Eminor3rd

Goodbye Robin, thanks for being the irrational scapegoat that most of the posters here needed. We no longer have to pretend it's your fault that the team sucked.

I generally tend to defend FO decisions, if only because everyone around here vehemently pretends to have enough information to call everything black and white when the truth is that none of us have any idea what we're talking about. But even I have to join the criticism bandwagon for the last 7-8 months of decision-making. 1. To this day, I feel like they foolishly cut the acquisitions short during the latter half of the offseason. There were a million good short AND long-term reasons to lay out for a final OF bat (and/or Ian Desmond), and they fell short. I don't get the strategy there. 2. The Shields thing was always terrible. I spent way too much time around here digging up and typing out the reasons we shouldn't sign him when he was a free agent, and ALL of them still applied to trading for him. I thought passing on Shields as a free agent was evidence that Hahn took pitching peripherals seriously, but when he made the trade, I now have to wonder what info he's using.

QUOTE (captain54 @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 03:27 PM) So according to that logic, the Cubs move to hire Joe Maddon was irrelevant... they'd have the same 100 win season with Ronnie Woo Woo as the skipper, right? Yes, this: QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 03:30 PM) Maddon definitely helps, but their talent level would've guaranteed 85+ wins last season and 95+ wins this season had they retained Renteria.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 03:21 PM) Because Robin Ventura CAN be changed, VERY EASILY, WITHOUT COSTING ANYTHING, and likely more than one thing about this formula isn't working. Because Robin Ventura has a LONG TRACK RECORD with several different team compositions, and he is not even CLOSE to .500 as a manager. But what do you want Robin to do differently? What would you have a new manager do differently? I mean, I think we can all think of some instances where we disagreed with some of Robin;'s bullpen moves, but like really, what is this team lacking from a manager that is preventing it from winning? I get that it's attractive to use the manager as a scapegoat. But if you really JUST want someone's head to roll, I think it's all a waste of bluster. Because if the front office fires the manager and then trots the same half-assed team out there, are you really going to be satisfied? Yes, Robin has a losing record as a manager. So does the janitor, I guess. Who cares? Neither of them win or lose games. Front offices use managers as "fall guys" to placate angry fan mobs. It's a nearly meaningless gesture and it SHOULDN'T be enough for you. Don't let them pass off a different manager as a proxy for change.

I just don't understand how you can all be so convinced that Robin Ventura is what needs to change to turn this team into a winner. I'm not saying Robin is good or deserves a contract extension, but just who cares? He fills out the lineup card. The players have to win. They are professionals, they know how to train. If they don't hit, it has jack to do with the manager. QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 03:14 PM) The team plays hard???? How do you know they play as hard as they can??? They seem to like playing for him???? I DON'T GIVE A s***. Go play for Drake f***ing LaRoche. 85 wins is what you remember about 2012? My f***ing god. What I remember is the team going 7-10 at home in September and October. What I remember is the team going 13-18 down the stretch when they had a chance to win the division. What I remember is a massive f***ing chokejob. And THAT'S what we should be looking to, when considering bringing back Ventura? Are you f***ing kidding? Should we hang a gold star on the White Sox 2006 3rd place 90 win campaign, now? What if we make a gold statue of Jamie Burke getting run over by Torii Hunter in 2004? I mean, that team won 83 games. Who cares what place they finished in? Jamie Burke never hit the ground so hard as when Ozzie Guillen managed him. Right? That post ^ seems like it would be a reaction to "Hahn says White Sox roster is a finished product for 2017." All of that stuff is you being disappointed with a baseball team, and yet you're saying it regarding the job security of an American League manager.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 01:24 PM) Honestly, I don't even care at this point anymore. They have bigger problems to address.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Sep 13, 2016 -> 01:49 PM) I posted their career PA's to show that one is a finished product and the other is not despite their similar age. And I would have expected a lot more from you than simply comparing career wRC+ of a guy who has played 4+ full seasons vs. a guy with less one full season. One guy is improving and the other guy is arguably regressing. And take out Lawrie's ridiculous cup of coffee, which clearly has been an abberation, and he's closer to a 96 wRC+ hitter for his career (or basically where Saladino is right now). Factor in 2B defense, where Saladino has been the superior player this season (SSS) and I'm not sure what the argument is. Seems like you're expecting Saladino to regress for some reason and I can't understand why. I'm not expecting Saladino to do anything, I'm just telling you why Lawrie is the de facto starter.

