Dick Allen

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 03:33 PM) It all depends, if those are vesting options then this could be pretty damn brutal. You have to think that Soriano would only agree to such a deal if there was a clause in there that could make a few of those option years gauranteed. The Tribune won't own the team those final couple of years, so they couldn't care less. I heard Trump wants to buy the Cubs and build a new stadium close to downtown. I wonder what the sheep would do then.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) True. So what do you guys think of this lineup? Soriano Derosa Lee Ramirez Jones? Barrett Murton? Izturis That's just my guess as of right now. Obviously this will change if guys like Murton or Jones are traded. That's a pretty good lineup, though. It should feast on the garbage pitching that is the NL central. If they stay healthy, that is a very nice NL line-up. Its pretty spectacular for an AL line-up as well. It will be interesting to see who Hendry brings in to pitch.

If it was a team like the White Sox which really has to watch its bottom line, this contract would be foolish, but for a team like the Cubs, its really not that bad. Soriano is the best player on the market, and many scouts do think he will turn into a pretty good outfielder. 5 or 6 years from now, Soriano's $17 million a year may not be all that much. The Tribune Company won't be owning the team too much longer IMO and behind the scenes they have been blown away by the offers they are receiving for the team. The National League is weak, the Cardinals just proved that a mediocre team can win the WS. My biggest concern being a Cub hater was when they signed Piniella. That team is going to have a different attitude, and obviously now are willing to spend money. They aren't done. They are going to have a $120-130 million payroll in 2007 I believe. It just goes to show how much money they have made over the years.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 08:43 AM) Who says I was making an argument? I was pointing something out, nothing more, like an editor points out a missing comma or a faulty transition. I'm not saying that Garland isn't the lowest injury risk. I'm just pointing out that, hey, it isn't just the Old Men Of the Staff who wound up at some point or another hurt. I was simply pointing out that as far as physical issues, only the one who wasn't involved in 2005 went unscathed. I'd imagine Garland the lowest injury risk of them all since he hasn't thrown anywhere near as many innings as the others, is fairly young, and doesn't throw particularly hard. That said, I think he's the most likely to suck next year, too, aside from McCarthy who I think is going to be a huge homerun machine. But on the subject of injuries, I think McCarthy is the biggest injury risk. Dude's mechanics aren't particularly inspiring, and I imagine his career will end early as a result. Like Mark Prior. That's just my thoughts -- and I'm not saying, "DON'T PUT HIM IN THE ROTATION!" or anything because he's bound to wind up losing his career to injury, I'm just saying that's what I think will eventually happen to Young Cy Young. At the beginning of last season, Widger commented that Garland was having some shoulder problems. He seemed to overcome them obviously. I do think the White Sox luck with pitcher's health has to come to an end sometime. I know Herm Schneider is considered among the best if not the best, but there is only so much a trainer can do to help prevent injury.

QUOTE(kwolf68 @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 02:49 PM) Danks immediately becomes our #1 pitching prospect if we get him. I would do whatever I could to land him...wouldn't mind nabbing Thomas Diamond either (he's in AA right now I think), but that's probably too much bounty to get. I am perplexed at the mention of TWO RELIEF righties...Otsuka, Mac and Jenks???? If this deal goes down, Kenny isn't done...one of our closer-talent righties would be moved...considering the market for quality relief pitchers, it's not a bad idea to really corner the market there and then go load up somewhere. I'd been stunned if KW moved any of relievers he would deem as quality pitchers. They want to get back to having a nasty bullpen. I think KW learned a lesson last offseason when he virtually blew off the bullpen.

