chitownsportsfan

Well, the thing is that that "out on a ball in play" is exclusive from any "moving over" of the runners. Essentially, it's worse than a strikout because a runner might get got in a pickle from 3rd to home or 2nd to 3rd. That's the only logic I can think of for that. Any other ideas?

Good point Shaftr, I think we had this debate over on SSS a few weeks ago. The Pods/Lee trade cannot be evaluated in isolation. That is, the trade was really part of a larger organizational emphasis on defense and a spreading out of resources. I'd take Lee over Pods anyday of the week, twice on doubleheader days. However Pods was an adequate piece on a world championship team, nothing wrong with that. I also have no doubt that if the Sox had had the money to still sign Vizcaino and Iguchi and Dye with Lee in LF, then they still would have won at least 99 games and the World Series--everything else being equal outside of Lee and Pods' 2005 stats.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...e-outs-article/ If you're still not convinced, Google "productive outs", there are hours of reading material proving their relative worthlessness to winning baseball.

Yea, I just realized all those numbers were from 2004 anyway, the point stands, but not as well. Dang Google and ESPN teaming up against me. Who knew the string, "Productive outs 2005" would produce the 2004 stats...

Defense has been widely regarded as a major reason the Sox were so good at preventing runs in 2005, it's been discussed even by the arrogant Baseball Prospectus, which even took the extremely rare step for them of admitting they were wrong. The Sox converted a higher percentage of balls in play into outs then every team except Oakland. That's a good thing. However, the Sox were 20th in "productive outs" http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/productive?tp=team The top 3 teams in "productive outs" were Washington, Colorado, and Pitsburgh. In fact, the winning percentage of the bottom 1/3 in productive outs is much higher than the top 1/3. Productive outs is about the last thing I'd look at to see how well a team performed. It's almost meaningless.

RME JICO--you're my hero! I didn't even have to dig through the archives of THT's to prove my point. I thought those articles were very fair, they concluded that speed does make the pitcher a little more loose--to the tune of 2 runs a year--that's rather yawnworthy in my book. Give me two LF'ers, all things being equal, power hitting, contact hitting, arm, and I'll take the faster guy every time. Speed has a place in baseball no doubt. But its place is relatively unimportant compared to the other major American team sports.

For the sake of Hermie I hope that a) he either pitches pain-free without the shots, or B) he realizes that his future healthy depends on not ruining his back when he's 33. He's a guy that the cliche, "gets by on grit" applies to fairly well. I wish him the best.

It's not, not in the grand scheme of things. Why can't people just accept that historical data that shows there are plenty of things more important than base stealing for creating runs--like OBP and SLG. It's not being arrogant; it's being reasonable. No stat head is going to tell Scottie Pods to not attempt to steal if he can swipe at an 80% clip, but they are going to ask the leadoff hitter to get on base more, and to throw in some doubles and HR every once and awile--something he doesn't really do well at all. Scottie Pods is an average major league LF in his good seasons, nothing more, nothing less. However, compared to stonehands and lead footed Carlos Lee, he fit into the Sox's idea for better defense, which looks like a smart move in hindsight. I think their analysis of last year's offseason was spot on. And I think their analysis of this off-season is better than 95% of the offseason reviews you will see online or elsewhere. I'm not sure about Boston or the Yankees being ahead of the Sox, so I agree with that. But the Dodgers had a very good offseason, as did the A's, I'd put the Sox 2 and Oakland 2a, but IMO, the Dodgers, from a purely "how many more wins this year" standpoint did the best job, helped by the fact that they had a lot longer to go to get to the playoffs then the Sox and A's.

I have faith in Cooper to improve any pitcher he handles based on his proven track record. However, it's one thing to work with a guy over the winter, it's another thing to work with him 12 days before the season starts. The first lead Thortnon blows will have us all clamoring for Marte and Viz, which is sad. How does a bullpen go from a position of strength to the biggest weakness in a month? At the top the bullpen still looks strong with Jenks and Cotts, but it's the middle guys that are looking real shaky right now for those 6th and 7th innings where the Sox are in a tight game.

CWWKeith posted this over at SSS: Also, the Cheat raved about his performance today as well. Seems like if Lumpy can stay healthy he'll be a top of the rotation starter. In a farm system mostly empty of anything, this is great news. It's encouraging to see him throwing a consistnent 92+ heater that's dancing, while displaying good control as well.

I agree that this trade makes little sense for the Sox and much more for the Mariners. The stakes are so low however that there isn't much risk for either side, however the Mariners get a guy likely to make their club, and the Sox got a guy likely to be pumping gas come April 1st. I thought the Marlins were showing interest in Borchard? Surely they have someone better Thornton laying around... Doesn't sound like there was any market for Borchard, or KW failed to create one.

Hahahaa, only 5 pages until someone suggested this means Sweeney might make the roster. We should put the "Does this mean Sweeney makes team post" over/under at 5 on all threads.

Yea, but only 'cause Japan might win the WBC without him. Spring Training is meaningless. A professional like the Gooch will worry if his OPS is .640 in late June. I'd start worrying too at that point. Until then, I"ll just hope he stays healthy in the cactus league.

Frank really had to put this behind him--what was he going to go into the hall as a White Sox while still pissed off at everyone? No way.

Ron Howard helped create Arrested Development. That gets him a spring training look in and of itself.

I believe NWA started the Sox cap trend back in the late 80's early 90's. It's continued ever since.

I believe Dr. Dre popularized the Sox 'tilted brim look circa 1992. No doubt the Sox baseball cap (and baseball caps in general) have a certain popularity among the hip-hop generation--that is great.

A major upgrade no doubt. It's for that reason Balta that I'm not predicting doom and gloom this season--I'm predicting playoffs. I really think the offense will pickup the rest of the things that can and will go wrong.

