Dick Allen

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 07:14 PM) Right now, still quite a bit. Per minute, Noah rebounds about the same as him, but he shoots a significantly higher %age than Noah on the offensive end. Noah also picks up just about as many fouls in 20 minutes as Chandler does in 30. And I'd add that currently, Noah just can't slow down Centers who are stronger than him. But then again, Noah is in his 2nd year and turns 24 this month, while Chandler is in his 8th season and turns 27 later this year. Noah needs to add some mass (Chandler outweighs him by about 15 pounds) and get the foul trouble under control. Then we can talk. Chandler fouled a lot when he played for the Bulls. He certainly isn't $9 million a year better than Noah, which is the difference between their total paychecks. I think if Noah added 15-20 pounds of muscle, he could average a double double. He just is not strong enough right now.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 06:58 PM) I have a really hard time judging ARod. Yes he admitted it but (and I hope I have my facts straight) many of the tests back then were taken to establish weather MLB actually had a steroid problem. There wasn't a list of banned substances or penalties for taking any of this stuff in baseball at the time ARod is admitting to taking steroids . So basically he wasn't doing anything forbidden. If I'm wrong someone give me dates of when MLB instituted a policy against steroids and when they started making lists of what substances were banned . I do believe he was guilty of trying to keep pace with his peers and did little wrong according to the rules established at that time. If he was injecting himself in the USA he most likely was breaking the law. I'm an ARod guy, and I don't buy his story that he really had no idea what he was taking, but I'm with you, these tests were supposed to be anonymous. I don't know who screwed up, whether it was the union or the league or whoever, but they did the game a great disservice letting this get out. Having press conferences to explain 6 year old steroid tests does nobody any good, and ARod shouldn't have had to answer questions. There was absolutely nothing he could have said today, short of "I have been doing steroids my whole career and will retire because I am a fraud, and give back every dime I have been paid", that would have satisfied most.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 04:26 PM) Trouble is, his numbers have already dropped off dramatically this season. That's part of the reason why this trade is happening...if the Hornets hadn't had the injury bug all year and people had played to expectations and they hadn't wasted money stupidly on a guy like Posey, they'd be right back up challenging for the top spot, and much more willing to go in to tax territory if needbe. Chandler is pulling down 8.3 rebounds per game this year. That's his worst # since the 2003-2004 season with the Bulls when he was playing 22 minutes per game and played only 35 games. His scoring has dropped from 11.8 to 8.8 ppg this year, and his FG %age has dropped from 62% each of the last 2 years to 56% this year. He's going to score even less without Paul giving him points, but to be fair to him, he has been injured a lot this season. I think he's played hurt, but really, how much better than Noah is this guy?

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 04:35 PM) Dick, are you suggesting that cheating is cheating and since some got away with it, or it was laughed off, that all cheating should be treated the same and laughed off? Would you enforce any rules? Of course not. I'm all for penalties, but they should not include not getting into the HOF. And cheating from past eras should be examined as well. Maybe make baseball like golf. If you're out and the umpire calls you safe, tell him you were out and go back to the dugout. ARod not in the HOF? That's ridiculous. As I said, he's also facing juiced up pitchers. I'm saying cheating has always been laughed at. What a player could get away with has always been sort of admired. I don't admire anyone taking steroids, but if there were no penalties when this cheating occurred, what can you do about it? Guys with a HOF vote try to use their power to keep guys out of the HOF, when, most likely, guys they do elect, at least a few of them, used, and either weren't caught, or it wasn't obvious. Sammy Sosa won't get in the HOF and he's never tested positive as far as I know. Is that fair? He got bigger. He played 15 years and gained 50 pounds of muscle. It looks very suspicious, but its not impossible to be done without cheating.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 04:17 PM) Again, when Sammy was caught with the corked bat, he was punished. When guys were caught scuffing the ball, throwing spitters, they were punished. Sure, they were laughed at. So let's also laigh at Bonds and the rest happy? So some kids go out and try to scuff a ball or cork a bat, they learn a bit about physics and don't hurt themselves. Now look at steroids No way to catch them on the field. It damages their bodies, when kids emulate them, it damages their bodies. They are cheating 100% of the time. Using your logic, we would never enforce any rules or laws. Why do w ignore someone who is speeding 5 mph over the limit and arrest someone speeding 50 mph over the limit? Why do we call a kids mom when he is caught stealing a candy bar and call the police when he grabs $$$$ out of the register? You can keep pretending to not see the difference, but realize you are in a very small minority of people who cannot understand the difference. Saying some forms of cheating are OK and some are not doesn't make sense to me. If I ever was caught stealing a candy bar I know my punishment at home would have made me want to be in jail. I think what I'm saying is the other trangressions were cheating as well. People laughed. Gaylord Perry is a HOFer, he cheated. So did Phil Niekro, and many, many others. How many players do you think used greenies the past 30-40 years? When ARod tested positive, there were no penalties in place in MLB for this type of cheating. None. Now there are. I never said look the other way, but keeping guys out of the HOF, because of one or two positive tests seems ludicrious. How many times did Steve Howe test positive for cocaine? Tim Raines was a cokehead, but a lot of people here think he's a HOF. Did kids snort lines because Tim Raines did? Its sad ARod made the choice he made. Its even sadder a most predictable press conference occurs. Its time to move on. The testing is in place. I still think many are using and are ahead of the tests. The only reason steroids are an issue is the home run records. When Sosa and McGwire were hitting everything out of the park in 1998 nobody blinked an eye. If they hit 50-55 each and everyone stayed around there, I believe there still would be no issue. Just remember, the guys pitching the ball were also users.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 04:08 PM) Do you consider W. Mark Felt to be a rat? How about Bonds and the rest, they took a steroid needle in the ass to make more cash? Seems like they would be pretty big rats. I'm saying if Jose Canseco, a guy who first said steroids were good for you but changed his tune when he could make more money, is a hero figure to anyone, I really feel sorry for that person. Didn't Canseco a couple months ago regret naming names? Now that ARod is out there, he's thinking another sequel.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 04:03 PM) And when they got caught, they were not just laughed at, they were also tossed out of games, suspended, etc. The unique problem with steroids is, unlike a substance on the ball, scuffing, or even corking a bat, there is no evidence that can be observed on the field. Yes, people have cheated and gotten away with it, but that does not make it right, nor absolve those who are entrusted to run the game, their responsibility to catch those that cheat and punish them. Why is getting caught the end all? Listen to Hawk talk about corking bats. He laughs about it. He talks about guys scuffing balls and throwing spitters, again, they laugh. Cheating is cheating. What's unique about steroids is it benefits both hitter and pitcher. More pitchers threw in the 90s during the steroid era than ever before. The hitters are the ones, except for Clemens, who are being hung here, even guys like Sosa who never has been caught. Has there been one pitcher other than the Rocket with zero positive tests that has even been speculated about? I think that's one thing that's lost here. The pitchers these guys were facing were doing the exact same thing.

