iamshack

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 03:17 PM) I love data of all kinds. But really, the outdoors happens to be one of my passions, so I do a lot of reading and discussion on related topics. Same goes for finance, technology, law, the Sox, and some other areas of interest or my career. I'd bet you have some areas you have that kind of knowledge too. Yeah, unfortunately they are fairly useless. Baseball, law, electricity trading and transmission, and women.

KHP, I agree with a lot of that, but don't confuse stacking a number of good hitters in a row throughout a lineup with protection theory. Certainly the better your hitters are, the more professional, dangerous hitters you stack up on one another, the more runs your team will score, for all and more of the reasons you listed. However, the studies show that a dominant hitter puts up similar individual numbers regardless of whether he has good hitters in front of or behind him in the lineup or not. That's not to say AGon won't drive in more runs because he has more men on base in front of him, or score more runs because he has better hitters behind him to knock him in. But the studies are showing that a hitter such as Manny Ramirez or AGon are not necessarily hitting more home runs or XBH because pitchers have to come after them more. From what I have read, the relationship is not a linear one. My guess is there may be some correlation, but it is difficult to recognize over that sample size because the odds of hitters increasing their slugging percentage aren't all that great based on seeing one better pitch to hit per AB. They still have to put that ball in play, they still have to hit it where someone isn't, etc. Most elite hitters get an XBH around 1/20 at bats, from what I understand. So if you do the math, that isn't necessarily coming out to a ton more XBH a year because you are still dealing having to put those pitches in play and hitting them where someone isn't. My very uneducated guess would be that it may come out to some 4-5 additional XBH per year. As for your other points regarding the position of the franchise in 2 years, I think you're spot on. A LOT will change between now and two years from now. Whether we sign AGon or not. KW has proven that.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 09:40 AM) Yeah, I tend to agree - they are predators for things we don't want and that are overpopulated. They will also, unfortunately, occasionally take small pets - but that is rare, and people can take precautions. But what will happen more and more, and is already happening in the burbs where coyote are more common now, is that people are freaking out about not only pets, but also their kids. Mind you, their kid is more likely to be killed by a racoon (or a rat or other disease carrying animal), but, a recent news story will make things worse - a woman in Canada was actually killed by coyotes. They think it is probably the first human death by coyote in modern recorded history for the US and Canada. So again, very, very, very, very rare - but that's all it takes for some folks to get into a panic. I really wish those people would focus on things that are actually likely to hurt their children, but, oh well. Jeesh...you and Balta have minds like freaking steel traps. How do you read all this stuff? And secondly, how do you retain it?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 04:00 PM) its like the lyceum of baseball. Indeed it is, the digital lyceum for intelligent baseball chatter, even with some good one-liners in there! Honestly, it's been very refreshing for me, instead of reading all the same nonsense about JR being cheap, Kenny sucking, the basecloggers, etc...

Actually, there is a lot more in this thread than just the speculation. There's some really good debate in here on a bunch of topics: Known production vs. prospect worth; Examples of other mega deals for stars; Position scarcity; Lineup protection theory, etc. A lot of people could learn some things by checking out this thread. In my opinion, one of the better threads of the year, honestly.

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 01:49 PM) He was +13.2 in 2003 which is very good, but aside from that not really and he's a career -14.5 UZR (-2.1 per 150) although data only goes back to 2002. He's also a combined +15 runs saved since 2004 going by Dewan's +/-. Your point on his positioning is actually spot on according to his +/-, he scores very high on balls hit deep and he scores badly on shallow hit balls. Ahh. good to know the stats do sometimes tell you what the eyes do indeed see...

For you sabermetrics guys, has Hunter ever profiled extremely well in regards to UZR? I've always thought he just plays extremely deep and has an extraordinary talent for timing leaps to pull down potential home run balls. On the other side of that coin (as the great HAWK-eh-roo likes to say), seems like he has always let a crapload of singles drop because of that defensive positioning. So I am just curious if he was always overrated, or just as he has gotten older and a step or so slower?

