Greg Hibbard

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Sep 12, 2011 -> 11:33 AM) Is there much of a difference between batting Dunn or Rios cleanup? No, not really, but there's still a slightly better chance with one. With the future outlook of this team being quite grim, you have to take every little advantage you can. This is assuming that playing to win the last month of the season has no value going forward. I think it has value in terms of evaluating talent, addressing some issues that have come up this season. For example, playing Rios and Dunn as much as possible might win you more games if they come out of their respective slumps which would cost you draft positioning, but it might also set the Sox up for them to have improved 2012 seasons.

Yes, probably replacing management to some extent, but also identifying what can be done about addressing/fixing Dunn and Rios' issues.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Sep 12, 2011 -> 11:22 AM) No, because Sox wil draft the cheapest safest pick in round 1. Then why do people want the White Sox to pursue this strategy?

It's clear that even on Sept 2 that the top nine picks were already locked down by Houston, Baltimore, KC, Minnesota, Seattle, San Diego, Pittsburgh, Oakland and Washington. It wasn't going to be possible for the White Sox to win less games than those teams at that point in the season. Is the difference between the #10 overall pick (our lowest conceivable win total at that point) and the #18 overall pick (our highest conceivable finish is 13th best record) really that significant?

I looked at Pierre's gamelog for May, and it did seem like there were missed running opportunities there, so some of the people on the other side of this debate seem to have a point. I didn't realize that he's .342 with runners in scoring position this season, and I wonder where his RBI total ranks for leadoff hitters. He does finally have a positive WAR, for what its worth. I know people will say he righted the ship at a time that it didn't mean anything, but seems like 90% of mlb players' careers are built on statistics accrued when those players aren't playing for anything, since baseball has such an unforgiving playoff structure.

when I say "hitter" - I mean "hitter" in terms of getting hits, not getting on base. The rest of your post is quite good, chw42, and I'll respond to it after the game.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 04:23 PM) So do the advanced metrics. A higher batting average is inherently beneficial to OBP, OPS etc. It's just that they get a little deeper than what a BA can tell you. I'd agree, but I also believe OPS is a statistic that ultimately weights SLG too highly in comparison with OBP, and that using OPS is especially problematic with traditional leadoff hitters.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 04:20 PM) 84% of Rios' at bats this year were from the 5th spot and lower. Thus, his struggles this year have nothing to do with Pierre's inability to steal bases. You might be the first person I've seen suggest that Pierre wasn't ineffective on the bases this year. I do not mean to suggest he is not more ineffective than in previous seasons. I think he has stolen bases at his career clip since May. I think some of the situations have evaporated because of our anemic offense.

QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 04:00 PM) Juan Pierre has been a very average player this year. I really have no idea what else there is to discuss. This is a very acceptable response, IMO.

