witesoxfan

I thought the coolest thing about baseball was that, aside from the pitcher and catcher, you could theoretically play the remaining 7 guys any way that you wanted to. Consider me in the group that hates this idea.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 06:38 PM) My question would be what has to happen for a 'shutdown ' to occur? Does a scoreless inning in a one run game increase the WPA by .06? How about in a two run game ? Wade Davis striking out the side on 9 pitches or Zach Duke getting 3 flyouts has the same effect on win probability. That stat could depend more on situations the relievers are brought in. The meltdown stat obviously makes sense, if your bullpen can't hold leads, you are gonna lose. Right, and even in the OP, I didn't discuss enough. It's still a very vague statistic in that it doesn't discuss how these things happen and doesn't preclude other scenarios where a pitcher totally screws up or does the entirely wrong thing and the defense saves their ass, which is why I wanted to say that "we can't predict these things" and "previous numbers do not indicate that we CAN predict these things." You could have a guy that puts up a flukish great SD/MD percentage, but if he's garbage doing it, you still want to see him put up other numbers (and vice versa). Because yes, if a pitcher comes in with his team, runner on 3rd, 1 out, the idea is for him to get a strikeout, but if he gets a flyball and an outfielder makes a great throw against the tagging guy, it counts the same as him getting two outs all by himself, when, really, he screwed up. It's not a perfect statistic - there is no such thing - but I thought I'd point it out and validate the point many on here made all winter in that "yes, it was a 73 win team, but how much of that was based on a weakened roster in September? and how much of that was based on a bullpen that seemingly blew more games than it saved?" --- As an aside that is also connected to this, I once again want to say that if Jesse Crain is good and healthy, he is going to be one of the 7 best relievers on this team and he is going to make the roster.

Aside from being the only player in MLB history to steal 100+ bases in 3 straight seasons, but, in 1986, he also happened to steal 107 bases (88.4% SB%) with an OBP of .301. Also, having not done much research at all, and qualifying it with a minimum PA of 2000, I'm guessing he has the most stolen bases (752) per plate appearance (5970). (I naturally have to qualify because Herb Washington had 46 career stolen bases and 0 career plate appearances) EDIT: I love Herb Washington as such an outlier in baseball history so much that I edited my poster title.

The Brewers traded or are close to trading for Papelbon today, and it got me wondering "why?" Maybe they think he's legitimately better than anybody else and he will justify the cost, or maybe they think he is going to help reduce bullpen meltdowns. So I perused the stats on FanGraphs and noticed a little something here that we all saw last year and perhaps couldn't put a finger on just WHAT it was exactly. FanGraphs tracks statistics called Shutdowns and Meltdowns on their win probability section. These correlate to an appearance by a relief pitcher who either increases his team's chances of winning by 6% (WPA of 0.06; this is a Shutdown) or decreases his team's chances of winning by 6% (WPA of -0.06; this is a Meltdown). Here were the Sox rankings in both of these categories as a team: Shutdowns: 114 (8th fewest) Meltdowns: 91 (2nd most) In looking at these, I don't see a team needing a bullpen with shutdown type guys to be successful - the Tigers had the fewest with 98, the Braves and Athletics had 112, the Blue Jays, 113, the Mariners 115, and the Giants 119. However, I do think this CAN allude to high level talent in the bullpen, as the notable teams at the top were the Angels, Orioles, Indians, Cardinals, Pirates, Yankees, and Phillies (and yes, the Phillies are notable, because they have some incredibly talented arms in their bullpen, though they've traded a couple of those away this offseason (assuming the Papelbon trade goes through)). So this is nice to have, but I don't necessarily see this as something that is vital. However, the Sox 2nd most Meltdowns was topped only by the Rockies with 103. None of the 10 teams that allowed the most made the playoffs, with the Indians and Yankees coming closest at 85 and 84 wins respectively. The 10 teams who had the fewest meltdowns? The Brewers, Tigers, Dodgers, Nationals, Athletics, Phillies, Giants, Padres, Mariners and Royals. The Brewers almost made the playoffs last year, the Phillies, as previously discussed, do have a ton of talent, the Padres seemingly always have a good bullpen, and the Mariners finished 1 game out of a Wild Card spot. There's nothing concrete that will help us determine which pitchers will or will not shutdown or meltdown other than accumulating as many good relievers as you realistically can, but it leads some light into possible bullpen constructions. Really, it's nice having guys who can be shutdown relievers, but the most important part of a relievers job is to not screw the pooch. If they can keep everything under control and not blow up, they've done their job. Sorry, wanted to include a link for funsies: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...=&players=0