Good post KHP, but check out that article Qwerty posted about Adrian's walks. It points out that simply because he'll see more strikes hitting in a better lineup doesn't necessarily mean he'll hit more of those strikes for XBH. I think there is probably some truth to that - lineup protection seems to be a very mythological idea... Where I do think AGon will make up for the fewer walks is, as you mention, because of the park factors. I think more of those doubles he hit in Petco will be home runs in US Cellular, which will drive up his slugging percentage, and therefore, increase his OPS in that regard, even if his OBP is falling because he is being pitched around fewer times. As for the position scarcity argument, I couldn't agree with you more. At some point, an elite hitter is an elite hitter no matter where he plays on the diamond. Considering the fact that we have finite resources, and only 9 slots on the lineup card, with other skills needed to win baseball games (solid defensive players), I think Adrian, especially at his salary, is amongst the most valuable players right now in the game.

I have to agree with a lot of what is being said regarding no one blaming Cutler here. It's a defense-mechanism for all the excitement and praise we have been throwing upon him since the trade was made. We want to feel justified in our excitement and in saying that in fact we do, finally, have a franchise quarterback. Being out in Vegas, while the Bears are a "public" team, many people have seen them primarily in the National games that have been broadcasted on Sunday Night Football and now on Thursday night. And as Fathom pointed out, those are easily Cutler's worse 4 games of the season. The problem is, we have only played 9 games now, and he has already played poorly in 4 of them. I sat in a bar with mostly Niners fans and to hear them talk about how badly Cutler sucks is the same frustration to me as you guys hearing the idiots calling in on sports radio. He clearly doesn't suck. And honestly, as much as you want to dissect the INT's that were his fault, and those that were not, there is a very real cumulative effect going on here, as some have mentioned. The guy realizes the situation he is in, probably even secretly despises Ron Turner, and feels like he has to make every throw there is. This is also something he has been dealing with for several years now because he hasn't had a defense worth a s*** for most of his time in the NFL. Unfortunately, he does need to keep his chin up and settle down. I thought he did a good job of that in the Browns game, however, he came out of that game feeling as sore as he has ever felt (his own words). The guy shouldn't have to eat the ball all the time, because honestly, he'd be dead if he did that. Half the issue with trying to make every throw is to make something happen, the other half is to save his own life. Personally, I find it difficult to blame the guy, even though some of the problems do fall upon his decision making. As some have said, he is far down the list of problems, but at the same time, he shouldn't be immune to criticism. I just hope there is something that can be done, and quickly, otherwise finally having ourselves a good qb will all be for nothing...

QUOTE (KevinM @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 11:04 AM) I would hope (for their sake) they would go Rivera/Granderson/Hunter left to right. Yeah, but then they might offend the great Torii Hunter. Hunter is the best CF in the history of the game! That's preposterous!

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 11:05 AM) and a highly paid Gary Mathews Jr on the bench Jeesh, does that contract ever end?

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 12:20 AM) You might not like it, but that's the world of value in baseball economics especially at one of the easiest positions to fill as far a position player. No doubt Adrian is a beast and will be a tough sign in FA regardless in a couple years, but lets not even think about that for a second. I'll say an example and I still love the move the sox did here in the long run.. lets say years from now the sox want to trade Gordon Beckham. We'll say on "average" he puts up a .290/.350/.440/.800 line. You don't think the sox would get way more in terms of value at 2B than they would if he was playing 3B especially with those numbers? Sure some GMs would ask for more than what they should get (see Balt. GM/Brian Roberts) but some of the potential deals going through are way easier to see for a guy playing more up the middle or the outfield. (mostly CF) Utley would net more of a ransom more so than say.. a Kevin Youkilis (1B Youk) IMO. BTW.. I'll put every dime I got, barring an unforeseen extension, (which I highly doubt, though you never know) Joey Votto will be traded next year even though he's still in arb. I still believe the Reds will be having financial problems (stadium issues?) after this year. They need a s***load of buyouts and bargains in the market. I think he realizes the position scarcity argument. Certainly GB is more valuable with his offensive production at 2b as compared to 3b, because his production will be greater relative to other 2b than it will be to other 3b. However, the real question is where do you draw the line? Is a .950 OPS 1b less valuable than a .800 OPS 2b? At some point, a team can only afford to put 9 guys on the lineup card, and the runs the 1b knocks in count just as much as those that the 2b knocks in. The question is, where is that line drawn? In the case of AGon, I think he far exceeds that line. His value as a young, productive, cheap run producer is great enough that the position scarcity argument doesn't really come into play.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 11:55 PM) Eh.. I prefer my slang or abbreviated terminologies alot more. I was referring to TBolt's "incite."

