Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 27, 2015 -> 11:24 AM) In that case, the team's general manager vastly overestimated the talent available on his team because some of them had made it look too easy last year and invested $50 million this season based on that overestimation. The team's General Manager then has completely failed at his job by any reasonable standard, costing his employer a huge amount of money. He should be replaced. Balta, I love you man, but this response completely missed the entire point of the part you bolded in my post. When it comes to roster moves, a GM makes his money by making predictive decisions. The reality is that every decision you make that is predictive needs to be viewed, essentially, as a probability. For example, every player in baseball, in a given season, comes with a small chance of becoming the best player in the entire league. They also come with higher likelihoods of being average or whatever, but there's no way to prognositcate what is going to happen ahead of time. It's all a deal from the deck, and the GM's job is to stack that deck in his favor as much as possible. So let's take Chris Sale, who has posted a 4.29 ERA so far. Heading into this season, we could expect that there's a tiny chance he'd bust and be the worst pitcher in the league, a larger but still small chance he'd win the CY Young, a larger chance he'd hit the DL for the whole year, a and so on with other outcomes -- but the most likely single outcome was that he'd put out a star-level season as one of the top 20 or so pitchers around. That is the outcome that Hahn expected and should be judged on putting out. Unless you think Chris Sale is a true talent 4.29 ERA pitcher and shouldn't have been considered the ace of a contender, you have to be comfortable with Hahn expecting more. Yet, here we are. Our ace has, on average, pitched like a #4 guy. That's how the cookie crumbles, though, there was ALWAYS a chance that would happen. When you look around the roster, you see a LOT of that to varying degrees. A ton of dudes who are performing below what consensus expected. But the only thing strange about is that it's all happening at once. Individually, they're all realistic, if not necessarily the most likely outcome. And then, when you look around the league and realize that half the teams have to lose every day, even that it's all happening at once doesn't seem strange. Yes, it MIGHT be a coaching problem or a player dev problem or something else that is theoretically fixable -- but from where you and I sit, we have NO evidence to suggest that or anything else in particular. Occam's Razor demands that the most likely outcome is the dudes are just s***ting the bed. Half the guys in the league do it every year. I disagree strongly with the desperation that everyone is feeling regarding the roster. If you look at the preseason predictions thread, you'll see me predicting a roughly .500 record, and yet I adored the offseason that Hahn had. This is because I think he did an EXCELLENT job of balancing short and long-term interests. When I look at the 25 man, the only boat anchor I see is John Danks. I see a team that's due for some bounceback in a lot of areas and is going to retain long-term flexibility in others. Yeah, Samardzija is likely not going to provide value going forward, but that's the cost of doing business. There's no point in running a team if you aren't going to try to win, and the cost was very reasonable. Again, I think we can all agree that the most likely outcome for Semien was much worse than reality and the most likely outcome for Samardzija was a much better one -- but there was ALWAYS a chance it would turn out this way. He traded a guy with a 10% chance of hitting like a star for a guy who had maybe a 50-60% chance of remaining one. Those are rough, oversimplified estimates, but you get my point. If you want to claim the GM failed, you have to judge him on the decisions he made at the time he made them. When the outcomes all fall in the realistic range, sometimes it's just the luck of the draw. You can make a claim about a systemic problem with coaching or scouting, but you need some real good evidence to back it up, and it's very difficult to come up with any from where you and I sit.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2015 -> 08:13 AM) By that argument, no CEO or manager or coach should ever be fired, except for gross negligence. Unless you accept the fact that the White Sox actual or real "mean" is 0-5 games under .500 (and last place in the division) and are contented with that level of performance....then we'll be stuck in that same pattern of continual and consistent mediocrity for another 20-30 years. No, that's not true at all. Firstly, we're only dealing with the question of "will firing a manager in season improve the Sox chances to win," and secondly, we're only dealing with a job where the players have others actively trying to impede their success. Sports is an area where you can try and fail at your job. There doesn't exist the same gap between strategy and execution in nearly all office jobs. Sales probably comes closest. The thing that is missing from all the "fire RV" discussion is the complete lack of willingness for anyone to accept the possibility that the players are simply failing because success is hard. Every single at bat in baseball, someone fails and someone succeeds. There isn't always an explanation you can put on a flowchart. It's certainly plausible that something is wrong upstairs that is leading to failure on the field, but none of us have any way of knowing and the play on the field is not remotely close to sufficient evidence.