CaliSoxFanViaSWside

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 05:05 PM) It isn't that it came from B/R, it's that it's based on nothing. They claim to consult various statistics, but the actual point values they assign are based on their gut feeling (that is informed by stats, but who knows to what extent). That's dumb. All trades and free agents signings are based in part on past and future perceived worth. That's why you have some people liking or hating on trades and signings. I think the lists are useful for fun and not thinking they're the defintive word . That's whats fun abour baseball ,comparing players to each other.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 07:06 PM) Then surely, Santiago would be on it and Quintana would be top 50? If they used FanGraphs Steamer projections maybe not . They weren't too kind to Santiago for next year .Also there are still a fair share of Sox fans who don't think Quitana can sustain what he's been doing. The ones who doubted him after his 1st good year still hoping to be right in their analysis though if it were me I'd be more than happy to admit I was wrong.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 05:05 PM) It isn't that it came from B/R, it's that it's based on nothing. They claim to consult various statistics, but the actual point values they assign are based on their gut feeling (that is informed by stats, but who knows to what extent). That's dumb. I think you have to remember that list was for who they consider best for 2014 so a certain amount of speculation went into it.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 03:55 PM) I don't understand the arbitrary point values given. De Aza was given something like a 13/25 for baserunning. Why 13? Why out of 25? I'm not saying their actual rankings on that list are bad, I just don't understand their scoring system for figuring that list. It was actually 12 out of 20 for baserunning. And I can't answer why they picked a 20 pt. system for running the bases. But a 12/20 seems fair. He has speed but not elite speed and his SB percentage wasn't good per attempt nor was his baserunning. He provides value for speed and not much when you factor in his blunders. Looks like they wanted a 100 point sytem overall divided by 6 categories with some categories worth more than others.

Top 150 starting pitchers 131. Danks , 58. Quintana , 5. Sale. Santiago wasn't among the 150 which seems curious considering he had 1 more start than Danks and pitched better but Danks also didnt pitch in relief. Also no Eik Johnson and they do put some prospects in the list most notable Archie Bradley who they ranked 47th This list seems the most open to arguments.

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 01:15 PM) Yeah, I gotta pay more attention. I tend to not read the words in links. Based on the D metrics, which I'm no fan of, I think he'd likely rate better for LFers, but I could be mistaken. For corner outfielders they did a top 70. Avisail wasn't on it ,Viciedo was 64. Dubtful De Aza even played enough LF to even qualify and I sure can't argue with their placement of De Aza or Viciedo.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 12:19 PM) It's from Bleacher Report, so it really shouldn't be taken too seriously anyway. I don't think it 's difficult for knowledgeable people to make a list like that . To automatically dismiss it for that reason is pretty silly. Of course there will be disputes among fans but the list in general is fairly accurate. Of course there will be those who disagree amongst fans. That can't be avoided. They used various respected websites to compile their lists. Baseball-Reference.com provided basic stats. FanGraphs offered more complex stats, most notably plate-discipline data that was referenced for both hitters and pitchers. Brooks Baseball afforded spray charts; zone profiles; and, most importantly, pitch data. Pitch types, velocity and movement data all came from there. Lastly, Baseball Prospectus produced additional data and was particularly handy in forming the health sections by way of its injury records. Rotoworld helped with more recent injury updates. They took everything into consideration . Hitting, hitting for power, baserunning,fielding and health.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 10:18 AM) Are you suggesting Keppinger and Konerko were worse? Because that's silly. They merely played more. If you give Phegley the same number of plate appearances, he ends up as the worst. Using wRC+ which tells you how you played relative to the league as opposed to offensive runs accumulated, which is a measure of how often you play, then Phegley's 34 comes out as the worst...by far. You know it's a sad state of affairs when people argue over who's the worst player on the team and if that player or our other players were the worst in baseball. So he sucked after his call up. Imagine that, a rookie sucking with his first exposure to ML league pitching.

