Dick Allen

QUOTE(quickman @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 02:49 PM) Last year on the Radio in an interview JR was asked why he won't go after Boras clients, he said" I don't work with liars" I think that should sum up the whole Crede issue. BYE BYE, maybe not this year, but next year for sure. Joe had a great postseason, but lets face it, for the 162 game season he's been pretty mediocre. He's also had his hot streaks before to make you think he is going to break out, only to return to his mediocre form. If they can ride his high stock right now and replace him with a guy like Blalock its a no-brainer no matter who his agent is.

I find all this talk about Blalock's splits amusing considering the clamouring for the returns of Konerko and Thomas. Konerko had a pretty wide split this year, Thomas had huge differences in home and away numbers for several years.

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 12:22 PM) I swear I posted in this thread, but I don't see it anywhere anyway what I meant to say was...if you could have Garland for 06 only knowing he'd walk but you'd get to at least to the CS (not knowing whether you'd win or lose the CS or series) or two top prospects, which would you rather have? You would keep him. How many people would have been upset the Sox didn't move Konerko and get something for him last winter if he had signed with the Angels? Of course it was a different circumstance. The White Sox didn't want to negotiate with Konerko last year. If the Sox don't trade Garland, what you get for him if he walks is a season of his pitching, which, if he pitches anywhere near last year is a good deal, plus a couple of draft picks.

It was the dumbest trade of all-time. It made no sense from the get-go. There are bad trades, but at least with most you can see some sort of logic with them. This was stupid from the time it was official.

Wasn't he supposed to be included in the Garland/Erstad trade that the Angels backed out of a few years ago?

Is there any chance El Duque flunks his physical and the Garland trade talk becomes moot?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 09:53 AM) So are you guys saying you wouldn't do Blalock, Wilkerson and Danks or Diamond for Garland and Crede? I hate giving up Crede, but if Crede's back is going to be an issue, I'd make the move. I think Blalock has a heck of a lot of talent, but he has definately struggled as of late. Blalock has some serious tatoos. The Sox can use a guy like that.

If they are resigned to trading Garland, pitching is at such a premium, KW should act like Chuck LaMar and ask for ridiculous amounts of major league ready players and prospects. He can always lower his demands a little bit, but he holds the cards. A talented pitcher who appears to have turned the corner, and you get exclusive negotiating rights with him until November. If all that is out there is a deal like they got for Ray Durham, KW would be much better off keeping Garland for 2006 and getting the draft picks.

For all those who think the Sox could get Carl Crawford for Garland.............forget about it. No way. Why would TB trade a guy they have signed to a reasonable contract for a guy who certainly would walk away at the end of the season.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 05:55 PM) Blalock is icky. Even though he's not a pitcher, I'm sure Coop could turn him around.

Ralph Malph has a great source. Potsie Weber knows the Rangers inside and out.

Hey, I see quickman is on line. I have a question, is 2006 the year of the Baj? They have a couple openings in the bullpen.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 05:23 PM) Can someone tell me where these gigantic glasses of "Expect The Worst" are being dispensed so I can avoid the area please. Top talent? Rowand, El Duque, Vizcaino, and prospects?? I'm pretty sure he is talking about the prospects. When's the last time the White Sox acquired a top prospect from another organization? I can't remember. Maybe Jerry Owens, but I don't think he was all that highly thought of. The White Sox are going to need some cheap players on their roster. It would be nice if these cheap players could actually play a little bit.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 05:16 PM) Why is that, has the GM not proven himself? KW seems to have given a pretty big discount to teams acquiring White Sox players with expiring contracts in the past. That Durham trade was ridiculous, considering the White Sox paid most of his contract anyway.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 05:08 PM) I don't want Garland on the team next year if it's a sure thing he's not coming back. Those situations can get ugly, and I'm not sure how Ozzie/Garland would publically handle the situation. With some players, I would agree with you, but Garland is pretty laid back. I don't think it would bother him at all to play with a one year deal, and head back to California for his huge contract. I would hate to trade Garland and get a package back like the great Omar Minaya got for Bartolo Colon. For some reason I see Garland going and 3 Jon Adkins coming back.

QUOTE(Wanne @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 04:50 PM) I think you answered your own question DA. Did you or KW know PK was going to have a solid year again and be a post season hero?!? He could have fallen flat on his face this year and KW was just being cautious in case he needed to move in another direction other than Paulie. All he's saying is he doesn't want to put himself in a situation like they were with Paulie this off season and have their hands tied by other teams overspending. If KW didn't know if Konerko was going to have a solid year again, how can he be so sure Garland and Contreras are if he is offering them extensions. Of the 3 of them, Konerko was surely the best bet to have a big year in 2005. I think its pretty clear KW wants to get guys signed so it won't cost him like it did to sign Konerko. I think both Garland and Contreras should be solid in 2006. It may be tough for them to match their 2005 numbers, but anything close, how could you say they don't deserve a contract equal or better to the one Vazquez is playing under?

