chitownsportsfan

I completely agree with this. We can agree!

I suppose I took that out of context when I infered that it meant they would "never trade him". Still, when people write in all caps, I tend to think they are screaming. Did you write "never", of course not. But you did phrase your response in a) all caps, and B) a rhetorical and sarcastic question meant to belittle Vafan. Differences of opinion are fine with me, this place would be pretty boring if we all agreed with each other. This debate is helping me get through another boring winter without Sox baseball. I appreciate your passion and love for baseball and Sox. That said, I'm probably going to let this one go for now, I've already sunk too much energy in it. On a side note, I took "logic and reasoning" my sophomore spring of college, I got a "C-" and never looked back. The final question involved a proof in symbolic language over 20 steps long. I couldn't figure it out, probably why I got a "C-" in the class. I can't always "do the math" like the really hardcore stats guys, but like Michael Lewis quotes a baseball executive in Moneyball: I don't understand how to do a regression equation, but I can understand the implications.

You know the thing about 5th starters is: they just aren't that hard to find. So, say we lose Count to FA in 2007, we have the following pitchers to choose from: RHSP: Paul Wilson (Team Option) Wade Miller Tomo Ohka Ramon Ortiz Jason Johnson (Mutual Option) Gil Meche Joe Mays Byung-Hyun Kim (Team Option) Sidney Ponson Tony Armas Jr. Jose Contreras Kevin Jarvis Greg Maddux Brian Moehler Jason Schmidt Jeff Suppan Rick Helling Woody Williams Brad Radke Kerry Wood (Mutual Option) Mike Mussina (Team Option) Cory Lidle Kelvim Escobar Chan Ho Park Ryan Franklin Orlando Hernandez Jaret Wright (Team + Player Void options) Kip Wells Jason Marquis Vicente Padilla Adam Eaton Tim Wakefield (Annual Team Renew Option) LHSP: Ted Lilly Brian Anderson Mark Redman Shawn Estes Tom Glavine Kevin Appier Jamie Moyer Andy Pettitte Mark Mulder Barry Zito Doug Davis Randy Wolf Mark Buerhle (Team Option) David Wells Darrell May Eric Milton (Void Option) My personal recomendation would be to teach Neal Cotts another pitch and move him into the rotation: provided he has another "lights out" year in 2006. Still, there are plenty of names to choose from should Contreras walk. I understand that KW is "trying to build a dynasty", but that really says nothing in and of itself. If the marginal cost to retain Contreras is too high in 2006, than someone else comes in who KW believes can do the job. I don't believe Contreras has much trade value, unless a team becomes desperate at the last minute and doesn't give a crap (Yankees? Sawx? Mets? Dodgers? Cubs?) about money or next year. In my mind , I do think it's wise to plan years ahead as a GM, but immediate returns are always worth more than future returns. If the Sox need short-term solutions (more offense) in 2006, then long-term solutions (next year's pitching) should go out the window.

No, I'm not taking stats this semester. To respond to the question about contracts: I agree, Vasquez being under our control for more than this season is a bonus. I don't agree this is a reason KW won't trade him. Let me reason with you, I won't use any stats, since you seem to just reject them on sight. KW has shown a propensity for trading prospects this offseason in an attempt to "win now", i.e. in 2006, not 2007, 2008, etc. So, with that in mind, why wouldn't KW spin off Vasquez for Abreu if the Sox were scuffling because they couldn't score runs? What if Thome gets hurt? I mean, to say in a post that KW will never trade a player if idiotic. It doesn't take stats to figure that out. I called Jimh out on it. Besides, here is one stat you need to know regarding Vasquez: 12 million dollars a freaking season, or more than 10 times what Bmac will cost.

Hijack my butt. Just a well reasoned response (albeit sorta drunk) to someone claiming to have a devining rod into the mind of KW. I understand that SABR backlash, but for being buzzed only spelling "Vasquez" wrong once or twice can't be that hard of foul. At least I got those stats right! Besides, sabrmetrics are so much more relevant with a world series champ, it's like the intersection of theory and practice! In this case forcing SABR to re-evaluate the importance of defense and speed.

