Dick Allen

QUOTE (bschmaranz @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 10:36 AM) I'm still not quite getting how Heyward was a "steal" at nearly $200 million and this guy is too risky for $100 million. I don't think anyone thinks Heyward is a steal. I just don't know why some assume Cespedes will be the player he was during his walk year. This is a scenario we have seen played out time and time again. One reason I like Gordon more is I think the chances are better he doesn't have mediocre seasons even though he supposedly is older. But Cespedes had a couple of years in Oakland where he wasn't a guy you would want to give $120 million.

QUOTE (peavy44 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 10:29 AM) If orioles don't sign Davis cespedes will sign there. I doubt it. Angelos hates risks. He is pretty, pretty, risky.

QUOTE (blackmooncreeping @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 10:16 AM) I agree, sending Avi to AAA would be a waste. I think he's either on our roster or we've traded him to acquire some sort of pitching. To overstate the obvious, Robocop Laroche is really the clog in the drain. I still think it would be worth it to basically buy him out and facilitate a trade to any team who is willing to take him on for 3 to 5 million. The lineup flexibility is worth it imo. If he was using the same approach and swing, yes it would be a waste. If they want to change some things up, it is worth a shot. Nelson Cruz was a failed AAAA player until he changed some things up and/or took some booster shots.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 09:58 AM) But it's also the most important position on the field. The majority of MLB managers spent at least part of their major or minor league careers at that position. Majority would be more than half. Another falsehood.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 09:57 AM) By WAR, those are the five best catchers in all of baseball since 2010. When you have players who are really good at baseball, the teams are more likely to be winning. It's not just about intangibles there, it's talent. Sometimes they play on bad teams as well. When teams win, the chemistry is great, the leaders are great. Yet those guys have played for and probably will play on bad teams again. Avila played on playoff teams , so did Navarro, yet, because they will be wearing a White Sox jersey, it doesn't count.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 09:52 AM) Alex Gordon on MLB says "I'm still hoping something works out" with Royals. John Smoltz says he thinks they find a way. https://twitter.com/JACKWHB?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Hurry, delete all your posts about how it is better off for the Royals to let him go.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 09:40 AM) i remember yelling at the TV many times back in 2013/2014, in the 7th-9th inning's with a runner on 1st/2nd and Dunn being up. Opponent brings in a LOOGY, and Robin lets Dunn hit. (or last year with Laroche) What were the other options? That is the key. At least with those guys, there is a chance they could put one on the board. People gave Ozzie crap for putting Thome in the line up vs. Sabathia. He didn't hit him well, but took him deep a few times. The problem is, if you pinch hit with a weak hitter, and they either switch pitchers then or later in the game, you are going to have the same problem. With 4 guys on the bench and one being a catcher which every manager is reluctant to use, even in the NL with no DH, there aren't all these possibilities. It's a great theory, but actually being able to pull it off all the time isn't reasonable, and when your bench is short anyway, it makes it more unreasonable.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 09:19 AM) But we're nowhere there that point. As usual, you're jumping to conclusions based on nothing. He makes up conclusions. He told us JR would exercise Alexei's option because of his stupid loyalty. He told us the White Sox didn't make the playoffs in 2012 because they signed Adam Dunn instead of Victor Martinez. Of course Dunn hit 41 homers in 2012 and Martinez missed that season with an injury. He now is on a catcher needs to be a leader kick because of what kansascity.com tells him about Sal Perez. I mention Avila has been a playoff team catcher, he tells us that was in the past, but mentions Matt Weiters as a leader type catcher, and mentions how they were in the playoffs in 2014. He obviously forgets to tell you Weiters was injured and played 26 games. He is a clear troll.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 09:12 AM) Yeah, when you consistently make the wrong choices, like we have seen. Saying the only possible plan going forward is the Big 3 no longer feels realistic...so adjustments have to be made, otherwise Hahn and Sox fans will get left holding the bag and feel they've been sold a false bill of goods. At some point, contingency plans have to be acted on. LMAO. Your game is to try to determine what you believe to be the White Sox plan. Once you think you have it, you post endlessly about how the other way is THE way to go. The White Sox don't cost you any money or any time you don't want to give up. In fact, I am quite certain you enjoy when they suck. As far as I can tell, none of the top 3 OFs have signed, and it has been reported that if the Sox fail in their attempt to lure one, they will be adding an OF regardless. So now tell us how that is wrong.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 08:59 AM) Here's the way to add three guys and not lose a single pick...upgrading three weaknesses instead of just one. Latos or Fister is signed to a one year deal, then you wait until June to add Fowler or Desmond (in June) depending on how Saladino and the outfield situation is going... So essentially Latos/Fister vs. Erik Johnson/Danks and you buy insurance against injury and can attach a QO if they pitch well (which they're going to be more motivated to do on a one year deal, theoretically). Then you're looking at Parra getting most of the playing time in RF. Garcia would DH against lefties, with Shuck playing RF for Parra. If you want to spend more for a higher OPS, you go Span over Parra and still keep the draft pick. And you don't have to worry about long-term ramifications for signing any of the Big 3 to five year exploding contracts. Not to mention you have even more financial flexibility created next season. Weren't you the guy telling us signing the middle tier free agents was a terrible plan? Do you ever keep a goalpost in the same place?

