caulfield12

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 8, 2015 -> 05:05 PM) Adam Dunn had 2 seasons in his career where advanced stats said he was more valuable than The 2014 version of Alexei Ramirez, mwho was supposed to be falling apart 2 years ago. I'll believe it when I see Alex Gordon and Jason Heyward get $100+ million free agent contracts coming off merely "decent" (775ish OPS) offensive years. It's one thing to overweight defense...or exploit seeming oversights (first it was OBP, then outfield defense....now it's bullpen construction and shifts). It's quite another to build an organizational philosophy around it. At any rate, we shall see.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 8, 2015 -> 04:58 PM) Sorry, it was a 1 WARP according to BP. He had a 3.57 FIP and a 9.1 VORP, making him our third most valuable pitcher last season. He had a .339 BABIP. He was unlucky. That's where the "eye test" and studying game after game of video comes in... Looking at positioning, how many of the "unlucky" hits are liners versus infield singles, etc. The fact of the matter is that no matter how unlucky you supposedly are, eventually your manager has no choice but to pull the plug when your teammates lose confidence in you. I don't think we've ever seen a post-game press conference after the 3rd blown save in a week where the manager trotted out FIP numbers or VORP as a defense, because it sounds like an excuse or rationalization for not getting the job done, not bowing your necking/cinching it up and hunkering down (insert other Will To Win Hawkisms here). At least, it hasn't happened yet. Maybe in front offices...but not coming from the actual coaching staff.

That's what Chris Beck has been doing for two years now. Conserving his strength and keeping his pitch count down. It is pretty telling that the manager of a 3-time World Series winner (populated with great arms during those runs) looks at a strikeout more from the standpoint of wearing out the starter than from the productive out side of things.

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/47432098/ant...ces-offensively "It's a big difference," said Brewers third baseman Aramis Ramirez, a 16-year veteran. "I don't think it's a big deal now if you strike out 120, 130, 150 times a year." "Striking out is not a bad thing sometimes. It is [bad] when you need a productive out. But it makes the pitcher log more pitches." -- Giants manager Bruce Bochy There was a time when strikeouts were humiliating, to the point that the mere notion worked its way into other elements of our culture. If you asked a girl to the prom and she denied you, what happened? You "struck out," in the parlance of your peers. Worse yet, in many states, habitual offenders became subjected to "three-strike laws," the slang of a sport directly impacting the particulars of imprisonment.

Unless we're to believe 80-85% of the steroid usage was among power hitters and that they don't give pitchers as much of an advantage. Or the ball has been changed physically again.

QUOTE (Brian @ Feb 8, 2015 -> 04:07 PM) Hutton is high energy. Moss, I have no clue how he got a D1 scholarship. He has never stood out in a high school game. Must be an AAU type kid. Good to hear. They're going to need some guys next year who can come off the bench and provide instant offense, or, in Hutton's case, lock down a player defensively. Over the last twenty years or so, Iowa hasn't had many of those athletes....Marble always had a "score first" mentality like his father. You have to go back to Haluska/Brunner/Horner for an Iowa team that had a real chance to get to the 2nd weekend...and then the Reggie Evans/Luke Recker team that imploded at the turn of the century. Texas, Syracuse, UNI (Des Moines), Iowa State, WISKY (2x), MSU and at Purdue (without White for 2nd half). That's an impressive list of losses, to go with beating UNC in Chapel Hill, sweeping OSU and now crushing MI (on the road) and MD. They came back to almost beat Purdue but have also played terrible against in-state schools, Wisconsin and MSU in the 2nd halves of games. Not that it's a sin this year to lose to the Badgers.

