Ozzie Ball

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 04:09 PM) FWIW, if Fernando Rodney is only worth $11 million for two years, I think KW is going to have the fingers on the trigger with Jenks at $7 million plus. What do you men by only worth $11m? That was a horrible contract. The Angels essentially bought his 2009 save percentage and if they expect him to repeat said SV% in '10, then they'll almost certainly be very disappointed.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 26, 2009 -> 10:48 PM) Does UZR ever take into account the first baseman saving the other infielder's ass on a play? Ramirez had a UZR of 2.4 I believe last year. If Frank Thomas was the White Sox first baseman, he easily would have had at least 15 more errors maybe 20 or 25 if he made the same throws. Would his UZR still be 2.4? I'm not being a smart ass, I don't know the answer. I would imagine a first baseman that is good defensively would probably increase every other infielder's UZR. As far as I'm aware this is not tracked by UZR, although if you want a truly accurate measure of a players defensive ability then it certainly would need to be tracked. If Ramirez had made a lot more throwing errors due to having a worse receiver at 1B (Thomas being a good example), then his ErrR would have been lower resulting in his UZR being lower. But again, UZR is a measure of defensive value, not ability. Your last point would also be correct. A good receiver at 1B would raise the UZR of his fellow infielders by lowering their error totals.

QUOTE (scotty22hotty @ Dec 26, 2009 -> 10:24 PM) Sabermetrically, Nick Swisher is an OBP stud worth around $15M and Javier Vazquez is an SO ace worth $22M a year... So were these guys just mismanaged? Hopefully Ozzie knows how to handle Rios in '10. Vazquez wasn't a great fit here. A flyball pitcher with a small home ballpark and some bad outfield defenses. That doesn't sound like a recipe for success to me. He was also somewhat unlucky during his down years of '06 and '08 when he posted two of the three highest BABIP's of his career at .321 and .328 respectively (his career mark is .309). He also had the two lowest strand rates of his career since 1999 at 65.8% and 68.3% compared to his average during that time frame of about 72/73%. Vazquez is a strange pitcher though. Advanced statistics would tell you that he's a 3.60 ERA pitcher on talent, yet here he is after 2500 career IP with an ERA of 4.19. Is it really possible for a pitcher to be that unlucky for that amount of time? I guess there are always going to be outliers. As for Swisher he just had a down year. It happens. Luck wasn't on his side with a .251 BABIP compared to his career .278 BABIP and an expected BABIP (based on his speed, power, contact and batted ball data) in '07 of .299. But luck aside his BB%, K% and power were all below his career averages. I have no doubts that Swisher would have returned to his career averages (or thereabouts) if he had stayed with the team for '09 and his performance with the Yankees shows that he wasn't a player on the decline. I have the same expectations of Alex Rios next year (returning to his career norms, that is).

