Dick Allen

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 06:37 PM) Score more runs. DGAF if it's via infield hits and stolen bases and bunts. Score. More. Runs. Don't consistently field a bottom 1/3 offense in any metric : RS, OPS, wRC+, OBP, etc. Find. More. Good. Hitters. The HR argument is bulls***. Just get better hitters. How they are good doesn't matter. 23rd in runs 22nd in home runs. The HR argument is not bulls***. You don't play home games in ah home run paradise and not have a home run happy team. It makes zero sense.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 05:22 PM) The discussion wasn't about the view, it was about the construction of a 29 row deck at an absurd angle with the opening at the deck's base. That was an architectural disaster. Seriously, it is almost beyond belief that such a design could ever be drawn up by a architectural firm, much less get approved by Sox management. New Comiskey's upper deck was so elderly and obese person unfriendly, it wasn't even funny. And it was soundly and appropriately rejected by Sox fans, as evidenced by the lack of tickets sold to sit up there in the 90s and early 00s. Like an obese or elderly person would have no problem getting to the top row at Camden Yards. Again, when the park opened , it was cheaper to sit in the outfield.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 03:10 PM) Pay closer attention to the discussion. My references to the 29th row have been in the context of the original design of the park, not in its current state. And LMAO as well, a renowned contrarian making observations about the kind of company I provide. Oh, the irony! I don't think anyone buying a 29th row upper deck ticket would be expecting a great view, no matter what the venue. Except for maybe one. There is a reason they are called the cheap seats.

The 2000 White Sox scored 978 runs. If they had that offense, they would easily be a playoff team.

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 12:35 PM) I think your comments are certainly a part of the problem but not all of it. Remember the Sox have also had many years since the start of the new century where they hit a lot of home runs but also went into prolonged slumps and losing streaks because of the "home run or nothing" approach. To me the solution can be summed up in one word...balance. A team that can beat you by stealing a base, by dropping down a bunt with a man on third, by getting enough on a pitch to bloop it into short right field or by hitting a three run home run. The Sox haven't had that balance since the 2005 season. It's very difficult to do. Mark The 2005 team, up until that point, scored the second fewest runs per game than any other White Sox team since moving across the street. They were based on home runs. Hit over 200 of them. A lock down bullpen and a nice rotation does make any offensive fault look like it really isn't there. But that offense was no better than the rest. In fact quite worse in some cases. They scored over 230 fewer runs than the 2000 White Sox.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 01:48 PM) That goes back to the lack of winning over the years. Check the won/loss records. Yet you continue to whine about the 29th row in the upper deck that was removed a decade and a half ago, when the White Sox acknowledged a mistake. LMAO, you must be a fun guy to be around.

Homers are up this season. I think the ball is wound a little tighter. I knew something was up in spring training.

I think the White Sox have had one decent team since they opened their current home that didn't hit a lot of home runs. 1992 I think. One other thing I noticed is their OF positioning. The White Sox play Dyson almost in the exact same spots KC plays Avi. Perhaps one reason for some KC specials.

I just heard something pretty funny. The Gordie Howe hat trick is a goal, an assist and a fight. The Cutler hat trick is an INT, a fumble and an injury.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 06:14 AM) Defending the disaster that is the construction of the 29 row, 35 degree angled upper deck of new Comiskey is the essence of arguing just for the sake of arguing. No. Arguing to argue is continuing to mention the 29th row in the upper deck which has been gone for a decade and a half. The entire upper deck argument is silly. Not many people sat in the upper deck of the old park either. Check the attendance. When I was a kid I was at a game vs. the Yankees where the RF upper deck was closed. Reggie Jackson hit a HR up there and I was able to convince an Andy Frain to let me go get it. Pick out the worst seats at every park and there isn't one you would gripe about. Another fun fact, the first several years this park was opened, it was cheaper to buy a lower deck bleacher seat than an upper deck ticket. So more arguing to argue.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Sep 21, 2016 -> 03:19 PM) The reason his WAR is 5.7 instead of the usual solid 3.7 is because of his defense....as a right fielder. But this Whitesox braintrust diminishing its own players is certainly nothing new. He wasn't as good as his numbers. You told us that several times when saying he needed to be on a different team.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 21, 2016 -> 01:57 PM) Not true at all. 29 rows at a 35 degree angle with the opening to the deck at it's base is much worse than a 27 row upper deck at a 31 degree angle with the opening somewhere in the middle. Period. There hasn't been 29 rows in the upper deck for 13 or 14 years, and the article you linked said the distance to the field was the same. The higher degree angle makes the higher seats closer. How many times did you have tickets for the 29th row in the upper deck and actually sat there? And while having the concourse higher than the base makes sense, it really doesn't change the view AT ALL from the high rows. It did take out some front row seats. Adam Jomes is calling out Orioles fans for their weak crowds. I guess a 31 degree slope wouldn't improve attendance either.

