Can we please find a big league 3B?!

[Dick Allen]

I think the collective at Soxtalk is over-reacting to some painfully blown games over the weekend. People need to chill, it's f***ing baseball! It's mid-way through June and the White Sox are in first. Talk of dropping Dunn or Peavy is asinine.

Its not assinine, and I'm not saying it because they lost some games this weekend. Of the 3, Peavy is the last in my line because he's not owed that much in the future.

[Dick Allen]

If someone told me back in February that the three of them would have this level of production, I think the Sox would be doing bigger cartwheels. The Sox, as an organization, want to win. They do not want to do a rebuild. If you trade any one of them, you may as well trade all of them.

 

The whole point of acquiring them was to win the division and advance in the postseason. It hasn't worked out that way yet, and you've had to pay them all along the way...now it is working out, so we are going to trade them?

 

To be honest, I know the vast majority of the fans do not like Alex Rios, but what we do know is that since this new coaching staff has come in, he has played well and displayed a hard work ethic and a positive attitude. Who's to say that he regresses again?

 

Dunn, I'm willing to give him a mulligan for last year.

 

Peavy will most likely be gone next year.

 

At the very least, you hold on to these guys til the offseason and then trade them then (see Wells, Vernon) after you've given it a shot this year.

 

I'm saying you get rid of them when you can, except for maybe Peavy. There's nothing to say they have a bad second half and become immovable again, if they even are moveable now.

 

[Steve9347]

Its not assinine, and I'm not saying it because they lost some games this weekend. Of the 3, Peavy is the last in my line because he's not owed that much in the future.

Aren't you normally Mr. White Sox Ra-Ra? Seriously?

 

I'm just confused. The White Sox signed Adam Dunn to a contract we all considered a steal. In the second year of said contract, he leads the Majors in home runs (on pace for a White Sox record) and leads the AL in walks.

 

He is 5th in the AL in OPS, with teammate Paul Konerko 2nd. These two are the best 3/4 in all of baseball.

 

Yes, Dunn was horrific last year - but his confidence is back and he's been even better than expected when signed. There is zero reason to trade Adam Dunn, and certainly no reason to waive him - not right now anyway.

 

The White Sox have another hot streak in them, and they are a playoff team this year. They've lost some tough ones, but talk of ridding ourselves of Dunn this year for the sake of the future is, well, asinine.

[Dick Allen]

Aren't you normally Mr. White Sox Ra-Ra? Seriously?

 

I'm just confused. The White Sox signed Adam Dunn to a contract we all considered a steal. In the second year of said contract, he leads the Majors in home runs (on pace for a White Sox record) and leads the AL in walks.

 

He is 5th in the AL in OPS, with teammate Paul Konerko 2nd. These two are the best 3/4 in all of baseball.

 

Yes, Dunn was horrific last year - but his confidence is back and he's been even better than expected when signed. There is zero reason to trade Adam Dunn, and certainly no reason to waive him - not right now anyway.

 

The White Sox have another hot streak in them, and they are a playoff team this year. They've lost some tough ones, but talk of ridding ourselves of Dunn this year for the sake of the future is, well, asinine.

There are a lot of dollars owed to Dunn, that and the memory of 2011. Maybe you considered his contract a steal, I would say the majority would have thought at the very least a slight overpay. We know how bad he can be. Again, if I was convinced he would hit like he's hit this year for the rest of the season and the next 2, he wouldn't be touchable except for an overpay. I don't think that. Its my opinion.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Dick Allen

[iamshack]

I'm saying you get rid of them when you can, except for maybe Peavy. There's nothing to say they have a bad second half and become immovable again, if they even are moveable now.

Yeah, I get that...and I'm saying what the hell did you sign them for in the first place?

 

In essence, what you're saying is the chances of them winning the World Series this year (or in the next 2-3 years even) are not great enough to warrant taking the financial risk and setting us back even further in the future.

