witesoxfan

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 05:39 PM) Belisario is pitching very similiar to last year. I tend to ignore era and w/l for relievers. Last year batters hit .274 off him and this year it is .284. Last year his WHIP was 1.47 and it is 1.38 this year. That is because his walks are down this year. He was mediocre last year so I am not sure what you expected this year. Jones had mediocre numbers as well last year. Lindstom has a career .274 BA against him. That is poor for a reliver. Please explain to me how Nate Jones was mediocre last year.

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 04:54 PM) The other thing about getting wrapped up in single season WAR numbers is that the defensive statistic underlying the calculation is susceptible to some year-to-year variation. UZR ideally has a sample size of three or more seasons, so when looking at a player's defensive component, it's always important to see whether it lines up with his career norms. Right, not that a player wasn't playing poor defense, but more along the lines of some guys will go get it for one year and then lose athleticism or their ability to read balls (thinking of De Aza here) or they can just have a bad year when they're normally great. Same thing happens to hitters too. Does anybody really think Chris Davis or Evan Longoria are as bad a hitters as they look this season?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 04:46 PM) We're on the same page at least you don't say sabermetrics are the end all be all. It just seems WAR and saber stats will be misused for many years without the general media people and most people in general having advanced knowledge on how they work. I know you're not talking about me, but I like using WAR as basically a reference: 0 - Replacement 1 - Accetable but bad starter/Bench player/Middle reliever 2 - Mediocre starter 3 - Good starter 4 - Great starter 5 - All-Star Caliber Starter 6 - All-Star Caliber Starter/Possible MVP candidate 7 - MVP Candidate 8 - Best player in the league candidate 9-11 - Mike Trout 14 - Barry Bonds I don't like to line players up by WAR and say "so and so IS better than so and so because his WAR is higher," just that "so and so has been as valuable as so and so has to his team" or "so and so has been more valuable to his team than so and so." You may also see me refer to certain players as a "4-5 WAR player" or something along those lines attempting to quantify qualitative adjectives like "good, great, and really, really great."

Well ss2k hijacked this from the Jose Abreu discussion, so even though I "started" the thread, I really didn't start it. Therefore, I'm taking Lyle Mouton.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 04:23 PM) It really all depends on a specific team's needs. And you've found the crux of the entire situation. This is why you can't just say "Would you rather have Donaldson or Abreu?" Both players have the same value, and they have star power and both have missed a bit of time (meaning both could easily be 4.5-5 WAR players at this point) but WAR is not meant to transplant players, it's meant to provide some sort of baseline value for these players. Given what the Sox offense looks like, and the fact that they have a viable option at 3B in Gillaspie, I'd obviously much rather have Abreu, but ask Oakland, with Moss hanging around 1B for them, who they'd rather have and they'd certainly tell you Donaldson. Ask the Cubs who they'd rather have. Conversely, ask the Nationals or Twins or Rangers who they'd rather have, and they'd assuredly tell you Abreu.

QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 04:09 PM) To me, it's a simple question. Who is harder to replace? Isn't WAR all about replacement value after all? In my opinion, it's always harder to find the star offensive player, the guy that makes everyone else in the lineup better (ala Miggy, prime Pujols, Bonds, Big Hurt), than a guy like Donaldson who is very good at everything but not great at any one thing. It's incredibly difficult to replace either one of them. How many players out there are gold glove caliber players at 3B who also draw walks and hit for a lot of power? How many players have the arm and range of a guy like Jason Heyward? Let's put this a different way - if you could only pick one of Chris Sale or Jose Abreu, which would you pick? It's the same exact thing. Again, I think you are severely underrating the importance and the value of their defense.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 03:06 PM) That's the problem with those stats. They are based on measures and probabilities and linear weights and measures and God knows what else a simpleton like me can't nor doesn't want to take the time to try and understand without going back to college or taking night classes. The beauty of ERA and batting averages and RBI's and Slugging and OBP is that the math for calculating those things is relatively simple. Anyone with an 8th grade education can follow it. They are part of the reason why baseball was America's game. I understand that the game is no longer the simple pleasure it once was . But it is still the same game on the field with a DH . But is no longer simple to evaluate a player . It has gone the way of big business and over analization to the point of reams and reams of paper pushing.It makes the guys with the computers instant baseball experts wihthout ever having stepped foot on the field or been in the trenches . For this my heart break a little. Yes, they have a complicated calculation for WAR itself, but I don't look it to the point you do. I look at it and it allows me some knid of base guideline to compare a shortstop to a left fielder to a centerfielder to a first baseman to a starting pitcher to a relief pitcher. How valuable are these guys contributions to a team? It's not cut and dry and, as I've said and shown in the past, a 6.5 WAR may be "greater" than a 6.0 WAR, but it may not be "better" depending upon the composition of the team. We compare Donaldson and Abreu, but Donaldson's value is greater to the A's than it would be the White Sox because then the Sox have to shift Gillaspie to 1B (where he loses value because he's suddenly being compared to guys like Cabrera, Abreu, Rizzo, Freeman, Encarnacion, Moss, and any others) instead of being compared to those who also play 3B (Frazier, Sandoval, Longoria, Carpenter, Donaldson, and whoever else). Based on that, the Sox lose value there. I still use all the numbers when I'm gauging how good players are. I don't merely look at WAR. It's a quick reference guide and, while there's value, a lot of it is subjective value.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 02:14 PM) I have a confession to make, last week i went on vacation when i had a 3 game gamethread win streak, and I left it up to Littlehurt and SS2k5 to make a gamethread and continue the streak. They failed. And because they failed, I failed. We all failed. Mostly them, a little bit me, but i failed a little bit. Not nearly as much as them, though. Vacation was fun, though. Go Sox. Oh so you're the reason we got all these problems. Why am I not surprised? I am going to start a thread and say "Is it Kyyle's fault that the Sox have had as many problems as they did and couldn't make any trades and why they don't spend any money and the minor leagues are so bad?"

QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 01:51 PM) I strongly disagree that the Sox would have the same record with Donaldson instead of Abreu That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I think you are vastly underrating the defensive prowess of guys like Donaldson, Gordon (who has a fairly good line, despite what you suggested), and Heyward and that effect on a team's overall success.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 01:33 PM) I think the more accurate question is does anyone really believe that if you switched Donaldson's and Abreu's exact preformances this year to the opposite teams, if there would be no change at all on their respective teams. If the answer is no, the stat is flawed. Of course it's a flawed statistic, but no statistic is perfect. It's also difficult to just assume that teams are going to remain the same record wise. The Sox I think would be - they could simply move Gillaspie over to 1B and they'd be sitting right around their same mark - but the A's then have to do something with Moss or Abreu and find a 3B, which cuts 5 positional runs from either's value due to the positional adjustment made in WAR.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 12:25 PM) It wouldn't have solved all the woes, but if you take history into account, it alone makes the team at least 2 or 3 games better. The DBacks have lost 3 games when leading in the 9th. The White Sox the 2 years Reed was closing, lost 4 each season. They have lost 6 so far. Right there they are contending. Asking someone exactly what they would do is a set up because I don't know what was available as far as trades. All I'm saying is he picked the wrong guys and shouldn't have traded Addison Reed. Reed was very underappreciated, and like Alexei Ramirez, who seems to be a popular guy to want to trade, is a guy who is going to cost a lot more to replace than he cost. To some extent, I agree, but it's not as if there haven't been talented arms in the bullpen or guys who have a decent track record. Soemtimes those don't work out. It's just frustrating seeing people say "It's Hahn's fault!" when he has brought in some good arms and they haven't done anything. At some point, the accountability has to be put on the players too. It's worth pointing out that Reed has an even lower ground ball percentge this year, which means he could have legitimately allowed more home runs here too - 1 or 2 more is a signficant number and it could have been the difference between those. He's not a bad reliever, and the bullpen would be better with him, but it's impossible to say how much better or what would have happened exactly. The results of that trade haven't looked good thus far but I would hope that Hahn and company will continue to see opportunities to cash in on value like that moving forward.

QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 12:10 PM) how flawed is WAR when Abreu is at 4.0 and guys like Josh Donaldson, Jason Heyward, and Alex Gordon are 4.5+? I realize Abreu is hurt by his baserunning/defense but his offense is SO much better than those three guys that there's no way their baserunning/defense superiority should overcome Abreu's immense run producing capabilities. Are the White Sox really only 4 wins better with Abreu rather than a guy like Garrett Jones playing 1B? Josh Donaldson, Jason Heyward, and Alex Gordon all play semi-premium to premium defensive positions and they play it incredibly well while being fairly to very productive hitters to boot. It's not flawed whatsoever. In theory, yes, the White Sox are only 4 games better. Much of that depends upon context, which WAR removes from the equation. Still, I feel the difference between 54-58 and 50-62 is incredibly signficant.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 12:02 PM) I will agree with this. Hahn, KW and JR specifically said they didn't want to go through another 99 loss season again. One way to pretty much assure that of not happening is to have a decent bullpen. If it is so easy, that should have been addressed. Most every team is always in the market for relievers, so I'm going to guess it's not as easy as advertised, especially when you really don't have anything in AAA or near ready in AA to even remotely consider hanging your hat. Guys are going to fail, guys are going to get injured. You have to assume that. The Sox got burned because they signed the wrong guys and had nothing but waiver guys ready to step in when they and other waiver guys failed. The lack of arms high in the system isn't necessarily Hahn's fault, but it wasn't like he wasn't part of the decision makers the past decade. Here are your free agents then: http://espn.go.com/mlb/freeagents/_/position/rp What would you have done differently? It's so easy to criticize when we're sitting behind a computer screen with incomplete information. Given what was on the market, I have no problem with what Hahn did. I also understand that you wouldn't have traded Reed, but I am going to disagree strongly and suggest that you are sorely mistaken if you think that would have solved all of the bullpen woes.

QUOTE (VAfan @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 11:48 AM) Another point. To those who think Hahn didn't focus on the pen because we were "rebuilding" but he'll fix it next year, because it's easy to fix, doesn't that make out Hahn as a total moron? I mean, if it's easy to fix the pen in a year, then why didn't Hahn do it this year? My opinion is that Hahn tried to fix the pen, but did a very bad job of it, starting with the fact the team had no real closer once it traded Reed. I'm not saying the Reed trade was ill conceived on its own. I would say without a backup plan for a pen without Reed, it was extremely risky, and the risk Hahn took blew up in his face. Hahn did the same thing with the starting rotation, but on that score, he's been much more fortunate. Erik Johnson and Felipe Paulino blew up, but the Sox have gotten by with wire-waiver claim Hector Noesi and 29-year-old rookie Scott Carroll. Plus, John Danks has pitched much better than might have been expected. Really? He's not tied the Sox up to any long-term contracts in the bullpen. You can typically fix a pen pretty quickly if you throw a lot of money at it. There's not a lot of room there for return on investment. Instead, you bring in a lot of guys long on talent and short on results and see if you can fix them, so to speak. I'm not upset at the results the Sox have gotten out of Guerra, Putnam, Petricka, nor Webb. I think there's still talent in Belisario's arm, but I won't be upset if he's no longer with the club after the season. If you can find good, cheap, alternatives, it allows you to spend money on guys like Jose Abreu. Tell me, would you rather the Sox pay Jose Abreu $11 mill this year or Rafael Soriano $14 mill? It's not as easy as Rick Hahn waving a magic wand, but to some degree, it is as easy as Jerry Reinsdorf waving his magic wand.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 11:35 AM) I view yours and Kalapse posts as support LOL, I like Moises, but he's definitely a guy you bring along slowly. Acting as the 4th outfielder for the near and intermediate future is a perfect role for him, and if he plays himself into more plate appearances, that's not a bad thing.