It wasn't that long ago that Michael Ynoa was considered to be a future ace with a limitless future. He's a pitcher, so there was more inherent risk, but hitters can bust just as easily. In a situation like that, ESPECIALLY a situation like that, spreading out your risk is the far safer and more logical move [unless you have a virtually limitless amount of monetary resources].

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 03:53 PM) jon greenberg ‏@jon_greenberg 34m34 minutes ago I told Samardzija the Sox are using him to market the team. "Smart," he said. "I'd do that too." Daryl Van Schouwen ‏@CST_soxvan 44m44 minutes ago Samardzija says he's 'home.' Says #whitesox are built to win 'and built to win every day.' We have it first hand from Jeff Samardzija that anything less than 162-0 is a disappointment.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 03:37 PM) After reading this thread I kind of am reminiscing about the old ootp days. Like when I had an 84 win Rangers team win their division and then storm through the World Series? Yeah, that was awesome. Andrew Brackman FTW.

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 12:24 PM) Lol no way. I'm not signing a 33 year old James Shields to a 75 million dollar contract Over 3 years, it'd probably be too much. Over 4 years, that would be a worthwhile deal. Over 5 years it'd be an absolute bargain. Over 75,000 years, I'll pay for the deal myself.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 12:22 PM) dang it, that is what i thought. When GMs say they could "conceivably" do something, it's as empty and vague as a statement can get and it means nothing at all. I could conceivably drive to Chicago right now and go to Soxfest because I have a car and enough money to pay for gas and a scalped ticket, but it's not going to happen.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 12:21 PM) to the best of your knowledge, who are the 4.... thanks in advance. Sale, Quintana, Danks, Rodon

This was a minor league signing and that's because Crain hasn't been healthy enough to pitch for a year and a half, but I genuinely think that if he's healthy, he's making the big league roster because he's going to be one of the 7 best relievers on the team. I just don't know that he'll be healthy.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 11:53 AM) Alright guys, time to start listing what you are making for the superbowl. Ribs are gonna be on my menu My mom makes the best ribs, so I will probably ask her to do some of those. I am making Buffalo chicken dip, hummus (two different kinds...green olive and roasted red pepper), and BBQ smokies.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 10:39 AM) Definitely the "spaghetti against the wall" strategy this year. But, you can't have EVERYTHING you want, right? Why throw spaghetti against the wall? That's not only a hell of a mess to clean up, but that's delicious spaghetti you're throwing against that wall!

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 11:18 AM) In my opinion, if Scott Carroll starts a game for the 2015 White Sox, something went terribly wrong. If Scott Carroll starts 3 or more games, I'd say something has gone terribly wrong. But if it's like the 2nd of a double header or a quick start to eat some innings while the pitching staff is depleted, it's not as big of a deal to me.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 11:45 PM) I'd prefer Micah. If it's Sanchez, he better be a whiz defensively cause he ain't a hitter, right? Sanchez hit .293/.349/.412 in 494 PAs in AAA last year. He may be an OK hitter at the majors but likely nothing special.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 09:15 AM) this is my attempt of kissarse and brown-nosing. but i am serious. this is 1 of the best sites of posters who are willing to help. many thanks. can i respond to this or make a general statement as a counter?? You can do whatever you want, this is America.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 06:29 AM) if someone can asked a couple of questions for me. 1. how come the sox haven't gone after some of the Cubans that were just recently sign?? are they planning to going after anymore in the immediate future?? Yoan Lopez could be a 1 rnd potential and all that was needed was a signing bonus. there are others who can help the system or the the team 2. are the sox going to sign or obtain any more key players to help the team go further in the playoff?? 1) We did homework on the guys and pursued them as far as we could, but didn't feel that there was a fit, Regarding Yoan Lopez specifically, we felt that a 100% tax on overage charges didn't justify the cost of bringing him in. Had we done so, it would have cost nearly 2 times the value of his contract and would limit other potential signings we could make outside of him, so we just didn't feel that was the right opportunity. 2) We are always looking to improve the team and we have been in contact with a few players, but we can't say one way or the other whether or not we will obtain these players.

