eickevinmorris

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 09:22 AM) Essentially Guillen does not want to have a guy that when they play those 12 games in the NL park, they are unavaialble. What Guillen wants are platoon type guys that he can use for certain matchups. This works well in this division as I have seen enough of the Cy Youngification of s*** pitchers. I think something is going to happen and it is going to be related to John Danks and his contract situation. ...or they could just hold on to one of the best young pitchers in baseball and sign one of the many DH types on the market.

QUOTE (SEALgep @ Dec 11, 2009 -> 11:52 AM) Both are talented, they have different games. Talented enough to play MLB? Yes. One is talented enough to be a perennial .900 OPS guy with a few 1.000 OPS years mixed in. The other is talented enough to be a great defensive CF with good speed and a mediocre bat. There's a big difference.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Dec 11, 2009 -> 10:16 AM) What I'm comparing is the fact that they both started their MLB careers as a 4th outfielder for an organization in which they had minor league success and then initially had some struggles in MLB. They both were blocked at the major league level. Quentin went on to flourish with another club when he played every day. Gardner may very well do the same. He's not gonna get a full time opportunity for NY. Your analogy ignores the gulf of talent disparity.

DA, you are also dismissing the defensive impact Gardner would have on our lineup. Having a solid defensive outfield would make our good pitching staff even better.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 11, 2009 -> 06:52 AM) I said offensively. IMO Getz has as much OBP potential as Gardner. Getz got slammed around here. People said he had no power, wasn't exactly young for a rookie and wouldn't get better. You can say the exact same thing about Gardner. If he is such a stud waiting to happen, why are the Yankees, a team cutting payroll, bringing in expensive pieces to play in front of him? He's not an everyday player. He wouldn't be a bad guy to have off the bench, but leading off every day will make the fire Greg Walker threads grow. Christ. Getz played garbage defense and had no range. No one is saying he's a stud waiting to happen. People think he's a decent player who can fill out the outfield and play good defense with decent offensive production.

Kalapse, good work in this thread. We shouldn't be pissing our pants about Rios moving to RF, as it would drastically improve our defense by keeping the club-footed CQ in left. Gardner would be a good addition if his defense matches the fans' projections on Fangraphs.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 9, 2009 -> 02:33 PM) I agree with you, BABIP over the years can be useful, but you need to include other stats. The post that is being referenced only talked about Quentins BABIP in the Current Year vs the Prior Year. No where did it take into account line drive percentages, contact percentages, etc. Therefor, I thought it was a pretty poor argument to just say its bad luck because his BABIP changed year over year. That is about as valid of an argument as me throwing out two years worth of batting averages and attributing the change in average to bad luck. I think the stat is very meaningful (despite me mis-typing it) as a tool for analysis, but the true meaning behind the stat comes from the underlying stats (ie, line-drive rate, contact rate, etc). Fair enough. I agree.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 9, 2009 -> 12:08 PM) Comparing current BAPIP with past BAPIP is completely worthless. That's some awe-inspiring hyperbole. And if you're going to label something completely worthless and malign it to such a degree, you may want to get its name right. Again, simply comparing Carlos' BABIP data from two separate seasons is insufficient analysis, but including batted ball rates and (at times) contact percentages will give you a rough idea of how unlucky Carlos was. I think his poor season can probably be attributed to injury, as I was just campaigning for BABIP as a useful tool of analysis. Which it absolutely is, and tests have proven this time after time. It should be used with a great deal of caution, and with other things in mind (like contact/batted ball rates/injury/scouting), but it certainly has utility. It's not the end all be all metric, but this argument shouldn't be black and white. I do think we can have a discussion without it devolving into "anyone with have (sic) a brain" sorts of insults. I fancy my brain quite a bit, and I think a player's statistical fluctuation may be attributed to luck from time to time. Do I believe that's the case with Carlos? A layman's/preliminary analysis of his batted ball rates tell me that it may have contributed to his poor performance. I also believe his injury didn't help. Ok. And I believe it may have. This doesn't have to be a black and white, you don't have "have (sic) a brain" argument. We can discuss it.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 9, 2009 -> 06:38 AM) Soooooo, how bout that Quentin for Crawford rumor Bunk, presumably. This team does not need to make lateral moves. I see KW closing in on Putz as a sign that they may move Jenks for an outfielder. Happy day, if true.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 07:12 PM) You really could've sounded about 3 or 4 shades less condescending, but in any case I really kind of addressed that when I said "I can't post the full rant I usually do about BABIP" so I thought the reason for the lack of semantics was going to be self-evident. Oh and... for the record, yes people look at BABIP in isolation all the time, in this thread, even. Well post the full rant. Find it and paste it. I'm intrigued. Honestly. Said poster also followed up by listing Carlos' past BABIP data.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 01:47 PM) umm wtf are you talking about, please read the thread first before making a comment like this I read the thread. I didn't see anyone claim BABIP was a relevant statistic on its own. In fact, I've never seen a SABR guy/girl simply throw BABIP out there without batted ball rates or something similar. No one simply looks at BABIP in isolation. You said you didn't believe in its utility, but then stated that you only have a problem with it in isolation. You are failing to understand how BABIP is used -- as it is always coupled with batted ball rates and past BABIP data.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 11:59 AM) That's what I'm saying. I don't really think anyone is arguing that BABIP is a good statistic in isolation. Don't make up an argument to dispute.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 29, 2009 -> 09:11 PM) Not really. Stunting a guy like Hudson could mean the next Andy Sisco. It would have been interesting to see what happened to him had he not been a rule V pick and allowed to throw 150 IP a year as a minor league starter. Or easing him into MLB could mean the next Mark Buehrle or Adam Wainwright.

