Dick Allen

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 05:30 PM) Question for the board. What if Houston caved in and said they would trade Bregman but the trade would be Bregman for Q straight up. Would ya do it? At this point, for sure. The extra control alone is worth it. Bregman, Anderson, Moncada could be 3/4 of a monster infield.

Kim seems sweet on Dylan. I hope she is right. Lot of garbage time this year to give him some innings. I think his stuff would really have to be short to get offered back

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 05:54 PM) I think you need revisit the definition of "blown save". Yes. In 2014 Wade Davis had an ERA of 1.00. His WHIP was 0.85. He struck out 109 in 72 innings, and he had 3 saves and 3 blown saves. Using that stat for set up guys is crazy.

QUOTE (heirdog @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:53 PM) Curious to know if Tim anderson was prospect eligible right now, where would he rank in top 100? If you want to see something unreal, look at Anderson's splits ahead in the count and behind in the count. Someone should beat that in his head all winter. If he ever gets somewhat patient, there is no telling how good he could be.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 02:39 PM) The threads that have very little to do with the actual game of baseball being played are always dominated by DA. I'm always fascinated when the reason for attendance being so low goes from lack of consecutive playoff appearances to people really don't go for the game. They go to be entertained by something else. The Sox don't do this and even though their ticket prices are below league average, they charge way too much. Wrigley, with the highest prices in baseball do it right. They entertain the s*** out of you. I haven't been there myself in a couple of years, but something must of changed. Other than the horrible guest conductor during the 7th inning, it always seemed like a typical baseball game experience except the park is older and I can stare at weeds hiding the brick OF walls.

QUOTE (The Mighty Mite @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 02:37 PM) They had a nice team in 1990 but the main reason they doubled the attendance from 1989 was because 1990 was the last year for old Comiskey. That helped, but not to double it.

QUOTE (heirdog @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:47 PM) He's inserting his credit card into the seat back slot right now to release the "airplane phone" and make some calls. He's home right now doing bong hits after spending the last 96 hours nonstop with KW.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 02:19 PM) :lol: What's laughable is you think all those people who come to games with their White Sox swag on really aren't there for the game, they are there to be entertained by something else. The game may be icing on the cake. Bizarre. It might be true at Wrigley Field to a certain degree. I once read a story where a big time marketing guy said they could turn the seats around and have them face away from the field and still sell out. But that is really not the case on the South side or probably anywhere else. Look at how many people on this board say the Sox fans go to games when they win. And what exactly do they do at Wrigley that creates a fun atmosphere? The vast majority of the 40k there for a game don't spend the day at the neighborhood bars.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 02:08 PM) Sure I can. Both things matter. How do you think teams like the Cubs draw when they suck? They draw because Wrigley is really fun. Why is it fun? They cultivated a fun atmosphere. Winning is the icing on the cake that takes it to a new level. Life is nuanced Dick Allen, not everything is as black and white as you'd like it to be. Yes, you can find cheap tickets, but the entire package is expensive. The Sox need to think of creative ways to attract attendance. It's been done before. You say they don't care about the game because they went to the game but not for the game. So the result of the game shouldn't matter. If it does matter, like you now claim as "icing on the cake" the White Sox won 45 out of 81 home games. You say price matters. White Sox average ticket prices are below league average. Most people who go to White Sox games have a lot of fun. Maybe before you knock it, you should try it.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 02:05 PM) I'm not doubting this "total rebuild" thing ... but until they make the next wave of moves (Robertson, Quintana, Frazier, Melky, Lawrie, Abreu) they haven't committed themselves to a total rebuild yet. Right now, you've got two new starting pitchers for the rotation to replace Sale next season and you've got a new second baseman. Again, I'm EXPECTING those guys all to be traded soon, but again, as of now, the rebuild is not completely underway. s***, three of the guys we've acquired will be contributing next season (the two Nats pitchers and the new second baseman). Whether you like it or hate it, they traded Sale and Eaton. Not to finish it off cannot happen and will not happen. They may keep Abreu or Jones, Hahn mentioned Lawrie can play 3B or something, but anybody else that can get them anything are gone. We haven't heard anything about Melky. I bet he is one guy the Sox throw a little money in to get something decent.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:57 PM) Well, don't forget a key contributor to the low attendance figures in years '87-'89 was due in large part to the infamous owner casting a pall over the ballpark with his threats to move the club to Florida and the blackmailing tactics he employed to secure his sweetheart lease deal from the state. They broke ground on the new park in 1989 when attendance was at it's lowest. And the evil JR drew 2 million in 1990. The difference was the team was good in 1990. You don't really believe White Sox fans are going to rally behind this rebuild and come to games in droves do you?

