Dick Allen

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.

QUOTE (Rex Hudler @ Dec 7, 2012 -> 08:17 AM) If I read "three straight Rose Bowls" again, I'm going to throw something!! Wisky was 4-4 in the B1G this year and finished 3rd in their division. They only had a chance to play in the CG this year because of PSU and OSU's f*ck ups. Yes, he beat Nebraska, but let's not compare this season with the last two, please. On that note, I'm off to Vegas for the weekend to catch the Pacquiao - Marquez fight. Hold down the fort. If Wisconsin thinks one 4-4 season in the Big 10 after 2 legit Rose Bowl appearances is grounds for firing, good luck to them. They will be going through more coaches than Al Davis. Reminds me of when Self left Illinois. All of a sudden Illini fans said he wasn't a very good coach, couldn't win big games, slept with cheerleaders, good riddance. I think Self is a better coach than Bielema, but like him or not, his record at Wisconsin speaks for itself. His successor will have his work cut out for him just to match.

If the Sox trade De Aza, they are going to need a leadoff hitter.

I wonder if the Sox would trade De Aza, Floyd and a reliever to Boston for Ellsbury. Granted there is a 99.999999% chance you only have Ellsbury for a year, but you would only have Floyd for a year. The Sox have several interchangable relievers and probably will sign another one or 2 anyway. You would basically be giving up controlled years of De Aza for one year of Ellsbury. I don't know if Boston would do it, but I would think the correct color would consider it.

Tribune says the Sox are dangling De Aza and Viciedo.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 6, 2012 -> 10:51 AM) Granderson's due for a huge contract soon. He's probably my favorite non-White Sox player, but I don't think it would be a good fit. Paulie is coming off the books next year. TV money is increasing and Granderson may be inclined to give a hometown discount.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 6, 2012 -> 10:34 AM) I think Granderson would hit a ton of homers at the Cell Plus he is a guy the Sox wanted really bad when the Yankees got him. They noticed a flaw in his swing.

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Dec 6, 2012 -> 10:31 AM) Headley or Logan Morrison? Not sure where LoMo would fit or if he's even an upgrade at this point. Granderson and Kubel are available.

He sucks, but maybe he will run to 1B.

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 6, 2012 -> 08:52 AM) Greinke and Hamilton are holding up the whole offseason, and they probably would have had more action if the Winter Meetings were next week and not this week. It would probably just delay the free agent action a week. I do agree the free agents are holding up trades. I just wish there was a way they could get the major guys out of the way before the winter meetings began. I think it would make a real nice offseason event for MLB, but with contracts what they are, and only going higher, it probably will never happen. Also, the days of baseball trades with contracts not playing the leading role for either side, are probably over as well.

Has there ever been a Winter Meetings with so few trades?