Jake

Jeffery caught one!

Clausen looks excellent. Accurate, making smart decisions, has been victimized by four drops at least by now. The one bad play was the fourth down on the goal line - I don't know if there was a guy to throw to, but he chucked it up to Eben Britton

Clausen actually looks really good.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Dec 20, 2014 -> 11:05 PM) A google search tells me no but maybe I'm missing someting...In an effort to save money I'm thinking about getting a roku...but only if theres way to full baseball, basketball, and football games...I'm SOL n that regard right? Basketball is possible via NBA League Pass - $149/year. MLB.tv is possible, I believe that's also $149 for a full season. I might be wrong and it could be as high as $199. There is no streaming support for NFL on Roku or any other streaming device other than game consoles

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 18, 2014 -> 08:11 PM) I think you're reaching a bit here. I won't deny that actual WAR is fairly predictive of actual wins, but projected WAR doesn't seem to be very predictive of actual wins. I mean, we're only talking about a .43 r2 between projected and actual WAR. And again, actual WAR is fairly predictive of actual wins, but it's far from perfect (BTW, not suggesting it should be). So saying projected WAR is "fairly predictive" of actual wins doesn't seem entirely accurate to me. I would say that projected WAR is directionally right more often than not, but it will still have its fair share of misses, some of which are quite sizable. I'm not arguing that these projection systems don't provide value, because they do, but I would never use them more than a frame of reference when setting my own expectations. Without more human input, the accuracy of these protection systems will always be limited. I'm a social scientist, so we poop our pants when we see an R2 that high

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Dec 19, 2014 -> 04:57 PM) Family plan. I'm in the same boat. I'm on a company line where there's just no way it's advantageous for me to get an off-contract device short of needing one before I'm eligible for upgrade. The thing is, if I call them (ATT), they always give me an early upgrade.

Once the cap moves up, whatever we pay Jimmy in the summer will look like a steal

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 18, 2014 -> 06:15 PM) It's an admittedly small sample size, but this begins to paint a picture. What I thought about while reading was - okay, so we know actual WAR is very predictive of actual wins and that projected WAR is fairly predictive of actual wins. What would be nice is a comparison to other things. Maybe compare against analysts' predictions and against some other statistics, like bWAR or WARP or non-sabermetric statistics.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 10:46 PM) Speaking of Democrats and Obama ... Did anybody see that AWESOME skit on Sat. Night Live a week or so ago where they had that funny cast member, don't know his name, the chubby (fat?) guy as host of a panel discussion. The gist of it was he asks his black guests questions about Obama failures and the guest comments on them and agrees that Obama is a joke, then the host asks the guest, "Does he lose your vote??" The guest immediately says, "No." He repeats it with 3-4 guests and they all say "no," when the host says, "does he lose your vote?" It's really funny and backs what I've said all along that Obama would be president the next 20 years or so if we had no term limits and he could keep running. No matter what he does and how inept he is ... he'd keep winning. It's a big LOL on our entire country. s***, it's like Kansas. Brownback is the worst government official probably in U.S. history (did you see the cuts he announced this week; slashing all sorts of organizations who do good things for citizens; and he'll kill all the programs for the elderly, etc) and what do KANSANS do ... they re-elect him. Shakin my head. You do realize the whole point of the skit was that Obama was still better than the alternatives. The gist was that these black folks felt so unwanted by the rest of politics that of course they weren't going to desert the first black President. Besides, they weren't listing off Obama failures, they were listing off hypotheticals like having his daughters talk back to him and other stuff like that.

He meant adding teams to the playoffs.

Playing for the scout team likely left Fales completely in the dark when it comes to our offense

It sounds to me like Cutler leaked the QB change

I'm glad this has sparked a lot of conversation. Clearly, a lot has to go right for us. Everyone knows I tend to be an optimist, so I'm not ruling out the possibility that these things do go right. But one of the keys to being a happy optimist is keeping hopes high and expectations low. My expectations low. Key developments that would change the trajectory of this team: -Noesi breaks out, Danks comes back, and/or Rodon breaks in -Somebody at 2B is league average or better -Putnam and Petricka prove not to be one-year flashes -Avisail requires no learning curve or simply starts playing good defense -Conor improves upon last season or Matt Davidson finds his way back into the fray

I don't have high hopes for Jimmy Clausen, but let's all acknowledge that the guy has started 10 games in his career, all in his rookie season on a terrible team. It's not like the book is closed on the guy. You don't have to be fabulous to be successful with this offense.

I wonder how much of a look they'll give Saladino at 2B. He very well could be the best of the bunch, especially for this season.

