Dick Allen

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 27, 2006 -> 11:36 AM) The only one of those 3 I can say with strong confidence should be better in 07 than 06 is Anderson. Uribe, I'm just not sure. He's had multiple chances to finally learn how to get his swing under control, take a few pitches, and become "Better". His 2nd year defensively at SS to my eyes was worse than his first year there, although not by much. He has enormous room for improvement, but thus far I haven't seen anything which will convince me that he actually will improve. Pods last season was certainly not acceptable for leadoff. 40/59 in stolen bases, plus a bundle of pickoffs at first, is simply not acceptable, especially not from a guy who's job it is to steal bases, and especially not from a guy who puts up a .330 OBP. He has room for improvement again, but I can't say with any certainty that he'll be healthier in 2007 than he was in 2006 or that he'll get over any of his other problems. Uribe is playing for a big contract. He is the poster boy of players who are most likely to have a huge season under this circumstance. He's very talented, and for one season can put it all together and be a fantastic player. The Sox should keep him, and let him walk if he plays his way to huge money.

Too bad the White Sox weren't as prudent as the Angels and not allowed Freddy to pitch in the WBC. That seems to be what they are blaming his lost velocity on. Will the fastball come back? That is the $40 million question.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 27, 2006 -> 05:39 PM) The Sox only real need in the pen at this point is a long reliever. That's not Shields. If the Angels made Shields available, I'm sure Kenny and Ozzie would find a place to insert him in a game about 75 times in 2007. He would be the best relief pitcher on the roster, and he has a rubber arm. As far as this deal goes, I think Santana is a stud in the making and Figgins is coming off a down year, but is a better player than he showed in 2006. I still think the Sox could get more. If I'm KW, I'm asking for the moon, and if the Angels don't want to give it to me, someone will eventually. If not, wait until the deadline to deal a starter. Make spring training a 6 man race for 5 jobs and the loser goes to bullpen.

Maybe NL pitching staffs realized how to get Pods out in 2004 and the AL staffs realized it in 2006. Anyway you slice it, the guy is below average. If he can't steal 50 bases and be successful 75-80% of his attempts, there is no reason for him to be on a major league field.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 26, 2006 -> 06:09 AM) That's the epitome of intelligent baseball analysis. C'mon, you're better than that. While leadoff hitter is not a defensive postion, it is a position in the lineup. There are two sides to the game, offensive and defensive. You position your players in the field ... 1 thru 9 ... to prevent runs as best possible. You also position your players in the lineup ... 1 thru 9 ... to score runs as ofter as possible. As for Iguchi batting leadoff, he's never done so that I'm aware of, yet you think Ozzie is thickheaded because he doesn't play your hunch that Iguchi would be a good leadoff hitter. My hunch is that he'd be batting out of position. What Pods did in '05 with his very solid 1st half was spark this team to what proved to an insurmountable lead that allowed the to reach the playoffs, which in turn allowed them to bring home the trophy. That's a nice theory but the reality is your leadoff hitter is only guaranteed to leadoff once a game. Pods got way too much credit for his contribution to the 2005 White Sox. He scored a very pedestrian 85 runs. He actually was a better offensive player in 2006 save for the batting average and a few more ks. He drove in more, he scored more, he slugged better, and everyone agrees he wasn't very good in 2006.

Its amazing how bad of a coach Bill Self became to Illini fans when he left Champaign. If he was so bad, why was everyone so angry he left? Charlie Villenueva would have looked pretty good in their line-up.

Uribe is playing for a payday. Keep him around. I think he's going to have a big year.

