Voros

Every great play Beckham makes at second becomes a double edged sword to me. He looks great over there, but it does make you wonder about what kind of player he could be at his natural position.

QUOTE (striker @ Apr 2, 2010 -> 10:01 AM) The projection systems are a little different. Those are simulated applications that come up with numbers. They are based on algorithms. If they are off then their reputation is on the line. The key is that they're all going to be off. Even a theoretically perfect system will have a standard error of a little over 6 games in either direction. I think most folks think that the gap between the Twins and White Sox is likely no bigger than that. So no one can predict the winner of the AL Central with anything close to any level of certainty. The correct answer to "who is going to win the AL Central" is almost certainly "I don't know." And no one other than maybe God has access to such a system, so the error range is even greater even for the very best at it. So yeah even the Indians and Tigers are both in this. I do think that the AL Central is the only likely path to the playoffs for the White Sox though. The consensus best three teams in the league are all in the same division and that's not good news for the Wild Card hopes of everybody else, particularly since the other two teams in that division are thought to be considerably weaker (and therefore a source of wins for the top three).

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 12:20 PM) I can't wait to see Anti-Ankiel in person. He is one of my most anticipated players to watch. He throws very hard (obviously). So far from seeing him live (I live in AZ) and on TV he has a tendency to fall behind and then they sit on his fastball. And he don't throw _that_ hard to get by doing that. His off-speed stuff isn't awful, but I don't see him throwing them for strikes in the Majors right now. I think he's mopup duty and I also think if he winds up with any sort of knock, they'll DL him with as lengthy a rehab stint as they can get away with. I don't think the White Sox believe he's a more effective pitcher than Hudson or Torres right now, but Hudson needs to get his starts and both he and Torres have options left. But the Sox need to commit to this move. There's no point in going ballistic on him when the inevitable train-wreck outing pops up for him. It's going to happen, so folks need to understand what's going on and be a little more patient with him than others.

I know Dan pretty well and I'm thrilled for him that he's got this gig. He knows what he's doing. I think the issue is not so much that the Indians are projected to be good (they're not), but that it's a crappy division (it is). If the Sox have an offense right now, they're going to need some production from some unlikely sources. Preventing runs is only 50% of the game and so the pitching staff and a decent defense are only going to take the Sox so far. The weight of the world currently rests on the shoulders of Beckham, Quentin and Konerko; they have to produce and produce big. I probably _would_ put the Sox ahead of the Indians as the Indians really have had quite a time of it with their pitchers the last few years and the early returns on Branyan are not looking so good. But I certainly wouldn't make that gap more than a couple of games.

Run expectancy tables suffer from two flaws: 1) They represent the outcome with average players on base, at the plate and due up. Change those players and you change the numbers. That is why, of course, no one argues about pitchers bunting in those situations. 2) Later in games, it starts to diverge with what you're really looking for: win expectancy. For example, with a tie game in the bottom of the ninth, scoring one run is as good as scoring 10 runs, either outcome wins you the game. So multi-run strategies lose their advantages over single run strategies. That said they are a pretty decent starting benchmark for a strategic analysis of what you're doing. More often than not, bunting a guy over with a man on first and no one out is a bad strategy. There are times when it has its benefits, and there's a benefit to doing it every now and then just to keep the other team honest. But if the lead-off hitter reaches base in the first, and the White Sox have their best hitters coming up, it's pretty crazy to suggest the number two guy should bunt. To me I think when guys who can run a bit sacrifice bunt, they should try and bunt for a hit and take the sacrifice if they get thrown out. It not only increases the chances for the guy to reach base, but it puts additional pressure on the opposing defense to make a quick decision and a good throw and that can lead to more throwing errors by them.

