Dick Allen

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 26, 2009 -> 02:08 PM) Wow that's awful news, RIP. We can only hope Johnny Red isn't next, and that his health improves. I agree with you though kyyle, Norm should have been at Red's ceremony. Red and his family made the VIP list. It wasn't the Bulls snubbing the Dutchman. I heard Boers speaking about Krause not being invited. He said Red had nothing bad to say about anyone-except Krause.

Died today. No details as of yet.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 02:51 PM) I really wish Rooney would have stuck around to broadcast with Stoney. Hawk could be the Erin Andrews on the field. I liked Rooney a lot, but I'll never forget in 1987 when he said he would rather have Gary Redus than Rickey Henderson. That was ridiculous.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 01:12 AM) I agree with all this, but I still don't think the international playing field has really evened out or will even out so long as certain teams have higher budgets. The large market teams can always afford to spend more in any given area, and as we've seen so often in baseball unlike other sports, it is often quantity over quality. For example, we gave Dayan something like $10M I believe. That's great, and I hope he becomes the next Miguel Cabrera, but I'd feel much more confident in our ability to produce at least one superstar had we taken that $10M and signed 30 of the top 60 international prospects for $333K a piece. Obviously that is unrealistic, but the point I'm making is that even though the field has leveled to the extent of large and small market teams both becoming aware of certain players, and even though both types of teams may have the funds to offer large enough bonuses to sign a particular player, the large market teams always have the advantage. The large market teams can afford to spend, spend, spend in multiple areas regardless of whether or not they get their most desired player, whereas small market teams, should they splurge, are forced to make a decision between splurging on one top player or spreading the money around to many of the more under-the-radar players. But anyway, I think the large-market teams always need some advantage as well in order to keep them and baseball itself successful. A slotted draft would be a nice thing to see overall, but it would hurt the large market teams considerably, and you'd have to in return protect their interests through international free agency. I also agree with you about the teams that have had success with lesser budgets. These are the types of small- and middle-market teams baseball should be looking to reward through a slotted draft, not garbage like the Pirates. Because through a slotted draft, teams have the ability to manage the finances of their drafts knowing that they'll be able to get the best player available at any given slot, and they'll know how much the bonus amount would be. Look at the Twins taking Ben Revere when lots of people thought that was a bad or at least strange pick. Imagine what the Twins could have done had they been able to trade down, take Revere later, then pick up a second or third rounder in the process. Even though all teams have knowledge of all the best players, not all scouts are the same, and not all GM's are the same, and a team may easily view a guy projected to go 40-50 as a better bet to be a better player than some of the guys projected to go in the 21-30 range where they pick. Teams like the Yankees and the Red Sox can continue to throw money at players even if they make several mistakes. Don't think for a minute after Joe Borchard got the highest signing bonus in history for a while, and he didn't pan out, it didn't weigh heavily on the White Sox scouting department. There are probably 20-25 other teams who would be in the same boat. Its probably why guys like Broadway and McCullough were drafted. Ironic how Shaeffer went ultra conservative probably in an effort to save his job, and that thought pattern actually cost him his job.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 02:58 PM) This would be at the deadline though. There are no free agents to pit against each other. The only talent you have available is what teams are willing to trade you. If you are in the pennant race, it is harder to not make moves to improve your team, especially if you can get the guy who has hit the most HRs for a RF over the last 4 years. If you don't have the money now, chances are you won't have it in July. Unless the White Sox eat money, or the Yankees or Mets are desperate, the 3 old slow guys making 8 figures will be White Sox at least until Sept 1, with Konerko until Sept. 2010.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 02:10 PM) It would be $4M + $1M buyout. Hence the $5M If the White Sox eat nothing, unless its a team based in NY, I don't see Dye getting traded unless its the September 1 deadline.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 01:56 PM) Jermaine Dye will only cost a team ~$5M at the deadline, if the Sox are out of it, Dye is having a good year and there's a team out there in need of a right handed power bat (preferably as a DH) I'm sure they'd be willing to take a flier on Jermaine. It would be $5 million + $1 million buyout. Considering Abreu could only get $5 million for a full season, I really doubt teams would be willing to pay Dye that for half a season or less, unless its the Yankees. Even Boston is cutting back. I read John Henry has lost $60 % of his net worth the past several months.