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 26, 2009 -> 07:19 AM) I also think it's absurd that because we have access to SABRmetrics, some of us think they have a better idea of how to put together a team than the people who are paid to put together a team. This isn't fantasy baseball, and a real team doesn't work like that. But at the same time just because someone is paid to put a team together doesn't mean that his opinion is superior to the opinion of the well informed fan. As has been previously mentioned, there are many terrible GM's. Is it just a coincidence that teams are leaning towards sabermetrics more and more? I don't think so. People are starting to look at the Oakland A's and Billy Beane as an example of why sabermetrics don't work, but these people are failing to see the whole picture. The A's were able to put great teams together on a small budget because their methods of evaluation were different to everyone else, they were able to sign the underrated, unappreciated player on the cheap who in turn gave them great value. Now, however, these players are no longer underrated (or at least not to the previous extent), now you have Boston and New York swooping in and snapping these players up. That is why the A's haven't been as competitive of late, it's not because sabermetrics don't work, but rather, because the rest of the field has caught up.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 26, 2009 -> 04:32 AM) Oh, well since the UZR says so, it must be true. Do you guys even know how UZR, RF, and defensive stats of the like are even measured? You realize none of them accurately measure the speed of the ball off the bat (actually they don't even try to) or the defensive positioning prior to the pitch? These statistics should be looked at and considered, but if you're going to use them as your sole proof of a defensive player's worth, you're going to be misguided much of the time. Companies like Stats Inc. are working on a system using cameras and computers (not people watching on monitors) to precisely measure stuff like this. Baseball has been moving forward with collecting data from this software from Sportsvision that does basically the same thing. Eventually it will be used in every ballpark, and after it is perfected and utilized, we'll have a considerably more accurate measure of defensive abilities. For the time being, UZR is flawed and it's a mistake to use it as a bible of some kind. It should be considered but shouldn't be everything. (Oh, and a happy holiday to everyone.) Exact batted ball speeds are not calculated, true, nor are they attempted to be calculated, again true, but the issue of batted ball speed is not entirely ignored. There are stringers at every game who break down the speed of every batted ball into one of three categories (hard, medium and soft), this then gives us lots of useful and relevant information that is factored into UZR calculations. I realize that these classifications are not as accurate as exact batted ball speeds, and nor are they trying to be, but they give us a rough idea of batted ball speeds. Getting back to the classifications we know things such as the average ground ball out percentage for balls hit into zone 3 (the area directly behind the first base bag) for "hard" hit balls was 0.639, for "medium" hit balls was 0.883 and for "soft" hit balls was 0.953 (all as of 2003). These figures are then combined with batter handedness to give us a more accurate evaluation of defensive value. Defensive positioning would be a problem if, and only if, UZR was attempting asses defensive ability. It's not. UZR attempts to asses defensive value as compared to league average over a one year period. The best way to asses ability is to use multiple years of UZR data weighted towards the most recent year. Of course multi year data still doesn't take positioning into account, but at some point you just have to hope that the managers/players are smart enough to position themselves so they can reach as many balls that they are expected to reach as possible. For the time being, UZR is flawed and it's a mistake to use it as a bible of some kind. It should be considered but shouldn't be everything. So how do you propose we evaluate defense then? UZR is flawed and can only be given some consideration. You scoff at "people watching on monitors", so I guess opinions formed by watching games on T.V. are out of the equation. So what's left? We need to quantify defense somehow and holding our balls until GAMEf/x arrives is hardly a pro active solution.

QUOTE (Voros @ Dec 20, 2009 -> 01:57 AM) Well I'm not really worried about the way they're splitting up the money they're getting from the two deals (time value of money is important but not that important). Money saved this year by that method is money spent next year, so if Johnson's deal was two years at $11.5 the White Sox would be paying significantly more for Pierre and Teahen still. IIRC it's two years and around $13 million total for the two after the cash back is factored in. My point is simply that the White Sox have spent money this offseason in a way that probably could have been spent a little more wisely. A million here and there on Kotsay and Vizquel, a few million on Teahen and four million on Pierre and you're now starting to talk about a fairly decent chunk of change on a group of players that aren't much of an upgrade from the Ryan Shealys that float about the league this time of year at league min. Throw in $3 million on a player like Putz with a good track record but recent concerns and it's actually quite a bit of money that's been spent. Any one of those moves in and of itself really isn't anything to worry about. But in total it seems like there were better ways to spend that money. Could the White Sox still win the division? Sure. But considering what else is going on in this division and the amount of money they're spending, the White Sox should be clear favorites in this division and they certainly aren't that right now. Post more often. I agree with a lot of what you have just said. Given the rotation that we have this team could have been turned into a potential 90 win ballclub with a couple of choice offensive signings, but instead, Kenny has spent a decent chunk of change, as you put it, and in return we have a selection of fairly mediocre players. They seem to be expecting some sort of resurgent year from Teahen, and perhaps that happens, but when he hasn't shown that ability for two straight years now you should really look at his potential resurgence as a bonus, not a necessary requirement in order for this to be a good offensive team. The DH spot is still a big issue. I can't believe that Ozzie said he's satisfied with this rotating DH monstrosity, but if he really did then he should have been fired on the spot. We all knew he was insane, but to have somebody that clueless in charge of your ballclub is really an embarrassment. Nick Johnson plus a Randy Winn type would have been doable and would have put us in a much better position than we're currently in.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 02:53 AM) According to Scott Merkin, as reported earlier, it seems like Ozzie talked KW out of adding a power bat and they will rotate the DH. I'm pretty sure KW is just waiting for this to blow up in Ozzie's face and then will add a DH midseason. So anyone with the know, who did they plan on adding? My guess would be Milton Bradley. It would almost be worth losing 100 games next year just so we could get Ozzie out of here.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 12:32 AM) Good stuff as always, Qwerty. I had read the stuff about the base stealing and the "havoc on the bases" theory. My next question would be what about the net effect of the team simply having better base runners? Not necessarily from a stealing perspective, but more runners who could advance from 1st to 3rd and more runners who could score from 1st base or 2nd base? What about the ability to make more productive outs as opposed to unproductive outs? Using team EqBRR (Equivalent Base Running Runs), the difference between the best baserunning team, Oakland, and the worst baserunning team, Baltimore, was 33.4 runs or approximately 3.34 wins. Over the last decade the difference has been anywhere between 22 and 44 runs. EqBRR is considered the best baserunning metric by most and the explanation for it is below. Incidentally if you're looking to add EqBRR to WAR, which is something that you should do when looking at the overall value of player, then you will need to subtract EqSBR from EqBRR, as WAR already includes SB and CS values. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary...p;category=true

