Dick Allen

My take is the White Sox as an organization had taken the high road on Marriotti for years until Hawk decided enough is enough, and started calling Marriotti out in defense of JR. Marriotti knows damn well what he's doing, and now has the Sox playing into his hand by popping off at every negative article. As the saying goes, there's no such thing as bad publicity. More people read Marriotti's column because of the White Sox reaction. Unfortunately, Marriotti isn't like a little kid who will stop his act once he realizes he isn't getting his desired attention. And while I agree with Flash for the most part, (I have heard the same words Ozzie used to describe people thousands of times in my life) the White Sox are taking a risk of making Marriotti a sympathetic figure. That would be pathetic. Although I understand the comments, and if I was in the same situation, would be hard-pressed not to say anything, I think the Sox would be better off just ignoring anything Marriotti.

Smoltz was on ESPN seemingly endorsing a trade to Detroit. He has veto power on all deals. Someone at ESPN was speculating that Scherholtz and Cox would likely sit down with Smoltz, and if he wanted out would probably grant his request due to all he's done for the Braves, and the fact that the Braves look to be entering a rebuilding faze and Smoltz is getting up there in years. There has been speculation of a Smoltz/Zumaya trade which looks like a decent deal for the Braves, especially since they aren't going to win anything this season but it also would solidify the Detroit rotation. The Sox don't want to fall too far behind Detroit. They will spend lots of money reinforcing their team.

QUOTE(Linnwood @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 04:24 AM) I can't say this enough: Please need to sit down and watch the flippin' game. This is my biggest complaint about these areas... and it is the same people every five minutes getting up to get s***. :banghead Its one of the biggest reasons I moved to the Club level several years ago. It amazes me how much money people spend at baseball games. They spend the majority of their time at concession and souvenir stands, and then walk back blocking your view when you want to watch a game. There are at least a few people that realize they are inconveniencing people standing in the aisle, but most just don't care. The other problem is if you happen to sit on an aisle, the people in the middle of the section have to buy something from every vendor in the park. You spend a lot of time passing money, beer, hot dogs, cotton candy, and sodas around.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 12:25 AM) Where's Tracey when we need him.. That was an unbelievable offensive display. At one point 9 out of 10 guys got hits. It was obvious what Riske's job was since Cotts was warming up hard the previous half inning and in between innings. He sat down once the inning started, but was obviously getting ready to go in after an ejection. I'm surprised they didn't use steroid boy Montero for the retaliation, considering the Sox wouldn't be hurt by a suspension to him. They actually would be helped, as Ozzie couldn't use him. Maybe Ozzie learned his lesson with Tracey, and didn't want a rookie to go out there and fail.

John Rooney must be stopped from saying " that's a Cardinals winner" until at least Friday.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 03:47 PM) I think most ISU fans in the state are thrilled and quite a few Hawk fans will be pissed. A lot of people thought he turned the corner in the Big 10 this year, but the failure to beat any team named Northwestern hangs over his head. Now I just hope McDermott is as good of a coach as everyone seems to think he is. A part of me still hates him. A couple of tough losses to Northwestern in consecutive years hurts. Winning the Big 10 Tournament took a lot of the sting out of those losses however.

I'm an Iowa alum and was an Alford backer until Pierce let him down the second time. I wanted him gone, but he's changed his staff, and suddenly is recruiting better players. I actually have optimism about the Iowa program again. I think he's learned from his mistakes. Now if he could only get his players to be able to shoot like him.