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 12:04 PM) A worldwide draft is more fair, but I don't think it would work out all that well. Would Daisuke Matsuzaka leave baseball in Japan to go play for the Pirates, because the posting system would be gone? And not only that, but it hurts teams like us with our Cuban connections, Seattle with their Japanese connections, New York with their Dominican connections, etc. I kind of like the international FA system as it is simply because it's a free market, and I think it would be a great balance to a rigid slotting system in the draft. If you slot the draft, then the best talent is still going to get overpaid, it's just that now the s***ty teams are going to get all those guys and they won't fall lower. I personally don't feel you should punish teams like the Yanks and Red Sox for doing the scouting, spending lots but spending wisely, and winning, while rewarding teams like Pittsburgh who run their organizations like utter s*** with the best players in the draft. Keeping international FA like it is would still allow the big market, bottom-first round teams to get high level first round talent elsewhere. Of course there's the argument that such-and-such team is winning, and such-and-such spends more money, so they can live without that type of talent falling to them, but realistically, teams like the Yankees and Red Sox need that talent, because they need to win, because half of baseball depends on them through revenue sharing. Make no mistake, if the Yankees don't win and draw, then the Pirates contract, simple as that. Players are out of jobs and parity in baseball is gone. Also, you have to consider that teams that frequent the top of the draft usually suck because they suck as an organization. Why have the Twins and A's specifically done so well over the years despite smaller payrolls? Why do the Cubs spend like the Cubs and still end up the Cubs, meanwhile St. Louis will spend just as much or less and come away the better team? The Cubs won their divisions the last two years, but it hasn't always been like that. And look at Tampa. They had the best picks for a long time but the only reason any of it is paying off now is because as an organization they are run much better. Sure BJ Upton is a stud, but it was the JP Howell, Edwin Jackson, Andy Sonnanstine, Akinori Iwamura, Grant Balfour, Dioner Navarro, Gabe Gross, take-a-chance-on-Carlos Pena, dump-Elijah Dukes-for-nothing, type of complimentary/unheralded picks and moves that made them AL Champions last year. Also, if you slot the first round in such a way that 20-30 overall picks are getting something like $2-3M in bonuses - because you know the MLBPA would want large bonuses all the way through the first round in exchange for doing away with the later round, high-bonus picks - then you end up hurting teams like the Twins, who rely on their scouting and generally spend cheaply on the draft. And of course the late round, high-bonus players couldn't work anymore. I think if the draft were to be slotted, you'd have to keep international FA the way it is, plus bring back the draft-and-follow system, plus allow for the trading of draft picks (so the #1 team doesn't have to spend $7M on a draft pick if they can't afford it, and can opt to trade down for say a #20, a #27, and a #50 instead). On top of that, you also have to come up with rules about MLB contracts, like either eliminate MLB contracts entirely or make it a rule for the first five or so picks. Because otherwise, if say you wanted to take a high school player within the first few picks but didn't want to give him an MLB contract because you're unsure if he'd be ready in four years, then either you'd be forced to trade down and take him after the MLB contract slots were gone, or select another player. I'd rather eliminate the MLB contracts because it would ensure almost every single top-5 or so pick is a college player, but this would be an issue for the MLBPA as well. And furthermore, you couldn't slot the draft without coming up with a legit FA compensation system. You'd have to know what pick and therefore what amount of money your compensation-eligible player is worth so you could then decide what he's worth to you. For this, I think the Elias system is a great start, but what I would do it take the 30 best FA's according to Elias, put each of their names into a plastic ball, and then hold a lottery. Eliminate the supplemental first round, then have a slotted second round with equal bonuses throughout (say $750K) work solely as a compensation round. You do your lottery, and however it lines up, each departing player nets his former team that pick. You don't charge the signing team with a draft pick and you don't deal in Type A/Type B designations. You make a list of all players, and the top 30 that are offered and deny arbitration and sign with new MLB teams are the ones worth picks. Teams may have several picks in this round or none. I think a system like that would work well also because it would help facilitate more deadline deals as Type A players would be worth a lot less on the open market, being worth only one pick instead of two. That was a long post. But I hope some of it made sense. I think teams like the Red Sox and Yankees can get away with spending less on scouting and have weaker scouts because of the system now. Its pretty common knowledge who are the top players in the draft. You can determine them fairly cheaply. The Yankees can just wait for them to fall because they won't sign for X amount of $. Another thing I would like to see is the ability to trade draft picks. No matter what, the system now sucks. There is no way signability should be an issue in a draft in the first round, unless its a kid who is deciding between college and starting his pro career. Maybe even make players declare for the draft.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 09:56 AM) What I'm wondering is this; Is all the attention because they treat the Scouts like royalty and line their pockets? Seems like Scouts are mining for gold in more than one way, and if this gets cleaned up, we may just see a more normal distribution. Remember, the edge is these players are not under the restrictions of the amateur draft, baseball could clean this up with one rule change. And if they would slot the draft, it would take the agents out of it, and take the draft back to what it was intended for. It also would free up a little cash for major league players.