QUOTE (tonyho7476 @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 03:55 PM) I'd say so. So you aren't a Tyler Flowers guy.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 03:49 PM) We all know the losers in baseball's steroid era, how about a few people that may look like heroes in the retelling. Frank Thomas for not and (possibly) Jose Canseco for coming clean and naming names. Others? Canseco is a rat, and while he may be the big whistle-blower, he shouldn't be a hero. He opened his mouth for cash.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 03:40 PM) Perhaps I am missing your point. I believe since he was getting $250 mil, he knew what was in his contract, what could null and void the contract, exactly what he was taking, and that it was illegal. He knowingly cheated to get his $250 mil. Players have cheated in baseball ever since they started playing. Why is taking steroids so bad, but throwing spitballs, scuffing balls, taking amphetimines, corking bats..etc. just laughed at as part of the game? I used to think I wouldn't want any PED users on the White Sox, but the more I think about it, they were just looking for an edge just like everyone else was doing other things. The home run record may be sacred, but if it really is, why did they expand the season? Where's the outrage there? Why aren't people complaining about smaller more hitter friendly parks? And oh, by the way, pitchers percentage-wise probably use PEDs more often or at least as often as hitters. If Barry Bonds faces Roger Clemens, shouldn't that be a wash?

QUOTE (tonyho7476 @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 03:22 PM) Its all such garbage...more people are involved...by saying its a cousin in the dominican, he's trying to keep people from digging deeper. He's a piece of crap like the rest of them...a rich piece of crap...but still a piece of crap. Are all PED users pieces of crap? Just interested, because at one time, I thought they were, but I've changed.

I'm not sure the weight loss is being determined by the amount he weighed when he went down. He does look trimmer than any time he has been with the White Sox but I heard yesterday he had gone up to 270 eating his mom's cooking in the offseason. The numbers are probably from there. He's probably 10-15 lbs lighter than when he last pitched.

QUOTE (3E8 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 11:09 PM) You're such a dick, allen He clearly says in the original post that a few are "about the same". What, can we only call them same if the dollar amount matches exactly Actually,my original post was not directed at him, it was shock that Minnesota could remain the same because they have guys who were getting big bumps and their roster is almost identical. I think Young is getting about $300k less, but everyone else should be higher. Almost like Philadelphia who had a huge increase, but didn't change much personnel-wise except lost Burrell and added Ibanez. Then he got personal.