Garland has had 1 full season where his ERA has been lower than 4.51, although he has won 18 games each of the past 2 seasons. Vazquez is a below .500 pitcher for his career. He's had a couple of good seasons playing in front of high school baseball sized crowds in Montreal, other than that he's been mediocre at best although he makes a lot of money. Contreras had a great second half of 2005 and first half of 2006, other than that he hasn't been too reliable of a pitcher. Buerhle has been great most of his career, but he was pounded the second half of the season. There has to be some cause for concern. Its no lock he returns to his previous form. Garcia lost a lot of velocity and was pretty crappy in 2006 before a hot streak in September made most of his numbers fairly respectable. I am one thinking if he doesn't get his velocity back, his September mastery is a mirage, and considering everyone who gets on base against him is almost a lock to be in scoring position eventually........... They all have some serious issues. A couple of them will probably bounce back, and a couple will most likely falter even more. Hopefully KW picks the correct one to move.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 03:12 PM) I bet Levine hates Omar Vizquel When the Sox acquired Garcia, Levine stated there was "no way" Garcia would sign an extension with the White Sox, that he would go through the free agent process. The next day, Garcia signed an extension.

I wouldn't mind them trading Garland, I think he, like the other 4 starters are overrated. If they were the studs everyone makes them out to be, the White Sox wouldn't have finished in 3rd place in 2006. It would be an instance of selling high. I don't know much about the Rangers prospects, but KW supposedly loves their pitchers. If he gets a couple + the reliever, its really not a bad trade. You know when KW finally unloads a pitcher or 2, the others will probably spend some time on the DL, but this move gets the Sox some prospects, maybe improves the bullpen and frees up some money. I'd rather get rid of Vazquez or Garcia, but won't shed any tears if Garland is sent packing. His low strikeout rate indicates he's apt to start getting lit up. Its sure to net more than the last time KW traded him. I wonder if Ozzie's little blow-up with Garland has anything to do with him being gone, if in fact he does go. Ozzie didn't like how CLee slid into second-he gone. He was pissed at Tracey for not hitting a batter-he gone to Charlotte, and he was pissed at Garland for not hitting a batter-maybe he gone to Texas.