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:53 PM) Winning creates a fun atmosphere. There are other ways to create a fun atmosphere. You know this. You're just doing that really boring thing you do in every thread. No, you just realized you went a little too far and are trying to change the focus. You can't say they aren't there for the game, and then say what happens in the game matters. Besides, if it did, the team was 45-36 at home this season. Why was it a morgue? And you said Sox games are expensive. You are wrong again.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:46 PM) They haven't drawn more because going to the Cell is expensive and not all that fun. Obviously a good team is going to draw more because "winning is fun." Of course I didn't say it didn't matter, but typical Dick Allen, putting words in poster's mouths and creating gross mischaracterizations. You said they aren't there for the game. Here's the reality, the vast majority of people at a baseball game aren't there for the game. That's your quote. So why would winning be fun? BTW, Sox games can be really cheap. Like cheaper than the Schaumburg Boomers if you go on Sunday.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:43 PM) You just put "Sox fans'" and "patience" right next to each other, without it being a joke? Sox fans won't have five years worth of patience. That I know. Yep. It didn't take long for Carson Fulmer to be a reliever at best around here. About a month.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:37 PM) Here's the reality, the vast majority of people at a baseball game aren't there for the game. They're there for the attraction. You can still attract fans by making it reasonably priced and fun. It's not rocket science. Then why haven't they drawn more, and why would putting a better team out there make things better if the game didn't matter? The last time the Sox did a total rebuild was 1987 attendance 1987 1,208,060 1988 1,115,749 1989 1,045,951 Then they won 94 games and drew 2 million in 1990.

QUOTE (SonofaRoache @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 12:46 PM) These are going to be dark times. Fans may be okay with the rebuild but look how long it took the Cubs. It got to a point where Cubs fans stopped coming to games. The fans will not show up to the G and will probably watch another team during the first two years. Sadly that team may be the Cubs. Yes. Theo's plan was questioned. Banks were all over Ricketts to sell the team. And theirs went pretty well. If being in first place in 2012 for most of the season didn't inspire anyone to buy a ticket, the line up that they are going to throw out their in 2017 isn't going to inspire anyone either, regardless of whether or not you support a total rebuild. There might be a couple of people, but I guarantee more will do less. I have a 27 game package and went to about 45 games last year. No way I go to 45 in 2017. And I have been a lot more tolerant of bad baseball than 99% of the posters here. Watching the White Sox get killed with replacement level or lower players scattered through the line up, I can do on my couch and save myself a lot of hassle. I'll start doing more than my package when they put a team on the field that is legitimately major league. It won't be that in 2017.

QUOTE (Ro Da Don @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 11:45 AM) Fans didn't show up the past 5 years "while trying to win" and f***ing sucking. I expect the ballpark will be mostly empty the first few months of 2017, but when your Moncadas and Giolitos etc. start getting called up, more and more people will come back over the course of the next few years. Young players with star potential are very exciting to a lot of people. Obviously, our franchise won't get a full reboot with the attendance until the whole team is competitive, but the sense that I get is that our fanbase is freshly energized from this moves and the excitement will rise further when more players get moved. No they won't. They barely showed up for Chris Sale starts despite lower level seats with free t-shirts for $15 or $20. I appreciate all the people who are thinking about or actually buying tickets, but as a whole, it isn't going to happen. Attendance will be way off. All this talk was like the talk right after 9/11 how people were going to buy stocks for America, so the stock market didn't crash. The stock market crashed. Those that bought stocks to be patriotic got burned. Its one thing to sit through 3 or 4 of those, but you buy a season ticket package, you are going to wonder why you just didn't go to Stubhub.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 06:37 AM) Out of the seven players we acquired, three of them will be ready at some point next year. Giolito & Lopez should be able to step into the rotation immediately, although it's very possible they aren't up until some point in May or whenever the date is to get that extra year of team control. Moncada needs more seasoning and will certainly not be up until that same date. I'm super excited to follow all three of these guys next year. I find it fascinating that in year 1 of our rebuild, we'll already have three young, high ceiling starters in our rotation. That alone makes 60% of games watchable to me. A dynamic middle infield of Anderson & Moncada should keep the rest of the games at least somewhat interesting. I fully acknowledge that I'm a diehard fan who is excited to watch young players develop, while most casual fans only care about winning. But you know what, who the f*** cares? Attendance & TV ratings don't matter in a rebuild, all we should care about is developing a young core that can lead to sustainable success. And that's exactly what these first two moves are setting us up for. Is that really what you want though in a rebuild? Why do you want 2 or 3 or 4 years of control lost on meaningless games? If anything, this should stop the Sox for even thinking of rushing a guy. Keep them down all year if necessary. No use starting their clocks to get clocked. It isn't like they are going to hit the mound and have a ton of help behind them and a bunch of runs scored for them.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:26 PM) right you know more than a local reporter that has almost 4K followers on Twitter. Honestly you are one of the worst posters I have ever come across in 10+ years of heavy sports message board reading. At least you could acknowledge I was right, and what this guy wrote really made no sense from the get go.