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 08:52 AM) Well of course you do. Nothing like 3 years of non-competitive teams. He platooned Thompson to ease him in because he was a young player, not because he couldn't hit right handed pitching. Right handed Avi, not "proven veteran" Melky, was his primary platoon partner. Based on his use (or non-use ) of pinch hitters, moves such as pinch running for Abreu in close games in late innings (even when Abreu wasn't the lead runner), limited use of defensive replacements, it remains to be seen whether he can operate in this fashion. (thankfully, he cut back on the pinch running for Abreu stuff). Now the Sox haven't had a decent bench in years, so maybe with more options, we'd see more use. When your bench features Bonifacio, Leury Garcia, and the like, your platoon system isn't going to work. He did OK with JB Shuck. He did OK with Soto, of course if he used Soto as a DH and there was an injury and the pitcher had to hit, Don Ventura (Robbie) would be clueless again. I don't understand why you are complaining about failure. It is where all your ideas lead.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 08:18 AM) I think it's a reasonable approach; I think Parra/Jackson would markedly improve this team....basically to the extent Alex Gordon would IF they platoon them properly (big if with the skills of this manager). 2 year deals would fit right with the Todd Frazier window. However, there is no way you can do this with Desmond, Chen, Gallardo or anyone with a QO. From the Sox perspective, 3 top 50 picks is a big chance to invigorate the farm. But from anyone's perspective, losing a nice draft choice for 1 year of a so-so player is not the way to go. If you are going to lose a draft choice, make it worthwhile. I always love the "if he was platooned correctly" line. Ventura platooned Trayce Thompson early to perfection, yet when he platooned him, people complained. He needs to be playing every day. Especially with the way bullpens are used today, if you platoon and yank a guy early, you are going to have a match up later where someone will call the manager a fool for not using players correctly. It was a lot easier when they had 15 or 16 position players on the roster. Now that it is 13 or sometimes even 12, the idea of being able to platoon all over the place is hogwash, especially when starting pitchers are making shorter appearances.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 06:48 AM) Were the Orioles not in the playoffs two years ago? As for fun, that's why Iowa bb and fb is fun...lower expectations, easier to be pleasantly surprised. Somehow I kinda doubt Ventura will last as long in one job as Ferentz and Stoops, though. Stoops doesn't coach at Iowa.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 06:22 AM) Was being the past tense...LaRoche was a good hitter in 2014, Samardzija a good pitcher. Avila was last "good" in which year that he had 400+ at-bats? http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/team/_/stat/p...ed-2/order/true Here's a category the White Sox pitching staff overall was last in the AL, KC first. The Royals were better in whip, ERA, baa and ops. Whether it's starters or relievers that are your comparative advantage, you still need solid defense and offensive balance. And Complaining about starting pitching is irrelevant in the same way it will be in Yankees' games this season. If you have one of the top five bullpens in modern baseball history for two years running, why would you care if your starters go 6.5 vs. 5.25 innings on average? Then how did Wieters make your list? Adjust the goalposts again. I really don't understand what you chronic complainers get out of constantly complaining,. Baseball is a game. Games are supposed to be fun.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 01:52 AM) My only concern is whether there's enough left if one of our starting pitchers goes down to fix the problem, if they're not willing to spend the money, they're going to have to give up talent and be in a relatively desperate situation. Like it or not, our "quality" depth isn't there like with some of the better contending AL teams...we absolutely can't afford to have many injuries. For example, at catcher. I still feel that if you look at the majority of contending teams around baseball, a lot of them have had really strong leaders in that position, guys like Posey, Molina, Sal Perez, Russell Martin, Weiters, Cervelli more recently, Montero, McCann, maybe not all "great" players but consistent, stable veteran leadership behind the plate. We just haven't had that since AJ, and it's critically important IMO. Alex Avila was the starting catcher for many playoff teams. We understand the White Sox don't have 25 all stars on their roster which apparently is need to make the playoffs. Your Royals had the worst staring pitching in the league last season, and the White Sox, as bad as they were at catcher, had more WAR from that position than they did, the future HOFer Sal Perez be damned.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 09:47 PM) 2017 was always going to be the key year after most of last season's acquisitions fizzled out or under-performed badly. They re-opened that window again and went all-in, so of course the thinking has changed (once again). Now, they THEORETICALLY can compete with the current roster, but you can also make an argument for every single team in the AL with that line of thinking (compared to the NL, where you can eliminate 5-6 teams instantly). And they do have a current two-year window to compete (again), simply because of the players who will be leaving after 2017. We also don't have the luxury of knowing how Semien would have performed if given more time (compared to what Lawrie will do, and the fact he will have to be replaced). They would also be a lot better off having Bassitt or Montas as insurance for a hole in the rotation than Jacob Turner or Beck, but we'll find out how long they can go without having to use another starting pitcher. Right now, it's not looking particularly optimistic in terms of our position prospects unless Trey M., Engel, May and Hawkins make a lot more progress. We still don't have a catching solution in sight. The best-case scenario is that Fulmer and Anderson are both Rookie of the Year candidates in 2017 and 100% experienced and even better in 2018, like we expect that same progression from Rodon to take place this year. You aren't answering the question. Melky will be gone, but that was known when you said they wouldn't compete for 2 years. Frazier wasn't here so his being gone doesn't matter, and same with Lawrie. Who are the prospects that were lost that now makes the window closed in 2 years when you said perhaps it would open then. And considering you judge trades by if it in your mind sells season tickets, you should have loved the Samardzija trade. It really did sell them.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 08:52 PM) https://www.overdrive.com/media/709737/wilpons-folly Just read anything from Megdal on Wilpon and the Mets. There's no way in hell they can afford Cespedes in 2018/19, and they can't afford the risk with signing him of being stuck with that contract since they already have $30 million balloon payments due on the Madoff settlement each year, basically like signing another Cespedes (+) except the money an outflow to creditors. Going back to Ptac's point, yes, it's POSSIBLE they can compete STILL, yes, it's probably NOT wise to sign Cespedes for 6 years (let alone Upton) and certainly not Alex Gordon for five, but the fact remains that: 1) They don't have enough minor league talent behind Anderson/Fulmer to pull off a major trade 2) That Cabrera, Lawrie and Frazier will be free agents after 2017 3) That next year's FA market is horrific 4) That another year of .500ish baseball would almost force a Quintana or Sale megatrade because there won't even be the talent available on the market to spend even if they want to do so. You can definitely see a scenario where they bring in one of Span/Parra/Jackson (no to Fowler because of the pick attached) and also add a starting pitcher that falls through the cracks for one year or one year and an option (like a Brett Anderson situation last year w/ LA, or Medlen with KC). Now that's going to move the needle up a bit, but is it enough? Maybe. Maybe not. They definitely should have a better option than Beck/Turner as their 6th starter. Realistically, you need seven legit starters at the beginning of the season in terms of depth, and I'm not even 100% convinced we have five right now with question marks about Erik Johnson still looming. The only other possibility is waiting for guys like Desmond and Fowler to not get signed and picking them up on "make good" or pillow deals for 1-2 years...but we all saw how poorly Kendrys Morales and Stephen Drew performed when their spring training time essentially began in May. Desmond would be more of an investment for 2017 than one with an immediate payoff in 2016. Of course, those two cases with veterans doesn't mean every single player under 30-31 will struggle to get their timing and offensive rhythm back to the same extent. Before the White Sox traded for Frazier, you said they wouldn't be able to compete for 2 years. Now it appears you are saying just the opposite, that they have 2 years to compete. Which of the prospects given up for Frazier were the key to the future?

