qwerty

QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 02:49 PM) Scott Eyre...retired. Shame on you for not mentioning wasserman got picked up by the phillies.

I never got around to telling you bob dylan, and you will likely never read this, but after watching synecdoche, new york three times now, it is still as difficult to break down as it was the first time, probably more so actually. Hurts my head.

How good raines really was...

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 09:53 PM) • The artist who did the static cell art for Space Angel was Alex Toth — a guy that probably only Kyyle would recognize, but a comic book and animation legend. Did many years great late golden age DC comic work into the 1950s, and also was the Hannah Barbara production designer who designed Space Ghost. My parents and I have a pretty extensive amount of comics featuring toth's DC comic work, along with his short, but very impressive standard comic tenure. I would say i am a fairly big fan of his. Sadly though, comics have been horrible for far too long now, so much so that i don't even try to bother keep up with them. I do not bother with pretty much anything past the bronze age. The asinine prices in the first place are enough to scare me away, and that is not even bothering with all the flaws acquired in the past 25 years.

You better bet tom tango has had great deal of influence this off-season for the mariners.

QUOTE (klaus kinski @ Jan 4, 2010 -> 10:45 AM) Wish they'd give Kroeger a real shot QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jan 4, 2010 -> 11:00 AM) I wish someone would give him a chance too. He's still young enough to do some good somewhere. Couple of jokers we have on our hands here.

No where in this nation is it a new year yet. The catch all 2009 version is getting robbed of it's time to shine.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 31, 2009 -> 12:36 AM) The suspense is killing me as well A.J. Fess up you pansy. A couple of my friends came over in the last 40 minutes, and have fed me 8 shots of new amsterdam gin, chill.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 31, 2009 -> 12:32 AM) Who is your preference, Q? I feel vlad will get a one year deal with a nice amount of money in the back end of an mutual option year, as it is the most logical for himself. I am in favor of lefties, the more the merrier i say, i don't want someone for the sake of them being left handed, whether than pitch or hit, it all depends on their production. Everyone remembers thome's 2005 injury riddled season, i am pretty certain. Vlad looked several times better this past season than thome ever did in 2005, and both were in their age 34 season. I see no reason why vlad cannot provide us with at the very least an .825 ops, all the way up to .950. Realistically i see him putting up somewhere between an .865-.900 ops. Nick johnson and vlad were tied for my first choice, as each provide something different than the other... thome is my third and last option. Most players on average, do not go out, in any sport, still putting up above average numbers. My only worry is thome can (i don't necessarily think he will) decline, and decline at an alarming rate.

Kila ka'aihue does not excite me in the very least. I cannot see him putting up anything more than a .750 ops in a full season worth of play in the major leagues. I do not know the answer to our hole (i have a preference), but i 'm fairly certain he is not the answer short term, and especially not long term, for any term around the majors, especially our white sox.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 12:31 PM) Well, if you have been reading and learning from Ozzieball and Qwerty here, it seems that using UZR for one year is not a great method of assessing a player's defensive ability, but instead, his value. It seems to me that UZR measures the value each player had at his position, rather than what type of ability he has. A guy such as Ben Zobrist may have had more defensive value at 2b this season than Chase Utley, and yet, Utley still may have more ability. From what I understand, you would want to compare several years of UZR numbers before you start building a profile for ability. I agree with you though, there are some really radical departures (and arrivals) from year-to-year when it comes to UZR in regards to certain players. The best thing is probably to look at the numbers over a 3-5 year period before you start getting a fair idea of a player's defensive ability. By now you likely have seen targetview, but if not, it's rather cool. http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/10/6...argetview-graph

