caulfield12

60 MPH eephus pitch. Eaton's hitting 887 against fastballs and under 700 now against anything else. Gotta make some adjustments.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 21, 2014 -> 11:24 AM) Baseball America ‏@BaseballAmerica 21m Re: Kolek. @jluhnow and Nolan Ryan attended at least one of the Shepherd High righthander's final five starts. http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastros/2014/...out/#22822101=0 … http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastros/2014/...out/#22822101=0 Tyler Kolek invited to Astros pre-draft workout Of course, it's an online survey or poll, but even his native Texans only voted 53% to 47% to take Kolek #1 overall.

QUOTE (Jake @ May 21, 2014 -> 07:19 PM) I would say conventional statistics vastly overrated Michael Bourn and sabermetrics showed exactly how bad of a deal he was as a free agent. Aging veteran who wasn't a league average offensive player and whose value was predicated solely on his legs. Unfortunately, he had a high batting average and was fast, the former of which is especially overrated See Chone Figgins. Stolen bases always get overvalued. SABR analysis typically would tear apart Juan Pierre, even though he was universally loved by his managers and teammates for his work ethic and leadership skills. You need those type of players on your team, but you shouldn't ever overpay for them and you shouldn't ever have more than 1 or 2 in your line-up. The Indians are definitely regretting the Bourn and Swisher (darling of OBP) deals right now.

Viciedo's ball would have been a homer the last two nights. Conor all the way up to .353. FWIW, Guthrie's 12th start against the White Sox since 2012, 23rd in his career. Seems we see him and Chen every single series.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 21, 2014 -> 05:55 PM) Hawkins starting to strike out a ton again. 0-8 with 6K this week 45K/142 AB's Another RBI double. Despite everything, his elevated double and walk totals have kept his OPS in the high 800's. Mitchell with another K. This is becoming something of a comedy with what starting out as a promising career.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 21, 2014 -> 12:59 PM) 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." The problem isn't SABR stats themselves, it's using them to put together a winning team. The Mariners were noted all around baseball for a one-year turnaround largely based on acquiring undervalued defensive assets like Gutierrez in CF (and that had everything to do with applying the new defensive metrics of the time). That was a niche for awhile, but they couldn't exploit it enough to build a contender simply because those teams couldn't produce enough offense to go along with the defense and pitching. The Royals used a similar philosophy with their bullpen...that having great middle relievers and set-up guys was another niche to be exploited and could give them a competitive advantage. The thing is that the Moore philosophy comes directly from the Schuerholz philosophy, which underpins everything the Braves have done for the past 20 years or so. The Braves have had some of the best pitching staffs of the past 20-30 years, same with the Giants and the A's success with Moneyball had more to do with Mulder/Zito/Hudson than any single factor. We all know that. Nobody's equating SABR analysis with identifying pitching for those three organizations. The Pirates did it with defensive shifts and having their starters go to more two-seam sinking fastballs and now everyone is shifting their infields this season and the Pirates are back in their customary place in the standings. In response to the Mike Trout comment, well, Luhnow was the one in the Cardinals' farm system who is/was most identified with SABR analysis, and we all know that simply using the OPS/SLG/OBP/walk numbers of a decade ago is of very little help in scouting players (maybe moreso for collegiate players) around the world and projecting their ultimate big league success. Time will tell how good the Astros' philosophy is. For that matter, if Epstein was following the Bill James model, and he is also building one of the best minor league systems in baseball and clearly has been exposed to that side of front office philosophy as he was one of the first of the "whiz kids" with Ivy League educations, I don't think it's fair to say the Astros have a great farm system and then all we read at SoxTalk is about how terrible the Cubs' major league roster is and how they've been rebuilding for 3-4 years now. (Which is pretty much what the Astros have been doing, as well). Aren't the Astros and Cubs doing the exact same thing, minus the acquisition of Edwin Jackson, who has actually been decent this year...and then trading away starting pitching assets for prospects (Hammel, Samardzija and Arrieta will be the next to go), like what we wanted to do with Paulino and our bullpen guys? With the Ryan example, so much damage was done by Bill Smith that it's taking Ryan time to undo the damage. The fact of the matter is that their system identified Hicks, Gibson, Buxton and Sano, all Top 50 prospects. And you can't argue with the results of 2002-2010 with the Twins. Smith made some terrible trades during that timeframe (JJ Hardy to the Orioles) and Morneau got hurt and they had to shed Cuddyer/Kubel/Nathan because of Mauer's contract. None of that has anything to do with SABR or anti-SABR. Finally, one of the most forward-thinking administrators in the game (Hall in Arizona) just picked LaRussa to run things, who is as anti-SABR as Hawk Harrelson. Towers over there was thought to be the best GM's in the game before he left the Padres after 2009 and he was also pretty notably anti-SABR. It wasn't so long ago (before they messed up the Justin Upton situation) that the Dbacks were the darling franchise of MLB with Gibson in his first season over there. Let's not forget, the DBacks' system produced the most WAR of any system from 2002-2012, if you look at players who originated over there.

