witesoxfan

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 04:34 PM) I'll be disappointed if Micah Johnson can't put up similar numbers (outside of stolen bases) as Gordon in a few years. Montas is more valuable, IMO. Yeah, Dee Gordon doesn't excite me that much. Nice player but if the Sox bring in a 2B, I hope it's someone who is like really really good.

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 04:08 PM) Jimmy Rollins is the Dodgers SS Gonna be really weird seeing him in anything other than a Phillies uni after 15 years.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 03:23 PM) No. The Bears lost on my birthday once. Looked really good for the first 13 seconds and then it went all downhill. You were born on February 4th!

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 03:17 PM) https://twitter.com/JoeO670/status/542782825632899072 Saw PTI yesterday, and of course I shook my head. On the other hand, it would be nice if Sale got some run support and bullpen support, and stacked five 20-win seasons in a row. And Q and Smarj got 17-18 wins next year. Wins are fun. Kornheiser's a moron and a troll. I can't take him seriously.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 03:01 PM) Sox have never won on my birthday. Have they ever lost?

DeShilelds Jr sounds really intriguing. I could 100% see him as a guy the White Sox target.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 01:11 PM) Will never have Gordo's glove. Will likely be marginally better with the bat. I would be surprised if this is true, but I also think much higher of Semien than I do Beckham.

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 12:47 PM) Is Diamond still around? The Sox would have the rotting hulk of the DVD combo for maximum let downs. Last pitched in 2011 in the minors for the Cubs and Twins. He had an ERA of 8.52, a WHIP of 1.995, but a stellar K/9 of 9.6. Yes, he is the savior and solution to all of the problems.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 11:25 AM) There are only so many roster spots. If the player they acquire cannot be a productive addition to that roster, I'd rather have some minor league prospects. I just don't see Ackley as a guy who helps this team improve the roster. He provides depth. He can play several positions on the field and he won't kill you at the plate nor in the field. Those glue guys can add a lot to a team.

QUOTE (balfanman @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) Maybe I'm off base here, but Crawford seems to me to be a guy who can transfer quite nicely from a speedster, to more of a power guy with adequate speed. Sort of a Jim Thome with a little less power, but better legs. Is it wrong to think that he could hit 25 - 30 home runs at the cell and provide better than average defense? If he doesn't have to rely quite so much on his legs he might remain healthier. Then you have the Herm Schnieder effect too. I think he can be perfectly fine as he ages, but 25 to 30 homers is asking too much. His power is definitely not that good. He could be a 10-15 homer guy at the cell I think. I'd have no problem with Crawford so long as the cost was adequate.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 10:24 AM) I still don't get why we didn't non-tender Dayan. I think it's because they like him enough that he can be a fallback option in the event that they don't get an outfielder, but if they do, his salary is conceivably low enough that they can trade him or DFA him. I could see a team like the Padres or Twins or Phillies taking a shot on him. They don't believe they're close to competing and can maybe find room for a guy like that on their team, so what's the worst thing that's going to happen? They get mediocre production and cut him the following year?

QUOTE (LDF @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 10:07 AM) He will go fart

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 09:57 AM) The last one also won't happen since Liriano just signed a 3 year deal with Pittsburgh. Also, what was the deal with McCarthy? I know they traded him for Danks, but that seemed to be because BMac was overvalued and Danks undervalued. Was there some kind of specific problem with BMac? Supposedly they felt that his mechanics would lead to injuries. It's safe to say they weren't wrong if that's what they believed. However, prior to his contract with the DBacks, I recall the Sox being interested in him.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) I agree, but he also wants 5 years last I heard. Both are the same age. He's not going to get 5 years. He wanted a 6 year, $100 million deal last year. I'd offer 3 years and $14 mill a year.