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 11:30 AM) I think they are excited now but the truth will show once we suck next season and when the prospects we got in return have some bad months and struggle. There will be the same people who are cheering this now jumping ship as soon as it starts hurting. They are patting Hahn on the back now. When they are 28-57 half way through the season, and if a couple of these new acquisitions are pitching like Carson Fulmer in 2016, KW will have been swindled, and Rick Renteria will make them pine for Robin Ventura. No fan base is patient in a rebuild, especially when it looks like the team will be rock bottom bad. The Cubs had the fortune of not having too many bumps in their road. Far less than most, but they were there. Rizzo struggled for a while. Baez was considered a bust on this board a year ago. Castro became mediocre. They had other prospects who Theo inherited that were highly thought of who did crap. Brett Jackson comes to mind. Chances are some of the guys the Sox acquired are either going to totally suck, or will have a lot of growing pains. I get people wanting them to be so terrible they get a top draft pick for a couple of years, but frankly, I couldn't stand it. Depending how low they go, if it's too low and it's more than a season of being god awful, they are going to alienate a large percentage of their ticket buyers.

QUOTE (miracleon35th @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 11:22 AM) I was referring to "elite" position players, perhaps those rated in the top 25 players in the minors. The Sox need position players that can hit the ball, excite the fan base, and put fannies in the seats. One of Trea Turner, Bregman or Benintendi could very well be worth more than all of the pitching prospects they just acquired. And that is why they are the untouchables. Ask most casual Sox fans for the names of the guys that the Sox just acquired for Sale and Eaton. Most will only recall one name - Moncada. For years, even before KW was the GM, the Sox focused more on pitching in the draft than hitters. I remember one year they actually contemplated taking only pitchers. The thought was they develop pitching, they could acquire hitting. As we have seen recently, that is not the case. Offense, despite playing in a bandbox has been horrid. Eaton-gone, Frazier-gone, in a couple years if not sooner-Abreu gone, Melky-gone. They haven't been able to trade for much offense over the years. They need to focus on that with their remaining trade chips.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 11:15 AM) Our "bargain basement" team friendly deals go away, yes. But our payroll is going to be next to nothing after we deal Robertson, Frazier, Melky, Quintana, etc. We will be entering an amazing free agent class with loads of money to spend on talent. Most of our players will be cost controlled giving us great flexibility for when we are ready to compete again I hope it goes that smoothly.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 10:11 AM) I guess because "Fall" is for the playoffs and World Series, and everyone considers December a winter month even though it's technically fall for 2/3 of it. And most of Spring Training is not during the Spring.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 09:55 AM) 3 years from beginning to end is insane. Even 5 years puts us at 2021. That is another problem the Sox have. The Cubs got good right when their top guys hit the big leagues, except for the half a billion they spend on pitching. They have a lot of control. If this takes 4 or 5 years, if these guys are as good as advertised, they will have not so much control and will be hitting arb. It would be more like KC, where then you would have a 2 or 3 year window before you have to be prepare for a gigantic payroll or start over. It will be interesting to see the team's ownership situation in 4 or 5 years. If you think about it, maybe JR will sell after next season. The payroll will be next to nothing with no long term commitments. Then you have the 2018 free agent class, and many new owners like to spend cash to get the ball rolling. Sign a star or two, get some good development, maybe they can be interesting in 2 years, but a lot more will have to go right than had to go right when they were piece mealing a run at a playoff berth.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 09:48 AM) I don't think he got hosed, I just think Hahn got him in the perfect storm where because he did not have enough for Sale and Hahn was in those talks, he created a perfect value benchmark for Eaton. The thing is, if Eaton is anywhere near a 5 or 6 WAR player the next 5 seasons, he probably was worth more in trade than Sale for the extra 2 years at the same total cash. Eaton, Q, those guys are undervalued by many, including people whose job it is to know these things. I was watching MLBN and someone was making a case why Eaton is not worth anything near Cutch in trade. That's just being lazy. Rizzo said his analytics people and old school scouting people were the same on Eaton. It's a huge asset to give up. I hope it works out. Hahn is going to see all his bargain basement team friendly deals go to other teams this off season. I doubt he has much luck having 3 or 4 of those types of contracts on one roster again. BTW, why do the call them the Winter Meetings when it isn't technically Winter?