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ May 21, 2014 -> 01:32 PM) Bulls***. The reason Putman has been successful is pitch selection, plain and simple. His best pitch is the splitter. Prior to the Sox he threw the splitter roughly 30% of the time, seldom on first pitch or in hitter's counts. Now he is throwing the splitter 55% of the time and both on first pitch and hitter's counts. Putman is successful this season because he is "playing to his strengths" as opposed to throwing meatballs 60% of the time, which he did in Cleveland, Colorado and with the Chubs. So what you're saying is a journeyman reliever was miraculously fixed by Don Cooper (ala Matt Thornton) and will be a fixture in our bullpen for 2015-2016-2017-2018 barring injury?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:46 AM) Dunn hitting well and Beckham seemingly improving are both best case scenarios, whether you want the team to compete or you want tradeable assets. A guy like Dunn, if he keeps up where he is, can be shipped off to a contender in July for a prospect. It won't be a super high-end prospect, but his value in power is at a premium right now. You can shave off, say, $6M from your books, and get back some sort of prospect. And that's exactly what the Sox should do, unless they are somehow seriously incontention in July (and I don't mean a few games and a few teams out of the last wildcard spot). That's $6M more they may have to spend next year, and maybe another prospect to add to the system. Or it's just erasing $6 million in revenue loss due to lower attendance. It's a risky endeavor to invest in pitching in the FA market. We're already seeing signs of Verlander deteriorating many years before the end of that deal. Scherzer, Lester and Shields...I can't see us touching those guys. And Masterson supposedly turned down $50 million for 3 years from the Indians but for the White Sox to commit let's say $80 million over even 4 seasons to him...they were willing to gamble on Tanaka because of his age and ace potential, but based on what he's looking like so far this year, would anyone jump up and down with joy getting Masterson for $80/4 (were he to continue putting up relatively pedestrian numbers)? Last year, he was very good, better than Quintana. But this year, he's giving up more hits than IP, a WHIP of around 1.5 and a 5+ ERA. Maybe the looming contract situation/FA is in his head (see Sandoval in SF), but that disappearing ability "disease" has infected Carlos Santana, Bourn and Nick Swisher as well. http://www.indiansbaseballinsider.com/blog...easonable-63355 Joe Chengery March 23, 2014 - 10:59 PM EDT While the shorter length (and virtually no one thought they'd take a two-year deal, and the preference for them really is three) helps, it's still a risk, and still a lot of payroll to tie up in a guy who has not put up back-to-back good seasons, and is a borderline frontline starter (i.e. #2) at best. Signing Kazmir would have probably been more prudent; as I said before, the length of Ubaldo's contract would have made me shy away, but on the other hand, Ubaldo has matched or outdone Masterson over their careers, and it was a reasonable bet he could maintain a level of success here. Would it have been as good as the second half of 2013? That probably wasn't likely because very few pitchers stay in that "hot zone"- even Verlander hasn't been as dominant as he was a few seasons ago, but I think with (Mickey) Callaway's guidance and familiar surroundings, Ubaldo could have been a consistently good starter at a lower cost. I'm not as sure of that elsewhere; like I said though, I would have preferred Ubaldo at three years plus an option, but that turned out NOT to be an option in the end. Keep in mind that no one expected Masterson to take a two-year deal, and the only real reason he's doing it is because of a possible change in the QO in the next bargaining agreement; taking a shorter contract would still enable him to still get a larger contract while he's still in his prime. A QO would probably affect his value since his track record is no better, and arguably worse, than Jimenez and Garza, so the shorter p-length contract is a calculated move on the part of Masterson and his agent, just as it was to make it seem as if the contract offer is a discount, when in reality, it isn't. Seth, I still don't think Masterson's 2013 was that great; his 2011 was better, and his 2012 wasn't much better than Ubaldo's and that's where the rub is- can Masterson put together back-to-back strong seasons, presuming 2013 was a strong season? (I think Ubaldo had the stronger, more consistent overall 2013, along with a healthier 2013). If Masterson can put together a strong 2014 (more like he did in 2011 with better command, since I'm not confident his H and K rates will be as strong in 2014 based on his track record, necessitating the need for better command), it will be the first time he's done that in his career. I think that is a major reason why the Indians are hesitating - which Masterson are you going to get- the strong three, borderline two starter like in 2011 and parts of 2013, or the inconsistent 4-5 starter you got in 2012, and even parts of 2010 and 2013? That's why they don't think putting down 1/6 to 1/5 of this year's and next year's payroll is the best idea, especially when other salaries will be increasing next year (including Kipnis, who they want to sign long term, plus any upgrades the Indians may need next offseason. Signing Masterson to such a contract may tie their hands to the point where they won't be able to sign anyone of significance, even a Murphy-level signing).

