Dick Allen

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 01:21 PM) So should we stop treating people for cancer until we find a cure that works every time? No, you use all of the best info you can, Dick. Why wouldn't you? All the poster did was cite some low FIPs to try to find an indicator of what Hahn might have seen in these guys. Does finding guys with high strikeouts, low walks, and low homeruns sound like a bad starting point for building a bullpen? As someone who lost his mom to cancer, I have some thoughts on cancer treatments in the US. I read the Sox shouldn't spend a lot of money on relievers because their performance varies from year to year, so why would FIP apply?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 01:17 PM) So, how? Why don't you tell me. The only thing I am blaming Hahn for is the Reed trade. I admitted I like the Beli signing. But many gang up on me and start making things up, how I think the Sox should max the payroll out... all I said was Hahn made a bad trade and keeping a $538k reliever would have had this team in contention.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 01:11 PM) So how do you build a bullpen? Not by looking at their FIP. If FIP is a more accurate predictor of the future, exactly what period is it predicting? It is always changing. Another way is not trading your young cheap good relievers away for .198 hitting, weak fielding AAA strikeout machines.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 01:05 PM) But it is MORE accurate. As with anything, smaller sample data begets less reliable predictions, and relievers always have small sample data. So if you're saying something along the lines of "yeah, I'm not going to look much into results at all when projecting these guys, I'd rather go with scouting," I think that's a perfectly defensible claim. But if a guy IS going to try to use results to project, the fact that the guy is using FIP instead of something else is nothing to balk at because it is, in fact, among the most reliable indicators we have available to us. Who cares if it is MORE accurate if it isn't accurate?

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 12:53 PM) Using ERA to value relievers is dumb as dirt. If you're a reliever and you come in with the bases loaded and you give up a grand salami in your inning of work your ERA is 9. If you give up a triple in your inning your ERA is zero. Those things happen all the time. FIP is MUCH better to use for relievers. As Eminor said it's more predictive than ERA, that's a fact you cannot dispute, it's like the Earth revolving around the sun. I am not the world's biggest supporter of DIPS theory but you can't argue that FIP is worse than ERA for relievers, no freaking way. I agree with reliever ERA's. One or two really bad outings can really effect them. But that doesn't mean FIP is accurate .

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 12:30 PM) Because if you read the thread the worry was it would carry over to penalties in a game of which I responded he has no history of it. It was part of a conversation than lasted more than one post. Even though Bennett has never had a personal foul in a regular season game, discipline is discipline. And that's not to say he isn't a 15 yard penalty at the wrong time waiting to happen, and an ejection away from hurting the Bears offense. But if the goal is to win a Super Bowl, body slamming the team's #1 pick isn't going to be tolerated, and shouldn't be.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 11:24 AM) Or its easier to send a message to the team that even a respected Vet can be punished for behavior they dont think fits a contending team. Theories abound even with the hard evidence he's never done that in a game, ever. So what if he hasn't done it in a game. He bodyslammed his teammate, a guy the Bears need. What if he fractured his clavicle? The boys will be boys defense wouldn't work. Putting an end to it before something like that happens is the goal.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 10:40 AM) Like I said I'm not sure if it's meant to be used on a year to year basis. This does show you how fickle bullpen arms can be from a year to year basis. I ask you, how is Hahn supposed to predict those guys, who obviously had success last year, would fail? BTW, I've been "against" the FIP stat, notice how I said "People". I could do the same thing with ERA and it still looks good. Projection is a FO's job. People on this board project both an increase in production and a decrease. One thing that doesn't make sense to me is if a relief pitcher's performance greatly varies from year to year, why would anyone use the previous season as the indicator for how they will perform in the current season? Regression and breakouts happen all the time. The Sox have a couple of breakouts in Petricka and Putnam. Next year, those guys both could be regressions.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 10:24 AM) People always say that FIP is "A better indicator of future success", so with that said here is look at the bullpen Hahn built...Kinda. ( Closer- Nate Jones- 2.64 Matt Lindstrom- 3.15 Scott Downs- 3.09 Ronald Belisario- 3.64 Daniel Webb- 2.34 Jake Petricka- 3.72 Now I'm not sure that the whole future success thing should really be used on a year to to year basis, but this shows you just how "good" the guys he brought together were last year. Those guys duplicate those numbers this year, which I'm sure Hahn was hoping for, then the bullpen is fine. Greg, VA, and whoever else who is arguing otherwise, please, explain how Rick Hahn is supposed to know these guys were gonna fail. Their regular ERA and FIP were good, so what else can he go off of? If you can't can't come up with a reason, then why blame Hahn? If FIP is an indicator of future success, it appears it needs a bit of fine tuning.

Baez is one year older than Courtney Hawkins. If Hawkins were putting up the same numbers in AAA next year, this board would want to see him in Chicago. Besides, if Baez is going to be a bust, who cares about super 2 status?

He was incredibly hot and lucky for a stretch. Then he went into a streak hardly any non pitcher has every had, now he is incredibly hot again. Flowers always was really streaky. Even when he was putting up big numbers in the minors. This year, I doubt he winds up .250, but some of that could be attributed to a cold spell that really is abnormal as much as maintaining a .380 BABIP. Ride out and enjoy the hot streak. A cold one is coming. They always do, but at least he has shown he does have the ability to be decent. It would be nice if he could just be more consistent.

