Dick Allen

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 17, 2009 -> 08:35 AM) What he is saying is smart baseball management if you're a team like the Sox. Unlike the Blue Jays, the Sox do not NEED to dump a good player's salary in order to pay a bad player to suck. What got JP Ricciardi fired was giving out massive contracts to several players, with Vernon Wells and BJ Ryan being the most devastating ones. Ricciardi didn't get fired because he didn't trade Halladay. The Halladay situation only came up because the Blue Jays spent a ton of money on a team that was performing so poorly dollar-for-dollar that they were forced to cut payroll because the fans weren't showing up. The Blue Jays because of their commitments to bad players do *not* have a choice to try to compete with the Red Sox and Yankees. If they did then they would target the kind of players the poster was talking about, proven talent that makes the team better. The Jays are forced to target prospects simply because they will not be able to compete again until a lot of these horrible deals are off their books. I agree though that Ricciardi SHOULD have traded Halladay, but trade or not trade, that franchise was already screwed. They have a choice to try to compete. The only reason they even considered trading Halladay is because Roy basically stated he was going to walk when his contract was up. They were going nowhere in 2009 and 2010 is probably a longshot. Put things into perspective here. The Blue Jays were devasted by injury. I think most of their starting rotation was out. Attendance was weak. They dumped a lot of salary in Rios and Rolen, but have some nice talent. Wells is a problem, but when he signed, I don't think it raised too many eyebrows. JP's problem was that he was in the AL East. Its going to be hard for any team to compete year in and year out with Boston and NY and now TB. The Blue Jays still have won more games the past 4 seasons than the White Sox. I think if Toronto was in the Central, JP would have been given an extension rather than a pink slip.

If a team gives him $60 million, MLB using the economy as an excuse at all the next year or two, should be laughed at.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 12:23 PM) They have no money left under the cap. They would have to find a deal to get rid of Campell or Huet first. If Rocky is willing to eat money, he can send them to the minors, pay them, and it won't count against the cap.

BTW, as good as Buerhle is and I am a big fan, he's 50-44 the past 4 seasons.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 02:02 PM) No, Mark's value was never LOWER at that point. Mark didn't have a contract beyond that season. He was a rental for a half season that would garner 2 draft picks if he declined arbitration. That's it. You guys who think Mark should be traded need to have your heads examined. Go back and look at the perfect game threads. Every motherf***er here was slobbering all over his nuts, as we all should, and every single sports media outlet was going on about how under-appreciated he is, and how the fans outside of Chicago don't understand how good he is. Now you same motherf***ers want to trade him AS SOON as we acquire a starting staff to complement him. Go burn your Sox hats. You make me sick! Here's the deal. He is signed for 2 more years. He has said he will retire when his contract is up. So he's around for 2 seasons. His performance declined in the second half. If the Sox are to make the playoffs, he not only will he have to not fall apart in the second half, he will have to come up big in the playoffs. He did it before he can do it again. I love Buerhle because you can write down what he's going to give you in April and its almost always close. So if he pitches well and into the playoffs, his performance seems to fade the next season, which, according to him, would be his final one. Ozzie has said he's going to be a #4 guy. #4 guys, who make $14 million a year, who say they will be retiring in 2 seasons, and who will be 5/10 guys halfway through next season, seem very tradeable to me if they can get back serious value which would include established players and can't miss prospects, not a Javy Vazquez return. That's the only way you can trade him. The PR hit would be huge. I just wonder what his value is. If giving him up can fix the bullpen and maybe add a real good position player, it at least would have to be considered. His perfect game was great. What followed was not so great. I would rather he pitch a 5 hitter and finish the rest of the year strong than what happened.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 01:40 PM) For the Cubs. Exactly.