By the way, has anyone seen Brandon Hutton (De La Salle) or Isaiah Moss (Simeon) play? Those are the first two Chicago players Iowa has recruited in AGES. And they've also got a kid from basketball powerhouse Oak Hill Academy coming in (Andrew Fleming)...it will be a lot of fun to watch, at least, anything's better than Lickliter/Alford in terms of style of play. These are the 6'4" to 6'7" swing guys they need, if they can get enough from the frontcourt...and they have played basically with four guards already at different times this year. Then you have Conor McCaffrey in 2017...who could become the best guard has had since Jeff Horner. EDIT: I can't believe that Woodbury's going to be around another year. He's only a junior. Gesell Jok Uthoff Uhl Woodbury That's your starting five. Probably not an NCAA team unless those four freshman can make a big impact right away. Clemmons and Trey Dickerson are your other two guards/back-court depth.

Iowa out to a 25 point lead over the Terps. It seems MD has been overrated for most of the season. For Iowa, other than playing at Indiana, they should be the favorite in 7 of their last 8 games....which probably means they'll go 4-4, haha. Actually, compared to last season when the "great collapse" began at roughly this time, this Iowa team has actually been getting better and better. Next year will suck, as you can't replace White/Olaseni/Woodbury in one year, but hopefully they can get back in the Top 25 again and pick up their recruiting/athleticism. Dominique Uhl figures to become a much more important player next year, and Uthoff might have to play more 4 (if he doesn't go pro, he's got the game for it) than he'd like, but it will be interesting to see how McCaffrey "rebuilds" on the fly. Feb 12 vs MINN 7:00 PM ET Feb 15 @ NW 3:00 PM ET Feb 19 vs RUTG 8:00 PM ET Feb 22 @ NEB 3:00 PM ET Feb 25 vs ILL 9:00 PM ET Feb 28 @ PSU 6:00 PM ET Mar 3 @ IND 7:00 PM ET Mar 7 vs NW TBD

Don't forget collard greens. Thanks, Fuzzy Zoeller Actually, aren't tacos part of Spanish culture? Or did they originate in Mexico after colonization? Just curious. I eat at "tapas" restaurants here in China, but Mexican "international" food is pretty much non-existent except for Shanghai, Beijing and Hong Kong. I've also never seen a single Taco Bell (which of course is not "authentic" compared to what you'd get south of the Border, either) in any Asia country. Most Asians do eat rice, dumplings and/or noodles everyday in some form....so the "go eat rice" thing isn't nearly as annoying to them as the making the "slant eyes" gesture last seen in the World Championships for basketball. As to being "right" or conservative, the slam/political forums are the place for that. It also depends how you go about being conservative....if it's self-deprecating or annoying (like the newest incantation of Donald Trump). At any rate, the baseball side of the forum tends to be a lot more sensitive to those types of statements. And perhaps there's even some remnants of working class/labor/Southside "populism" left in being a White Sox fan. Maybe Brooks Boyer and his demographics people could be more illuminating. One would think the Sox and Cubs fanbases have become more similar than dissimilar over the last generation or two of fans, compared to say the 70's or 80's.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 8, 2015 -> 12:48 PM) In 2008, the average fastball clocked at 90.8. By 2013 it had risen to 92. In 2003, only 1 pitcher threw 25+ balls clocked at 100+. In 2013, 22 pitchers did. Your only explanation for this is that its a league-wide conspiracy to crank up radar gun readings. It's partially because of the proliferation of in-stadium radar gun readings being shown on the board. And yes, there are some stadiums with those particular pitchers (like Aroldis Chapman) where they do crank it up enough to get their guys over the top more consistently...along with the "video game" industry evolving graphics and pitch effects-wise and there's the whole marketing/excitement angle for fans. Once 100 becomes a sort of routine...then a substitute will have to replace it as the marginal utility of throwing that high is career-risk/arm and shoulder surgeries. Of course, the biggest factor is the fact that starters no longer are rewarded for complete games, it's pretty much discouraged from the minor league level on up. Just like closers tire now in their second inning of work (or certainly second time through the line-up), there's a number of pitchers who are fine-tuned to just go 5-6 innings at max effort and then turn the game over the pens. Can we objectively say that pitching has become better? Or is it more that with specialization and huge contracts for even set-up guys (think of loogies that hang on seemingly forever) that the quality of relief pitching has simply gone up by 25-50% in the last decade or so? Is there any way to chart average bullpen ERA's over the decades versus ERA's from starters? I think you'll also find that with more offensive parity, there are fewer blowout games where the "long mans" of the world like Dylan Axelrod/Rienzo/Jamie Carroll have to put up significant innings than previously.

