witesoxfan

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 12:14 PM) There's some weird stuff goin down over here....First off my computer turned itself on at 4am, which is straight up creepin me out, and now neither firefox nor chrome are letting me on facebook. Some sort of security block. The computer is steps away from where I was sleeping and I'm a light sleeper so I would have heard someone turn it on and change my security settings....Any idea what the hell happened? Oh, and now my computers calender says it 12/31/2006 10:29p.....Is this real life? How many pots did you smoke last night?

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 11:54 AM) This ^ You have to get within the error bars. 10 or so games will be decided purely by luck. If your true talent is 85 wins, you're in the race. And getting rid of Dunn makes no sense, Marty. If you could get something of value, you'd trade him, but you can't, so you have to use him. There's no argument for eating money to get rid of him other than tanking for more losses, which does not sit well the with fanbase, the league office, or the player's union. You can hate him, but there's no one better to replace him. My favorite story I've ever read was one where they took a league full of 30 completely average teams in every way - neutralizing for anything and everything - and they ran 1000 seasons worth of simulations. At the end of nearly every single one of those seasons, you had a fair number teams with 88-92 wins and a fair number of teams with 70-74 wins. The conclusion was that the only determining factor in all of those teams was merely luck. Not everything is that cut and dry in the majors today, but more of it is than people realize. I think, talent wise, this Sox team was probably about 79-81 wins coming into the year. Due to injury and trades, they are going to finish well below that 10 game threshold, but if they end up around 64 or 65 wins, it's going to end up right around that mark (Peavy is at 1.3 fWAR and Thornton at 0.3 fWAR in Boston, Rios is at 0.7 fWAR in Texas, and Gavin Floyd is typically a 2-4 fWAR pitcher who was out for the year and struggled previously due to injury). If the Sox make solid additions and are bold but smart with their offseason moves, I definitely think they can go into next year with a team that's got 85-87 win talent and then you hope you get the breaks from there.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 11:09 AM) Winning 85 games gets you nothing. I'd prefer any goal to that of being "competitive" Don't saddle the fans that go to the park with one more year of Dunn striking out it's not aesthetically pleasing baseball to see a guy who is not part of your future plans swing-and-miss so often. The Indians and Royals went into the year with plans of being "competitive." They are not going to win the Central, but both still have very legitimate chances at winning a Wild Card. They are also both set up to be (what I like to call) "BETTER" next year. That might not happen and they may fall back, but they have teams capable of winning 90 games in 2014. If the Sox go into next year with a goal of winning 85 games, you are looking at a team that's not going to win 85 games simply because of the nature of baseball is one of volatility and unpredictability. If they stay really healthy and their performance is up to par, they'd probably win 88 games, but if they suffer from injury and underperformers, they probably only win 75-78. That is the nature of the beast. Beyond that, at least an 85 win team is interesting for most of the year. As a fan, I prefer that than the POS the Sox ran out in June, July, and August. --- Regarding Dunn, he also has a tendency to hit balls a lot ways. Chicks still dig the long ball. You aren't getting anything valuable for him and, in fact, you'd probably still have to pick up $5-7 million MINIMUM just to get a team to take him on to save you some money. It's not smart business.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 10:50 AM) How do you define "compete"? As far as Dunn is concerned, his going would represent a clean start which would be a good thing. Compete, as in winning 85 games and being competitive. Please expound on this "clean start," because frankly it doesn't make sense to me. I could just as easily say letting go of Paul Konerko does that too, but that doesn't cost anything. Getting rid of Dunn creates dead money when there are no suitable replacements lined up. It's a bad idea.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 10:09 AM) Kolek is a HS pitcher. If they go pitcher that high I think it'd be a college arm. They could go HS bat though. I really like Alex Jackson. Honestly, I haven't the slightest clue who they'll take. My only thought is that it will be the best player available on their board, regardless of position. It could be a tall, lanky left handed pitcher with a big fastball and slider, and they'd take him. It's not like facing Chris Sale twice as often is going to make him any easier to hit.