QUOTE (ptatc @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) The problem with this is you can say that putnam and petricka are pitching are currently pitching at an elite level. There is no track record for them. Are you going to move them around based on only how they are currently pitching? If they have a couple of bad outings do you move them? Pitchers like routine. They will respond better if they know about what their job is. If you continually switch everything around based on their last or last two outings you will lose the bullpen. With Putnam, his career record suggests you just have to ride him while he's hot in the 7th and 8th, mostly. There's always going to be that unique situation (Jason Grilli last year, Politte and Cotts in 2005, etc.) where someone just catches fire for almost the entire season, but it's pretty rare, indeed. Petricka's pitched all over the place, from the 5th-9th, same with Webb. But Ventura, after quickly losing faith in Cleto, definitely has been favoring Putnam and Belisario, and for good reason too, statistically. To call Petricka or Webb elite...well, let's just say we have no idea right now exactly what they are...although I'd love to see if they have the ability to close out an elite team on the road in front of 40,000+ screaming fans, we just don't know yet.

2011 We all know that story, but Beckham and Rios were also among the five worst OPS for qualified hitters, Dunn would have been worst, and Juan Pierre wasn't far off 2012 800 OPS (MLB rank, #57) 2013 762 (MLB rank, #69) 2014 869 (MLB rank, #26)

QUOTE (raBBit @ May 21, 2014 -> 09:23 AM) Whatever Rienzo is, and I don't think he's more than a #5, I have no problem watching him compete every fifth day. He makes me laugh but I love his fire. He's maybe a little overzealous with the fist pumps but at least he's (seemingly) stranding runners consistently. The big thing is mixing enough curveballs at lower velocities to go with his slider/cutter/fastball/sinker combination. Because he has a tendency to throw a lot of pitches at roughly the same speed, he needs to have at least one pitch that makes his usual high 80's stuff (and he did throw a few four seamers at 93) look even faster. Seems he has a tendency to either fall in love with his curve or go away from it completely for stretches.