QUOTE (Cali @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 02:02 PM) So....a team struggles offensively, the hitting coach, one of the best in baseball, has to be held accountable....hmmmm....that's interesting....what an interesting philosophy.... Rudy leaving Texas isn't about the Rangers struggling and ironic isn't it that they had a low OBP low BA couldn't hit with RISP, struck out a ton, and scored via the homer probably more than any team in baseball? This was all about the benjamins. He makes manager cash.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 12:56 PM) Walker is already back anyway. He probably makes less than a minimum player. If they thought this guy could make the difference half this board thinks he could, they could eat Walker's contract in a heartbeat. He'll probably wind up in Chicago.

QUOTE (soxfan-kwman @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 12:33 PM) How about Giambi- ya he had a ruff year, but he also didn't have Jeter, A-Rod, Johny Damon, & Bobby Abreu hitting in the same lineup as him. I think he has 1 or 2 good years left in him. He has a high on base %, and ya he is not lighting quick, but he would be a good power bat that you could actually throw out at first base. If, and only if we could get him cheaply, he could be a decent DH for our club. I'm not saying he is fast, but he is faster than Thome, Dye, Paulie, & probaly AJ. Giambi hitting between Carlos & Paulie with AJ batting 6th- it could be a pretty good lineup. I'm not saying he'll hitting 40 hrs, but he did hit 32hrs in 2008. Otherwise were stuck with a platoon situation, which could be helpful to Josh Fields development. With a platoon situation I like Kotsay playing first base, with Paulie DHing(playing first base occasionally). Fields at 1B/DH against Lefties & Paulie DH/1B. If we keep Kotsay, & let paulie DH will have more speed with Kotsay then we would with Giambi (Plus Kotsay can play outfield). Any thoughts? If you are going to be interested in Giambi, why wouldn't you just go back to Thome? He's far better.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 12:47 PM) The Sox should trade Buerhle and AJ right away. That way we can weaken our team AND piss off just about every Sox fan sans a few here at SoxTalk all at the same time. What a great idea. While I agree trading AJ is just foolish, except for the horrible PR move it would be, trading Buerhle makes a lot of sense if you could get market rate.

The fire Greg Walker people have their savior available. Interesting is the Rangers offensive woes in 2009. From ESPN.com Longtime hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo rejected a contract and will not return to the Texas Rangers next season, a team official said Wednesday. Jaramillo's contract was set to expire on October 31. The Rangers' offense struggled in 2009, scoring 784 runs, the fewest since Jaramillo was hired before the 1995 season. The team batted .260, its lowest average since moving into Rangers Ballpark in Arlington in 1994. The disappointing season came after the Rangers hit .283 and scored a league-high 901 runs in 2008. Injuries and inconsistency contributed to the lagging offense. Josh Hamilton played just 89 games and a group of veterans had up-and-down seasons. Ian Kinsler started great in April, but tailed off. The Rangers didn't get much from first base as Chris Davis struggled at the start and was sent to the minors for a swing tune-up. Manager Ron Washington urged his team to manufacture runs and they did that at times, but couldn't score enough runs in clutch situations. "We have to understand how to score runs without getting base hits," Washington said a few days after the season. "Put the ball in the play. We struck out in situations where if we put it in play, it would have resulted in another run. Now that they've been through it, we expect it to get better." The Rangers were 20th in the majors in runs scored and RBIs with runners in scoring position.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 09:30 AM) 13 of his saves came when he entered with a three run lead. 1 save was with a five run lead against the twins in which he came with the bases loaded and pitched one inning and threw a strikeout and a double play. 8 of his saves came when he entered with a 2 run lead. 7 of his saves came when he entered with a 1 run lead. All 6 of his blown saves came with a 1 run lead. My numbers were a little off but not much and considering he only had one save when he went more than 1 inning,(he gave up 2 runs) he had mostly easy chances. To blow 6 is a bad year, especially when he's a guy who is not used to get out of other pitcher's messes ie, doesn't come in much with men on base.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 08:16 AM) Where did you see that at? It was a couple of years ago. Gonzalez had it in the Tribune. I've commented about it on this board before.

