Dick Allen

With the Sox acquisitions as of late, if they get Putz, and if they can all turn the clock back to 2006 or 2007, the Sox should have no problem with the AL Central.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 07:34 PM) Yeah... really I would do the same thing if for no other reason than just to mess with people. It could be used as a smokescreen as was suggested earlier in the thread. If people think he's working on a Halladay deal, they may miss what he really working on. He does like the "under the radar" approach. Fewer Sox big deals get leaked before they actually happen than any other team IMO. I'm sure he's just ressponding exactly how he would like every other club that is asked potential deals with the White Sox to respond. Even though Putz is a FA, I bet KW isn't so happy Thornton let out his interest.

QUOTE (daa84 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 07:34 PM) what are these horror stories youve heard? i mean ive heard hes always been a primadonna, but i haven't heard anythign that has led me to believe that he's that much worse than everett was He's been known as trouble from the beginning. Montreal traded him and KW really wanted him back then, but Cleveland got him. He doesn't stay anywhere very long because he's nothing but trouble.

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 07:30 PM) That would be interesting. Wouldn't it be something if Bradley found a home with the Sox and hit .325 getting along with the clubhouse. Now, I try not to let anything on the northside cloud my opinions of the Sox, but it would be sweet if Bradley tore the cover off of the ball for the Sox while the cubs paid his salary. I know he has a lot of baggage but so did Jurassic Carl. There's a better chance Brent Lillibridge wins the triple crown in 2010 than Milton Bradley going through a season without issues.

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 07:25 PM) I agree. And if you know anything about Kenny Williams, he's not going to bring that psycho into the clubhouse. I think you're right, and I hope you're right. I played fantasy baseball and stratomatic, just like a lot of people on this board, but real life baseball is a little different. It isn't all about the numbers. This guy has pretty much had an issue everywhere he's been. They made it sound like he was a model citizen in Texas, then they found out he sat out games with minor injuries so he wouldn't take a chance at hurting his stats. He's been an asshole his entire career. He isn't going to change.

I really can't believe there is a White Sox fan alive that wants Milton Bradley on the White Sox.

QUOTE (gatnom @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 07:11 PM) What is up with the obsession with homeruns and RBI's? Especially RBI's... that would probably be the last stat I would look at, if I even looked at it at all, for judging how good of a hitter somebody is. It's such a team dependent stat, and the Kansas City Royals aren't exactly going to put a huge number of men on base for him to drive them in. That being said, I wouldn't expect a whole lot from Teahen this year, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was more 2006 than 2008-9 this season. OK, how about checking out his numbers with 2 out and RISP the last 2 seasons? Pitcheresque.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 01:20 PM) He most definitely would have gotten more. For 2010, If he's the same player he's been, and you wouldn't want to pay him in 2011 and 2012, well, now you have to.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 11:36 AM) Ah. Interesting. That could be an incredible fit for the Sox. I wonder if that is why Kenny played coy when Roy's name came up? I think they could have asked him about any player currently with another team and he would have responded the same way. I think people read way too much into his response.

Don't the White Sox have payroll issues? Doesn't Halladay make a ton of money? Doesn't Halladay have a no trade clause? Hasn't he made it clear he wants to train in FL? Don't the White Sox train in AZ? If they have to money to upgrade to Halladay, and they wouldn't keep their current top 4 intact, they should spend it on some bullpen help and the Sox need some offense. White Sox starting pitchers were #2 in ERA in the AL last season. The offense was near the bottom. Having Quentin healthy would be a plus. Having Beckham an additional 2 months would be a plus. Having Rios hit .260 would be a plus, but not enough. Teahan, Jones, Vizquel isn't exactly an offensive upgrade from Thome, Dye, Getz even Nix.

The Sun Times reported on Saturday that the ND coach could be named on Sunday with Stoops the frontrunner. It never happened. How come Cowley did pop off?