QUOTE (almagest @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 06:55 PM) What else is there to talk about? This also has a verified source. It's not just idle speculation. What do you mean by verified?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 01:32 PM) You are assuming that LAA is in this deal primarily for Konerko. On the contrary, I'd be they are in it to get the right spect or two, and Konerko is a nice 1B/DH fill, as a secondary desired piece. Define nice. 34 year old first baseman with 3-year OPS splits of .841/.783/.842 aren't worth $12 million -- probably not even two-thirds that. And I don't see the Sox sending money anyone's way. That would have to be one hell of a prospect. I'm assuming that the Angels aren't going to help another AL team get markedly better while bogging down their payroll.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 01:16 PM) I wonder if there's some way they can do this and send the farm minus Hudson. oooh Also where are all the "you dont trade the face of the organization" posts (ie PK or Buehrle) ? For the right deal you do it Yeah, not buying it. I'm guessing the Angels aren't jumping at the bit to get a mediocre, overpaid first baseman while also ensuring that one of their fellow AL contenders gets a far better player at the same position. Why wouldn't they just go after Gonzalez? Any package we put together could easily be trumped (save me the 7-8 player package KHP, it's not realistic).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 14, 2009 -> 07:24 PM) Freddy had shoulder surgery, not TJ. From what I understand, elbows are a lot easier to fix than shoulders. Its pretty rare for a guy to pitch as little as Freddy has the past 3 years and suddenly go up to 150-175 IP. I would definitely bet against it. Yep. Can't believe I missed that. Assuming that Freddy's going to pitch like its 2006 because he's no longer throwing in the mid-80s is crazy. His likelihood of injury is far higher than any other pitcher on the staff.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 14, 2009 -> 01:28 PM) Freddy Garcia has been in the Major Leagues since 1999. There has only been one season during that period where Freddy had been physically healthy enough to take the ball all season long and yet did not pitch 200 innings. That was 2009. The reason? His arm strength had not returned. Now that it has, and Freddy is fully healthy again, he should be expected to resume his previous work. 2000 he was plagued by injuries and worked 124.1 2007 he had TJ after pitching hurt 2008 he recovered from TJ and made a comeback, but was still weak 2009 he completed his comeback with Sox, fully recovered There is not anything structurally wrong with Freddy Garcia's arm or shoulder. He's been checked out and he is healthy. He has regained the velocity he had with us in 2006, minus maybe a tick of 1mph, and that is what he will be working on over the offseason. The man has rededicated himself to conditioning and is nowhere near the 83-86mph Freddy that we saw pitch against us in Detroit. There is no reason to expect a fully healthy Freddy Garcia to not pitch like a fully healthy Freddy Garcia. Other than the fact that he's four years older than he was in 2006, hasn't had a significant workload since then, and pitchers at his age generally don't have three years with such low innings totals and miss a beat.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 14, 2009 -> 01:03 PM) Yeah, people who believe that Freddy is going to have to undergo TJ again right after making a full recovery, or whatever would have to be the case to so limit his innings, are clueless. TJ is the only reason Freddy missed so much time, and when you look at recent history, the amount of time it took Freddy to come back is pretty much the same amount of time it takes for everyone else to work their way back, which is about 1.5-2 years. Billy Wagner took a bit less than 1.5 years and by comparison he came back very quickly. 1. No one has argued that Freddy will undergo TJ again. 2. Sure, his recovery time has been equitable, but comparing Wagner to Garcia is apples and oranges. Probable? 120 is probable, 160 is possible, and 200 is extremely unlikely. Yes. He was a good pitcher four years ago. No one's denying that.