QUOTE (chisox2334 @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 07:44 AM) Jenks, lost weight prior to this upcoming season. Pointing that he's only one needs be in shape is crap. Go tell all members of team they need not to be last in defense when this season comes up. How about we get guys that can score runner from third with less than 2 outs. If he lost weight, all he has to do is check his body he will find it. The ongoing back issue really hadn't been public knowledge until this article came out, but obviously the Sox staff feels Jenks wouldn't have many of the issues he has been having, and lets face it, injuries have robbed him of time the past 2 seasons, if he got down to even 240, which still is more weight than most carry on a 6'2" frame. Jenks has officially weighed in at 299 pounds as a White Sox. It probably was more than that, they just didn't want to give him the distinction of being a 300 pounder. If his attitude is "I'll be as heavy as a want to be" it would be one thing if he's still lights out. He's not. If you look at the body of his work in 2009, even with an ERA in the mid 3's and 29 saves, you will find his overall performance to be well below average. He was only about 50% converting saves when he came in with a 1 run lead. Most of his saves were lay ups. 18 or 19 I believe were recorded when he entered with a 3 run lead. Your other points are true, and I don't think the White Sox have sidestepped him, but don't you find it at least slightly disheartening that a guy in line to be paid $7-8 million, or about $125k an inning, doesn't seem interested in the least to be in top physical condition?

QUOTE (soxfan-kwman @ Oct 13, 2009 -> 04:57 PM) I think Pods will get 2 years for 6mil ($3mil each season ,with $1mil incentives), w/ an option third year($4 mill, $500,000 buyout). I think we all could live with that. That would be a silly contract for a guy who was out of baseball, done, until he came back and hit pretty well. Expecting anything near that is like expecting Cliff Politte and Neal Cotts to repeat their 2005 performances. Chances are Pods is a fringe guy worthy of a release next year. Throwing that much cash at him is insane.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Oct 13, 2009 -> 07:33 AM) Nobody compared him to his LAA days. 05 08 09 I think he wears some sort of girdle type shirt underneath. Have you ever seen Freddy Garcia in person? In his uniform, he can almost look lanky. He's an offensive lineman in person.

Last spring Ozzie stopped talking about Jenks weight saying he stopped caring about it, he just wanted him to perform. I think he and the rest of the organization believe most of his injuries could be avoided or at least be less of an issue if he dropped some weight. He should probably listen to them. As far as keeping him home, its probably nothing. The Sox had some extra guys up and the clubhouses get a little crowded, and maybe even the hotels are a bit tight. He wasn't going to pitch so staying at home with your family shouldn't be a big deal .