http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/20/50363...hit-better.html Royals don't need "clutch" hitting, they simply need better hitting...debunks the idea of "clutch" "Judging" the Royals at kansascity.com (Lee Judge) http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/21/50366...stball-and.html Adam Dunn crushes a fastball and changes the game May 21 BY LEE JUDGE The Kansas City Star "My favorite word in English is 'youneverknow.' " According to the internet, Joaquin Andujar said that and we all know the internet never lies. (Hot women are waiting for our phone calls—I’m sure of it.) The reason I bring this up is because of what happened in the eighth inning of Tuesday night’s game. Aaron Crow came in to pitch the eighth inning of a 4-2 game. The Royals hadn’t done a lot offensively at that point—two runs on five hits—but youneverknow. Aaron gave up a singles to Gordon Beckham and Conor Gillaspie, got a fly ball out and then faced Adam Dunn; the gigantic Chicago first baseman who was born to play Lennie in "Of Mice and Men." But instead of crushing a puppy, Dunn crushed a fastball. A 93 MPH two-seamer, thrown right down the middle. Dunn hit the ball over 420 feet, Lorenzo Cain and the centerfield wall. The score went from 4-2 to 7-2 and at that point, it didn’t seem to make a lot of difference, but youneverknow. You play the game right all the time because you never know when you’re going to make a comeback and that fastball you served up in the eighth inning will prove to be the margin of victory in the ninth. And that’s exactly what happened. The White Sox beat the Royals, 7-6. Would Salvador Perez have made a difference? In the fifth inning starting pitcher Yordano Ventura gave up a 2-1 lead and a Tyler Flowers home run on a hanging curve—the Chicago catcher hit the ball 411 feet. Fair enough, he earned it. But then Chicago scored two more runs that they didn’t earn. With one out Adam Eaton doubled and a wild pitch allowed Eaton to move to third. The runner on third brought the infield in and Gordon Beckham hit a soft liner over Danny Valencia’s head—a ball that would have been caught easily if the infield had been playing back. A second wild pitch let Beckham take second. The Chicago second baseman took third when Conor Gillaspie hit the ball to first baseman Eric Hosmer and then Beckham scored on the third wild pitch of the inning—no wild pitches, no runs score. Brett Hayes was filling in for Perez while Sal rested a bruised hand; would Salvador Perez have made a difference? On the first wild pitch, probably not; Ventura spiked a curve well out in front of home plate and the ball came up so high it hit Hayes in the shoulder. The second wild pitch appeared to be a passed ball—a fastball that never hit the ground before going off Hayes’ mitt—and the third wild pitch was another curve in the dirt. Hayes appeared to do everything right, but the ball still got away from him, so he probably didn’t do everything right. Bottom line: I don’t know if Perez would have made a difference—Ventura was bouncing the ball well out in front of home plate. But you can’t afford to give up two runs that the other team didn’t earn; especially when you lose by one. How the Royals gave up their first run Everyone is looking for patterns and the first guy to recognize one has an advantage. In the first inning catcher Brett Hayes and pitcher Yordano Ventura started every hitter with a fastball. With two down and a runner on third, Dayan Viciedo jumped on that first-pitch fastball, singled and drove the run in. But it’s also worth noting how that run got on third: left-handed Conor Gillaspie was at the plate and right fielder Nori Aoki was playing straight up—in line with second and third base. Ventura was blowing gas in the upper nineties, so the odds of Gillaspie pulling a fastball weren’t great, so he pulled a changeup. A Yordano Ventura changeup is still 88 miles-an-hour, but slow enough for Gillaspie to poke it down into the right-field corner, which meant Aoki had a long run to the ball. Leaving a changeup up in the zone meant the ball was hit to an unprotected part of the field. The Royals paid with one run. Why you should look for similar hitters Pitchers and catchers do not have nine game plans for nine hitters; they tend to pitch similar hitters in similar ways. Chicago’s starting pitcher, Andre Rienzo—who clearly ought to be driving on the Grand Prix circuit, he’s got the right name—threw right-handed Billy Butler cutter after cutter down and away. A cutter is halfway between a fastball and a slider and Rienzo’s was clocked in the upper eighties. If Rienzo hit his spot—down and away—the Royals right-handed hitters would have to hit the ball to the opposite field to have any chance. Pull that down and away slider and you’re going to hit an easy rollover grounder to the left side of the field. So if right-handed Lorenzo Cain was paying attention he might assume he’d be seeing cutters down and away. Here’s exactly what he saw: curveball, cutter, cutter, fastball, curveball, cutter. But instead of trying to hit the ball to right field, Lorenzo was trying to pull the ball. He missed the last cutter by about two feet. I came closer to my ideal weight in my last checkup than Cain came to that cutter in the second inning—and I didn’t come that close to my ideal weight. (I either need to lose 20 pounds or grow six inches.) Danny Valencia, on the other hand, was either paying more attention or just got lucky: he saw a cutter, a curveball and another cutter and drove the second cutter to the opposite field, into the right-center gap for a two-run double. The Mike Moustakas pinch-hit When Mike Moustakas first came to the big leagues I told him he was lucky because he’d never know if people were booing him; boo and Moose sound pretty much the same. When Mike came out to pinch hit in the eighth inning the crowd went off and nobody could tell if they were booing Mike or encouraging him. The score was 7-5, two runners were on and Brett Hayes was due up. Brett has not had a hit this year—he was 0 for 19 coming into this at-bat—so Ned Yost went to his bench and the cupboard was bare. If Yost wasn’t going to let Hayes hit, he had to choose between Moose (a guy who might run into one and give the Royals a lead), Jarrod Dyson (who doesn’t have much power), Francisco Pena (a catcher who has yet to have a major league at-bat) and Salvador Perez (who is sitting out to rest a bruised hand). Moustakas got to two strikes and chased a fastball that was up out of the zone. That resulted in a pop up to third base and was about 200 feet short of being deep enough to drive in Danny Valencia, the runner on third. When should Jarrod Dyson steal? Down 7-5 the Royals staged a two-out rally in the ninth inning; Billy Butler doubled, advanced to third on a passed ball and scored on an Alex Gordon single. Then Jarrod Dyson came out to pinch run for Gordon. When Dyson is used as a pinch runner late in a game, the PA announcer might as well say: "Now stealing, Jarrod Dyson." Everybody knows he’s going to run. But that’s one definition of a true base stealer: a guy who can still swipe a bag when everybody knows he’s going to. And most of the time Dyson has to swipe that bag quickly. With two outs, if he hangs first base too long, Jarrod might waste a hit and only go first to third, not second to home. With one out he wants to be on third when the ball is put in play. But if Dyson goes on the first pitch every time, that knowledge will get around; pitchers will attempt pickoffs and managers will try pitchouts. For the stolen base to do any good, Dyson’s got to get on the move quickly. A hitter might take one strike to let Dyson steal a base, but taking two is not advisable. When Jarrod Dyson comes out to pinch run, look for him to steal a base in the first three pitches. Tuesday night Jarrod took off right away, but it did no good; after an instant replay review that confirmed he stole second base and moved the tying run into scoring position, Lorenzo Cain ended the game by striking out on three pitches. Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/21/50366...l#storylink=cpy