QUOTE (chisoxfan310 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 07:57 AM) I wouldn't want Granderson unless it meant Dunn was the odd man out making Viciedo the DH. Otherwise, its a deep draft, lets not waste our high draft position. Alejandro De Aza named 37th best CF in baseball out of 40 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1755728...center-fielders

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 01:43 PM) I totally agree with your thoughts on CF and I wanted Bourjos before he was moved I just don't know how likely it is. Another thing, I don't if I think or I am confident we'll compete but that is where the FO wants to go so it's definitely something to note when looking ahead this offseason. I thought Bourjos was a perfect fit for the Sox and was disappointed the Cards beat us to the punch. Haven't done much looking to see who might fit the bill but I like Juan Lagares of the Mets . Here's a little something on him from Fangraphs. Unfortunately he's not LH. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/juan-lagare...sin-of-runners/

Hawks win 5-2 , finsihing " Circus Trip" with a 6-1 record after the opening lose to Colorado with 6 straight wins.

Kane putting on another clinic with a goal and assist leading the Hawks to a 3-0 lead over the 'Yotes after 1.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 02:44 PM) Hate to be THAT guy but there is a lot of talk of an '08 team that won 1 playoff game and then failed the following year. That should hardly be the team we are trying to emulate Oh Future you know Balta was just using that team as an example of a s*** team that got into the playoffs the next year in order to spread a little good cheer . Besides being THAT guy you're also the guy who just got done advocating boom or bust from season to season. The playoffs look like an uphill battle from where we were last year let alone any kind of sustained success. When the Sox do manage to make the playoffs 2 years in a row I think it would be the 1st time in Sox history or at least since the playoff system started.

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Nov 29, 2013 -> 07:33 PM) Thomas should be a first ballot HOF'er no doubt. You'll have some complain about his defense but you don't make the HOF based defense. A great SS or OF may get consideration because they were great defensively but you still have to put up the numbers on ofense. I know there's speculation about Piazza and PED's but has there ever been anything concrete? I don't remember him being named in any reports. Unless, it's a well know but un-reported fact, which I find hard to believe in these times, he should be in. You can't/shouldn't keep a guy out because you think he did something. There has to be proof, in my book, if you're going to keep someone out. http://www.metstoday.com/8374/12-13-offsea...dmits-peds-use/ http://metsblog.com/news/mike-piazza/mike-...-upcoming-book/ http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2013...ns-hall-of-fame On the issue of performance-enhancing drugs, Piazza claims he never used any illegal substances. However, he admits he used androstenedione and “greenies,” both of which were legal at the time but have since been banned by Major League Baseball. Borrowed from the comments section of Suthsidesox recent article on Thomas

