Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Feb 28, 2015 -> 06:33 AM) Team Semien :'( *finally creeping out of the bush he's been weeping under since the Samardzija trade* Don't cry Feeky -- Dayan Viciedo is on the Blue Jays now!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 26, 2015 -> 01:40 PM) Wait until the meltdown after Team Beckham wins the job... Haha. We'll all crash the Team Beckham victory party, which is just elrockin sitting by himself at the Big Hurt brewpub.

Team Sanchez. Real solid, makes contact with the bat. Needs a chance to see if he can hit enough, and I love that he can be at the back of the order instead of batting second.

QUOTE (Douglas Rome @ Feb 26, 2015 -> 06:52 AM) it was talked about a little on the TV yesterday, but what is America's fixation with facial hair? I watched American Idol last nite and all three Ryan Secrest, Keith Urban and Harry Connick look like they hadn't seen a barber or a razor blade in months. The Sox lineup looks like the players are auditioning for Smith Bros cough drops. Can the manager impose appearance codes or is that a thing of the past? thanks, douglas It's just current fashion. It's irrelevant.

QUOTE (Jake @ Feb 25, 2015 -> 04:54 PM) FWIW, there's no reason to believe that Sanchez isn't ready. He's repeated AAA and did very well there last year. There's reason to believe he's not going to be a very good major leaguer, but I'd be shocked if he isn't at least competent and probably slightly more valuable than Beckham ever was over a full season. Micah has a much higher bust potential, because he really hasn't been any good in AAA yet. But, that's why he probably won't break camp with the team. Agreed.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 25, 2015 -> 02:16 PM) Or we can just plug Montas or Danish into the equation... If all else fails, there's always going to be a slew of pitchers in that $8-12 million per year category who could slot in at 4 behind Sale/Quintana/Rodon and ahead of Danks. Assuming half the league is wrong about them both being relievers. Which I hope, but none of us know. 8-12 million bucks buys you a reclamation project like Brett Anderson.

Nope. Doesn't seem like a difference-maker, will have to outbid several big spenders for a guy who is likely league-average. Let's use our young depth here to save some resources for next year when we'll have to replace a starter.

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 05:09 PM) "Hope Runs" lead to many donations and raised awareness for numerous charitable causes across the country.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 04:55 PM) So says a new way to try and measure that: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article....articleid=25647 Goes on to talk for 5 hours about what they are measuring, then we find that over 3 seasons Ventura is better than average. Last season alone, near the top of the list. Signed, Robin Ventura THEN WHOSE FAULT IS IT WHEN RONALD BELISARIO GIVES UPA HOPMERUN!!!!!!!!!!!!_

Pizza Cutter!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 01:24 PM) The problem is first getting to the playoffs.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:39 AM) And I think it's a claim that ignores the value of being a pitcher who pitched enough to be considered an active Major League baseball player in 2014 so the team doesn't have to go to the pitchers who are literally worse who are in the minor leagues mostly. It's like saying, "That guy is one of the least wealthy billionaires." It might be true, but the fact that you're taking from a certain exclusive subset weakens the claim. Which is why I originally said... "You mentioned that they both qualified but then discarded the inherent value of that. If you're on the qualifying list and your WAR is higher than 0, then there are probably at least ten guys I'd take after you." And I think that claim still stands. Note: I am aware it's probably more impressive to be a billionaire than qualify for the ERA title one year. It's an example. Right, but no matter where you set the bar, Danks is among the absolute worst of the people who will be pitching a bunch of innings for baseball teams. Therefore, we have a competitive disadvantage. So he represents a massive weakness in the rotation.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:39 AM) Because of tradition, weather, length of the postseason. They should be able to finish a baseball season before the month of Thanksgiving and the first snow. I don't understand why that's self-evidently good, though. Weather is about the only one that makes sense to me.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:33 AM) As long as Game 7 of the World Series is always the last Wednesday of October, I'm good with whatever. This year, the WS could go into November. It's bad optics. Why?

