witesoxfan

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 02:24 PM) Those are not all of the statistics on the back of the card. Surely you can't be talking about walks and strikeouts, can you? Those are tomfoolery samerfetrics!

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 02:22 PM) He gut lucky. Sabremetricians know all about that. Must have talked to the right sportswriters then.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 02:17 PM) No example, just a lot of hot air from the Sabermetricians. Player A - .263 BA, 41 HR, 114 RBI, 96 R, 5 SB, 4 CS Player B - .276 BA, 28 HR, 66 RBI, 75 R, 5 SB, 0 CS There are only very minor differences in era here. Please tell me which of these back of the baseball card players you would prefer to have on your team. One of them was a notorious abuser of PEDs while the other was merely suspected.

I think when Rienzo takes the field, the team just knows what a stud he is and how hard he's worked to that point so they're super psyched to score runs and win ball games for him.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 21, 2014 -> 02:12 PM) Well unless they've started putting microchips on the backs of baseball cards since I collected them, I'd say a lot. Advanced metrics includes getting a lot more raw data, but more so is about different lenses to see the data. From the perspective of a statistician (not baseball, but in general), this stuff isn't even very complex. It is elementary analysis techniques. Filter out pollution and noise to give a more meaningful answer to a question. This isn't wizardry. I have no idea what you just said but it sounds scary and gimmicky.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 02:05 PM) What does Sabremetrics tell you that you can't find from the stats on the back of baseball cards. I didn't even know they still made baseball cards.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 02:00 PM) Take away their money and their PEDs. Why would you do that? That has absolutely nothing to do with sabermetrics whatsoever.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 01:56 PM) Like I said, it's largely a gimmick. Who has benefitted most from Sabremetrics? Those who sell products based around bootleg stats. The Boston Red Sox have won 3 World Series in 10 years. How's that? If that's not good enough, the Rays have become one of the best and most well run teams in the majors, the Athletics are one of the best teams in the league, the Cardinals have been at the top of the division and competitive for a number of years now, and the Astros have the best farm system in the majors. Meanwhile, teams that don't use them as extensively (because, let's face it, EVERY team uses sabermetrics) like the Royals, Twins, and Mariners are consistently finishing at the bottom of their divisions. Calling it a gimmick is the same thing as calling home runs gimmicks. It's a ridiculous premise based entirely on the concept of a term I refer to as "Marty-trolling."

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 01:05 PM) Sabermetrics is largely a gimmick. Calling sabermetrics a gimmick is like saying hitting home runs is a gimmick. NO TEAM WILL EVER USE THAT except that all teams, to some degree, run their teams through sabermetric analysis.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 21, 2014 -> 01:08 PM) Maybe while trying to make someone look a fool next time your saber buddy starts adding up individual WAR coming up with team win totals, you can point this out. You are seriously the only person to have brought up WAR in this thread, so obviously I use it as an end all, be all. Good one. Yes, I may use it as an estimation (a player with 3 WAR can be expected to add approximately 3 wins, but that's all subject to what he did and when he did it, but he's obviously fairly solid player), so if I say that AJ would have taken from the Sox from 63 wins to 66 wins, it was with the understood caveat that the number is not without error. He may have added 5 wins, he may have added 10 wins or 12 wins, or he may have been so bad in those situations when the Sox needed him most that he actually ends up costing the Sox even more, losing the Sox a game or two. I don't see how that would be possible, but anything is. Pretty sure any time the idea of WAR is discussed, it's always with the words "this is not the end all, be all." That is what makes posts like this... QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 21, 2014 -> 12:47 PM) I got a laugh out of that too. WAR is the last word in baseball arguments until it's not. ...absolutely hilarious. It's the easiest to cite and paints a pretty clear initial picture which is why it's cited so often.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 21, 2014 -> 11:55 AM) Wow. There's a thread about keeping Dunn beyond this year. Adam f***ing Dunn. It's nice to see him not be entirely worthless for a moment, but come on, yo. 60 years, all the money

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 21, 2014 -> 11:46 AM) Soxtalk didn't like Santana or Jimenez, but for some reason have a fascination with Masterson, a guy who has put up exactly 2 seasons of more than 10 starts and an ERA lower than 4.50. I think he's a fairly good pitcher, but I'm not on board with giving him a big contract. I don't want them spending a significant amount on any starter in the free agent market.

QUOTE (Tmar @ May 21, 2014 -> 11:01 AM) You're racist for thinking of that No, I'm prejudiced for that, but you are racist for thinking that I'm racist for it.

