Dick Allen

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.

One thing I find fascinating, is guys like Quintana aren't suspected of juicing anymore once they get caught. I don't know how many times Hawk has mentioned how much bigger and stronger Quintana got over the winter. He said he was almost unrecognizable.The first winter after earning a sweet paycheck.anyone reaaly think Colon is just naturally doing what he is doing at 40? Studies have shown most people who do time commit more crime after they do the time. I suspect juicing is the same.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 03:59 PM) The NFL has nothing to do with this. It's full of hypocrites, but they are cracking down starting next year. But if you are saying that McGwire and Bonds are necssarily vilified for breaking baseball's records, then why would ARod NOT be? He's 5th on the all time home run list and, up until recent injuries and now a looming suspension, was on pace to shatter the all time home run record, and it was going to be because of PEDs. And yes, people generally don't care about cheaters who fail, because they failed anyways. If they cheat and succeed, people will believe it to be unfair and yes, they will be hated. Bud and MLB take the sam view. If they had the same thing they supposedly have on ARod on any of the other players that were suspended, ie they supposedly did exactly the same things as ARod, does anyone really think they would get 211 games?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 03:16 PM) Perhaps the closest examples might be the trades done by the Marlins and the Red Sox over the last year. The Blue Jays and Dodgers wanted Jose Reyes and Adrian Gonzalez, respectively, but their teams didn't want to give them up for nothing, so the teams took on extra dollars in the form of bad contracts given to Mark Buehrle and Carl Crawford along with them. But, the teams taking on that salary also gave up a few players as well, they didn't send prospects along, just bad contracts. But that isn't what he wrote. He said teams will give you their top prospects to take bad contracts off their hands. He said it's the new thing in baseball. He is full of s***. It hasn't happened. With the extra $25 million every team gets next year, it will make the desperation of gettimg rid of bad contracts even smaller. Teams will want to get rid of them without a doubt, but not for their top prospects, unless their top prospects aren't any good and they have a Pujols-like deal they want to dump. You could point this out to Bernstein but he would cut you off , hang up on you and call you stupid while you have dial tone. But here, he's the idiot. In the NBA it might happen because of luxury tax and salary cap. Not in MLB. It is good to have money to spend. I will give him that, but taking on bad contracts of failed free agents doesn't make much sense when you could just sign other free agents.

Rios and De Aza have almost identical numbers except for strikeouts. Rios is obviously a better fielder, and a better baserunner although he's also prone to some mental blunders. He also makes about $10 million a year more than De Aza.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 10:41 AM) When have the A's traded a 7 WAR starter? Their MO has been to trade guys like Quintana and Santiago, not guys like Chris Sale. They traded Haren after 2007. Gio a couple of years ago.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 10:39 AM) I didn't imply no value, I simply was pointing out that it's not very likely you are going to get a comparable player back, no matter prospect "rankings" or whatever. I said the expected results of that package was 2 regulars, 1 utility player, 1 mid rotation starter, and 1 reliever (I didn't suggest the pitchers word for word, but implied it with the Andre Rienzo/live arm thing). Is that the value you want? With the Felix thing, I even said that there were 6 good players in that deal, just that they have been inconsistent at the MLB level and that I still wouldn't have made the move. Of course, Bogaerts could turn out like Hanley Ramirez, and then the Sox need only one other prospect to turn out to win big time. But my thing is this...it's 2013. You really, really don't think that, if you save up enough, you can buy dress shoes, cufflinks, and a silk shirt and whatever else you need over the next 2 and a half years? Realize that during those years, you will have very busy periods of buying and selling still. This is ASSUMING that your mom doesn't surprise you with a shirt or shoes or whatever that she has made herself. I think it's absolutely crazy to think that you won't have a full suit by 2016. I think you can have a full suit by 2015. If teams would pay the Sox price for Sale and the Sox weren't planning on contending for a few seasons, trading him makes a lot of sense. There isn't much besides him around who will get you a decent prospect. Then you are having him pitch in basically meaningless games for multiple seasons. The risk of injury is tremendous, not just because he is a toothpick with an awkward motion, but because he is a pitcher. Just using the past and I know neither is near Sale's level, but after 2008, the Sox could have received a ton of prospects and/or current major leaguers for Danks and Floyd. They had zero throw away seasons after that, both got hurt, they haven't made the playoffs since, and while Floyd is gone, if someone claimed Danks, they would let him go for nothing. Sale is awesome, but I think the Sox should at least listen to offers.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 08:35 AM) It certainly wouldn't stun me if as a 26-27 year old he suddenly put up a 50 HR season. He certainly has the power to do that and it may very well be like a lightswitch for him if he figures out how to stay in that "locked-in" mode for an entire season. Please don't say 50 HR season. No White Sox has ever done that, and the last young guy on here I heard was capable of doing it was Josh Fields.

Apparently very few have been placed on waivers. For guys who have a chance not to clear, teams are waiting for some hangers on who think they have a slight chance and will block to drop out. I would think Ramirez would be claimed. I think most of the others, the Sox would be thrilled if they were claimed.