I made this thread title confusing and poorly worded because I am an idiot and like that Borat sketch.

QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 22, 2015 -> 02:48 PM) Announcement coming....24 invited. That's a lot. http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/107...spring-training Scott Carroll lives. Figured Carroll would be back. Edit to add that a lot of those vets have MLB experience and some of them had a lot of success at the MLB level.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 22, 2015 -> 10:49 AM) That's crazy -- I feel like I've read that he's lost velocity everywhere. Good find, you crazy Dakota person! We can't trust what we read these days Maybe it's just that his results are consistent with a loss in velocity: K/9: 2012 - 8.82 2013 - 7.71 2014 - 7.14 BB/9: 2012 - 2.29 2013 - 2.68 2014 - 1.74 So this basically tells us that he's either lost K's and made up for it with fewer walks, or that he's consciously decided to allow more contact. The former is bad because he is relying more on his defense, making his performance much less reliable, especially considering he was pitching in front of the best defense in the league. The latter could be good depending on the type of contact he's allowed. Ok, so contact: GB%: 2012 - 52.3% 2013 - 41.6% 2014 - 45.2% HR/FB% 2012 - 13.4% 2013 - 8.6% 2014 - 9.7% Even though I didn't list it, basically every year before 2012 he had HR/FB's between 11-13%. So it looks like as soon as he got to KC, he started giving up way more contact, but that contact was more a lot more fly balls and those fly balls have left the park at a lower rate than ever before. Given that his career FIP/ERA are within 5 points of each other, there's no reason to believe that he has an unusual ability to suppress hard contact, which means the only logical conclusion is that he's benefited greatly from some combination of (1) good defense, (2) favorable park factors, and (3) lucky homerun rates. It's a little too perfect that all of those things got stronger the minute he got to KC. So moving into a situation where he's pitching in a bandbox in front of a defense that is mediocre at best makes that regression look pretty likely. Good find on the velo -- maybe that's not what's causing him to regress. But SOMETHING is, or at least has been. I haven't seen the Brooks Baseball numbers and graphs, but I'd like to see how the movement on his two and four seamers have changed over the years. It's just weird to see pitchers with his mileage maintain or increase velocity past 30. Hell, it's weird to see ANY pitcher maintain or increase velocity past 30, not considering mileage on their arm. My guess is that the Royals did suggest to him that he should pitch to contact. Don't be afraid to put guys away, but we have an insanely good defense, so feel free to work quick and work in the zone, because we have guys that will go and get it. I think he'd have to get away from that some in Chicago. What I find most interesting about his pitch selection is the cutter/slider. They are pitchers that are distinctly different but they have similar movement, so I think they can confuse pitch recognition software OR he is consciously throwing his slider harder in spite of movement to sneak up on guys or he's throwing his cutter slower to generate more movement. Again, I can't verify any of this stuff without Brooks and I just won't have time during the day to do that, but let's take a look at the usage (via PITCHf/x; cutter, slider) 2009: 7.1, 12.0 2010: 8.9, 7.9 2011: 4.4, 11.2 2012: 5.0, 15.4 2013: 17.6, 3.2 2014: 25.3, 0 He went to the Royals in 2013. Did they ask him to abandon the use of the slider and focus on the cutter (a pitch with less movement, thus being easier to hit, but also hard to square up) or is his ability to throw a real hard moving slider diminishing to the point that he's really only able to throw a cutter? Without watching [hours and hours] of video, I'd have no way of knowing. I'd also be unable to just call up Shields and ask him. However, pitching theory would dictate that you can use the cutter in the zone more often as it's disguised as a fastball and then breaks at the last second, inducing weak contact. The same cannot be said for the slider, as they work better when moving away from a hitter or, if it's a real honker, back-dooring or front-dooring a hitter, and thus they are not as easy to throw in the zone while getting away with it. I'm sure there's more to it, and the above may honestly be gobbledygook, but it logically makes sense and at least provides some working models for what's caused some of the "lack of velocity" regression without an actual lack of velocity.

