Dick Allen

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 09:30 AM) watching old videos of him, he's got a big bright redass...always chompin' and yellin' and jumpin' around. Just the kind of guy KW loves. I would think an excitable guy would be a positive. A lot of this. team. is. dead. the last 10 years.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) And Oakland blog had similar conclusions. Really worries me. I was reading something about him from a Toronto guy giving an Oakland board a scouting report, and he said he made many spectacular plays at 3B and had a really nice arm. He probably won't win a GG, but he is an upgrade over Conor that is for sure, and I would imagine over Youk, and the Sox did OK with Youk.

Lawrie should lead the team in tats.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:50 AM) I think his anger is more directed toward the "not here to play the game" part. Seems fair to me. I wouldn't say my purpose in life is my employment. His quote was taken way out of context. There is nothing to suggest Adam LaRoche isn't dedicated to baseball.

QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:11 AM) Laroche is a born again idiot that said he's not here to play the game,but to spread the gospel. No dickf***, you are getting paid 25 million to hit a f***ing baseball. Once he said that crap, I wanted him gone in a flash. That is really crossing the line. Have you ever met Adam LaRoche or asked his teammates about him? You take his words out of context and burst into a ignorant rant.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:42 AM) I feel like the Sox should sell high on Engel now. He was a nobody before the AFL, and now he's on the radar. It's time to capitalize on his value. I don't know. You most likely are right, but there are late bloomers. If he is one of them, Sox fans will be upset if he's doing his thing with another team. He has a lot of tools to be both good offensively and defensively. Something not many White Sox prospects can say.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:36 AM) The rumor which speculates that it's Avi, Engel and Thompson makes no sense. The A's are said to be looking for pitching. Moreover, they would not want 3 outfielders, and the Sox do not have enough outfield depth to be trading away 3 of their better prospects. They can always move along the extra OFs.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:35 AM) Avi would struggle to hit 5 homers in Oakland lol. For a big dude, he literally has no pull power whatsoever. He has a ton of power. Hit a couple of balls 450 in the same game. He just doesn't have the correct mechanics or approach to do it much.

If they are giving up Thompson and Avi, doesn't it make sense what rabbit reported is probably closer to reality?

QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:27 AM) Supposedly MLB Radio said the Sox are giving up Engel, Thompson and Avi. I don't know this report to true so don't freak out but that would be steep. You look at it initially, you think that is really too much, but Avi is really nothing at this point. Engel is very intriguing but still a ways away. Trayce...if he hit like he probably will hit in 2016 during his call up, you would think he has a lot of potential, but you have to give up something to get something. Trayce to the Bay Area with his brother there, has to be appealing from a marketing standpoint. I might give up 1 of Engel or Trayce, but not both, even if they are taking Avi. Avi in Oakland...oh my.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:17 AM) You're the guy that wants to trade Eaton and Melky but keep Avi... That plan seems like it'd have a 100% failure rate as well. He still thinks trading for Freddy Garcia was stupid. That's all you really need to know.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 08:07 AM) I do. You just don't like what I throw out there. Acquire young talent. Don't trade for rents, career years and mediocre veterans. What the Sox are doing has a 100% failure rate. I have no interest in the average Lawrie, except on the cheap. This team is not competing in 2016, no matter how much fawning Williams and Hahn do at the feet of Billy Beane. No matter how many of our young players we hand over to him. And if the price I heard is correct, it's an outrage. Lawrie was a former top prospect who is 1 year older than Trayce Thompson. Has breakout potential. He might not do it, but he's certainly a better gamble than some of the others.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 06:24 PM) Leaks has to be one of the most over-rated starters in baseball. I,agree.