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 03:04 PM) Jesus man, The Trib owns the Cubs--even if they did try and "skew" the coverage to "distance" the murder from the ballclub, it's like, "gee, who could have seen that one coming"? THEY OWN THE TEAM. You just made my point. That's why the coverage is always going to be uneven. How come the guy who murdered someone in front of that dump not as well known as Ligue? How come that girl who threw a ball at Jacques Jones was not prosecuted, and outed by the media? Even poor Bartman was outed, because he "screwed" the Cubs. People were threatening his life and news crews were outside his house, making it easier for some sicko to do something. Last week someone ran onto the field at Wrigley. No mention anywhere. If it happened at USCF, you could bet it would be on WGN news, radio and the Tribune. Even the Tribune's writers see the conflict of interest here and wouldn't mind the Tribune selling the Cubs. If they did, I'd bet my life you'd see a whole different looking sports section if these teams continued to perform as they are performing. The problem is, its not in the Tribune Co.'s best interests to be reporting the truth right now ie pro-Sox, anti-Cubs, due to all of their holdings. The other thing is that the Tribune would never acknowledge the conflict of interest, and will always stand by the line that they cover each team equally.

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 02:27 PM) That doesn't make any sense to me. Those terms, "profits", and "newspapers sold" enjoy a correlation, whereas you make it seem like they are mutually exclusive. And then, when you say, "A few more subscriptions on the SS won't change the bottom line", you're providing evidence for my argument: the Tribune caters to the more affluent Northside, the CUBS fans, in order to sell newspapers and raise advertising rates. You're correct when you say that wealthy demographics bring wealthy advertisers, which is exactly why the CUBS are featured more prominently. As for the study, I'd have to personally review it before I draw any conclusions. Data can be manipulated, and "average" can be easily thrown out of wack by outliers. I believe you can get the Tribune for approx. $2-3 a week with a subscription. Even if their circulation was 5 million which I doubt, $10 million is not exactly that much money to the Tribune Co. It is more important for them who its circulated to, than how many its circulated to. The circulation number is important to a point,obviously. But its much better for them to circulate 20,000 in Winnetka than 40,000 in Englewood.

QUOTE(Muscatel @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 02:18 PM) I found Hangar’s count to be inaccurate on other occasions when he was doing his media watch on WSI. But I also question some of his other claims about bias and how the “Cubune” frequently buries negative stories about the Cubs. That came up yesterday, when either Hangar or one of his supporters mentioned the murder of the fan outside Wrigley Field as evidence, noting that the paper uses “Lakeview” instead of “Wrigleyville” to protect the franchise. So, on company time, I went to the library today to check it out. The shooting took place on Thursday, May 6, 2004. In Friday’s paper, a story appeared on the front page of the Tribune Metro section, not on page 5 as someone said yesterday. The headline said “Pedestrian fatally shot near Wrigley.” On Saturday, May 8, the Tribune had a front-page story – front page of the newspaper, not the Metro section -- with two photos and a graphic showing where it happened and the headline was “Suspect charged in killing near Wrigley.” In scanning the story, “Wrigleyville” was mentioned at least four times and I didn’t see “Lakeview” once. Note: I only scanned the story quickly, so I’m not claiming this is fact. On Sunday, May 9, a story on the front of the Metro section said “Volatile mix at Wrigley a worry,” and the story talked about all the drinkers in the neighborhood after games and the problems they can create. Now, I saw “Lakeview” used twice in that story, but one of them was a direct quote from someone from Citizens United for Baseball in Sunshine, a group opposed to night games at Wrigley. That means some people in the neighborhood call it “Lakeview” too. Rick Morrissey also had a column on the front of the Sunday Sports section under the head “Wrigleyville a neighborhood, not a theme park” That’s four stories in three days, all prominently displayed. I don’t see that as an attempt by the Tribune to bury a negative story about the Cubs. I was looking at Chicago city editions, so story placement may have been different in suburban editions – where people expect to see news about their suburbs. Were the stories biased in the way they were written, worded to protect the company’s image? That’s something individual readers have to decide (sorry, I can’t reproduce the stories here). Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and when the beholder is as hell-bent as Hangar is to prove his point, then only a fool would take what he says as gospel. It’s his perception, and that perception may be warped by things that none of us know anything about. I don't have time to check all of Hangar's alleged "facts," so I guess the best thing is to treat them for what they are -- rants. I live in the city and it was on page 5 of the metro section the second half of a story from page 1 of the metro section, and there was no headline mentioning the murder at all. The story was buried and that burial was a big topic of conversation on sports radio.

