Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 04:02 PM) Why don't you show the post you actually dismissed my Steamer numbers. Feeky uses Steamer. You have used it a few times. The only time I see you fighting against it is when it says Victor Martinez should be really good next year and it goes against your argument that 36 year olds shouldn't be playing major league baseball. I did! Did you even read what I just posted? The first post I made was the first post that started the conversation! You used Steamer to argue that Victor Martinez was going to beat his career averages next year, but THEN you decried Balta or whoever it was by saying that if he wants to use FanGraphs, he shouldn't pick and choose numbers. Because you saw Steamer on FanGraphs. The only issue I had was you implying that Steamer projections are as reliable or completely in line with everything that FanGraphs is. My point was that in a few months, you'll see two other projection systems there too, at least one of which is considered better, and that to disagree with Steamer is not necessarily to disagree with FanGraphs in general. I don't know how else to say this. Use Steamer! Just don't make the mistake of assuming the validity of Steamer is the same as the valididty of, say "wRC+" or something.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 03:57 PM) This is off topic a little bit, but i'm appalled at DeAza's improvement once he got to a team with a good manager. WTF. I mean if DeAza was going to do that we could have kept him another five years. Something has to give with our team, folks. Something may be amiss. Anyhow, Saunders for Viciedo might be a decent flip flop; we shall see. I honestly think he just got unlucky with De Aza. His true talent was always better than his 2014 performance with us. We just kept waiting for the other shoe to drop and for him to start playing better, and he never did. Then he got to Baltimore. Annoying, definitely.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 03:44 PM) It is funny how you continue to use Steamer, yet when I used it for someone else, it was pretty much dismissed. It's funnier how it doesn't matter how many times I try to clarify what I said to you about Steamer, you continue to make this conclusion. For everyone's benefit, here are the quotes you're misapplying along with some context: QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 11:23 AM) As I stated but you just ignored, if he put up his career average, we all would be happy. Just pointed out, since fangraphs WAR was so important to you, that their page is projecting a pretty nice season next year. So if you are going to use Fangraphs, you really shouldn't pick and choose which numbers to use. For his career his wRC+ is 125. QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 01:28 PM) Steamer is just the first system to come out for the coming year -- ZiPS is almost universally considered better, and Marcel is usually factored in as well, heavy-handed as that system is. Anyone at FanGraphs would recommend using several systems for context, so it isn't necessarily true to cite Steamer and say "See! FanGraphs says he's good!" QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 03:09 PM) It is just funny that you throw out Steamer in order to say something makes sense, but when I throw out the same, "theres something better than Steamer". The only reason I used it is because you did earlier. Just be consistent. QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 03:16 PM) Steamer isn't useless nor infallible, it's a point of reference. Especially in the instance of some uncommon statistical anomaly, such as Victor Martinez's random career year, it's best to use multiple points of reference. I'm not telling you you shouldn't use it, but rather pointing out that Steamer is not akin to some sort of "FanGraphs official stance" on a player's future performance like you seemed to be implying. Now please stop claiming I said Steamer cannot be used. The only reason I said anything was because of your line that I bolded above, because it's a nonsensical thing to say. That's all. I wasn't even arguing with the point you were making USING Steamer (which was that it saw Victor Martinez as better than his career averages), only the part where you said "if you want to use FanGraphs, don't pick and choose stats."

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 03:37 PM) the power numbers are less than DV. Well, the homers are less, but you'll notice that Saunders actually has a higher SLG. Which really just underscores the issue with Viciedo, which is that he doesn't hit enough to take advantage of his power. He clearly HAS more power than Saunders, but it actually PLAYS lower.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 03:39 PM) a good point with the stats added. many thanks. however how does the power stats look like? Looks like he's a 15-ish homer/25-ish double guy over a full year. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...amp;position=OF

