Dick Allen

QUOTE(sayitaintso @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 07:38 AM) They should put brick on the walls of the bullpen. It would look so much better than the gray wall. Probably just basic upkeep. This seat sale if they are only selling 7000 seats will net them less than $2 million. Hardly enough for anything very significant.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:51 PM) Wilkerson is a damn good player who's always played in a bad hitter's park. He could easily put up numbers better than Blalock or Crede. If the Sox were able to make this trade, and it probably is just a BS rumor, the offense would be fun to watch. Maybe the most enjoyable White Sox offense of our lifetimes.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:50 PM) Yeah because Blalock wasn't supposed to be offered up in that Beckett deal at all. Oh, I remember that now. Blalock just turned 25 a month ago. Why don't you compare his and Crede's numbers at a comparable age?

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:47 PM) If he's such a stud player, then why is he one of the guys they are always willing to give up in trades? I liked the Pods trade simply because it gave us a leadoff hitter not named Aaron Rowand. They have traded him the same amount of times the White Sox traded Frank Thomas. Great players get traded and some non-tendered every year.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:42 PM) Look at the park adjusted stats. They're the same player. Then why not take the younger player with a far greater upside? One of the criticisms of Blalock the last couple of years is he has been swinging for the fences. There are more than a couple scouts who compare him to George Brett when he has his line drive stroke working.

Blalock is only 3 months older than Jerry Owens and he has 89 career homers.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:33 PM) Officially the most one-sided thread of the year. And were not even taking into account the issue with his back. The White Sox are obviously very concerned.

1000 to 1 at best.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:29 PM) Sorry, he had the protection of Juan Uribe and Aaron Rowand/Aj Pierzynski. That's hell of protection. Your protection argument is total BS. The higher up in the order he hit, the worse he hit. Its not like Pods provided much protection for him when he hit ninth. He isn't exactly a guy who can drive runs home.

Considering Crede hit .333 batting 9th, .241 batting 8th, and .155 batting 7th, the last thing you would want to do is have him hit 3,4 or 5.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:19 PM) I'm pretty sure Crede was the 9 hole hitter until the last month or so of the season. He had 102 ABs batting 9th and hit .333 with 9 homers batting ninth. He had 253 ABs in the 8th spot with a lot less success.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:18 PM) I don't know if we should trade for Blalock or not but why do people worry so much that he only hits well at Ameriquest? Would he not hit at the Cell as well? No. He could only hit at Texas. Which is good because the Sox have struggled there in recent years.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:17 PM) Cleveland has a pretty good staff. The Tigers have 2 good pitchers. Royals have like 1. Seattle doesn't have a great staff. Oakland does, but Harden was injured for more than half the year. The Angels had Colon and that's it. Washburn and Lackey weren't bad, and their bullpen was pretty good.

Hank Blalock isn't going to suck anywhere. He will hit with comparable or better numbers than he has put up thus far in his career. Joe Crede had to get hot at the end of the year to hit .250. He was nails in the playoffs, and seems poised for a breakout. The Sox have been here a few times with him already in his career and have been dissapointed each time. I think Crede has the better glove, but only slightly.

nitetrain, I noticed in the Frank Thomas thread you wrote you never want him to leave. Ever notice his horrific splits the last 4 or 5 seasons between home and away? There's nothing to say Blalock wouldn't flourish at USCF, and as to his numbers dying in the second half, maybe not playing in the 100 degree heat for half his schedule will keep him stronger.

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.