Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
EvilJester99

Sox sign Hendriks: 3/$39M - 4th year optional with $15M buyout

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, vilehoopster said:

All that matters is winning the game. 

And winning the division

And winning the playoffs

And winning the World Series

That's the kind of vision I like to tunnel in on: and that starts with saving the most games with the highest percentage so you win the most games. 

So you're basically not analytical at all. Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rounding_Third said:

There's only 2 quality closers left, right?  Colome and Hand?  With at least a half dozen teams looking for closers, including the friggin Dodgers, I think Colome is going to sign for just a couple $m under Hendriks.  No proof just thinking logically.  If true,  give me Hendriks for a little more. 

Bradley and Rosenthal too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone factored into their calculation the fact that Hendriks gives 110% out on the field, rather than merely 100?  That is literally ten more, which makes a difference when extrapolated over a 162 game season.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

So you're basically not analytical at all. Lol.

So you're basically hiding behind stats, "analytical" to ignore observable realities. Lol. 

There are liars, damn lies, and statistics. As true today as it was over a hundred years ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bmags said:

Bradley and Rosenthal too

They not in the same category; next level down, at best.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 35thstreetswarm said:

Has anyone factored into their calculation the fact that Hendriks gives 110% out on the field, rather than merely 100?  That is literally ten more, which makes a difference when extrapolated over a 162 game season.

I think this is one of the Grinder rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

So you're basically hiding behind stats, "analytical" to ignore observable realities. Lol. 

There are liars, damn lies, and statistics. As true today as it was over a hundred years ago. 

Reality and your reality are two different things.  There is more to making a point about a player other than "winning" or "saves." This is a team game and there is a lot more at work than that; you don't have to be an analytics guy or professional to understand that. 

I am a fan of Colome, for the record. But there are a myriad of excellent points that run contrary to your frankly silly blanket statements. And it seems that you are ignoring them. 

There are other factors simply besides "getting the save" that easily make Hendriks an arguably better closer than Colome, which include fielding and other elements you yourself mentioned yet scoffed at.

You definitely come across like a simpleton here. If you don't think statistics play a part you're silly. If you think every save merely comes down to the closer himself and nothing else then clearly not very much is actually "observable" to you.

Tunnel vision isn't a compliment. You're not listening. 

Edited by RagahRagah
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

So you're basically hiding behind stats, "analytical" to ignore observable realities. Lol. 

There are liars, damn lies, and statistics. As true today as it was over a hundred years ago. 

You literally gave us a stat in save percentage, as the reason that Colome is a better option.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

Weird to me that Passan is calling 1 signing a "spending spree." Does he know something we don't?

I guess compared to every other team. You're adding salary in Eaton, Hendriks, and Lynn (I know he was traded for, but you're replacing a guy who would make league minimum with him).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, manbearpuig said:

I guess compared to every other team. You're adding salary in Eaton, Hendriks, and Lynn (I know he was traded for, but you're replacing a guy who would make league minimum with him).

I guess in the context of a normal year this doesn't seem like much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

I guess in the context of a normal year this doesn't seem like much.

Right. You can field a pretty good MLB team or 2 with all the guys that are still out there one January 12th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

So you're basically hiding behind stats, "analytical" to ignore observable realities. Lol. 

There are liars, damn lies, and statistics. As true today as it was over a hundred years ago. 

Colome's ERA and Save stats are a great example of stats that lie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have white sox at 126.4M after Hendricks ($11m ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ron883 said:

Colome isn't throwing 50 pitches or getting a 3 inning save in the playoffs. Hendriks did both during the last postseason. 

Colome wouldn't need 50 pitches! Probably 20.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bmags said:

So I have white sox at 126.4M after Hendricks ($11m ) 

If $140 target, ~$15 more for SP, DH, backup catcher is very doable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bmags said:

So I have white sox at 126.4M after Hendricks ($11m ) 

More tgan enough left to sign bauer

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HOFHurt35 said:

Colome's ERA and Save stats are a great example of stats that lie. 

I don't think they lied. He saved the games. But we aren't replaying 2019 or 2020 anymore. Moving forward, Hendriks looks like the far better bet.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, HOFHurt35 said:

Colome's ERA and Save stats are a great example of stats that lie. 

Fake news

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rounding_Third said:

If $140 target, ~$15 more for SP, DH, backup catcher is very doable.

Agreed. And a backup catcher is what, like $1 mill of that. Plenty of room to add.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know why Colome isn't thought of as good as Hendricks. Same age. Better career. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

Reality and your reality are two different things.  There is more to making a point about a player other than "winning" or "saves." This is a team game and there is a lot more at work than that; you don't have to be an analytics guy or professional to understand that. 

I am a fan of Colome, for the record. But there are a myriad of excellent points that run contrary to your frankly silly blanket statements. And it seems that you are ignoring them. 

There are other factors simply besides "getting the save" that easily make Hendriks an arguably better closer than Colome, which include fielding and other elements you yourself mentioned yet scoffed at.

You definitely come across like a simpleton here. If you don't think statistics play a part you're silly. If you think every save merely comes down to the closer himself and nothing else then clearly not very much is actually "observable" to you.

Tunnel vision isn't a compliment. You're not listening. 

I know you see yourself as the smary, intellectual guy who points out to all of us the errors of our ways. To try to win your argument, you start with "your reality versus reality".

I gave a reality: Hendriks has blown twice as many saves the last two years: hard, total reality, not my reality. The point of my argument (which I have since abandoned to cheer Hendrik's arrival with the Sox), is that people get caught up in minor statistics to the point of ignoring the most important statistics like save percentage and winning the game. (See, this is what the idoim/metaphor "not seeing the forest for the trees" means.)  

My point about winning deserves the most importance (over other statistics, worse than "damn liars") is absolutely true. Winning the game and the World Series deserves tunnel vision, and this is a reality that most people on this forum share with me. 

I know you know what "seeing the forest for the trees" means. I just wanted to give you a dose of your own pseudo-intellectualism.

Like when you try to explain tunnel vision to me. I know, why don't you tell me I'm incorrectly using "overkill"', even though the guy used it perfectly correctly.  

  • Fire 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, zisk said:

Don't know why Colome isn't thought of as good as Hendricks. Same age. Better career. 

Because relievers are so volatile you can't look at past performace to evaluate them.  You have to look at the pitcher they are right now and Hendrik's is clearly the better reliever right now over Colome's fading stuff and high wire act.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, manbearpuig said:

Agreed. And a backup catcher is what, like $1 mill of that. Plenty of room to add.

Yep, $2m tops.  Plenty of choices too.  Too bad we missed (Giants) on Casali at $1.5m

Edited by Rounding_Third

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Because relievers are so volatile you can't look at past performace to evaluate them.  You have to look at the pitcher they are right now and Hendrik's is clearly the better reliever right now over Colome's fading stuff and high wire act.  

Actually Colomes best attribute is his lack of volatility. He has been consistently good for years, and Hendricks hasn't been.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×