vilehoopster

Edwin Jackson has an interesting article on MLB.com right now where he talks about all the cities he played in and which ones he like best for this reason or that reason. He listed Chicago as the best city for kids and for pizza. Anyway, he listed St. Louis as friendliest city and as having the best fans. It's pretty funny that he mentioned only one person he ever heard booed there. Can you guess? It's a former White Sox? Here's the quote: "The only place that I've never heard a person get booed, except for A.J. Pierzynski, is St. Louis," Jackson says. "They kinda cheer for everybody, and that's something you don't see anywhere." Here's the link, a good read, if it works. https://www.mlb.com/news/edwin-jackson-talks-favorite-baseball-cities

I really hope that there's a minor league season. Being down here in Indiana, I really look forward to Charlotte playing in Indy every year. It's great: cheap seats right down by the field, up close in a great park with easy in and out before and after game. Don't my seeing Charlotte from me two years in a row!

Am I the only guy that doesn't want Cruz because of this cheating with PEDs. I have said this before: you have to be naive to not think that Cruz is on on PEDs. I know he has never actually been caught, failed drug test caught, and only caught by connection to that whatever lab, but still, it's unreasonable to think he's not on them. The way he has gotten better in his upper 30s, his connection to PEDs in the past. Lance Armstrong when years and years winning Tour de France races, while not getting caught when everyone know he was on PEDs. So don't use his never failing drug tests as an example of his innocence. Plus many, many people on this forum have complained about his PED use in his years with the Twins. But now that he's available, we want his PED cheating ass with the Sox? That just seems so hypocritical to me, "He pisses me off that he cheating for Minny, but wait; now I want him to come cheat for the Sox". I don't want to cheer for a cheater; I don't. If that means the Sox win a few less game, so be it. But I think the Sox can be (and are right now) a World Series contender without the putting the odor of PED cheating on any success the Sox have in the upcoming years. Again, I don't want to cheer for a cheater.

OKay, that is good. Pretty funny.

Of course, he should have won MVP. He had the best statistical season and he was extremely valuable to his team in terms of leadership and creating a winning club house culture. He was the Most Valuable Player, in the entire league, to his team's success this year. I don't know how you could reasonably debate otherwise. War, bwar, FUwar are, to me, stats that seem to be the ultimate example of "not seeing the forest for the trees". I talked about my distrust of war on here repeatedly. All you need to know about the value of war, whichever war it was that year, is the example of two or three years ago, when Abreu had a year-end war barely above Yolmer Sanchez. They (and there were MANY on this Board) used this war to say how the White Sox should unload Abreu to the Red Sox for whatever they can get. They quoted war (again many, many posters and posts on this board) that the Sox should offer Jose one year, at most and not for even 10 million, to return to the Sox. If he won't take it, let him walk. That people are still using war to discredit or demean Abreu is shown in the quote I started with above. Even before this past MVP season this year, Abreu led the AL in RBIs and people were talking about his low war. It kills me. When a guy leads the league in RBIs and you're using war to show that the guy is not that good; well, that says less about the caliber of the player and more about how weak war is as a stat. Come on, people. You know who you are/were. Another knock I have with war is how ridiculously low Colome's war was. I had a long post on that one. People quote his war and imply he was barely above average, but he saved (not sure of this number, don't feel like looking it up) something like 42 of 46 games in the last two years. How can a closer have such a great save percentage, but barely be above average in war for relievers. it makes no sense to me. To me, war is the ultimate "can't see the forest for the trees" stat. And how it is/ was used to assess Abreu is my example of that.

Yeah, stay away Ass Faces !!! Can you imagine an outfield of Colas, Robert, and Cespedes in two or three years. That is so beautiful to think about.

I agree; the trade of Lopez for seems like a natural for both clubs. Pretty much, both organizations and fan bases have soured on the two players. I have to believe both sides see the loss of their player as very, very minor. Yet both have big upsides that could really plug a hole that the other teams needs. Lopez has something that if you could find it and tap into it, would give you a very solid starting pitcher. Boston needs pitching, and again, Boston has soured on B. There is nowhere for Lopez to be of value to the Sox. The bullpen is loaded. People who think maybe Lopez in the bullpen, do you really want to see him jogging out to take the ball with a guy on 1st and the Sox holding a one or two run lead in the 6th or 7th inning? Do you want that? I sure don't. On the other hand, Benintendi could plug several different holes for the Sox: An insurance if Eaton gets hurt, we still would have a left hand bat to put in right field. Another left-handed bat to DH or play in left field if Eloy is sitting or hurt. Again, he has a really big upside that it seems worth the Sox time to try to find. Could the Sox make this happen if they threw in a minor minor leaguer, the equivalent of a Weems? Too me, the Sox lose nothing in moving Lopez. He's like a college junior part-time starting power forward, and the coach has brought in two freshmen forwards who are clearly better than the returning player. Like this junior forward, Lopez doesn't have a spot anymore. The Sox have recruited over Lopez's talent level. So why not move him.