They should have done this much sooner. At the least, you want Clausen to get enough reps that you know whether or not he's worth a s***. At this point, I'm not sure if you can learn anything from how he plays. See Cousins, Kirk

The problem with the shirt is the extent to which it reads a lot like a death threat to all those who break the law

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 05:07 PM) He is going to be a limited sample size guy no matter what the stats say. Just watching him out there, he looked like a little leaguer fighting the ball and routes. I felt like he had a few head-scratchers out there but also several fabulous plays. I'm honestly not sure how good of a defender he is. I'm not convinced he's bad, but I'm not convinced he's great either.

The main question to ask is if there's something about these projections - that have little human input besides the playing time portion, which has a few errors - that makes it pessimistic towards the White Sox and not other teams? QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 15, 2014 -> 02:51 PM) This is the most likely outcome based on the metrics this group uses. You should clarify that. In the medical world, I never based my conclusion on anything just one person/group says. Yes - it's an ATTEMPT at finding the most likely outcome by weighting all possible outcomes. It's like setting betting odds, but a little less vulnerable to outside influence.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Dec 15, 2014 -> 12:46 PM) One thing these computer based projections don't account for simply adding stabilizers like Robertson and Duke at the end of bullpen will take away pressure from guys like Petricka, Putnam, Guerra and Webb. If we are only asking them to pitch the 6/7/8 instead of high leverage 8th and 9th, it would put them in a better position to succeed as well. 3 of those guys have a big fastball, they just didn't command it well last year. Taking pressure off them would certainly help. But yea, 2 WAR for this bullpen grossly under-projecting. They don't do that because the effects of doing things like that are repeatedly tested and never show an effect. If it does, it is so infrequently that it can't be distinguished from random chance. The only thing about those acquisitions that makes us better is that those players are better than the ones they are replacing.

To assume that Johnson will be starting at 2B - unless the Sox just don't give a s*** about his measurable readiness - and Rodon will put up 2 WAR is ludicrously optimistic. This isn't about "what could be," this is about what is the most likely outcome if weighting every possibility based on its individual likelihood.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 15, 2014 -> 09:14 AM) Why do you love Flowers. Mainly because he's been a White Sox for the better part of a decade and he's by most accounts a decent guy. I want him to play well and I hope for the best for him in his personal life. As opposed to Melky, who is not a long-time White Sox and for whom I do not wish happiness, etc. beyond what he earns on the baseball field.

The hardest thing about looking at the projections is keeping in mind that if you're comparing a player only to himself, he usually looks bad because the projection system tries to account for all possibilities. And given that some amount of the time, every player will get hurt, a lot of guys have lowered projection totals because it has to account for the possibility of injury. This is part of the reason why every pitcher seems to have a lower WAR projection - nobody is getting projected to throw 250 IP like Kluber threw last year. And FWIW, WAR is definitely the best way to think about this. There is a stat called BaseRuns which is overall better for projecting record, but not as useful for finding weak spots on the team. Either way, you want to be able to account for all phases of the game in a way that is better than going, "Hmm...we're pretty good at this, not so good at that, really good at that other thing...we're good." My main takeaways were: -Abreu, Eaton, Avisail have more to prove -Gillaspie, Flowers, and everyone at 2B still need to prove that they are even starting-caliber MLB guys -Quintana's projection is absurdly low, IMO -The back end of the rotation could feasibly come back and bite us -Melky and LaRoche weren't exactly cost-efficient upgrades So the key in projecting us in a more subjective way is deciding whether we have a decent option for 2B, what we can reasonably expect from our stars (1B/CF/RF/SS), and if our marginal guys won't kill us (C/3B). Interestingly enough, I don't think there's a lot of intrigue with the pitching staff.

