Balta1701

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 2, 2014 -> 02:06 PM) Pitching coaches have a much greater ability to impact players then hitting coaches though. It is much easier for a pitcher to make adjustments, be taught tweaks to a pitch, etc, then it is to do anything major to a players swing. Is this really the case though? Maybe in the modern world it is but it used to be very, very common for hitters to change their swing and approach and technique and positioning depending on how they were feeling, recent results, even the situation they're in/count.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 2, 2014 -> 01:33 PM) Not just that CDC insists on testing themselves. If a person has just travelled from a country that is an epicenter for an outbreak of something like this, they need to have bulletin-updated protocols sent to hospitals to override previous procedure. That should be obvious. The CDC has put out several alerts with detailed procedures and links to more information over the past few months. These include procedures for recognizing symptoms, treatment and quarantine responses, how to deal with contaminated biological waste, and lots of other stuff. The CDC isn't allowed to come in and take over every hospital in the country to make sure they listen.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 2, 2014 -> 01:39 PM) The procedure is specifically for EBV outbreaks and includes branching paths based on potential EBV exposure. I don't know how many people fly from Sierra Leone, Liberia or Nigeria to the US and then go to the hospital for one reason or another within three weeks, but if it's a decent amount of people*, you need to find a way to screen out who actually should be tested. *I don't know what sort of resources are available for EBV testing and what would count as enough people that testing all of them would overwhelm the system and create a backlog where more likely cases don't get tested quickly enough. The number who go to a hospital after traveling to those areas who are complaining of flu-like symptoms are going to be small enough that testing them all would be less effort than we're going through right now trying to track these people down. There's no excuse for the hospital making this mistake, there's no way around it, someone f***ed up.

QUOTE (knightni @ Oct 2, 2014 -> 01:25 PM) The doctors should have at least asked him questions before releasing him the first time. "Have you been anywhere outside of the country recently?" "Have you been around anyone who's been sick lately?" They did ask that by the reports I've read, but somehow that wasn't transmitted up the line enough to motivate actual testing, which should be an indictment of the hospital itself and no one else.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 08:58 PM) What's the quote in this case? Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Sigh.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 09:33 PM) Sandoval too expensive and risky. I think we'll look at Alvarez (dh to start but could be moved back to third if they can fix his throwing issues)...headley would be okay but that makes viciedo or Gillaspie the dh...or Conor and semien. Outfield will be Rasmus or Dominic brown. Would prefer Rasmus but perhaps will be too expensive...simply because of his improving the defense in the outfield at a corner spot. Then someone like volquez with upside but risk mitigated by cooper...two relievers maybe Soria and any lefty reliever not named miller. You absolutely, positively, cannot trade for Alvarez with that even on your mind. Absolutely not. No no no no no no no. He's got one of those major mental blocks right now. Those have ruined people's careers before. He's got some ability to cover things as 1b to potentially save his career, but there's no amount of practice, no tricks, no time with the trainer that's going to fix it. You can't even have him display that he's over it in practice because it's not a game. If you're trading for him its because you are wiling to put him at DH/1b. You may well never even try him at 3b once.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 07:00 PM) Look into the detailed components that go into those calculations, in no way shape or form do I see anything being applied that would negate for the speed factor of a player and thus adjustments that should be made to the run coefficient based upon speed tools nor is there an adjustment / factor for strikeout to out at least not that is defined. And the first variable would be extremely difficult to actually figure out as you can't just use pure speed times as there are many aspects that go into baserunning from jumps to secondary leads to just being a good runner. OPS and OPS+ certainly don't factor in those components either. Bottom line, for the various reasons I listed, I think the value applied to Dunn's OBP and the lack of negative on the strikeouts, are just two aspects that should be negatively factored into some of these advanced stats that seem to still show him being "productive". I'd also tell you I could cherry pick anything and come up with productivity and that is why you have to consider many things and that is why you can't be a GM from behind a computer, you actually have to apply logic and consider numerous factors when making decisions. You're definitely right, OPS and OPS+ do not take those into account. However, they are factored in, in exactly the way you keep asking for, into WAR. This part is simply untrue. Went to Baseball Reference's page and just found how they define it: They do exactly what I thought they would do, they calculate how the probability of scoring changes depending on how the player moves between bases and compare it to the number of outs made on the bases. They consider 39 different scenarios by my count.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 05:35 PM) Again, I don't believe models account for these variables and again, this overstates Dunn's value. Without going into too many details, this is sort of the key phrase, and actually this should actually be very easy to account for statistically. There is a probability of a runner scoring by being stuck on first and a probability of him scoring if he's advanced to second. The value of a ball put in play is that it can change that probability. That means you weight the strikeouts leaving the runner at 1b against the added value of the guy getting to 2nd. I don't see any reason why a solid mathematical treatment wouldn't have done this already. Pay me for a couple days to do nothing else and I'd have a rudimentary version of it. Is there a solid literature statement somewhere saying explicitly that this is not included in modern understanding of offensive production? Similarly, you refer to the value of a guy who is able to take 2nd. This is almost certainly included in models of production these days under the "base running" category. Guys like Konerko and Dunn are hugely downgraded on that because when they get to 1b they aren't able to score on a double and that costs runs. To calculate that, you figure out things like "the fraction of times a double was hit where this guy scored" and details like that. It's not fast and easy but with a full season's worth of data and enough time (aka, pay me a lot of money to sit at Excel for a couple weeks) we could have a really good model of this. That last part may or may not go into "RC+", I cannot say for sure, but it definitely gets included in the full WAR calculations.