QUOTE (Brian @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 10:22 AM) Why am I not starting Rivers over Brady? I can't pull the trigger. Until Gronkowski and/or Amendola gets back, he doesn't have a consistent and stable set of receivers to throw to. Seriously, you have to think they're kicking themselves right now for not bringing back Wes. I think the Dolphins are the favorite in that division right now.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 10:10 AM) Only complete morons could have looked at this roster and thought the White Sox would win anything this year. Pretty much all of Soxtalk then http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=88092 This has been an incredibly disappointing season, but much of it has to do with injuries, guys playing below their talent level, a surprisingly bad defense, players not developing and growing, and age (in only 1 instance). There were not a lot of signs for this demise, so no, people were not "complete morons" thinking this team would compete.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 07:33 AM) Chiefs have some talent on both sides of the ball. Now that they are finally healthy and they have a pro quarterback, watch out. It was fairly obvious watching the game last night which team had an NFL coach that has 10+ years of experience and which had a rookie head coach with a very explosive system.

Will you guys be hoping for Kolek if he goes down early in the year with a shoulder injury? I know we fantasize about picks, but speculating on potential draft picks in September is about as silly as speculating on a major league roster for 2015.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 20, 2013 -> 07:19 AM) I wish I knew if Sox have hit bottom yet. Miami probably has. Houston? Probably not. Cubs? I hope not. SI might have been over the top on the farm system, since Sox had several positive surprises this year (Semian, the Johnson boys. Beck, Goldberg, etc). Who's to say that a couple more might rise from the ashes in 2014. I wish the author would have put more blame on KW, but after re-reading it, he didn't have to. It's obvious. Konerko? I think he should retire. Dunn? That is one of Hahn's dilemmas -- what to do with him, but I hope he is gone, too. I would rather have Andy Wilkins at first base next year. If the Sox are going to attempt to compete next year - and they most certainly will - then you need Dunn on the roster. Even if he only adds 1-2 WAR, you simply aren't going to be able to reproduce what he does and what he means for the lineup. Personally, I'd prefer he hit 6th. If you just DFA Dunn (won't happen), then you are eating $15 million just to be done with him. You do this with players like Milton Bradley, who stop producing and are a distraction both in and out of the clubhouse. Dunn is a consummate citizen and teammate, and that he can hit a ball 500 feet only helps. If you trade Dunn, you are going to need to eat money. That's dead money for the club, preventing them from signing someone, losing production, and you will get virtually nothing in return. --- Dunn only had one year left on his deal. There's a very, very good chance he's not brought back. People need to relax and let it play out, because the Sox aren't just flat out going to get rid of him.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 19, 2013 -> 12:37 PM) I don't think that's even a question. Bridgewater if they're lucky, Boyd or Hundley are the "consultation" prizes. So do you have to consult someone or be consulted to get Boyd or Hundley? (I also think Manziel is going to be a good pro QB. I love him)

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 19, 2013 -> 01:42 PM) But if our slow pitchers helped cause the defensive woes ... and if the defensive woes caused us to lose 33 one-run games, hmmmm would he have been worth signing? They lost 21 one run games last year. They won 85 games last year without Mark Buehrle and it took an historical choke to miss the playoffs with essentially the same rotation.