QUOTE (striker @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 12:20 PM) I think your Overbay option is interesting but I wonder if KW/Ozzie want an outfielder/DH. The key to my post was to re-evaluate the situation in March. The price of players will have gone down. KW/Ozzie will have a better read if Kotsay/Jones/Flowers can DH. I think more is riding on Rios, Konerko and Quentin to perform that who our DH is, unless our DH was a stud like Prince Fielder or Adrian Gonzalez, and we can all assume it's not going to be a stud. Just because a ''stud'' is not brought in it why should we settle for a lesser option than necessary? Especially going into the season. The intent of every off-season should be to go into the season as strong as possible. The first game of the year is just as important as the last. Pieces can and should be added during the season, but only when needed, say one of your everyday players goes down for any extended period of time, need a reliever due to lack of production from the pen, bench piece, etc. This platoon situation (as it stands) is a horrid option, considering the players sharing the majority of the at-bats. We need someone brought in that we have an idea of the sort of production we will be receiving, not a major crap shoot, especially when you factor in that this offense is not exactly potent. I realize everyone is banking on the pitching, but the more runs the offense scores, the easier it is on the entire pitching staff in the long run. We still need a big (better than the current options anyway) bat to even be considered in the same discussions as the top teams in the the majors.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 26, 2009 -> 04:12 PM) Basically, you're agreeing that UZR is flawed and that Sportsvision's program should give us some real accuracy. You're admitting that UZR doesn't give us the full story, which is exactly what I'm saying. I didn't say, and I'm not saying, that it should be ignored. It should be considered, it shouldn't be everything. It's helpful, but there isn't yet a defensive statistic that can stand alone (like we have with offense and OPS). Sportsvision and STATS will have systems that can accurately measure ball speed so we don't have to rely on UZR which has an element of subjectivity. The problem with having an individual declare a soft, medium, or hard-hit ball is that the subjectivity of that decision ultimately influences the final number. Therefore, it can be a disputable Of course, there's a good reason to use SABR, but there is also a very good reason that they still rely heavily on scouting and obeservation, too. Teams don't dismiss a player simply because they don't like his UZR. We can't quantify everything. I agree with you, though, that the infield was responsible for up to 80% of the unearned runs, which is what I've been saying. The infield killed them last year. He was definitely trying to be a smartass instead of actually contributing to the discussion. I'm not gonna reiterate what ozzie ball said considering he hit the nail on the head... in every post thus far. I was also insulted by... Do you guys even know how UZR, RF, and defensive stats of the like are even measured? as it was directed at myself. Come on, that is baby stuff, absolute basics, and if you don't know the methodology behind any stat, i feel there is no reason to even bring it up. You are more from the old school training of thought, not entirely, but more so than some others. You seem to be willing at times to be opened up to some of the slightly advanced metrics, but then discount them because they have flaws. Basically every stat has a flaw(s) in some shape or form, but we have to do our best to work around them (while trying to find ways to eliminate the flaws) and get the most information out of them. I acknowledge what is wrong with uzr, much more past what has been mentioned in this very thread, but i'm not gonna cite it's flaws in a precursor form every time uzr is mentioned. I don't owe anyone that much, nor does anyone else. By your logic since upwards of 80% of the unearned runs came from infield they hurt us more than the outfield. As previously stated by bmags are more common in the infield than the outfield, vastly more common, for a number of reasons. You state that the infield defense killed the sox, but the degree that the outfield defense hurt us was not significant which is highly debatable, to say the least. Say what you want about uzr, but a -25.6 outfield defense in comparison to -10 infield defense is too large to of a difference to throw out the window. The outfield defense would have therefore cost us two and a half wins.. while on the other hand the infield defense cost us just one. It's fine to have a right to your own opinion, but the numbers (debatable or not, they are the best we as a community have to work with) do not favor your argument, in any shape or form. Well i just read your last post in this thread, and i see that you don't think uzr can measure the amount of runs saved or lost close to the neighborhood it suggests, so it's sort of a lost cause. Anyway, when sportsvision and STATS bring those systems public, i'll be the first one to jump on board. But until then, it's uzr, +/- (not a huge fan) zone rating, range factor, arm ratings, etc. Everyone of these bring something to the table, that the others cannot by themselves. Defensive metrics are best used when these stats are used together, and not standing alone, the best analytical studies are done in such a fashion. Defense is the hardest thing to gauge in every sport, always has, and always will, so there will always be big time debate about the subject. Ops does indeed stand alone, if just for two reasons, the simplicity of it, and how well it correlates to runs scored. Though ops still has a number of flaws of it's own, that cannot be disputed.