Don't stop believing Kyle.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jan 22, 2015 -> 12:24 AM) Anyone play Out of the Park baseball? I'm currently downloading OOTP 15 because I've been dying to play another baseball sim ever since BMO baseball crashed and never came back online. I've been watching videos and it looks insanely detailed, probably too detailed for my liking, but I look forward to building a Rick Hahn-like dynasty. First order of business will be trading Adam Dunn for a real catcher. Most video games value Adam Dunn rather highly because he always has awesome power/plate disc. ratings. Used to play OOTP 6.5 a ton. Haven't played in a long time though and the computer I had it on crashed hard. I tried OOTP 10 or 11 and there was just too much for me and I couldn't get into it.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 07:56 PM) He's most likely gonna get that fifth year, and at 33 and losing velocity fast, he's more likely to turn into a more expensive John Danks than he is to be a mid-rotation guy throughout the life of that deal. There's no question he's a huge upgrade for us in 2015, but this would NOT fit the current RH plan of making upgrades that aren't enormous future risks. He's already "just" a "good #3," and his further decline could happen as early as 2016. Not for $100m, man. Lot of miles on that arm and the velo is already fringe and on its way down. On the plus side, we'd only be giving up a 4th round draft pick at this point, lol. I initially thought Shields' velocity was on the downward trend given what we know about precedent and pitchers getting older, but check this: FG Pitch Type, FB velocities: 2011: 91 2012: 92.3 2013: 92.2 2014: 92.4 And then we look at his PITCHf/x (four seam, two seam) 2011: 90.9, 91 2012: 92, 92.1 2013: 92.2, 92.1 2014: 92.5, 92.1 The velocity of his cutter hit a high of 89 in 2012 but has typically been around 86-87. I'd offer 4/$80 in some form, but wouldn't budge from that. If some team wants to risk the 5th year, then I'd be out.

Also, I think this is the Sox most upgradable spot. There are still a few pitchers available who would be certifiable upgrades which would allow Noesi to remain on the MLB roster as a swing man/long reliever which also increases the depth of the team and helps safeguard against a disaster. C, 3B, and 2B could probably be upgraded too, and you could think about a mini-blockbuster that sends Garcia out and a proven RF in, but those are all a lot more complicated. Adding one more starting pitcher does not. This is one of those moves that doesn't make sense at the beginning of the offseason, but now that it's played out and you can see the holes, this is something that would really some sense.

Really, if you want to assume that Samardzija is going to leave (and I think you can safely make that assumption), I'd have no problem bringing Shields in. It at least guarantees you another starter beyond this year while allowing room for Rodon next year and, draft pick wise, you'd actually come out ahead (giving up a 4th this year for Shields while getting a sandwich next year for Samardzija). It essentially eliminates the possibility for a Samardzija extension, but I think I'd be OK with that in this scenario. If you can get Shields for 4 years, $80 mill or so, you can likely count on him to be good for the next 2 years (3-3.5 WAR) and solid-average the next two (2-2.5 WAR). If we assume 3.5 and then a half win reduction each following year, we'd be looking at approximately 11 WAR, which would be about $7.28 mill per win, which really isn't a bad price to pay on the open market. That's if he doesn't get 5 years, which is something that throws a huge kink into the whole thing. At 5/$100, assuming the same regression, you're looking at $8 mill per win. That's not outrageous, but makes it more difficult to justify, and older players have a tendency to fall off more quickly and become unplayable.