QUOTE (Tmar @ May 21, 2014 -> 10:57 AM) Wow that's racist You're racist for saying that.

I know a guy who took a year long trip on bike all the way down to the very southernmost tip of North America. The coolest thing about it? I've been able to follow him along his journey on Facebook. It's interesting living vicariously through him as he makes this journey. Last I checked though, I believe he is about done and ready to head back north.

I think if Adam Dunn weren't on the team right now, the Sox would only have 2 wins.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:51 AM) Well agree to disagree then. Maybe one of the worst is too harsh, but hes not one of the best either. Belisario, Putnam, and Petrika are all pitching at an elite level. Webb has the experience in the minors, nice potential, and has been mostly better than Lindstrom this year anyways. I'd rather see any of those guys close. Or get rid of the role all together but we know that's likely not to happen, even if they won't officially name one now. Ideally, they'd go closer by committee just playing matchups, but there's something about the human psyche that doesn't allow relievers to ever get comfortable with that notion. My personal choice was Webb, FWIW, but it was just not a very important issue for me.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ May 21, 2014 -> 10:08 AM) Alright, let's pump the brakes here. The kid is 21 and only has 100 pro games under his belt. He's got a couple more years until we can forget about him. I don't think fringe prospect status means he's given up on him, but consider that he was 13th on the FutureSox board coming into the year, and the couple of people in the current top 10 thread that ran it out to 25 had him at 19th and 16th respectively. Frankly, Barnum is a fringe prospect at this point. I'm not even close to writing him off, but when I think of White Sox prospects, his status barely crosses my mind. Hopefully he figures it out.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 21, 2014 -> 10:04 AM) The good news is Dunn's production this season isn't all that much better than his production the last calendar year. He might be able to maintain it or at least come pretty close. You obviously have not looked at Dunn's numbers very closely then. Dunn 2013 - .219/.320/.442/.762, 12.5% BB rate, 31.1% K rate Dunn 2014 - .250/.394/.476/.869, 18.7% BB rate, 29% K rate How is any of that "not that much better than his production the last calendar year?" Please, explain.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:51 AM) Considering the crap you give someone when they said AJ would make have made a big difference last year by pointing out his WAR, it is interesting you write there's no way the Sox are anywhere near where they are right now without Dunn in the lineup when he is sporting a 0.3 WAR. OK, they'd be exactly where they are. Are you happy now? They are still a game below .500, but it wouldn't be surprising if they were 4 or 5 games below if he weren't here. WAR is context neutral. That homer he hit last night that was the difference in the Sox winning and losing was not context neutral. The Sox would have been better last year with AJ. Maybe 72 wins, maybe 75, maybe 67 wins. It's not the difference between them competing and not. One more FYI - Dunn's WPA this year is 0.72. That's currently on pace to be his best total since 2010.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:41 AM) Correct. Which is why I mentioned him being our 5th best reliever. The closer doesn't need to be your best guy but he shouldn't be one of your worst, either. I don't agree that he's one of the worst. Of the current relievers, the only one I'd 100% of the time take over him is Belisario. Lindstrom, Putnam, Webb, and Petricka are all interchangeable as far as I'm concerned, so going with the guy who has some experience in the closer's role makes a hell of a lot of sense.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:35 AM) Meh, my Royal fan friends are pretty down. After all these years of losing and finally this is supposed to be their year and they come out of the gates pretty low. just tell them to

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:33 AM) He has a 1.47 WHIP. He's the 5th best righty reliever on the team. He should not be the closer. Your "closer," or the guy that pitches the 9th inning, doesn't have to be your best pitcher. You want your best pitcher available to throw in the 7th, 8th, AND 9th innings. I've mentioned it before, but the Sox organization, like every other organization in baseball, is very aware of leverage in pitching situations, and they want their best pitchers available for the highest leverage spots. The 9th inning, up by 1 or 2, with no outs and no one on base is pretty much a medium leverage spot, all things considered. He also has a GO/AO of 1.75, so it's not like a lot of the hits he gave up were bullets all over the field. They're pretty much all going to be singles.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:30 AM) I've been getting really confused now that Charlotte is the Hornets again. I was about to write a long post about how much better New Orleans would be with 2 lottery picks and Noel, but then realized they are the pelicans, and this went to the bob cats...and it's like playing madden 5 years into a franchise where no team is in same city and all names have changed. No kidding, the Los Angeles All-Stars being in the AFC South was weird enough, but then the Los Angeles Aftershocks ended up in the AFC North!

Considering they gave Guerrero $28 million and Olivo's on a MLC, I think I know how this one ends.