Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Soxtalk.com

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Dick Allen

Members
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dick Allen

  1. QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 10:55 PM) Who says it would be for 3 months? I can't remember KW ever getting a player for only a rental with no intentions of signing him. Why would he start now? It just isn't his style. I believe if we trade for him and give up top prospects then KW will have some kind of deal set in place with Soriano. Everett, RAlomar, wanted Delgado, even Blum was a rental.
  2. I would much rather trade Fields and Broadway for Soriano than any trade involving McCarthy. I think Fields stock is at an all time high, but I really think he's going to have trouble hitting major league pitching, at least for a long while. I have never been high on Broadway, I think he's a back of the rotation guy at best. I'd try to give up less, but if that what it took to keep him away from Detroit and Minnesota, I would do it, although you really should worry about Minnesota more at this point, and they are after CLee.
  3. QUOTE(BobDylan @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 10:22 PM) Just goes to show you ESPN rarely does their homework. There is no fishing way Williams lets the Sox finish the year with Podsednik in center. You wouldn't think, but he had Everett out there in 2003.
  4. Vazquez has had this pattern all season. He does have 9 wins, although he's only one 1 game when the Sox have scored less than 8 runs, the 4-0 game against KC. He also has had the lead in every start except one I believe. This is not what KW had in mind when he shipped out Chris Young. This will probably go down as KW's worst deal.
  5. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 10:31 PM) See, I think of it more as him having trouble with runners on and it just so happens to be that the bloop hit seems to come later in the game and than he falters. Today he did a better job with runners. Obviously he wasn't perfect, but he really is looking better. I realize I'm in the minority here though and I can't blame you guys for thinking the other way. There was nobody on when he gave up the bomb to Morneau.
  6. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 10:23 PM) I really can't blame Ozz. Its hard to listen to the stats that say Javy can't get guys out late in the games, when he throws so dominant and had barely been hit for 5 innings. Then why have Cotts ready at the beginning of the 6th inning? After the game I was going to commend Ozzie for having him ready although Vazquez was absolutely cruising. I must say, I am at the point where I just can't stand Vazquez and his mental fragility. Its really going to be hard watching him the rest of this season and next.
  7. If you have to rely on Javier Vazquez to win a big game for you.........................season over. He is horrid. A couple of things I don't understand. Why did Ozzie have Cotts ready in the 6th, anticipating the collapse, and let Vazquez face Morneau? Another thing that boggles my mind is why when the opposition has runners on first and third, when they have absolutely no intention on throwing to second, do they have a middle infielder covering second? I haven't seen the White Sox throw down in that situation all season.
  8. QUOTE(GoRowand33 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 06:05 PM) maybe this soriano thing is the Griffey rumour of the year The only difference is the Griffey thing wasn't a rumor. It was agreed upon. I read an article that was printed right before the Detroit series. In it, KW was quoted as his only problem with the roster was 1 relief pitcher. He got MacDougal. I really believe he'll be fine with it if nothing else comes to pass.
  9. QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 06:05 PM) The articles were all worded so awkwardly, it made you wonder. Never 'imminent trade of Alfonso Soriano for Brandon McCarthy', always, 'imminent, and the Nationals want Brandon McCarthy'. It may have been the Nats trying to get the Tigers' price up, too. I don't think KW is going to be able to keep the Tigers from getting a big bat, but he's sure going to try.
  10. QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 06:00 PM) If I had to make a guess, I would say Williams could not hammer down a long term deal with Soriuano, so the deal was a no go. That would be my guess, but who knows for sure. I really believe him when he says he wouldn't trade McCarthy. I think Bowden must have given some indication that he would be willing to take something else, because I really believe McCarthy is as untouchable as they come in KW's mind. QUOTE(GoRowand33 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 06:01 PM) Dick: who's your source Someone very close to the chairman.
