Balta1701

Caulfield forgot Dioner Navarro!!

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 06:31 PM) Over Loney's last 3,596 plate appearances, which includes this past season, he's put up splits of .280/.336/.404/.740. Over his last 4 full years in LA - excluding the previous 2 seasons - he's put up splits of .281/.341/.411/.752. There's not a lot that inspires confidence in these numbers whatsoever. Loney is a guy I want the Sox to avoid. Maybe he did figure something out with his swing, but I think the Sox need to let someone else deal with that. He's not going to make much of a difference in the Sox fortunes. Frankly, I'd rather see them let Wilkins start as opposed to bringing in Loney. The only way I'd say it makes sense for the Sox to land Loney is if they add 2 major bats elsewhere. If they add McCann and successfully trade for a big bat at 3b (and no, I have no idea who that would be that works), then that could make sense. (Granderson also does not fit the billing here because he's only a moderate upgrade over De Aza based on his last couple seasons).

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 06:04 PM) Corey Hart will be 32 starting in March and has had 2 knee surgeries and didnt play at all last year. Kendry Morales put up a similiar season to Loney offensively had 8 more HR's yet his wRC+ is 116 to Loneys 118 , his WAR 1.2 to Loney's 2.7 and turns 31 in June. Really who is out there ?? Yes I want Abreu , yes, I was dyng for the Sox to somehow get Adams from the Cards at the trade deadline. I don't see a better option for a LH bat which we need desperately. A big part of the difference in WAR for Morales is that he spent a large portion of the last 2 seasons at DH. The teams he's been on, notably, have had other guys who also play 1b that they would want to put out there (named Smoak and Pujols). Spending more time at DH hurts his overall numbers in the position adjustment. Consequently there's not a lot of details on his defensive performance the last 2 years but he has been a positive defender in the past, although the last few seasons are spotty because of the injury and DH time.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 12:09 PM) James Loney just had his career year at 2.7 WAR, and he's poised to be overpaid. Also, despite his reputation for being a high end defender, he has managed a negative UZR literally every year of his career. Sure, UZR can be wonky from year to year, but six consecutive years of below average numbers paints a pretty compelling picture. At his best, he's a touch above an average player, and he's about to be overpaid to enter his decline years. Wait, I just went to fangraphs and this isn't true. Here's his UZR by year: 3.7 -3.5 -10.3 1.2 -0.2 4.0 7.6 6.1

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 05:47 PM) Career best in some areas not others. Since when is 30 old? Up to 32 was always consider prime years even before steroids made primes last longer. Here's one look at it. Almost every relevant stat for players who last into their 30's peaks before 30 and is declining afterwards. Obviously it depends on the player of course, but if we look back at his career at the end, we should have zero surprise if his 29 year old season winds up being his best season.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 05:11 PM) His arm didn't come into play as much in 2013 because baserunners knew not to run on him. I'd be surprised if the metrics didn't take that into account these days. It's worth more if he gets the out but if guys take fewer bases on balls hit to him than to other OF's that is a signal which should show up. That said, it was obvious to everyone he did a worse job and made more mistakes out there in 2013. Heck, in the most basic stat he went from 2 errors in 2012 to 5.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 05:06 PM) So you expect his avg, obp ,and slg. to drop below his career average in the Cell ? I expect at least a 285.avg 340obp. and .420 slg. if not higher. A guy coming off a career-best year and turning 30? yeah, reductions in his performance should be expected.

Girardi signs a 4 year deal with the Yankees.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 01:53 PM) Should we even continue the restriction on natural born American? If voters are willing to elect someone born outside the US shouldn't they be allowed to do that? We allow it in all other elected offices. No.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 10:22 AM) The biggest problem is his ability to catch a ball negates the benefits of his arm more than anything. Really, if you look at the stats, this isn't true. They put him in LF in 2012 and he was just a small tick below "average" out there. Both UZR and Defensive Runs Saved agree on this, UZR he was at -3 with 0 being average, DRS he was actually above average in 2012. The problem is he was significantly worse in both metrics in 2013. In 2012, he covered enough ground and was reliable enough of a fielder that when you factor in his arm, he was just fine in 2012. The problem is he suffered from the same 2013 disease as the rest of the team and got worse.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 10:07 AM) Logic dictates they find offense from both 1B and LF. Since they're probably NOT going to fill both positions via free agency, and because they're still relatively confident in Viciedo as a hitter...they might buy someone on the cheap (names like Matt Joyce or Brennan Boesch come to mind) and put Dayan at 1B. I'll believe it when I see it...in terms of buying 2-3 expensive free agents on the open market. Not that I like that....but I'd rather buy low on Matt Joyce than do what the Mariners did, with all the veterans they brought in, like Bay, Morse and Ibanez that weren't/aren't going to be part of the future, just placeholders or roster spots. Maybe, maybe Morse...who fits into that Corey Hart category. Just so it's said again...putting Dayan Viciedo at 1b negates what is by far his strongest skill in the field, his throwing arm. And yes, he is certainly coming off a bad season in the field in 2013, but that also followed the pattern of the rest of the team in doing a much worse job out there than the same players did in 2012 (which I continue to attribute to lack of preparation for the season).