QUOTE(Wanne @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 04:50 PM) I think you answered your own question DA. Did you or KW know PK was going to have a solid year again and be a post season hero?!? He could have fallen flat on his face this year and KW was just being cautious in case he needed to move in another direction other than Paulie. All he's saying is he doesn't want to put himself in a situation like they were with Paulie this off season and have their hands tied by other teams overspending. KW's approach with Konerko cost the White Sox a lot of money and obligations for at least 1 if not 2 more seasons with him.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 04:44 PM) Ha, big bad KW, bullying these poor players. Now that's funny. Yes I keep bringing up cost certainty because I am thinking along with the GM and front office, seeing how they do business, and then trying to predict what they do based on they way they do things. Konerko's situation was different. They don't win, they wouldn't have re-signed him. Simple. They didn't sign him long term because they were not a good team in 2004 and they knew they wanted more pitching, which signing Konerko may have precluded them from getting. They won, they have more money now, it's a new scenario. Well he is trying to bully Garland and Contreras into signing extensions, and Garland's supposed offer is well below what he would get if he became a free agent and pitched anywhere near like he did in 2005. If Contreras turns down the offer is he going to be moved as well? Personally, I really don't think KW or JR want too much guaranteed 3 or 4 years down the line. I think they would like some flexibility.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 04:35 PM) Well considering Kenny believes that he needs to move on from Jon I think I'll go along with him, considering he's a little closer to the situation then we are. KW makes mistakes once in a while. Last year everything worked out perfectly, even the greatest GMs don't have that happen too often. I do think if he trades him it will be to the NL or to a second or third tier team in the AL. He wouldn't want Garland to bite him in the ass next season.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 04:34 PM) Well VAFan, just like all those Giles threads, you have wasted your time. It doesn't matter what everyone assumes, it matters what Ken Williams and the White Sox front office think. They think he wants to test free agency. The White Sox don't want to let him walk for nothing. It is that simple, please stop trying to complicate things. Read what Williams says, then watch his actions. There is a definite pattern. They want cost certainty while fielding the most competitive team possible. You keep bringing up cost certainty. If that is the White Sox end all, why did KW refuse to negotiate with Konerko last offseason? The problem with not doing that is everyone, players and agents included, see how much more Konerko is going to have to play with, and no one is going to sign a contract well below market value. If Esteban Loiasa gets $21 million over 3 years, there is no telling what these White Sox pitchers next contracts are going to look like if they play their cards right and don't let KW bully them.

Evidently not accepting the team's first proposal for a contract extension, believed to be 3 years/24 million means you don't want to play for the White Sox according to Soxtalk. A lot of people are speculating on what Garland would command in the open market, and the figures on this board are so much higher than the White Sox reported offer, he would be a fool to accept said offer. KW might have gotten burned by not negotiating with Konerko last off season, but that was his fault. Konerko wanted to negotiate, KW did not. To now take a stance that says you sign here well below market value, or you get traded is puzzling. If you are truly going for another championship and Garland is one of your top 5 pitchers, you keep him. As a matter of fact, looking at Vasquez's performance his last 50 starts or so, he should be the sixth starter. His second half ERA in 2004 with the Yankees in a good park to pitch in was 6.92. Last year in the NL it was 4.42, granted he pitched in a good park to hit in, but he will be doing that now as well. The one problem with having a guy signed or under control for a few years is you may not want him those couple years. Hopefully, that's not the case with Vazquez, but I think if they had the bet in Vegas, Garland would be the odds on favorite to have the better season in 2006, and I'm a guy who wanted him gone last offseason. Keep him around, he's pitching for a contract. Worst case scenerio, you get the draft picks.

I like Griffey, but with Thome in the picture, I think playing CF for a full season isn't going to happen. I do like the Ichiro idea, although it would really be something if Seattle traded him. It is going to be interesting to see how the Sox fill up the open spots in their bullpen. Will 2006 be the year of Baj?

QUOTE(WinninUgly @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 12:00 PM) I don't know if this has been posted, but it looks like the D-Backs will pay $8 million: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/20...s-vazquez_x.htm Wow. Considering they initially weren't willing to pay anything in a Vazquez deal, that's shocking. It also goes to show what they think of Chris Young. With Vizcaino arb eligible, the money is close to a wash this season with Duque getting 4.5 Vizcaino around 2.0 and 4.0 from the D-Backs, that's only $1 million the Sox are adding to the payroll.

I'm not a big fan of this trade--yet. It will depend on the follow-up deal or deals which are sure to follow.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 09:43 AM) ok, I'm not going to beat up that point. The whole thing smells, and it's not necessarily your fault. You can't blame him. Its on the other board too. Levine made it sound as if the deal he threw together off the top of his head, was imminent.