Okay here's my theoretical 25 man roster (again I was asked): C - Pierzynski C - Erik Kratz (journeyman minor leaguer with a good glove and decent bat - league min) 1B - Konerko/Nick Johnson 2B - Getz/Nix platoon SS - Ramirez/Beckham 3B - Beckham/Ramirez LF - Quentin CF - Rick Ankiel/Rios (Ankiel at about a WAG of around $3 mil/yr) RF - Rios/Ankiel DH - Nick Johnson/Konerko (Johnson at about $6 mil/yr) IF - Nix/Getz IF - Mike McCoy (the Rockies waived him and the Jays claimed him before the White Sox turn, but you could have gotten him before then, league min) OF - Ryan Langerhans (non-tendered by the Mariners on the 12th and then re-signed a week later. Defensive specialist, league minimum or close to it) SP1 - Peavy SP2 - Danks SP3 - Buerhle SP4 - Floyd SP5 - Garcia/Hudson/Torres RP - Jenks RP - Thornton RP - Linebrink RP - Pena RP - Torres/Garcia (if Hudson's not starting I'd prefer him in AAA) RP - R.J. Swindle (minor league lefty killer currently on an NRI for the Rays, league min) RP - Chris Bootcheck or a guy like him (have a sort of open competition with guys like this in ST and see who looks the best. all league min) And I'm under the current amount spent. So if I see a reliever I really like for under $2 million, I can pounce. There's other guys you could go after like Andruw or Gabe Gross who would be useful additions to the team and wouldn't cost much. Freddy Dolsi wasn't a terrible pickup as he's a groundball specialist and they can be useful out of the pen, though I think he's a little hittable. I think this team is better than the current one and doesn't cost any more. I don't think it's a great team, but then that has a lot to do with a poor minor league system and some questionable existing long term big money contracts. The biggest risks (other than maybe Ankiel) are in spots where a flop doesn't really hurt you too bad and you can change courses pretty quickly. A guy like Swindle, despite his clear weaknesses, he throws strikes and lefties just don't seem to hit him at all and therefore should be more than adequate as a back of the pen platoon specialist. To me, little pickups like that are how you put together a bench: cheap with a little bit of potential should things break your way.

QUOTE (bschmaranz @ Dec 20, 2009 -> 12:45 AM) Don't beat around the bush, tell us what you really think? Well he asked "What were better ways to spend the money?" and I gave my answer. Ultimately I do think that when it comes to the bench and the back of the bullpen, you're better off just cobbling the thing together as best as you can and not wasting too many resources on it. Hell, even the Yankees didn't spend much on their bullpen last year past Rivera and they actually have the payroll to spend heavily on it if they wanted.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 19, 2009 -> 07:28 PM) What were better ways to spend the money? Well money spent on Vizquel on Kotsay to me are wastes. They're no better than guys like Mike McCoy and Ryan Langerhans who are available for league minimum, a handshake and a kind word. I'm not sure Kotsay is even much better than De Aza at this stage of their careers and the Sox already have him. Even if Kotsay and Vizquel are slightly better (extremely doubtful in Kotsay's case), if the two play enough to where "slightly better" has any meaning, the team is in trouble anyway. There's two million saved. Then trading Getz and Fields for a player not any better than Getz but considerably more expensive is another two million gone. Andruw was a decent pickup since he only costs you more than league minimum if he actually does something. Third man out of the bullpen is probably not someone you want to be spending $3 million on, particularly when it means you can't tender a guy who was an effective workhorse out of the pen last year. Putz does have a track record of some success, but he's always had control problems and obviously 2009 wasn't the most encouraging season. I wouldn't have spent that money that way. That's $2.5 million saved. $4 million on Juan Pierre is a considerable overpay in and of itself and Ely wasn't a completely worthless chip either. Pierre is the kind of bench player you spend $1.5 million on, but that wasn't on the table. So that's $3.5 million saved. That's $12 million above league minimum for those slots. Fill guys like McCoy and Langerhans in at two of the slots. The Andruw deal is fine for one of the slots. So far we haven't spent any of that $12 million. $5 million for Nick Johnson or $5.5 if you think the White Sox needed to exceed the Yankees offer. So that's $6.5 million for an outfielder (Marlon Byrd or Rick Ankiel are both good players likely available for less than that) and a middle reliever to fill out the 25 (and a league minimum backup catcher). To me guys like Kotsay and Vizquel and Teahen haven't filled any holes. They aren't any better than options the White Sox already had available to them. Then when it comes to guys like Pierre, you can get a better player for the same kind of money. Finally when it comes to Putz, you're spending a premium to fill a not all that critical position on the team on a guy whose recent history ain't all that great. I don't like any of it.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 19, 2009 -> 07:05 PM) I really think this is going to be a fun team. I'm less optimistic because I think the biggest strength of the White Sox right now is the weaknesses of their divisional opposition. If one of them manages to sort things out (or Minnesota doesn't crater), I'm not sure this team is good enough to fight it out with them. Everyone except Kansas City has a shot at this, and so I'd have preferred a plan that either aggressively targeted 2010 or aggressively targeted the future. This offseason hasn't seemed to accomplish either. To put it more simply: the chances of any one team getting lucky ain't great. The chances of one of three teams getting lucky is much better, and I don't think the White Sox are good enough to beat that unless they get lucky too. If the White Sox get unlucky (injuries unusually poor performances) it's over pretty quickly.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 19, 2009 -> 06:45 PM) Pierre and Teahan will be paid about $6 million combined this year. Johnson will make $5.5 plus incentives. I wouldn't say they are paying the two "significantly" more than Johnson alone is making from the Yankees though. 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.