QUOTE (Andy the Clown @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 01:21 PM) He's a DH (with no other skill besides hitting) who just slugged .380. Wanting him is demonstrably stupid. 2 years ago he slugged .510. His career Slug is .449.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 10:24 AM) It doesn't seem like it would have made much of a difference, because I don't think getting Dunn an extra month makes up 7 or 8 games, but maybe it does make the WC game a home game, and that could have made a huge difference. The other thing that happened to that team seemed to be a mental collapse in August, they all stopped hitting at once. Maybe Dunn isn't worth 7 to 8 games on his own, but maybe a big home run or just having a guy on base helps them win a game that otherwise they'd have lost and that helps drop the stress level team-wide.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 10:13 AM) Do you think the Sox would have taken Sanburn at the actual deadline? I think that is a pretty good prospect in return for Dunn. Beane really gambled and gave up a lot this year. He'll trade-off and recoup some assets this winter for sure. If the A's were taking on more money, I'd say its very likely. The A's held out as long as they could.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 10:21 AM) Didn't many of these same players also have the successes you mentioned while Walker was the hitting coach? How would you explain that? There are a couple options. Perhaps this is one of those situations where having the same voice and the same methods applied winds up working for a while but then reaches a point where it is no longer effective, in which case simply changing voice and approach will produce benefits. Alternatively, it is possible that there are some flaws to the approach being taught which are systematic but which take time to exploit because of video, scouting, and practice. In that case, similarly, a change of personnel could produce a dramatic turnaround. In either case, the only way to evaluate the work of the coach is the performance on the field and that is heading the wrong way systematically. What's the worst that happens if a change happens, they get unacceptable results? They're already getting unacceptable results.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 09:48 AM) I am not a Beane fan, but I can't argue with the Lester trade. I always questioned the trade with the Cubs because I am not a Jeff S. fan and he was sure to drop off as well as the other guy. Russell was a high price to pay. The one thing I can say is that I still can't fathom why Adam Dunn was not on the A's 2 days after the Lester trade. Ok it's not a perfect match but by all accounts you're downgrading your lineup by taking Cespedes out of the middle of it, if you're paying the kind of price you paid for Samardzija then why on Earth would you go cheap about adding in a replacement bat?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 09:29 AM) No, what I am saying is adding Jose Abreu to your line up suddenly makes your hitting coach a heck of a lot smarter. The Sox are definitely on the upswing, and should have better hitters fill their line up in coming years, so Steverson won't be an idiot until they start to decline. I think many place way too much responsibility on a player's failure to hit on the hitting coach. Hitting is a tough thing. BJ Upton doesn't suck because Greg Walker is the hitting coach. A worthwhile question for the Braves is what do you do when it seems like the entire team takes a step back at once. Fine, BJ Upton flopped. I'll even grant you that is on the GM and player evaluation, assuming that the hitting coach had no say in that, and the GM was appropriately fired as a consequence. Jason Heyward's OPS went down 40 points last year and 30 points this year at a time when he should be approaching his prime and getting better, and injuries don't seem to be an excuse this year since he was solid in the OF. Chris Johnson fell apart, put up his worst season of his career. Maybe he's not the player he was last year but he's been an above average bat almost every year of his career. Freddie Freeman signed a big contract and his OPS dropped 50 points. Andrelton Simmons isn't there for his bat, but the drop off from his .692 OPS last year to a .617 OPS this year almost makes it difficult to put him out there for that glove. The only 2 guys in their lineup who got slightly better were Evan Gattis and Justin Upton, each by about 20 points of OPS. Basically they, within error, repeated their previous seasons. So what the heck happened? Was the entire team hurt? Was the entire team misused? Guys who are at ages when they should be getting better seemed to uniformly go the opposite way. Was there something in the water? What else do you say about that?

