Dick Allen

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 07:21 PM) Well if OBP is all you want from him then thats good. But his eye isnt something that delines, his power stroke does. Right now he's on pace to hit 30 or 31 homers if he gets to 500 ABs which is actually pretty good. Putting that into perspective, Willie Mays hit 660 homers in 10880 at bats. About the same rate the declining Jim Thome is hitting them this season. He has the best home run per at bat ratio on the team. Better than Konerko, better than Dye, better than even Josh Fields. This is right after he's been sort of cold, chances are it will go up.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 06:40 PM) When was the last time he slugged under .500? How bout under .530? Shoot, whens the last time he hit under 30 hr's? The guy is declining, and declining fast. Up until 3 weeks ago, he was second in the AL in OBP. I'll take that decline. He's as streaky as they come. He may hit 8 homers the next 2 weeks. The thing is when he's hitting, he's also walking a lot and not striking out much. When he's not going well, everything pretty much goes with him. He'll be fine. The answer to both of your questions is 2005.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 07:13 PM) I've thought that. Wouldn't it be kind of funny? You have to figure he will eventually go under the knife. I think if he had a multi year contract with the Phillies, they would have had him get it done, but they didn't want their high profile acquisition done in June, and therefore done with the Phillies. especially with only 1 victory to his credit. Unless someone wants to give Freddy a decent sized check, I really think he eventually, whether its next season or a year after surgery will come back to the Sox on a cheap 1 year contract.

Does anyone think KW may take a flier on Freddy Garcia this winter? He had a rehab assignment Saturday. He probably would have been better off having surgery, but I'm sure will be available cheap, and probably wants to get back to hanging around Ozzie.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 06:58 PM) AJ + Hall wouldn't even be that hot if he hadn't been injured. Give Toby a break. He's driven in a run this season. It must really suck for Toby that when you open his page on whitesox.com, the action photo isn't even him, its not even anyone any good. Its Nick Masset.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 06:59 PM) <!--quoteo(post=1493466:date=Aug 21, 2007 -> 04:56 PM:name=elrockinMT)-->QUOTE(elrockinMT @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 04:56 PM) <!--quotec-->Kalapse, your expert analysis of our players amazes me. Buerhle shouldn't have been traded either and wasn't. I spoke out against that trade idea too. Buerhle, Garland and Vazquez are better than "slightly above average." I am not too certain about Contreras anymore and if we get offered a good return in a trade that maybe Jose should go, but when he is on he is one of the best and has shown that. You don't mess around with trading away good pitching just because they have a rough stretch. There's nothing in the numbers that tells me Garland is anything more than a slightly above league average starter, not a damn thing. If you have some statistics that I have not seen that proves otherwise I'd love to see it. A career 4.48 ERA, 103 ERA+ (100 being average), 1.37 WHIP and a ~2.2:1 K:BB suggests he's pretty damn average. I'm not saying he's a bad pitcher or anything, I think a league average starter is an incredibly valuable thing. You seem to have a habit of overrating White Sox personnel. ERA ERA+ WHIP K BB HR 4.58 100 1.407 112 83 23 2002 4.51 99 1.367 108 74 28 2003 4.89 100 1.378 113 76 34 2004 3.50 127 1.172 115 47 26 2005 4.51 103 1.363 112 41 26 2006 4.84 94 1.407 90* 61* 23* 2007 --------------------------- 4.45 102 1.344 108 64 27 6 Year Totals *Projected totals What am I missing here? His 2007 is eerily similar to 2002 and 2006 is almost the same to 2003. The last 2 years under Jerry Manuel, the guy that supposedly handled Garland all wrong and the last 2 years under Ozzie Guillen, the guy that made Garland a decent pitcher, are virtually identical. Amazing.

