qwerty

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? I don't have time to go into detail at the moment as i'm heading out any minute, but i promise i will get back to you sometime tomorrow, unless someone clears it up for you beforehand.

QUOTE (chunk23 @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 06:14 PM) The reason I brought up OPS and the other measures is because they other ones weight OBP as more important than slugging, whereas OPS obviously does not. This does result in an increase in predictability, but it isn't much. As such, it appears that OBP is the most important, but slg is important too. (iirc, some believe 1 point of OBP is as important as 5 points of slg). Depodesta claimed that 1 point of obp is worth 3 of slugging, which is rather inaccurate. Mark pankin breaks it down rather nicely in this pdf. http://www.retrosheet.org/Research/PankinM/Pankin-sabr36.pdf

Shack... read the baseball fever thread... well take a look everything in this post. http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=48531 http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9329 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Both are excellent reads. http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2006/2/12/133645/296 http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2006/2/19/192135/078 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just for s***s and giggles... http://cyrilmorong.com/Havoc.htm

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 01:22 AM) That doesn't necessarily dramatically affect the outcome of the season as just about every single team that's ever won the World Series has had a couple of players below league-average for their positions. The question is: does that player contribute in some way and are there other areas of the team strong enough to pick up whatever slack is left? I mean, you don't put a real team together like you'd assemble a fantasy team. There is a philosophy that fans (and sometimes organizations) make too much of the leadoff hitter. And that people who use the "he gets the most ABs on the team" argument are overstating the importance of that position. Statistically speaking, some numbers suggest that the extra plate appearances by the leadoff hitter are worth very little over the course of the season. It just doesn't make much sense to put too much stock in one spot in the lineup like some people seem to be doing when they discuss Pierre. Look, he's far from the ideal and he doesn't excite me, but I think he can contribute enough to help the lineup overall. First and foremost you look for on base percentage from your leadoff hitter, then pitches per plate appearance, and lastly, average. There is a very distinct and direct correlation to on base percentage and runs scored. Nothing is being overstated by the fans, and especially not organizations. Countless studies have been done on the subject, so many in fact, that i don't think there is even a need to post them. QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 07:49 AM) Can't find the article now, but saw yesterday... by having Pierre and Vizquel on the team, the 2010 White Sox will have the #1 and #2 among active players in baseball, in both stolen bases, and bunt hits. pitches per plate appearance, and then average. http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/press...sp&c_id=cws

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 11:19 PM) One thing I disagree with seemingly most the board... I for one believe Andruw was signed to have a serious role here. I have an exceptionally hard time envisioning the sox banking anything more than 250-350 at-bats for jones if the last three seasons of his were any indicator (level of play). There are only two ways jones will qualify for the batting title this season, which is 502 plate appearances. Injury after injury and we have to stick someone out there. or he is absolutely mashing the ball... to the point he cannot be denied playing time. Both are rather unlikely scenarios, though neither can be written off entirely. QUOTE (Wanne @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 11:38 PM) Obviously with the signing of Pierre...Jones was no more than a backup plan and potential occasional DH...plus a big insurance policy for Q's next injury. He was never seriously being considered for a starting role. Pierre was traded for, not signed. I have seen this mistake all over today. QUOTE (monomach @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 11:39 PM) Not sure how you figure that, since our lineup only has 8 hitters right now without him. Did teams report to spring training and i was not notified, or what?

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 11:15 PM) What about Chad Tracy? He can resurrect his career elsewhere. 840 total plate appearances in the past three seasons instills no confidence in me. If he didn't hit as well as he did in 2005, the majority of people wouldn't even know who the man was at this point.

http://www.metstoday.com/4139/mets-buzz/wh...-luis-castillo/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2009/06/n..._baseman_l.html He handled his bone headed play against the yankees better than expected. I have yet to find anything concrete about castillo for the bad. He seems to have been pretty well liked (by the players) at every stop he has been at. Though on the other hand i have seen it hinted that management (mets) does not agree with their assessment (the players).

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 08:51 PM) I'm late to thread, so I'm just gonna say I like the move, since we're getting a Pods at almost half the cost, younger, less injury prone, slightly better D, better on base paths, and generally a better average. Also, the top levels of our system are unscathed so (to be a dead horse) Gonzalez isn't completely out of the question, and that would give us a good offense to go with the pitching. Podsednik is not gonna make 5, 6, 7, etc million a season... unless we are talking about yen.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 04:04 PM) Boston still has pleanty of depth in their farm even after the V-Mart trade last year. I wouldn't say they would blow us out of the water though. . We have a great amount of depth in the farm still. . I'm loving all the laughs here today.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 06:54 PM) And a backup C, though I think we have options in house for that which I'd be fine with. Let me guess... donny lucy? Lolz ∞.

