almagest

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Oct 3, 2008 -> 07:40 PM) I never said he was bad. But he isn't a good HITTER. He is a good all around offensive player because of his good eye, not because he rips singles all over the park.Semantics. Dunn doesn't hit for average, but he does everything else. Add in hitting for average, and you start talking a hall of fame caliber player. That's an awfully high benchmark. So, based on that, do you think a player who ONLY hits for average is better, or something? You really aren't making any sense.

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Oct 3, 2008 -> 07:26 PM) Yeah, that's all he does. He hit what, .245? I never said he doesn't get on base for us- that would be the reason I'd want to keep him actually, if his AVG wasn't so bad. So yeah, he isn't a good hitter. Probably 75% of Adam Dunn's hits were extra base hits, does that make him a good hitter? Don't think so.So all Thome does is get on base and club doubles and homers. Man, what an awful DH! And, yeah, Adam Dunn is a good hitter. I don't know what metrics you rate good hitters by, but someone who has a .381 lifetime OBP and a slugging percentage over .500 is pretty good. Seriously I can't believe you thought Adam Dunn being bad was a valid point. Do you pay attention to ANY stat besides batting average?

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Oct 3, 2008 -> 07:15 PM) Did Thome almost break the record? All I'm saying is that Cust is like 10 years younger or so and that's something he can improve on. Thome's K's will continue to rise due to his bat getting slower, he still can't hit a LHP, and he just isn't a good hitter. All of those things, however, Cust could improve on. Thome "just isn't a good hitter?" On whose authority? Yours? Please. He got us into the playoffs. He still put up an .865 OPS at the age of 37. He gets on base a ton and more than half his hits were extra base hits. You probably want to come up with some actual legitimate evidence before you post.

Why does this topic keep coming up? It's pretty simple -- Young isn't very good. Maybe he will be, but he hasn't posted an OPS+ over 100 yet, and he still strikes out like 4x more than he walks. Also, for comparison, Nick Swisher had roughly the same OPS+ as Young this year (93 vs. 92), and Swisher has been a huge disappointment. Would we want another outfielder putting up those stats?

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Oct 1, 2008 -> 03:14 PM) I'm not home yet, but what do you mean TBS is blacking it out? For real?Since the game is on TBS, it's blacked out on MLB.tv.

Damn mlb.tv and TBS blacking this one out. Anyone watching it on a stream?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 1, 2008 -> 01:01 PM) I'm not going to defend Wise' defense but to compare what Delmon Young did on the Dye hit and what Wise' did on the Cuddyer hit is ludicrous. Do they have the same speed ( the hit ball and the outfielders)? Were both outfielders in the exact same spot when the ball was 1st struck ? Did the ball roll in the exact same line of travel ? Did both balls have the exact same spin ? Unless you can answer yes to those questions you can't compare why Young got to the ball and held Dye to a single and why Wise couldn't cut off the ball and Cuddyer got a double.Michael Cuddyer in his career has the overwhelming majority of his hits between the left field line and left-center. The defense was likely shading him to left/left center. Dye, while playing for far longer than Cuddyer, has similar splits as far as hit location. I'd imagine the defense would play him much the same as Cuddyer. It's impossible to tell if both balls were hit the same way, but they were close as far as I could tell. Also, even neglecting the stats, if you watched the game, and watched the way Wise ran at that ball, didn't get himself into good position to cut it off, then overran it and fell down, I don't see how you could argue that he played it extremely poorly. I can't remember a left fielder fall down as much as I've seen Wise fall down over the last 2 weeks or so.

The Gomez triple that went off Wise's glove, and the double last night by Cuddyer on almost the same ball that Delmon Young was able to cut off told me all I need to know about Wise's defense.