From earlier this season one of Ken Rosenthal's columns a Q & A with KW. Kenny sounding a little pompous Q: Now that you've seen the young pitchers you've acquired, how much better do you feel about the moves that you made? A: It's everybody else that feels better. I had already seen these kids. That's why we got 'em. I already had a sense of optimism based on our evaluations. But the coaching staff hadn't seen them. The manager hadn't. Now they understand to a greater degree. They're excited. And the players are, too. I've had a few of them come up to me. Mark Buerhle said publicly the other day, the public perception is that we're looking for a fifth starter. All the players are saying, 'How are they going to choose one from this group?' They're impressive. And we had to do it. Q: When did you decide it was necessary? A: Three years ago. Q: You knew it three years ago? You knew it would be this off-season? A: Sure. Q: Just the way the contracts laid out? A: The way the contracts laid out, the way trends go on successful pitchers, the accumulations of workload. And success, which correlates into higher compensation. If we would have continued on, we would have damn near had a $70 million rotation. Q: So you knew in '04 that this was an off-season in which you would have to do some things. A: One of the reasons Javy was brought in last year was with that mindset that you're going to have some variables. If you don't prepare for either the loss of talent in free agency, injuries, poor performance, whatever — if you don't insulate yourself — your competitive level could drop off a cliff. Will Mark Buerhle still be with the White Sox come 2008? (Rob Leiter/MLB / Getty Images) And once it does, it's been my observation — and I hope I never have to witness it first-hand — it takes you a long time to climb back. Why? Because your first line of defense more times than not has slipped. And that first line of defense is pitching. Q: The criticism of what you have done is that you've taken a step back in '07. A: The disappointing thing is that I would think people by now would know me better than that. If and when I feel like that — that we're rebuilding and I don't think we can compete for a championship — I'll be the first one to tell you. But if you just look at things on the surface, what have we done? We've fortified the bullpen. People don't know what we know about Andy Sisco, don't know the name Nick Masset, don't know Aardsma turned the corner at the end of last year for the Cubs, don't know Charlie Haeger's versatility. We eliminated one starter. The common thought is that we eliminated two starters. That's not true. Brandon wasn't in last year's rotation. Freddy was the starter we eliminated. Now we have three or four candidates to go into that spot, with probably Floyd and Danks leading the way. Everyone wants to focus on this whole makeover. What makeover? One of our off-season needs was a backup catcher. We feel we now have one of the best tandems (A.J. Pierzynski and Toby Hall) in the game. We needed to insulate ourselves against Brian (Anderson) in center field to make sure he was going to continue to progress. So, in comes (Darin) Erstad. (Scott) Podsednik gets hurt, so now Erstad becomes that much more valuable to us. Everybody else is the same. Q: How good are the three starting pitching prospects you acquired — Floyd, Gonzalez and Danks? A: We look at things a little differently sometimes than other clubs. Here's what we think: We think they can pitch on a championship team. Otherwise, they wouldn't be here. Who pans out to be a No. 1, 2 or 3, I don't know. They're all going to be somewhere in there. But fortunately, with Jon Garland, Mark Buerhle, Jose Contreras and Javier Vazquez, we don't need them to be anything but a No. 5 right now and next year as well. They've got time to grow into whoever they're going to turn out to be. But they're going to be special. Q: A lot of people think your moves were driven by owner Jerry Reinsdorf, that he wanted to cut payroll... A: He absolutely did not tell me to lower payroll. The payroll went up. The payroll since '05 has gone up about $28 million. The revenues haven't gone up that much, I guarantee you that. It's kind of an unfair picture that's being painted. We're over $100 million. And while it's great to be able to pay some of the stars of the game, we did win (the 2005 World Series) on a $75 million payroll. Money is not the answer to one's issues. It's not. I told Jerry, we're going to be very unpopular until right around March 15. And he said, 'Why March 15?' I said, 'Because that's when people are going to get it. They're going to see for themselves. They don't know the names. They just see, a 17-game winner (Garcia) and young stud prospect (McCarthy) in and out the door.' I said, 'Right around March 15, they'll start to figure it out.' And it actually happened, right around March 4. Whatever people didn't know that he knew about Sisco, Masset and Aarsmda, I'm kind of glad I don't know.