The more I think about it, the more I think the Sox should at least see what the market is for Buerhle. He faded down the stretch, and if the Sox do make the playoffs, they way they have been talking brings up 2 questions: A. Would he be ready to pitch in the playoffs effectively? B. If the Sox had a decent playoff run, how would that affect him the following season? If you remember he horrid second half of 2006 was blamed on the playoff run. 4 years older, you would have to believe the effect would be at least the same. You then add that to the talk he will now be a #4 starter, his salary, and the little nugget that he threw out last year about retiring when his contract is up, so he may only pitch 2 more seasons anyway, it seems like a good time to at least listen to offers. As far as payroll, its going to be lower than last year IMO. Last year they dropped it while increasing prices with a 95% renewal rate and 3 extra home dates. Chevy is supposedly exiting the sponsor race, so that will probably make some dent, although how much does Chevy throw at the White Sox anyway? Can it be more than $2 million a year? I heard and the source isn't all that reliable, that the $90-95 million mark estimated above is pretty accurate.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Oct 12, 2009 -> 07:22 AM) It's not that he's a new man. It's that his style of hitting has changed. He used to wait for strikes, letting the FB's down the middle go by him esp. when he was ahead in the count. This year, he was swinging at them. Also, when he was behind in the count, Pods was slapping them on the ground to try and get IF hits. It worked. That kind of approach should also work in 2010--provided he sees most of the time at DH and only steals when given the sign to. I just have a hard time seeing who out there via trade or free agency who can replace Pods' 2009 numbers--which the sox need. For 2010, Pods seems as good a choice as any. I think he will be a waste of money as he regresses to his norm. If he wants to work for what his entire piece of work his career would net him, which would be less than $2 million on a one year contract perhaps with some incentives, then fine, sign him up. But if someone is going to give him $4-5 million a year for a couple of years, and the Sox match it, they shouldn't be miffed when he doesn't live up to the contract, because there is a very slim chance he would.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Oct 12, 2009 -> 06:03 AM) Pods changed his hitting approach this year and was very consistent all season. He became more aggressive when he was ahead in the count, which led him to see more fastballs, him hitting the ball hard and increasing his SLG. And he also tried to make contact when he was behind. This led him to have a ton of IF hits. Barring injury, Pods' hitting shouldn't change much from his 2009 numbers. Esp. as he'd see less time in the field, Pods should be a solid bet to stay healthy and replicate his 2009 year. I just think it would be hard to pass up signing a .300 hitter who can post an above league avg. OBP for a relatively cheap deal [which Pods should sign as he comes with risk]. The sox know the risk better than other teams and will probably be comfortable taking it. This whole notion that Pods is a new man now is kind of crazy. Check out his 2003 season. He was better in every way than he is now, yet the next season, and there were no injuries and he was in what should be the prime of his career, his numbers, except for SB, dropped drastically. He isn't going to steal 70 bases anymore and giving him anywhere near $5 million would be insane. He was a .300 hitter in 2009, that doesn't mean he will be anywhere near that in 2010. His baserunning and fielding are most likely only going to get worse. Who knows, maybe all of baseball will agree with the point of view I have, and aren't all sold on Pods going from out of baseball to a top leadoff man overnight, and he will be available at a cheaper rate. He should follow the money and if a team wants to give him $5 million a year, he should take it. I just hope it isn't the White Sox. I feel the 2009 Pods was Cinderella and the clock struck midnight when the season ended.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Oct 11, 2009 -> 05:33 PM) Yes, the computer has a hard on for Swisher. When you're 18.7 runs below replacement defensively you're not going to be worth s*** unless you're absolutely raking. Swisher came in at 0.1 runs below replacement which is average. They use weighted on base average to determine a hitter's park adjusted runs above average, if you want to know how the number is calculated then you can read about it here. So if you knew exactly how they would play and you were running a team, you would take Nick Swisher's 2009 over JD's 2006 and Nick Swisher's 2008 over JD's 2009, because fangraphs has them both worth $5 million more than the other choice. In fact, Juan Uribe's 2009 is worth a couple of million more than JD's 2006. How come no one is b****ing about letting him go for nothing? At least they received some bodies for the other guys. Stiffs, but bodies. As far as Swisher's defense vs. JD's this year, I know JD is horrid defensive, but even fangraphs says Swishers defense was on par with Scott Podsednik's this year, I don't see $17 million worth of production difference between the 2. Its a lot of money.