 

I disagree for two reasons: 1) I think any time you have a chance to win the division, you have a chance to get hot in the Postseason and win it all, and winning it all, is the main goal, after all; and 2) even if you do manage to unload these contracts, the future is not so bright even with that money off the books to make me say the risk of going for it while you have a chance is unwarranted.

 

You simply cannot predict with any certainty the failure or success of any MLB franchise.

 

Look at the 2010 SF Giants...I don't think anyone saw that coming...look at this year's Dodgers...last year the long-term outlook on them was fairly grim...now it is as rosy as any MLB team.

[iamshack]

There are a lot of dollars owed to Dunn, that and the memory of 2011. Maybe you considered his contract a steal, I would say the majority would have thought at the very least a slight overpay. We know how bad he can be. Again, if I was convinced he would hit like he's hit this year for the rest of the season and the next 2, he wouldn't be touchable except for an overpay. I don't think that. Its my opinion.

At this point, no one knows what he will do the next few years...the huge number of K's is definitely something you might point to...but considering his body of work, you'd have to say last year was an aberration more than an indicator, IMHO.

[Chicago White Sox]

I'm saying you get rid of them when you can, except for maybe Peavy. There's nothing to say they have a bad second half and become immovable again, if they even are moveable now.

If you trade Dunn or Peavy, then you are calling it a season. We don't have any replacements for them whatsoever. There is really no debating this.

 

The only way we survive trading Rios is if Danks can play above everyone's expectations or we trade for a replacement, which may prevent us from improving other areas of the team.

 

I've got to be honest, I'm shocked you proposed this. Killing a season where we have a chance and pissing off the few fans we have attending games to free up some money for the future is just crazy to me.

[Steve9347]

There are a lot of dollars owed to Dunn, that and the memory of 2011. Maybe you considered his contract a steal, I would say the majority would have thought at the very least a slight overpay. We know how bad he can be. Again, if I was convinced he would hit like he's hit this year for the rest of the season and the next 2, he wouldn't be touchable except for an overpay. I don't think that. Its my opinion.

You are entitled to it, of course. Looking at Dunn's career over 13 MLB seasons, 2011 is the outlier, not his start to 2012. I just don't see how anyone could talk of dumping him, no matter how shrewd a move it has the slight possibility of being.

[Dick Allen]

Yeah, I get that...and I'm saying what the hell did you sign them for in the first place?

 

In essence, what you're saying is the chances of them winning the World Series this year (or in the next 2-3 years even) are not great enough to warrant taking the financial risk and setting us back even further in the future.

 

I disagree for two reasons: 1) I think any time you have a chance to win the division, you have a chance to get hot in the Postseason and win it all, and winning it all, is the main goal, after all; and 2) even if you do manage to unload these contracts, the future is not so bright even with that money off the books to make me say the risk of going for it while you have a chance is unwarranted.

 

You simply cannot predict with any certainty the failure or success of any MLB franchise.

 

Look at the 2010 SF Giants...I don't think anyone saw that coming...look at this year's Dodgers...last year the long-term outlook on them was fairly grim...now it is as rosy as any MLB team.

You wanted the Sox to trade Viciedo. Why did they sign him in the first place? I don't think Dunn and Rios performances will match their salaries moving forward, just like you don't think or at least didn't think Viciedo was a good as advertised and wanted to max his trade value. I believe there is a good chance the Sox will be "stuck" with Dunn and Rios in the future, and will not waver with if someone will take their money, let them have them. Mine isn't so much trade value. Its being obligated to pay tens of millions of dollars to guys that aren't going to be worth tens of millions of dollars. Right now, they are earning their checks, but they haven't the majority of their Whtie Sox careers.