QUOTE(SEALgep @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 06:15 PM) And let the guy rust over until ST of 08? He still needs to be out there if you expect him to contribute, even next year. That wouldn't matter. What should happen is instead of bringing in Myers to face lefties, maybe try a few righties, who knows they may get a couple out and convince the manager that a pitcher throwing well out of the bullpen doesn't have to be a closer to face batters from both sides of the plate. I am happy they got rid of Gonzalez for a week. I think they should either bring back Aardsma or Masset. I just think if you want to look at Myers for next season which is what this is, how he throws in spring training would be a far better indicator of where he'll be at next season than what he does now, especially if he's a guy who would be pitching for a job.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 08:41 AM) IMO, Myers with a 3.00 ERA who can get lefties out, plus what the sox can get in a trade for Thornton would be >> than thornton with a +5.00 ERA who can't get lefties out. The sox can get a close look at Myers and see if he's a fit for the 2008 bullpen. Additionally, the Sox can use Logan in the 7th, 8th innings vs. lefties and righties--ie, Thorton's role. So Logan gets more experience, which is very important going into 2008. He'd take over as the top LH set up man. Right now, if a young LHP was called up like Vasquez or Reynoso, they'd probably get lit up. They don't seem to have the control or stuff to be anything more than a LOGGY at this point. Yet when rosters expand in Sept, they'll probably get a shot. and Maybe Phillips in a relief role as well. Once again I ask what does Myers' performance the rest of this season have anything to do with how he will perform in 2008? Politte and Cotts were good at this time in 2005, what did that mean for 2006? Thornton, MacDougal, Masset, and Aardsma were pretty good the final month or so of 2006, what did that translate to in 2007? The Sox should give their young pitchers the innings they are giving Myers to get some experience. Myers should take some time off, and the Sox should have invited him to spring training.

The big problem with trading Garland is who replaces the 200 innings? Rookies tend to struggle, Contreras won't be any younger next year, and there will be questions about how many innings Danks can throw. Can Vazquez keep up with what he's doing? There were a lot of questions in 2005 as well. I think unless KW gets someone to take Contreras' entire contract, that Garland is gone.

Wily Mo is 11 months older than Josh Fields. He's had a couple of decent statistical years. I wouldn't write him off. I'd rather have Dye, but if the Sox weren't going to sign him, I'd rather have Wily Mo than the draft picks.

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 08:39 AM) To guage the value of Garland's worth start with the fact he has never missed a start and he throws about 200 innings. The prospect NOT THE REALITY of this scenario got Gil Meche a really nice deal. Garland in the NL wold be very successful. Sounds like a certain Venezuelan who was traded to Philadelphia last winter. Garland's performance the balance of this season is going to come into play. Garcia won 17 games and makes $10 million. Garland will make $12 million and is complaining about a knot in his shoulder. I think the return will be about the same, although Garland most likely won't tank like Garcia.

