chitownsportsfan

Info from Fangraphs via the 2016 Padres prospect report: Relevant/Interesting Metrics Produced average exit velocity of just 83.6 mph in small major-league sample. League average was 89. Scouting Report Rondon plays a dynamite shortstop with above-average range, arm and athleticism that lead to some acrobatic plays. He also has plus bat speed. But Rondon’s load is both excessively high and excessively deep (which should have been the tagline for Deep Blue Sea for several reasons you can infer for yourself), which leads to weak contact and tardy swings. He projects as a below-average regular for me by virtue of the fact that he can play an above-average shortstop, but some don’t think the defense is good enough to balance out Rondon’s punchless offensive projection and consider him more of a utility man. That’s still a solid return for the relief combo plate San Diego traded to acquire Rondon from Anaheim. KATOH+ Projection for first six years: 2.6 WAR There's a bit more on him at he link, scroll all the way down he's #20. https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/prospect-re...n-diego-padres/ Seems like a slap hitting utility guy. Meh. I'd probably rather have just kept the spot open.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 9, 2018 -> 02:02 PM) I have no interest at ALL in a dick measuring contest with you. God forbid someone point out that the random, free, lost-year bullpen flyer that the White Sox picked up might have some reasons for hope in his peripherals. If you have to pick up random dudes for your pen so that Dylan Covey doesn't have to pitch all year, it's smart to buy low on a guy with better peripherals than results. Why can't you bring yourself to admit that? I refuse to believe that you are incapable of understanding the BASICS of probability. Mathematics factually proves that pitchers with the numbers that Joakim Soria had last year are MORE LIKELY to improve (assuming health) than those that do not. Nothing, anywhere, EVER has suggested that it's LOCK that Joakim Soria improves. A guessing game, therefore, means nothing. If he sucks because you guessed he would suck based on nothing at all, it doesn't make you smart or correct about anything useful. If Soria becomes the best reliever in the league, it will not prove that low FIP always leads to improvement. No matter what happens, it will just be another data point contributing to a general trend that currently, whether or not Soria ultimately strengthens or weakens the argument, shows that low-FIP pitchers are more likely to improve. I know you love to contradict everything I say, though, so I'm sure you'll reply again with something that either (1) quibbles with some specific component of what is above, despite the fact that it doesn't change the argument at all, to try to get me away from my point, or (2) presents absolutely no useful information, likely including a snide comment about biased moderators or making some pathetic "wager" involving comment signatures like we're a couple of s***ty third graders on a playground. If that's what you need to do, go ahead. It won't change the tiny, non-controversial anecdote of a claim that all of us are making that there may be some hope to Soria in the numbers. And I know that you understand it, even if you pretend not to. well damn.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Jan 8, 2018 -> 08:13 PM) What position was that? The trade was between two teams at the bottom of their division. It was just a bad trade for White Sox. hindsight is 20/20 but at the time the Sox were a surprise early contender and were 1.5 games out of the WC and 4 back in the division. It wasn't at all obvious that they were out of it and management picked the wrong lane. And Tatis Jr was a random lotto ticket. But the point really isn't how bad Shields is or how great Tatis looks the point is know where you are on your win curve and try and avoid situations like 2016 where you're not sure.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 8, 2018 -> 06:34 PM) When a team is a clear contender you can make those risks of dealing top prospects to try and win in the short term. We just are not close enough to contention to even be thinking about dealing from our farm though. We still need another full season or two of rebuilding before we can start getting aggressive. An obvious example is the James Shields trade. We never, ever want to be a position to do that again.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 8, 2018 -> 05:58 PM) Hypothetically, if you were in the Astros position and Verlander never became available, and you lost the ALCS this year, would you be saying the same thing? That it was correct to hold onto the prospects rather than go for a pitcher to put you over the top? Their own players were questioning why they didn't come away at the trade deadline with a starter. The need was obvious last offseason. I'd call that a risk I have no interest in taking. If trading someone who could be a star after 2019 wins us the 2020 trophy, I will be much more content with the trophy than the prospect. It was a calculated risk and Verlander performed beyond even what my most homer Tigers fans from Michigan predicted. So in that sense they got lucky. If he was just mediocre for them or blew a couple playoff starts the risk look worse. My position is that this is why GMs get paid well and don't sleep much. It's hard to say WHEN exactly you need to start taking risks like this and when it's time to simply do nothing. I think the clubhouse reacting how it did to the lack of movement at the deadline spurred them somewhat to action. How amazingly well that action played out certainly had an element of luck. lol. Tragically we have the 2010-2016 Sox to remind us of our own domboing -- or perhaps Williamsing.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 8, 2018 -> 05:37 PM) Honestly? They got LUCKY. Anyone here who saw Verlander being both dominant enough to earn his contract and available because the Tigers otherwise fell apart going into last season? That deal doesn't happen and the Astros don't have the ammunition to win it. Yea they did get pretty lucky, but it was a "preparation meets opportunity" style break. If you're in position to vulture from clubs looking to just get out from under a veteran contract you should try and take advantage, as they did.