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 14, 2009 -> 01:58 AM) Id be all over Ryan Garko as an option for DH Really? I find it very difficult to get excited about a player as mediocre as Garko. He's average to below average defensively. He doesn't hit for much power, doesn't walk, isn't quick. He's completely bleh for me. Now Cust on the other hand...

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 10:59 PM) Also, the Future Sox Twitter page was referenced on MLB Trade Rumors in regard to these signings. I was wondering why we got a sudden jump in follower numbers. I imagine this was the reason.

Continued...

QUOTE (bighurt4life @ Dec 5, 2009 -> 02:08 AM) I definitely enjoyed reading some different opinions about our prospects. I disagree with his assessment of Flowers defense, it's no secret that he was voted the best defensive catcher in the SOU league by the league managers. That tells me all I need to know about his ability behind the plate. Also, he's only been a catcher for 2 or 2 1/2 years, if he can improve that much in that short a time then he's definitely got the goods to stick behind the plate. Some of this other picks were surprising too, for one, I don't think that Santeliz is really that highly regarded by our front office, If you want a guy with a dynamite FB and nothing else then look at Sergio Santos who can pump it in at about 99mph. Also, having Remenowsky and Jones rated so low is crazy. Remenowsky absolutely dominated this season. If you believe Phil Rogers then the organization is very high on Santeliz and this is also the first time I've seen him listed as a one pitch pitcher. From what I've read, his slider is supposed to be pretty good, maybe even plus.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 04:14 PM) Agreed. Carrasco is ready for an expanded role. No question he was good in his role last year, but we cant wait to see if the guys who are supposed to get late inning outs...will. Carrasco is just fine where he is. I wouldn't trust the guy in any high pressure situations as he just doesn't have the skillset. I'd be thrilled if we get '09 Carrasco next year but his 4.34 xFIP suggest that he's in for regression.

Santeliz pitching well- 10.07 K/9, 3.2 BB/9 (3.15 K/BB) plus just 1 home run in 19.2 innings.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 01:09 PM) He hasn't been able to make it through a full season healthy since 2005. What makes you think 2010 would be the year? Let's just get the usual stuff out of the way: --Yes, he was good for about 1.5 seasons with the bat --Yes, he was very good defensively at one point, when his back was only an occasional problem --Yes, he played a big part in the championship, and we'll always love him for that --Yes, we all played more f***ing Journey on our iPods for 2 years than should ever have been the case --No, he's not healthy --No, he hasn't been able to play a full season in years --No, he's not worth the investment --No, he is not a great bat, career-wise He had a 12.5 UZR last year (23.4/150) and he's not even healthy. Knock his bat and health all you want but the guy can still pick it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 30, 2009 -> 04:47 PM) I'd rather bring back Thome. Me too.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 04:09 PM) An average of 35 saves a year is elite. I'm not a particularly eloquent person so I'm going to defer to this quote from the blog Triples Alley, it directly relates to RBI's, but can easily be shifted for wins, saves, holds, runs etc. Sure, it's a closers job to come in with a small lead and get the last 3 outs, but the way that they get these outs is far more important for assessing ability and predicting future success than the simple fact of whether they picked up the save or not.