Here a couple of examples of intangible things that have no doubt hindered Juan Pierre to getting into SOME (NOT ALL) decent running situations: 1) Having Adam Dunn be able to make contact with the baseball, work counts with the frequency he usually can, and command the kind of respect from pitchers where they will throw him balls instead of center cut fastball strikes he cannot make contact with (and thus set up catchers to throw out any decent speedster) 2) See above for Alex Rios. If you don't think those two things have had an impact on Pierre's running game indirectly, I think you are deluding yourself. Alexei's relative inability to work counts as a #2 has to also have some impact on his running game.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 03:33 PM) We give up. Juan Pierre is the greatest player in White Sox history. Without him, we would have won 4 or 5 games this year. It's responses like this that make threads like this utterly ridiculous. I never said anything like this. I believe Pierre is an above average hitter, whose speed makes him a decent asset if the middle of the lineup is working properly. I don't believe he merits the continuous bashing he receives by the same five people who resort to childish tactics to make their points.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 03:40 PM) Is this a relatively new statistic? I've never heard of it No f***in s***. You're the one who threw out the 11th in hits stat, Greg is talking about "tangible" statistics, so I was just trying to be as simplistic as him. But once again, thanks for letting me in on this new batting average thing, I'll look into it. You're welcome. I tend to think there is some value in a player who has a high batting average.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 03:13 PM) Ay, FINE. If you take away ALL of Pierre's sacrifices and don't take away any one elses, he's still 11th in all of baseball in outs made. You happy now? Again, outs made, like hits, are better reflected by this statistic called BATTING AVERAGE.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 01:53 PM) Tangible fact: He's 3rd in baseball in outs made. Who cares how many at bats he has? That was fun. Tangible fact: he's also first in sacrifices, which are productive outs he's called on (not decides) to make. That was fun, too.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 01:40 PM) He's 11th in the AL in hits while being 8th in at bats, so no, it literally does nothing to help your argument. Yes, most dudes who have the most hits happen to have the most at bats. As it turns out, at one time Major League Baseball devised a statistic to describe a player's effectiveness in getting hits compared to the number of at bats that player has. That statistic is called "batting average." As it turns out, Juan Pierre is just outside of the top twenty in the entire American League in that statistic as well (of the 77 qualified batters). In other words, he's basically in the top quarter of the league. Of the 129 batters with a minimum of 300 plate appearances, Juan Pierre happens to be 29th in batting average, or near the top fifth of the league. In other words, I think he's alright in that department.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 01:10 PM) *Facepalm. Can you tell me where he ranks in OBP and OPS? Or hell, where's at in terms of batting average? His hits are some of the most empty in all of baseball. He's also getting a ton of PAs since he's a leadoff hitter. But no, let's look at a stat that doesn't take a plethora of things into context. Pierre's a replacement level player who only started to hit when we were already in the s***. His fielding in April also cost the Sox games. There's no use to defend him, you're fighting a losing battle. Can you tell me where in OPS a player's ability to go from first to third on a single to right field is denoted? Or a player's ability to go home on a double from first? It's an extra base that a high-OPS, slower player doesn't get, yet it's not picked up in that stat. Could you honestly argue that Pierre's intangible speed which earns him an extra base in every running situation against a much slower player is picked up by a stat like OPS? This is exactly why using OPS to measure Juan Pierre's total skill is a totally misguided venture. You don't look at Paul Konerko's stolen bases, and yet you want to measure Juan Pierre's power.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 01:07 PM) Come up with whatever garbage you have to refute that, nobody but the usual loonies are going to believe you. I have to go catch a flight. You all have a good weekend. I'm sure we all appreciate that you are an important man, to catch a flight after you resort to name-calling and degradation in order to make your points, rather than taking the time to actually look up data and back the s*** you claim up. If the usual loonies are the ones who actually do research to back up their opinions rather than just insult people, then yes, I think I'd rather listen to them.

I'm inclined to be much more patient with Morel than other players. I expect slight improvement from Morel. If we get rid of Walker I think Beckham will return to form as well.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 12:45 PM) he can't even steal anymore, It's statements like this that make detractors look ridiculous. Again, why are you so desperate to exaggerate? The dude CAN clearly steal bases. In fact, his SB/CS percentage since May 1st is exactly in line with his career rate. Unless you can prove that Ozzie automatically green-lighted him AND that he has had several count/situational missed opportunities, you cannot assume that the lack of offense/situations had SOMETHING to do with his lower totals. From a SB/CS perspective, Juan had an abysmal April. The rest is normal. Sorry you disagree; the numbers don't lie.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 12:32 PM) I don't know how to argue with you. Let's start with this: Juan had something to do with us starting 7-4 instead of 9-2, which I felt was no big deal. The rest of the team had a ton to do with the subsequent 4-18 stretch. People would like to believe the two games that made us 7-4 instead of 9-2 caused the downward spiral that led to our utter doom. I think it has a lot more to do with the 4-18 stretch that Juan Pierre's defense had little or nothing to do with.

Let's be clear. After Juan Pierre dropped two fly balls, the White Sox were 7-4, and Matt Thornton was still the closer. People are saying that those two dropped fly balls that ultimately resulted in the White Sox being 7-4 were more responsible for the 11-22 start than the subsequent 4-18 stretch in which Juan Pierre did not drop any fly balls? And we're also saying that Matt Thornton's role as closer was threatened by this? I don't think Ozzie or anyone else would agree with that.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 11:30 AM) Juan Pierre torpedoed Matt Thornton's season more than Matt did. This might be the most amazing thing I've ever read on this site.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 11:28 AM) It's ironic because GHibbard basically showed stats the other day that said after our bad start, the Sox had no chance to make the playoffs. Unless Detroit and the rest of the division won less than 85 games. You guys keep twisting this point.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 9, 2011 -> 11:28 AM) It's ironic because GHibbard basically showed stats the other day that said after our bad start, the Sox had no chance to make the playoffs. No player was more responsible for that awful start than Pierre. Juan's a good guy who's had a solid 2nd half of the year, but there should be a ton of pissed off Sox fans if he's brought back next year when the more talented De Aza/Lillibridge combo could take over for cheaper and be more productive. Juan Pierre was more responsible than Matt Thornton and the rest of the bullpen for the 11-22? They blew 3-4 games IN A ROW.

Juan is also 11th overall in the AL in hits. Not that that means he's anything but total s***, of course.