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 07:39 PM) It's all in his wording I suppose. When he mentioned Vizquel leading off and playing DH he qualified the statement with something along the lines of "if we don't have a leadoff man or true DH'. If Kenny fills these holes -- I don't really think Kenny cares what Ozzie wants when he's working on potential acquisitions -- Ozzie will have no reason to threaten us with these terrifying scenarios. Supposedly they have interest in Pierre.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 07:29 PM) I still believe that I wish we didn't bring Kotsay back, as there's no doubt he'll get too many at bats next season. I hope he had too many beers, but I read an Ozzie quote where he said Vizquel may even DH AND lead off occassionally. 1995 called and said "Good idea".

Jones hasn't had an .800 OPS against LHP in any of the past 3 seasons. He's been with 3 different teams and hasn't hit higher than .222 during those years. If there was a decent probability he would return to his 2006 form, Scott Boras could have probably secured more for him than $500k. In fact one of the criticisms Ron Washington received last year was exposing Jones too much. Lighting in a bottle, .900 OPS vs. LHP, it may happen, but is highly unlikeley.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 05:15 PM) I think Ozzie needs to get over this 'I want my DH to be able to play the field' crap. I mean players for the most part that are DH's are DH's for a reason. I don't care if my DH can't play the field. I want my DH to mash. Especially if they are going to make the DH guys like Kotsay and Jones rotating. You aren't going to win short a bat in the AL.

QUOTE (MattZakrowski @ Dec 6, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) The Chicago White Sox are not the kind of organization that runs garbage players out as everyday starters in Center Field, sorry Andrew. You may have missed the list of CFs the Sox have been running out there recently.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 6, 2009 -> 10:46 AM) If the Sox could get the equivalent of a Santos Rodriguez/Nathan Jones type player for Jenks - someone who is talented but is still a ways away and doesn't take up a roster spot, and who basically meets or exceeds the value of a 2nd round pick - and then put that Jenks money towards another veteran on a 2-year deal with possibly an option for a third, then I would do that. I wouldn't ask for anything more than that for Jenks because I agree with you, he's not going to be worth a really great prospect or anything like that. But I think Jenks does definitely have *some* value if for no other reason than the fact that he'll make in arb what would be his market value or less, and he's only a 1-year commitment versus the other closers on the market who will all want at least 2 years guaranteed. I do kind of disagree about the breaking down part though since IIRC his main issues were with his non-pitching shoulder and kidney stones. Jenks was still going out there on many occasions and flashing very high-level stuff even though he didn't always get the job done in the way he was expected to. He has back issues and the calf popped at the end of the year.

Good for him he wants to start. Bad for the White Sox if he does.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Dec 6, 2009 -> 12:36 AM) Forget Al Harrington, the Bulls should go after Anthony Randolph. If he could get out of Golden State, and Nellie's doghouse, he's a potential all-star. But back to the Bulls, the problems are all on offense, and if you only score 90PPG, you're not going to win many games of basketball. Whoever thought they wouldn't miss Ben Gordon's shooting was way off, but as has been pointed out, this isn't a contender with him either. They probably are better taking their lumps and getting a lottery pick. The Bulls better hope Wade or LeBron come to Chicago or they will be stuck being a team that really isn't good enough for a long time. Rose can be great, but even adding a Bosh isn't going to make them a team that would have much of a chance against the top teams in the NBA in a 7 game series. If they don't land one of the top FA, they will be exactly what you don't want an NBA team to be. Good enough to where guys like James Johnson are the top guys on the board when you draft, but not good enough to ever really go on a serious playoff run. If the Bulls didn't beat the odds and win the lottery a couple of years ago, just think how bad their present and future would be.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 6, 2009 -> 09:35 AM) I think that all depends though. I mean, Jenks should get $7-8M this year in arb, which means that if he's at least pretty good in 2010 then he'll be looking for at least $10M in arb going into 2011, his last arbitration year. If the Sox could deal Jenks for prospects and dump his salary, and then sign Soriano/Valverde for 2/$18 or something (the same amount or less), then that could work out a lot better. Because of how we finished, if we signed Soriano/Valverde we only give up a 2nd rounder, and we should be able to recoup that value in a Jenks deal, and possibly get a little more. At least that way we get some cost certainty, and depending on what is out there, we may even be able to improve in 2010 as well. That might sound redundant, but because of Jenks' arb situation we're basically shelling out $7-8M for him this year and hoping he's good, and then if he is, we still may have some serious reservations about tendering him a contract in 2011, meaning we could lose him for nothing. Unloading him now, getting a little something back, and then picking up another 2-year option wouldn't be a bad thing at all IMO. It wouldn't but it takes two to tango. Why would another team give up something useful for Jenks and pick up Jenks' money especially after he came off a mediocre at best season and finished the season hurt? The rumor is Jenks is getting into better shape, but we have all heard that before. He was at an autograph signing a couple of weeks ago, and judging by some photos I saw, looked as round as ever. I think the Sox would trade him if they could get something for him, but chances are, they won't. If that is the case, its best for the Sox to offer him arb, and if he shows up at Spring Training heavy and throwing 91 and looking like he won't be earning his $7 million, just cut him. It seems harsh, especially since he probably has earned more chances than others, but money comes into play. Guys that break down in their 20s who really don't do anything about it, don't suddenly stop breaking down. It will be interesting to see how Jenks proceeds this winter.