Okay, so we're working on the rent for the place in Bucktown/Humbolt, but we found another place in what the agent termed as "Old Irving," on Addison and Pulaski. It's about 4-5 blocks from the Addison blue line stop. Does anyone know anything about this area?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 29, 2008 -> 11:42 AM) You stated this: And no, I wouldn't want him on the Sox. He's all attitude, no ability. You constantly harp on his performance and say he has no ability. Your words. I also never said he would be Rickey Henderson II. That was Hawk, I think he be below that. All I said was Jerry Owens couldn't hold his jock and you won't change my mind. His performance is mediocre. All I've seen from him is speed and attitude, with nothing so far in his entire career to back it up. Maybe Owens can't hold his jock potential-wise, but potential means nothing if he hasn't backed it up with performance yet, and most assuredly has a long way to go to live up to it.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 29, 2008 -> 10:37 AM) Please read the post I responded to. It wasn't even yours. I copy and pasted the quote in my answer. Then you tell me I'm cherry picking. The post said nobody. I mentioned a few off my head. I will say this, for a guy who never has had success and never will, he's pretty highly coveted around baseball. For a guy who never will have any success he sure did look pretty good last Thursday a game where if the White Sox won, they wouldn't have to bother with today or tomorrow. He's 22 years old. You think he sucks and always will, I think he'll turn into a good ballplayer and has already contributed. Why don't we leave it at that?You continually miss the point. I don't think he sucks and always will. He sucks this year, and has had a mediocre minor league career. I don't see what about this means he'll become Rickey Henderson II.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 29, 2008 -> 07:07 AM) Considering the post I was answering included this: Any player who can't post a .800 OPS in the minors has no chance of ever being a useful Major League hitter. Why is it "cherry-picking" when I find 3 off the top of my head? Wouldn't just 1 suffice? Strawman. I never said a player who didn't post an .800 OPS in the minors had no chance of being a useful major league hitter. I said there's no reason to hype a guy who never posted an .800 OPS in the minors, because he hasn't come close to realizing the potential that made him a high-ranked prospect. You also continually miss the point that the players you mentioned have ALL had success either in college, Cuba, the minors, or very early in their major league careers. Carlos Gomez has had none of this so far.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 28, 2008 -> 05:23 PM) Robin Ventura didn't. Carlton Fisk did in low A ball, in 195 AB, but didn't after that. Jason Varitek never did. The only time Brian Roberts ever did was a 29 AB stint in rookie ball. Put things into perspective. Gomez is 9 months older than the latest White Sox #1 pick. He still hit .260. Stole 30 bases. Maybe that's not useful to you, but for a 22 year old its not bad. His OBP is .014 lower than Alexei Ramirez. It obviously needs some work, but he's only 22 with a ton of talent. I don't think he's as good as Hawk says he is, but he's certtainly a lot better than Jerry Owens.You can cherry-pick former and current player stats all you want, but ALL of the players you mentioned had seasons in college, the minors, Cuba, and/or the majors early in their careers that justified their hype. Nothing Gomez has done so far in 5 years of professional baseball has merited any recognition. He's had a couple of decent minor league seasons, has a negative runs contributed value (-.145 MLVr), and is overall playing at replacement level (0.6 VORP) in the majors. He needs to vastly improve on his contact rate, his selectivity at the plate, and he needs to start hitting for more power before he comes close to the hype given to him as a prospect, and by himself. That's a pretty tall order, and lots of players with as much or more ability as him can't do that, so what makes him worth such a vehement defense?

What we need is for our pitching staff to stop giving up 12 runs a game. Work on patching the bullpen a bit, maybe shore up the starters, and we're fine.

QUOTE (SoxFanForever @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 10:52 PM) Almagest, I don't think that is too bad an area. You are pretty much in Bucktown/Wicker Park there. The area of Humboldt that you really want to avoid is west of Kedzie. Used to be anything west of Western. However, that area has been yuppified in recent years and I think you should probably enjoy it. What agent did you meet with? I'm planning to check the area slightly east of you in the upcoming weeks. Yeah, that's the conclusion we came to as well, after a lot of research. We'll probably take it, as long as it's still available. Urban Domain is the agency. They have a couple listings in the West Loop/Bucktown/Wicker Park area. Check 'em out -- should just be http://www.urbandomain.com