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 12:15 PM) I really can't stand complaints about the mainstream media. If it bothers you, ignore it. The fact that there are more Cubs stories on average than White Sox ones isn't some grand conspiracy to keep the White Sox down, but is entirely due to the fact that the Cubs are more popular and thus more likely to sell newspapers. The Tribune Company's job is to sell newspapers. The sports page isn't hard news, they don't even need the pretense of objectity. The Tribune Company's job is not to sell newspapers, its to make profits. Coming up with a couple thousand more subscriptions from a non-affluent part of the city on the southside is not going to change their advertising rates, and certainly will not make a dent in their bottom line. The Tribune caters to the affluent, which probably don't make up the majority of their readers, but are the force that their advertisers want to advertise to. Its one of the reasons the notion that the rich and beautiful go to Wrigley and the poor and uneducated go to USCF has been around. It may shock you to learn, after we have had this beat into our heads for years that a study was done last year, and the average White Sox fan actually was slightly higher educated and earned slightly more money than the average Cub fan. With the Cubs being under the Tribune Co.'s umbrella, there is no way they would ever make the White Sox the media darlings of Chicago. Have you seen the baseball commercial on WGN? The World Champion White Sox, and the world renowned Cubs? Ridiculous. They haven't been as over-the-top unfair recently, but if for some reason the Cubs won the WS last year, and the Sox had the Cubs record this year, the White Sox would be as insignificant in the Tribune as the Blackhawks. The WS parade shocked a lot of people last year. There are far more people that care about the White Sox than even the White Sox knew.

QUOTE(SnB @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 01:32 PM) forecast doesn't look awful http://wwwa.accuweather.com/forecast-hourl...etric=0&whend=1 Neither does the radar, they'll get this game in I think its supposed to rain this afternoon, but should be ok this evening.

Vazquez is something like 1-6 lifetime against STL. Its time he turn the tide. The TOR/ATL matchup tonight features Towers 1-8 vs. Sosa 1-9. Watch it be a 2-1 game.

I still don't understand why the Player's Association and the league didn't make the slotting of signing bonuses an issue in collective bargaining.They should also allow trading of draft picks. Make it like the NBA. If you get picked in this slot your bonus is between this and this. It would make more money available to players who have already established themselves. It would prevent guys like Boras from ruining the draft. The draft would be more heavily based on talent, not signability. The Borchard signing obviously was ridiculous. This kid has nothing to lose either, as if he decides to play football a year from now he'll walk away with close to $1 million. Not a bad summer job.

This notion that the Tribune bases everything it does on its customer base is absurd. The Tribune routinely endorses Republican political candidates, almost always the Republican candidate for President, and in its circulation area, the Democratic candidate usually gets more votes. The company has used its newspaper, its sports section in particular, as an advertisement for another branch of its companies. To say there have been more Cub stories than Sox stories in that particular paper over the years, and the reason is the Cubs are more popular is BS. If anything, the exposure has made them more popular. Isn't one of the reasons the Sox popularity was not what it used to be blamed on its leaving WGN(yet another Tribune Co.) many years ago? As far as why the Sun-Times would have the same discrepancy, the Tribune is the big fish, they have to follow, although I really doubt there is a high percentage of people who purchase a newspaper based on Cubs vs. Sox content. At least they offer a more objective perspective on issues such as Ligue, the murder at Clark and Addison actually rated a headline from them, and they were a lot more objective than the Tribune when Wrigley Field starting crumbling down. The Sox are always going to be a little behind with the Cubs a sister company of a newspaper, television station and radio station. All three have bent over backwards promoting this team and its home for the past 22 years. People are getting sick of Wood, Prior, they tired of Sosa, but they will never get sick of that dump they play in. The Sox have closed the gap, and the newspapers have to, and apparently have at least a little bit, responded, as hangar's numbers lately have been pretty even, but with the Tribune's entire media machine running on all cylinders, I think the Cubs could lose 100 games a year for the next 20 years and on a July day in 2027 Wrigley Field would be packed for yet another meaningless major league game played on the north side of Chicago.