From the Tribune, Ozzie's take on the leadoff spot: Manager Ozzie Guillen is fully aware that there are four months left until the White Sox's 2010 regular season opener against Cleveland, so he was careful about any thought of selecting rookie sensation Gordon Beckham as his leadoff hitter. "A lot of people are saying that," Guillen said Saturday night at the Fairmont Hotel, where he was participating in the Easter Seals of Metropolitan Chicago (ESMC) Holiday Gala. "He's the one in the lineup I have right now. Is he ideal? That's the only (one) have. "But I really like to have someone else out there. Bekcham is a very, very good RBI man. And I don't want to take the bat away from him, and hoepfully we find someone to take his spot." Guillen is aware that general manager Ken Williams is searching for a leadoff batter. "We tried to find one," Guillen said. "It's not easy. We tried looking for one, the one out there is very expensive, and the one is not there, we have to make big trades. If they don't find a legit guy there are a lot worse scenerios than having perhaps your best hitter bat the most times. I would imagine the one that was out there was Figgins.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 3, 2009 -> 10:54 AM) I still don't see where this philosophy makes any sense. You want to invest the biggest dollars in the bullpen, which should be at least decent next year as is, and then go to the scrap heap for both OF and DH? Pods wants a multi-year deal, you want to take that risk? Bullpens are dicey propositions always, and the very few truly consistently solid arms are very costly for a guy who pitches 3 innings a week. I'd rather invest in the two positions that play every day, and where we can have a better read on future success. I wouldn't want to give a reliever a 4 year contract, but spending $3-4 million on a one or two year contract doesn't seem like it should hamper other areas.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 3, 2009 -> 10:30 AM) I think there is a danger in going with Williams. First, despite that he did reasonably well last year, his career history says he's unlikely to do it again. Second, the Sox basically have no lefties in the system who are major league ready or close to it. I think what KW will do, and should do, is pick up one or two Williams-like guys off the scrap heap, knowing that one of the three will likely show something in ST, and the other two can be in Charlotte in case the guy in Chicago screws up. I am not against Williams per se, but, I'd like to see the Sox find something cheap in a LF reliever to add to the pool. I hope not. He tried that in 2007. I do agree about Williams.

I remember all the anger that came out of this board when Jim Thome was the Sox DH. Then I read about all the suggestions for his replacement and LMAO. Someday you will come to the conclusion Jim Thome was a fine DH, and the guy that succeeded him, if KW takes advice from this board, was a huge downgrade.

QUOTE (T R U @ Nov 29, 2009 -> 09:29 PM) ESPN pisses me off so much when they say Tiger Woods is the best athlete in the world.. Competitive eaters are the greatest athletes in the world.