QUOTE (MattZakrowski @ Dec 9, 2009 -> 04:52 PM) Not doubting you, but where have you seen this? Studies have been done, though not very in depth, most lean toward hitters doing worse while not playing the field, rather than playing the field. No matter what side of the fence people are on, everyone is cautious, and eagerly awaiting a fully in depth conclusion, one way or another. http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/..._hall_of_merit/ **************************************************************************************************** http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/...l_james_and_me/ Read tango's last post here too. http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/..._dh_adjustment/ http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/386 http://oneifbylandsports.blogspot.com/2009...s-of-dhing.html

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 10, 2009 -> 11:02 PM) Beckham hopes they find a leadoff hitter. $$$

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Dec 10, 2009 -> 06:01 PM) Here's what i'd do: LR: Linebrink LR: Pena Mr: Hudson Mr: Carrasco SU: Thornton SU: Putz CL: Jenks I imagine, however, Hudson will be LR and Pena will be MR: QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 10, 2009 -> 06:06 PM) I would imagine Pena would start off in setup until he either lost the job or Putz earned it. I also don't see Carrasco being used as much more than a rubber arm, similar to what he's done the past two seasons. I also think Ozzie is going to want two lefties, because he always does. Neither linebrink or pena will be long men. Nothing suggests such. It's all carrasco's job, and if for whatever reason he can't go, next in line would be hudson, no matter what role in the pen becomes his primary. I fully agree putz has to earn the role, why throw him to the lions, aka put him in a role he is possibly no longer capable of? Ideally linebrink is in middle relief until he proves he is worthy of greater. Pena and thornton respectively ''setup'' from the right and left side. Though i would not put it past ozzie to start the season of with linebrink setting up games for us in favor of pena, and putz for that matter (if signed of course). I hate the two lefty garbage, get me someone that can get lefties out, regardless of their throwing arm.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 06:23 PM) This would totally be a move to be able to dump Jenks. I wouldn't bank on putz to being anything close to his 2006 and 2007 numbers. His past 75.2 innings have been pretty disgusting. Seemingly he has lost his command. I would of course take a chance on him, but i think it would be silly to move jenks in favor of putz.

Mark Teahan's curious deal.

Tango wrote this up march 6th, 2009. How far would juan pierre have to defer his contract?

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 11:41 PM) In another shocking turn of events the Washington Nationals will waste $6M over the next 2 years on Ivan Rodriguez. Ivan Rodriquez and his value to a team.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 04:10 PM) I like the deal, because if he hits like 2006 form, its a good deal. Don't like 3 years though...might have preferred 2. The whole point is to buy out his free agent year on the cheap, if he does indeed hit like his 2006 season, either next year, or the year after, preferably both.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:26 PM) It'd be really interesting to see a study about players who switch positions throughout the year as opposed to them later playing just one position and seeing if it really does make a big difference. My guess would be that there is little difference and that there may be other factors that play into it as well. I'll try and get back to you at some point later, have to look through my archives, have some nice studies done on the subject. You are right though, the difference is not that great, though players do hit slightly better when playing one primary position. Nothing earth shattering. The fielding ability increases a good deal in comparison though, which is logical. QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:38 PM) I'm sure our good (and I use that term very loosely) friend qwerty can find some sort of study/stats for it. Great read from tango here on position switch, from the defensive stand point. When and when not to make the switch. It's currently done wrong way more than it should be. Probably no one will read it, their loss http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/...on_adjustments/

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:18 PM) All understood, but my problem is being locked in with him the next few years. I wouldnt have minded going to arb with him this year and then having options open for a big spending spree for hitters next year, with Nix as the replacement for MT. More than 80% of the time teams do not go to arbitration with players, i have the specific number somewhere, but i'm not going to bother looking for it at the moment. The sox have long history of avoiding arbitration at all costs. It wasn't an option. As others have stated he would have gotten right around the same amount he is getting paid next season, though it would have likely been slightly more. Worst case scenario is he puts up roughly his career numbers for us, but then we will not have to give him a pay raise due to that, which he would have gotten. Best case scenario is teahan exceeds expectations this season and next, and we have him for an additional year (what would have been his free agent season) for a bargain. Teahan can be moved regardless, worse players with bigger contract have. His contract is not gonna hinder the sox from going on a ''big spending spree'' next season, or the season after, etc. The sox made the right move, easily. Not being thrilled with teahan being a starter is another story entirely though.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 04:36 PM) I honestly believe that if Danks got time in the majors next year, it would be a huge mistake. Jordan danks has zero business being on the major league roster at any point this season. Danks bat is no where near major league ready at this very point. I could see if danks was on the verge of being a major league player, with not much more to prove, but let's not jump the gun and rush him when it is unwarranted. It's senseless. The reward is just not worth the risk (big risk it is... for danks the player, not the team), considering there are other options. Quentin also has no business being moved to dh anytime soon, when that day comes, it will be the sign of quentin on his way out (injuries - body breaking down) of the white white sox organization.

QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 03:39 PM) So what evidence is there that Woods is racist? There is none. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard...ats-white-women

QUOTE (Bern Danstein @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 03:55 PM) Just the air? I am always the same. Names change, but style never does. Otherwise.... I wouldn't be ME. Ya know? Andruw Jones IS a good low-key signing, though. Now if only Rios would remember where he misplaced his TALENT..... QUOTE (Bern Danstein @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 04:00 PM) Um, I don't do obsession. Takes a few minutes. A few posts here and there about my favorite team.... who could that possibly hurt? Now if only Sox would get Adrian Gonzalez.... the happy quotient would go up for everybody, no? It's nothing short of pathetic.

QUOTE (Bern Danstein @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 03:46 PM) Why? I admit my avatar is not nearly as clever as your screen-name (or thoughts, for that matter), but I think I'll live. Interesting. I merely thought there was a mistake made regarding your avatar. Thanks for the insults (attempted) though, my day just would have not been the same without. My savior.

QUOTE (Bern Danstein @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 03:16 PM) Jones on the juice, in shape and with healthy knees, was a borderline HOF. How sad what he's become now. I am all about 2nd chances, though, so if he wants to get in shape and compete for a starting job..... it's not as if Sox have anything in CF and RF right now (Quentin is a LF/DH, at this point in his career) that's set in stone. Meh. I think someone put a dakota fanning avatar up by accident for you. You might want to look into that.