QUOTE(TLAK @ Nov 25, 2006 -> 08:48 AM) Ozzie put him out there in September against Seattle and if you watched the game you would know that Ross' arm will not allow him to play outfield in the Major Leagues. Chuck Knoblauch threw better. I'm really not too concerned with the LF's arm, although Pods' arm is beyond pathetic. The White Sox had a powerhouse of a team with Raines in LF and the One Dog in CF. Pods throws no worse than either of them. Its the tip toeing to balls that pisses me off. He gets bad jumps and is so tentative, its sickening. Also people seem stuck on finding a "leadoff guy". Pods isn't exactly a great leadoff guy. He doesn't get on a lot, when he does he's prone to getting thrown out or picked off and he whiffs at a pretty high rate for a guy who homers about as often as Ozzie Guillen did. I don't think its necessary to have a guy leading off who may steal 40 bases. I just want someone who can get on base, and maybe even get a bunt down once in a while. Those aren't strong points in Pods' game at this point.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Nov 25, 2006 -> 07:06 AM) Maybe because he was the sox best option leading off. Like I said, the first half he hit .276 with an OBP of .353. Those are decent numbers. I also said he was brutal in the 2nd half, and very tentative for the entire yr on defense in 06. What do you attribute his poor defense to after playing a solid first half of 2005? That sounds like someone playing hurt or trying hard to avoid a re-injury. Instead of using up resources to get an upgrade for leadoff in LF/ Cf this year, i'd like the sox to try and upgrade at SS, someone who would start the yr in AAA. The cost will be less than it would be for someone expected to start the yr in the bigs. The White Sox current SS is a far better player than the White Sox current LF. Pods has never been a solid defensive player. Offensively, as bad as he was, except for batting average, he was a much better hitter in 2006 than he was in 2005. I should say batting average, and taking strike 3 right down the middle, which I cannot imagine anyway being connected to an injury. I guess I just don't buy that he was hurt, and if he was, how is it that it is a given he will be completely healthy this year? Its funny that a board that laughs at a team on the other side of town always assuming their injured players will suddenly be healthy, (and rightfully so), do exactly the same thing with the players on their team. If Pods was/is hurt, and I'm still not buying, what does everyone base their faith on his total health in 2007, a year where the Sox will have to pay him a lot more that the $2.4 million they were paying him for his pathetic performance in 2006?

QUOTE(beck72 @ Nov 25, 2006 -> 06:45 AM) I'd just like to add, Pods 1st half of 06 was decent. What could have happened is Pods wore down in the 2nd half after the offseason surgery, that he probably came into 06 in decent shape after the surgery. But it's hard to fully strengthen and prepare your body after recovering from being hurt. i'm also of the opinion the Pods/ Owens plan is probably the best bet heading into 07. Owens stays in AAA playing Lf and leading off, insurance in case Pods can't cut it. What I'd like to see is the sox get a SS prospect near major league ready who has the ability/ tools to hit leadoff. That way, the sox have another option at leadoff besides Owens and someone who could replace Uribe. Pods was pathetic in April, had a great May and was mediocre to poor the rest of the season. I wouldn't call his first half decent. If he was so hurt, why did a team trying to defend its championship stick with him the entire year, when a guy like Mackowiak was riding pine or playing out of position? I don't buy the injury excuse. If he was so hurt how come he hit .318 with a .443 obp and an obs over .900 in May? Its a weak argument. The guy just isn't very good. He got a lot of credit for stealing bases in 2005. It would be nice to have a SS with the ability to leadoff, but there aren't many of those, and teams with them aren't going to give them up.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Nov 23, 2006 -> 11:17 PM) I'm just not thrilled with the thought of Dave Roberts patrolling LF beyond next season. For a 1yr solution, without quesiton; but not beyond 2007. I'd rather select Podsednik over Roberts if it means one extra season of conditioning a possible replacement (Fields/Sweeney), or perhaps understanding whether or not he's capable of recovering from injury. If Podsednik has a good season next year, they can sign him to a long term deal. If not, we'll let him go and persue other options. You sign Roberts to a 3 year contract and IF he comes up big next season, he can always be traded as long as they don't give him a no-trade. It may be worth the gamble. QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Nov 24, 2006 -> 08:09 AM) pods tends to have a good year followed by a bad year. So hopefully hes due for a good year. I think if he comes back healthy he hits .280 and steals 50 bases. Please. The guy lost his burst. If he can't steal, he's worthless. He hasn't been very good for at least a year and a half.