Unless the Yankees want those guys, or the White Sox are willing to eat a large chunk of their contracts, Dye, Konerko and/or Thome will be White Sox until their contracts expire.

QUOTE (bschmaranz @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 04:27 PM) Anyone win the lottery to get tickets for the Milwaukee series? I didn't You're better off getting them on ebay or stubhub. They really jacked up the prices of the tickets for that series to non season ticketholders. Infield boxes are $80. They had some for $60 on stubhub I grabbed for Sunday and Friday. Saturday appears to be a problem but prices normally come down as gametime approaches.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 07:37 PM) No matter how convincing some blurb from Cheat's blog may be I'll just go with common sense which tells me that players signed to minor league deals don't go on the 40 man roster, that's sort of the whole point of signing someone to a minor league contract; they don't take up a roster spot. And now after looking at Rotoworld I see that they confirmed 2 days after the Sox signed Nix that it was a major league deal. http://rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/p...=MLB&id=488 I'm wondering why they just didn't claim him on waivers.

Wasn't the investigation started after Wilder was caught going through customs with a bag with $40k inside? He's a scumbag's scumbag that is for sure. I'm sure KW felt like a fool for trusting him. I haven't read the articles, but was he doing this all along, or just when he started having money troubles with his club?

Chances are he will be a mediocre defensive C at best. If he hits like they hope he'll hit, it makes a lot of sense to change positions. Piazza may still be raking if he was a 1B.

I'm pretty sure HE GONE

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 05:56 PM) Well lucky for Josh the season doesn't end in mid-September. And that .229/.283/.433/.716 line Josh had through September 14th as a 24 year old (before finishing the season with a 1.295 OPS over his final 56 PA) isn't far off from the .239/.299/.418/.717 line Crede put up as a 26 year old. Oh if only the season lasted from the beginning of June to mid September the .296/.337/.428/.765 line Brian put up over that exact same span in '06 would have earned him the starting gig in '07 and we never would have had to see Darin Erstad in a White Sox uniform. So the argument is evertime Crede came up big if he would have done something earlier it would have made his heroics mute, but Josh Fields tearing it up the final 2 weeks of Sept. 2007 in a battle for last place against the Royals is significant. In July and August 2006, BA hit over .300 combined. He had a tough Sept. and hit .257 post all star break. There was more to the BA story than performance or potential. Ozzie just didn't like him. He probably still doesn't, but at least he can tolerate him now and hopefully give him a fair shot.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 22, 2009 -> 01:49 AM) Hence the problem. The worshiping of a false idol, turning a baseball commoner into a baseball god. Some wonder why I "hate" Joe, I don't, I like him, I just can't stand it when people exaggerate a player's production/worth to this level and well, there's no other good discussion on here currently so I'm gonna make some Crede posts. You said earlier if Fields maintains his 2007 batting average (.244) and adds a little to his walk rate, he becomes a very valuable player. Crede is a lifetime .257 hitter. He has had some big moments and his glove, while you don't think its anything special, has been better than Fields. Wouldn't that make Crede a very valuable player during his White Sox career?

