Dick Allen

If it was Morrison, I don't know why you would need to wait on a corresponding move financially. He makes peanuts.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 10, 2012 -> 12:59 PM) Doesnt matter at this point anyway. Illini were 10-0 last year as well.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 10, 2012 -> 11:09 AM) Nope, the trade went down June 27, 2004. Pre-2012 season Meyers was rated #28 prospect. He did have a big year so he probably would be considered higher now. Pre-2004 season, Jeremy Reed rated #25 prospect. Plus Olivio and Morse. I don't consider the price for Shields as excessive as most. Prospects are prospects until they prove otherwise, and really for the Royals to win they are going to need pitching. Doing what they did or paying ridiculous amounts of money in free agency is the only way to do that quickly. I just don't see Shields leading them to the promised land.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Dec 10, 2012 -> 10:22 AM) You're either selling Olivo short or you weren't paying that much attention at the time. Olivo wasn't just "solid looking," he was an excellent combination of speed + power + defense from a young athletic catcher. He wasn't tearing it up at the MLB level, but he was ready to be there and learning. He had tons of value. Reed was a truly elite prospect at the time. Morse was a scouting type, but obviously one a lot of teams would have wanted to get. For a half season of Freddy Garcia that deal was considered a massive mistake by KW, yet it won him a WS. Freddy was extended and the package was a pittance compared to what happened because of the trade. This deal, given a year and maybe more of Shields plus Davis, is very comparable. As for this deal, again, the PROSPECTS DO NOT MATTER. Let me say it again THE PROSPECTS DONT MATTER The Kansas City Royals haven't had a 90+ win season since 1989. Yeah. 1989. They've had 3 "winning" seasons since then and won 83, 82, and 84 games. They've been absolute dogs*** for 23 years. Dogs***. They've blown it, time and time and again, whenever they've had a core to build around. They've finally something real that actually matters. People want to keep the prospects? Really? Guess what line of thinking got them into this mess? Kudos to KC. As a Sox fan I don't like it because it makes them a legitimate threat now and in the future, but as a baseball fan who also appreciates the sport, this is wonderful for KC and their fans. But again, Glass has to do his part. They're not there yet, but at least they're trying to get there. Prospects do matter, but there's a decent chance the prospects the Royals gave up don't turn into perrenial all stars. They have played the wait for the prospects game for a long time and it wasn't working out so I don't blame them for this move. I just don't see where you see how this is going to propel them to annual contenders. There is a lot of talent on the roster, but those guys haven't done it before, so in essence guys like Moustakis and Hosmer are nothing more than prospects, so you kind of contradict yourself thinking of them as contenders.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 10, 2012 -> 10:13 AM) They hosted the All-Star game last year and drew 1.79 million fans. The White Sox drew 1.96 million, and this was considered a down year, even sparking a 400+ post thread on how to increase attendance. They do not outdraw the White Sox. It's not even close. And their TV and radio contract isn't as lucrative, they don't collect as much ticket revenue. Their spending will always be lower than the White Sox as long as the Sox are in win mode.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Dec 10, 2012 -> 10:06 AM) Denial sucks man. Those guys are good. Take the blinders off. IF --- and it's a big IF -- this move means the Royals are in "win now" mode then yes, KC is very much a place to win. They have a better park than us & they outdraw us. They have better talent too. If their FO is going to start acting like winners instead of perennial losers then they are very much for real. Denial is the ignoring of the 20+ years it has been since KC has been to the playoffs. If KC is the place to go to win, so is just about every other team in baseball.

My dad was an Andy Frain usher as a kid. He was a rare one who actually liked both teams. He worked Wrigley one day there was a DH. He was working the boxes behind homeplate. During the second half of the second game, the Cubs GM at the time saw him leaning against the railing and told Andy Frain to fire him. My dad gets called up to see Andy and Andy tells him the story but told him he wasn't going to fire him, and that he should go hide in the upper deck the rest of the day. Because of that, my dad hated the Cubs. If it never happened, I probably would have been one of the few who liked both.

Bears offense scored 7, gave up 14.

Cutler pisses me off.