 

The point is most likely mute. I really, really doubt anyone is asking about them, and I really doubt KW is throwing their names out there.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Dick Allen

[Steve9347]

You wanted the Sox to trade Viciedo. Why did they sign him in the first place? I don't think Dunn and Rios performances will match their salaries moving forward, just like you don't think or at least didn't think Viciedo was a good as advertised and wanted to max his trade value. I believe there is a good chance the Sox will be "stuck" with Dunn and Rios in the future, and will not waver with if someone will take their money, let them have them. Mine isn't so much trade value. Its being obligated to pay tens of millions of dollars to guys that aren't going to be worth tens of millions of dollars. Right now, they are earning their checks, but they haven't the majority of their Whtie Sox careers.

 

The point is most likely mute. I really, really doubt anyone is asking about them, and I really doubt KW is throwing their names out there.

moot

[iamshack]

You wanted the Sox to trade Viciedo. Why did they sign him in the first place? I don't think Dunn and Rios performances will match their salaries moving forward, just like you don't think or at least didn't think Viciedo was a good as advertised and wanted to max his trade value. I believe there is a good chance the Sox will be "stuck" with Dunn and Rios in the future, and will not waver with if someone will take their money, let them have them. Mine isn't so much trade value. Its being obligated to pay tens of millions of dollars to guys that aren't going to be worth tens of millions of dollars. Right now, they are earning their checks, but they haven't the majority of their Whtie Sox careers.

Yeah, I still would trade Viciedo...but I want to do it because I think we can capitalize on some potential value that will not materialize down the road. I'd be hoping to increase our talent pool, not decrease it. You're essentially saying let's decrease our talent pool for the sake of the future, based entirely on finances.

 

Now if you have a game plan for replacing these guys for less money, and you think it can be carried-out, then yes, I'd be entirely open to that. But from what I understand, you're espousing that we trade these guys for the sake of dumping salary, and not looking to replace them with much externally.

[Dick Allen]

Yeah, I still would trade Viciedo...but I want to do it because I think we can capitalize on some potential value that will not materialize down the road. I'd be hoping to increase our talent pool, not decrease it. You're essentially saying let's decrease our talent pool for the sake of the future, based entirely on finances.

 

Now if you have a game plan for replacing these guys for less money, and you think it can be carried-out, then yes, I'd be entirely open to that. But from what I understand, you're espousing that we trade these guys for the sake of dumping salary, and not looking to replace them with much externally.

It frees up a lot of money to pursue other players. I'm a one trick pony with this right now. Dump the contracts and then see what you can do with the savings. I don't know what else is available, but with that kind of money for your use, I'd imagine replacements wouldn't be that hard to obtain. The White Sox and Tigers were the teams in on Dunn when he was a free agent. The Tigers don't have room for him, the Sox would never trade him there anyway. No one else wanted to pay him what the Sox paid him in 2010. Its extremely unlikely there even is a market for him anyway, as I doubt his value has increased. He's limited defensively, although his weight loss may convince an NL team to make a run at him, but I doubt it, and how many teams are looking for DHs and have the payroll space and desire to take him on?

Edited June 18, 2012 by Dick Allen

[caulfield12]

Here's the problem, when we do trade our prime players like Santos and Edwin Jackson, what do we have to show for it?

 

Molina and Stewart doesn't inspire any confidence. I guess you can blame Paddy for those, but KW is ultimately accountable.

 

 

Now Dick Allen and I are on opposite sides of the argument. Pretty funny stuff. In the end, it's true, we might have held on to Ramirez, Thornton and Gavin Floyd too long. What's done is done. But can anyone really have confidence that we're going to get back value or replace those salaries with anything resembling superstar caliber talent?

 

At best, it's going to be piecing together a roster with complementary parts that gel into a team, in the face of the monster that is Verlander/Cabrera/Fielder.

 

That's why we need Chris Sale to counter. For Viciedo to live up to expectations. But if we keep trading all these pieces because we're afraid they'll lose value, then we'll end up like the Oakland A's. And even they tried to break that trend with Cespedes. In the end, there has to be a centerpiece to build your team around.

 

Maybe it will be Hawkins, but that's a 3-4-5 year project in all likelihood. In the meantime, we have to protect the franchise from the very real likelihood that our attendance ends up in the teen's for half a decade before we finally have another team to compete for the AL Central.

