witesoxfan

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 23, 2014 -> 01:08 PM) Mark Appel signed for $6.35 million as the #1 pick last year. 18% BELOW SLOT, and below the 2 previous #1 picks. He alledged turned down Houston's offer of $6 million the year before so the Astros moved on. I find it hard to believe Rodon would risk what he would be risking to not sign right around slot at #3. It was the Pirates initially, but yes, this is exactly right. It'd be absolutely insane for Boras to not have his client sign at the #3 pick value or maybe even a little above slot.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ May 23, 2014 -> 02:07 PM) Hawkins is the better prospect now due his huge power, but the consistent lack of solid contact is really concerning me. I know Hawkins is a level in front of Michalczewski, but he's also a year older and Michalczewski is preforming better in every aspect aside from the power. They're both walking at an acceptable rate and both striking out too much. Don't get me wrong, I like both of them, and I'm admittedly biased because, while I want him striking out less, I absolutely love Hawkins. Hawkins also has top of the line talent while I'm not sure Michalczewski is there on a talent level.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ May 22, 2014 -> 11:17 AM) My top 15, trying not to overreact to start of the 2014 season. 1. Anderson 2. Davidson 3. Johnson 4. Hawkins 5. Danish 6. Michalczewski 7. Sanchez 8. Ravelo 9. Beck 10. Thompson 11. Montas 12. Rondon 13. May 14. Barnum 15. Engel I think Anderson has the highest ceiling in our system and his stats are very impressive considering how raw he was coming from juco. Not panicking on Davidson; panicking a bit on Hawkins. Love what Michalczewski is doing at age 19 in Kannapolis, also what Ravelo is doing in Birmingham at 22. Sanchez is having a resurgent year in Charlotte, remember he's only 21 and really had no business being in AAA last year. Thompson appears to be a 4th outfielder with some pop, don't think he can hit consistently enough to earn a starting spot. Big fan of Montas and his upside. Michalczewski, 19, low-A - .275/.374/.379/.753, 26.2% K rate, 12% BB rate Hawkins, 20, high-A - .257/.337/.514/.851, 28.4% K rate, 10.7 BB rate I mean, I don't disagree with your rankings (though mine would be different), but I don't understand why you're panicking on Hawkins while loving what Michalczewski's doing.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 23, 2014 -> 10:41 AM) I've never seen this kid, but that name popped into my head because every said the same things about him. Wacha also saw his velocity increase by a couple MPH. Wacha's velocity in college was like 88-92 while he's averaging 93+ in the majors. He's the exception to the rule. I haven't seen any of his starts either, but the name that pops into my mind when I hear high floor but better stuff than you think is Mike Leake.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 23, 2014 -> 09:58 AM) I'm not sure these numbers are that great, but in Sale's last two starts (vs Boston, NYY), he's gone: 13 innings, 2 hits, 1 run, 3 walks, 20 strikeouts. That 0.39 WHIP could be improved. I think he's the best pitcher in the AL and it's not particularly close, and the only other pitcher I can even rate on his level is Kershaw.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ May 23, 2014 -> 09:39 AM) Ok as simply as possible. You're talking about measuring an event (outside zone swings) and recording it as generally a bad thing/undesirable result, completely ignoring that it in some situations it may be a very, very good thing and doing so selectively may be an indication of excellent strikezone judgement and plate discipline in a hitter. I think that's dumb. As I've clarified, most of the time it IS a bad thing, just as ground balls are typically bad because they're usually very weak outs and when they aren't they usually do very little damage as they are typically singles. Most of the time, swinging at pitches in the zone IS a good thing, just the same as hitting line drives is a good thing because they are hits most of the time and they can even be doubles or homers. However, there are instances where the opposite of the expected effect occurs, where you hit a grounder down the right field line just past the outstretched glove of the 1B and it kicks around and you end up with a triple, or you hit a screaming bullet to LF and the defender makes a stupendous catch. Generally speaking, you can't say so and so's O/Z-Swing is a bad thing because it ultimately does matter how they are performing, but players that swing at pitches out of the zone at a higher rate will typically be worse than those who do not.