Hey, Jimh, did you talk to Kenny Williams last night when he was drunk? Did you visit the Oracle at Delphi? Since it's widely been acknowledged that the Sox are employing sabermetrics more than ever, lets take a look at Abreu and Vasquez and try and come to a logical conclusion regarding if "they will never trade Vasquez for Abreu". I won't go into why here, (try here: http://www.tangotiger.net/rc2.html") but OBP is the most important statistic for a hitter. It has been proven that getting on base is the single most important thing for a hitter to do as it produces the highest increase in expected runs. Moreso than average, moreso than slugging, moreso than OPS. Don't even mention RBI's please. Lets look at Abreu's OBP compared to the league average the past 3 years: .409--league: .334 .428 .343 .405 .349 Lets do some simple math to realize how much more valuable those percentages are. Compared to the avg MLB player, over 500 AB's a player with a .400 OBP will get on 200 times. A player with a .350 OBP will get on base 175 times. Now, suppose Jim Thome bats behind Abreu, he gets 25 more times to hit with a runner on. That is valuable. If look at Abreu's career statistics, they are quite good, wow, borderline HOF good. http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/abreubo01.shtml Moving on to Vasquez: the man is a victim of one stat he doesn't seem able to change: his G/F ratio. Vasquez has suffered mightily the past two seasons due to both bad luck and a bad G/F ratio. In MLB, fly balls go for homeruns roughtly 10 percent of the time. But the past two seasons fly balls became HR's 13 and 16 percent of the tiem for Vasquez. Before you hollar, "well isn't HR rate per fly something a pitcher can control?", let me point you here: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...eeks-ago/" But anyways, we all know flyballs go out at The Cell rather often, both empirically and through statistics, so when Vasques posts G/F ratio's like he has been, it's kinda scary: 2001 1.28 2002 0.94 2003 0.83 2004 0.85 2005 1.19 That aside, Javier is pretty damn good pitcher. His DIPS suggest he has been unlucky. It just scares me to see a fly ball picher at US Cellular. For these reasons, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see Vasquez in a package for Abreu.

The White Sox put the series away today 5-2 behind an 8 inning, 5 hit, 2 run performance from Jose Contreras. The Sox lost only two games all postseason, as the Marines and Angels were the only teams able to take a game from the Sox. Carl Everett finished the last two games an astouding 8-8, proving that even an old dinosaur can learn new tricks.

Yea, the hot stove is down to embers.

Thanks to Global Warming, winter and these mid 40's in January are going just fine. Yea, I got bored of stairing out the window about 3 minutes after game 4. Now I'm just waiting for spring impatiently. My Lions have sucked it up again, and the Bulls just aren't that exciting right now, call me back in March I guess.

I really don't think this is that bad that the Sox are going to have to bring one of these guys into be the LOOGY. I mean, one of them has to have put up decent enough career splits vs. Lefties to be a sufficient number 2lefty out of the 'pen. As long as Ozzie realizes that to be a LOOGY, you have to be able to get lefties out (and to only come in in "one out" situations!), none of these guys will have any significant impact on the season even if they perform at replacement level. The Bullpen might not be as good as last year, but than again the whole pitching staff figures to regress to the mean. But the offense is better, much better. That is the risk KW is taking, I figure it to be a good one.

I found it humorous, especially after I looked up Crosby's career OPS.

Dude, referencing BP for your argument, than arguing a player's defensive value is in "errors" is like being a SUV driving vegan: it's bonkers.

That's the thing about 3rd and 4th relievers: every year half of them "find their form" and half of them "lose their form". Middle relief guys like Marte are a dime a dozen (paging Cliff Politte and Dustin Hermanson), and getting rid of his high salary for Mackowiak was a coup for Kenny Williams and a good move for the Padres as well. Marte is a lefty, which raises his value somewhat, but the Sox already have Cotts and nobody should be paying an aging LOOGY with control problems 4 million a year, especially not a headcase that almost quit on the team. I bet Marte "finds his form" next year, and that will be fine with me. The Padres bullpen needed him much more than we did. The utility of the trade makes sense for both teams, as they needed a bullpen guy, we needed a versatile bench guy that provided some insurance in case Crede's back flairs up for a long stretch.

This forum is blowin up!

