Eminor3rd

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 07:11 AM) again, setting them selves up not to go forward. the window of opportunity is now, why do this and have a 1 yr rental in jeff s is they will not go all the way. tell me, can you actually see the sox going far in the playoff, or even make the playoff with this rotation??? i am a die heart fans of sox baseball. but other teams are still getting themselves in a position to acquire more pieces. the window of opportunity is now...... I think you're right that the team has holes and lacks depth, but now you're seeing why so many of us were/are hesitant to "push the chips in" so soon. I think many of us often forget that there's only so much a GM can accomplish over a given period of time. You can't just say "I want that guy" and pay up -- other parties have to agree to contract condition and trade proposals, and things are ALWAYS more complicated than we assume from the fan perspective. The best way to look at this team is that it's definitely good enough to contend. Yes, most things are going to need to go well. Yes, an injury or two could derail it. But this signals a period of time where Rick Hahn is planning (and will be expected) to put a competitive team on the field every year that he holds his job. But you're going to be able to find holes. You're not likely to be able to go into a season confident that every position looks awesome.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 10:26 AM) It's not a bad thing though. At the very minimum, it puts more balls in play which will increase the opportunities for hits. If it's an infield fly, it won't matter as much as those are outs 99% of the time too. The White Sox have brought better hitters in, so the reduction in strikeouts shouldn't be much of a revelation. Yeah, it's just usually such a topic around here, I thought people would be interested in knowing that the team is built to make much more contact than it has recently. A lot of that might just be NOT having Dunn though, lol.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/colby-rasmu...and-strikeouts/ The research also points out that strikeouts aren't really correlated with differences in projected offense, though. Which really seems kind of self-explanatory to me, because obviously the effect of those strikeouts is baked in from the start, but whatever.

QUOTE (La Marr Hoyt HOF @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 12:32 AM) so if this is the year to go for it This is where you're wrong. It's not about it being THE year to go for it, it's about it being the first of many years to go for it. With the second WC, we're seeing teams strive to be "in contention" frewquently in stead of building a super team for a year or two and having to tear it down later. If we commit too much of the future to 2015, we're going to be right back in a rebuild. QUOTE (La Marr Hoyt HOF @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 12:32 AM) Not free, but wouldn't be too expensive I think you're underestimating the cost. The Samardzija trade was a coup, but we don't have another Semien to give up and we shouldn't expect other GMs to value quantity over quality like Beane has done for years. Especially not the Nats, who have no need for modest upgrades at this point since they have possibly the best team on paper already.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 06:54 PM) The list is in alphabetical order. Oh, haha.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 02:17 PM) Fine, 89.5. You can season and prepare the hat however you'd like. It might as well taste good. If I fried it and buried it in cheese, could it really be THAT much worse than eggplant parmesan?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 10:14 AM) Fowler is weird, because both UZR and DRS show him as a very bad fielder, but a few of the other statistics show that he's OK in the field, nothing special but nothing terrible either. I think he'd be better served in LF personally. Fowler has become sort of the poster child for the "wow, we thought he was good because he's so fast but he sure doesn't actually catch a whole lot" awakening that the defensive metrics are just now starting to unearth. The opposite can be said for slow guys that get good jumps -- in a way, this is our first taste of measuring "instincts," albeit in a very heavy-handed, results-based way.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 12:17 PM) Only cited June because wite pointed to his HR/FB in September. I understand all the arguments based on his peripherals, I think I just dissected his season and came to a different conclusion than you. ZiPS somehow has him at a higher OPS than last year and it knows all about his batted ball profile. Let's bet on it. Put the wRC+ over/under at 88.5. Loser has to eat a hat. Can I use hot sauce? I'll take the under, but give me 89.5 to make it nice and round at "below 90."