There's just no way Porcello doesn't win it with that record.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Sep 13, 2016 -> 05:51 AM) Player A Age 27 550 Career PA's .737 OPS 95 wRC+ 14.3 UZR/150 1.2 fWAR Player B Age 26.5 2,417 Career PA's .723 OPS 91 wRC+ -7.7 UZR/150 0.8 fWAR Those are only 2016 stats and the UZR/150 values are for 2B only. Regardless, I'll easily take player A as my starting 2B over player B. Not only has Saladino been far more productive this year due to his defense, he's also a less developed player and has room for growth despite being slightly older than Lawrie. I'm certain that with a full year of regular playing time his BB rate would increase (look at his minor league numbers) and he could become a 3 WAR 2B. Factor in the team control and there really is no argument for starting Lawrie over Saladino. So you posted their ages and career PA, and then immediately put their 2016 numbers below them? For anyone who is justifiably confused, Lawrie's career wRC+ is 100, and Saladino's is 80. And that is why Lawrie will get the first chance to start over Saladino.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 12, 2016 -> 11:31 PM) Get rid of Lawrie. Case closed. I guess everybody devalues Saladino cause of where he was chosen in the draft. Sorry, stat nerds (I say that lovingly) and draftniks ... the eye test is all that matters on Saladino. Sox are too dumb to play him, however. Sox scouts and front office and coaching staff is a fricking joke. This is your worst post in a while.

All the best

QUOTE (kwill @ Aug 31, 2016 -> 01:30 PM) Hey guys, Thanks so much for the information. It is super interesting. I think it would be hard for me to go to games in the minors. It seems like individual success is way more important than any kind of team success. Our average fan could hardly care less whether or not the teams wins. Our season-ticket holders do, though, but they also really latch onto specific players and root them on/hope they succeed at higher levels. There's no question that, from the affiliate end, they only really care about individual success. But you wouldn't be able to tell by watching what's on the field. The coaches and players treat it like it's the only baseball happening; they see winning as part of the training process.

NSS is right on all of that. I work for a Yankees affiliate; we're basically a contractor for the NYY. Our job is, essentially, to put on a game around their players. That includes ticket sales, concessions, stadium operations, gameday operations, etc. All of the operations staff are on our payroll, but all the players, coaches, trainers, and clubbies are on their payroll. The NYY have small ownership stake in us, but the operation is run by a private group that owns nearly all of it. Our GM is responsible for "baseball operations," which is mostly stuff like transportation and lodging for the players, dealing with umpires, and managing facility compliance. For example, the outfield grass must maintain a certain level of "brightness" when the lights are on at night, measured in footcandles. The league and/or the Yankees send guys to check up on that type of stuff from time to time. Player movement is (as mentioned above) entirely out of our hands, but TBH, it's just an operational afterthought for our GM. We all want our team to win because we work here, but our on-field success has next to no impact on attendance, and playoff games are generally not well attended anywhere in the MiLB. We started of our season 14-4, and then our five best position players got called up and we immediately started losing games. That was a bummer, but it didn't really make our GM's job any harder.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 31, 2016 -> 09:43 AM) Disagree. Hamels fell down last night. Q will reign. C Y Y O QUINTANA N G - C - - Y - - Y - - O - QUINTANA - N - - G -