This will give the Sox ample opportunity for some retaliation. Its time Barrett goes down.

QUOTE(Muscatel @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 05:31 PM) This is an interesting discussion that attracted me first as an observer and now as a participant. I’m disappointed that weekend stories weren’t counted, because that surely affects the outcome. If this were a lawsuit, a judge might throw out the case if there was such a glaring oversight. I don’t get the S-T, but Saturday’s Tribune had three Sox stories and three Cubs stories. Results of the Friday games for both teams started on the front Sports page and the others were on page 3. Sunday, in what some may see as more evidence of favoritism, the Cubs won the story count 4-3 because the Trib ran one about the return of Mark Prior and a sidebar about his previous “comebacks.” The number of stories may not be the only indicator of whether there is bias. The story on the Sox’s 8-6 win was on the front page of Sports, and the Cubs’ 9-3 loss was on page 3, so the Sox got more prominent play. But the story of the Cubs game was negative in tone, so did the Trib “bury” it on page 3 to minimize the impact on ticket sales (which some believe is the case) or just relegate the Cubs to their rightful place? You decide. Here is the top of the game story by Paul Sullivan, which ran under the headline “Home turns sour on skidding Cubs.” I challenge anyone to find evidence of pro-Cubs bias in this excerpt: The blue “L” flag waved in the wind from the center-field scoreboard Saturday after the Cubs’ 9-3 loss to Detroit, just as it has after every game on the current homestand. The Cubs have lost five straight and 10 of their last 12 at Wrigley Field despite near-sellout crowds every day. “It’s embarrassing,” second baseman Todd Walker said. “It’s not fun to go out there and lose every day, especially when you’re giving your heart to it.” The Cubs were one game ahead of last-place Pittsburgh in the NL Central with the third-lowest winning percentage in baseball. Since April 20, the day Derrek Lee went on the disabled list, the Cubs are 17-36, the second-worst record in the majors in that span. Kansas City was 16-37 after Saturday night’s loss at Houston. Mark Prior returns Sunday, but instead of trying to save the season, his main task will be to help keep the Cubs from enduring an 0-6 homestand. Wrigley somehow has become the home away from home for almost every team the Cubs play.### And another thing …. The Sunday Trib also had a story on page 4 about how most pitchers don’t come back from torn labrum surgery. Kerry Wood was prominently mentioned in this story since that is his injury, but so were several ex-Sox pitchers who went through the same thing. Is this a Sox or Cubs story? Or in the intricate world of media watching, does each team get a point? I'm asking, because there are probably several stories like this during the course of a season. Depending on who is doing the counting they could end up in the wrong column. There are other subtle things the Tribune does to plant a seed. When the guy got beat up and killed at Clark and Addison it was buried in the Metro section on page 5 in the back of another story, so it didn't even get a headline. The continuing Ligue stories. Who cares what Ligue is up to these days or whose car he's breaking into except the car's owner and local law enforcement. The Tribune though loves to update Ligue's arrests any chance they get to keep it in the back of people's minds who are on the fence that USCF may be a little too dangerous. Do you ever see updates on the guy who went after Randy Myers? Did they ever even tell you his name? A few years ago they were digging for a body about 3 or 4 blocks from USCF, and the Tribune made sure everyone knew it was within walking distance of USCF, although a body was not found. There's probably a lot of crimes that occur in the 4 block radius of Wrigley that you will never hear mentioned in the Tribune. The Tribune also has 2 names it calls the area around Wrigley. On its positive pieces its Wrigleyville, if its something unpleasant the area reverts back to Lakeview. Hangar gets attacked, but yet I haven't seen a count that would disprove his numbers. To think that the Tribune doesn't have bias would be naive IMO. Sullivan got called into the principal's office. He even stated the Cubs expected the paper to be its "house organ". Sullivan then backtracks a little bit, and what do you know, a fluff piece on the Cubs.