Vazquez is only signed through 2007 although under the team's control through 2008, but that would be an arbitration year. With what very mediocre pitching seems to be commanding these days, if Vazquez somehow had a decent year, you're looking at probably $14 million+ for 2008. No thanks.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 06:02 PM) It's so funny. Thome's "bad" September = not clutch when we needed him Garcia's good September = doesn't matter because it was against garbage teams. I'm not saying you're trying to have it both ways Dick, but these are common comments on Soxtalk. The Sox were still in it when Garcia nearly threw a perfecto, but that Oakland series was killer for me. SSI71 thinks the season ended in August. I guess we should just throw some of Jermaine's stats out the window and not have to worry about Buehrle's end of the season struggles. I've been pretty consistent. I have never had a problem with Thome. A lot of people expect him to hit .800 with a homer every other AB against pitchers that hardly anyone hits. I don't care who the teams are, Garcia got hot when the Sox had virtually no chance to win, and if it was fatigue that was bothering him earlier, why would more pitching allow him to make stronger starts? Wouldn't he become more fatiqued.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 05:48 PM) Its quite simple, Freddy showed a plus splitter to go with already good breaking pitches and a much better feel for pitching late in the season. Mix that in with a guy who has been a 200 inning a year guy consistently, who has won big games, pitches good against contenders (historically speaking) and can absolutely dominate teams (especially when Colon will probably still have some set backs) and it makes a lot of sense, imo. The Angels aren't looking to win 2 years from now, they want to develop some guys but Moreno learned one thing last year and thats that you can't develop too much so he may be telling Stoneman, get me a proven ace, and Santana is probably the closest to getting a raise so they've decided he could be expendable (for the right price). And if they get Anderson (defensively they need help in CF) and a guy like Josh Fields (with us getting Figgins back, who they are apparently down on) and it makes a lot of sense to me. He was pitching in useless games in September when he had his success. Garcia's combined ERA for June, July and August was 5.37. Santana may be a better pitcher right now. Garcia's September success could be as fleeting as Jim Abbott's in September of 1998. The White Sox signed Abbott after the Angels released him. His junk was floating just right that in 5 starts with the White Sox, he went 5-0. The Brewers gave him a lot of money after that brilliance and he didn't make it through the next season. I don't want to suggest Garcia is at the end of his career, just that he, IMO, is done being dominant for a long stretch, and certainly can't be the ace of a staff especially if he can't bring intensity against lesser teams. He makes approximately $300,000 a start and plays for one of his closest friends. If that doesn't allow you to be intense, I just wonder what the effect of a southern California lifestyle would have on him.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 05:35 PM) For whatever reason the Angels have offered Santana in a lot of trade packages. I think they want to win now and right now they really need that top of the rotation guy. Freddy has been that in the past and I (and I'm sure if the Angels made the deal they would too) think he can be it again. You put Freddy with a horse like Lackey and if they get Colon back (another potential horse, although I wouldn't count on it) mix that with Weaver and obviously they have Saunders (who looks pretty good) mixed with Escobar and thats pretty nasty (being that Sanders would replace Colon if Colon was hurt). I can definately see it making sense. You can only have so many young guys in your rotation and win pennants (imo) and they will likely have Sanders/Weaver already in there. Plus the Angels can spend the money to resign Freddy if they want. I don't know why you want a guy who has lost 7-8 mph off his fastball who appears not to be in the greatest of shape, who makes a lot of money and can walk after the season over a guy who will be 24 on opening day and is coming off 12 and 16 win seasons. It makes absolutely no sense to me. With Lackey and if Colon can return, they don't need a guy who admits he doesn't focus on lesser opponents. Maybe offseason rest will bring some velocity back for Garcia, but we were under the same impression with Billy Koch after he lost the same amount of velocity. His workload the season before and some mechanics were being blamed. Freddy made his numbers look a lot better than the reality last year.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 05:27 PM) I doubt that the Angels are offering Santana for Garcia straight up, but I wouldn't be stunned if they were willing to part with Santana for Garcia and some throw-ins. It would be more than throw-ins. Santana has 28 wins the last 2 seasons, and improved in just about every category last year. There is reason to believe he is just going to get better. I think DeLuca shares the same fact checker as Marriotti.

Does anyone else realize the ridiculousness of this "proposed" trade? There have been a couple of posts about how successful Freddy has been pitching in Anaheim, but then look at Santana's home numbers. Over the next 5 years, chances are Santana will win more games than Freddy and get paid a few lifetime's worth of money less, couple with the fact that Garcia could walk after 1 season, but Santana is still under the club's control for another 4 or 5. If the deal really is Santana + for Garcia, KW would have jumped at it so fast before the Angels could change their minds.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 03:39 PM) Freddy Garcia was arguably our best pitcher last season, yet people are so quick to kick him to the curb. How many times did he step it up big time when we neede him the most? Judging by his record and numbers with the Sox, it happened a lot more time than the situation you are mentioning. Considering Freddy's ERA was over 5.00 most of the season until the end when he strung together some nice outings only to have the White Sox finish 3rd, and his admitting that he doesn't "get up" for lesser opponents, indicates to me that he didn't step up when the White Sox needed him. Santana won 16 games, and had an ERA lower than Freddy's and makes $8 million less than him. The Angels would be crazy making the trade, and I think DeLuca is full of s***. Garcia is going to get even more money in 2008 and beyond if he's halfway decent next year.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:45 AM) Who wouldn't rather post them? 51.1 million will buy alot of players and payroll flexibility. Who would pay that much for some pitchers who got shelled the last season they pitched?