Can people at least wait for Jared Mitchell to accrue some value before they ship him off in deals for overrated, age 30+ relief pitchers? The kid's raw as hell. He needs time, and the investment could pay off big time. Think Desmond Jennings.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 06:57 PM) Yeah, I suppose you're right, we shouldn't count on more than that. But I really think he's going to exceed a lot of expectations around the league. The key for me is that he looked as though he had learned how to pitch without the stuff he used to have. I just think the guy is a big, strong dude. And although he's been injured recently, he looked like he was headed for a full recovery when he pitched for us last year. I dunno, I'm probably wrong. But he's not a guy I find easy to underestimate. I'd just be very, very surprised if someone with that history could toss 200 innings. I'm not faulting Freddy -- it's a challenge for anyone. I'd count on him for 120-140 innings with a 4.50 - 4.75 ERA. From our no. 5, that's fantastic. Don't get me wrong, the White Sox are incredible at limiting DL time, but some guys just can't do it. I hope he proves me wrong. Truth. It makes sense in theory, but every substantive study I've seen on it debunks that theory. I just believe more in a team with pitching depth than any other. Gonzalez would help, but for the price suggested here, I'll pass. If we're going to unload the farm for a Gonzalez, let's go get Carlos.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 06:33 PM) I'm assuming you mean the fifth. And I don't think it's necessarily fair to rule Freddy out from approaching 200 IP. Maybe 170ish is more realistic, but let's not forget this guy was a horse in the early part of his career. He exceeded 200 IP in 7 of his first 8 seasons. While he has struggled with injuries recently, he's looked quite adept at learning how to pitch without a great fastball anymore, and I think if he continues that, he can approach 180-190 IP. The guy is still just 33 years old. People forget that. Yes, my mistake. Freddy has thrown 58, 15, and 56 innings the last three seasons. We should count on 120 innings and go from there. He's why holding onto Daniel should be a priority.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) I started reading that article and I guess I'll go back and give it a chance. I really disagree with idea of protection being a myth. The better hitters before and after you, the tougher it is on the opposing pitcher. The better the hitters are in front of you, the likelier it is for someone to be on base. Going after a big RBI guy with a man on base is very different than attacking him with no one on. Also, if the previous hitter - let's say Beckham - gets into a battle and sees a lot of pitches, and if he forces the pitcher to use just about everything he has, then a smart hitter on deck is going to be watching this, and he is going to go up to the plate with a better idea of what to look to for. From the standpoint of the pitcher, it's a ton easier to work around a tough hitter and then risk making a mistake to a weaker hitter than it is to make good pitches to 3 hitters in a row because you have to. If the pitcher finds it hard to get into a rhythm and he drives up his pitch count in the process, the odds of the bullpen entering the game sooner increase, which is generally going to help your chances of scoring runs, especially if you can get into a bullpen early during the first game of a series. I'm one of those people who believe that the stress of an inning mentally is harder on a pitcher than just throwing pitches in general, and the more stress you put on him, the likelier it is for him to make a mistake. A 3-4-5 of Beckham-Gonzalez-Quentin IMO would add a ton of stress to opposing pitchers. Obviously there will be some guys who are very good pitchers and are just "on," and they'll be able to work through this without much difficulty, but more often than not, it is going to be a pain in the ass for opposing pitchers to work through that kind middle of the order. For a recent example here, I don't think it's much of a coincidence that Dye, Thome, Paulie, and Crede all had excellent years for themselves in 2006 while hitting in a row. They all had very good years on their own, but they also benefited from each other. And I'll say this too: just look at our starting rotation. We have 5 guys that on any given day can go 7 innings and pretty much shut down a lineup. As it stands right now we are were lacking in offense and I believe that even if we don't make any major improvements in that area, we'll still be able to scrape across enough runs to win quite a few close ballgames. If we add a bat like Gonzalez we are going to really going to boost our run differential, and there are going to be more games where we'll be up with big leads, and our starters will take us deep, and because of the leads we'll be able to rely on the front of our bullpen (Carrasco) to finish out games. You can never really count on a bullpen, especially one-inning relievers, but having 5 starters each capable of working 200+IP as well as a potent offense could do wonders to improve our bullpen simply by taking stress off of our weakest back-end relievers by going to them less frequently in tight situations. If I didn't believe Adrian Gonzalez would make us a World Series contender for 2010 and 2011 then I wouldn't suggest trading the farm for him since it is likely we would lose him to free agency in 2012 and only pick up draft picks. But I just find it so surprising that so many people are so concerned about the 2012 team that they'd pass up a chance like this, if it really is there. If we get Adrian and we make major runs for the next two years than EVERYTHING is going to change. You can't just sit here and imagine that things two years from now would be similar to the way they are now, only worse because we won't have any good young players anymore. Two years represents 2 more years of development for the remaining prospects we would keep, plus two years worth of drafts and international signing periods, plus two years of better attendance and a more attractive atmosphere to potential advertisers which leads to more money to play around with, plus two years or additional roster moves by the front office. Two years from now we may have another Floyd/Danks/Quentin/Alexei type that is cheap, young, productive, under team control, and who is **not even in our organization right now.** Go back 2 years from now to 2007 and very few if any of us here would have thought we'd be in such good position as we are in currently, given how s***ty that 2007 team was. I just don't understand how dealing the farm now for a player of Gonzalez's caliber somehow dooms us in the future. That's a very bleak attitude and IMO it is completely unnecessary given the strides our organization has made in general since the 2003 offseason compared to prior periods. I'm counting Peavy, Danks, Buehrle, and Floyd. Who is the fourth? If you say Garcia, then, well, you're doing it wrong.

QUOTE (BaseballNick @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 10:02 AM) The Angels really love outfielders. I imagine CG would play LF, Hunter would stay in CF, Rivera would swing over to RF and Abreu would DH. I would hope (for their sake) they would go Rivera/Granderson/Hunter left to right.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 08:44 PM) The personal crap stops now. Ok? Understood. I'm doing my best to be civil.