This isn't a big deal.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 04:36 PM) Those flies could also become doubles, which adds about a half run back on (1.283 double constant * .126 league fly ball BABIP * 3 = .485; I'm assuming the type of flies that affect HR/FB rate would turn into doubles far more often than singles). I cited GB/FB rate by half as evidence that perhaps he changed his approach. Unless a 95 wRC+ from him next year would shock you, I don't think we even disagree by much here. Lemme put it this way - I'll live with 1 WAR because Flowers is about 20th on my list of things that will make or break the Sox. I'm not expecting him to repeat a .401 OPS June either. 95 wouldn't SHOCK me, in that it's possible, but I think it would be him having another "good" season. His career 83 seems more likely, though Steamer's projected 76 seems a bit harsh as it projects a below career and below league average BABIP. Also, I don't think it's that useful to break him (or anyone) down by month -- it's normal for players to be streaky by month, what they end up with at the end of the season is what is most helpful for evaluation/prediction. He's most likely going to lose 50 or 60 points on his average on ball in play next year, and probably 5% or so on his HR/FB rate, and I think that is going to contribute to a sub-90 QUOTE (Vance Law @ Jan 17, 2015 -> 05:23 AM) World Champion A.J. Pierzynski: 2005 WAR 1.8 Tyler Flowers : 2014 WAR 1.8 I'm not sure what you're getting at here, but I assume it's either (1) you don't need an awesome catcher to win the WS, (2) AJP wasn't as good as we remembered, or (3) WAR doesn't mean s*** for catchers. If it's #1: the fact that you CAN win without having an above average player at each position does not mean you wouldn't RATHER have an above average player at every position, so that's not a good argument for upgrading on Flowers. We should get as good as we can. Also, the key to what I'm arguing is that Flowers is not going to repeat even his mediocre 2014 season. If 2014 was "good enough," then we're likely going to have to deal with much less. If it's #2: Interesting If it's #3: You're right that we can't quantify C defense and gamecalling very well, but it doesn't change the fact that his bat is garbage. Again, 93 is passable if we think he's good at everything else, but he doesn't look anything like a true talent 93 wRC+ from his batted ball profile. You can throw WAR out the window and still see he's a bad bat. QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jan 17, 2015 -> 02:09 PM) Mike, I know you're new here, but please, don't get the Sabes started. There's a whole separate thread for that. Thanks, Leonard Don't pick fights, LEONARD.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 03:55 PM) His career HR/FB if you strip out 2014 is 16.3%, which would have given him 12 homers instead of 15 last year. Somewhat significant but not very. ZiPS has him hitting 13 next year in about 100 fewer PA's. ZiPS also has him at a nearly identical wOBA as 2014 - .310 compared to .308. His season was really strange. The BABIP is driven up by all the 48-hoppers through the infield early on. Then he hit that horrible slump, and then he put on a power show in the second half. Look at his ISO by half - .086, .273. Or GB/FB by half - 2.27, 1.03. A lot of that fluctuation is SSS, but how do you know he didn't make a change? Put it all together and I don't think a 90-95 wRC+ is unreasonable to expect. I'd be surprised if it's lower. If we assume everybody who has a hot month "made a change," we're going to be wrong practically every time. The better question to ask is: "do we have any reason to believe he DID make a change?" Because history shows us that month-over-month performance is frequently all over the place for all players. The normal effect is that he'd be inconsistent. Also, I disagree that 12 vs 15 homers is insignificant. the wOBA constant for a homer was 2.135 runs last year, so those three extra homers were worth 6.405 runs, or roughly two thirds of a win. Without those homers, he had a 1.2 fWAR season, which is suddenly NOT within earshot of a league average season. Still well worth $2m, but not starting-catcher-on-a-contender material.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 03:34 PM) Way more than he is worth. 1.6 mil would be about the top for him. I mean the salary is fine -- he's a decent backup catcher who just happens to be starting for us. I'm just arguing that he's a weakness. I know we can't expect Hahn to fix literally everything in a single offseason, I just want to make clear that C IS a hole on the current team.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 03:27 PM) FWIW, that BABIP didn't come out of nowhere. He drastically increased his LD% and GB%. His HR/FB% wasn't too terribly far off career norms, either. He definitely looked lucky a lot, but I wouldn't want to suggest that the only difference between 2013 and 2014 Flowers was luck. LD% is crazy volatile though, which is a big part of the reason that BABIP is volatile. His career HR/FB is 3% lower, which I think is definitely significant especially when you consider that the 21.1% had to have brought that up quite a bit. Also, it's easier to believe in HR/FB jumps if a guy has made a change to try to swing for the fences, but Flowers' actually had a higher-than-normal GB% too, which means the change in rate is extra strange.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 03:24 PM) Luckily, nobody thinks he's going to be very good. We just feel pretty certain he won't be 2012 Brent Morel kind of bad, which is nice. 11 wRC+, lol

QUOTE (TheTruth05 @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 02:48 PM) well then. Meghan Montemurro ‏@M_Montemurro #Phillies have claimed OF Jordan Danks off waivers from the Chicago White Sox, GM Ruben Amaro Jr. announced today. Oh well.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 03:12 PM) WAR sometimes doesn't agree with the eye test, but FWIW, Flowers had a 2.3 bWAR and 1.8 fWAR last year, so he's considered to be a league average catcher. $2.7 mil for a $10 mil value ain't bad at all. Not a league average CATCHER, but a league average PLAYER. There's a huge positional adjustment for catchers, which makes a mediocre catcher a more valuable player than a mediocre guy at almost every other position. He ranks #20 for catchers. So Flowers, on the strength of a BABIP and HR/FB rate that are well into the range of unsustainable, ended up approximating a league average player. There's no reason to believe he'll do that again, and even if he did, he'd still be a below average catcher.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 02:46 PM) Flowers isn't great, but neither is the vast majority of all major league catchers. For the price, it ain't bad. He's below average.