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 02:28 PM) The other big roster change was Alexei taking over 2b and Uribe moving from 2b to 3b. In fact, 3b got somewhat worse with the bats because 2007 was Josh Fields's one good season. They brought in Nick Swisher with the goal of having him take over CF but that was such a disaster that Wise and Griffey wound up taking over the position for significant portions of the season. They also traded Jon Garland for Orlando Cabrera to fill their SS spot, he was the leadoff hitter for much of the year in 08 but he was basically just tolerable, .705 OPS and .334 OBP out of the leadoff spot isn't that great. The other thing that made a big difference was that Floyd and Danks were rookie pitchers in 2007, struggling or in the minors for much of the year, and they pitched like really good big league starters in 2008. We also spent some money on the bullpen in 2008 to bring in Linebrink and Dotel, they were useful pieces as well. The things that made a difference were...getting the pitching staff infused with Floyd and Danks (biggest improvement), adding 2 real key bats in Quentin and Alexei, getting a few guys back towards their career norms (Buehrle), and basically getting rid of the black holes that did nothing. They still weren't that great on defense or baserunning in 08, but they had solid pitching and adding that MVP quality bat in the middle of their lineup did wonders. I'm really hoping we just added that MVP caliber bat to our order. And frankly, yeah I'll be disappointed if he's not somewhere close to that. That 08 team also led the ML in HR's by 21 over the next best HR hitting team ( Phillies) and 35 for the next best AL team ( Detroit).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 01:58 PM) The 07 white sox put up the fewest runs in the league, worst OBP in the league, worst sb% age in the league, 12th in ERA out of 14 teams, and 12th in errors out of 14 teams. It's actually kind of remarkable with how bad that 07 team performed that the '13 team lost more games than them. The 2007 Sox were terrible in every aspect of the game, including pitching. Every aspect of the game you mentioned. In 07, Cleveland went to the ALCS and barely were beaten by the Red Sox, the Tigers were a year removed from a world series birth, and the Twins had solid 06 and 08 campaigns at the bookends. The Tigers, Indians, and Twins could all be called strong competitors - it literally came down to the last day of the season the next year. It wasn't the AL East but that was a solid division with a number of legit, evenly-matched competitors. And the White sox became one of those competitors in 1 season after being incredibly bad in 07. Andy Gonzalez as a starting IF bad. You covered some of what I'd research. But I'd also look at how many roster spots turned over and at what cost. and who had career years , who regressed etc. If you're expecting Abreu to be the 2014 Quentin the main difference is Quentin's didn't cost the Sox $17M in the 1st year they got him. But I understand your point , it's just too much of a reach for me to consider it seriously with basically the same roster like you suggested.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 01:42 PM) I came into this offseason saying "Hahn needs 1 piece to have a team I can say can compete if everything goes right and that's Abreu". He nailed that one. Our weakest position by far last year was 1b; we expected it to carry us, we paid it to carry us, and it was one of the worst in baseball. Beyond that...we have a couple positions that could hurt us. Catcher is the big worry...but I still say I have no clue what we have there. If the scouts say it won't get better then something needs to be done...but I'd also be surprised if they said that given how they were willing to push guys upwards last year. This team could compete if everything goes right as it is. Catcher is my next worry on the list, but that one I can't make the call because I don't know what Hahn has been told by his guys. I guess thats where we differ because everything going right for the same basic team means some really bad players and I mean bad at a lot of different aspects on playing baseball the right way all of a sudden become real good players . I don't even like to think of the odds of that happening because it's depressing.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 01:34 PM) But after 2007, did we want to compete in 2008? Many of us did not, but we did, and we all know what happened. The Sox were terrible in every aspect of the game last year except pitching. Defense , hitting, fundamentals ,base running , on base percentage, the bench and leadership all crumbled. That's just way too much to fix . I can't really comment on 2008 because I'd have to do a ton of reseach on 2007 and 2008 and see where the Sox were in relation to the rest of the division. The Royals , Indians and Tigers are all looking strong now. Maybe if Viciedo can pull an MVP type season out of his ass like Quentin did it's possible if we can get some good glove guys and OBP guys somehow.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 01:18 PM) I completely agree with you and I was just going to make a case using Cleveland as the example. It's just the poster who I had quoted was a bit overzealous in his breakdown of our "young core." And of course I always go back to the A's/Rays. Those teams are never sexy but they just churn out pitching and play the game the right way. We already have the pitching part going for us. I say: Get a catcher: Jaso/Grandal/Castro/Rosario. Move Santiago/Quintana IF the right piece comes in return. Sign/pick up a LH SU guy. (Eric O'Flaherty??) Sign a middle/back of the rotation pitcher who our organization likes. I really don't think that's too much to ask for and I really think the FO is going to shock this board and pick up an established bat to hit 5/6 or even 2nd. You and Balta think much like me as far as trying to compete for 2014 but I think we know in our hearts that it's not likely to happen. About the only thing I can say for what I really want to see happen besides what you outlined is that a strong defensive CF is a must. I think that kind of player sets the tone for the whole team defensively. I know thats probably not backed up statistically in any way, just my basic baseball instincts about being strong defensively up the middle, especially CF. We also need a few guys who don't view OBP as a disease and more lefthanded hitters.