Dick Allen

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 08:08 AM) BJ Upton Justin Upton I'm sure there are a ton of HS and college SS that eventually wound up in CF.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 08:06 AM) He couldn't be worse than Avi or Viciedo. At any rate, it's more likely he would stick at SS since that's one of our three weakest positions. Pretty much nobody in history has moved from SS to the outfield successfully, though. Robin Yount.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 07:30 PM) o Is it better if I naively cheerlead with all my posts that we actually are going to get Cespedes or Upton? You'll notice that most of the mods aren't getting overly optimistic either... So you're on record as being how confident that we sign either or them? You'll notice that many times in the last few weeks I've put forth alternative/Plan B scenarios in anticipation. There's nothing wrong with the fallback options if you can find the right values. That's going to remove some of the sex appeal or marketing sizzle but it's the more pragmatic approach unless the contract terms are reasonable. Usually in FA they're not, as we learned last off-season. what kind of extra money are baseball players making due to this marketing sizzle? Maybe link something to show us.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 07:24 PM) Let's also look at the marketing side of this. If you're Upton and Cespedes, and you feel you're a superstar, playing on the East Coast with the Nats, the Orioles, the Red Sox (although there was a rough parting there), the Yankees, maybe the Cards (winning tradition), the Tigers... Which one will give you the most media exposure and opportunities to supplement your endorsement income? Let's face it, right now Chicago is locked down barring a huge breakout from the Sox with Cubs mania/Cubs Nation/W flags. Cespedes barely speaks English. I doubt he is looking for huge marketing opportunities, and frankly very few baseball players have them, but never mind that,. The White Sox are hopeless.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 07:18 PM) If you're Cespedes, and you're getting the same offer from the White Sox and Nationals...where would you go? You can play in the nation's capital with one of the two true superstars in the game on what everyone considers a playoff contender versus a White Sox team that's somewhere between 3rd (optimistic) and last (pessimistic) right now out of a 5 team division. You're also even more confident in the NL East than the AL, where you now have a proven track record and just put up near MVP numbers. You've also got two "dead in water" franchises in the Braves and Phillies to pick apart offensively. The White Sox would probably have to overpay by at least 5% to get it done, if not 10%. Same thing with returning to the Tigers...unless the draw of being paired with Abreu is truly that enticing. Why do you post on a White Sox message board?