Pods sucks. He will be too expensive with what he brings to the table. Sweeney at the new major league minimum of $380,000 is a better option. I'm really not worried about who then leads off. Perhaps someone else could be acquired, but the leadoff man is only guaranteed to lead off once a game.

Trading Crede would be a mistake if his replacement is Fields. If Fields was handed the 3rd base job, it would take 2 weeks tops before people would be clamouring for the likes of Joe Randa.

The White Sox generally don't go more than 3 years with pitchers. I think they gave Navarro 4 years and were prepared to give Alex Fernandez 4 years. I can't see them giving Buerhle more than 4 years, maybe if he returns to form there's a slight chance at 5, so chances are after 2007 if not before the end of 2007-he gone.

How much are all these ridiculous contracts going to increase Pods' arbitration number? I think the odds of Pods getting non-tendered even if KW doesn't acquire anybody is increasing with every overpriced contract that is signed.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Nov 21, 2006 -> 05:45 PM) Did you see the demands Boras has for Zito? 7-8 years at around 15-17 mil. They can stuff it for that. While I certainly wouldn't give him that kind of deal and I don't think anyone will, but I never thought Juan Pierre would get $45 million or the Walker LOOGY would get $3million-$4million a year. I think the way its going, the White Sox are going to have to overpay if they want to sign a free agent, or if they want to acquire good players and/or retain them. I do laugh that Boras says Zito isn't an injury risk. There is no such thing as a pitcher who isn't an injury risk.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Nov 21, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) Its a pretty big leap to say that Garcia is a far better pitcher than Vazquez ever has been. Career: 252 1643.2 1584 775 191 529 1202 116 71 0 103.6 1.29 .252 4.01 290 1845.2 1859 961 246 493 1602 100 105 0 101.8 1.27 .260 4.34 The top is Freddy, bottom Vaz. What is striking about those numbers is that Vaz has less walks then Freddy with 200 more ip. Also they are a fraction different in whip, yet there is a much bigger difference in era. I think this has to do with the fact Vaz never seems to get good play behind him. Many times this year Vaz gave up big innings after the Sox screwed him with defense. That being said, I would not really want to trade either Freddy or Vaz. I think they are different types of pitchers who both are durable and have shown that they can pitch a full season. Im willing to give Vaz another year before selling low, so I would personally trade Count, or stand pat. The only reason I defend Vaz is because its "fashionable" to blame everything on him. When I believe he pitched pretty well down the stretch. Vazquez also has spent most of his career in the NL not having to face DHs. He did pitch pretty well down the stretch, and probably deserved some more wins, however earlier in the season he got some wins when he had no business getting them. It evened out and what you got was a guy a shade under .500 with a mediocre ERA. That is eerily similar to his career stats and he's been around a long time. Personally, I'd advocate a lifetime contract for Kenny Williams if he got real crazy and traded both of them for a couple of big packages. Use the salary relief to sign Zito or Schmidt and you have your rotation intact and have replenished your system.

QUOTE(Hatchetman @ Nov 21, 2006 -> 01:16 PM) as bad as it is now, the mid to late 80s were worse. Himes made up for it with McDowell in 1987, thank you Cubs for taking Harkey the guy the Sox really wanted, Ventura in 1988, Thomas in 1989, thank you Phillies for taking Jeff Jackson, the guy the Sox really wanted, and Fernandez in 1990. A pretty incredible streak. He also got a couple of decent players in later rounds like Ray Durham. I think Himes also got Jason Bere in the 36th round. JR couldn't stand him(Himes) personally so he was shown the door. The late 80's weren't bad. Not a lot of quantity but plenty of quality. Taking Kurt Brown in 1985 when Barry Bonds was still on the board was not something Roland Hemond or his scouts would put on their resumes.