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 12:52 PM) If someone can explain to me what it was mentally that took that team from the most consistent, reliable defense in the league in 2012 to the least consistent, most unreliable defense in the league in 2013 I could then imagine them being right back to competitive with the roster they have now. They have talent through the lineup and guys who could contribute. They are really loaded on pitching and that could overcome even some struggles from the offense. But seriously, what the heck happened to this team's focus? In 2012 they were right on for 5 months. In 2013 they were...Ooh look a squirrel! I don't think it's explainable . When you look at the Sox individually as defenders the only above average fielder they have is Alexei. Beckham is about league average maybe better than that by a hair since maybe his range was affected by injuries .The outfield sucked , the infield sucked, the catching sucked. Murphy's Law took over in 2013 , 2012 the opposite of Murphy's Law happened. Whatever glue held them together in 2012 dissolved in 2013.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 11:27 AM) The last time the White Sox lost 90 games, they had an even worse system than the one they have right now, and they came out and won the division the next year without making many major FA signings other than keeping their own guys (and could very well have gone farther had their key guy on offense not broken his hand). That's the exception rather than the rule. Sure I have hope they can do that again but realistically I'm looking to get to a place to improve from. Improve this year 15-20 games this year and 15 20 games for 2015 and you're competing for the division by 2015 barring any catastrophic injuries to key pieces. Otherwise who knows how long we're looking at. Right now we're looking at so much that needs to go right that I can't even imagine getting a playoff spot next year.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 11:07 AM) Is all of that worth it for a .500 team? Even if we change all of the "luck" and manage to win 85 games that's still not anywhere really near the playoffs in the AL. IDK, maybe I'm different, but I've always been a championship contention or bust type of person. I'd rather lose for 2 straight years and come back with a well built team than throw together team that is simply designed not to loose a lot but has no real shot of winning anything when its all said and done. I don't think the Sox have the kind of organization to make huge leaps in one years time. Most organizations built step by step . You'd prefer the Sox lose another 90+ games and then all of a sudden compete somehow ? I'd really like to hear how they would accomplish that given that every lousy year will mean lower payroll. I want to compete in 2014 also but right now there's no indication of that considering we hear about an $80-85M payroll and letting Konerko decide if he will play for the Sox next year. Maybe Hahn has some surprises up his sleeve but getting back to.500 in one year would be a big step in the right direction for me if it can be accomplished with a youthful core and promising players in the system . The Sox are just not going to sign big money free agents and you can't trade fool's gold for real gold.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 08:43 AM) My first reaction to the "close losses" stat is that it has no context. I have no clue if that is more than normal or what. Our pythagorean W-L had us with 67 wins (versus 63), which says that we did have an unlucky distribution of runs. If we had been pretty damn lucky in our distribution of runs, we're just getting into the mid-70s of wins. For reference, we won 85 games in 2012 and our pythagorean W-L was 88 wins, so we were actually "unlucky" last year. I put unlucky in quotes because luck isn't the only thing that affects the distribution of runs. Obviously, good teams may "pick their spots" so to speak better. For instance, a good team will surrender a larger portion of runs in games that they're winning big than a bad team. My first reaction to Pythag speak ( and I mean no disrespect by this ) is huh ? I'm talking strictly baseball. We didnt score runs or field the ball very well and lost a lot of low scoring close games. Let's assume Abreu hits and Garcia hits and we get a few gloves , a few BP arms maybe one other reliable hitter and get rid of 3 of the main culprits from last year. I know I'm assuming a lot but if we get the same type of pitching we got in 2012 get a little more run production and much better fielding, smarter base running and the BP holds up well I think we can be a .500 team which would be a huge improvement . Bad luck to me = bad fielding , bad base running and bad hitting. Improve on those things and your luck changes.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Nov 29, 2013 -> 06:23 PM) By my, perhaps twisted, logic they don't have to replicate what those guys did run for run. The Sox lost 52 of their 99 games by 2 runs or less. To me, and perhaps only to me, that means they're not as far away as some might think. Once again, perhaps only in my world, I think if you improve 3 positions, Abreu already being one, Granderson being another, and a trade could bring another. I see both arguments and believe they're both valid, Hahn can go either way. You know you're not the only one. I've been singing that same song right along with you for quite a while. I usually use the 1 run and extra inning games . Going to 2 run losses seems to be pushing it a bit. My nature is to want to beleive the Sox want to be competitive however I'm not convinced yet they mean it. We'll see what else Hahn does and then see if I beleive. But I truly beleive they need to support the pitching staff with some much better gloves more than I think more bats are needed. If Abreu and Garcia don't hit we're strarting from scratch again next year.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 28, 2013 -> 06:58 AM) I liked Coffey, oh and I called it wrap after Calgary went up 2-0, sigh. Ha thats weird you quoted my Pale Hose Talk discussion in the NHL thread. But yeah I fell asleep between the 2nd and 3rd period woke up and saw the final then watched the highlights . Kane is amazing.