Dick Allen

Supposedly the Mets will try to sign Abreu if his price falls below $4 million.

They did say the Sox would lose 90 in 2007, but they have also been wrong before. The problem with depending on young players asking them to perform at a level they have not performed, is some, if not most, are bound to fail. 2008 was an exception. Hopefully, those guys can continue to grow or at least maintain their performance levels. One thing I do know, is the White Sox should have better team than they have had the last few years if they ever get back to a $120 million payroll.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 03:51 PM) That seems kind of weird to me that Phoenix would take Marion back after trading him last season and moving to more of a half-court system. Plus one of the stories was that he was a problem in the locker room. Here's another thought: would Miami be better off just keeping Beasley and Marion, waiting until the off-season, and then signing either Boozer or Millsap? I think it's debateable. However, I think that makes quite a bit of sense from both sides. Miami seems to desperately want more length and post-scoring up front and Wade and Amare would be a scary combination, and Phoenix would get considerable cap space and a potential stud in Beasley. That seems to be a hard offer to beat unless they can somehow exchange 2010 big men with Toronto or get Lamarcus Aldridge. Golden State giving up Biedrins or Ellis is another interesting one, though personally I wouldn't touch Monta right now. It would be for the expiring contract.

Yeah, if ARod really was "manning up" he would have told Katie Couric that he used when she asked, not talked about how he dominates without it. I do applaude him for coming clean, although how much can you really believe? I just wish this would all go away. The less Jose Canseco we see, the better off the world

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 02:56 PM) A couple things bearing on that...first, a number of substances weren't tested for in the 03 trial run. Specifically the BALCO supplied THG, which Bonds was on, was in fact found in his 03 sample but there wasn't a test for it used by MLB at the time. Second, in terms of no big names getting caught...the first year that it was "1 positive test and you get exposed" was 2005. The guy you may remember going down that year was former future HOF Rafael Palmeiro. That's a fairly big name. And of the suspensions, what other players of significance have ever gone down? I think he's the only one.

QUOTE (Middle Buffalo @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 02:50 PM) I'm conflicted. I'd like to know the names of all the players who failed the test in 2003, but I think it's unfair that a "survey" test that was supposed to remain anonymous has been leaked. It's unfair to the players who've been outed, but it's also unfair to "clean" players (if there are any) who are guilty by association. Oh, well, at least Bud Selig makes big bucks for completely and repeatedly dropping the ball. There are plenty of guys who had clean tests who were using. They were warned they would be taking the test. ARod is a victim here for sure. That test was supposed to remain confidential. Its weird. The positive tests during the annoymous portion that were supposed to remain confidential only seem to be naming big names. The guys getting suspended for the most part were weak players. Something doesn't add up.

QUOTE (joesaiditstrue @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 02:37 PM) He did it for three years (2001-2003) Watching the interview, he seemed really upset/emotional while talking to Gammons. I've always heard he had a huge conscience, and tried doing the right things, whether that's accurate or not... I don't know, but he looked like he was truly sorry for this You never know though, some people are hard to read I like ARod, but he's upset because he was caught. If those tests were destroyed, he'd still be lying about it. Coming clean is cool though. And he did say 3 years. I don't know if that's true or not, and we have no reason to believe him since he admittedly lied before, but it is time to move onI wonder if he thinks they could put an asterisk on those 3 seasons and count everything else for his totals so if he hits 900 homers which is possible he would still be considered the home run king. It was apparent steroids were and maybe are still a problem, but 6 year old news to keep lowlifes like Canseco, a guy who on one hand brags about how he basically introduced steroids to baseball, and then goes and points out all the "frauds" in the game.

According to the Daily Herald, the rumor is Miami would be willing to offer Marion and his expiring $17 million contract and Michael Beasley for Stoudamire and some cap matching filler. Could the Bulls beat that?