dadgummit

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 05:50 PM) I don't know if anyone has really noticed, but Garland has been as bad, or worse than, Jose Contreras over the last couple of months. Should we be thinking about dumping both Contreras and Garland after this season? Or maybe keeping Contreras and dealing Garland, as he would be a FA after 2008 anyway? Maybe in hindsite should we have taken the Astros deal without Hunter Pence, and kept McCarthy? Thoughts? Garland makes $12 million next year, and is going to want even more per year after. I think its an upset if KW doesn't at least try to deal him this winter. If he continues to get shelled, that may be a difficult task, especially if you are looking for a big return.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 05:48 PM) The injury to Sweeney couldn't have come at a worse time for him. he could very well be getting an on the job audition if he doesn't hurt himself. Instead he has given guys like Fields (in LF at least) and Owens the chance pass him on the depth chart in the OF. While those guys may have passed him for now, Sweeney is a favorite of both Ozzie and KW. The injury is unfortunate, but unlike some, he'll still get every opportunity to show what he's got. I still think he's going to be a real good player.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 05:44 PM) I don't mind the move at all. As Beck said, if Myers can pitch well and get back to that 06 Yankee form, it gives us options in regards to Thornton, who could be dealt to help bring in a SS for example. But what does Myers performance the rest of this season have to do with how he will perform next year? I'd rather get some young guy up who could use some experience and invite Myers to spring training. Swapping out Thornton for Myers does not strengthen the bullpen IMO.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 03:36 PM) Isn't this argument sort of a false choice? Either Uribe sucks ass, or no: it's Fields! How about: Uribe is at the very best underachieving and at the worst lazy and mentally distracted? Or: Fields has a lot of potential and can swing the big stick but he's also a ROOKIE? I wouldn't say that. I just think if you think Uribe is garbage, I think Fields needs to show you a little more to be categorized as a future star.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 02:12 PM) There are 26 SS's in baseball with a qualifying number of at bats. Juan Uribe is 24th out of those 26 in OPS. Tony Pena Jr. and Omar Vizquel are the only 2 worse than him in all of baseball with the bat. There are 37 3rd basemen in baseball who have had over 250 plate appearances at that position. Josh Fields' OPS is 21nd out of those. At the worst, therefore, Josh has put up average offensive #'s for a 3rd baseman this season, in his first 1/2 season in the bigs. So Uribe is the 24th SS and he's garbage while Fields is the 21st 3rd baseman and he's a star that Crede be non-tendered to make room for. Disregard defense and its still not that clear of an argument.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 01:59 PM) Fields is putting up a .755 ops as a rookie, that's pretty damn impressive. And yes, those 14 homers in 245 ab's is pretty freakin good as well. Uribe on the other hand has an ops about 100 points lower than Fields and while Fields should and will definitely improve, Uribe seems to be declining. Those two really don't compare offensively. Uribe is a SS. His replacement's OPS probably won't be that high either. While one would think Fields would improve there is no guarantee. I'm not arguing Fields vs. Uribe per se, I just have a hard time figuring out why one is a lock to be a star while the other one is garbage. Look at Uribe's first 275 abs

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 01:07 PM) Ah yes, comparing 265 AB's to just under 3000(2974)...... From the start of 2006, Uribe is batting .230 with a .267 OBP, a .671 OPS, has not played "Uribe" type defense, and is set to make 5 million next season. I know you have some sort of hard on for Uribe, along with some sort of grudge to Fields, but it's easy to see where the "garbage" references come from with Uribe. Maybe he will get better, but paycheck aside, if Uribe's performance is "garbage", the same can be said about Fields. I don't think either have been garbage, but I do think while he's not the greatest, Uribe is way undervalued around here, and Fields at this point is overrated because he's hit some homers. I would have no problem with Uribe being replaced if it were someone who actually was better. Greene is not better. Furcal may be, but is he $8 million better? Tejada is better, but Eckstein?

Coming into yesterday's game, Fields had an OBP this season .001 higher than Uribe's lifetime OBP yet Fields is a star and Uribe is garbage.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 12:15 PM) So was he experiencing this same "tightness" from '00-'04? Either way, he's maddeningly inconsistent. Those seasons he was very young.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 11:43 AM) Huh, wouldn't the same go for the hitting? I know you want to get "at bats", but isn't there a BIG difference between having somebody hit off of a major league ready pitcher and hit off of a AA guy? So doesn't it make sense to just keep all of your starters out of the B game level? The whole thing just sounds of doing something different just to do something different. Contreras was the only guy in the rotation until Garland blew up that you could say underperformed this season, and he was outstanding in the spring.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 11:47 AM) Or perhaps he's just not as good a pitcher as '05 suggested. Ozzie made Garland after Jerry Manuel nearly ruined him, if you want to believe everything you hear and read. Garland goes on rolls. His shoulder was tight the first half last season and he was battered, and it was tight the second half this one with the same result. When it was "loose" he was outstanding. I wonder if there's a bigger problem than a knot.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 05:28 PM) Article on the White Sox site, Guillen stating he wants starting pitchers to pitch in spring games vs. B games to get them more ready for April. I can vouch for what he says about scouts at the B games and the back fields ... sometimes a couple dozen are in attendance. http://whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?y...sp&c_id=cws Hawk has always praised Ozzie for finding a ton of playing time for minor leaguers in spring training games. I wonder if he will praise him now for making his frontline pitchers travel.