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2015 -> 07:04 AM) http://m.mlb.com/news/article/5791926/ in the 2000's, they worked out 9 of 34 times (and two of them were by the Rockies/O'Dowd, who curiously speaks out against them in the article) in terms of the new manager leading the team to the playoffs 2010 7 changes (Baltimore twice), KC, Orioles, DBacks, Mariners all finish last, Cubs 5th, Marlins 3rd (0/7) 2011 4 changes....Ozzie for Cooper at end of season (3rd place), A's and Nats 3rd, Marlins 5th (0/4) 2012 2 changes......Astros last, Indians next to last (Alomar, Jr., at very end of the season) (0/2) 2013 1 change.....Sandberg for Manuel, 4th place (0/1) 2014 3 changes....Astros/Rangers 4th, DBacks last (0/3) 2015 2 changes....Counsell for Roenicke, Dan Jennings for Mike Redmond 2010-2015 (0/17 in terms of a managerial change leading to the playoffs, although it should be noted Kirk Gibson came in at the end of 2010 and quickly led Arizona to the playoffs the following season) Basically, the odds are 20% (in terms of a change leading to the playoffs) in the last 15 years. Do the White Sox under Ventura have the same odds if he continues as manager? Dodgers outfielder Juan Pierre, a part of the Marlins' turnaround in 2003, said it's not always true that players on underachieving teams want the manager pushed out the door. "But maybe it's a different personality or a different voice," Pierre said. "I'm not a parent, but I know some parents can tell their child to do something over and over again. Then maybe they have an aunt or an uncle or a neighbor tell the child the same thing, and the child listens. "It applies to kids, and sometimes it applies to professional athletes." In Houston in '04, the situation called for urgency. "Garner came in with the attitude, 'I've only got three months. I don't care if I hurt feelings, you'll do it my way,'" Ausmus said. ..... In 2009, O'Dowd said he made the move because he felt Tracy could quickly implement his priorities (despite Hurdle's leading the team to the 2007 World Series, just two years prior). What makes such a move work? New strategies? A different voice? Shock value? All of the aforementioned changes figured in those successful changes. With the Rockies, all have applied to the turnaround. "I can't speak for any other sport, but in the history of the game it doesn't work," O'Dowd said. "A lot of times when you make a change, you've got deep-seeded (seated) problems that don't go away overnight. And usually your personnel is not very good either. History shows making a change is not an elixir." "They only work when you have a specific plan in mind of why you're making the change," O'Dowd said. "If you make a change for change sake, you have absolutely no chance for it working." Top 10 midseason improvements since 1900 after a managerial change (not including changes in the first or last 20 games of the season): #1: 1989 Blue Jays 12-24 (.333) under Jimy Williams 77-49 (.626) under Cito Gaston Midseason improvement: +.293 #2: 1940 Cardinals 15-29 (.341) under Ray Blades and Mike Gonzalez 69-40 (.633) under Billy Southworth Midseason improvement: +.292 #3: 1912 Indians 54-71 (.470) under Harry Davis 21-7 (.750) under Joe Birmingham Midseason improvement: +.280 #4: 1999 Angels 51-82 (.383) under Terry Collins 19-10 (.655) under Joe Maddon Midseason improvement: +.272 #5: 2009 Rockies 18-28 (.391) under Clint Hurdle 74-42 (.638) under Jim Tracy Midseason improvement: +.247 #6: 1988 Padres 16-30 (.348) under Larry Bowa 67-48 (.583) under Jack McKeon Midseason improvement: +.235 #7: 1925 Cardinals 13-25 (.342) under Branch Rickey 64-51 (.556) under Rogers Hornsby Midseason improvement: +.214 #8: 1980 Twins 54-71 (.432) under Gene Mauch 23-13 (.639) under Johnny Goryl Midseason improvement: +.207 #9: 2002 Rockies 6-16 (.2727) under Buddy Bell 67-73 (.4786) under Clint Hurdle Midseason improvement: +.2059 #10: 1969 Angels 11-28 (.2821) under Bill Rigney 60-63 (.4878) under Lefty Phillips Midseason improvement: +.2057 source, baseball-reference.com How can you not see the selection bias issue with this? Let me ask you this: how many teams have ever fired their manager while the team was playing well? Managers are only ever fired when the team is underperforming, therefore natural regression to the mean will see the team improve regardless. There was a Freakonomics study about this years ago showing no difference between the ROS performance of bad teams that fired their managers versus bad teams that kept their managers.