 

The attendance for this series, during the week....will be very telling. There's still a lot of skepticism about this team, and it's perfectly reflected in the back and forth in this thread. Nobody wants to get attached to any of the players when there's not a belief that they'll be around for long and Konerko and AJ could easily be the next to go, severing all connections with 2005.

 

 

Edited June 18, 2012 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Here's the problem, when we do trade our prime players like Santos and Edwin Jackson, what do we have to show for it?

 

Molina and Stewart doesn't inspire any confidence. I guess you can blame Paddy for those, but KW is ultimately accountable.

 

 

Now Dick Allen and I are on opposite sides of the argument. Pretty funny stuff. In the end, it's true, we might have held on to Ramirez, Thornton and Gavin Floyd too long. What's done is done. But can anyone really have confidence that we're going to get back value or replace those salaries with anything resembling superstar caliber talent?

 

At best, it's going to be piecing together a roster with complementary parts that gel into a team, in the face of the monster that is Verlander/Cabrera/Fielder.

 

That's why we need Chris Sale to counter. For Viciedo to live up to expectations. But if we keep trading all these pieces because we're afraid they'll lose value, then we'll end up like the Oakland A's. And even they tried to break that trend with Cespedes. In the end, there has to be a centerpiece to build your team around.

 

Maybe it will be Hawkins, but that's a 3-4-5 year project in all likelihood. In the meantime, we have to protect the franchise to the extent that our attendance ends up in the teen's for half a decade before we finally have another team to compete for the AL Central.

Rios, Dunn and to a much lesser extent, Peavy, are not about maxing out value per se. Its about being a one time opportunity to get out of contracts that can strangle you in the future. And again, I don't think it will happen, I don't think it can happen. I'm just saying if it was an option, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Dick Allen

[caulfield12]

Rios, Dunn and to a much lesser extent, Peavy, are not about maxing out value per se. Its about being a one time opportunity to get out of contracts that can strangle you in the future. And again, I don't think it will happen, I don't think it can happen. I'm just saying if it was an option, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

 

 

But then you start playing this game, then Ramirez and Danks might be contracts in the same boat.

 

So where do you stop? Then you trade Thornton and Floyd and maybe Crain, then what's the point of having AJ and Konerko around any longer?

 

That's the flaw in this whole "band aid" approach, as soon as things are looking good, another two more holes in the dike will pop up and there won't be enough money/attendance/minor league depth to make a big enough move.

 

The only way we can increase revenues is actually the bump from the attendance the year after a deep playoff run. Otherwise, the fans will just sit back on their hands and knees and wait until something is proven to them conclusively.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

But then you start playing this game, then Ramirez and Danks might be contracts in the same boat.

 

So where do you stop? Then you trade Thornton and Floyd and maybe Crain, then what's the point of having AJ and Konerko around any longer?

 

That's the flaw in this whole "band aid" approach, as soon as things are looking good, another two more holes in the dike will pop up and there won't be enough money/attendance/minor league depth to make a big enough move.

 

The only way we can increase revenues is actually the bump from the attendance the year after a deep playoff run. Otherwise, the fans will just sit back on their hands and knees and wait until something is proven to them conclusively.

If someone took Peavy, Dunn and Rios right now, it would theoretically free up over $81 million the next 3.5 years. I think you could find a centerpiece that could excite the fanbase.

[hogan873]

If someone took Peavy, Dunn and Rios right now, it would theoretically free up over $81 million the next 3.5 years. I think you could find a centerpiece that could excite the fanbase.

No doubt, but what about right now? I think that's where some of are confused. Why sacrifice this season for the POTENTIAL of the future?

[LittleHurt05]

If someone took Peavy, Dunn and Rios right now, it would theoretically free up over $81 million the next 3.5 years. I think you could find a centerpiece that could excite the fanbase.

 

If you did that, attendance would take an even bigger hit.

