chunk23

QUOTE (Cubano @ Dec 19, 2009 -> 04:14 PM) I have a list here with some info on them. I even post clips of them. http://cubanballplayers.blogspot.com/ Gomez's article: http://cubanballplayers.blogspot.com/2009/...among-best.html Marti is among the league ERA leader. He has not pitched in a while. Is this because he receive an offer? I do not know. Is this because he is injured? I do not know. http://www.mlb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?po...&pid=493335 There are a lot of young talented Cubans in the free agent market. There have not been a period like this one where many of mine compatriots are leaving. As why Marti and Gomez are without contract even ML ones, I guess because their age. They have produced more than many big leaguers, but still no contract. IIRC they had some very unimpressive workout sessions.

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Dec 18, 2009 -> 07:37 PM) isn't rotating Kotsay,Jones,and whoever below mediocrity? Absolutely.

It's sad that people would even consider him as a serious option. People really are settling for mediocrity.

We're already wasting enough roster spots on old and busted players, we don't have room for Blalock.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 08:20 PM) At this point in time, this team needs to assemble itself to give themselves best opportunity to win this division. The players they are bringing in do that. They will hit the mediocore pitchers that kill the Sox. The bigger bat can be had in July. This rotation, if it performs to its capability, is good enough to carry this team to the World Series. I am not sure where this site goes from time to time but having bench players that can hit pedestrian pitching is something I like as compared to watching Thome look awful against just about every LHP he faces. I think the big question right now is whether to give Flowers a DH/C role and pick up a third catcher or get a bigger DH type bat and let Flowers play in the minors. The 2009 Josh Fields campaign probably plays a big role in this. If the bigger bat can not be had, Flowers is your bigger bat . I'm not sure I follow your logic. You think that our mediocre lineup will do fine against average pitching, so they should wait to acquire a big bat. But if they're doing fine, why would they go after another bat? If they aren't doing ok, wouldn't it have made more sense to get the big bat right away and avoid a long stretch of poor hitting? And don't players usually cost more in terms of talent mid-season compared to the offseason?

QUOTE (PeavyTime @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 03:38 PM) I'd take Milton Bradley right now if the Cubs eat at least 75% of the contract. I'm glad people are coming around on this idea. I doubt they'd straight up eat that much, but what about sending them Linebrink?

KW did say he wasn't interested in Matsui during the winter meetings, maybe he was actually telling the truth for once.

QUOTE (b-Rye @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 04:44 AM) Hmm... KW wants a lefty bat but has no money left.. I see Milton Bradley + 18million for Nix and a low level prospect... wouldn't that be a hated team by non sox and some sox fans.(Milton, AJP, Ozzie, Andruw Jones, Pierre) It'd be a great deal if we could send them Linebrink for Bradley.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 03:53 AM) According to Scott Merkin, as reported earlier, it seems like Ozzie talked KW out of adding a power bat and they will rotate the DH. I'm pretty sure KW is just waiting for this to blow up in Ozzie's face and then will add a DH midseason. So anyone with the know, who did they plan on adding? My guess would be Milton Bradley. There's no way KW would be willing to lose that many games in order to make a point to Ozzie. Not gonna happen. They'll bring in another bat before the start of the season.