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 12:47 AM) Aren't 27-year-old, left-handed, gold glove-winning, MVP candidates pretty hard to come by? There's not a precedent in very recent history for what Gonzalez would bring. You can however look at what Mark Texiera brought back with 1.5 years left and while making more money, and while also not being the power hitter Gonzalez is. Texeira, along with Ron Mahay, brought back Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Neftail Feliz, Elvis Andrus, Matt Harrison, and Beau Jones in a massive 2-for-5 deal. Yeah, that is another comparable...but I just don't feel like Teixeira had as high a ceiling as AGon has. To put it bluntly, Teixeira was putting up lower numbers in a hitter's paradise than AGon put up last year in a pitcher's park. Edit: I take that back...their numbers are fairly comparable. They put up comparable numbers with Teixeira in a hitter's park and AGon in a pitcher's park.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 11:43 PM) Eek... I hope he doesn't show him his follow thru or the towel drill.... Or teaching him how to spell...

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 12:37 AM) And he's a pitcher of course.. albeit.. a damn good one. Though usually those type of deals revolves more so on pitching a good ace mostly as pitchers are harder to come by, which is why I still commend KW on getting Peavy. Same as the Mets and Minaya basically robbing the Twins on netting Santana. Yeah, I dunno...I think you're right that an ace is harder to come by, but that begs the question: Does an ace contribute more to your club than a superstar everyday player?

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 12:25 AM) Look, I think I'm the one that started the 7-for-1 talk. That doesn't really matter to me. There's not player on the farm I'd hold back if we were going to get Adrian Gonzalez for 2 years at about $10M combined in return. If we could do 4-5 players, even better. Whatever players that the Padres thought were our 6th and 7th best players probably aren't so awesome that it would be worth going nuts over if we're getting that kind of return. The two best recent examples IMO would be the Haren deal (2 years remaining IIRC and cheap) and the Bedard deal (2 years remaining and cheap). The Haren deal was 6-for-2 and the Bedard deal was 5-for-1. Yeah, I think the Haren deal is as close as you can get.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 12:06 AM) Because apparently the new owner still has a big mess to clean up. I believe they still have big payments due for the ballpark, plus issues with fans not showing up, and there may be lingering issues from the divorce the previous owner went through which forced the sale of the team. Ownership has given the $40M payroll figure for the future, so it makes the most sense to acquire as many prospects as possible and try to build a contender by 2012, which is probably the soonest they'll be able to compete. Gonzalez is a FA after 2011, and clearly he doesn't fit given what he'd bring in cash on the open market. It makes sense to trade him now because they'll be able to get more, plus they'll be able to let the players they get back develop alongside the current new core they already have in place. I believe they pay $18 million a year on their ballpark.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 11:03 PM) Since it wasn't brought up, I would say much of the huge blockbuster trades that seem to happen atleast once or twice a year are because of increased salaries. Impending free agents who are going to be tough to resign have less value to teams that 3-4 prospects, whereas just 10 years ago the Astros sent Carlos Guillen, Freddy Garcia and John Halama for half of a season of Randy Johnson simply to be a rent a pitcher. Sabathia was the exact same scenario, but I seem to remember the only real big prospect that the Brewers gave up was LaPorta, and they didn't really have anywhere to play him anyways. The best two comparisons I could probably make off the top of my head in regards to value for Gonzalez would be Cabrera from Florida to Detroit and Griffey from Seattle to Cincinnati. Griffey had in fact just come off winning an MVP and putting up a .960 OPS as a CFer, and the two previous years he hit 56 homers in each. I don't know how they were rated, but I know that Cameron was a good prospect and Brett Tomko was a good prospect at one point in time too. I don't know about Jake Meyer (who was originally drafted by the Sox) or Antonio Perez, but they couldn't have been bad. I seem to remember Griffey sort of forcing the trade to Cinci, so that example may not work perfectly. Either way, I think the cost of players has a huge effect on why more players have been dealt recently. This is exactly the point I'm making. So to ask how many of these 7-1 trades have there been in the history of the game is to actually ask, how many have there been in the last 10 years. That's all I'm saying. Even still, you'd be hard-pressed to find a guy who has proven what AGon has proven in the major leagues to be on the block at his relative cost in terms of dollars. The MCab trade is actually not even close, as I have mentioned previously.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 07:49 PM) I'm glad, I was thinking to myself, who the f*** was Von Hayes and how do I not remember this trade. Than it turns out it was made before I was born. I remember Von Hayes playing for the Phillies in the postseason the year the White Sox lost to Baltimore in the AL League Championship series. He had some decent years in the mid-eighties, but never really turned into the player many thought he would be.