QUOTE (ptatc @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 09:30 AM) That's true if it was only the very serious cases. How about a 2 million dollar settlement when a person got an infection (not necessarily the physician's fault) because the patient was delayed in returning to work for 4 weeks? These are the cases to which I'm referring. If you screw up you screw up and there should be penalties. Remember how I said there was "way too much malpractice"? Infection in hospitals is a problem that can be significantly reduced simply by following proper procedures. This has been repeatedly established in trials of basic checklist use, for example, but many hospitals have simply treated them as a cost of doing business.

Link

QUOTE (Boogua @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 08:30 AM) It's so hard to make predictions because a lot of it depends on health, team chemistry, etc. There are too many unknowns. As of now the Heat obviously have to be the favorite, but could you imagine them having a to play a completely healthy Nets team that play well together? How would the Heat counter KG and Lopez? Who would guard D-Will? This sounds very similar to the questions you could have asked the last couple years about the Heat and the Celtics. How would they deal with Rondo, how would they deal with all the size the Celtics have. The Heat have already had success with guys like Chalmers and Birdman filling those roles, and they're able to be pretty good at it because the other guys on the court can do so much on both ends that they can focus on narrow roles. On top of that this year, the Heat have the several high risk, high reward rolls of the dice to throw in there. Think for a second how that question looks if Oden can average 20 minutes and 8 boards a game, suddenly all their size issues are gone because they can neutralize the opponent any time they go "really big".

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 09:00 AM) It is a lie. There is nothing accurate about the unemployment rate they throw around. FAR more than 10% of this country is unemployed. All the pseudo rules, loopholes and shortcuts they use to arrive at their number are lies, lies, and damn lies. Of course, the real question to ask is whether or not the data is actually showing anything useful, and in that sense it certainly appears both surveys give realistic looks at the labor market. If you compare unemployment now to the 5% in 2006, the 3.5% in 2000, or the 10% in 2009/2010, it's quite clear that today's is in fact expressing a much worse labor market than the former and a better labor market than the latter, which is entirely what everyone would expect based on their experiences. Similarly, when the employer survey shows a loss of 800,000 jobs a month in Dec/Jan 08-09, that's sort of bad, while the rapid turnaround to job gains of 100,000 a month suggests that some policies were done correctly in that period. However, the stagnation at 100,000 a month since then suggests we've screwed things up since then and the labor market has basically been one step above completely stagnant since then, which again, appears entirely true. Furthermore, job gains of 200,000 a month reported by that survey have clearly been associated with times when we think the economy is doing better based on other data, while job gains under 100,000 a month since then have clearly been associated with other indications of slowdowns. The difference between 150,000 and 160,000 obviously isn't statistically significant, but the difference between 150,000 and 200,000 is.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 08:44 PM) Since the unemployment rate is nothing but a lie anyway, who f***ing cares. I was expecting that the link would reference people dropping out of the labor force, a number tracked by the same survey, done by the government, and was not disappointed.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 07:07 PM) And a 4.6 WAR last season, more than twice that of De Aza, and better than Rios ever did with the Sox, not to mention younger than Rios and De Aza, and even Jordan Danks for that measure. Wait, that war number doesn't make sense next to the stats you replied to, was all his value defense and ballpark adjustments? A .277 average and 7 home runs shouldn't give a war that high?