I’d rather have Q.

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.

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 just said this to get me going again on my Colome better than Hendriks argument, didn't you? Well, not taking the bait. I know, most of you are saying, "Thank God".

Okay, I said I was through on this topic and I keep posting but I have a question, a question not really on this topic but on my earlier twist on the topic. Is anyone else afraid that Colome is gonna end up in Minnesota with the Twins? Because I sure am.

Thank you for saying this. But really, I come here for the debate, the mental gymnastics for trying to prove my point and that I'm correct. I was doing pretty well for a while, but the point about getting a loss in earlier innings but not getting a save, I had no counter for that. Plus your point about how strikes out are more important with a, let's say, less-good defense behind you; is very true, and is a strong point why Hendriks is a better fit for the Sox next year than Colome. So welcome Hendriks and come on season and get here.

Okay, my last post on this topic. I am glad the Sox signed Hendriks. I am ecstatic that the Sox are willing to spend this type of money to win. But I am a loyalty guy and I hate to see Colome go; I hate to see it. Hendriks will come in and be great. I believe Colome would have been great (as I have debated the last couple pages). My first ever post on this forum was that the Sox should pay and keep Avi Garcia. The next day he was released, rather funny and ironic. It's really tough for me to see guys whom I cheer for and have helped the team go, so I argued/ debated that we should have kept Garcia and I argue that we should have kept Colome. Again, I love that we got Hendriks. There is no doubt that the Sox are clearly going for the World Series this year. The closer king is dead, Colome; long live the new closer king Hendriks. I'm behind him 100% God, oh God, I want the season to start soon. I am so excited for what is coming. I hope it isn't delayed too much.

This is a good point. I cannot think of a counter to this arguement/ point. You have me. Coming in without the opportunity for the save (but still get the loss), does show why the save percentage might skew in Colome's favor. A good point. You have me on this one.

Do you expect Hendriks to stay healthy? If you're gonna use that argument, one is a valid as the other.

Again, a good point, but the defense behind Hendriks the last two years was better than the defense behind Colome. Think about the outfield defense Colome had in 2019 compared to the outfield Hendricks had that year. Also, something like blocked kicks or errors in baseball, over two seasons (even a shortened season) somewhat even outs or if not, comes down in Hendriks favor. Again, did Hendriks have twice as many of his field goals blocked, because he blew twice as many saves.

Looked deeper into the blown saves. 2 of those blown saves were as an 8th inning or earlier guy not as a closer. He became the A's closer in June of 2019. So that knocks it down to 6 blown saves as a closer vs 4 for Colome. This was also a brand new role for him moving from 7th/8th inning to 9th inning. 3 of those 6 blown saves happened within his month of being a closer in July over a 3 game stretch looking at the game log, one of those being a multiple inning affair. Taking out a single stat in isolation without the full picture is why it is a bad take. Looking at the full body of work over 2 years in which he was clearly the best RP in all of baseball is a clearer look at Hendriks vs. Colome as a closer. An appearance is an appearance; a blown save is a blown save. What does it matter if it's in the 8th or the 9th inning. If anything, there's less pressure in the 8th inning. Going back to my field goal kicker analogy: you're saying that because you're field goal kicker missed his field goals in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, they are somehow less important to the stat of field goal percentage?? And if we're gonna look closer at each blown save, remember again, Hendriks had a better defense behind him. Colome's only blown save from last year was when Grandal let the ball go through his legs while he was looking over at the dugout. I think looking closer at blown saves only helps my argument.

Colome isn't throwing 50 pitches or getting a 3 inning save in the playoffs. Hendriks did both during the last postseason. Okay, I'll debate this point too. 1) Aren't we all saying that with the Sox bullpen this year, this won't ever happen, ever? Haven't we more or less said that the Sox have tons of outstanding options for the 7th and 8th inning (to the point that we can trade some young guys), so our closer doesn't need to pitch three innings. 2) Also, this is just from memory, so give me a break, but didn't Colome in 2019, get four outs against KC for the win or save in the first game and then come back and pitch the 9th for a save in a double header? I pretty sure he did that. To me, that's pretty much the same as what Hendriks did.