First, I'd like to say that I'm one who wouldn't have really dreamed of this offseason. I don't love the Samardzija acquisition, because he's in a contract year, has had only one good season (though it was his most recent), and because we lost our most viable 2B candidate to get him. I don't love the Cabrera acquisition because he's a douchebag, has only had three good seasons, one of which was just before PED suspension and the other the same year as that suspension - he isn't a great runner, fielder, or power-hitter, making him highly dependent on his stroke. Nonetheless, the team has definitely gotten better. But how good are we, really? I noticed that, even with Melky added into the calculation, that FanGraphs' WAR projection still has the Sox as 2nd-to-last in the AL. Rather than just assume that they are completely off-base, I wanted to look at exactly what they are projecting. I've tried to make this skimmable. Catcher Total WAR - 1.4 MLB Rank - #29 Tyler Flowers (352 PA) - 0.8 WAR, .208/.272/.362 Adrian Nieto (192 PA) - 0.3 WAR, .223/.287/.337 Clearly, they're probably wrong about Nieto's role. From the looks of the projection for Brantly, we'd have a modest gain by giving him Nieto's at-bats. Still, the main thing here is to have Flowers outperform this projection. We're really weak at this position with not a lot of upside. First Base Total WAR - 3.3 MLB Rank - #8 Jose Abreu (350 PA) - 2.3 WAR, .283/.355/.530 Adam LaRoche (315 PA) - 1.0 WAR, .239/.343/.434 Before you lose your mind, these are only the statistics expected to compiled by the players while playing first base. So their projected ABs for Abreu at DH will up that projection for him. Nonetheless, they're taking a conservative guess at how he'll do in his second year. This is reasonable given how limited his track record is. I don't think they have the playing time mix right at this spot, but it's not very significant as they aren't all that different defensively. Second Base Total WAR - 0.5 MLB Rank - #29 Carlos Sanchez (490 PA) - 0.6 WAR, .259/.306/.341 Leury Garcia (175 PA) - -0.2 WAR, .225/.268/.306 Well, they definitely have the playing time mix wrong here as I think most of us would agree that Leury is a relative longshot to make the roster, let alone get around 20% of the reps at 2B. Even if we gave those reps to Sanchez's projection, we don't move up a single spot in the MLB rankings. There's just nobody with a MLB track record here. Sanchez is the most prepared, arguably, but the projection reflects how little upside he has. Saladino could be in the mix here and arguably possesses higher upside. The Sox may have optimism for Micah here, but his AAA production wasn't there to make me feel confident. Third Base Total WAR - 1.2 MLB Rank - #26 Conor Gillaspie (490 PA) - 1.0 WAR, .255/.319/.393 Matt Davidson (140 PA) - 0.3 WAR, .218/.289/.381 While I don't think Davidson gets those ABs, it shows you that someone is likely to get a lot of reserve ABs at 3B and there aren't any promising candidates. And a lot of us are remembering 1st half Gillaspie and forgetting how dreadful he was down the stretch. We just don't have much at this position unless Gillaspie suddenly finds more consistency at the dish or gets a lot better defensively. A productive platoon partner could make a lot of difference, too. Shortstop Total WAR - 2.4 WAR MLB Rank - #13 Alexei Ramirez (630 PA) - 2.3 WAR, .265/.300/.379 This is about as pessimistic of a projection for Alexei as their system could have produced. He's coming off seasons of 3.1 and 3.3 WAR with similar plate appearance numbers as their projection has. The projection basically has his offense regressing back to where it was in 2013 and his defense to where it was in 2014 (the worst of his career). It also projects a career low in baserunning. Again, pretty pessimistic, though not implausible. Either way, it's a strength of the team, but whether he replicates last year or falls to their projection could play a role in how good the Sox are. Left Field Total WAR - 1.8 MLB Rank - #20 Melky Cabrera (560 PA) - 1.6 WAR, .288/.341/.432 Pretty expensive upgrade from #27 projection to #20 projection at this position. If you think the playing time is low, do know that he's only reached 560 PA three times in nine seasons. Melky had the second-best offensive season of his career last year and had a 2.6 WAR, so this isn't a crazy projection overall. His real downfall is that he's a bad defensive player at this point in his career. Melky's advanced defensive numbers show that he's only a modest improvement on Dayan in LF, with not much difference in range, which is kind of crazy and shows you that he's gotten chubby and possibly lazy. If Melky stays where he was last year or does something more like 2012, that would be a big boost. Center Field Total WAR - 2.2 MLB Rank - #20 Adam Eaton (595 PA) - 2.0 WAR, .273/.343/.379 As is typical, second-year players aren't assumed to replicate success. They see him taking a step back towards the numbers he posted with the D-Backs in 2013. His 2014 WAR was 2.7, for comparison's sake. This is another case of a place where we have upside depending on whether he avoids injuries and/or gets even better at the plate. Their