This just in, AJ Preller named "most interesting GM in the world." In talks to do an advertisement with the Dos Equis bearded marvel.

QUOTE (Brian @ Feb 8, 2015 -> 06:45 AM) Watched "Blue Ruin" on Netflix. Interesting. Don't remember seeing a movie with so little dialogue but it's a well made indy movie. Lots of tension. Blue Ruin wasn't bad. It had its moments, in a Deliverance type way. Much better than "Out of the Furnace" as well. I like another movie I saw that same day, COHERENCE, even more. Both were on one of those "indie movies you might have missed" lists. It's my goal not only to beat Brian in most posts by a non-admin, but also the highest average per day...that's easy to do because of the game threads, so he will get woefully behind if this season turns out to be as exciting as promised.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 8, 2015 -> 09:54 AM) Almost everything in this post is factually incorrect. There were an average of 10 more stolen bases per team in 2014 than 2005, and the average OPS is down 50 points to .700, not .800. I could address the rest of your bullet points too, but it would pretty much all read like the above. I'm talking about the 60's-80's style of player, compared to today. Of course, stolen bases were non-existent back in the heart of the steroids era (1995-2010), as everyone employed the Earl Weaver "wait for a three run homer" style of offense, Ozzie Ball for two plus months notwithstanding. There are two different arguments here, the pitchers of 2014 versus the 1990's and the pitchers of today versus the pitchers of the past, let's say 1968, when Gibson, Drysdale, McLain, etc., were so dominant. My point is that one-dimensional players like Adam Dunn in the past weren't thought of as superstars...to be a truly great player back then, you had possess at least 3 of the 5 skills and usually 4 or even 5 out of 5. If nothing else, Moneyball has created a generation where hitters could make millions with just three outcomes...whereas those players in the past, the likes of Pete Incaviglia, Dave Kingman or Rob Deer, were derided for their lack of contact and lower batting averages. As to my remark about an 800 OPS, it was about the idea that unless you were Dayan Viciedo in the OF, no matter how many K's you put on the stat sheet, it was all things considered a good season (with the possible exception of a 1B/DH, where an 850+ was desired).

Yes, pitching has become more specialized, with the supreme example of the Royals' bullpen, speed and defense from innings 6-9 making a so-so offense dangerous. On the other hand, as Dick Allen has pointed out....hitters no longer are: 1) Threats to bunt, which puts less pressure on pitchers and catchers 2) Running nearly as aggressive on the basepaths, with a few exceptions 3) Capable of situational hitting, for the most part 4) Providing any offense from 3B and C 5) Changing their approach with two strikes 6) Shifts, defensive metrics and focus on defense in the last decade have given the pitchers another advantage 7) Expanded strike zone by the umpires I don't know where you could find it, but surely the batting average success of hitters at 0-2, 1-2, 0-1 is much worse for this generation of hitters than it used to be in the past. How many hitters (other than Barry Bonds) do you see choking up on the bat, AT ALL, let alone with 2 strikes? What negative consequence is there for hitters if they strike out 25-40% of the time, as long as they maintain a 800+ OPS? How much easier is it for pitchers to only go 200 innings per season (and that's been very hard for Sale) compared to their predecessors who commonly went 225-275 innings per year? Remember when four man rotations were common in the game? To be a pitcher is easier than ever before because you only have to go 5-7 innings (forget about complete games, that's why the Quality Start was invented by agents, for arbitration hearings and to protect the arms of clients)....we all know Hawk's stories from the past about pitchers going back-to-back doubleheaders at a time when throwing a complete game was EXPECTED and not a rare anomaly.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/9749 If it was mostly about size, you wouldn't see the success of pitchers like Pedro, Maddux, Glavine, Billy Wagner, Roy Oswalt, Tim Lincecum, Fernando Valenzuela, Ron Guidry or Whitey Ford. Another factor is that some of the greatest athletes of this generation have been attracted to the NBA and NFL to a lesser extent...with that talent gap being "covered" largely by the explosion in Latin American and Asian players. Has there ever been a correlation analysis done with size and pitching effectiveness? For example in soccer, three of the greatest players of all-time (Pele, Messi and Diego Maradona, not to mention Ronaldhino) were short/slight of stature. How can the Asian MLB players be successful when their size is typically smaller as well?