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ May 20, 2014 -> 11:25 PM) This team is pretty damn resilient. 4/5 starters have had some problem or another weather it's health or poor pitching. With al the ijuries staying around .500 is a minor miracle. A lot of guys are picking up the slack. http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/20/50361...-as-royals.html That's not to mention all the issues with Nate Jones, Cleto, Donnie Veal, Lindstrom and Scott Downs. Oh, and Frank Francisco now. Actually, other than Downs and Francisco, the pen is as solid as it has been all season long. And, at this point, who knows what we get out of Guerra? At least Petricka, Putnam, Belisario and Webb have been good to stellar. Cleto, Veal and Heath are next in line, one would imagine. De Los Santos has been walking too many.

Royals' fans must be out on the cliffs of the Missouri River right now. Losing to a White Sox team without Sale, Abreu and a closer? Twice in a row, at home?

I hope we don't see Salvador Perez at any point this inning.

Is Hawk campaigning to pick up Billy Butler "on the cheap" for DH in 2015?

Great location on that sinker to Hosmer.

Tough part of the batting order. Shouldn't have been a test of Belisario, but here we are anyway. Cleto's probably on his way back, or Heath, or De Los Santos. I wonder if Downs will make it through the entire season without getting released? He certainly has no trade value.

Thought Flowers was just going to free fall into the .240's. Kudos to Tyler for battling his way through this tough period and at least not being an automatic out.

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ May 20, 2014 -> 08:54 PM) 1. Johnson 2. Hawkins 3. Anderson 4. Danish 5. Sanchez 6. Michalczewski 7. Beck 8. Montas 9. Ravelo 10. Davidson Wendelken somewhere in the Top 20? Davidson has gone from a Top 100 prospect in all of baseball to almost outside of the Top 10 of one of the worst systems in baseball in the span of two months?

Gausman didn't exactly blow through the Knights' line-up, but still an ugly overall record for them. Barnum's still alive, barely.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ May 20, 2014 -> 06:47 PM) He will be back for Yankess series love to see Sale/Tanaka Sunday. Great for marketing/ESPN. Not sure about Sale's career longevity.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ May 20, 2014 -> 06:17 PM) Nice triple. Gillaspie's lucky he didn't get thrown out. He was really hesitating coming around 2nd and McEwing wasn't encouraging him to go for it, either.

Short and quick from Viciedo. 98 MPH fastball. That wouldn't have happened the last couple of seasons.

Indians destroying Verlander. 5-1...9 of the first 11 batters reached, including 6 in a row. Santana got a rare hit and was deked into going for 2nd by Cabrera and got thrown out by a mile or it would have been 6-1. Interestingly, the Tigers' announcers said that was Justin's best velocity of the year, around 95, whereas his last start was 89-91.