QUOTE (whitesox91403 @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 07:12 PM) Don’t post much but this thread baffles med. people are really complaining about getting two relievers that may or may not be good, in a rebuild year? If they do well they get traded furthering the rebuild and if they don’t, who cares because it’s a rebuild year? And all it cost was Jake Peter? I’d say Rick did fine here. People just like to b**** and moan or be contratian. I get it to a degree but there's no downside here Peter was never, ever going to contribute in a big role on a Sox team with Moncada at 2B and there is no long term commitment to either of these relievers.

QUOTE (wrathofhahn @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 06:12 PM) I mean I sort of understand the owners sentiment. He has been rolling with a 160 ish payroll as a small market club. Why continue to maintain those numbers in a rebuild. The more I think about the less likely it's to clear money for Hosmer. This is probably a directive from Moore to cut payroll. Don't be surprised if Duffy and Herrara are moved as well. The problem is pretty much all their top talent are FA and those that remain are coming off down years with the exception of Duffy. Hard to see them getting much for Herrara. Kennedy and Gordon are untradable. Hammel was awful. It's been said quite a bit but it's really nice that just as the Sox look like they have a really solid foundation starting probably in 2019 or 2020 the Tigers and Royals are going to be absolutely awful. Minny we'll see but the Sox are going to make a lot of hay against bad Detroit and KC teams.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 06:00 PM) Guys who come to mind... Martin Prado, Kelvin Herrera, Matt Kemp, Brandon McCarthy, Scott Kazmir, Jacob Ellsbury,... Yea keep talking, especially with the Dodgers.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 05:41 PM) We essentially given a free solid LH reliever to take Soria. We had to give up a guy that we would have let anyone in MLB have for $100k a month ago. If we got another deal like that, you are danged right the White Sox should look at it. Hell they should be asking how much prospect stock the Dodgers would be willing to spend to take Kemp off of their hands. Hell they should be looking around MLB for situations of the same ilk in other teams. No kidding. Leverage what they have and that's payroll space and a "free" season to evaluate and pump and dump or just dump. Hahn has been on fire with these type of moves. Most of the Royals fan reaction seems to be "we sold way too low here" and if we are that desperate to clear payroll we're in trouble.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 05:21 PM) As I said, he was replacement level in 2016, his next worse season was 2015, trending downward, then 2017 age 33 season highest WAR in 7 years, best k-rate for a full season in 8 years. Age 34 projections have him very similar to 2016, replacement level. He gave up 1 homer last year. Previously HR had become a problem. That could rear it's ugly head in his new home park. If the White Sox were actually trying to win, the optimism wouldn't be so great, despite all these peripherals. Huh? Steamer has him at .5 fWAR. For a quick and dirty comp Kahnle is projected at .7 fWAR. Soria is a quality MLB reliever. It's really not good practice to use year by year WAR totals for relievers. The sample is too small. Just look at totals and projections.

QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 02:46 PM) Soria was worth 1.1 bWAR and 1.7(!) fWAR last year. A 1 WAR season is a good season for a reliever. A 2 WAR season is an amazing season for a reliever. As the above numbers suggest (bWAR is more reliant on stats that tell on field results, while fWAR relies more on peripherals and predictive stats), Soria pitched better than his results suggested, and even his results made for a good season for a reliever. He's going into his age 34 season, and effectively has 2 years of control. If he pitches well, he should bring a quality return in July should the Sox decide to move him. If he pitches poorly, they're not required to keep him beyond this year. The best part is Hahn got him for nothing. Peter went to LAD for Avilan. I don't understand how anyone could be unhappy about any part of this trade, and I liked Peter. Yea he's a good reliever that ran into some bad luck. This is a great move.

Good move. Hahn is doing a helluva job on trades lately.