QUOTE(beautox @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:37 AM) Figgins is "teh sux" hes in the same boat and Podsednik and Pierre, this FA class and offseason has shown us that the price for the unknown(Matz) is HIGH and that the price for the known(Zito,Schmiditt,Garcia,ect.) is going to be even higher, wait until the dust settles for Zito and Schmidt, KW will get what he wants for one(Pelfry & Humber) possibly two of our starters. You want to give Garcia away for a speedy utility player that had an OBP of .336 and thrown in a propsect, hoping that gets the deal done. I agree. KW should wait until all the free agent dust has settled and a couple of teams have come up empty. He will be able to maximize his return IMO.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:25 AM) Santana is not better than Freddy and if he came to the Sox he would be even worse. Look at these splits: 2006 Home: 10-2, 3.02 ERA, 1.10 WHIP 2006 Away: 6-6, 5.95 ERA, 1.40 WHIP Career Home: 19-5. 3.09 ERA, 1.14 WHIP Career Away: 9-11, 6.46 ERA, 1.53 Just some perspective, here's Garcia's numbers at USCF 2006: 4.11 ERA, 1.26 WHIP 2005: 4.38 ERA, 1.39 WHIP 2004: 5.37 ERA, 1.40 WHIP Freddy gets a lot of flack for being "terrible" at home, but Santana's road numbers are much worse than Garcia's numbers at USCF. Just say NO to Santana. He's another one of these guys that ESPN talks up and has splits that tell another story. (See Blalock and Young.) Santana is 24 years old. Freddy's ERA was over 5.00 on the road, he also makes a ton more money. Frank Thomas couldn't hit home runs outside of US Cellular Field to save his life, but he seemed to do fine with Oakland. I'll take Santana and his numbers + $7-8 million a year to spend on other parts over Garcia at this point of his career any day. Freddy got hot at the end of the year, but I don't see where that shows he will be dominant in 2007. Seems he and the rest of the Sox staff were quite good at the end of 2005 and it translated to nothing in 2006.

I can't imagine the Angels would give up Santana and something else for Garcia. Santana's numbers are just as good if not better than Freddy's and he's a lot younger and cheaper, and will be cheaper for a few seasons. I think Deluca is full of it.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 03:41 PM) His mechanical flaw is the same mechanical flaw he has had since we picked him up from the As. The latin phrase for it is ....nonthrowusstrikustomuchus. He constantly gets behind every hitter, and then whammo. Cotts was bat in 2004, maybe the oddity was 2005 and he became Neal Cotts again. Like uncle cliffy became the same pitcher that was tossed by the bullpen retarded Blue Jays. He has been in the league for how long and hasnt learned how to throw a decent breaking pitch. I mean come on now. Aardsma seems to have the same problem. At least Cotts has shown he can be very successful at the major league level. KW was talking up Logan and Reynoso today. I'm getting worried.

I really don't think there is one starter who should be off limits. Every one of them has some issues and some huge quesion marks. Everyone of them is also capable of making you regret trading them. If it were me, Vazquez would be the guy I would want to dump, followed by Garcia, Contreras, Garland and Buerhle, but I would trade Buerhle in a heartbeat if the price was right. I wouldn't mind seeing KW trade 2 in the same deal and raid a team's minor league system, while freeing up some cash to sign a free agent.

Cotts and Buerhle were equally as bad last year. I think Cotts had a mechanical flaw making him very hittable. If Cooper is such a magician, why not keep Cotts? Aardsma's claim to fame is he is now the first player listed in the Baseball Encyclopedia. Cotts was bad in 2006, but I think he'll rebound, although maybe not as a starter. I think the Sox would have been better off holding on to him and deal him after he had a nice 2007 season.

I don't blame the White Sox for not throwing that kind of cash at a guy who will pitch 45 innings a year.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 15, 2006 -> 10:16 PM) Joe Crede K'd what 111 times his last year in AA. Our Lord and Savior Aaron Rowand K'd also 117 times his last full season in AA. Fields k'd 15 times in 10 games in Venezuela before he quit and went home.

For someone who claimed he never had more fun than he had last season, Frank sure is fleeing Oakland in a hurry. I can't blame him for that kind of money, and I can't blame Oakland for not matching it. Geddy Lee is now going to be a Frank Thomas fan.