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 06:39 PM) This post is the rebuttal (correctly) to all of those in this thread and in the White Sox fanbase who think Joe Crede is the 2nd coming of Mr. Jesus Christ. Crede did have many big hits in big spots late in games, but just because he had a lot of 7th to 9th inning hits that drove in runs and helped win games doesn't make him any better than, say, Jim Thome. There are A LOT of baseball games that are won (and lost) by events that occur in the first three innings. That is part of what makes baseball great is it's the one sport moreso than all others where you have to watch the entire game because the events that decide who wins and loses can happen at any time, as opposed to football and basketball where the game more often than not is decided in the 4th quarter. I would bet in many of the games where Joe Crede "saved our ass" with a big hit late, he was 0 for 4 or 1 for 5 or something like that heading into the at bat. If he had been 2 for 4 or 3 for 5, maybe we wouldn't have needed that "big hit." What makes it even funnier is the assumption that everytime Crede got a big hit he basically was making up for f***ing up earlier. Let's go back to the 2005 ALCS. Game 1 he was 1-4 with a homer. The Sox lost 3-2. Joe f***ed up. The one time up he was huge, but if he would have homered 4 times the Sox would have won. Game 2 when he doubled in Ozuna for the winner he was only 2-4 with 2 doubles. In the clincher he only drove in the first run. Then he homered to tie it up in the 7th. Then he drove in the go ahead and winning run in the 8th. I suppose if he would have done something in his second AB he wouldn't have had to come up big. Joe is not a HOFer. He was drafted by the White Sox. He played hurt, didn't complain, kept his mouth shut, and helped the White Sox win. I really find it odd people have a problem with him. He earned his paycheck. That can't be said about everyone.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 05:56 PM) Well lucky for Josh the season doesn't end in mid-September. And that .229/.283/.433/.716 line Josh had through September 14th as a 24 year old (before finishing the season with a 1.295 OPS over his final 56 PA) isn't far off from the .239/.299/.418/.717 line Crede put up as a 26 year old. Oh if only the season lasted from the beginning of June to mid September the .296/.337/.428/.765 line Brian put up over that exact same span in '06 would have earned him the starting gig in '07 and we never would have had to see Darin Erstad in a White Sox uniform. When Crede was 24 he put up some decent numbers too.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 04:26 PM) I fear that Fields is going to get a lot of undeserved hatred this season from a LOT of fans because he took Crede's spot. He's going to have to be perfect to gain a decent following. For a guy who on Sept. 14 2007 was hitting .228 with a .289 OBP, he got a lot of love last year. Everyone wanted Crede gone. I think even Crede's biggest fans realize it was time for the White Sox to move on. I don't think Fields is better. Hopefully Viciedo is.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 02:26 PM) Joe hit .248 last year and .239 in 2004 so if he somehow managed to get 476 AB .236 wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility. We're comparing Fields to a hitter with a .306 career OBP and 5.8% (4.6% in 2006) walk rate, it shouldn't be too hard for Josh to top that. I don't know. When Fields was supposedly awesome, his OBP was .308. .303 for his career.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 01:51 PM) Not having to play Juan Uribe or Andy Gonzalez at the position for 60+ games will be nice. Pretty much all projections have Josh Fields putting up equal or better numbers than Joe next season over more ABs, I know this means nothing to you but it is the case. Fields' PECOTA numbers has him hitting .236 with 20 homers in 476 AB. If Crede did that, he would be horrible.. We aren't even talking defense.

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 11:16 AM) As someone else said, I'm much more concerned with the possibility of the Twins acquiring Juan Cruz. With the sign and trade supposedly being available, I'm surprised KW hasn't tried to make something happen. He has been interested in Cruz before.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 10:49 AM) This is good news for the White Sox. If Josh Field needed any more motivation to perform, here it is. With the rivalries between these two teams all Fields will have to do is pick up the paper to see the inevitable Crede comparison breathing down his neck, and with the type of personality Fields has this could be exactly what he needs to get his ass in gear. If Josh Fields needs more motivation to perform, its time to look elsewhere for a 3b.

$2.5 million guaranteed. Up to $7 million with incentives.