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 07:18 PM) I think if it was truly close a major writer would've picked up on it. Things can happen quickly. I personally believe their offers are lower than they were projected. Heyward got his money, but like with Abreu, most of the big spenders are not shopping in this aisle. I think they are hoping someone suddenly has a need and offers a boatload.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 07:12 PM) I think all this did was confirm most people's suspicions. Why wouldn't the idiot just delete his old tweets? White Sox and Cespedes agree to 6 year deal worth $125-135 million. Just be patient, to talks break down because Ceapedes wants 6 years Sox offering 5. If there are people as dumb as him who think at least someone will buy what he is saying and still think he is all sourced up, I suppose there must be someone dumb enough to make that a reality.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 07:07 PM) @PatrickHoward50 "Hearing talks broke down because Yoenis Cespedes wants a 6-year deal, while White Sox only want to offer 5. Upton out of picture. (Pt. 1)." "White Sox still prefer Cespedes, may circle back to Alex Gordon if K.C. offer is low. White Sox willing to add 5th year to Gordon contract." ...So, I think that says all it does needs to about that whole saga in terms of his tweets last night. Totally contradicts what he said was agreed upon yesterday. Are there people that will actually believe what he says?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 03:09 PM) we should go back and review chaveztalk.com bonerman69 would be a twitter insider fraud

It it is true, this entire thread is a waste of time.

The trade off to me is for a possible year or two of worth the money production, you don't have to pay for at least as many years, if not more, of decline. I would give all these 30 year old and over free agents an opt out.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 02:53 PM) But in this scenario it's the Dodgers and their seemingly unlimited amount of money and that can absorb the hit of him picking up his option. Supposedly they were in the process of chopping about $100 million from the payroll.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 02:46 PM) Unless he underperforms and then doesn't opt out (Vernon Wells). Yes it can help out a team, like what happened with Belle and the Sox, but it still favors the player more than the team. Technically yes. But unless you can't live without him, if he is opting out, you get productive years and let some other team pay him even more for the decline. The thing is, even without an opt out, you are going to have to guarantee what should be declining seasons. How many $16 million a year years does a guy like Kazmir have in him? It's probably less than 3. If the Dodgers get one, I'm sure they will be happy.