QUOTE (Steff @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 08:33 PM) I played with the iPhone a bit and Lord does it suck. I text at lightening speed and that thing has severe lag. It would end up out the window fast. I like the Curve a lot. They didn't tell me about the Storm though. I'll have to read up on it. I told them I would be back on Tuesday after I did some more research. Is the internet slow on the BB? They said that was the only thing faster on the iPhone.Mobile Safari is a much better browser than whatever Blackberries use. I doubt the speed is any different though, if both phones use 3G. Do Blackberries use wifi if it's available? If not, the iPhone would be faster when connected to a wifi network. If you text a lot, though, I'd highly suggest a sidekick. Easiest device to text on. Not sure if AT&T offers those, though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 02:47 PM) "Oh no the corn! Paul Newman's gonna have my legs broke!" - Simpsons quote.Fixed that for ya.

I love these threads that blame our "HR or nothing" offense for this losing streak, yet in the past three games we've scored 6, 8, and 6 runs, yet lost all 3. Really the only game we had a chance in & our offense let us down on this losing streak was the second game in Minnesota. You can argue the third Minnesota game was also the offense's fault because they didn't score after the 4th, but the pitching staff blew a 5 run lead. You can't do that and expect to win.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 09:28 PM) I do know several scouts. I never said numbers don't matter, I said they weren't all that important. Its what you can become being more important than what you currently are. You now are using Ventura's numbers in college using aluminum bats vs. Gomez playing professional baseball with wooden bats? That is as crazy as it gets. As 22 year olds, they were major league hitters needing to improve. Of course Gomez has to improve, but there's a very reasonable chance of that happening. Many don't like his brashness, but as I said earlier in the thread, I bet if he was a White Sox you and others would have a different opinion of him. I bet you wouldn't think he was a Jerry Owens clone if he was a White Sox.So what do these scouts say about Gomez? What has his mediocre 1.5 seasons on the majors done to impress them? Nothing about what Gomez currently is, or has been in the minors, points to him becoming anything special. Quite simply, he has a bunch of raw tools he hasn't done anything impressive with in 5 years. And no, I wouldn't want him on the Sox. He's all attitude, no ability. When he puts up an OPS of .800 or better at ANY professional level, he can punch his chest and scream and yell all he wants. Oh, and I guess Ventura's 3-time All-American, 58-game hitting streak, Golden Spikes Award, Dick Howser Trophy, .428 batting average, .792 slugging percentage, 302 RBI (in 3 years), and inaugural induction into the College Baseball Hall of Fame mean absolutely nothing because he hit with a metal bat. Right. None of that comes close to Gomez's magnificent .735 career MiLB OPS. Seriously, do you think before you post some of this? It took me all of 1 minute to check Wikipedia and find Ventura's gaudy college career numbers. You are right about one thing, though. Both were 22 year olds who need(ed) to improve. Except Ventura actually had a track record that indicated he had a good shot to improve -- Gomez has nothing but hype.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 07:31 PM) The only thing I said was Owens couldn't hold Gomez's jock. You said they are essentially the same player. I used Ventura as a 22 year old just to show that at that age numbers don't mean a lot. Ask a scout. Numbers for a 18 19 20 21 year old in the minor leagues aren't very important. For an older player they become more significant. If I were a GM and I could have either to trade, I know I could get a lot more for Gomez than I could for Owens. Gomez sure got a horrible read on AJ's ball last week didn't he? Except Ventura's numbers were at 22 in the majors, after only 1 year in the minors. Gomez has had 4 years in the minors. You keep glossing over this fact. You also gloss over Ventura's stellar college numbers, which Gomez hasn't even approached in any of his minor league seasons. I also sincerely doubt scouts will tell you numbers don't matter from 18-21. Most every scouting report I've seen mentions things like K/BB ratio. I bet that can tell you a lot about a player at any age -- Gomez has a "stellar" 82 BB / 250 