QUOTE (Swingandalongonetoleft @ May 26, 2015 -> 08:04 AM) A knuckleballer against this legendary offense should be fun to watch. Maybe it will fry their brains and give them a hard reset on the season. Kind of like holding your breath to get rid of the hiccups.

Some of you just THRIVE on negativity. What the f*** does Buddy Bell have to do with Melky Cabrera's 54 wRC+ or John Danks' 5.11 ERA? This team has played like s*** this year and they deserve to lose, but giving up your fandom over a s***ty season is just so dramatic. Fine, blame the manager if you want to pretend you have any idea why they're hitting so badly, but the bottom line is they're losing because they're playing like s***. The players have not performed anywhere close to the level they could have been expected to perform. It happens to 10+ teams every year. I don't know why it's so satisfying to find a political reason to hate your team.

QUOTE (LDF @ May 26, 2015 -> 07:44 AM) who is the real culprit, RV or the Hitters or the Defense??? i know who i would blame, but i like to see your opinions. Whole team sucks

Team sucks

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ May 26, 2015 -> 12:01 AM) We score zero runs.

QUOTE (glangon @ May 22, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) Ladies and Gentlemen, boys and girls, Soxtalk.com presents your Chicago White Sox at home tonight in the AL Central Clash with the Minnesota Twins. In the Blue Corner we have Phil "Huggy Bear" Hughes who is 3-4 with a 4.76 ERA with 35 strikeouts in 51 innings pitched. And in the Black and White corner we have Jeff "The Shark" Samardzija who is 3-2 with a 4.58 ERA with 50 strikeouts in 53 innings pitched. Can Jose Abreu find his Home Run swing? will Alexei start hitting? and will our defence be error free tonight? Find out tonight at US Cellular Field. Tonights performance starts at 7:10pm Central Time and is shown live on Comcast Sports Net and on MLBTV (blackout restrictions apply) GO SOX!! Nice work

John Danks needs to f***ing retire.

QUOTE (WBWSF @ May 20, 2015 -> 01:57 PM) The White Sox should be ashamed of themselves for selling SRO tickets for $75. I'm in a season ticket package so it doesn't affect me. But still to charge that much for SRO tickets is shameful. I think it's another PR mistake for the White Sox. I don't see any reason not to sell tickets at market rate.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 20, 2015 -> 08:49 AM) I see his name listed on the Houston top prospects, but his minor league numbers look like a powerless 3B ala Connor Gillaspie. What is the big attraction to him, as I know nothing about him. He has always been polarizing -- one of those guys where 8-10 teams saw him as a top 5 overall talent, and 8-10 others saw him as 5th round or later. He's undersized and thrives on bat speed, from what I remember reading.