While 99.9% of the comments in this thread make perfect sense, the fact of the matter is you don't have to be very good in the NL to win. You can't say the Cubs with a healthy Lee and Soriano in the line-up aren't capable of winning 82-87 games, something that would get you 3rd or 4th place in the AL. You get on a roll in the playoffs, and you sneak a world title, like the Cardinals did this year. The Cardinals were one of the worst teams I saw at USCF this year, but they will get rings.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Nov 20, 2006 -> 10:10 AM) Wells trade wasn't his IIRC. It was Schueler. It was a KW trade. Schueler was employed as an advisor. He advised against sending Fogg with Wells. It really was a bad trade.

QUOTE(G&T @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 07:04 PM) I'm very interested to see what Dye commands in free agency, and whether that pushes KW toward trading for an outfielder now. If he has another year like last year, he's probably going to get at least 4 years and at least $60 million. That's a lowball figure.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 03:33 PM) It all depends, if those are vesting options then this could be pretty damn brutal. You have to think that Soriano would only agree to such a deal if there was a clause in there that could make a few of those option years gauranteed. The Tribune won't own the team those final couple of years, so they couldn't care less. I heard Trump wants to buy the Cubs and build a new stadium close to downtown. I wonder what the sheep would do then.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) True. So what do you guys think of this lineup? Soriano Derosa Lee Ramirez Jones? Barrett Murton? Izturis That's just my guess as of right now. Obviously this will change if guys like Murton or Jones are traded. That's a pretty good lineup, though. It should feast on the garbage pitching that is the NL central. If they stay healthy, that is a very nice NL line-up. Its pretty spectacular for an AL line-up as well. It will be interesting to see who Hendry brings in to pitch.

If it was a team like the White Sox which really has to watch its bottom line, this contract would be foolish, but for a team like the Cubs, its really not that bad. Soriano is the best player on the market, and many scouts do think he will turn into a pretty good outfielder. 5 or 6 years from now, Soriano's $17 million a year may not be all that much. The Tribune Company won't be owning the team too much longer IMO and behind the scenes they have been blown away by the offers they are receiving for the team. The National League is weak, the Cardinals just proved that a mediocre team can win the WS. My biggest concern being a Cub hater was when they signed Piniella. That team is going to have a different attitude, and obviously now are willing to spend money. They aren't done. They are going to have a $120-130 million payroll in 2007 I believe. It just goes to show how much money they have made over the years.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 08:43 AM) Who says I was making an argument? I was pointing something out, nothing more, like an editor points out a missing comma or a faulty transition. I'm not saying that Garland isn't the lowest injury risk. I'm just pointing out that, hey, it isn't just the Old Men Of the Staff who wound up at some point or another hurt. I was simply pointing out that as far as physical issues, only the one who wasn't involved in 2005 went unscathed. I'd imagine Garland the lowest injury risk of them all since he hasn't thrown anywhere near as many innings as the others, is fairly young, and doesn't throw particularly hard. That said, I think he's the most likely to suck next year, too, aside from McCarthy who I think is going to be a huge homerun machine. But on the subject of injuries, I think McCarthy is the biggest injury risk. Dude's mechanics aren't particularly inspiring, and I imagine his career will end early as a result. Like Mark Prior. That's just my thoughts -- and I'm not saying, "DON'T PUT HIM IN THE ROTATION!" or anything because he's bound to wind up losing his career to injury, I'm just saying that's what I think will eventually happen to Young Cy Young. At the beginning of last season, Widger commented that Garland was having some shoulder problems. He seemed to overcome them obviously. I do think the White Sox luck with pitcher's health has to come to an end sometime. I know Herm Schneider is considered among the best if not the best, but there is only so much a trainer can do to help prevent injury.