I think the point people are trying to make is that Albert Pujols would be the best leadoff hitter in baseball. The problem of course is that his value is better served in the middle of a lineup. Not hitting for power is not a feature for a leadoff hitter, it's just that it's a weakness that doesn't cost as much if he bats a lot with no one on base (as leadoff hitters tend to do, especially in the NL). Pierre's problem is that not only does he not hit for power, he only has average-ish on base skills to go with it making him a very dubious hitter anywhere in the lineup. Now he's almost certainly a plus glove in left field despite his lousy arm, so that does help but this team really had huge offensive shortcomings last year and haven't replaced the biggest offensive producer (and another guy who was in the top third of their producers) with anything remotely comparable. At this point they really have two starters at the three outfield positions and DH, and have a bunch of guys who probably are good bench guys but not good enough to play every day. Way earlier in the offseason I suggested Nick Johnson as a good signing and he's now with the Yankees for significantly less money than the combined salaries of Pierre and Teahen. I hope the White Sox have their best starting pitching in 20 years next year, they'll need it (or monstrous breakouts from guys like Beckham, Ramirez and Quentin) to be a 90 win team. You can talk about the park making some hitters statistics look better, but then they're gonna make Jake Peavy's look a lot worse (considering Peavy played in the best pitcher's park in baseball).

QUOTE (longshot7 @ Aug 3, 2009 -> 12:34 PM) What no one has addressed is if we lose Thome, we will no longer have a power LH bat. Would it be better to resign him for less or trade for someone like Adam Dunn? In my example Ankiel would provide that and Johnson's a lefty too. I'm not sure you necessarily need a lefty power bat. A good lefty bat maybe (that's Johnson). The problem with Ankiel is Boras, but that's a different situation entirely than having to negotiate with him over Holliday.

If you want to weight OBP and SLG a little more correctly than OPS does, something like (1.8 * OBP) + SLG works fairly well. But with the exception of extreme cases, OPS mostly gets the job done. Getz hasn't been a good offensive player so far in the majors, but I think he could probably hit a little better going forward. How much is debatable. If he continues that kind of stolen base success rate (unlikely but even close to that is nice) that should help a little.

By the way, I think what a lot of folks are hinting at here is a variation of the backpack problem. Valuing Peavy is a little more complicated than counting up how many wins he's worth and multiplying that by the value of a win. A major league baseball team only has a 25 man roster and can only play 9 (10 in the AL) players at once. So even if you could theoretically sign 100 players worth $2 million each, for only $1 million each, you wouldn't be able to reap the full benefits because most of those players would have nowhere to play. You'd make $9 million on the first 9 and lose money on most of the rest. But in the case of a superstar, not only do all the wins he adds have value, but being able to have all those wins come from a single roster spot and a single spot in the lineup carries with it additional value over and above. This is particularly true because a win that gets you from 93 to 94 wins is a hell of a lot more valuable than one that gets you from 83 to 84. So the more wins you pile up, the more each successive win from there is worth. Those sorts of considerations make it kind of a difficult thing to evaluate.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Aug 3, 2009 -> 10:28 AM) To judge any trade four days after is dumb. Well, yes and no. Technically, you judge a trade based on all of the information that potentially can be known when the trade was made. To say otherwise, is like saying hitting on 18 in blackjack is a good move if a '3' comes up. It was still a bad move, it just happened to work out anyway. On the other hand, which actor in the trade had the most information and used it the best is difficult to know immediately, and future events may help untangle that. So it's not quite as simple as the blackjack example above. Going from a pitcher's park in the NL to a hitter's park in the AL is unlikely to help Peavy's numbers any, so I think that's a legitimate concern. His injury issues are probably a concern, but could be overblown a bit since only shoulder injuries are massive red flags. I'm not a real big fan of the trade, but pitching prospects are notoriously unreliable so I wouldn't slag it too badly. A healthy Peavy sure isn't going to hurt the rotation any.