QUOTE (balfanman @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 04:43 PM) In all honesty you can say the same thing about any deal. In your previous example what if Nick Johnson spend most of the season on the disabled list and we have to replace him with a lesser bat, wind up losing few 1 or 2 run games, and losing the division by a game or two? What if it takes 2 or 3 seasons before Flowers, Danks, etc. become proficient ballplayers. By that time our outstanding starting rotation will be about gone. The truth is that any way we go has risk involved. Personally, I think that going for it all for the next couple of seasons has less risk than hoping a few of these minor leagers pan out. Our GM works under the philosophy that a sure thing is better than a few unknown quantities. I also think that in the last 24 months or so, our organization in it's entirety has done a fabulous job of pinpointing the guys with potential that really translates to mlb success from those that don't. I think it's encouraging that Beckham was never available. The same goes for Hudson and Flowers. They have been for the most part "off the table" from what we've heard in recent discussions. Now should a player like AGon truly become available, I am positive Kenny will look into it, even if it means players like Hudson and Flowers must be part of the package. Whether he decides AGon is worth those players, I don't know if any of us can be certain. But all I can say is, better them making the decisions than us...

Yeah, this is getting nasty guys. It's one thing to argue your points, it's another to insult eachother as your concluding sentence for every paragraph. Again, I love the debate here, but keep it civil. You're both intelligent guys, no need to lower the discussion to include insults.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 05:11 PM) CC sabathia. In tersm of 7 guys being dealt for one, yeah, i'll grant, that deosn't happen vary often. The point I'm trying to make is not that that large of a trade is uncommon; if it takes 7 guys to get him, we're not getting him. The point I'm trying to make is that we shouldn't sit here and think that getting Adrian Gonzalez is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to get a 40-50 home run guy. Those type of players are moving quite commonly. In the next year or two we'll see another one move in Fielder. Gonzales may have a cost for 2 years that is unusually low, but that's something we'll see more as teams sign guys early like Longoria. I don't think anyone has said that this is a once-in-a-lifetime chance. However, it's difficult to ignore how perfectly he resembles the player the White Sox need right now. I see both points here, and again, KHP and Kevin, outside of the jabs you're taking at one another, some great stuff here. I am really enjoying it. I see what Kevin is saying...the prospects and young players we have right now are better than we've had in quite a while, it would be a shame to give them all away for 1 player. However, I also see what KHP is saying. A great farm system is wonderful and all, but in the end, a farm system is a means to an end. It is a tool one uses to help the big league club win. I don't care if the posters of Soxtalk have to fill our minor league rosters if we are winning titles.

QUOTE (KevinM @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 05:01 PM) Well, in order to combat the "what do you propose we do?!" posts I've run across in this thread, here's a guy I would target: Seth Smith. He'd slot very nicely into RF and wouldn't cost a ton in terms of prospects. I've heard that same suggestion from my old roommate. If the Rockies were smart though, wouldn't they deal Hawpe instead and play Smith regularly?

QUOTE (KevinM @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 04:49 PM) I think they value Correia quite a bit, actually. Pitcher valuation is definitely fickle these days. 198.0 innings with a 94 ERA+ is definitely worth the $750,000 they gave him. Yeah, I think you're probably pretty right on, but I think most guys that pitch in that park are going to put up those kind of numbers. He's definitely a nice innings eater, but one that they could sacrifice if they really liked a package of Hudson, Flowers, Danks2 +. And my guess is Kenny is going to ask them to throw us a few bones so as to avoid the exact same thing you're talking about - people saying why did we trade 5 or 6 guys for 1?