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 03:00 PM) Say what? You also made it a point to mention that Keppinger hit a home run in a game you attended. Are you serious when you type this stuff? Because if it's all a bit, then you might be the most brilliant poster on the site. A key stat that hasn't been mentioned: Kep had a .332 BABIP last year. He's at .294 for his career. He might be good against lefties, but if this is your everyday third baseman, then that's some sorry ass s***. We're in for a lot more fun in 2013. He won the tallest midget contest. $4 million a year isn't going to get you the perfect candidate, but it probably was a better idea than paying Youk 2 or 3 times as much or paying around the same thing for the right to have Eric Chavez on your DL. When it was announced I said I was dissappointed,because I don't think he will match his 2012 season, but if you look at his career, he has had a couple really nice offensive seasons, and his career numbers are very similar to what Youk gave the Sox last year but with fewer homers. Perhaps more contact in the 2 hole can mean more RBI from 3 and 4.

Marty's source has been identified:

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 11:23 AM) Is that what your source says? Everyone knows Upton is available, so just by MO, the White Sox have inquired. But minor leaguers like what they would get from Viciedo are not what Arizona covets. That's what my source, mlbtraderumors.com, Jon Heyman, Ken Rosenthal, Jon Moresi, Peter Gammons say. The D-Backs want a major league SS, not prospects. They have been working on trades for Cabrera and Andrus but can't get those done. If your source was legit, he would know the DBacks would either have to be interested in Ramirez or De Aza/Viciedo/Floyd would have to be dangled to a team for a SS of Arizona's liking, as part of the package. For a guy who wants nothing more than to re-build, stating that you would gut the Sox entire minor leagues except for one player for Justin Upton is beyond curious. And even if Upton was acquired, if he was anywhere near the player he could be, the chances of him and Hawkins playing together for more than one season, if that, are remote. He's signed for 3 more seasons. Hawkins is in the minors at least the next 2.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 11:14 AM) I'll trust my source on the Hahn/Guillen relationship over your speculation. That doesn't hurt me. Just don't be too surprised if neither Upton or Guillen are ever collecting White Sox paychecks.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 11:01 AM) There was no problems between Hahn and Guillen. Except Oney didn't think too much of Hahn because he didn't play professionally. Hahn can say and play nice with Ozzie all he wants, but he is far too smart to bring him back to the dugout.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 10:41 AM) Just guessing, but that probably means that the people who were likely to drop their season tix did it last year, selecting for the diehards this year who will retain at a higher rate. I don't interpret it as THAT positive of a sign (not a bad one either, of course). If the renewal rate is that high so far, they will be able to talk a few of the non renewals up until now into renewing, and will bring some new accounts in. It is almost guaranteed right now they won't have their 7th straight season of attendance decline, and that is before they really complete their roster. You know one way one another, the new GM is going to put his stamp on this team which will mean a big name or 2. That will sell tickets.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 10:48 AM) did you see the really nice things Hahn said about Guillen after he was fired? I was tempted to post it. KW said some really nice things as well. It's easy when he's not your problem anymore.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 10:37 AM) Info from someone connected to organization. Is this the same guy who told you Hahn wants to bring Ozzie back?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 10:10 AM) First, Viciedo is no Justin Upton. I applaud Hahn's effort to get creative in his pursuit of Upton, but it would have to be considered something of a longshot if he could turn Viciedo and De Aza into a group of more attractive prospects. We'll see. As for Upton, I think he's the best player on the market and well worth emptying anything we have on the farm (aside from Hawkins) to get. Think about it, when Hawkins is scheduled to be in the big leagues Upton will just be hitting his prime years. 35-40 HR's a year in his prime at the Cell. How do you know he is pursuing Upton?

QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 08:02 AM) Where did u hear this? It's on their website.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Dec 8, 2012 -> 01:21 AM) I'm lazy and am not going to do this, but I heard something today that leads me to believe somebody might want to check Upton's home/road splits. Pretty damn good at home, not so much on the road. We do play 81 games per year on the road. It's probably the reason he is available.