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). I think it's really just an issue of perspective. When people start to think of high OBP players as "Base-cloggers", it's a problem. OBP can come from walking, having speed, a high contact rate, etc. It doesn't have to be some slow hulk out there.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 12:41 AM) Well, this isn't about Moneyball, as much as the association seems to come from my mention of teams such as the A's, Blue Jays, and Red Sox. Unfortunately, anytime anyone mentions a team run by a GM mentioned in Moneyball, the topic seems to arise. That was not my intention at all. What I am asking about is the correlation between OBP and runs scored. It's pretty obvious that teams such as the A's, Blue Jays, and Red Sox compiled teams filled with players who sustained high OBP's, even at the expense of any other skillset. I distinctly remember the Blue Jays, A's and Red Sox being station-to-station teams between 2003-2008 or so, and I was curious as to whether the shortcomings of having a roster full of those types of players ever overshadowed the advantages of having a roster rich in high OBP players. Or to put it another way, did their inability to manufacture runs in other ways (besides just reaching base) cause them to score less runs than perhaps another team with a lower OBP but with players with other skillsets as well, such as running the bases better, moving runners over, etc., ? Perhaps there is a critical mix that exists between OBP ability and other skillsets? Sort of a point of diminishing returns or something? That is more of what I am interested in here. I'm glad we cleared up the Moneyball thing. OPS is one of the best correlational predictors of runs scored. The better ones, like wOBA, weight OBP as more important than slugging. However, the difference between OPS and the other measures is small enough that OPS can be effectively used. I don't see OBP having a diminished return on runs scored seeing as the higher the OBP, the more likely it is a runner is on base, and therefore more likely to score. The only scenario I can think of that it wouldn't work well is if it was like the midget Veeck had bat. Yeah he got on base but there was no way he was scoring. That's such an extreme though. To put it simply, all those skill sets, like bunting and basestealing, don't matter if you don't get on base. Of course, defensive ability is a different story. Dunn has a great OBP but he's awful in the field. He's more valuable in the AL as a DH than he is in the NL as a OF. I suppose you can only sacrifice so much defense for OBP, but I don't know why you'd have to. The Red Sox have 2 WS rings and a few more playoff appearances in the time span you designated. The Blue Jays have had exceptional pythags and would probably have made the playoffs a few times if they were in any other division.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 11:38 PM) I agree with you about the leadoff part, but we definitely could use the team speed. Say we ignored every every statistic other than OBP and simply signed the players with the highest OBP out of the entire player pool. While good in theory, a team of plodders with not many skills other getting on base seems a bit limited to me. Haven't the A's, Blue Jays, Red Sox, etc., tried this for the past 5-6 years, with limited success? Is the correlation between OBP and runs scored that strong that you can completely ignore other skills such as bunting, speed, and contact altogether? The Red Sox have clearly been successful, and the Blue Jays would have been champions in any other division. THe A's were pretty successful early in the decade. Besides, Moneyball isn't about valuing OBP. It's about identifying undervalued aspects of a player's ability in order to maintain a low payroll. At the time it was OBP, now it's probably defensive ability. It seems to be a rare player profile who has high OBP but can't do anything else. I would a guess venture that a high OBP would have a strong association with at least a high SLG. Contact as well. The Dunns of the world are an exception with an extremely high ISO. Most players won't have a high OBP without a high contact rate. Obviously, there are several different profiles for a high OBP player. Ichiro doesn't walk much, but makes such a high amount of contact that it doesn't matter. A single is more valuable than a walk, so this is a great profile. But it typically is the worst long term, since it's so reliant on speed and athleticism. A player like Youkilis, who walks quite a bit, has a skill set that will last with age. You want to build around that kind of player. Both are valuable, but in the long term you want someone who has a high walk rate. OPS is actually a great indicator of success, but one criticism is that it doesn't value OBP high enough. In fact, the predictive value of OPS is remarkably close to more advanced statistics like wOBA. So much so that an eyeball estimate using OPS is probably good enough. OBP is easily the most important stat for a hitter. Certainly the team needs a "leadoff" hitter, but finding a good left fielder is the higher priority. I think some here overvalue leadoff hitters. It's not really a big deal. Having at least average offensive production from your corner OFs is. And we won't be getting that.

QUOTE (chisox2334 @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 07:01 PM) red sox can offer best package and im not suprised their leading the chase for him Mariners, Os, Rangers off the top of my head could offer better packages. Hoyer is a doubled edged sword. He knows the intimate details of the Red Sox system, so he knows who is hype and who is for real. He can ravage their system. He won't give them a sweet heart deal. However, he can probably work well with the RS front office, making negotiations easier. Hoyer has to prove himself as a new GM and sell this move to the fans. Plus he doesn't want to be accused of collusion if he doesn't get enough back. Acquiring Gonzalez could be a pyrrhic victory for Boston.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 05:15 AM) If the leadoff position isn't important then why not just put Alejandro De Aza out there for the minimum? They could very well win or lose because of Pierre, the number of times your guys get on at the top is directly proportionate to the number of runs a lineup produces. If all else is equal you will score more runs with a high OBP hitter at the top than you will with a low OBP hitter, more runs means more wins if the pitching and defense are equal and since the only variable in this scenario is your leadoff man all else is in fact equal. Just because a team at a time won a world series without a great leadoff man (and Podsednik wasn't great but he was definitely good in '05) doesn't mean that spot in the order won't matter for this team. Because, like the many players some pine for in the leadoff spot, De Aza is not good. You can't just look at how they hit as a "leadoff hitter". Are they league average for the position they play? Pierre is well below average at LF and CF.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 07:09 PM) What obvious differences are there in our lives now that there is a Dem controlled Congress and Executive branch? I think it'd pretty much just be a faster freefall.