Great thread. Would read again, if only to see SS2K get riled up with his confirmation bias regarding "rushing" the rebuild. Just teasing buddy. Happy new year Sox fans. Days are getting longer.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 09:32 PM) Looks good and trim, sweet beard too. Not claiming to be an expert... but shouldn't those hands still be moving a little less? I was always taught to keep the hands back and load up sooner. Just seems like he'd be easy to get off balance with all of those moving parts in his swing. No I agree his upper body is "noisy" as they say. I think the Sox might work with him some this winter on getting his hands a little closer to where they end up, maybe via a timing mechanism. His weight transfer is beautiful however and you can see the power from his hips.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 05:41 PM) Elaborating on this is merkin: https://www.mlb.com/news/white-sox-prospect...6?tid=151437456 I have to say I didn't read that and feel that great about Sheets. Isn't Sheets' dad an former MLBer and his coach in HS? I don't know if that's a point in his favor or not. Seems like he's had good coaching which might result in a lower ceiling. Or maybe his dad's coaching was holding him back. Or maybe it's neither or somewhere in between. Christ I'm sick of January already.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 02:41 PM) Yeah I don't think anyone but sbnation has that local structure relying on free contributors. I think BP ran out that same sort of model. According to SB Nation's job listing for SSS it's a contract position as the "lead" blogger. I'm not sure how hours are billed but it's probably capped at something fairly low. I don't think you can make a living as a SB Nation lead blogger unless you've got alt revenue coming in or are independently wealthy. I just don't see how SB Nation holds on long term without charging for content. The ad revenue isn't enough, obviously.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 11:09 AM) If it works for him sure, but I'm not sure I like how much his head position changes during the loading before the swing. Looks like a pretty long, complicated swing IMO. Easy to see why he generates such power however and great overall balance. I wonder if the Sox will change some things with him this winter at their swing camp.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 01:25 AM) He'll be as ripped as Kopech by March. We're gonna have to build a bigger field for these guys.

He's in the best shape of his life...in January? But where's he gonna be in March?

Hopefully this results in more quality Sox coverage online, not less. There's a chance for someone a bit younger, with maybe a bit more of an unique vision to take over SSS. Vox is apparently an awful employer so it will probably need to mostly be a labor of love. Jim does journalism for a living so I'm sure at a certain point he figured branding his own site again would result in more revenue and satisfaction for him long term.

Not a big Jim fan but this is a big blow for SSS, obviously.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2017 -> 05:30 PM) Can I find 15 WAR by 2019 or 2018? 2018 I agree with your skepticism, I just want a baseline to look at because this does feel like something > a 65 win team right now, based on what we saw last August. When we swap in 3s for Kopech and Jiminez and 5 for Machado, plus maybe get more from a developed DH spot? 2019 I can totally see that level of a boost. For various reasons I think this is a 75 win team not a 65 win team. I'm skeptical that Jose Abreu isn't going to crack 3 WAR and I'm also skeptical that Avi is going to turn back into a 1 WAR pumpkin. I think Moncada is going to put up 3-5 WAR as well and that Yolmer is closer to a 3 WAR true talent than 1 WAR. The pitching side of things, with probably a veteran flyer being added in spring and maybe Kopech and Hansen coming up in late summer and Rodon's status up in the air -- I have no idea. The bullpen blowing high leverage situations isn't going to reflect too much on WAR but it will have a bad effect on winning. And the pen IS going to be awful. No doubt about that, at least as we sit here today in late December. I'm ready to start spring training. The last two weeks of Dec and the month of January are always the worst imo. Just let us get to February 1st and then I can stop staring out the window, or maybe I still am but I can see the snow melting and the sun getting higher in the sky.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2017 -> 05:06 PM) I count 17 WAR in that projection am I right? Can someone who has seen how these turn out give that in terms of a "Projected record"? If this team does that...they're likely what, a 55 win team? So that's our starting point and anything beyond that is more improvement than expected? Like a 65 win team. Can you find 15 WAR somewhere that ZIPS doesn't see? To get the Sox to 80 and ready to compete in 2019? Probably the biggest delta I see is between the IF projections and my own expectations. ZIPS sees 6.9 WAR between Yolmer, Jose, Yoan and Timmy. I could see that group putting up 10-12. It's going to take some improvement that ZIPS doesn't see from the young guys but hey that's why they play the games.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 29, 2017 -> 04:44 PM) Bad. Very very bad. Yea it looks pretty brutal. That said, I'm taking the over on a lot of those wRC+ projections.