more pessimistic projection seems to be based on a lower BABIP, which was .359 last year. In the minors, Eaton posted BABIPs of .446, .430, .379, .345, .375, and .432. I'd say it wouldn't be crazy for him to continue to have high BABIP which might color your own projections differently. Right Field Total WAR - 1.3 MLB Rank - #22 Avisail Garcia (490 PA) - 1.1 WAR, .273/.317/.426 JB Shuck/Dayan Viciedo/Jordan Danks combined for 0.2 WAR in 210 additional PA. Two things to note: Avi wasn't healthy, so they don't yet endow him with a projection of good health. Avi also hasn't proven himself at the plate, so he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt there. They're also pretty optimistic on his defense, which has been awful thus far. Avi is a big wildcard, I don't know what we'll get from him. This is a position where we can say "at least we have upside" because I could see us getting as much as 4.0 WAR from this spot which would be huge. We could also end up demoting the kid at some point for all we know. Designated Hitter Total WAR - 2.3 MLB Rank - #4 Adam LaRoche (280 PA) - 0.6 WAR, .239/.343/.434 Jose Abreu (245 PA) - 1.4 WAR, .283/.355/.530 As mentioned before, I think LaRoche gets a larger portion of the PA here than they have projected, but it doesn't really matter. See comments on the 1Bmen. Starting Pitchers Total WAR - 10.5 MLB Rank - #8 Chris Sale (188 IP) - 4.6 WAR, 3.02 ERA/3.07 FIP Jeff Samardzija (188 IP) - 3.0 WAR, 3.93 ERA/3.69 FIP Jose Quintana (179 IP) - 2.4 WAR, 3.95 ERA/3.89 FIP Hector Noesi (139 IP) - 0.2 WAR, 5.04 ERA/5.02 FIP John Danks (129 IP) - 0.3 WAR, 5.01 ERA/4.89 FIP Nothing too crazy here. Seems too pessimistic on Quintana for me, though. By season, Q has put up 3.76 ERA/4.23 FIP, 3.51/3.82, and 3.32/2.81. Odd to project his worst season or at least worst since rookie season now. I think some of it has to do with the fact that his HR rate was cut in half last year compared to the previous two seasons, suggesting some luck. I think he'll pitch pretty similarly to last year. I also don't think both Noesi and Danks will do that poorly. It is important, though, to keep in mind that these projections are averages of the many possible seasons these guys could have. So this accounts for the possibility that Noesi/Danks post 7.00 ERA and things like that. The weight of bad possibilities compared to good ones is probably tilted towards bad for those guys. Either way, this is a good rotation! If we have the 8th best output from our starters next year, we'll all be happy. We were at 11 last season. Relief Pitchers Total WAR - 2.0 MLB Rank - #14 David Robertson (65 IP) - 1.6 WAR, 2.82 ERA/2.78 FIP Zach Duke (65 IP) - 0.7 WAR, 3.44 ERA/3.48 FIP Zach Putnam (55 IP) - 0.1 WAR, 4.15 ERA/4.01 FIP Jake Petricka (55 IP) - 0.1 WAR, 4.17 ERA/4.01 FIP Javy Guerra (45 IP) - -0.1 WAR, 4.49 ERA/4.49 FIP Daniel Webb (40 IP) - 0.0 WAR, 4.25 ERA/4.11 FIP Dan Jennings (35 IP) - 0.0 WAR, 4.18 ERA/4.13 FIP Once again, nothing crazy. Relievers are hard to project and some of the guys we'll be counting on based on their production last year basically came out of nowhere (Putnam and Petricka especially, to a lesser extent Guerra but he didn't do that great and we aren't really depending on him). Jennings might stand out to some, but bear in mind that he's never thrown a ton of innings and has posted stats that seem very regression-worthy. It won't be the end of the world if he posts those kind of numbers. We were at #25 from relievers last season, FWIW. I also don't have an easy to access this, but last I looked into it I believe we had the worst MLB record with leads in 7th, 8th, and 9th innings. Those should definitely improve. Final thoughts Once again, our total projection is to be the second-worst team in the AL. With that said, we are also ahead of 7 NL teams, which says something about the league-wide balance of power (and the difference the DH makes to this calculation). It's also worth noting that where we are (#22, 28.8 WAR) and 4th best team in MLB is less than 10 WAR. It isn't easy to add 10 WAR to your projection, but it isn't at all crazy for the projections to ultimately be off by that far. It's also worth directing your attention to FanGraphs' own article about how projections are not predictions. Projections are our best guesses and in the case of places like FanGraphs, they are always subject to change, whether that is via new players or new information - like if the players start outperforming the initial projections. Nonetheless, despite our improvements, the numbers clearly show that we have to have a lot of things go right. A lot of our best players are relatively unproven. We have some wide-open question mark positions. We can't afford to have many guys underperform their expectations and we have to have several guys outperform expectations. I wouldn't be placing any bets on the Sox just yet, even if we are a lot more exciting.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 14, 2014 -> 06:30 PM) Meh, has there been a Brian Cole surgery that we've ended up saying "Whoa, he healed so fast!" We have a confounding variable here. Especially when it comes to recovery time, the training staff has more to do with it.