Dick Allen

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 01:16 PM) So Thome, Dye, Konerko, AJP... all terrible players, huh? Not having a bad year, just bad players? The problem is even when these guys put up great numbers, and I really don't know how you could expect bigger numbers collectively than what these guys provided in 2006, it wasn't nearly good enough. The pitching will be key. Somehow KW is going to have to fix the mess he has while peeling off a Garland or Vazquez. Its going to be difficult, because the Sox don't have an organization filled with innings eaters.

I do think the Marlins took Adrian Gonzalez #1 in 2000 based on signability. I'm pretty sure he was projected to go in the first round but much lower. You look at that 2000 draft and scratch your head. The first round was pretty bad. Gonzalez actually may be the best player.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 12:07 PM) Nice cherry-picking, again. 2 years after? I once posted in here (I need to find the post) a list of how teams did the YEAR after they won a WS. As I recall, a significant number played below .500, and I don't think more than half made the playoffs the next year. So looking at 2 years out, this team collapsed, and that is actually not as fast as a number of teams collapsed. What I stated was a fact and it has to do with this season since it was 2 years ago the White Sox won it all. It is not cherry picking. I also stated a few teams were below .500 the season after they won but bounced back. It actually was on a Fox or ESPN broadcast back in April or May. I also pointed out it depends how you look at it when it was posed this was one of the biggest collapes ever. I actually posted my fact earlier this year when I thought the odds were the White Sox would have a decent second half based on it.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:49 AM) So, you're basically saying that this team fell apart quicker and worse than any other Championship team in history? It depends how you look at it, but its up there.

A question I have is why aren't guys like Masset and Aardsma now with the team. They would seem to have a better shot at the 2008 roster than Bukvich or Myers, and you never know you may have a 15 inning game and probably can use one.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:48 AM) Baseball is a game that is supposed to be enjoyed. Sorry if their isn't equal time given to every negative thing that happens, or could be happening to the White Sox, but I am guessing the reason is simply that for something that is supposed to be entertainment, most people who rather focus on the postive versus obsessing about the negative. If you want to strain to see the negative in everything, have at it. Most people watch baseball because it brings them happiness. Because of that you are going to see a focus on the good things. For most people if they didn't enjoy it, they wouldn't waste their time on it. Different strokes for different folks I guess. Then nobody with this "attitude" should ever rip on Cubs fans. They should be admired for being positive about all the negative. I agree, baseball should be enjoyed, and having Gavin as part of your rotation in 2008 will make it not enjoyable.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:37 AM) Who's the last team to fall so far so quickly (1st to basically last) that didn't do it intentionally (Marlins)? Before this season, the Marlins were the only team to finish below .500 2 years after winning the WS. I think they did it both times they won. There were a couple of teams that finish below .500 right after winning but bounced back the next season.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 10:50 AM) Jake Westbrook sucked with the Yankees too. He turned out all right. You're right. The 6 2/3 innings he pitched for the Yankees when he was 22 were godawful.

I changed my mind. Floyd is great, as are Fields, Richar, Gonzalez, and Owens. I will disregard the 7-21 record the last 28 games. The Sox have the best owner, GM , manager and players in the game. It was just a fluke this year it didn't work out. Its worked out so often in the past. At least once since 1917. Its funny guys talk about others egos when stating opinions that differ from theirs. Maybe they are looking in the wrong direction for inflated egos.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 10:19 AM) We all have seen some new things this season, but I have to just shake my head reading "Sox fans" come up with excuses for White Sox players success. "Well, you can't really give credit to Floyd in his start at Detroit, and it's such a big park," or "Well, it was raining pretty good, which can make it hard for Indian hitters" I know a lot of you have your internet ego's to keep up with, but GMAB. It's one thing to root for a high pick, that helps with the future. But to look for actual reasons to discount young players success is a different story. Well then, why isn't there thread after thread about how Fields is going backwards offensively lately or the same with Richar? Should we ignore what they did earlier and just go by the past week or so? Why isn't there anybody backing off the Contreras is 94 years old and a bum when his last 5 starts he's 2-2 with a 4.50 ERA. Lower than Vazquez in 2006 when the going rate for that we were told on this board was 11 million to 12 million a year. Contreras could be a bargain at 10 mill. The bottom line is Floyd pitched a couple of decent games, but having that trump the awful outings or the rest of his career isn't wise IMO. Sorry you disagree. If you think Danks, Floyd and a rookie filling the last 3 spots in the White Sox rotation in 2008 is a good way to win in 2008, more power to you. I think it means battling with KC again.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 01:22 AM) So Cleveland and Detroit are mailing it in? I don't get it. You and Pratt wont give Gavin a chance. He automatically sucked to both of you before he made one single pitch for this team. He did suck before he threw one pitch for the Sox, check his performance in Philadelphia. As far as I can tell, even with his September awakening his ERA this season is near 6.00. Maybe you think that's outstanding, but I think it sucks.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:28 AM) He faced two teams trying to get to the playoffs, he didn't face two teams who have shut it down already. HUGE difference. He faced the Tigers struggling, without Sheffield, no Ordonez, really Hawk was laughing at their line-up. Cleveland is cruising and it was a rainy night. What about the starts when he was crushed? There really is no race in the AL Central. Its funny, the Sox have all the guys people seem to be foaming over in the line-up. Richar, Fields now Floyd and the Sox continue to lose. I think there are a lot of masochists on this board. BTW, the Indians didn't even get into Chicago yesterday until 4:30 AM. It probably was a good time to face them.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:00 AM) You keep saying September starts like because it's September that they don't mean anything. That's just wrong. Great, so a 21, 22 and 23 year old pitcher struggled, I know it's impossible at the ripe old age of 24 to improve, but hey look...Gavin is improving. You pull out some odd comparisons at times, a 24 year old pitcher who is clearly getting better to a pitcher who is about 84 and clearly getting worse, no comparison there at all. Ask KW about evaluating September performances for young guys. I'm glad Floyd is improving, but really how could he not have improved? If he has a 3.00 ERA this month does it mean he will continue to get better? Look at his 2004 numbers. They were pretty good, why was he not able to continue to improve then. He's a tease, and always will be. Contreras at least has shown he can get the job done in meaningful games.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 08:43 AM) Yet he continues to give him starts. curious And Andy Gonzalez continues to play 3rd base, and Mike Myers continues to get called in from the bullpen and.............................