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 09:17 AM) I think you would have to be a fool to go more than 6 years on a 30 year old pitcher. That being said it wouldn't surprise me at all if somebody did. I would have to think at some point GMs are going to get smarter and see how bad the contracts given out to players like Sabathia, Pujols, Hamilton, Fielder, A-Rod, Crawford, Howard, etcetera are hamstringing their teams and will look to avoid them. If someone give Scherzer 7 or 8 years at $25 million there is a good chance they are going to regret at least $50 million of that contract. But stop and think the other way. The Yankees won a world series by giving Sabathia and ARoid big money. I still don't see them giving back that 2009 world series trophy. Pujols and hamilton have had down seasons but the Angels had the best record in MLB this year. Both Fielder and Crawford have proven to be moveable contracts. Out of that list, the only one that is really a complete disaster for the team that signed it is Howard's extension. Somebody, maybe the Cubs or Yankees, is going to ante up a fortune for each of those 2. When is the last time the top starting pitcher on the market signed for less than you thought he would?

QUOTE (beautox @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 02:11 AM) Honestly I don't think it is with the economics of the game what they currently are. You're essentially paying him to be a 1WAR reliever with the added upside for additional value. Paying setup men this type of money is old hat to the sox; they've had two recent experiences with this with polarizing results: Crain(3/14) and Linebrink(4/19). As for finding pieces internally I think Noesi/Bassit/Carroll/Sanburn/Beck all fit the mold but it would be unwise to only have one left handed option in the pen, which is why bringing in Miller is a good move. I would not be surprised if the White Sox brought in a veteran LH option out of the bullpen, but I would be surprised if the White Sox paid top dollar over multiple years for the top available lefty on the market. Which leaves the real question...assume Miller is out of our range but we still would want a veteran lefty. What options do we have available to fill that need?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 07:59 AM) Jay Bruce from 2010 to 2013: WAR: 4.9, 3.0, 2.1, 4.0 (avg. = 3.5) wRC+: 124, 119, 120, 117 (avg. = 120) He turns 28 on Opening Day next year, bats left-handed, and is under-team control for the next three years at $12.5M/per. One horrific season, almost certainly due to a knee injury, won't change my expectations of him over the next three years. I'm confident he'll be a 3 to 4 WAR player during that time. Bruce is a guy that would normally cost you three top 5 prospects to obtain, so if I can get him for three guys in our 6 to 15 range you can bet I'll make that deal. I'd obviously like to hold onto Montas and Danish if possible, but they aren't going to hold me back from Jay Bruce if the other two pieces I'm giving up are Sanchez & Ravelo, neither who has star upside. Your deal is a no-brainer IMO. You haven't added why I should have confidence that a knee injury that hurt him the entire season will not be a future issue.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Oct 1, 2014 -> 08:38 AM) Story in Boston paper yesterday estimates Scherzer and Lester will get 6 years at $25+Mil per year and Shields will get 4 years in $90 mil range. Cole Hamels will also be available at 4 and $90 but he will require compensation. I'd expect Scherzer and Lester to get longer than that. Scherzer already turned down 6/$144.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 06:56 PM) Sure, if you discount Dunn was several years older, owed many millions more (about $20 million in guaranteed money),and blow off Dunn wasn't really a defensive player and Bruce is a plus RF., and had a far worse season. Other than that, you are right, it is pretty much the same. I don't see why it's impossible to discount that. After all, you discounted the words "or 2012" in my comment.