As Omar from HBO's The Wire would say, "oh indeed". (Sorry obscure reference--but a good one IMO) If there is one reason to think the Sox will win more than 99 games this season, it's the offense. Throw PECOTA out the window, I think their Sox prejections are mostly junk. I'm not a big fan of BP in general, but that is for another day... Uribe, Crede, Iguchi, and BA will almost certainly improve as a group. Thome/Gload will improve the DH spot massively barring injury. (which is looking unlikely given the suddenly statue like Thome) I expect AJ to be about the same: sacrificing contact for power. I expect Pods to be about the same: dead average for his career. I expect Dye to perform about the same, and I expect Kong to have a slightly "worse" year. I am most optimisic about the offense this season. Say we score 50 more runs--will that make up for losses other places? Hopefully.

More good points Balta, I'm glad you're around on a Friday night to debate baseball with me--lol. I think however that in the grand sabermetricaly aligned scheme of things in my head that those things that went wrong cost relatively few wins compared to those things that went right. I agree however that the Sox had some things go badly, which will likely go right this year. The biggest thing to me that sabermetricians forget, and which you mentioned is the freaking abysmal play of Timo Perez. I mean, dude got 180 AB? I almost feel sorry for the White Sox, then I think of Neifi Perez, and how my pain pales in comparison. However, an improved bench is a reason the homer and sabermetric side of me sees nothing to argue with as a reason for optimism. Will an improved bench make of up a near certain regression from the bullpen? That remains to be seen.

Yea, and some people think AK isn't a good poker hand because they lost to AA one time. No, seriously, you make excellent points Felix, and I agree completely with you: people think everything that went right last year will go right again this year, and then some more still will go right for the cherry on top. Reality is that maybe 1/2 of went right last year will go right again. Will the bullpen have journeymen like Politte and Hermanson post unreal ERA's? Probably not. Will the starting pitching have a remarkable run of career years and good healthy? Probably not. Will the Sox be so good in 1 run games? Probably not. And even given all those things going wrong, this is still a 90+ win team. I mean, that is the dream of every team in baseball. I guarantee that every team outside of maybe the Oakland and NY would switch rosters straight up with the Sox. However, prediciting 100+ is a bit much for me. It's freaking hard to win 100 games, and everything that went right for the Sox last year, (everything you listed) will have to happen again--and then some. It doesn't make any sense to think like that, at least in my opinion. Sure the Sox got Thome and Vasquez, but given normal health and a few more 1-run losses and blown leads by the bullpen, things will even out.

Ah, back to reality. Do some of you guys realize how hard it is to win 100+ games? As good as the Sox were in both halves of the season last year they still only managed 99 games--that was with great health, amazing pitching, and a league average offense. 95 wins would be great for this club, for any club in MLB. I'm predicting 93 and a playoff berth.

This crazy talk about BA not being the starting CF if he hits .188 until the middle of may should stop now. He's not a high average hitter. Never will be. And wasn't Jermaine Dye struggling against the mendoza line in mid May last year? The point is that it's a small sample size, too small to get a judge on how BA is going to perform over the course of the season. Plus, who do the Sox have other than BA to play CF? Mackowiak? Pods? No and no. Mackowiak won't hit much any better than BA, and his defense will be much worse. Pods' defense will be worse than BA's, and then who plays LF? Sweeney will never play CF in MLB, at least not for a team that has a league average player out there. He hasn't even played above the AA level yet, and he hits 3 homers off some scrubs in 80 degree thin air and he's ready for a starting gig over BA, Dye, and Pods? Get real. He's a gifted prospect, for him to be so far along at 21 is a good sign, but it doesn't make up for the fact that he struggled with power at AA last year. Injuries played a large role, so why not let him get some real confidence this year in AAA or AA when he's healthy? The abritration clock is a great point, I believe Kalapse made it first (things get fuzzy through 7 pages in one sitting), and why waste options and cheap years for Sweeney so he can sit on the bench 99% of the time? BA is the starting CF, and will be the whole season barring a total collapse or an injury. That's the reality of the situation for the Sox. Sure, I'd like a stud in CF, but the Sox have studs elsewheres that allow below average offense from CF. Defense is almost always there, and as long as he plays a good CF, he will and he should be out there.

Like others have said, let Sweeney go back to AA and be an everyday play. There is no reason to rush anything with Dye, Pods, Owens, and BA already logjammed in front of him. If he tears it up at AA, then the Sox have some options for 2007. The Sox still have a glut of higher level outfield prospects even after trading Chris Young and Jeremy Reed. Ideally for me would be to have every player, Pods, Dye, Anderson, Sweeney, and Owens play well enough this year to make trading a guy like Sweeney for something the Sox need more than outfielders, like pitching and infield prospects, a real possibility. Sweeney is still a very young 21 and breaking him into the big leagues at 22 in 2007 would be awesome, provided the Sox clear some room in front of him and he puts up great numbers in AA/AAA this year.

Mackowiak, like was already stated, is not a everyday major league CF. He's an extremely versatile super sub that has a respectable career ops+ of 92. He'll hurt you as an everyday CF, but help tremendously as an emergency fill-in and super sub. BA projects as above average defensively, and average offensively. Yes, he's going to strikout plenty. Yes, he's going to struggle at times. Yes, he'll struggle to hit .260--but he has good pop and draws a few walks too. He's a good bet to beat Arow's OPS from last year while providing slightly inferior defense. He's dirt cheap and can be an asset to the Sox for the next 5 years easily. Everyone should be happy that KW made a solid if unspectacular draft pick that has come to fruition. Go ask Oakland or the Braves how playing their good young players that were dirt cheap and ready to play has worked out. More often than not, going with youth is scary but necessary to remain competitive for everyone other than the Yankees and Red Sox.