Eminor3rd

Don't let us jerkwads scare you away. We get "passionate" about arguing ideas, but we aren't trying to be personal. Just argue "passionately" right back!

If everything goes according to plan, Bonifacio will be a high-playing time platoon bench player doing the Zobrist thing -- 2B, 3B, OF. That said, there's a real chance that Sanchez/Johnson are awful, and Bonifacio gets a lot of starts. It's not plan A, but it's a better outcome than that time going to Leury or Saladino.

QUOTE (Douglas Rome @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 07:25 AM) I don't miss the circus, but I do miss the clowns. thanks, douglas There's a reason you only find clowns in the circus, though.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 10:53 AM) i am still going to preach the concept, if the cost of getting this or any pitcher is NOT cost prohibitive, i would get a 1yr or 2 yr rental, a SP who will walk, give him a QO and hopefully redeem a draft pick. lets look at the Marlins, they have won 2 world series and immediately dismantle the team. i am not saying completely dismantle the team but to let them walk with a QO, to help the farm system. I think a lot of that money possibly just went to Bonifacio, unfortunately. I agree with the concept, though. If it was up to me, we'd only be betting on ONE of Danks/Noesi to break in the rotation next year. I think the Sox see Danks as a lock, though, and assume that Rodon will put pressure on Noesi eventually. The thing no one ever brings up, though, is that SOMEONE is likely to get injured.

When Danks is absolutely ON POINT, he can still be a good pitcher. The problem is that no one is really ON like that very often. To be a good major leaguer, you have to be a good player when you're performing at 75-80% of your best. Unfortunately for John, 75-80% right now means 88 mph with ok command or 91 mph with no command. I think he'll have some good starts next year, but he's ultimately a 5.00 ERA pitcher. For him to be better than that, IMO, he'll have to find a way to re-invent himself with a brand new pitch or style. That's certainly possible, just not likely.

170 wRC+ vs. lefties last year, 48 vs. righties.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 4, 2015 -> 11:45 AM) does anyone have a espn subscription??? olney talked about Scherzer mlb teams breakdown fit. http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/buster-oln...mp;refresh=true Here's the Sox part:

QUOTE (Blackout Friday @ Jan 4, 2015 -> 04:54 AM) I would trade Sale for him simply to hear Melton pronounce his name during ST. Haha, "But it was a damn good post" indeed.

Too much money for what looks like a flyer prospect at this point.

QUOTE (Douglas Rome @ Dec 30, 2014 -> 06:41 AM) I been around a long time, and I can say the Ozzie years were the most entertaining since I was a little kid. Regardless of his perception with most folks here, he did keep the Sox on the front page and on the AM radio stations. Name me one Sox manager in the last 50yrs who anybody cared about listening to? I know what you are going to say, all you care about is winning, but there's more to it than that, it also has to be provacative. thanks, douglas Correlation doesn't imply causation though. All of the positive press the Sox got in that era was related to them winning. All of the press the Ozzie got that WASN'T related to winning was negative and distracting. Any manager could have gotten us the positive press if we won a WS. In order for you to argue that Ozzie was responsible for that era being "entertaining," you have to argue that he was an absolutely necessary condition for them winning the WS. I can acknowledge that he was a contributor that year, but I don't think anyone can make a non-speculative argument that they couldn't/wouldn't have won with any other decent manager instead.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 29, 2014 -> 10:36 PM) Thanks, Douglas! Thanks, hi8is. lol

QUOTE (Mike F. @ Dec 30, 2014 -> 10:44 AM) I'd much rather have Emilio Bonifacio over Drew. Which is why he isn't going to get $10m like he wants. He'd have to come at $2m for me to take at-bats away from Sanchez, honestly.

I just can't get worked up over this either way.

QUOTE (lvjeremylv @ Dec 30, 2014 -> 12:43 AM) Of course when acquiring players you go with the one with better stats (ERA, WHIP, K/BB ratio, batting average, RBI's, OBP, etc). My original question was, would you rather have had a season with lots of personal success while the team struggled, or one where your team did better while your stats suffered. I, personally, would rather be on a team that won more games. Or here's another one. Would you rather be Brad Johnson, NFL QB, who never did much in terms of personal stats or fame, but won a Super Bowl? Or Dan Marino who held lots of records but never won the big game? I, personally, would take the career of Brad Johnson. Some people might call that crazy, but I guess it's about personal preference. So in review. In hindsight, I'd take wins over anything. In looking to the future and trying to predict what's more likely to happen when compiling players on a team? I'll take stats and not look at wins, particularly for pitchers, because yes, they are quite overrated. I mean, it really depends on context. For example, say I'm 25, late round draft pick, never supposed to get past AA. Some injuries happen when I'm playing well and I'm getting maybe my only real shot to stick in the big leagues, pulling a pro-rated $500k for the first time in my life. I'd rather have a good year. It's a big deal for me and it could be the difference between having a successful career and setting my family up financially forever or trying to figure out how to sell real estate. I don't think it's unreasonably selfish to want to establish yourself first. THEN go for the gold. Walk before you run. If I'm a veteran who has already made my first $25m or whatever, of course I want the ring. But what does this have to do with Robin's bullpen management and how bad the White Sox relievers were last year?