A lot of tweets the Sox won't go more than 3 years. No tweets they are out on anyone. Interesting.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:56 PM) What would be your bench with the current team? Navarro/Avila C Sanchez 2B/SS (can still make a ton of starts if he gets at bats from LaRoche while Frazier or Lawrie get some DH at bats) Shuck OF And then another infielder? Garcia or a minor league signing? Or say screw the 4th spot and go 8th reliever? Actually thinking about it, they play what 7-8 games in a row to open the season? They could break camp with a crowded bullpen and send a guy down when they need another position player. I would think Avi, depending what they want to do with him.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:46 PM) So between him, Sands and Olt, who would be most likely to be the 25th man? Or does anyone think as of now, Sanchez is the platoon guy with LaRoche (keeping Frazier at third or moving Lawrie to third with other DHing)? Obviously I know they aren't done with the starting lineup or bench but it's a hypothetical season starts tomorrow scenario. I would say none of them. I really don't understand this one other than OF depth at Charlotte. Maybe it means they are going to trade a guy like Shuck or something, but that wouldn't exactly be a blockbuster, and I would think they would be pretty happy with Shuck.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:40 PM) $13.5 million in 2013 (Konerko) vs. $19 million in 2020... It's actually $13.5 million vs. $23 million because he gets $4 million that they owe him.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:27 PM) What were Konerko's age 35 numbers, or Zobrist's? Konerko was obviously toast the end of that previous year. You can look them up, it was 2011 when the Sox were all in. Konerko and AJ were supposed to be goners but they came back, and Paulie has never made anywhere near the $19 million Gordon would receive on top of the $4 million deferral or buyout. Mutual options are pretty irrelevant. Especially considering they are 4 years in the future.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:19 PM) Isn't that what Rabbit keeps intimating? Or was that Bucket? Hard to keep track. This supposed offer on Monday was only for three years? That seems crazy to be so far off...knowing you're going to have to pay a premium to dislodge him from the only team he's ever played for. If Hahn is this great negotiator, he would have to have known it would mean paying 10-15% more than KC. Or the Royals' package three days later (and direct communication from Moore to Gordon and not through Close) came as a complete shock. The Royals lowballed him until New Year's Eve.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:15 PM) Except if Mark Buehrle or Paul Konerko had a very solid season at age 35 and the Whie Sox let them go when they had an option to keep them (basically a loyalty rewards send off)...it wouldn't sit very well with the fanbase to see an entire career with one organization end his career with another team (in the case of a Buerhle or Gordon). There is nothing for stopping them from mutually agreeing to a contract of any amount of any length in 4 years. This thing is just for show. And I'm sure White Sox fans would understand if Konerko didn't get an additional $19 million for a victory lap. They gave him $2 million with $1 million deferred and people still were mad. I'm sure Hahn would be up for a 3 year $55 million contract for Cespedes with a $40 million mutual options in years 4 and 5, and I doubt you would call that 5 years $135 million.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:00 PM) Um, because it was a mutual option that seems like it only will be plausible in a very specific circumstance What are the odds the team thinks he's worth an extra $19 million that season and his side is content with a 1 year, $23 million deal? That probably means it gives each side a tiny bit of leverage to hold onto him and negotiate an extension if he decides to finish a career there and if the Royals can afford his last couple years. The mutual option was BS. It means nothing. It's there for the buyout because the buyout becomes a trade kicker if he gets traded. As I stated before, every free agent technically is on a "mutual option" if you think about it.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:03 PM) http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/01/whit...rs-waivers.html Not sure he lasts to long They will waive him when it's their turn to claim Andy Wilkins.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:50 PM) Platinum boxes and luxury suites versus partial season ticket plans are clearly the same thing....most White Sox fans must be swimming in so much money they no longer need to budget or plan ahead of time on allocating precious resources on season tickets. Why don't you call your season ticket rep and ask where they are +/- with ticket sales at this point last year. I'm sure they would love to give that information to me. The Sox will lose some of the $207 plans but even if they lost 3000 of them, which they don't even have, that barely covers a minimum salary player. Why don't you call the season ticket office and get to the bottom of it. You are the one who can't stop mentioning selling season tickets. How many posters here have received White Sox season tickets as a Christmas gift. Not tickets to a game or two, but full blown season tickets? I bet you could count them on one hand.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:39 PM) I work in the Minor Leagues, and I certainly do not have anything like credible knowledge of MLB teams revenue/finances, but I do end up coming in contact with some of the executives from time to time and have been part of a few interesting discussions. One of my favorite things is how everyone laughs anytime someone brings up the Forbes projections of team value and revenue. It appears there's a pretty clear consensus that those numbers are a joke. MLB teams are never going to admit to making tons of money. The proof is in pudding. Whether the Forbes thing is accurate is obviously debateable, the fact is their team values and where they are actually sold when they are sold usually shows the "value" if you want to define value as what they would get if they are sold is always reported lower than reality. There is no question these teams all make money. How many times did Hawk praise Bud Selig and talk about how everyone is making money? There was one time KW said the Forbes stuff was way off, but then used Forbes when Forbes said they Sox used the highest percentage of its revenue on player payroll.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:40 PM) You can go with Balta's argument if you prefer. There's still not enough revenue from last year to justify deliberately going into a loss of $10-15 million unless they felt the potential season ticket gain would be worth it. The closer we get to the regular season, the smaller the bounce. They've already missed the Christmas gift season window. The season ticket Christmas gift. LMAO. Yeah, there are thousands of people who hand out professional sports season ticket packages as Christmas gifts. You know what we should get our 8 year old for Christmas honey? White Sox season tickets. He's been a good boy, lets get him Platinum boxes. I really thought your GM must have at least been a varsity starter on the HS baseball team took the cake, but you still are making even more stuff up that makes no sense every day. Congratulations.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:31 PM) Otoh, we paid a premium for offensive potential in Cabrera and didn't get any there, either. But yeah, it's the same reason guys like Heyward and Parra would make less sense...unless we were playing in Old Comiskey. A lot of the value for Cespedes and Gordon is related to their arms and preventing extra bases from being taken...and that's still relevant, as we saw with Viciedo in 2012 as well. Melky has a really good arm. Had 8 assists last year and 13 the year before that. It's one reason the Royals offered him 4 years before last season to play RF for them.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:22 PM) Maybe. If there was a profit, it was more related to their 40% ownership and share of Comcast profits related to the Cubs' surge in ratings and advertising rates than those extra season ticket sales. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 11:36 AM) * And that $31.9 million was invested into LaRoche, Cabrera, Robertson, Samardzija's deal, Duke, Bonifacio and Beckham. There's no way they made a profit last year. They couldn't even get legit offers on a lot of sponsorships and moved on instead of giving massive discounts that would be harder to raise price-wise in the future. Your very next post. No way they made a profit to maybe. And they White Sox don't own 40% of CSN. They own 20%. But if you want to add the Bulls bottom line to the White Sox, that would be more reason for you to never ever mention season tickets or payroll or anything financial again.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 11:17 AM) That's an interesting point. I don't know if that's relevant with the Sox's negotiations with Cespedes or not, but it's interesting nonetheless. I'm guessing that is what it is. And if the White Sox were the competition with KC for Gordon, why would KC have had to offer 4 years with an option for a 5th if the White Sox were only offering 3? That is another thing that doesn't make much sense. So either the Sox were offering 4 or 3 with an easily attainable 4th year vesting option or another team was offering 4.

Just did a twitter check. Nightengale tweeted the White Sox 3 year max thing on New Year's day. Moore said the Royals and Gordon got close on New Year's Eve. So this came out right about the time the Sox realized they had no shot at Gordon.

Whoever left Griffey off the ballot, no matter what the reason, shouldn't be voting for the HOF. No unanimous entrants ever is a joke. Griffey should have been, but he also should have been nowhere near the first.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 10:47 AM) The one plausible scenario I have seen is if a guy had 11 names he wanted to vote for, he could have left Griffey off knowing he was getting in and used his 10 votes for the others. I wonder if it is the voter who voted for Eckstein.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 10:53 AM) But, due to the fact he did agree to come back, there's at least a 50% chance they exercise it as long as he's still productive. The likelihood of that happening in KC is much higher than with any other team. 5 years before a $23 million mutual option is due, there is more than a 50% chance it is exercised? OK. The only reason this option would have any significance is if it became a player option if he were traded or maintained a certain level of performance. Other than that, everyone whose contract has expired is then on a "mutual" option.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 10:44 AM) Simple economics. $1 today is worth more than $1 in a year. Not that complex. Yes, but these days it $1.01 in a year, and if the Royals are spending that money elsewhere, while it will be less for Gordon overall, but not millions, it will probably wind up costing them more.