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 08:23 AM) Ya well you openly said here that you were rooting against him before he even threw a single pitch for this team. You never gave him a chance. He's shown he has a solid fastball(91-93 is perfectly fine when you can move it a bit like he can), he has a good curveball yet an inconsistant one and while he rarely uses his changeup, he has flashed one from time to time just to show teams he has one. IF(and it's still a big if) he can gain some consistancy in his curve, he can be at least a league average starter for this club imo. That would be absolutely huge because it does indeed give us more options in the offseason. It would be very foolish to make Floyd part of 2008's rotation based on a few September starts, totalling ignoring what has gone on before, not just this year but the 3 previous seasons as well. He's not very good. Its funny that Floyd's fastball is solid when he's 91-93, but if Contreras throws 91-93 he's washed up. Like Contreras, he must keep people off base because they run at will off of him. I'm not buying his success.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 11:05 PM) Since Coop changed his windup Gavin has 4 quality starts out of 5 I love September evaluations.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 10:55 PM) Signing Eckstein is nothing more than an "anything but Uribe" scenario. It gives our fans the illusion improvements have been made. We really have no choice but to play Richar and Fields. They're going to allow the White Sox possible financial wiggle room to sign their next batch of grinders. I mean, not every player can be like Asdrubal Cabrera and produce immediately upon promotion. Cmon, now. Everyone knows it's rare for any player to succeed within three years of first playing in the majors. The White Sox used to have guys who had success when they were promoted. Thomas, Lee, Ordonez, even Crede was on fire in 2002. Mike Caruso hit .300 has a rookie didn't he? In fact, Slappy's OPS was only .009 lower than Josh Fields. If Richar did that, we would be hearing he's a future HOFer and what a genius KW is for acquiring him. I don't think I've ever seen so many people so impressed with so little shown. Maybe he'll be good some day, but right now he is not a major league calibur player.

I don't know about a painter, but he's going to have to be a magician to make this roster championship quality without significantly raising the payroll. The word is ticket prices for this last place team will rise between $1-3. We used to laugh at the Cubs for doing that, and laughed even harder at their fans for paying it. I think Garland is gone, but I just don't see how there will be room for a huge free agent. Gavin Floyd is not a quality starter. Danks ran out of gas after about 90 innings. Contreras is a big question mark. Vazquez as a #2 is a question mark. Buerhle is solid. The bullpen is an absolute mess. I think you're right about painted in a corner here. Some of these contracts cannot be moved. Unfortunately reality isn't setting in in the front office on 35th St. This team is currently worse than almost every other team in baseball,

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 09:17 PM) It gets me scared to death about our offseason. I don't know how the Sox OBP problem would be solved with Eckstein, Richar, and Fields in the line-up. They need to get guys who can get on base, and who can catch and throw the ball. Eckstein is going to be paid a lot more than he's worth.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 10:31 PM) I could see a rotation of Buehrle-Vazquez-Danks-Floyd-Egbert. However, if that's the case, I think it is automatic that you have a 7 man rotation and one of Broadway, Haeger, Massett, or even Phillips in the pen. Danks is 0-7 with a 6.80 ERA his last 8 starts and he's the #3? Gavin Floyd is a #4? A rookie #5? Has everyone just dismissed what these guys have done this season?You better have a ton of relievers who can throw a ton of innings and an offense that can lead the league in runs scored if you want to be anywhere near .500. The pitching staff is scary.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 09:31 PM) With a handful of arms that we aren't quite sure about, I think my plan for the offseason has changed a bit. I now want both Garland and Contreras traded, and two of Floyd/Haeger/Egbert/Gonzalez to take over the fourth and fifth spots. I understand the potential for disaster is there, especially since you're moving an above average #5 starter in Danks into a spot where he becomes below average (#3), but the 2008 season is going to be a gamble anyways. Trade Garland and Contreras for a combination of your 2008 SS and prospects, sign one of those CFers (Bradley, Jones, Cameron, Rowand/Hunter in that order), let Crede take third, put Fields in left and hope to hell that you can mash the crap out of teams (and that your bullpen bounces back big time). The White Sox would be in the hunt for the #1 pick again with that rotation. Danks as a #3 is scary. He couldn't finish out this season. Floyd blows. The others would be rookies who most likely struggle. That's 3 out of 5 that are below average and really counting on Vazquez as a #2 guy would be very scary. Pitching wins. I really don't think you can say without a doubt Danks is an above average #5 starter. Making him #3 isn't potential disaster, its pretty close to guaranteed disaster.