What is interesting is the article said the seats were just as far away from the field in both upper decks. The Sox park, and Camden Yards. Upper decks are pretty similar all around. Sox fans were spoiled with the old park's upper deck. That isn't happening again. People need to get over it. Of course they don't even sell out of the $15 lower deck tickets with a free t shirt when Sale pitches, so most of the whining about the upper deck is much ado about nothing.

QUOTE (InTheDriversSeat @ Sep 20, 2016 -> 05:20 PM) Also going on tonite at Philadelphia at the same time as the baseball game is an AC/DC concert at 'Wells Fargo Center', which is practically across the street from 'Citizens Bank Park'. https://www.wellsfargocenterphilly.com/events/detail/acdc . I hav been there. The football stadium is right there as well.

The thing I have noticed is the White Sox rarely give up in games. They are short now in talent. Sanchez, Navarez, Coats, Garcia, all were getting time vs. KC. When your line up is the Charlotte Knights, you usually lose AAA games. Last week people were complaining Robin was trying too hard to win in an effort to save his job. That was laughable, and thinking they lost this weekend because KC wanted it more is laughable as well. The bullpen is short, the line up is short right now. They do have to clean up the mess they have made the last few years within the division. Outside of it, they are about as good as any other Central opponent. Cleaning up vs. the division is what won for them in 2005. I don't know exactly what it will take other than some new players, maybe some new scouts. We will see starting in a couple of weeks.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 20, 2016 -> 10:43 AM) In five seasons Brett Lawrie has never played 150 games. He has only been over 125 once. He has been under 100 twice. Right, and Saladino has the same issues. If you could get a haul for Lawrie, fine. What are you going to get for him? The team will be able to use both, and they both will probably miss time. I like having guys working on the last year of their contracts. Much more positive than negative. And while I am sure Saladino would rather play just one position, his value is in his ability to play multiple positions. Getting away from that doesn't make much sense to me.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Sep 20, 2016 -> 08:08 AM) This is all nonsense. Saladino put up a .284/.315/.455/.770 slash line across 93 plate appearances in August. What changed between August & July? Oh that's right, he got consistent playing. There's nothing really flukey about those numbers either, so it's convenient you completely ignored them. And no one is arguing that Saladino is a .837 OPS player, so I'm not sure why you're cherry-picking his last nine games. Clearly his September are inflated due to a ridiculous .413 BABIP. Show me one poster who said that player is their expectation. I patiently wait for your heavily-spinned response. Because 9 games ago, he had a .690 OPS. Combine that with his .627 OPS last season, not good. Carlos Sanchez had a hot month last year. I don't see people wanting him to be a regular. He isn't as good as he has been recently, he wasn't as bad as he was previously. To say he's a starter is very premature, and that isn't even getting into the physical problems he's had since he took over for Lawrie. Missed a bunch of games with a bad back. Missed some more now with a calf problem. His minor league career is sprinkled with physical issues. We all see this team has a lack of depth. What you are proposing, making Saladino the starter, getting rid of Lawrie, thins it out even more. Saladino is good to cover multiple positions.

On the heels of 4 3 hit games, Saladino raised this season's OPS from .690 to .738 his last 9 starts. It's great that he did that, but some regressing is most likely going to occur. Before that, he didn't hit all that well. On top of that, he is hurt again. To think he is what he has been the last week and a half offensively, and he will be able to stay healthy enough to be a regular is right now a dream based on nothing. I like the guy. But he still needs to show he is for real with the bat, and can keep himself on the field.

Omar was the 5th or 6th catcher in line this year, so the fact that he provided anything was a plus. But, moving forward, there really isn't too much to be excited about, other than the bar to be a halfway decent back up catcher these days is pretty low. The pitchers do seem to like throwing to him.

Omar is in a bit over his head right now. Hopefully he can develop a bit. Right now he's a back up catcher at best with his best offensive weapon being a walk. If you are catching Rodon, you CS numbers aren't going to be pretty.

QUOTE (maxjusttyped @ Sep 19, 2016 -> 01:45 PM) Definitely seems like Rodon's velocity fluctuates more than any Sox pitcher I can remember. If he's tired they should just shut him down. You just shut these guys down, how do you expect them to be ready to go when you do need them to be good in September and hopefully October?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 19, 2016 -> 09:08 AM) It is also worth noting that Tyler Saladino's OPS today is higher than any single season that Brett Lawrie has put up since his 2011 171 PAs season that he was a midseason call up. I like Tyler, but that's cherry picking to the max. 9 games ago, it was .690.

One thing they both have in common is trouble staying healthy. Saladino has had several injuries, and is currently out after hearing a pop in his calf Friday night. Might need them both around to make it through a season.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 01:29 PM) Did you just cite the team's record as "proof" a -0.1 WAR player didn't negatively impact the team? Considering Saladino had a .647 OPS at the time of Rollins leaving, yes.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 12:50 PM) Because he's only 26 and has more range than a fence post. The White Sox were .500 when Rollins was let go. The decision didn't cost games.