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 02:07 PM) I never thought Contreras looked so heavy that he needed to lose that much weight. In fact, I always thought he looked to be in great shape regardless I agree, but I think he was heavier last year than he had been. He's proportioned well. It looks like Jenks hasn't gone to nutrisystem during the winter, and it appears Ozzie doesn't care anymore. He may look like a taller version of Bob Wickman in a couple of years.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 03:18 PM) Like I said, you can call it whatever you want. Anymore nits to pick? That would require doing some of your own work though, instead of just picking apart what others say. Sorry to point out an error in your "research". I'll go to timeout for 15 minutes.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) Feel free to do your own research and make your own post anytime. I know I won't be holding my breath. If KW "raised" the payroll $3-4 million, you certainly wouldn't be calling it the "same". Your last sentence is really uncalled for.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 02:47 PM) If you did the research you would see they are sitting at about $60 million after being at $57 million last year. If you want to call that higher, that's fine with me. $2-3 million is hardly worth mentioning IMO. Their owner also said there is room to add, so I have it right now at $61 million. Its about 7% higher + they may add Crede or someone else. I'm sure if your boss told you that your would be getting an additional 7% added to your paycheck, you would call it a raise.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 02:20 PM) But teams like the Royals and Rays couldn't go much lower. And the Padres were being sold by an owner going through a divorce, so that explains that. But other than that, it is really amazing. I think what would be even more interesting to see is how much higher/lower these teams are going? For instance, are the teams that are cutting decreasing at a significantly higher rate than the adding teams are increasing? Either way, the economy is going to affect all sports for years to come...and if there was ever a time for the owners to push for a salary cap in baseball, now would be the time. Minnesota's remaining the same seems impossible to me. Nathan got an extension. Mourneau and Mauer had to get raises, and they pretty much are bring the rest of the roster back in tact.

Good thing he's not a Cub. Losing all that weight would mean he was on roids.

QUOTE (Gregory Pratt @ Feb 15, 2009 -> 12:53 PM) yeah, me neither Would it really surprise anyone if Gavin Floyd was back to awful in 2009?

Maybe by the time his contract expires, we all will be glad he's retiring. 3 seasons is a long time for a pitcher.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Feb 12, 2009 -> 04:37 PM) Yeah, but the major benchmark for success in 2009 should not be winning a s***ty division and putting ourselves in a position to win 1 out of 4 playoff games against much stronger AL teams. If they win the division, anything can happen. It would be better if they could win it without going into overtime, so they can set their pitching up, but winning the division should be the goal. A weaker division helps. I don't ever buy a team is built to win a division but not to win playoff series. After winning it all, winning a division and losing in the first round isn't thought of as highly as it once was.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 12, 2009 -> 04:23 PM) You are reading waaaaaaay too deeply into that statement and turning it into a 100% truism. I never said they completely abandoned common sense. It would be really stupid to add payroll to the point where you know you are going to have a loss in total revenues. As I said when you pulled out that tired Fukodome/Hunter arguement before, times have changed. Just because the team was willing to spend money last year, doesn't mean they are now. If the economy was the same as last year, I have no doubt the payroll would be the same, or even higher this year. There are years of history that prove that out, as compared to the anecdotal hypothesis with zero flexibility you are trying to paint this as. Failure to recognize that times have changed is the type of stupidity that turns you into the Phoenix Coyotes. Have you ever disagreed with anything KW has said. 1,000,000 posts, I'd like to see one. You're brainwashed. The fact is since you've used Forbes as a reference before, this is a team, especially with all the money they have coming off the books next year, that can easily take on a lot more money and not be the Phoenix Coyotes. I've never suggested they do that, but what have they done with Forbes estimate of $70 million in profits for those 3 seasons? Don't say put it in the payroll because that $70 million includes the additional payroll. If you have listened to JR and Brooks Boyer, they aren't anticipating this massive loss of revenue you are projecting obviously with KW's "can't spend $1 if you only have $.50" playing in your ears. Season ticket sales, according to Brooks in Craine's, is actually up this year. The White Sox don't play in Detroit. Last year they were coming off a 90 loss season and had no problem making payroll. They have a better beginning point this year and will have just as much money to play with, if not more. I'm hoping KW's crying poor is a smokescreen and will add players when teams can't make payroll during the season.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 12, 2009 -> 04:08 PM) So you don't think it is reasonable for them to cut costs in the worst economy in recent history? If I am drunk on Kool-aid, you need to be putting down the Hateorade. OK Stacey King. You just said they raise payroll by the margin of money they make the previous season, even though Forbes says they make a profit even after raising and paying payroll, $70 million combined for seasons 2005,2006,2007. I pointed out that BEFORE this crisis hit, they wanted Hunter or Fukudome and were willing to spend at least $50 million to get them. They didn't, and although JR is saying even with this economy attendance shouldn't be too affected and the raising of ticket prices which will more than cover the loss of 2 sponsors even if they are not replaced, which isn't happening, they will cut payroll. So, being zero sum as you say, they must have lost money last year, even with 3 extra home games and would have really been stuck this year had Hunter or Fukudome signed because contracts like those or Dye's, or Konerko's or Thome's aren't moving anywhere unless you pick up similar money.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 12, 2009 -> 03:40 PM) Its a myth in the narrowed sense of the term. In reality the payroll fluxuations pretty much match the profits from year over year. So they lost money last year, even with a couple of extra dates, and they really didn't want to sign Hunter or Fukudome. C'mon, you're not that drunk on the Kool-Aid. For the record, I have no problem with their payroll, I do have problems with raising ticket prices and lowering payroll, but there are some things that if you really think about it, are difficult to buy.