John Hart must have a White Sox hard on like KW had for old Indians. AJP, Beckham, Swisher, and now T Flow 2 years $5 million with some incentives.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 12:21 PM) 1. They were, in fact, ranked #5 in 2012. My statement continues to be 100% accurate. 2. Taking on money helped yes, but why were they able to trade for David Price? Why were they able to trade for Josh Donaldson (aside from Billy Beane being a fool unless he's negotiating with the White Sox)? Ditto Tulowitzki? They were able to do so because they had chips to cash in. 3. Why were they able to let Melky Cabrera walk and still get better? Because they had a young defender ready to step in. 4. Why were they able to "take on some cash"? Because they developed enough of their own guys or traded for undervalued guys...leaving them room to "take on some cash". It's not the only part. They are obviously better than our franchise at getting the best out of their hitters as well; Bautista, Encarnacion all testify to that. But no where did I say "it is the only part". There's always disagreement of course, maybe some other pub puts a team 7-8 when BA puts them top 5, but that's a good proxy for "having a strong-ish system". It's no guarantee. Being a top 5 franchise in the BA listings does not guarantee you will turn that into success. However, in 2015, it was a necessary but not sufficient condition. 0 teams made it that did not make the top 5 in recent years. In 2015, if you did not recently have a top 5 system in the BA numbers you did not make the playoffs. 0/10 slots filled by what the white sox tried to do is as strong of a message as baseball can send you. Here are their top prospects in 2012. Several they traded away long ago. Tell me again why being ranked by Phil Rogers and Company in the top 5 within 5 years is necessary to make the playoffs? It would be more interesting if you showed us the players that got them this ranking and how those players actually contributed to their winning. In the Blue Jays 2012 list, they actually helped the Mets a lot more. http://www.minorleagueball.com/2011/11/30/...spects-for-2012

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 11:33 AM) Why not? Here are the 10 teams that made the playoffs last year. Texas Rangers Houston Astros Kansas City Royals New York Yankees Toronto Blue Jays Chicago Cubs Pittsburgh Pirates St. Louis Cardinals Los Angeles Dodgers New York Mets Out of those 10 teams....every single one has been in the top 5 of Baseball America's prospect rankings in the last 5 years. Every single one. Even the f***ing Yankees and Dodgers, who still spent $500 million between them last year. 10/10. What does that mean? They either have a supply of their own guys they can rely on directly (Mets, Royals, Cubs, basically all of them, etc.) or they have guys available to trade for assets (Blue Jays, Cardinals, Royals, etc.) The number of teams that made the playoffs in 2014 while "rapidly retooling", without developing a strong system to support that retooling, was 0. Zero teams were able to spend their way or sneak their way into the playoffs in 2015 while doing what the White Sox want to do. And out of those teams...we're not going to be the biggest spenders. In other words, we need to somehow be "luckier than every other team that tries this". The games are giving you a clear message about what works and what doesn't. Free Agency and spending money, without a strong system of support, worked for 0 teams last year. Ignoring that message is how we got here. I would say taking on some cash propelled the Blue Jays. Not a stellar farm system.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 11:08 AM) While he is the White Sox top prospect, how does he stack up overall? I don't hear his name mentioned amongst the overall talent in the minors, but I'm hardly an expert on minor league talent. Coming into this season: Baseball America 92 mlb.com 76 Baseball Perspectus 39 And he did develop a bit this season.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 10:39 AM) Anderson is good, but he's like a mid-top 100 guy. That's a valuable but very movable asset. A much better (Margot) guy just got moved for Craig Kimbrel, for example. Anderson should not be untouchable; every system;'s "number one" prospect is not the same thing. How is Margot a much better guy? Anderson made huge strides this year defensively, and was better offensively and coming in, he was ranked a better prospect by about 20 with MLB.com and BP, and the Phil Rogers doing the ranking BA had Margot about 20 better. The fact that Anderson also plays SS has to factor in as well. They cannot trade him unless it's a really good deal and what is coming back is going to be around awhile.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 10:33 AM) That is less than the going rate that David Price and Zach Greinke got. They will be closer to $150k/IP. Yes, but it is Price or Greinke. Not Jason Motte.

In other breaking news, teams are also interested in Sale, Quintana, Rodon...

They are basically paying him a little over $100k per inning pitched. Jason Motte.

IMO, that is pretty crazy.

If the Sox were to sign this guy, I sure hope they wouldn't be paying for his career year.

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 09:37 AM) Keppinger? Terrible deal. LaRoche? Awful deal. Dunn? Four years of acid reflux. Danks? Slight pass for injury. Duke? Not looking promising. Downs? Ooops. What am I forgetting? Bonifacio, Belisario. There has been a problem with guys not working out so well the past couple of years.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 09:24 AM) I doubt they eat any of it. Not their MO honestly. They have eaten money recently.