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Oct 11, 2009 -> 05:16 PM) You can't just say that off the top of your head. Dye was the worst defender at his position and posted below average offensive production, there's no value in that. If you're going to be horrible at one facet of the game then you need to be above average at another, unfortunately Jermaine was not. Look at the numbers. Another 24 AB, Dye might hit 2 homers and would have more homers and RBI than Swisher and a higher average. Swisher was below average defensively as well. I can definitely say Swisher's 2009 performance is not worth 17 million more than JD's performance and I am really no fan of JD. They also had Swisher's value in 2008 over $5 million higher than Dye's in 2009. Check those numbers. Dye outdid him in hr, ribi, avg, obp and slug. pct. They obviously have a hard on for Swisher and walks must be the most important stat. In fact, Jermaine Dye's 2006 season when he hit 44 homers, had a .385 obp and an OPS of 1.006 is worth $5 million less than Nick Swisher's 2009. I know Dye hasn't been a plus fielder, but neither is Swisher. There is a flaw with their system.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Oct 11, 2009 -> 05:02 PM) Dye put up a .793 OPS this year, .826 is his career OPS. So there's a 76 point difference in OPS, that's f***ing huge. Just look at their OPS+'s, Swisher: 126 (well above average) and Dye: 102 (just about average). Jermaine put up a below average OPS for an AL right fielder (.793 compared to .803) and that's while playing half his games at the cell. So Dye put up average to below average offensive production for his position and was the worst defensive outfielder in the AL according to UZR where as Swisher was a well above average hitter and an average defender, that's where your tremendous difference in value comes from. They actually take into account defense. You also can not downplay the value of 33 extra walks over the course of a season, there's huge value in that. You're unintentionally highlighting the inherent flaw in using straight OPS to compare 2 players. OPS treats OBP and SLG as equals when they're anything but, OBP needs to be weighted more heavily. The difference is not $17 million worth of production. If it is, most players in the major leagues are vastly underpaid. Swisher made a few more plate appearances. I really doubt 33 walks, 5 walks a month is worth anywhere near $17 million.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 11, 2009 -> 09:49 AM) Fangraphs has their say on the Swisher move. Comes down somewhat hard on KW for making the move, when all indicators pointed his year to be a statistical fluke. "It’s not very often that one can say this about a Yankees acquisition, but swindling Swisher from the White Sox last fall was a thrifty move. New York bought low on a quality player, parting only with a future 5th starter, a decent relief prospect and a reserve infielder with platoon issues and no defensive home. Swish made just $5.3M this year, while providing $16.5M worth of value. He’s under contract for a total of $15.75M over the 2010-2011 seasons. Even if he regresses back to the three WAR range, he would give $27M worth of production over that time period. If you’re keeping score at home, that would mean Swisher offers the Yankees about $22.5M worth of surplus value from 2009-2011 (what his production is worth on the free agent market based on the $4.5M/WAR standard, minus his actual salary). And, he also has that reasonable option for the 2012 season. During an off-season in which the Yankees spent more than the gross domestic product of Tonga (no, seriously), the club also added Swisher for a song. This is a great example of why it’s vital to not just take a cursory glance at a player’s numbers and come to a definite conclusion about his talents. Fantasy owners who did their homework picked up an offensive cog without coughing up a high draft pick. " More At the Link. http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/index.php...hers-resurgence To put things in perspective while you are making arrangements for Nick Swisher's enshrinement into the HOF, he basically had the same offensive year as Jermaine Dye, except with a few more walks and a few more strikeouts, check the numbers, yet fangraphs has Swisher's production worth $16.5 million and Dye's worth -(yes that's negative) 600k. Could you say with a straight face their production is over $17 million worth of value apart? 498 AB 29 HR 82 RBI 97 BB 126 K .249 AVG .371 OBP .869 OPS 503 AB 27 HR 81 RBI 64 BB 108 K .250 AVG .340 OBP .826 OPS I don't see $17 million in difference. Obviously, Swisher's is slightly better, but fangraphs obviously has a major flaw in how the value players. If Dye had 20 more walks their numbers would basically be identical.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 10, 2009 -> 03:19 PM) Forget Abreu. It's not happening. The Angels are going to keep him, and/or Figgins. Why would they let these guys go, as they are marching along into the postseason? Not sure if people recall, but the Angels have not exactly been manufacturing big bats in the farm system recently. They've always looked to free agency or the trade market to fill that need, and I can't imagine now that they finally have the offense they need that they are going to just let them all walk away. I heard today Abreu is near an extension.