The clearest way to see the distinction is Tyler Flowers as a catcher versus Tyler Flowers as a first basemen. The Beckham situation is much less severe than that, but it's still a consideration I think. The idea is that the likely amount of offense you get from other positions changes pretty severely depending on where Flowers plays.

It's a shame about the Boras thing because I think a guy like Ankiel would be a better fit than Figgins (you just need a competent backup). He should come pretty cheap and there's a decent upside. Good fielder. Crisp does nothing for me. Crawford is going to be very expensive. Depending on price you could do worse than someone like Marlon Byrd, I suppose. A Mike Cameron return seems a little unlikely, but who knows. The CF free agent class looks thin to me. Here's my oddball, no chance of happening lineup: 1B = Nick Johnson 3B = Beckham LF = Quentin RF = Dye DH = Konerko CF = Rick Ankiel SS = Ramirez C = Pierzynski 2B = Getz You improve the defense with both changes and improve the offense with one of them. A lot of folks won't like Johnson as a leadoff hitter, so if needs be you can always put Getz there and shift everyone down a spot. The two added players both should come in pretty cheap thanks to injuries and a fairly subtle set of skills. You can replace Ankiel with Byrd if you think there's no way we sign a Boras free agent.

QUOTE (beautox @ Aug 3, 2009 -> 01:39 AM) I agree chris very well could become any of those players you mentioned but the promise of that upside a 770ops 10HR 30SB contact hitter with excellent base stealing technique is quite an asset to have. Then of course there's the Mike Caruso possibility which is sort of the flipside of Brian Roberts/Bill Doran comparisons. My concern is that I think the sox might have a limited window on moving Beckham back to the middle infield before he loses the ability to play it well. Maybe the safest route is just to leave him at third, but if he actually can play a good shortstop in the Majors, it seems awfully tempting to just have him do that and have everybody else adjust around him. Whether he can or not is info I don't have.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 3, 2009 -> 12:08 AM) Welcome to Soxtalk, by the way! Thanks.

Roberts is a career .284/.354/.417 hitter, just a little bit better than the .280/.350/.400 I listed as Getz's upside. And that's _upside_, not necessarily the most likely outcome. Adam Kennedy also hit .270/.318/.372 at 25 (with the exact same OPS+ as Getz) and that's more or less the player he's been since. Mike Lansing, Mark Grudzielanek, Tommie Herr, Harold Reynolds. All useful players, but nobody you wouldn't shove out of the way if Jeff Kent was waiting in the wings.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Aug 2, 2009 -> 10:51 AM) If they can change ARod around, anyone can be changed at any time for the betterment of the team If that were really true, ARod wouldn't have been the one who mas moved. The idea behind Beckham playing a more important defensive position like SS or 2B is that theoretically if Beckham is as good a defender at those positions as he is at 3B, average fielding third basemen tend to be better hitters than average fielding second baseman. In the case specifically of the White Sox, the presence of Viciedo only enhances that point. Getz is a nifty little player, but he's not real young and his upside with the stick looks like maybe .280/.350/.400. If it's that or Josh Fields, Getz looks not too bad. But otherwise you might want to consider trying to upgrade the offense there. The big problem I see is one of timing. Skills not used tend to disintegrate. If Beckham is ultimately not going to play third, it would be a mistake to leave him there much longer past this season. There was a time when Chipper Jones was probably a better defensive shortstop than a defensive third baseman. Obviously that's likely not the case anymore.