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 7, 2015 -> 11:12 PM) um... yes? emphatically yes? If that's true, shouldn't there be 3:20-3:30 minute mile runners by now? There are physical limitations to what the human shoulder/labrum and elbow can withstand. There always will be, until they invent Robot Baseball.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 7, 2015 -> 11:30 PM) This is one of the strangest posts I've ever read. Why are we to believe that pitchers have significantly improved and are actually better in this generation? They haven't. They aren't. It's simply perception. Back in the 90's, the hitters seemed better because of their glaring statistical numbers. Now that has shifted to the favor of the pitchers, but it will swing back again. It always does. Whether it's changes to the baseball, the calling of the strike zone, steroids, Tommy John recoveries...all these things will return to mean, just as the National League was the dominant style from the late 50's to the 70's and then shifted back to the American League (along with the DH change) until returning to balance again in the last 5-10 years. Are we to believe that parents all across America are suddenly training their children to be left-handed pitchers instead of catchers or 3B?

How many pitchers from this current generation are going to make the Hall of Fame or even make it to 200 wins? There might be more focus on pitching than ever before...but it's obviously going to shift back to hitters at some point, because casual fans clearly prefer offense to defense. If that wasn't the case. soccer/football would be much more popular in the US than it is. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/226964-...-the-90s/page/8 Take the "Top 30 pitchers from the 90's" and adjust their statistics to the new norm of the last few seasons for offense. Yet another factor is the fascination with radar gun readings, many of which have been cranked up 2-3 MPH higher than reality in order to get fans more excited about numbers in the 100's. Are we to believe pitchers magically are throwing much harder in the last five years than at any time in history, after basically having the notion that guys in the 50's and 60's like Sudden Sam McDowell, Ryne Duren or Nolan Ryan threw that much harder than anyone in modern baseball?