That's dumb.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:10 AM) He was purposefully put into situations where he was made to "fail" from a statistical standpoint in order to build up his arm to become a full time starter. It was truly a unique situation where a former full time reliever was built into a full time starter in mid-season, at the major league level. If the goal had been "winning" or keeping his numbers good, he wouldn't have pitched in many situations last year that he gave up runs in. I think I see what you're saying -- if your claim is that our expectations of Noesi's performance this year should be based on more than his performance last year because he was often fatigued from being "stretched out," then I think that's a plausible/reasonable argument. You could strengthen it if you found some evidence that he wore down later in the season or, if you wanted to argue that he'll improve in 2015, that he was bad after the fourth or fifth inning early on but began to show signs of greater endurance as the season progressed.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:08 AM) I don't know the stats, but it seemed like when he did start, it was Danks starts last season. When he was good, he was real good, and when he was bad, he was real bad. Yeah I agree that it seemed that way. We could test it, but it would require actually doing some math and research instead of just looking it up on Baseball Reference or FanGraphs. I'm not sure it matters much though -- like many have pointed out, everybody looks good on their best days. If we're thinking about what we're going to get from either Noesi or Danks next year, we have to take the bad ones in order to get the good ones.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:04 AM) Right, but not "one of the five worst pitchers in baseball." Ok, I agree that there are pitchers that are literally worse that are in the minor leagues mostly. But if we agree that "baseball" means Major League baseball, and that "pitchers" means "pitchers who pitched enough to be considered active Major League baseball players in 2014," I think the claim stands.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 10:52 AM) Situations like Noesi's last year are exactly why there is more to baseball than stats. I agree that there is more to baseball than stats, but what do you mean by this in regards to Noesi? That he's a better pitcher than his stats indicate because it "felt" like he gave up fewer runs than he really did?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 10:12 AM) That Samardzija article called back to mind the interaction of a "stat geek" and Hosmer/Moustakas. http://www.hardballtimes.com/learning-the-...-the-clubhouse/ There's a steep learning curve for the "sabes" (I love that Greg-ism) people to go through when interacting with professional athletes using their statistics-driven language. Athletes can sniff out a "poser" a million miles away, and they're often not as nice as someone like Mark Teahen or Jim Thome would be about it. You have to build a relationship and get respect from an athlete first..or at least give them some pertinent statistical information which helps them improve their games (rather than criticizing it). Eno is a great guy. Met him at the Winter Meetings last year.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 10:46 AM) and in some way the sox still don't except for the bull pen. however starting a new season, and hoping that the main core of pitchers can really pull it out, it is kind of exciting. Right. No question the top three are great, but this is one of the main reasons that the projections/skeptics are further down on the Sox' chances than we want them to be. Most teams get significant innings out of about 8 starters each season, and our top 8 include Danks, Noesi, Brad Penny, Erik Johnson, and like Scott Carroll or something. Certainly we have high hopes for Rodon and he could be difference maker, but he's a still a prospect.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:33 AM) When Danks had a quality start: 20 games, 130.2 innings, 2.48 ERA (team record 10-10, 1-6 in no decisions) Without quality starts: 12 games, 63 innings, 9.43 ERA #1 positive--he made his starts. No DL time. #2 positive--he's another year away from surgery, which could help him #3 positive--he's playing with a better offense to support him He'll be fine. QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:35 AM) If that were true, then why did Noesi qualify? He's got no big contract, we could have tossed him away at any time. The reason is because they'd have to be replaced. Danks qualified because if he weren't throwing those innings, somebody like the guys on that list would have been doing it instead. He may not deserve credit for having a big contract, but he deserves credit for putting up .8 WAR in those innings instead of 0 or less. Also, yes, he made his starts. He gets credit for his 0.8 fWAR over a full season -- which is a bad number. Substantially below average. He gets credit for giving us 200 innings of bad pitcher.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:35 AM) If that were true, then why did Noesi qualify? He's got no big contract, we could have tossed him away at any time. The reason is because they'd have to be replaced. Danks qualified because if he weren't throwing those innings, somebody like the guys on that list would have been doing it instead. He may not deserve credit for having a big contract, but he deserves credit for putting up .8 WAR in those innings instead of 0 or less. Because we didn't have anyone better, which is the point. We don't have any decent pitching depth. Hector Noesi and John Danks were terrible pitchers last year.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:26 AM) You mentioned that they both qualified but then discarded the inherent value of that. If you're on the qualifying list and your WAR is higher than 0, then there are probably at least ten guys I'd take after you. Here's a handful of them, for example: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...0&sort=17,d But all that really mean is that they threw a lot of innings. That's both where the "qualified" comes into play, AND it's an input of fWAR. The ONLY reason John Danks "qualified," for example, was because of his massive contract. I don't think he deserves credit for that.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) I'm guessing that much of this is spring training fluff pieces, so I'm not reading too much into it, but the quotes say that they believe in Noesi. The numbers indicate that there's nothing special about him, and that's how I feel about him, but perhaps there's genuine talent change on the way. Noesi was a fairly well regarded prospect so I wouldn't completely rule out the idea of him turning a new leaf over and being a legitimately good pitcher, but I'm not holding my breath and he's a replaceable piece at the moment. I think it's true that Noesi could have some upside left, and I've always liked him, even when he was on the Yankees. He was a long-time favorite sleeper of mine. But let's stop pretending that he's been a good pitcher so far, haha. That's all I'm saying.