QUOTE (harkness @ Aug 29, 2016 -> 06:48 PM) sigh... jose.... Awful at bat

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 29, 2016 -> 05:29 PM) Yeah, I guess we should celebrate Mylan and the $600 Epipen not being the sponsors. Although, if the amount they ponied up was double what Guaranteed Rate was forking out, I'm sure we would be attempting to rationalize that as well... That has absolutely nothing to do with CEOs not doing work.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Aug 27, 2016 -> 12:01 PM) Well now I am really confused because I trusted the WAR stats Chitown used but now looked it up myself and Fangraphs has Frazier at a 1.2 WAR and Baseball Ref has him at 2.2 WAR. 2015 Frazier 4.5, 2014 4.8, 2013 3.1, 2012 2.6 all per Fangraphs. Baseball Reference is more generous with WAR and just by a casual glance it appears to be wide differences in defensive WAR where Abreu is hurt very badly by the Fangraphs d WAR but not so much by the Baseball Ref. . I think I prefer Baseball Ref. just because defensive evaluations seem to matter way too much on Fangraphs. Of course they calculate WAR differently in other areas too so it's possible I am making a generalization about things I'm ignorant on. I don't think anyone here expected the worst WAR in Fraziers last 5 years. I often have pointed out how the Sox keep acquiring NL players whose stats drop once they get to the AL and I have said they need to start acquiring more AL players and have often been called out on it. But the facts speak for themselves at least for the Sox. And no one bring up Eaton because he didn't have a history of stats of the NL. Until there is some standardized way for calculate WAR I will remain skeptical of it's use. It isn't so much that the defense matters MORE on FanGraphs, it's that each site uses an entirely different defensive statistic to measure defensive contribution. Generally speaking, FanGraphs tends to favor statistics that "strip outside factors" to productivity, which theoretically gets more to the core of a player's "skill," at least to the extent that it is demonstrated in a particular season. The downside to this is that it leaves some rare, outlier-type skills out of the equation, simply because we can't be totally sure they're present. BR tends to prefer a more complete model, but wraps in a bunch of stuff that isn't predictive and it much more affected by luck. This gives you a more total look at what a player did, but the numbers are far less stable, and so it would be much easier to over or undervalue a player's true talent from season to season. The differences in the models are MUCH more pronounced on the pitching side, though.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Aug 27, 2016 -> 04:40 PM) Not sure if I'm reading this correctly, but Anderson has the second highest BABIP among all shortstops. Now I realize he strikes out a lot and doesn't walk much, but that's an encouraging sign if he can even get a little more plate discipline. Eh, I think it's actually a bad sign. Yes, speedy contact guys tend to run higher BABIPs than average, but literally no one in the live ball era has ever sustained .375. His elevated BABIP is more likely a sign pointing to near-term regression than it is a sign pointing to long-term success.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Aug 27, 2016 -> 09:40 AM) Do you even listen to what you just wrote because it's insane and nothing against you at all. You're trying to explain it to me and I greatly appreciate it. But what you just basically told me is a part time , injured catcher like Alex Avila ( all things being equal and in abstract ??? lost me there ) , I'd rather have him than Abreu ?? No , just no I wouldn't not even close. I mean WAR assigns each position on the field some kind of importance level right ? 1st base is at the bottom of the important positions where its crucial to have a very good defender, correct ?So how can being a bad 1st baseman hurt soooo much as to relegate Abreu to barely above league average as a player or is it barely above league average for a 1st baseman ? Because if its as a player how can you tell me with a straight face no less, all things being equal and in the abstract of course, that a platooned, injured, does nothing offensively but take walks, approx 150 AB's but good defensive catcher is worth more (?) than your full time ,2nd in RBI, 2nd in batting average , 2nd in doubles, 1st in OPS, approx 520 AB but bad defense 1st basemen ? I mean you do understand what I am saying right ? People assign money values to these WAR numbers right ? $7/8M per 1 WAR is standard now right ? Would you pay a part time catcher who gets 25-30% of the AB's of Abreu and offensively does nothing but take walks more than Abreu ? Would you be OK with just letting Abreu walk after this year like we all will be with letting Avila walk ? I don't ask all these silly questions to put you on the spot. I'm just really really trying to understand these WAR evaluations. I don't want to be a dinosaur and it's not as easy as understanding the traditional baseball stats. All of a sudden a light hitting defensive whiz like Heyward gets a huge contract based on these evaluations now and even at the age he got the contract his defensive whizardry wouldn't really last all that long,3 /4 years tops and he'll be mostly considered a middle of the pack RF once he losses some range. The thing is, I could never understand the Heyward hype that led to a contract like that from a traditionalists view. Traditionally offense has always been worth more and probably much more than defense.Good offense can probably be maintained for a longer period of time. Good offense puts you in the Hall of Fame . Does anyone think Heyward is a future HOF guy ? Yet he is given a HOF contract. Smething is wrong or agents are behind the creation of WAR . I say that jokingly of course but come on now something is way out of whack here. You're forgetting about positional adjustment, for one. Fangraphs lumps that in with defense, which leads a lot of people to be confused. You're not comparing Abreu's hitting versus Navarro's hitting -- you're comparing Abreu's value as it relates to other first baseman against Navarro's value as it relates to other catchers. Also, the "WAR is a counting stat" thing is critical. No, you wouldn't rather have Navarro than Abreu because Navarro has more WAR this year any more than you'd rather have Frazier than Donaldson because Frazier has more homeruns this year. But even that doesn't mean Navarro can't have been more valuable than Abreu over the course of a few months. Drawing sweeping conclusions from partial season counting-stat data is dumb and wrong regardless of which stats you use. If you're going to do that, it isn't the stats' fault. Forget about the dollar-value thing. People misuse that CONSTANTLY. All it was ever supposed to do is form a baseline for a specific year's market values during free agency. It was NEVER, expressly nor implied, supposed to be able to actually put a dollar value on a win for a team. There are WAY too many constantly changing variables (unique to each team and season) to be able to do that. But people constantly reference market norms for $/WAR from like 2012 to try to decide whether or not a slumping player is worth his contract going forward and other ridiculous stuff. Even professional writers do it, and it's sad.

Jesus

The "great stuff funky delivery don't care" thing worked great with Sale but... well, they can't all be zingers.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 11, 2016 -> 09:34 AM) ...what if Justin Morneau IS his son? #mindblown

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Aug 10, 2016 -> 06:09 PM) Why not? He's an average player and Saladino's just as good. Lawrie is a rent himself. Trade from excess. Even the disappointing version of Lawrie hits significantly better than Saladino.

This is a guy who simply may not be worth the baggage.

QUOTE (captain54 @ Aug 10, 2016 -> 12:41 PM) Of course it was. The discussion is concerning Robertsons performance vs value. You switched it up completely and brought up an entirely different issue involving Sale and the torn up uni's and missing a couple of starts. This is hilarious. You guys are pretty forgiving when it comes to someone else not getting value for their $$$. My guess is that if it was coming out of your pocket, or you were somehow accountable, you'd be taking a walk over to the dark side with all the irrational ranters, whiners, moaners and chronically unsatisfied Do you join hands and sing "Kumbaya" when you take your car in for a $5 k engine rebuild, and you break down not 20 minutes out of the shop, in rush hour on the Kennedy, bumper to bumper, in 95 degree temps? Are you seriously evaluating a reliever's performance based on the amount of "pitcher wins" he adds or subtracts to from Chris Sale's total? Because that would be total nonsense, and Quinarvy's post is simply stating that.