Dick Allen

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.

QUOTE(kwolf68 @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 02:49 PM) Danks immediately becomes our #1 pitching prospect if we get him. I would do whatever I could to land him...wouldn't mind nabbing Thomas Diamond either (he's in AA right now I think), but that's probably too much bounty to get. I am perplexed at the mention of TWO RELIEF righties...Otsuka, Mac and Jenks???? If this deal goes down, Kenny isn't done...one of our closer-talent righties would be moved...considering the market for quality relief pitchers, it's not a bad idea to really corner the market there and then go load up somewhere. I'd been stunned if KW moved any of relievers he would deem as quality pitchers. They want to get back to having a nasty bullpen. I think KW learned a lesson last offseason when he virtually blew off the bullpen.

Garland has had 1 full season where his ERA has been lower than 4.51, although he has won 18 games each of the past 2 seasons. Vazquez is a below .500 pitcher for his career. He's had a couple of good seasons playing in front of high school baseball sized crowds in Montreal, other than that he's been mediocre at best although he makes a lot of money. Contreras had a great second half of 2005 and first half of 2006, other than that he hasn't been too reliable of a pitcher. Buerhle has been great most of his career, but he was pounded the second half of the season. There has to be some cause for concern. Its no lock he returns to his previous form. Garcia lost a lot of velocity and was pretty crappy in 2006 before a hot streak in September made most of his numbers fairly respectable. I am one thinking if he doesn't get his velocity back, his September mastery is a mirage, and considering everyone who gets on base against him is almost a lock to be in scoring position eventually........... They all have some serious issues. A couple of them will probably bounce back, and a couple will most likely falter even more. Hopefully KW picks the correct one to move.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 03:12 PM) I bet Levine hates Omar Vizquel When the Sox acquired Garcia, Levine stated there was "no way" Garcia would sign an extension with the White Sox, that he would go through the free agent process. The next day, Garcia signed an extension.

I wouldn't mind them trading Garland, I think he, like the other 4 starters are overrated. If they were the studs everyone makes them out to be, the White Sox wouldn't have finished in 3rd place in 2006. It would be an instance of selling high. I don't know much about the Rangers prospects, but KW supposedly loves their pitchers. If he gets a couple + the reliever, its really not a bad trade. You know when KW finally unloads a pitcher or 2, the others will probably spend some time on the DL, but this move gets the Sox some prospects, maybe improves the bullpen and frees up some money. I'd rather get rid of Vazquez or Garcia, but won't shed any tears if Garland is sent packing. His low strikeout rate indicates he's apt to start getting lit up. Its sure to net more than the last time KW traded him. I wonder if Ozzie's little blow-up with Garland has anything to do with him being gone, if in fact he does go. Ozzie didn't like how CLee slid into second-he gone. He was pissed at Tracey for not hitting a batter-he gone to Charlotte, and he was pissed at Garland for not hitting a batter-maybe he gone to Texas.

Vazquez is only signed through 2007 although under the team's control through 2008, but that would be an arbitration year. With what very mediocre pitching seems to be commanding these days, if Vazquez somehow had a decent year, you're looking at probably $14 million+ for 2008. No thanks.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 06:02 PM) It's so funny. Thome's "bad" September = not clutch when we needed him Garcia's good September = doesn't matter because it was against garbage teams. I'm not saying you're trying to have it both ways Dick, but these are common comments on Soxtalk. The Sox were still in it when Garcia nearly threw a perfecto, but that Oakland series was killer for me. SSI71 thinks the season ended in August. I guess we should just throw some of Jermaine's stats out the window and not have to worry about Buehrle's end of the season struggles. I've been pretty consistent. I have never had a problem with Thome. A lot of people expect him to hit .800 with a homer every other AB against pitchers that hardly anyone hits. I don't care who the teams are, Garcia got hot when the Sox had virtually no chance to win, and if it was fatigue that was bothering him earlier, why would more pitching allow him to make stronger starts? Wouldn't he become more fatiqued.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 05:48 PM) Its quite simple, Freddy showed a plus splitter to go with already good breaking pitches and a much better feel for pitching late in the season. Mix that in with a guy who has been a 200 inning a year guy consistently, who has won big games, pitches good against contenders (historically speaking) and can absolutely dominate teams (especially when Colon will probably still have some set backs) and it makes a lot of sense, imo. The Angels aren't looking to win 2 years from now, they want to develop some guys but Moreno learned one thing last year and thats that you can't develop too much so he may be telling Stoneman, get me a proven ace, and Santana is probably the closest to getting a raise so they've decided he could be expendable (for the right price). And if they get Anderson (defensively they need help in CF) and a guy like Josh Fields (with us getting Figgins back, who they are apparently down on) and it makes a lot of sense to me. He was pitching in useless games in September when he had his success. Garcia's combined ERA for June, July and August was 5.37. Santana may be a better pitcher right now. Garcia's September success could be as fleeting as Jim Abbott's in September of 1998. The White Sox signed Abbott after the Angels released him. His junk was floating just right that in 5 starts with the White Sox, he went 5-0. The Brewers gave him a lot of money after that brilliance and he didn't make it through the next season. I don't want to suggest Garcia is at the end of his career, just that he, IMO, is done being dominant for a long stretch, and certainly can't be the ace of a staff especially if he can't bring intensity against lesser teams. He makes approximately $300,000 a start and plays for one of his closest friends. If that doesn't allow you to be intense, I just wonder what the effect of a southern California lifestyle would have on him.