[caulfield12]

If someone took Peavy, Dunn and Rios right now, it would theoretically free up over $81 million the next 3.5 years. I think you could find a centerpiece that could excite the fanbase.

 

 

Let's say we went crazy and went after Josh Hamilton.

 

The problem is we never have any leeway to make more than one or two mistakes or the franchise is completely stuck in neutral, like right now.

 

The right move, like a Miguel Cabrera (with the requisite minor league pieces being in place to get him) or Victor Martinez in 2011...you're set. But one false move, like holding Ramirez too long or Danks' contract being another disaster, you're stuck again in the same place.

 

Experience should have taught KW that going after the big names wasn't what worked....it was saving the money from Magglio/Valentin/C-Lee and investing it into about 8-10 mostly veteran players and having great starting pitching and a lights out bullpen.

 

The obvious problem is that our starting pitching is short and will likely be at least one more starter short in 2013. And then you're going to ask JR to take on a multi-year contract for a pitcher after watching what has happened with Peavy, Dunn, Rios and possibly Danks now?

 

No way would that be a good investment.

Edited June 18, 2012 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

If you did that, attendance would take an even bigger hit.

Not really. Most tickets are already sold. Their walk ups are next to nothing. Believe me, there is going to be questioning tonight when there are plenty of empty seats. They will fail to mention its at least $85 to sit downstairs and about $50 for the worst seats in the house. My couch, 46 inch Samsung, and a/c are looking really good tonight, although I'll go if I find something reasonable.

[caulfield12]

Not really. Most tickets are already sold. Their walk ups are next to nothing. Believe me, there is going to be questioning tonight when there are plenty of empty seats. They will fail to mention its at least $85 to sit downstairs and about $50 for the worst seats in the house. My couch, 46 inch Samsung, and a/c are looking really good tonight, although I'll go if I find something reasonable.

 

 

The only way I would spend $100+ dollars (assuming I was actually in America or Chicago) is if Sale or Peavy or Quintana was starting.

 

At this point in time, I'd just have ZERO interest in seeing Humber or Floyd struggle out there.

 

Zach Stewart, I'd be even less inclined.

 

 

 

Coca-Cola Value Packs

Looking for a great value?

These packs include 4 tickets, 4 Dodger Dogs, and 4 Coca-Cola's - all starting at just $18 per seat!

 

Here's what I don't get, if Los Angeles is an even more expensive place to live than Chicago, and they're not going to loosen up on the parking and ticket prices like they do in LA, why can't they offer more food/drink specials at USCF?

 

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2012 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

The only way I would spend $100+ dollars (assuming I was actually in America or Chicago) is if Sale or Peavy or Quintana was starting.

 

At this point in time, I'd just have ZERO interest in seeing Humber or Floyd struggle out there.

 

Zach Stewart, I'd be even less inclined.

I'm less picky when it comes to pitching match ups, but $100 for a regular season baseball game vs. one of the worst teams in the league is crazy. Premium lower boxes are $125 plus fees to sit in row 37.

[southsider2k5]

Even the crappy UD seats are still in the $75 range on stubhub for tonight.

[caulfield12]

White Sox dynamic ticket pricing....cutting off the nose to spite the face.

 

Sometimes, when you think of all the strategic mistakes they've made starting with SportsVision, Harry Caray, the new ballpark and its location....it's a miracle there's still another team still left in Chicago.

 

And yet, the White Sox are currently something like the 8th or 9th most valuable franchise in MLB. More valuable than the Cardinals, for example, which, to me, is the model for how to run an organization from top to bottom.

Edited June 18, 2012 by caulfield12

[LittleHurt05]

Not really. Most tickets are already sold. Their walk ups are next to nothing. Believe me, there is going to be questioning tonight when there are plenty of empty seats. They will fail to mention its at least $85 to sit downstairs and about $50 for the worst seats in the house. My couch, 46 inch Samsung, and a/c are looking really good tonight, although I'll go if I find something reasonable.

 

Walk ups may be minimal, but giving up on a pennant race would definitely decrease them.