QUOTE (ChiSox420* @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 01:50 PM) I don't know why but this Manny situation really bothers me. Manny may be the best right handed hitter of our time, and the interest he is drawing is insulting. Yeah I know teams are afraid of Manny being Manny but I am the only one who has heard of behavioral clauses in contracts, and yeah all teams are crying poor but lets be honest all of these teams are multimillion dollar franchises, and Manny may being in more dollars then he cost! Just had to get that out. Thanks. I disagree. I think Manny's rep. would hurt in additional revenues. If he were a stand up guy and never had a problem with effort or even feeling like playing I may agree with you, but remember this is a guy who wasn't satlsfied with the $40 million he had coming the next 2 years, so dissatisfied he jaked his way out of Boston. How much do you have to pay him for him to be happy and for him to feel like playing 162 games? He's no spring chicken either. The economy is in the dumps, no teams are looking to add a weak fielding OF/DH for the $100 million he wants. Obviously he's a better hitter than almost anyone in the world, but he's going to be a headache eventually..

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 12:15 PM) I got 4 for each game. They would have been gone in previous years because they gave first access to brokers and full seasons When I was on earlier, they said I had less than 1 minute, then it went to 2,3,4... up until 9. I finally got some but if I have a place in line I wonder why the time goes higher. I really think brokers have some sort of access to jump the line.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 11:26 AM) I read it as 4 per game not 4 for the whole series. My error. I'm more like Josh Fields than I care to believe.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 9, 2009 -> 11:11 AM) Annnnd, 4 for friday. Nice. I hope you have 2 accounts. There is a 4 ticket total limit for that series.

If its accurate, its probably for Charlotte.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 8, 2009 -> 04:39 PM) Big difference between being named to an All Star Team and being an All Star caliber player. Joe Crede has never had an All Star caliber season even though he's been named to a team, he's also never even come close to a Silver Slugger caliber season but was awarded one in 2006 because everyone hates Alex Rodriguez. It's also rather silly to call a player gold glove caliber when he's never won a gold glove or a Fielding Bible award. So you're saying if he makes an All Star team it doesn't make him an all star calibur player, and although he won a Silver Slugger, that doesn't necessarily make him Silver Slugger-calibur. But then said he can't be considered Gold Glove calibur because he's never won the award. That's not very consistent. If you're saying players get these accolades without deserving them, that would mean players who do deserve them don't get them. While I agree he didn't deserve the SS award, its ridiculous to say he's not or at least was a GG-calibur defensive player even without winning the award. If a player has an MVP-calibur season, it doesn't mean he won the MVP, it says his season was worthy enough to win one. There were 2or 3 years at least, no one would have scratched their heads if Crede won a GG.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 8, 2009 -> 04:19 PM) I still don't think the Sox offered 8M. They didn't. I think they were throwing that out there to see if it would interest them. Its about what the Reds were, at least at one time, rumored to be willing to pay Dye, so maybe they were checking to see if they were able to re-visit that, get something for Dye and pay Abreu, the cost would be a wash and Dye would go for whatever they received for him + Abreu. I don't think any team is willing to pick up Dye even if the White Sox eat $3 million now, the market has dropped that much. In October or November, it probably wouldn't have been a problem.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 8, 2009 -> 03:26 PM) Yes. He signed a $10 million(or so) 4 year deal. The only way that would work out to a 4 year deal is if the sox signed that standard "we'll release you after x years" clause. Otherwise it couldn't be a 4 year deal. Why not? They usually have 6 years of control. They basically would be buying out 1 year of arb?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 8, 2009 -> 02:48 PM) The thing to remember is we only have him on a 4 year contract. We get him for 4 years no matter what level he's at, then he becomes a FA. If he spends 3 years in the minors, we'd get virtually no time of him in the big leagues before he's a FA. We gain no time by keeping him in the minors. It actually behooves the sox to rush him, because it's our best shot at recouping our investment. Has it been confirmed the White Sox agreed to waive his arb? I know its regularly done with players from Cuba and Japan, but perhaps because of his age, they held on to that.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Feb 8, 2009 -> 02:36 PM) Cafardo of the Boston Globe had this nugget that the Sox, Cubs and Dodgers are after Hudson. The Sox would seem in the best spot to add Hudson quicker than the other two, with the Cubs sale and the Dodgers looking to add their big bat, ala Manny first. http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/reds...t_go_by/?page=5 Even though Hudson would cost the sox a draft pick, the top of the order would be adressed. Depending on how Getz and Lillibridge look in spring training, O-Dog, according to a couple of reports, one being Steve Stone, may be looked at as a CF. Supposedly, Lillibridge can play CF, but Getz is an infielder. Hudson is probably a one year stop gap way below market value in preparation for Beckham. Come to think of it, I beleive if the White Sox sign Hudson, it would be specifically to play CF. Ozzie has already said Beckham will have to switch from being a SS because of Ramirez, so he most likely will be a 2B. Getz and Lillibridge and Nix probably don't have much of a long-term future with this team as anything but a utility player unless there's a major injury.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Feb 8, 2009 -> 11:55 AM) If someone can sign Abreu for $3M then why would they take Dye who is making about $12M? Reading these post one would think Dye should be valued at about $150K for all the respect he is given.. Dye is superior to Abreu IMO. Not that Bobby isn't a good player, but if he is still unsigned and only worth $3M then maybe there is something more wrong than just the economy? No one is taking Dye. I think the $3 million is a downward exaggeration, but if its not, he's a steal. Only about $1 million more than the White Sox paid Toby Hall last year to basically make shaving cream pies.