What are the TV ratings like between the teams for similar times?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 03:03 PM) What is interesting is that the numbers really outpace attendance at the ballparks, so Sox fans are actually getting relatively more coverage vs the number of people who go to the ballpark. In terms of raw attendance, the Sox are drawing about 20% less fans per game than the Cubs are, yet they are almost dead even in terms of their stories in June. Interesting. Even just isolating June, the Sox are averaging 36,017 per game, and the Cubs are getting 40,486 good for about 10% more fans per game, which to me if the Cubs are getting about 10% more coverage with 10% more fans attending their games, that seems about right to me. Looking at things from a strictly business standpoint, you expect more coverage of things that draw more paying customers. I can't really argue with that. Its the reason the Sox and Cubs get coverage, while the Sky have fallen all of the way back to the back pages of the newspapers. One number that would really be interesting to see, and probably pretty hard to figure out is how many actual different people go to each park. I go to about 65-70 games a year and instead of being counted as 65, I would be counted as 1. There probably was a bigger group of people that went to USCF last year than to Wrigley due to total season tickets, although those are pawned off as well.

I don't think in today's game a classical leadoff hitter is a necessity. How many innings does Pods actually leadoff? For this season, he most likely will remain where he is, and as awful as he's supposedly been, he's only OBP is only .011 lower than last season, and he's hitting the ball with far more authority. Its very possible this is Pods last year with the Sox, and if it is, I'm sure the leadoff spot will be addressed.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 02:03 PM) No, there won't. Not from the federal government. Because unlike Louisiana, we can handle it, thank you. Aren't there a ton of Katrina "refugees" living in Houston?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 01:44 PM) WHERE'S BUSH? WHERE'S FEMA? DAMMIT, I DEMAND ACTION! Don't worry, its Texas, there will be a much quicker response.

QUOTE(heirdog @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 01:42 PM) We traded away a guy that could have brought back a lot more in return in Carlos "El Caballo" Lee in order to get Pods (along with Viz) so I think there was at least some point in time when the organization was high on him. How soon we forget the 2005 post-season with his clutch hits...now Pods is supposedly waiver fodder for the organization. So that they can bring up someone else from Triple A and let them "learn" how to field a new position and battle through a sub-.200 BA while getting used to the majors. Not going to happen. The White Sox didn't receive equal talent back because of financial considerations. The Sox most likely never would have made that trade at the time if the money was the same. It freed up cash for guys like AJP, and Iguchi. The Sox were very happy with Pods the first half of last year, and obviously in the playoffs. Defensively I think he's always been at least a little dissappointment to them. If you recall, there was debate as to who would play left and who would play CF between him and Rowand last year. Ozzie initially penciled Pods in CF. I think his defense has dropped off even more this season. Offensively, the only thing worse this season than last is his batting average. His OBP is pretty similar, he's driving in more runs, scoring more runs, IMO having a better offensive season. He's arbitration eligible, and will get expensive. Next offseason we will get the definitive answer about how much they really think of him, if they don't move him sooner.

As bad offensively as BA has been, and I think its pretty much a lock he will improve, his OBP is only 50 points lower than Rowand's.

I think there's a far better chance of Sweeney in LF than Fields. IMO, barring injury, either Fields or Crede will be gone from the White Sox organization by opening day 2007. Crede is going to start getting very expensive, and Fields value is skyrocketing. Might be a case like Philadelphia had with Howard and Thome at first base.