chw42

Nice drive to close out the half.

Hey, remember when our special teams was good?

Should have traded him when he wasn't hitting .220.

Balotelli to Liverpool as Suarez's replacement for only 16 million Euros. Balotelli hasn't exactly lived up to his talent, but that's a bargain at 16 million.

My draft is this Saturday and I've done no preparation whatsoever.

James Rodriguez has already scored for Real Madrid... Dude just knows how to score.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 05:53 PM) And more baserunners tend to lead to more runs. Its pretty simple. I agree with you on WHIP and there are other things to look at from a pitchers perspective, but we are talking about a guy with a WHIP at 1.4 over an 8 year career. That is no longer a sample size issue in total. More base runners also leads to more chances for said base runners to be eliminated on double plays for a ground ball pitcher. We're also talking about a guy with a 3.66 ERA and 3.48 FIP during his career over 400+ innings. My point was that judging a player based on a stat that depends on luck over a 60-70 inning sample size isn't enough. Baseball is about run prevention, not technically base-runner prevention. Over the course of Lindstrom's career, he's been good at limiting runs, yet not so good at limiting base runners. His ability to do the former has kept him in the league for 8 years. I'm not saying he's good - he's mediocre at best now, but he's clearly been an effective pitcher in the past despite allowing a decent amount of runners on base.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 05:06 PM) I think he's been able to stick around so long with that high a WHIP because he simply does not give up the long ball that often at all. Teams have to work to score their runs. He's a ground ball pitcher. For them, giving up base runners isn't as big of a deal since they usually won't give up home runs with guys on and they can cancel out those runners with the double play.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 05:01 PM) My point is, his WHIP sucked, yet his FIP indicates he would be good. That makes zero sense. And when I look at relievers, one of the biggest things to focus on, imo, is his WHIP as an ERA/FIP can be a pretty bad indicator. You could be a pretty crappy reliever and have a good ERA because the guy behind you is really good and bails you out a lot, etc. Everyone talks about relievers FIP this and FIP that...just go back to a really simple stat...WHIP. He gives up a lot of hits and walks per nine innings and has over a long career. Last year's numbers were pretty much in-line with his career numbers and while the ERA might have been solid, the WHIP wasn't, and he is not a good reliever. One of the reasons people even use FIP is because over small sample sizes, hits can be due to luck. For relief pitchers, this is even more evident since they only pitch 60-70 innings a year if they're lucky. A coupe of dinkers in a bad spot can raise their ERA by half a run. That can also raise their WHIP by about .1 or maybe even .2. WHIP is a nice simple stat to look at to see how many base runners a pitcher gives up. The less the better obviously. But at the same time, it's too simplistic for its own good and it definitely shouldn't be used as an end-all-be-all stat to evaluate relievers. For instance, a ground ball pitcher may give up more hits than a strike-out pitcher, yet their ERAs may actually be similar because the ground ball pitcher has a better chance of inducing double plays to reduce the damage in any situation with runners on. Case and point: Matt Lindstrom (also, Jake Petricka). And honestly, what you're saying about FIP making no sense since it doesn't match with WHIP also doesn't make a lot of sense. WHIP measures base runners. FIP measures runs. Those two things measure different things. Just because one is higher does not necessarily mean the other one has to be high. Yes, I get that more base runners = more likely to give up more runs, but it's not a perfect 1-to-1 relationship and it differs for different pitchers.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 04:39 PM) This shouldn't be new. I've been saying this since the original bullpen thread. Don't get me started on FIP and what a great predictor it is. FIP indicated decent numbers for Lindstrom even last year, when he posted a pretty garbage WHIP for a reliever. How are you projecting good / solid ERA results when you have a WHIP over 1.4? That really doesn't make much sense to me. His career WHIP is over 1.4 too. One more point about WHIP and relievers. There's a reason why Lindstrom's WHIP is bad yet he has a career 3.66 ERA. He's a heavy ground ball pitcher (49%), who can get himself out of trouble with men on base using the ground ball (similar to Petricka). So while his WHIP is bad, he shouldn't be judged entirely on it due to his pitching style.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 04:55 PM) Judging by his huge velocity drop, injury seems to be the clear front runner for me. He hasn't been right all year. That or he aged a lot in one off-season.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 04:49 PM) His 2013 FIP was 3.16, or his best since 2007. And it was 3.16 the year before too. FIP can predict ERA fairly well as long as talent-level stays constant. In this case, Lindstrom's talent level has fallen dramatically.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 04:39 PM) This shouldn't be new. I've been saying this since the original bullpen thread. Don't get me started on FIP and what a great predictor it is. FIP indicated decent numbers for Lindstrom even last year, when he posted a pretty garbage WHIP for a reliever. How are you projecting good / solid ERA results when you have a WHIP over 1.4? That really doesn't make much sense to me. His career WHIP is over 1.4 too. FIP and WHIP are almost completely independent stats. FIP weights home runs, walks, and strike outs. WHIP only takes walks and hits into account. One says a hit is all the pitcher's fault while another says only hits that are home runs are the pitcher's fault (and they really screw up his FIP). FIP cannot predict WHIP because it's not what it's trying to predict. It's supposed to project ERA, which it does a decent job of doing.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Aug 17, 2014 -> 08:59 PM) That was the problem last year, too. RVP carried them the year before. He missed half the season under Moyes. When your backline is Phil Jones, Chris Smalling and Tyler Blackett (who?) it's no wonder you're going to struggle though. They have nothing but offensive players and their defensive players suck. That would be fine if their offensive players were good, but outside of Rooney and Mata, they're either bad or meh.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 08:21 AM) Kyle Naughton , who is terrible, started at one of the FB positions for Spurs on Saturday and predictably was terrible, including getting a straight red and giving away a PK. I think Yedlin would seriously challenge for playing time if he moves in January, especially if they are still involved in the league cups and Europe. The terms of the deal aren't even clear when he'll move exactly. I'm not sure why he wouldn't move in January though. He'd be doing nothing for 3-4 months if the stays in the US.

Not enough to over-turn. I really wish they would tell the fans why they made the decision...like how they do it in football.

Absolutely love what Avi's been doing.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Aug 16, 2014 -> 10:04 AM) Moyes sucks....oh wait They need RVP back. Maybe they can still make a move for Vidal or another good midfielder.

Yedlin's moving to Totenham after this MLS season. $4 million transfer fee. He'll have a lot of competition to crack the starting lineup though. Kyle Walker is a pretty good RB.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Aug 16, 2014 -> 06:37 PM) Weems cut. Thankfully Now the Holmes signing makes even mores sense. He can still return punts right?

I definitely still would. I've been a Sox fan for more than half my life, there's no way I'd just pick up cheering for some other team, especially not the Cubs. That just doesn't do it for me.

Wow, this sure got overblown...

QUOTE (jdupps @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 04:58 PM) Replays and this blocking the plate rule are ruining the game I grew up with. There's nothing wrong with trying to get the call right. Instant replay, if done right, is great for the game. Unfortunately, the way some of these new rules are written have completely screwed it up.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 04:55 PM) Ironic thing is there would have been a national outcry last night if Posey was ruled as blocking the plate. Aspects of instant replay have really hurt the game watching experience this year. For real. Early in the year, it was that stupid rule where you couldn't drop the ball on a transfer on a force out. Now this stupid rule at the plate. Whoever came up with these rules clearly didn't think them through enough.

They need to re-write the rule right away. I don't think it's actually prevented any collisions. Instead, it's just given teams runs when they shouldn't have gotten them.