Alright, last question Rowand44, if I have anymore I'll take it to PM: Do you agree at all with sabermetrics?

I think it's generally assumed that Japan is the AAAA of baseball. Some have compared it to AAA+, meaning only slightly better than AAA. I have to agree with the more conservative estimate that Japan is just slightly above AAA. One reason more Japanese players don't come over is of course because the Japanese have estabilished the service rule and "bidding price" clause which discourages player movement.

What don't you like about them?

Yea, Jim Hendry is like the parent that buys his wild son an overpriced muscle car for his birthday only to see him crash it while the more efficient Honda sits in the garage. Fill in Hendry, Jaque Jones, Marquiss Grissom, and Dusty anywhere you want in the analogy. I suggest Hendry as parent, Dusty as son, and Jones and Grissom as the muscle car. I was going to suggest a cheap yet good youngster in the Cubs outfield for the Honda, but couldn't find one.

What is the problem?

No habla enspanol? No escucha...es facil, no? Pienso que este es un bueno idea que ayuda la gente que habla espanol les gustan los medios blancas mas. It heartens me to see comments like Anthrax's responded to in such a sensible manner. There is progress in this country after all. Last time I checked, Latino's pay taxes just like Pollacks, Jews, Protestants, Italians, WASPS, etc. Perhaps the mayor should try and make things a little easier on them. But I digress. This will only help the Sox became mas popular, que es la problema?

It's unfortunate that some of you seem to be lumping this "simulation" into all the other great work BP does. If you read the tone of the preview article BP wrote for the series, you get the feeling that the series is meant to be a mostly tongue-in-cheeck response to Valentine's crazy blather about how his team is better. Everyone is the sabermetric community admits that is extremely difficult to compare leagues. Nobody over at BP is going, "this is exactly how it would really happen". It's the middle of winter, instead of staring out the window and waiting for spring, they decided to have some fun. Please don't reject Bill James and sabermetrics just because of this.

I tend to agree Rowand, in a short series of 5 or 7 games, starting pitching depth past your number 3 starter is pretty much meaningless, meaning that teams that possess three good starters have a big advantage. I have yet to see any stats to back up my intuition though, so I will say "probably" until I do. I think someone over at BP was looking into doing an analysis of "what wins in the postseason" and the big assumption he was going to prove or disprove was the point you and I are making.

Ah yes, the mythical sample size of "one". LOL, you can't be seriously trying to argue this point can you? Last time I checked, if you scored more the opponent, you win. Obviously if you score 7 runs a games youe pitching can give up 6 and you'll still win more than you lose. If you mean that good pitching is harder to find and more expensive than good offense, I won't argue with you. If you're saying that pitching is more important than offense, I won't agree. Run creation and run prevention are equally important. The Red Sox won 95 games with a good/great offense and a mediocre pitching staff. You have to figure in the offense inflating Fenway into any argument. Top front line pitching depth 1-3, such as the the White Sox possess, might be more important than a good offense in the postseason. However, during the regular season it matters little if at all whether a team is good at scoring runs or good at creating runs.

1. Billy Beane--nobody does more every freaking year with less. People focus too much the Billy Beane described in Moneyball and assume he a) only knows about sabermetrics and B) doesn't care about defense. Both couldn't be further from the truth. Beane is natural charmer when it comes to the business side of the job, which helps just as much as his sabermetric knowledge. Also, the A's were the best defensive team in baseball last year. 2. Kenny Williams--KW might get burned time to time on a trade, but he's proven that a GM can learn on the job and go from mediocrity to greatness in only a few years. He's not afraid to "think outside the box" when it comes to player aquisitions. His decision to hire Ozzie was just what Sox needed after the corpse of Jerry Manuel.

And as Jico implied, ERA isn't that good of measure of a pitcher. Not as bad as RBI for hitters, but still not very accurate. WHIP is better K/BB is good K/9 is good DIPS is great ERA is blah Personally, I think ERA+ is a pretty good measure of pitchers worth. ERA+ is adjusted for park and league averages, which makes season's like Garland's, Garcia's, Count's and Buehrle's seem that much better. The Sox were second in MLB in defensive efficiency though, no doubt that helped all those guys' ERA+'s