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 07:31 PM) Question. wasn't there a change in the draft where teams can trade their draft picks, with first round being protected? am I thinking of the int'l draft or comp rounds? Some of the low revenue teams + the Cardinals for some reason are granted extra picks after the comp round as "Competitive Balance Picks" and those picks can be traded.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 06:15 PM) Chris Beck for Jay Bruce?? Walt Jocketty might actually did from laughter from that offer. Having said that, I would love to target Bruce and would easily give up several prospects in the 6 to 15 range to get him. After what he did this year, that would be like us laughing at an offer of Chris Beck for Adam Dunn after his 2011 or 2012 seasons. I don't think that would be laughable if the team giving that guy up took the salary on.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 04:27 PM) Ventura even mentioned him as a guy who could have a job in next years pen. If this is going to be a competitive team he shouldn't be penciled in as the main bullpen lefty, he should have to earn the spot in ST against Snodgress, but he should at least have a shot at it. That still leaves us absolutely in need of 1 other LHP in the bullpen. Snodgress + Surkamp out there would be fine for a rebuilding team but not if we're going to spend large sums of money elsewhere. But, with the lefties on this roster and in the minors, it makes more sense to bring in a guy on a "Downs-like" contract than it does to go for broke with the Andrew Miller some people have noted.

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 03:46 PM) If the White Sox want to contend in 2015, they will need to make substantial upgrades to the bullpen, especially how they combat lefthanded hitters in late-game situations. Seemingly all of the major league free agent signings Hahn has made thus far have been borderline disasters, but his non-roster signings have been pretty surprising. Let's hope there's a plan to acquire some better options than Surkamp, Veal, etc... just having a loogy in the bullpen for the sake of having a loogy in the bullpen doesn't make much sense when someone like Putnam can get better results against lefties than a AAA bust like Surkamp or an aging vet like Downs. it went unnoticed by a lot since no one cared about this team, but after returning from the Minors, Surkamp was really very effective. Over his last 15 games, struck out almost a batter an inning, held opponents to a .220 average/.553 OPS, 2.31 ERA over that stretch. Which may not be all that surprising as sometimes guys do struggle in their first real stint as a big league reliever. I'm not sure how much I can count on him next year but I don't mind at all if he's in competition for a bullpen spot, and calling him a "AAA Bust" ignores what he actually did during the latter part of the season.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 01:30 PM) How far can I go back? I'm guessing some of the guys from the Blake Street Bombers era were in that general area. Matt Holliday also had pretty disparate splits between home and away when he was in Colorado. Not sure it was quite that extreme, but I recall it being a major concern for people on his move to Oakland and then St. Louis. He ended up OK. Overall, I do worry more about his health than his ability to hit. Having had some time to think about it, that's probably what would drive me away from CarGo. Matt Holliday is actually a guy who really doesn't help you here as his season in Oakland went really bad for him. The .831 OPS he put up that year was the worst of his career before this season. The 4 seasons before and the 4 seasons after in St. Louis are all very much better than what he did in Oakland.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 10:46 AM) I guess I could see use there, but do they want to pay a part time player up to $3-4 mill per year? Those are pretty limited at bats for a guy that they might be able to find for 1/3 of that cost. Worth noting that they're paying Gaby Sanchez $2.3 million to fill that role this year and he's probably on the outs after getting worse each of the last couple years.