QUOTE (monomach @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 10:28 PM) Why have the Sox always been obsessed with leadoff hitters who can't get on base? I'm sure this is an Ozzie thing. He loves bad hitters with speed who make outs by getting caught stealing. ...and before someone brings up Pierre's .365 obp last year, you know it's just as much a fluke as Podsednik's 2009. Give me the leadoff hitter Boston was using for a while in 06/07: a Kevin Youkilis type. I want the underrated guy with doubles power and a super high walk total over a weak slap hitter who hits a bunch of ground balls and makes outs on the basepaths without drawing walks. If we don't get a real run producer for the DH role and do what Ozzie wants instead (giving bad players more ABs), we're going to waste this amazing pitching staff. Thank You. Speed doesn't matter if you can't get on base. I don't know where this idea of evaluating a player as a leadoff hitter instead of their position came from. Pierre, Pods, Crisp, all these options people are listing are below average players. You don't want a sub .750 OPS from a corner OF.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 09:42 PM) Isn't Boston in great shape to get Gonzalez now since they signed Lackey and Cameron? If there's any team that will have to pay an absolute full premium to get Gonzalez, it'd be Boston. Hoyer obviously knows everything about the Boston system and would demand the best. He knows who is all hype and who can cut it. He's not going to bend over for his old team. And if he did, he'd probably be accused of collusion. I don't think they can pull it off without giving up Westmoreland, Kelley, and Buchholz as a start.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 09:15 PM) I think you guys will end up waiting. The Sox aren't in any hurry at this point. They can afford to be very patient. In Kenny/Ozzie's eyes the club has one hole, the middle of the order, and he has a few months to plug that hole, so he can wait and get his guy at the right price. That doesn't mean Kenny is just sitting around and kicking the tires on DH's though, he'll always listen and always ask about guys and if he hears that a good player is available, you can bet your butt, Kenny will come knocking. But at the same time, whoever is on the other end of negotiations knows that KW still needs that bat, and as the offseason moves on, there'll be fewer options. In other words, let's get this moving because the anticipation is too much. At least drop a hint.

QUOTE (b-Rye @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 07:50 PM) My guess is Vlad/Thome/Agon/Dunn... Thome or nothing sounds most likely for $$$ reasons. It's weird. Thome was one of our best hitters last year, but I don't think I'd be too excited for him to return. I think I'm just ready to move on.

QUOTE (RibbieRubarb @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 06:33 PM) Off-Season is not over yet... Every day there are fewer options and fewer places to put them. QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 06:35 PM) Um...? Really? You don't think it's possible for this to be the best rotation we've ever had? It could be, but as it stands, 2005 was the best. Career years out of everyone. Certainly this one has the chance, but 2005 set a high bar.

QUOTE (RibbieRubarb @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:26 PM) Yeah...that LF situation hurt them in 2005. We had power production in many places that year that we don't now. Besides, those few homeruns from Pods were pretty important in the end that year.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:14 PM) A leadoff hitter who coincidentally enough, doesn't walk or get on base. This offseason has been very disappointing, IMO considering this move, and the year year deal to Teahen. Why wasn't the money ponied up for Figgins? Better player by FAR. This weird fascination with a "leadoff" hitter is so frustrating. I don't want a good leadoff hitter, I want a good hitter. Pierre is a below average left fielder, simple as that. I don't like this move and it doesn't bode well for the season. They better pick up a great DH.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 01:50 AM) How on earth could the offense be much worse than last year? Because we don't have a DH or starting outfielder?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 01:45 AM) Unless we're in the mix for Albert Pujols or Chase Utley, there's no one or even two guys available (not including trades) that's going to DRAMATICALLY improve this offense. Would Matsui make this offense that much better than last year with Thome? Not really. Vlad? Nope. CQ, Ramirez and Rios have to bounce back. It won't matter who we add if those three don't perform better than they did last year. Matsui wouldn't make the offense much better than last year, but as it stands this offense is much worse than that. I hope the Sox stay away from Vlad.

QUOTE (Melissa1334 @ Dec 14, 2009 -> 11:22 PM) besides felix and lee,their rotation isnt that great The thing is, though, that their defense is capable of making any pitcher look good. Look at Washburn last year with the Ms compared to his numbers with the Tigers.