The Boston Globe is reporting Abreu may have to take $3 million a year. In the same article: Orlando Hudson, 2B, free agent: It's amazing that a player of this caliber remains unsigned, but lining up are the Cubs, White Sox, and Dodgers. A few Cubs organizational people really want Hudson, but the impending transfer of ownership from the Chicago Tribune to Tom Ricketts may hinder GM Jim Hendry's ability to do anything until it's complete.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 7, 2009 -> 08:21 PM) There is about zero comparison between the economics of the 2007 off season and the 2008 off season. There is no rational to connect our actions of last year to this year. The world has completely changed. Failure to recognize that would turn this franchise into the Coyotes. He's been crying he has no money way before now. If he truly has no money, he's very fortunate those 2 turned him down, or he'd really be stuck. Its not like guys making 8 figures are easy to move these days.His explanation about Hunter and Fukudome was that they would generate a bunch of additional revenue such as jersey and t-shirts sales. I don't think Fukudome could generate $50 million in merchandise sales if he had 2 million relatives.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 7, 2009 -> 07:31 PM) I still feel reasonably confident that Frank didn't use. Not 100% of course, as I can't be, but pretty sure. My fear though, is that when HOF voters look at him, if they don't know him well enough, he'll be looked at as part of the whole thing. Also, if I had to completely ballpark it, I'd guess something like 20% to 30% of major leaguers have, at some point in their professional careers, used some sort of banned substance. Gammons thinks 80% at least tried it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 7, 2009 -> 02:34 PM) I bow to Kenny here because in reality, he, for a guy with our payroll size, has avoided giving out a big and bad contract, as opposed to some of the albatrosses around baseball, hell just 8.1 miles north. At the sametime he has managed to keep a talent pool pumping into Chicago that has allowed him to avoid the free agent market to save the team. We might not like the 50 cents talk, but why hate on the guy for telling it how it is? I'd rather have that than the Schuler type crap about how we went after a free agent that we offered a fraction of the money that the other teams did. (ala Ventura at 3 years 18 mil as compared to NYM at 4 years 32 mil). Give me honesty every time. Yet he offered Torii Hunter a lot and Fukudome $50 million. Doesn't sound like a guy who can't afford the electric bill.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 7, 2009 -> 02:36 PM) The reality is that probably a fraction of players were juiced on the 05 team. Heck if you take the 03 numbers of 104 positive tests, which doesn't include HGH type stuff, that is one in seven players testing positive. That averages out to 3 to 4 players per each team. Granted it sounds like some teams have a concetration of problems, but I doubt very seriously that any team has zero cheaters. It is inevitable that some of our favorites will end up being frauds to. It is going to happen, sooner or later, that a name will slip out of the Sox clubhouse. That's also with ample warning that they would be tested. I really think 50% would be a reasonable figure when determining users.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 7, 2009 -> 12:30 PM) You have the right to think that and I can definitely see a case made for your side of the debate. But at the same time, they aren't legal, and thus all of these guys that did take them are cheaters and should be looked down upon accordingly in my opinion. On a side note, baseball and football of the last few decades are starting to look like nothing more than wrestling without the fixed outcomes (and some would even argue the last part of that statement with how officiating is at times). I saw a story on ESPN how the 1963 San Diego Chargers, who won the AFL, were the first team to really use steroids. I didn't realize it went back THAT far, and it's just sad to see these sort of things. Even now, if you get busted in the NFL, you get a 4 week vacation.