QUOTE (rowand's rowdies @ Dec 27, 2014 -> 05:57 PM) Sounds like Denofria, Valencia, and Ogando are the consensus go get them Rick! Honestly, getting all three of those guys at this point would improve the team at least as much as getting Cabrera did, IMO.

lol how did I miss this thread? Holy crap

QUOTE (lvjeremylv @ Dec 28, 2014 -> 10:46 PM) So you'd choose personal success over team success in a team sport? Glad you don't play for the Sox. When acquiring players? Yes, lol. Are you saying that we should go after bad players who will be overpriced because they lucked into success? Glad YOU don't work for the Sox.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 28, 2014 -> 10:06 PM) I think his bullpen management was great. He would pick a closer and go with them until it was obvious they had to be replaced. Not crazy of all the situational lefty/righty crap, but it's not Robin. All managers do it way too early in games. I was incensed that game he ran out of pitchers. Hope that never happens again. But Robin's bullpen management was fine. He had one of the worst collection of pitchers to work with, expecially the few lefty hacks he was provided. Yeah greg!

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 28, 2014 -> 01:34 AM) And yet they don't matter when evaluating pitchers? Those are different stats.

What is the argument that starting a guy in the bullpen makes sense?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 19, 2014 -> 05:07 PM) Given that you could have 4 front of the rotation guys for a fraction of the front of the rotation cost, I absolutely don't think you move away from that and instead use the financial resources you have on other areas of the ballclub. Right, but that "financial cost-saving" component has increased trade value as well. In our situation, I think it likely makes most sense to keep the group together, but if a glaring hole opens up (maybe Avi Garcia busts or something) and a team is willing to pay up for a pitcher, it may make sense down the road to shuffle the assets.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 19, 2014 -> 12:50 PM) No question. If Sox want to spend big money on a pitcher, he's the choice. What if Rodon shows he's ready in 2015? Is it wise to go with 4 top of the rotation starters? Or should you trade one and firm up weaknesses elsewhere and live with 3 top of the rotation starters? Or not sign Samardizja and use the $20 million to firm up other spots. More information will be available in 6 months. And if TWO of the top pitching prospects show readiness, that will give the Sox a lot of weaponry. I get what you're saying. I think the answer depends on context. For example, where else does the team need shored up? Is it a buyer's or seller's market for pitching? I think there are certainly scenarios where it makes sense to "punt" your 4 and 5 spots if it allows you, in some way, to acquire a bigger upgrade elsewhere. However, a run saved is a run scored, so if you have to do something less than ideal to turn pitching into hitting, you can certainly be better off just being unbalanced. Depends on stuff.

I don't think it's likely at all that we re-sign Samardzija.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 18, 2014 -> 03:57 PM) League average OPS for Catchers: .688 OPS for Flowers: .693 Flowers 2014 BABIP: .355 (which we can all confirm from watching had a LOT to do with ducksnorts) He had a 93 wRC+, which was exactly league average for a catcher, but he'll be substantially below that with a league average (or even career average) BABIP. Flowers is not good as he currently exists. Maybe he has upside left, but he's a comfortably below average starting catcher as of today, unless you think he's an elite game caller or something.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 18, 2014 -> 12:02 PM) Welcome to SoxTalk! I agree on the exaggeration, and that Gillaspie has been pretty bad over there. But want to add two things... 1. Since his major issues, in my view, are with footwork... I think there is a decent chance he can improve. 2. I'd like to suggest a player already in the system - Tyler Saladino. He has played all the infield positions and is good enough arm and glove-wise to play them all competently, he's a RHB who tore up LHP last year in Charlotte, he's cheap and versatile. He's also got a little speed, and he's a guy Ventura said he really liked a couple years ago. Assuming he's healthy for ST, which supposedly he will be, he's a decent option to be Gillaspie's foil vs LHP and a general utility guy. If Saladino really can play an above-average ML 3B, I'm all for that. Still, if his bat can't be at least a 90 wRC+, we're one injury away from a real problem over there.