A co worker an i were wondering, since Thome signed a 1 day contract with the Tribe and then officially retired, does his HOF waiting period begin now or when he last played?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 08:22 PM) Other than his monster free agent year, he wasn't really that great of a hitter until age 31. He has been top 10 in the MVP vote 5 times, and he is one of the greatest fielding 3b of all time. Should have well over 400 homers. Ithink he is if he can stay clear of steroid talk. I don't trust he has been clean his whole career.

This bouncing off the top is unreal. That is bad luck.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 08:12 PM) I've tried this tactic with him. Brought up getting on those who critique Ventura in hindsight or 2nd guessing him and while he gets on Hahn. But he swears he isn't using hindsight, says he was critical of that trade from get go ,oops ,wait now its from the start of spring training thanks to SSk2 doing some detective work. I was like fine so which plan have you advocated the Sox (Hahn) follow ? Contend every year , spend the max on payroll every year or Hahn's plan to build up the core 1st because its a rebuild and try for sustained success while limiting costs for but spending more for special occasions, because the Sox don't have a lot of things going for them financially to be able to do both at the same time. He danced around the question every time never giving a straight answer. Then he went on the attack trying to divert my attention from him onto me, but I know his M.O. so I didn't bite. I politely called him a guy who plays devil's advocate to stir the pot which others would call a troll. I'm not even as anti troll as most people on a message board are because it can generate conversation for Jason's sake and the sake of keeping Soxtalk around awhile it aint all bad . LMAO.

Is Beltre a HOFer?

What happen to Rios' power?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 06:56 PM) Nothing, he is offering a false equivalency scenario just like you did a few posts up. I really don't understand. Towers specifically said he was targeting power then he trades Davidson. People said Davidson is a middle of the order power bat. Towers is wrong sometimes too. But apparenty he was correct to dump Davidson. And considering Reed supposedly sucks, it is really baffling he wasn't given a better offer. The discussion is the Reed/ Davidson trade. I think mentioning if he could reverse it is relevant.

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 05:06 PM) It's nice to see the Cubs have decided to give a s*** about their fans and just try to put one of the organization's better players on the field. I mean, it's not nice because f*** the Cubs, but I wouldn't mind as a fan of theirs that they made this decision without considering the Super 2 bulls***. I agree. If the guy earned a promotion, promote him. It is not like after a new TV contract and a renovated stadium with additional revenue sources the Cubs are the Tampa Bay Rays.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 06:45 PM) How about if the D'Backs were offered back Eaton and Skaggs for Trumbo? What does that have to do with anything? Apparently you are one person who thinks it is impossible for Hahn to make a bad move. Even he would disagree with you. I thought signing Beli was a decent move, but it turns out that was wrong. Every GM makes mistakes. I pointed out your boy Rick made several great moves, but this one was bad.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 06:30 PM) Is your point that the D'Back are really smart, and make all the right moves? Since they are the smartest they knew to unload Davidson to get Reed? Where were their smarts in the Eaton/Skaggs trade? While you're at it, look at it in the context of them just trading away Parra. Do you think if they had it to do over again they'd trade Parra at his peak value in the offseason and still have Eaton right now? Is your point that the DBack's GM is a genius who was intending to compete this year and so traded away a prospect for a closer who is getting more expensive and they are 14 games under .500 and have Mark Trumbo instead of Eaton and Skaggs? Take a breath. My point was he was willing to overpay for power. If he was as high on Davidson as Soxtalk, and I am guessing he has better reports, I doubt he overpays for power. Something didn't add up in my mind. Right or wrong that is the truth.

If you needed to build an entire team and you could trade them, I would take Sale. I think he gets you a bigger trade package. If it was for keeps, I would take Abreu for injury possibilities and because he affects each game, Sale only 1 in 5. I thin you are still pretty happy if you get the 2nd pick.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 05:50 PM) I'm sure not seeing anything like that. It seems like the more hind was sighted, the more opinion changed. I remember one guy who has been against this from day one and that is Oldsox who mentions it with every single blown save. Whateves. The sign that at least the DBacks didn't think too much of Davidson's " middle of the order " bat was when they traded for Trumbo, basically a RH Adam Dunn with fewer walks. Eaton and Skaggs is a high price to pay if you think you already have that power in house. And I definitely mentioned when a lot of people were concerned about his super 2 status, the possibility no one will give a crap about that during the season. Does anyone really think that if no egg would be on his face and Towers offered Reed for Davidson at the trade deadline, Hahn would pass?

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 04:58 PM) This thread blows. You don't spend a ton of money on a bullpen for a rebuilding team. You don't trade away prospects from a rebuilding team to get veteran bullpen arms. Relief pitchers have the most erratic results from year to year of any players. The bullpen as constructed with Jones and Lindstom not getting injured and Belisario and Shields simply pitching similarly to last year and the rest of their careers, the bullpen is just fine. If you are going to blame Rick Hahn for veteran relievers not pitching up to their historical numbers or getting injured then by the same "logic" you also have to credit Hahn for everything Jose Abreu has done. Abreu hasn't hit one home run this year, Hahn hit them. P.S.- Our bullpen is 12th best in the AL. Our starters are also 12th best. Can there be a separate forum on this site just for posters who don't say dumb s***? Fire Cooper

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 03:18 PM) Here are your replies from the trade thread. Maybe I can read into some that you aren't excited about Davidson, but I don't see anything about the loss of Reed, or that he is more valuable than Davidson. There really isn't much of a commitment from you on the trade one way or another. I left out the posts about other things. The first post is in relation to how everyone likes the trade. I really wasn't too familiar the day of the trade. The more I read about Davidson, the more the deal didn't seem very good to me. It isn't hindsight. That's too easy. I didn't like this trade before they reported to spring training.