K rate in 4 minor league seasons. Gomez also has an even more "stellar" 33 BB / 168 K rate in about 1.5 major league seasons. So, he has essentially no discipline so far, which sure doesn't help a speed guy. The stats I posted earlier also shows he has little power (low SLG), and can't hit much or walk (low AVG/OBP). Maybe you're right, and numbers don't matter that much at a young age, but Gomez has to improve in every single aspect of his game (besides speed) to become a good player, and he's going to have to improve a lot to earn that "5 tool player". Also, I like how you, a fan, are telling me, a fan, that I need to "ask a scout" about all these things. Since when did you go to scouting school and suddenly learn how to evaluate talent? You know no more than I do about it, except I at least have SOME evidence to back my opinion up.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 05:41 PM) If you really think Jerry Owens and Carlos Gomez are anywhere the same player, lets just say, I'm glad you're not a White Sox scout, or if you are or ever were, I can understand the condition of the system. What about defense? What about throwing arms? Comparing what Jerry Owens does when he's 25 or 26 or 27 to what Carlos Gomez does offensively when he's 19 or 20 or 21 is beyond silly. Gomez is a far better prospect. He will make a lot more money playing baseball than Jerry Owens. Look at Robin Ventura when he was 22 offensively in the major leagues. Ventura played all of 1 season in AA at the age of 21. By the time Ventura had 5 years of pro experience (what Gomez has now), he put up MLB OPS+ of 57 (Sept. of 1989, at the age of 21), 83, 126, 127, and 120. He was also one of the best defensive 3rd basemen in the league after his first year or two (Gold Glove in 1991). Gomez, on the other hand, has put up an OPS+ of 79 in his only season in MLB, his 5th pro season, at the age of 22 -- worse than Ventura's age 22 season, when Ventura only had 2 years of pro experience. Gomez's defense relies largely on speed because he gets bad reads. He does have a solid arm, though -- not the most important thing for a CF. Overall, I doubt anyone considers him a good defensive player. Hmm... sounds a lot like what people say about Owens, minus the good arm... So, let's see here... you compare Gomez to Ventura, which is a terrible comparison because they haven't had anywhere near the same career path so far (as I've shown), then you mention defense, which Gomez isn't very good on and appears to parallel (gasp!) Jerry Owens the most. Are you going to keep trying, or will you finally admit you've got a chubby for Superman .660 and are selectively picking and making up evidence to support your points?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 04:44 PM) Gomez is 9 months older than Gordon Beckham. Compare him to an almost 30 Jerry Owens. Good example. You have the most accurate name on soxtalk.Jerry Owens career minors (6 years): .291 .359 .359 (.718 OPS) 162 SB 66 CS (71%) Carlos Gomez career minors (4 years): .278 .336 .399 (.735 OPS) 141 SB 39 CS (78%) So Owens gets on base more and gets more hits, but Gomez has more power. a .017 point difference in OPS is basically nothing. Gomez is also a little better at stealing. But yeah, basically the same player. Also, Owens didn't start in Low A until he was 22, due to football. He's been a couple years behind the curve development-wise. Owens is also NOT "almost 30". He's 27. Gomez probably has a much higher ceiling due to his young age, but who knows if he'll reach it? If his attitude to this point ("The .660 OPS Superman") is any indication, he won't. And to say he and Owens are anything but almost the same player based on their careers to this point is silly.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 24, 2008 -> 08:30 AM) Im in the West Loop and couldnt be happier. Close to 2 major highways, lots of stuff around or being built around me, easy parking, older crowd. Rock, Anywhere in the West Loop that you'd say to look? Any areas around there to avoid?

QUOTE (WilliamTell @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 02:03 PM) Carlos Gomez just did the Fox lineup for the Twins and proclaimed himself as Superman while showing his Superman shirt under his jersey. I didn't know Superman meant .660 OPS. What a tool.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Sep 27, 2008 -> 12:58 PM) You got the exact address of intersection? 1740 Maplewood is the address. Nearest major intersection is Western & North Ave. About 3-4 blocks from the Western Blue Line stop.