Marty34

Williams. Among the poor trades and bad contracts, he also hired Dave Wilder.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 1, 2013 -> 07:57 PM) After watching the replay, it sure seems like Baker knew an offspeed pitch was coming. Check how his hand separates from his glove when he's throwing a fastball as opposed to when he's throwing a curve. Maybe I'm seeing or looking for things.

I think he's tipping his pitches.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 1, 2013 -> 08:09 AM) I really hope he makes you eat those words. I hope he does too. I've been right about a lot more players than I've been wrong about though.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ May 1, 2013 -> 03:01 PM) I think this is an important point and one of the factors that led to my initial post. If we were at 7 starters, I don't think by any means we would keep the "best" 5. I think Sale and Danks have 0% chance of getting moved. Quintana and Santiago have a little chance Peavy is up in the air - 10-30% chance Floyd is probably at 90%. The most likely scenario is Floyd getting moved and Santiago moving back into the bullpen. Things will get seriously interesting if Santiago excels in the rotation or if we suffer another loss. This scenario leaves us at: 1.) Sale 2.) Peavy 3.) Danks 4.) Quintana 5.) Axelrod with the amount of help the offense needs I can see the near future rotation shaking out like this: 1.) Sale 2.) not on roster 3.) Quintana or Santiago. (Deal one to help offense) 4.) not on roster 5.) Danks

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 1, 2013 -> 12:26 PM) Add to that six years of team control, and that has real value. A guy like that might actually fetch more on the trade market than a John Danks who has a big contract. Nobody would get within 60.5 feet of Danks contract. Axelrod has little if any value.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 1, 2013 -> 12:59 PM) Yeah! How dare I care about widespread poverty in the wealthiest country in the world! What a bunch of unimportant s*** when we've got THE DEFICIT to think about! How do you get people who don't care about the plight of the poor to care?

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ May 1, 2013 -> 02:12 AM) If they give up on the season, absolutely. Playing Flowers is giving up on season.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ May 1, 2013 -> 07:33 AM) Let's be honest, things will get better, at least offensively. We only have 1 1/2 regulars with OPSs above .700. That's absolutely crazy and will not last. The real concern is the defense. If they are going to be this bad all year then we don't have a chance. It's really shocking given how good they were last year. Hopefully they get their heads out of their asses soon and remember how to catch the ball. Biggest problem facing the Sox is there is very little upside to the team they field on a regular basis and that's when Beckham and Viciedo are in the lineup.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 29, 2013 -> 11:40 AM) Let's not make this out to be "poor White Sox, they are missing their ace #1 pitcher" because it's a load of s***. Which is where this whole thing started. And we may never see the "Ace" version of John Danks again.

QUOTE (SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 29, 2013 -> 09:14 AM) TWTW The Will To Watch. Tip of the cap to Sox fans supporting this mess.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 28, 2013 -> 06:41 PM) The same players were hitting the cutoff man and calling for the ball correctly last year. They were hitting with RISP too last year. Maybe you can only go to that "preperation" well so often.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 28, 2013 -> 06:27 PM) If this team came out of spring training with the same level of focus and discipline they had last year they'd be over .500 right now despite all the injuries. (and...some of those injuries might well be a consequence of people not getting adequate work in the spring as well). Maybe the team isn't comprised of fucused/disciplined players.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 28, 2013 -> 05:58 PM) But there's definitely a loss of focus again. And that's on top of last night, where missing a cutoff man helped contribute to a big inning. Look at the 8 position players fielded today and tell me how many games they should win. They'll lose a lot of games in a variety of ways because they aren't very good. Lack of focus is maybe one of the reasons they aren't very good.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 28, 2013 -> 04:30 PM) Just haven't had the will to win the past couple days. I don't want to hear anything about the pitching matchups. They were clearly out-sabred.

I'll believe the sabremetric hype when a top 5 revenue team consistently adheres to sabremetric principals and wins with something like a top 10 payroll.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 04:10 PM) When Elvis Andrus is getting $120/8...I don't think there's any reasonable complaint about Alexei making $9 million. And if the Sox were a top 5-10 organization in terms of talent like the Rangers instead of the bottom 10-12 that they are it wouldn't matter.

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 02:20 PM) What market is this do tell? Are you using the Reinsdorf-"3rd city market in a big city market" scale? Why pay a bottom-of-the-order hitter that kind of money.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 01:47 PM) You're basing the opinion that he is not worth it on what though? Offensive numbers, I'm very skeptical of dWar.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 01:38 PM) If you save yourself $10-15 million a year because of those fringe players, that can mean a lot of top line talent you are able to acquire through those methods you mentioned. That's my argument against Ramirez. $9M for a bottom-of-the-order hitter is too much even if he is a very good defensive SS. According to sabermetrics he's worth it though.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 01:29 PM) Zobrist was a 6th round draft pick...he's not so much a product of sabermetrics as much as he was a late bloomer. Or a really bad Astros front office.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 01:26 PM) It's not really that the scouts don't identify them...most players that can play the game decently are going to be noticed by the scouts. The difference is in the fringe and margins. Identifying players that can be make contributions for next to nothing can save a lot of resources over the course of time. Yes, every once in awhile one of these guys will break out and really make hay, but the vast majority of your returns from advanced analysis is going to come from identifying players that can play above replacement value for replacement value or lesser resources. Fringe guys aren't going to be the difference unless you have enough top line talent acquired through the draft, trade, or free agency.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 01:14 PM) If you want an example from the Rays I think it's Zobrist. Zobrist is an excellent player and the sabermetricians should take credit for him. Is one player enough to justify the hype though?

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 01:03 PM) You don't have to make the best out of anything. If Brooks started this than that's pretty dumb on his part. Let's take an old man crazy broadcaster, let him rant and rave and make no sense, and make it a rallying cry. On something that can't be measured, even through the FO disagrees with Hawk too. Adhere to the stupid I guess. Who are the players that sabremetrics are identifying that scouts aren't? Jeff Keppinger? Wonderful.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 27, 2013 -> 01:05 PM) We use stats and quantifiable things to evaluate players! Come to the north side! We use gibberish and don't believe in anything except a players TWTW factor, which you can't measure! Come to the south side! Now you're getting it. It's genius marketing really.