I think Richardson is going to be a similar player to Stephen Jackson

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2013 -> 12:14 PM) I would take the money. If he stays healthy, he will be young enough to cash in again. Definitely this. Something like 6 years, $112 million would be good for him. I'd love to see him set a record though. 15 years, $360 million (roughly) deal with an opt out after 6 years. The remaining 9 would be worth $247.5, or $27.5 mill per year.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 19, 2013 -> 10:13 AM) I'm sure people will be pleased to know that Rios is still not hustling down the line on routine plays, as seen last night on ESPN. Ha, I was going to specifically mention Rios when it came to dogging it. Don't get me wrong, I actually really do like Rios as a player, but of any players I've ever seen, he is the one that sticks out as a guy who was simply disinterested at times.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 19, 2013 -> 09:55 AM) He is also the only guy who has been pretty honest about how tough of a year this has been for the players, which unfairly brings him more attention from the fans who aren't watching very deeply. To be fair, Konerko did say the team was s*** before they traded players away. QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Sep 19, 2013 -> 09:58 AM) He might look disinterested, but the guy still hustles down the line on every play. Something I cannot say about Konerko. That's been a Konerko thing his whole career though, and now he's old. I've never felt like he has dogged it though.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 18, 2013 -> 09:06 PM) Why does Robin even put Dunn in the lineup? He looks disinterested, not that I blame him. There are about 27 guys on this roster that are disinterested right now, and yet you pick out Adam f***ing Dunn. Jesus Christ. The guy could hit a 700 foot ultimate grand slam, save a child from drowning in Lake Michigan, help an elderly lady cross the road, and be the designated driver that night and you'd say "Why didn't he stop at Taco Bell? It's like he's not even trying anymore." I'm sure he's as interested as anybody could be on a team that's 30 games below .500

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 19, 2013 -> 08:27 AM) I'm on the career horse and it pays way better. Whaaaaaaaaat pssshhhh you lie

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 18, 2013 -> 09:01 PM) Teams take longer between innings. Adds up. Gotta have those commercials. This has not changed in AT LEAST the last 15 years

Oh, and use whatever numbers you want to...Matt Harvey was the best pitcher in the major leagues this year by far. It's a damn shame we won't get to see him next year.

I hadn't done enough research into fWAR or FIP and, while I think it's a better true indication of pitcher's talent, I think xFIP is a better calibration of a pitcher's overall talent and luck becomes less of a factor. You look at the raw fWAR numbers and you see that Scherzer is at 6.1 and Sale is at 4.7. Does anybody on here really believe that Max Scherzer has been 30% better than Chris Sale has this year? I sure as hell don't. So, I looked it up. First, here's the formula for FIP: FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP))-(2*K))/IP + constant (the constant is generally about 3.2 to normalize to make it look like ERA, as is done with wOBA) Immediately, that tells me it skews away from pitchers who give up home runs, but who do you think is going to give up more home runs, Chris Sale with 330-375-400-375-330 around his home park, or Max Scherzer at 345-370-420-365-335? To further prove this, consider that USCF's multi-year park factor is 108 while Comerica's is 105. Beyond that, USCF's home run factor is 1.15 compared to Comerica's at 0.98 this year; last year it was 1.35 and 1.03 respectively. Digging deeper, I wanted to see which of Chris Sale's home runs would have been home runs elsewhere. Immediately I ran into an outlier that is likely included in his numbers - Ian Kinsler's 197 foot inside the park home run. 99.99% of the time that is not a home run, but due to fluke factors, it was, and it skews his FIP upward already. There were 5 others I thought could be here or there (listed as either 'Just Enough' or short home runs that I thought could have stayed in on other days, courtsey ESPN Hit Tracker) Josh Donaldson - 6/7 Matt Tuiasosopo - 7/11 Ryan Raburn - 8/1 Miguel Cabrera - 8/12 Asdrubal Cabrera - 9/15 For mere example's sake, we'll remove those too. Keeping all other numbers constant while using 17 as the home runs allowed, Sale's FIP would drop from 3.26 to 3.02. To some extent, that normalizes his FIP and would put him at 11th in the majors and 4th in the AL. Instead, he's tied with Jhoulys Chacin (xFIP 3.85) and Hyun-Jin Ryu (xFIP 3.49); Chris Sale's xFIP is 2.96 - because he's a much better pitcher than both Chacin and Ryu and is more in line with guys like Cliff Lee and Yu Darvish. So really, nuts and bolts of the matter, Chris Sale's fWAR is being penalized because he pitches in a home run park while Max Scherzer is getting a bonus for pitching in a park that tends to suppress home runs. Their xFIPs? Chris Sale would rank 3rd in the AL at 2.96 (behind Felix at 2.69 and Darvish at 2.76), while Scherzer would be 5th at 3.08 (behind teammate Anibal Sanchez at 2.97, who actually leads the AL in both ERA (2.51) and FIP (2.48) but has only thrown 172 innings). At the end of the day, context matters in everything, and using these numbers as any sort of measuring stick really defeats the purpose because they are just supposed to give an indication as to how good these guys have been, not be the end all, be all. I still believe fWAR is the best number number to use, and xFIP has it's flaws too, but nothing is without holes. Bottomline, when comparing pitchers to one another, consider everything, take time to think about it, and then come to a conclusion.