QUOTE (Lillian @ May 20, 2015 -> 12:39 PM) Ok. For all of you Smart Alecks, I would be satisfied if Adam La Roche could hit .260, with an OBP of close to .375. If he hits 20 homers and 25 doubles, and doesn't strike out 35% of the time, which is what he is doing now, I'll stop complaining. Oh, and Robin has to find a way to be sure that he doesn't start against any lefties. Does anyone disagree that the Sox would have been better off with K. Morales, Adam Lind or Andre Ethier? Yes, Lillian, we would be better if we had all the players having better seasons. Let Hahn use your crystal ball next year, please. There was literally no reason at all to believe that any of those guys would outproduce LaRoche in the offseason, which is when the decision had to be made.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 19, 2015 -> 02:55 PM) Last night was highest rated sox game since August '13 for csn, per soxvan. So looks like people did take an interest in the matchup after all. There ya go. Crazy what a little winning can do.

QUOTE (raBBit @ May 19, 2015 -> 02:32 PM) I am still pissed about that rumor and hate Boston fans even more. I was obsessed with the Chris Sale draft pick to the point where my Dad made fun of me for it. As a sort of joke, he bought me a Chris Sale jersey for Christmas in 2010. We went to Boston to watch the Sox play at Fenway in 2012. We went to the game and the Pedro Hernandez made a spot start. If that isn't his name it was the guy the Sox got for Ozzie. Anyways, our Sox got absolutely pissed on to the tune of 12-1 beating. A group of 25-30 year old fans followed my dad and I back to our hotel just chanting White Sox suck and making fun of our jerseys. My dad had a retro light blue Bill Melton jersey on. They made fun of that for being a "gay" color and I was wearing a "reliever's" jersey. Even though Sale had been in the rotation all of that year... I've seen the Sox play in 10 opposing stadiums and there are no fans like Boston fans. They are ruthless. Of course the Sox are 1-4 when I have seen them at Fenway but the aggressiveness of their fans mixed with the accents and corresponding cackles made for a bad environment leaving that stadium. Jhan Marinez?

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ May 19, 2015 -> 01:24 PM) He's only hitting .125 vs lefties In like 4 games.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 19, 2015 -> 12:52 PM) Tulo has 2 walks in over 120 plate appearances and is hurting again. He is a guy who won't be able to live up to the expectations when he is traded. He's got a 10% career walk rate over his prior 4000PA, so we should probably wait a little longer than 120PA to draw conclusions about his diminished ability to take walks. Him not having a great start is the only reason he'd be available/affordable for us. That said, I don't think we'd win the bidding and it would be hella risky, indeed. I can't make a strong case, but it would still be a TON of fun.

CLAP! CLAP! CLAP, CLAP, CLAP! CLAPCLAPCLAPCLAP! TU-LO!

The problem with this is that these comeback streaks are typically unsustainable. I'll feel a lot better when we start getting leads early.

QUOTE (shysocks @ May 19, 2015 -> 08:50 AM) 1) The scoring play by Eaton was really not that different than a lot of the "dumb" attempts the Sox have made on the bases this year. A lot of people pointed out that the baserunning luck would turn around a little, and that was an example. Thank you.

For those that wonder about what goes into WAR, here's a graphical representation: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/instagraphs...sition-players/

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2015 -> 10:29 AM) To me the question is easy. Would the Sox have had a 9-3 run if Ventura had been fired? Which is completely unanswerable.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2015 -> 08:26 AM) If the players like Robin as much as the media tells us, it isn't that much of a stretch to think that they are playing smarter to make sure he doesn't get fired. I don't know, I guess I just don't feel like players can just "turn it on" whenever they want and it's just a matter of them being motivated enough to do so. Maybe I'm just easily frustrated by issues where we'll never have an answer.

This is the worst thread on Soxtalk right now. Have you guys noticed that everyone loves RV when we win; hates RV when we lose? Do you REALLY think that the FO said some words to RV that made him MAKE our players play better?

QUOTE (Condor13 @ May 14, 2015 -> 03:45 PM) Pretty sure that's the definition of two-faced Only if you assume he owes you transparency.