Season ticket renewals right now over 90%. Last year they were 50%.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 7, 2012 -> 02:43 PM) Why would that be? Because I dont just say 74% is good without actually knowing what is really behind that number? If Wisconsin wins, if they lose, they are still going to be my team. I am not a Wisconsin fan because Wisconsin is the greatest football/basketball school on the earth, I am a Wisconsin fan because that is where I chose to go to college. So win, lose or draw, I will still root for my team. No, because you find so much wrong with a guy who was the coach for 7 years got the school 5 top 20 finishes and 3 top tens. That's not good enough. You aren't ever going to think what is coming is good enough.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 7, 2012 -> 02:34 PM) If you think Bielema is such a great coach, then start writing letters to your alma mater why they should hire him. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf...tabase/1715543/ Bielema was being paid $2.6million dollars at Wisconsin. That is more than the Head Coach at Florida, Notre Dame, USC and Penn State. I am expecting Bielema to be better than those coaches if he believes he should be paid more. As he is not better than all of those coaches, what exact reason is there to give him a better raise? Bielema doesnt recruit well, he doesnt coach well, he just happened to be in charge of Wisconsin when the rest of the Big10 fell apart and thus he looks good. You keep saying he won 74% of his games, that is basically the worst he could do. Think about the schedule (well use 12 games for easy math): 12 games - 4 ooc games against unranked low opponents, all wins. 4/12 = 25% of his wins are guaranteed. That leaves 8 games in the Big10. 4 of Wisconsin games in any year in the Big10 are against, Indiana (same division), Northwestern, Minnesota (protected rival every year), Illinois (same division), Purdue (same division) So lets say his 4 wins are against Illinois, Minnesota, Purdue and Indiana. Bielema goes 8/12- 75% by beating no one. Yet you argue his 74% win rate is something to brag about. It is basically the worst he could do. Here are the facts, 2012- Wisconsin played 1 rank team, Nebraska and was 1-1. 2011- Wisconsin played 5 ranked teams, 3-2 2010- Wisconsin played 4 ranked teams, 2-2 2009- Wisconsin played 3 ranked teams, 1-2 2008- 4 ranked teams, 1-3 (Not sure rankings stats are right before that year so not going to include them as 06 and 07 show Wisconsin playing no ranked teams) 5 year total against ranked teams- 7-7 To me that track record is not worthy of being paid as a top 20 coach. Wow. You are going to be a very angry guy during football season the rest of your life.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 7, 2012 -> 01:45 PM) Alvarez took over in 1990. That is 22 years ago. A lot has changed at Wisconsin in the last 22 years, including Wisconsin football becoming respectable. Alvarez's record is different because he took over a losing program. People respect him because he won 3 Rose Bowls, after Wisconsin did nothing for decades. You give deference to the man who built the program. You accept .500 records from the guy who through his own hard work built the program. He earned the respect he gets at Wisconsin. Because without Alvarez, none of this happens. I am sorry but we expect more now, as we should. It would be like arguing that after Bo Ryan leaves, it will be okay if the next coach doesnt go to the NCAA tournament or win Big10 titles, because prior to 1999 Wisconsin basketball hadnt been in the NCAA tournament for 30+. Wisconsin has higher expectations now. And Bielema won 74% of his games, 3 top ten finishes (same as Alvarez) In fact, his "embarrassing" 8 win season, gives him just 2 less than Alvarez in less than half the time. Look at some of the seasons Alvarez had after turning the program around. If you are expecting more, you better up the ante on the coach's salary, because obviously you think you are a top 10 program.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 7, 2012 -> 12:21 PM) I dont think Bielema was going to be fired. I think that Wisconsin was going to be stuck with him for as long as Alvarez was the AD. People keep talking about Bielema's record, as if he beat good teams. The guy thrived on beating the worst teams. He was 68-24 but lets look at that record: Bielema is 2-4 in bowl games Bielema is 1-5 lifetime against Ohio State, and has a losing record against Michigan State and Penn State as well. While he went 3-2 against a down Michigan program, Bielema was only a combined 1-10 on the road against those four aforementioned teams. Bielema was being paid top 20 coach money. He was not a top 20 coach. I personally believe that he should have been held more accountable and that he was given way to big of a pass due to Barry Alvarez. Whatever the case, Bielema was not going to be fired this year. But another 1 or 2 3rd place Leader division finishes there would have been trouble. Most Wisconsin fans do not think that this year is some sort of victory. Its an embarrassment. We finished 3rd, we got lucky. Its pretty terrible that Wisconsin finished behind PSU after all the trouble PSU had. You would think Wisconsin fans would know what embarrassment is considering what they were before Alvarez. Not counting his first few years in which he was building the program, after his first conference title, Alvarez, who is kind of God like around Madison was 4-4 or worse in the Big 10 six times. The Badger fans faces must have matched their shirts.