The U.S. is suspending its entire Antarctic research program and recalling its staff from bases around antarctica which are funded by NSF. This will cost hundreds, maybe thousands of scientists a full year of work and there is no turning back from it once the people leave because research trips cannot happen. This will also cost millions, maybe billions of dollars in lost research funds, it will cost support jobs worldwide for the entire year. Projects that have been monitoring things continuously for decades will be lost and some may basically start next year at square one.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 04:12 PM) Are you a part of that 99%? Because I don't put blame on anyone for the Mitchell situation, it was just unfortunate bad luck, and that happens. I actually agree with you there, the Sox might have gotten a good player but he basically lost 2 years where he should be developing to that injury. Another team might have had more success with him but unlikely since he was raw before the injury. What really drives me nuts is all the people saying how they knew we should have taken Trout. I actually once went back to that year's draft thread to check. The only response to Trout being drafted from the entire board was something similar to "the Angels sure do love their outfielders, don't they"?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 03:21 PM) I think there is a huge difference between an infielder and outfielder. If Garcia's problem was his throws were really inaccurate or he kicked base hits right at him, that could improve significantly. You cannot improve instinct, at least you can't a whole lot. Crede had great instincts, Garcia takes a lot of curious routes to balls hit his direction. I don't think that is going to get a heck of a lot better. Seriously? This would surprise me a lot. Can you actually add numbers to quantify this?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 03:20 PM) I know Loney will get the bigger contract , no doubt at all but why is there concern about paying a guy in his prime coming of a good year when when the Sox have all kinds of room to sign him ? I don't understand why Loney is high risk after hitting as well as he did and Hart is low risk after 2 knee surgeries, 2 yrs older than Loney ,and missed the whole yr. Just because of a lower contract ? I know we could discuss this all day, I'm just trying to understand your point of view better ,but its good baseball discussion. Hart's going to have quite a bit of adjusting to do physically after 2 surgeries and more adjusting after not facing ML pitching for over a year. We need more lefties. Where are the Sox going to get them ? McCann and Granderson ? What's your plan ? Because Loney's salary is going to be based in large part on what he did last year and his performance last year is an anomaly relative to the rest of his career. The rest of his career he's been a guy teams would happily replace if they had a better option. This year he's been a valuable player. If you pay him like a valuable player and next year he goes back to being "guy you'd be very happy to send to the bench for a better hitter", you're stuck with another unmovable contract.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 03:17 PM) The reason they should admit defeat on Mitchell is because an injury derailed his career, not being under talented or scouted poorly. If the Sox cut him loose, it shouldn't have to be a hit to their pride, because it was an uncontrollable factor that caused him to be worthless. He's not a blackmark on the scouts. Why do I feel like 99% of the posts on this site disagree and hold him strongly against the scouts? (interestingly enough all these posters are furious that the Sox didn't draft Trout).

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 02:59 PM) No way KC should do that. I wouldn't part with anything other than a 6th. Let's be real, KC's start is nice, but with Denver there they are massive underdogs, even with Tony G. It's a new system from when he was there and it's not worth more than that for half a season. Fasano and Kelce are due back in a couple weeks anyways Then Atlanta ought to be happy with a 6th or try to push it to a conditional 5th or something like that. With Jones out, having Gonzalez stuck there is kinda sad. They don't have the roster to compete this year, they may as well get something for him and give him a last hurrah with a team in the hunt.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 02:52 PM) I never said Garcia was competent in CF. People see he can run and throw, and hope or assume he can play CF because of that. The fact is, if he does play CF for the White Sox, odds are totally stacked against it being a long term thing. First off, while he has nice tools, he isn't great defensively now, and he is more than likely going to get bigger, and there aren't many 250 pound long term CF in the history of the sport. I don't think it will require any more to see that Garcia isn't going to be a Gold Glove CF, just like we knew right away that Viciedo wasn't going to be a Gold Glove LF. If the Sox put Garcia in CF, it will be because of a team need, not because he is a long term solution in CF. Why does he need to be judged on whether or not he'll be a gold glove CF? If he's "adequate" or "solid" he could never come close to winning a gold glove but if he's also putting up offensive numbers that remind us of Ordonez we'd be talking about one of the most valuable players in the league if he was in CF.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 01:38 PM) I can't speak for all schools, but I know at many DI schools, the athletic department is required to be financially self-sufficient. They need to generate enough revenue or funding to cover their costs, often including scholarships. I have no idea how many schools do and don't have that rule, but some do. And of course many schools don't have any significant intercollegiate sports at all. The requirement that they balance their budgets may exist but it's fungible. For example, the University of Tennessee just had to offer up a couple million dollars to balance the budget of their athletic program because they've had to repeatedly buy out the contracts of fired coaches at a time when they're not filling their football stadium to capacity.