  11. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 05:58 PM) Not necessarily. Vaz has been dominant in the NL in the past and my guess is they think he could come in and do more of the same while Pods could be a versatile leadoff man for them who fits the NL style of baseball much more fitting. Not saying he's better than Soriano, but if they would prefer major league help they would be getting exactly that in a Soriano move. They replace Soriano with a decent leadoff hitter (albeit one thats not near as explosive) and get a guy thats been an all star type pitcher in the NL. That and the fact that Soriano most likely will not be in DC next season.
  12. QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 05:55 PM) I don't remember that at all. Its absolutely true, and would have been Ron Schueler's finest moment.
  13. All along from what I've been told by a rock solid source, BMac was insisted upon by Washington. Maybe they backed down on that demand in the last couple of days, but if they haven't this whole thing was much to do about nothing.
  14. QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 05:05 PM) I just received information that leads me to believe this deal was very close to happening, but the Sox backed out when they couldn't get Soriano to agree to not having a no-trade clause for his full contract extension. In no way is this information confirmed, but there were members of the Sox organization who were told to order Soriano Sox jerseys today. About 10-12 years ago, just before he became totally dominant, the White Sox had a trade for Randy Johnson all but agreed upon. They had Johnson's jerseys hanging in the clubhouse, and the Mariners backed out at the last second.
  15. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 04:56 PM) From what I know the only way McCarthy goes is if Kenny finds out the Tigs have a deal on the table. If they do, Kenny will at least consider jumping on the deal. However, whats going on is obvious...Nats want Brandon, Sox are countering and the question is whether a team like the Tigers, Angels, Dodgers, or Twins are ready to jump in and make a deal that beats the Sox counter. I think the Nats are looking to get this move done shortly so that they can focus on moving Livan and Jose Guillen next and that we'll see something completed in the next 36 hr's. Jose Guillen isn't going anywhere. Elbow surgery, out for the season.
  16. QUOTE(daa84 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 04:55 PM) wow....all this for nothing...though i really question how jim rose would know this before anyone else He works for ABC a sister company to ESPN. He may have some knowledge, or he may just be wrong.
  17. Jim Rose just said that Washington wanted too much and the Soriano to the White Sox deal is off.
  18. QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:58 PM) Pods is weaker offensively than ANDERSON? HUH??? On top of that, Pods is a left handed bat, which gives us a killer left-right batting order if he's still around. And TWO proven base stealers. Soriano only has 4 less steals than Pods and has been thrown out 4 less times. Plus he only has 1 less homer than Thome.
  19. QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:55 PM) Just throwing this out there: Pods and McCarthy for Soriano.... Yes or no? I really have a hard time seeing the justification of trading McCarthy for 2 months of Soriano. McCarthy is at worst a decent #5 starter under control for 5 more years, and very cheap. The more I think of this, if Pods is not included in a trade, I almost think its a lock that Soriano's stay with the White Sox would be extremely brief.
  20. QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:53 PM) I've yet to hear an explanation of how, if it's not Soriano in LF and Pods in CF, Soriano's going to fit into the lineup. What, as a backup for Iguchi? If the Sox acquire Soriano to keep him, Pods will either get traded or become a back-up and pinch runner. The White Sox have not been happy with Pods this season, mostly because of his lack of focus defensively and inconsistent at bats.
  21. QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:50 PM) pitching AND defense is the key part there. A Soriano-Pods-Dye outfield is pretty horrendous defensively. Balls would be landing in the gaps all over the place, making our pitching look even worse. I really doubt the Sox would make Pods the CF if Soriano was acquired. Soriano is either going to get flipped to a team like Seattle or the LAAA, or Pods is going to be dealt or ride pine.
  22. Is McKay Christensen available to patrol CF?
  23. QUOTE(wsdp @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:18 PM) Middle of the summer? Odd time for the flu... Not really. The White Sox just had a flu bug go around the team.
  24. QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:16 PM) Here's what my buddy who's a royals fan told me about macdougal: "he hit 98 on the gun saturday night, and his slider hit 89. he struck out two of the three batters he faced. when he is on and healthy, he is very very good." The guy has a lot of potential. The problem being he's hardly ever healthy.
  25. Score is also reporting the Soriano deal isn't as close as has been reported, although it is Offman so take it FWIW.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.