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ May 23, 2014 -> 09:16 AM) The strikezone really exists in the mind of the hitter more than it does on paper. I just want to start by saying that I disagree with this premise entirely. There is a clearly defined strikezone by the MLB rules: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/umpires/strike_zone.jsp Beyond that, the strikezone is in the mind of the umpire more than it is the hitter. The hitter just needs to generally know which balls are strikes and which are not. All of this is talking about pitching theory. That's not what we were discussing earlier. It's an interesting discussion, but not on the topic. O-Swing% and Z-Swing% really don't have a lot to do with this. I will say that there are all kinds of ways you can get hitters out. You can change speeds (fastball-curve/change), you can make pitches look similar but have break away (fastball-splitter/slider/change), you can change eye levels (working up and down, constantly shifting), you can change locations (in and out), you can throw unhittable pitches (KNUCKLEBALL), or whatever else. What works for one guy won't work for another. The most important part of that piece, for any pitcher, is fastball command.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:46 AM) BTW what I'm saying above is basically what Steverson seems to be preaching, don't help the pitcher out but get your pitch and be aggressive when you get it. Great approach for really anyone but especially flawed hitters. Go up to the plate with a plan. This guy likes to work the outer half of the plate with breaking balls and bust you in with fastballs, or he throws first pitch fastball 86% of the time, or whatever. Know what to expect and what to look for, kill it when you get it and don't even swing when you don't.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:43 AM) I see that but with all the machines tracking things now I think some kind of hot zone type stat would work better to account for context. IE Michael Young IIRC used to always murder Buehrle in Texas on the outside fastball, he'd reach out and hit the ball well outside of the zone and lace it down the line just because Mark wasn't getting in on him enough. The pitch sequence and batter strengths in general combine with the umpires judgement on the day (tight, wide, idiotic, etc.) to create an intelligent strikezone that doesn't necessarily match the zone on paper. IE that low and away change in the zone, just let it go by if you're not ready for it because 1 K isn't as bad as a DP. But that high fastball when you're geared up for it in a hitter's count with men on? Alexei can hit that thing out just fine, has done so many times over. You can see heat zones and where guys hit the ball, FGs and Brooks baseball are both good for that (as well as any other number of sites). But why would you want to subjectively change the strikezone when [theoretically] the strike zone does not change? In a vacuum, swinging at pitches in the zone is good, swinging at pitches outside of the zone is bad. There are always going to be examples of times it works out the opposite way - just like you prefer hitting line drives over anything else, but there will be times that ground balls end up as triples and line drives end up as outs. Over time, those trends to even out. From a pitcher's point of view, they would prefer those heat zones. It would be interesting to see some of it - maybe a guy should be looking at balls here and maybe he should figure out a way to handle breaking balls on the outer edge a bit better - and I do believe they have some of it, but from the viewpoint of swinging at pitches in the zone or not (or not swinging at pitches in the zone or not), those just don't make as much sense.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:28 AM) There's a difference between swinging through a hard-biting breaking ball when you are in protect mode vs. chasing something you can't hit 0-0 or ahead in the count. In fact swinging at a good pitch out of the zone 0-2 is better than swinging at a pitcher's pitch inside the zone up 2-0 with another strike left. I'm not sure how you're figuring that stuff but I'm hoping you stat pickles are accounting for that in your evaluations. Assuming 3.5 P/PA (Viciedo is at 3.69 right now) and 600 plate appearances, that's 2100 pitches over the course of a season that a hitter will see. There will be some times where a player will swing and protect at a pitch technically out of the zone, and that's not a bad thing, and there will be times he'll let a pitch on the black go even though it's in the zone. That's all fine. But, over the 2100 pitch sample size, those will all even out. That's why these are indicative of trends and why you can say "swinging out of the zone is a bad thing."