I think I'm at the point where I know how bright the Cubs future looks, but it's impossible not to be skeptical.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 11:10 AM) Opening day leadoff hitter for a team coming off a playoff appearance. Still not as bad as Darin Erstad hitting 2nd on Opening Day for a team coming off a 90 win season, even if he did hit a 2 run homer.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 10:51 AM) They aren't. We shouldn't be thinking playoffs this year. Realistically, unless Verlanders arm falls off after he runs int Miguel Cabrera, which knocks his legs off, we shouldn't be expecting to win in 2015 either. I agree they shouldn't expect to, but I think they can. Just stick with this same approach and get youngish cost controlled players.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 10:47 AM) It's a rebuilding year. Hahn doesn't think he had a shot at winning.... I don't think that's true at all. The profiles of the guys he's brought in have been ground ball pitchers and, if possible, guys with power sinkers or good split finger stuff. Either way, he's been getting away from the flyball pitcher out of the pen. I think there's a parallel universe out there somewhere where this bullpen pitched up to it's potential, but that just wasn't the case here.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 10:25 AM) It also was unlucky for the hitter that ball didn't wind up in the seats. It was tatooed. Beli sucks, there are no 2 ways around it. It was a pitch low and away that Arcia went down and got. Guys hit balls hard all the time right at players. If you're using that argument, then Burton is lucky that the ball Dunn hit didn't leave the stadium.

A 53.2% LOB% is incredibly unlucky in the grand scheme of things. If you want one example, look at Arcia's 2 run double on Saturday's game. That entire play is De Aza's fault. He took a poor route, faced the wrong way, and as a result, had to adjust while going back and leap and he misplayed it, and somehow that is not an error on him. A good defender makes that play and "saves" two runs. Yet somehow, the official scorer believed that the 2 runs given up were Belisario's fault. Ask Angels or Blue Jays fans about Scott Downs. See what they tell you. That's a pretty poor argument. Belisario was fairly good last year and he's been mostly hit with one too many hits. I'd have no problem with him coming back. Gordon Beckham has gotten a bit unlucky. I don't see how that's relevant. There's also 2850 plate appearances worth of results to show that he's not a very good hitter and to expect change is insanity. I also am not a guy who feels that the Sox need to dump Danks, and you know that. An upgrade would be fine but it's not necessary. If they can get the right players, I don't mind them trading him.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 09:15 AM) It wasn't all bad luck. Downs was getting pretty old. Beli was a non tender, that's $7 million right there. Sure Jones may have helped. It was bad luck Lindstrom got hurt, but there were posts on here saying his injury was a blessing. Putnam got hurt, but his performance has well exceeded expectations. Petricka has been at least as good as anyone could expect, and the other guys were junk. Waiver wire pick ups or organizational arms like Rienzo who people get way too excited about. The good news is if you are a White Sox prospect and fancy at least starting your career in the bullpen, you have zero obstacles except poor performance or injury keeping you from a major league job. But it's mostly bad luck. Belisario wasn't bad last year and it seemed the Dodgers no longer wanted him because they had other guys coming in (meaning they were just spending as much money as they could on the bullpen) plus there were some concerns about his night life. He's been extraordinarily unlucky this year - a 53.2% LOB% is just about the lowest I've ever seen. Downs was a great reliever last year and he just couldn't find the strike zone with the Sox. Injuries are bad luck too.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 09:03 AM) I'll confess, I thought the pen was the strongest part of the roster coming into the season. I thought it looked really good too, and due to plain bad luck, it's been the worst. Frankly, I'm not sure what they could have done differently.

Remember that time that Tekotte caught that ball in Spring Training

No way I'm spending on Miller or Neshek. Not that they're bad relievers, but Miller could get upwards of $20+ mill and Neshek could be around $15-20 mill and I'm not too keen on spending that much for calculated lottery tickets.