I still think they will be handcuffed by the guaranteed money they already have out there. Garland won't bring back nearly what most think if he's traded. Ozzie has already started the "there aren't going to be many relievers available and we have guys under contract" line. So I think a lot more of this team will be back than should be back. Another year like 2007 in 2008 would be devastating.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 12:32 PM) No matter how many times you post that they should, they are not going to rebuild in 2008. Wouldn't it be better to wait it out and see what they do and what they can accomplish. Baseball works funny sometimes. Look at Detroit, not to pick on them specifically but many people were saying they will have a dynasty due to their pitching. Bonderman is on his way to see an elbow doctor today. Don't believe all the articles is all I can say. And don't believe JR, KW or OG. They thought they had a title contender this season and may wind up with the worst record in baseball.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Sep 9, 2007 -> 10:05 AM) I saw Rush last night - here are my three highlights and three lowlights: Highlight #3 - Their sound system is wonderful. Crystal clear enough to hear every slight detail, yet very loud. Highlight #2 - Geddy Lee, much to my surprise, hit almost every high note. I know this wouldn't be a highlight to many people, but I like to hear the songs the way I remember them, and he was able to pull it off. Highlight #1 - Neil Peart. The man is an amazing musician. I don't normally consider drummers "true musicians", but Peart is one in my opinion. Fantastic. Lowlight #3 - WAAAAAAAY too much of the new CD. Snakes And Arrows is nowhere near any of their better work to me. Lowlight #2 - Kind of related to #3, their set lists (two sets) were aimed too much at the Rushtards and not enough toward the people who came to hear the more familiar Rush songs. Simply said, not enough hits. Maybe 6 or 7 familiar songs in a 3-hour show. Terrible ratio. PLUS, two of the three encores were new songs - that's just idiotic. Lowlight #1 - They were just DULL. Excellent musicianship, songs sounded tight and professional, but it just didn't make me want to do anything. All in all, this show was a disappointment. This was the third time I've seen Rush and this was far and away the least impressive of the three. I've seen them 50 times or more and I thought last night was the best they've been. When you have as much material as they do, some are always going to have a problem with the setlist, even rushtards which I suppose I would qualify. Their last 2 tours, the setlists were virtually identical, so I was happy to hear the new one. Entre Nous, Circumstances, Freewill, Natural Science were great. Spirit of Radio, Tom Sawyer and Subdivisions, Limelight will show up on every tour. I'd have liked 2112 to make the cut, but its about a 3 hour show as it is. I really like the new album and they really seem to enjoy playing it. They do play 9 songs from it, so if you don't like it or aren't very familiar with it, this show is probably one you would like to skip. I didn't find them dull at all. I was upfront so maybe I was able to see more I'm not sure, but to be honest, there's probably no way I could ever be bored at a Rush show even if they truly were dull. The encore was One Little Victory from Vapor Trails, actually played during the Connie's pizza race once at USCF in 2006, and Passage to Bangkok and YYZ. Bangkok is 30 years old and YYZ is on Moving Pictures which was released in 1981.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 5, 2007 -> 07:44 AM) um... no. 2004: Sox payroll $51M, second to Minny's $55M, and CLE and DET were both around $49M, so they were pretty much on par with the Sox as well. The only team the Sox were way ahead of in payroll was KC. Also, in 2005, the Sox were first but DET was only about $5M below them. The gap wasn't significant until 2006, and even this year, DET is within $12M. So let's not make it seem like Ozzie has been constantly given the ALC title giftwrapped. According to baseball-almanac.com the White Sox payroll in 2004 was $76 million, significantly higher than anyone in the division. Anyone who says Boston and the Yankees have an advantage because of payroll should think the White Sox have the same advantage in their division. Also if the $5 million or $6 million in 2005 is not significant why was there all the fuss about the CLee trade how it allowed the White Sox to sign a few guys that totaled around $5 million or $6 million like Iguchi and AJ? And if its not so significant, why are people wanting Joe Crede to be non-tendered? He would cost $5.5 million tops.