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:14 AM) Looking at Buehrle's stats for the past 365 days really shows that he's been on a good run for awhile. Over the past year his stat line goes as follows 33GS, 19-8, 3.01 ERA, 209.1 IP, 6 K/9, 2.73 K/BB. Thats a pretty lengthy stretch of dominance for a guy who most have never considered an ace. MBINAA

#whyareweusinghashtagsonSoxtalk

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:10 AM) Didn't read it but we should trade him to Texas now though. 100 YEARS, $1 TRILLION DOLLARS AND THE ASTEROID BELT

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 23, 2014 -> 07:52 AM) The Sabre man just gave you proof that player A is better than player B by virtue of the .3 difference in WAR, there's no denying 7 > 6.7. It's just as laughable as TWTW though. Only you are saying that and can't seem to understand it. You have Miguel Cabrera and Carlos Gomez who both put up a WAR of 7.6 last year. They were vastly different players. Now, if you value or feel defense helps your team more, then you would prefer Gomez. If your defense is fine but you need a hitter in the lineup, you'd prefer Cabrera. It's all about the added value of the marginal utility and what you need more.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 22, 2014 -> 02:12 PM) No. At least you're honest.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 22, 2014 -> 01:55 PM) As the saying goes, everything in moderation. If you like a player there will always be a stat to hang your hat on. You come up with those toolsy outfielders yet?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 22, 2014 -> 12:26 PM) The Saber guys told us Carlos Gomez sucked. They told us Dayan Viciedo was pretty much a lost cause. They told us Alexei Ramirez wasn't going to be worth his contract moving forward. The fact is like Hickory posted earlier, a 7.0 WAR player isn't necessarily better than a 6.7 WAR player. Yet, if someone is considered anit-saber, that fact will always be used as proof that the person who thinks the 6.7 player is better is just wrong. There are going to be misses both good and bad with whatever you use. Carlos Gomez DID suck. He was good defensively and s*** with the bat. He's turned it around pretty well. Nobody said Viciedo is a lost cause. Eminor didn't like him, but nobody ever wrote him off. If you are trying to convince me that he was good the last 2 years, you better start digging. Nobody has ever said that Alexei Ramirez's contract would not be worth his production, and if they did, they're allowed to make mistakes and rescind or change those thoughts. This is America. I'm surely not going to say that "so and so 7.0 WAR player" is absolutely, positiviely better than "so and so 6.7 WAR player." It's a case by case thing. I will almost always say a guy who puts up a 7.0 WAR is better than a 5.0 WAR.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 22, 2014 -> 11:45 AM) When advanced metrics likes them they stop being toolsy outfielders, Again, stop making meaningless, vague statements and come up with concrete examples. Until you do that, you are doing nothing but trolling.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 22, 2014 -> 11:30 AM) Small sample size!!! Instead of spouting off meaningless interjections, give examples of outfielders advanced metrics doesn't like.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 22, 2014 -> 11:12 AM) Why would Semien be untouchable? His best position is 2nd base, and I would argue that Micah Johnson is a superior prospect to him. I don't think the Sox view Semien as a future SS, and he would be third on the depth chart behind Gillaspie and Davidson. There's no reason to trade any sort of young talent at this point, and there are still questions surrounding Johnson's glove at 2B. He will probably stick, but who knows? QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ May 22, 2014 -> 11:14 AM) I know lol I hate you for making me think you were all serious and stuff.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 22, 2014 -> 11:18 AM) It's all opinion, yet the Sabre crowd will pull out an advanced metric like it's some kind of trump in an argument. It's bad luck when the metric doesn't predict future performance. I get a laugh out of the disdain shown for toolsy outfielders from the Sabre crowd, I guess bad luck doesn't cut it for the scouts that recommend the ones that flop. Disdain shown for toolsy outfielders? You mean how they agreed that Andrew McCutchen was the NL MVP last year and that Mike Trout has been robbed 2 years in a row all the while baseball "traditionalists" have awarded a 1B the award 2 years in a row? Frankly, you're making s*** up as you go and you're embarrassing yourself. Stop.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ May 22, 2014 -> 11:03 AM) Gotcha. Thanks For exact numbers, he was signed for $500k as a 7th round pick. $500k was the slot amount for the 103rd pick, which is a late 3rd rounder.

Thanks. They're pretty close, but if the Marlins made Stanton available, I wouldn't be like "NO, I WILL NOT DEAL MARCUS SEMIEN OR MATT DAVIDSON AS THE LAST PIECE OF THE TRADE BECAUSE THEY'RE TOO AWESOME."

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ May 22, 2014 -> 10:58 AM) With our infield surplus, I'll be shocked if we don't trade at least one for pitching this year. I think the trade candidates include Ramirez, Beckham, Dunn, Semien, and Davidson. No one is untradable, but even discussing trading Semien or Davidson right now is crazy talk.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ May 22, 2014 -> 10:29 AM) Yeah! Like a pitchback! Good call. I have an answer for all of life's problems. Except when I don't. Then I just eat Funyuns.