from 5-530 live at US Cellular Field. Bernsrein mentioning the Sox and salary cap threshold shows he has absolutely no idea what he is writing about. He thinks it is the NBA.