He's not going to sign an extension.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 11:19 AM) Non-Moncada, but Schwarber being so high on that list is insane. Gallo at #5, lol

QUOTE (Armchair Hahn @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 10:30 AM) not saying that his bat is "The" reason why he's in...as everyone has said previously...a choice of who goes in is ultimately a composite decision...mostly of where you stand versus your peers/generation (offensively, defensively, pitching, etc) , longevity, your accomplishments (whether awards, championships, etc), where you stand in history (most incomparable due to changes in game over time). When i cite his OPS, its not me saying "see! this is why he should be in!", but rather a simple complement to him for being on that list. I personally like OPS as a singular general overview of offensive prowess, but am aware that there may be other statistics that might be more relevant, but aren't as simple for the layman to understand. QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 10:55 AM) OPS is not really a good stat to compare players from different generations as it's not adjust for park and league factors. If you really want to compare them you need to use OPS+ or better yet wRC+. Yep, exactly. I rant for wOBA against OPS about every three months, but even if you want to use OPS, you should go for OPS+ if you're comparing guys across eras, simply because it adjusts for offensive environment, and therefore adds context. Both OPS+ and wRC+ are indexes, which means they compare differences to average. 100 is league average every year, adjusted to the environment, and each point in either direction represents 1% above or below average. Raw stats from the steroid era don't compare to raw stats today, but an index takes care of this for us. Great example: Craig Biggio (OPS: .796 | OPS+: 112) vs. Lou Whitaker (OPS: .789 | OPS+: 117). Biggio had the better raw numbers, but they were less valuable than Lou's because Lou was doing what he did in an era where offense was down. Lou was a better hitter compared to his contemporaries than Biggio was compared to HIS contemporaries. Lou was 17% above average (in terms of OPS) for his career, Biggio was 12% above average.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 09:27 AM) Castro is obviously better than Flowers, but is he enough of an upgrade to give up what you would have to give up to get him? The Astros aren't going to trade him for Jordan Danks and the rights to Brian Anderson. I don't like Flowers, and I realize he hit a "lucky" .230 or whatever he hit last year, and it probably "should" have been .185. But it's not unreasonable to think he could hit .220-.230 without being lucky. It's not that much. Frankly, I think the Sox should have gone after Cervelli, now with Pittsburgh. He didn't cost much, and IMO he is better than either Flowers or Castro. Based on what the rumored prices were in November, absolutely not. However, I have to think he's still an Astro for a reason. No one would pay what they asked before, so if he's popping up in rumors again, maybe the price is dropping.

QUOTE (Armchair Hahn @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 09:32 AM) Because the hall of fame is also all about performing at a high level for a long time. 2000 PA is only 3-4 seasons. I can't think of any hall of famer that only played for 3-4 seasons, can you? 8000 PA can range between 10-13 seasons. No, but I can think of lots of solid second basemen that played for at least 3-4 season that definitely aren't hall of famers, and it turns out a lot of them were better hitters than Craig Biggio over the course of their careers. Some examples: George Grantham, Danny Murphy, Jim Delahanty, Ben Zobrist, Don Buford, Fred Dunlap. Also, tied for Biggio in career wRC+ is Neil Walker. I'm not saying Biggio isn't a hall of famer, I'm just saying it wasn't due the the brute force of his bat. Pointing out that using a particularly inflated offensive statistic puts him in the middle-of-the-pack among guys who managed to play a long time isn't a good argument for him. I mean, how many guys ABOVE him on your list aren't even in? Off the top of my head I can think of three likely: Jeff Kent? Bobby Grich? Lou Whitaker? EDIT: Just checked. No Lou Whitaker (though Lou has a higher wRC+), but there is Alfonso Soriano!

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 12:21 AM) Didn't he hit something like .220 last year? That's even worse than Flowers. Yes, obviously batting average isn't everything, but Castro only had one decent hitting season. Which is one more than Flowers, who has had none ever.

QUOTE (Armchair Hahn @ Jan 15, 2015 -> 05:24 PM) With a minimum of 8000 plate appearances, Biggio ranks 12th out of 28 in OPS. #13 is Ryne Sandberg. No idea why you'd set the PA bar that high, unless you were specifically trying to give him credit for being a "compiler," which is the biggest criticism against him. Also, it makes no sense to use OPS when comparing player across different time periods, especially when you're talking about someone whose career spanned the entirety of one of the most extreme periods of offense in history. If you set it to minimum 2000 PA, and use wRC+ (which is an index adjusted to the offensive environment of the era), he's #31. #32 is Bobby Doerr.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 15, 2015 -> 02:35 PM) With the amount of big-money pitchers that will be available next year, it may be in Jeff's interest to sign an extension with the Sox. There are only so many teams that can afford the big contracts. And if he goes to FA, there will be at l;east 6 pitchers all looking for that big money. Who's going to pay it? You can always find one or two stupid clubs, but now you have to find 6. Its going to be a numbers game, and it may actually favor the Sox for once. Any deal that's team-friendly enough for you and I to feel comfortable with is a deal that will be EASY for him to land in FA, no matter how many big names are out there. If he gets to the point where people are bidding him up -- the winner, buy definition, will be the first team willing to go high enough that it ISN'T comfortable. Put another way, if his 2015 performance puts him in a position to actually accept 5/110 or something, then that probably means he didn't pitch that well and we'll be afraid to give it to him.