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 7, 2015 -> 03:49 PM) I still can't decide how I feel about it if the Cubs sign Shields. He would definitely make their team a lot deeper this year, but I think they can spend their money better next offseason for Price, Cueto or Zimmermann. The Cubs should be looking at this the same way the White Sox are, albeit with at least a one year lag before competing. Their best year from Shields is likely to come in 2015, when they could get a great Shields performance and still be a .500ish team. The odds are pretty darned high unless the Tigers completely implode, they're going to make a huge effort to extend Price...as they've already lost Scherzer, Fister, Porcello and Smyly and have one of the worst farm systems in the game at this point (reminiscent of the White Sox from 2011-2012). A lot of teams like the Yankees and Red Sox have stayed out of the mix and will likely be dipping their toes next time around...not to mention the Giants will be in an even year again, haha. Finally, if the Nationals do win it all, they're going to have the financial resources to keep an ace and push out the likes of Gio or Roark.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 6, 2015 -> 11:54 AM) Plus the whole, best defensive OF in baseball, thing. Not last year. His first two seasons were much better defensively.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Feb 6, 2015 -> 01:28 AM) I didn't notice, but Season 2 of Sirens started a couple weeks ago. It's a comedy on USA about a paramedic team in Chicago. It's written by Denis Leary, so anyone who loved Rescue Me will appreciate the humor in this show. I highly recommend it for someone looking for a goofy comedy with a healthy dose of Chicago references and sports jokes. Didn't realize the first season of Criminal Minds way back in 2005-2006 had references by Mandy Pantinkin (Saul from Homeland, Dr. Jeffrey Geiger on Chicago Hope) to the White Sox winning the World Series and also one of the episodes had a key plot point revolve around a 1963 Nellie Fox card. Is Shameless getting any better? I've departed from 2014-15 tv world for one week (we just started Chinese New Year's holidays) to binge watch the first 35 episodes of Game of Thrones. When you binge watch that show, you become very frustrated with the slow pace, but I'm still addicted and just ordered the first four books (3500 pages) as well. For a long time, I didn't really have a favorite character, but it has slowly developed into Jamie Lannister and Peter Dinklage, the Lannister bros. Robb Stark never did much for me, as Jon Snow was always a more compelling presence. At various points during the 3rd and 4th season, I've simply wished for those dragons to grow up a lot faster and wipe out all the kings and see what would/will happen eventually with a more compelling ruler. The Stannis/Red Woman plotline drives me crazy, as well as anything to do with Eyrie or Lord Baelish (I know, I know, that's the sign of a good actor, if he makes you hate him) and Lena Headey/Cersei. How many books are there? 5? 6? 7? Is it worth going back to the start with the books or should I pick up where the show's leaving off before Season 5? And didn't Guardians of the Galaxy rip off Groot from Hodor?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 6, 2015 -> 01:29 PM) I wouldn't have minded Peavy's attitude at all if he'd been able to back up his talk. He talked a huge game, seemed like he'd never shut up, and then didn't do that much when given the ball. I got sick of reading quotes about how he'd be better and they'd be a strong team because Peavy wouldn't be contributing. JFP became "Just f***ing Pitch" with that. Like that scene from Indiana Jones when that swordsman is going through all those machinations and showing off...and Indy just shoots him and shrugs. Go away. Couldn't beat DET to save your life. But thanks for Garcia, Montas and Rondon. In the end, I'm sure his teammates with Boston and SF felt nearly the same way the past two off-seasons. Granted, he was important to the Giants in the regular season last year and gave them a huge lift down the stretch, but MEHHHH ever since the injuries and the FB velocity went down to 89-91. And he did sign a "very fair" (I'm not going to say bargain) make good contract with the Sox that made the trade possible.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 6, 2015 -> 01:25 PM) I don't know if that ever was a detriment to Peavy. Obviously Peavy was more expressive on a regular basis but I don't know how you'd be able to quantify any effect that had. Sale on the other hand had his moments where he'd blow up but they were just more memorable than Peavy's day-to-day antics. I remember Sale going ape on the water cooler against the Rangers in August 2013, I remember him freaking out in Detroit last year and then just throwing big fists pumps after big outs. Either way, I don't understand your parallel here or how Peavy's attitude became in issue. Seems like more a comparison of convenience than anything. I am biased because I played with a lot fire and like watching animated guys. Welcome Daenerys Targaryen to SoxTalk.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 6, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) There's some Nelson Cruz to Viciedo's game, so maybe he puts it together some day, but it wasn't going to be with the Sox. Had this offseason not come together the way it has, he would have gotten another shot here, but he didn't and now he'll try it somewhere else. He has the talent to put it together. I don't think he ever will. Guys with peak hit tools of a 40 or so (and it's probably a 30 right now, meaning well below average) don't usually make it except as a bench player. I'll still gladly take Viciedo over Beckham to have more homers from 2015 until the end of their respective careers.

Double-A will present a greater challenge for the 21-year-old outfielder — at that level, “you better know your swing,” Capra said — but if he’s able to pass the tests in Birmingham, it’ll be at that point he can finally start thinking about making his major league debut. “They have a plan,” Hawkins said. “Whatever their plan is, we gotta go along with it. We gotta buy into it. We gotta trust into it and go with it.” Not sure we should be in love with that quote...but being optimistic/hopeful. www.csnchicago.com