Isn't save percentage far and away a better measure of success, the most important stat to look at? With a football game on the line next year, do you want a field-goal kicker who makes 95% of his kicks over the last two years or the one who has only made 90% of his kicks the last two years? You're saying you want the one that makes 90% of his kicks because he has a better left-foot placement percentage or because he has a better spin of the ball off the holders finger rate. I'm saying those other stats don't matter. What matters is how often the ball goes through the uprights. And for a closer, babip and velocity and k-rates don't matter. What matters is who is most likely to walk off the field with a win. And Hendricks is twice as likely to not be that guy as Colome.

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.

Sorry, but this is a bad take. Colome hasn't even been the most valuable White Sox reliever over the last 2 years, that would be Bummer. Over the last 2 years Hendriks has been the best reliever in all of baseball and it isn't even particularly close. We've reached the point of this discussion of comparing save stats as to who is better. At least it's not ERA comparison. But still dumb no doubt. When a closer comes in, all that matters is the save, save the game for your team. How it was done should not matter at all, not at all. And when you look at who was better at saves, Colome was twice as good as Hendriks, twice as good. Again, indisputable fact: in the last two years, in one more appearance, Hendrick blew TWICE as many games as Colome over the last two years, indisputable fact. Whether he did it with ground out, fly outs, or strikes outs doesn't matter. What matters is saving the win. And again, Hendircks blew twice as many games as Colome over the last two years, and if we're gonna look at other factors, he blew twice as many with a much better defense behind him. The first guy I quoted gives all these stats: babip and strike out rate. That shit doesn't matter if you're blowing the save, twice as many. Looking at babip and missed bats and ignoring who is better at keeping the lead with the game on the line is the ultimate example of not seeing the forest for the trees. That's like saying after a loss, "Well, if you look at the stats, we really won. We had more hits, better bat on ball percentage, and less strike outs, so I think we should count this as a win." That's ridiculous. The win is what matters. For a closer, all that matters is the save, and Colome saves more games at a higher percentage than Hendricks. And let me quote the first guy in italics up above, "it isn't even particularly close". Comparing Colome to the Hendriks (looking at only past performance the last two years) Hendricks will loss two or three saves next year that Colome would have kept. But that's okay; we don't need those couple wins, we'll just admire Hendrik's babip and strike out rate.

I agree with this guy. The Sox spent all this money to get a guy less good than Colome. Here's a copy and past from what I posted earlier on this topic on a different thread: Colome is clearly, clearly better than Hendriks. Clearly. Colome the last two years: 2019 - 30 saves in 33 save opportunities 2020 - 12 saves in 13 save opportunities Hendricks last two years: 2019 - 25 saves in 32 save chances 2020 - 14 saves in 15 save opportunities Totals: Colome - 42 saves in 46 save opportunities -- four blown saves Hendricks - 39 saves in 47 opportunities - eight blown saves In only one more opportunity, Hendricks has blown twice as many games as Colome over the last two years, twice as many. I am glad the Sox are spending money, and I am going to say the the Sox brass knows what they're doing, but I don't get how Hendrick at the best closer in baseball when he wasn't better than Colome. Again, Hendrick blew twice as many saves as Colome over the last two years, twice as many. I'm glad the Sox are spending money and especially glad we didn't get a stiff like Brad Hand, but the Sox could have kept Colome for a lot, lot less money and had a better reliever.

You're that down on Cease?? He hasn't even had the equivalent of one full rookie season starting. That just seems way too pessimistic for a young guy with so much promise. You don't think the Sox should be putting him out there again? Because I sure do; there's so much potential. Any sense at all says you've got to see what Cease and Kopech can do next year.

Good, stay in contact with Colome and sign him. Pay him a fair price and keep him. Sorry, but I don't understand this "grass is greener on the other side" mentality on this board. Colome is clearly, clearly better than Hendriks. Clearly. Colome the last two years: 2019 - 30 saves in 33 save opportunities 2020 - 12 saves in 13 save opportunities Hendricks last two years: 2019 - 25 saves in 32 save chances 2020 - 14 saves in 15 save opportunities Totals: Colome - 42 saves in 46 save opportunities -- four blown saves Hendricks - 39 saves in 47 opportunities - eight blown saves In only one more opportunity, Hendricks has blown twice as many games as Colome over the last two years, twice as many. And yet people on this board are clamoring for Hendricks and saying let Colome go. I'm too lazy to look. Does anybody have a better save percentage than Colome's .913% over the last two years? I only looked up Hader, and he doesn't. Does anybody? And yet, we just want to let Colome walk to another team?? The grass is NOT greener. Pay and keep Colome. This is so obvious. Plus the Sox already have two outstanding lefties for finishing games: Bummer and Crochet. Don't screw this up. Keep Colome.