QUOTE (3E8 @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 06:37 AM) I'm not familiar with Project Prospect, but they are the only publication which will consider Hudson 3rd best pitching prospect in the game That doesn't mean that they are wrong, Project Prospect puts a lot of weight into both statistics and a prospects floor, hence the ranking of Hudson.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 10:53 PM) Since we already have a guy who can hopefully play a solid CF for us...our need for Upton is a little less than what other teams might have, esp. if he can't work as a leadoff hitter. It really doesn't make sense for this team to overpay for him. The thing that it would make sense for this team to overpay for would be a corner OF or a really big, 40 HR type bat somewhere on the field. If we're going to deal for Upton, we better feel like the Rays sold low. We still need an outfielder though, this way we'd be able to move Rios to RF, where he has been a better defensive player and then stick Upton in CF, where he has been better than Rios so you'd upgrading two positions defensively. I'd love to see a move for Upton if we can get him for a decent rate, but I wouldn't want to give Flowers, Hudson + for him.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 07:21 PM) Despite the loss in power and the low batting average, he actually cut his K rate pretty significantly going from W-S to Birmingham and he more than doubled his BB rate last year as well. Shelby will get claimed IMO. Every org also has a ton of fringey SP. Dumb move by the Sox protecting one of those guys over the far more talented Shelby. Edit: Shelby's OBP dropped only 8 points last year from his numbers at W-S even though his batting average dropped 52 points. Maybe his numbers weren't impressive overall, but that is. Exactly, what were the biggest knocks on Shelby coming into this year? His BB% and K%. What did he do this year? Improve both dramatically. The drop in average can be attributed to poor luck (BABIP). I expect him to perform much better next year.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 06:26 PM) Shelby isn't going to get picked in the Rule V draft. He still has too much to work on, imo. But he's the type of player that someone could take and hide as their 4th/5th outfielder and pinch runner for a year, which is a role I'm sure he could handle due to his good/very good defensive ability. Offensively he's obviously not ready but I am expecting him to get taken.

Although I do expect Rogers to put Morel ahead of Viciedo also.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 01:34 PM) That is also another pundit who has Morel over Viciedo. I am starting to worry about that $10 million. Two statistically inclined publications have put Morel over Viciedo, is that really a huge shock?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 11:00 PM) Here's my problem with his K's...I can't figure out how it'd be mathematically possible for him to continue hitting at a solid average while striking out 150+ times. In the minors, when he was on fire, and now in the AFL, he's been putting up BABIP values of >.400. Now, I know all the other caveats that go into that about how hard you're hitting the ball, how much bat control you have, etc., but bear with me here. Even the great players can't sustain those type of numbers once they get to the big leagues. Mauer pushed .373 this year with that stat, and his career mark is around .350. If you look at the guys in MLB who struck out 150 times+ last year, which is the pace D2 makes in the minors, you have 2 types of guys. You have Ryan Howard, Adam Dunn, Mark Reynolds...guys who don't give you a great batting average but you don't care because they're hitting 40 home runs. The other guys with 150 k's however, are guys like BJ Upton, Brandon Inge, Mike Cameron. These are guys who are playing because they give some performance with the bat, but they're out there either in the hopes that they'll develop (Upton) or because they have very good gloves. They wind up hitting below .250. Because they're not hitting the ball out of the ballpark, they're not putting the ball in play enough to put up a solid batting average with that number of strikeouts. If Danks stays on the 150k/year pace and is a 15-20 HR guy at best, then he's going to wind up hitting somewhere in the neighborhood of .250/.260 for his career. Against major league pitching, you just can't sustain that number of strikeouts and a really good batting average unless a lot of your hits are leaving the park. I agree with all of this.

Some AFL video: Danks Morel Retherford