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Dec 26, 2009 -> 02:41 AM) Exact batted ball speeds are not calculated, true, nor are they attempted to be calculated, again true, but the issue of batted ball speed is not entirely ignored. There are stringers at every game who break down the speed of every batted ball into one of three categories (hard, medium and soft), this then gives us lots of useful and relevant information that is factored into UZR calculations. I realize that these classifications are not as accurate as exact batted ball speeds, and nor are they trying to be, but they give us a rough idea of batted ball speeds. Getting back to the classifications we know things such as the average ground ball out percentage for balls hit into zone 3 (the area directly behind the first base bag) for "hard" hit balls was 0.639, for "medium" hit balls was 0.883 and for "soft" hit balls was 0.953 (all as of 2003). These figures are then combined with batter handedness to give us a more accurate evaluation of defensive value. Defensive positioning would be a problem if, and only if, UZR was attempting asses defensive ability. It's not. UZR attempts to asses defensive value as compared to league average over a one year period. The best way to asses ability is to use multiple years of UZR data weighted towards the most recent year. Of course multi year data still doesn't take positioning into account, but at some point you just have to hope that the managers/players are smart enough to position themselves so they can reach as many balls that they are expected to reach as possible. For the time being, UZR is flawed and it's a mistake to use it as a bible of some kind. It should be considered but shouldn't be everything. So how do you propose we evaluate defense then? UZR is flawed and can only be given some consideration. You scoff at "people watching on monitors", so I guess opinions formed by watching games on T.V. are out of the equation. So what's left? We need to quantify defense somehow and holding our balls until GAMEf/x arrives is hardly a pro active solution. You probably don't even know what uzr stands for.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 24, 2009 -> 10:01 PM) I'm pretty sure Hannahan's UZR/150 was actually in a small sample size. Crede was easily one of the best defensive 3B in all of baseball last year. He's up there with Longoria and Zimmerman. Both crede and hannahan played in 84 games, the difference is crede started all 84, and hannahan started in only 66 of his 84 games played. Crede played 728 innings and hannahan played 613. You can generally take something away from a season if a player starts at least one third of a season, which generally is my cut off.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 24, 2009 -> 04:30 PM) Teahen is in no way shape, or form, a better defensive 3B than Joe Crede. I have no idea how you would even hint at something so ludicrous. Crede was exceptional defensively last season. He just looked great out there. Crede had the second highest uzr/150 of all third baseman with over 1/3 of there games played at the position. His uzr/150 was 23.4 while posting a uzr of 12.5 in the 84 games played last season. Only jack hannahan posted a better uzr/150 at 27.7.

QUOTE (sircaffey @ Dec 22, 2009 -> 09:32 PM) Fangraphs has Javy's GB/FB at 1.20 last season and .98 career. Pretty much no sites coincide with one another in regards to gb/fb ratio... even if it is off by the slightest bit, some vary greatly on the other hand.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 12:16 AM) I think the additions of Pierre and Teahen, as well as the subtraction of Podsednik, is going to have an amazingly positive influence on our baserunning. Well our EqBRR was 25th in the league last season... gonna be extremely hard to do worse this season. The order of teams EqBRR can be seen here... and EQSBR for that matter. http://baseballprospectus.com/statistics/s...x.php?cid=69923

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 12:08 AM) They've talked about that a lot on Baseball Tonight, as Teahen has a handful of inside-the-parkers the past few years. He has hit two inside the park home runs in his career, both during 2008. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://uponfurtherreview.kansascity.com/?q=node/1078 Truly though... almost every article... even down to posts on message boards, suggest he is damn good.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 22, 2009 -> 11:53 PM) Really? Is there an article stating that somewhere that I could read? Simple google search should find you all you need to know on the subject.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 21, 2009 -> 10:55 PM) I think our OF defense cost us around 30-35 runs according to UZR. Dye was like a -20, Quentin was a -5, and Pods was like a -2 or 3. Anderson was positive, as was Wise. Kotsay was slightly negative. So yeah, around a -30 UZR in the outfield truly sucks. The sox were -25.6... tied with the red sox for third worst in baseball...ahead of the blue jays (-28.8) and twins (-30.6). But remember, the outfield defense wasn't really a problem anyway.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 21, 2009 -> 11:33 PM) Qwerty, these studies are saying do not make productive outs in lieu of taking a regular PA. But I wonder what the difference is when you factor in outs that were productive even though they weren't intentional sacrifices. I'm sure you see the distinction. I personally have not seen any thorough studies done on what you are looking for... as it is rather broad... and would take a significant amount of time and dedication to conclude anything worth noting.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 06:32 PM) Good stuff as always, Qwerty. I had read the stuff about the base stealing and the "havoc on the bases" theory. My next question would be what about the net effect of the team simply having better base runners? Not necessarily from a stealing perspective, but more runners who could advance from 1st to 3rd and more runners who could score from 1st base or 2nd base? What about the ability to make more productive outs as opposed to unproductive outs? Many times what looks like a productive out on the surface, in all reality, is the exact opposite. All of these articles coincide at some point... Pretty much two of the first articles written on the subject... http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...roductive-outs/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...e-outs-article/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://blogs.wsj.com/dailyfix/2009/10/19/t...hat-productive/ http://pinstripedbible.mlblogs.com/archive...a_surprise.html http://cyrilmorong.com/PROD.htm http://cyrilmorong.com/PRODA.htm http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/ind...out-percentage/

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 21, 2009 -> 05:50 PM) Which is both good and bad, IMO. Let me hear your thoughts, please?

They just don't make movies like they used to... it's that simple.