QUOTE (flavum @ Sep 18, 2013 -> 03:52 PM) 10 left. 2-8 to lose 100. I'd settle for 4-6. I am really hoping they can avoid losing 100 games. It's only happened 3 times in franchise history 1932 - 49-102 1948 - 51-101 1970 - 56-106 So, at the very least, this can't be the worst team in franchise history

QUOTE (Jake @ Sep 18, 2013 -> 03:18 PM) Honestly, the thing that Deadspin is doing to piss me off is the constant stuff about concussions. They are just beating Goodell over the head with this stuff, criticizing every new policy, etc. I am okay with talking about the concussion problem. Unfortunately, the more we learn about concussions the more the issue (CTE, not concussions in general) appears to be unavoidable. Rules about hits may not reduce concussions at all and Deadspin is happy to point this out. Helmets do almost nothing to reduce concussions. Deadspin is happy to point that out. The current state of research indicates that most of the damaging blows do not cause actual concussions. Much like we think of with a boxer, the accumulation of sub-concussive blows over time is what causes this problem. So, Deadspin says they are anti-concussions (basically), but they are not anti-NFL (not to be confused with anti-Goodell). NFL fans make up a big part of their users. The more we learn about CTE, unfortunately, the more it appears the only way to reduce this risk significantly enough is to stop playing football. I can entertain THIS conversation, but Deadspin won't. They're just flinging s***. Generally, they're critical of Goodell and the higher ups within the NFL, and some of it is justified. Offhand, I think of the way they try and cut down on these silly celebration penalties is one they reamed them pretty good for, but regarding concussions, I get the feel that they view Goodell as a hypocrite in that he wants to limit them but increase regular season games to 18. Their obsession with ESPN is over the top too. Yes, ESPN sucks. Leave it at that. I still enjoy the website quite a bit though, and the Jambaroos, FunBags, and FeedBags are sweet. I love Burneko. QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 18, 2013 -> 03:28 PM) I'm not sure I agree that Bulls fans don't hold onto the 90s, but it certainly is different. I don't know, I think because a world series win seemed so impossible in Chicago that it holds a different type of reverence. I'm guessing I miss some of this because I'm not from Chicago, but there is just a different feel between the Bears, Bulls, and Sox championships. You can't even compare the Blackhawks because that one simply has not worn off yet. The Cubs suck, so I don't even care about them

I do agree that I wish he'd mentioned the World Series, but that's one thing Sox fans hang on to as well, similar to the Bears and '85. I honestly don't see a lot of Bulls fans reminiscing about the 90s, but the second someone even begins to describe LeBron as the best in the game, a Bulls fan will always preface it with "RIGHT NOW." Still, how many people hold Joe Crede and Aaron Rowand in high regard simply due to that World Series? They weren't bad players, but, if not for a World Series, they shouldn't be players that are celebrated forever. I think he really hurt his article by not mentioning that. (oh, and of course Deadspin wants hits - what website doesn't? - but they are merely about producing good articles, and that has fallen off to some extent in recent years, even if it is still one of my favorite sites)