So I am absolutely not trolling here whatsoever, but I think Ervin Santana makes a hell of a lot more sense than Edinson Volquez.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 09:38 AM) It was invented in the early 80's. The idea of it is sound, but it's inaccurate because it assumes that on-base and total bases are equally valuable, which they aren't, and the relative value of each changes as the run environment changes. It was obsolete when they invented linear weights-based statistic like wOBA, which attempt to do the same thing as OPS except they are actually accurate because they utilize separate run values for each type of offensive event and those values are upated to the run environment every year. But OPS was still useful as shorthand because people weren't calibrated to what made a good or bad wOBA, but then they invented wRC+, which is wOBA but park-adjusted, league-adjusted, and constantly scaled to league average so it's even easier to understand than OPS on shorthand. Then they invented OPS+, which is just as easy to reference as wRC+, but is less accurate and therefore useless. I thought he was talking about the tuxedo shirt not being proper formal wear at a dinner party. That's all I wear to formal dinner parties.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 09:33 AM) That is fine. Not everyone looks at the game the same way. Maybe "most" was the wrong word. I will use "many" instead, and firmly stand behind that statement. I don't think there's necessarily a clear cut answer. If your best hitter happens to be a high OBP, limited slugging guy, leadoff or the two hole would be best. But if your best hitter has a ton of power, I'd say the cleanup spot is a much better spot for him. In the end, so long as they're near the top, you're OK. Studies have shown that the difference between the best lineup optimization and the worst lineup optimization without being completely irrational (like benching Jose Abreu for Leury Garcia) is only going to make a difference of like 5 games, and the most optimal lineup is not going to be that far off from the typical managerial lineup.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 09:30 AM) Most elite baseball minds would tell you that your best hitter should hit #2. And let them hit, none of this "get em' over, get em' in" BS. Both have merits, but the 2 hole is not utilized in the "traditional" way by many teams these days. I do not agree with this and I do not believe most elite baseball minds would agree with this either. I think the 2nd spot is a very important spot in the lineup, but it does not necessarily have to be your best hitter.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 09:23 AM) That's not what made those teams what they are - Those teams would trade every veteran they had with a pulse for prospects. Plenty of teams who win don't trade their top prospects. See the Cardinals in St Louis, e.g. It also helps that teams that do trade them - Boston e.g. - produces a heck of a lot of them. The Sox don't. I'm all for trading prospects- for young talent. Not for decliners who are signed until they are 37. People also seem to analyze reputation, and not look at actual numbers....like OPS in the low 600s. Trading Rodon for Will Myers (if it could be done) would be laughably awful. As for Rodon, he's a college pitcher that dominated the lower minors and is good enough for the pen today. He is RAdinsky if EVERYTHING goes wrong. I remember the Sox trading their best prospects for luminaries such as Swisher and Edwin Jackson and Vasquez. That didn't get us anywhere. Andrew Miller was a college pitcher who dominated the lower minors too. So was Brian Matusz. It's not always that easy. The Tigers have also gone about trading all of their minor leaguers to develop a consistent MLB team. They've also developed players too. When it comes to trading for bonafide superstars, like Longoria is, you have to be open to trading anybody. If the Sox and Rays were talking Longoria and Myers, Rodon would be involved and that's OK. Rodon can't be traded yet, so there's nothing to worry about.

This is weird too. I don't mind the intention, but this doesn't seem like a good mix.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 10, 2014 -> 09:08 AM) Wonderful. Trade our next Sale. Or the next Radinsky. That's why they're prospects. In this instance, you do it in a second. However, Rodon cannot be traded. You can't be totally against dealing prospects under any circumstance or else you end up like the Pirates or Royals and wait 20+ years.

I'd sell the house and car for them, but the Sox do not have the nicest house nor the shiniest car.

QUOTE (glangon @ Dec 9, 2014 -> 05:39 PM) 23 blown saves we had last year. Robertson saved 39 out of 44 chances last year, Take that he blows 5 of the 23 we blew. Simplistically, we'd have won 18 more games with Robertson as closer. That would have taken us 91 wins. That is worth the $11.5 million a year we are paying him. This is very choppy and flawed logic. Many of those blown saves occurred in the 7th or 8th innings when Robertson would not have been in the game. Beyond that, you can't just take his statistics from the previous year, transmute them to the following season, and assuming everything is going to be the same. If he gives up 1 run in a 3 run game, it's still save even if it's ugly. If he gives up 1 run in a 1 run game, it's a blown save and everyone is angry. He is a good pitcher whose addition is welcome. He is not worth 18 games.

Also, this little bit on Semien by Carson Cistulli, one of Marcus Semien's biggest non-White Sox fan fans. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-improba...comment-4851931

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 9, 2014 -> 05:08 PM) Ok, come on, the last 4 years, counting 2011 when he only pitched half a season? I'm trying not to be too dour, but come on man. Would you say Chris Sale has been a good pitcher for the last 4 years? I ask because Sale and Samardzija have been on the exact same developmental scale over the last 4 years. Save for Sale getting hurt this year, I think their innings would look almost exactly the same. Sale's better, but Samardzija is still a very, very good pitcher.