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 03:23 PM) Have you looked at Saunders' stats? It hardly would be a coup. It'd be two change of scenery guys like somebody stated on here. Saunders gets hurt a lot and that article made it sound like he's lazy. Another fourth outfielder type. Yeah, in fact his stats are all I'm going off of. Haven't seen him play much. Let's see: 2014: Saunders: .273/.341/.450 (126 wRC+) Viciedo: .231/.304/.405 (88 wRC+) Steamer 2015 Projections (all we have so far): Saunders: .244/.324/.405 (110 wRC+) Viciedo: .253/.304/.435 (104 wRC+) So the 2014 numbers are not even remotely close, and Steamer projects substantial negative regression from Saunders as well as substantial improvement from Viciedo, and yet Saunders STILL comes out ahead. I'm also willing to bet that Saunders will play much better defense. And also he's left-handed. No idea how this wouldn't be a huge win for us. EDIT: I mean, we're not even sure we're going to tender Viciedo a contract, right?

I don't want Samardzija for anything close to what I think he'll reasonably command.

That would be a coup for us. Saunders > Viciedo without question.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 02:16 PM) LaRussa hated Rasmus. The Sox could have had Rasmus when they trade EJax but didn't want him when he was cheaper and more highly thought of as a prospect. I have a hard time believing JR signs off on Rasmus, especially for 3 years. This guy has a lot of issues. I agree with this. We could have had him when he was more promising, and instead we decided we'd rather just be free of Mark Teahen. The ship has sailed there, methinks.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 10:49 AM) Yeah, it just seems like we're a little short here. Feels like the plan should be to do whatever we can to get competitive via trade for 2015, fill in the holes with low-commitment guys inf ree agency, and then take that core all the way in 2016. VMart-type signings to be considered next offseason.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 10:09 AM) Whereas Flores appears to be overly dependent upon his arm for his arm strength (as in, he's throwing primarily with his arm and not using his legs to generate strength, velocity, and accuracy on his throws), Semien appeared to be rushing his footwork - his feet were quick, but his arm was lagging behind, and as a result his backfoot would often rush up too soon, leading to his throws sailing a bit. I still think Semien's role on the club next year will be as a supersub and he'll get a significant amount of playing time to see whether he can stick at the MLB level. I think he will. I think that, both in the field and at the plate, Semien is at the point where he needs to learn IN the Major Leagues. I hope he gets the shot you think he shall have.

QUOTE (PorkChopExpress @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 10:10 AM) OK, here's a crazy idea. Prince Fielder. He has 6yrs/$144M left on his contract, $30M of which is already covered by the Tigers in the Kinsler trade, so 6yrs/$114M. Texas still needs to send money back, obviously, but sending another $24M makes him a $15M/year player. Or you can send Danks back their way to unload his contract. Send his brother, too. Hell, send Viciedo, too. Texas seems to be in the market for an OF anyway. The risk is obviously that Fielder had fusion surgery to repair a herniated disk in his neck last year, but had no injury concerns prior to that, and in fact played 162 games the three previous years. He is on the wrong side of 30 (31 next year) and has always had the weight issue, so who knows how he'll bounce back from the surgery. But that is why I think there might be a chance Texas considers trading him. They were atrocious last year, and getting Prince Fielder back is not going to fix their problems. Getting him off the books allows them to find other solutions. And if Fielder returns to even close to what he was, that's a big LH DH/1B to insert in the lineup behind Jose. I worry about the tail end of that contract, but if it means the Sox are in serious contention 2015-2017, I think it's worth it. Just spitballing. We don't want that contract. It was a time bomb the minute it was signed, and it has already started to explode. I continue to get angry every time I think about how Texas let Detroit off the hook with it.

He probably COULD play there, but putting him there comes with a high opportunity cost, because it seems like his bat is probably best suited for the middle infield, and then that prevents us from getting a better bat to stick in LF. Basically, it might end up being the best configuration for us next year, but it shouldn't be the plan right now for the offseason.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 07:02 PM) Why would a rebuilding team like the Mets trade for a 33 year old SS when they have a young budding 23 year old already there in Wilmer Flores? Murphy is at second so where does Flores fit in? Alexei makes zero sense for the Mets and just another reason why Levine is a complete and utter moron. Have you seen Wilmer Flores play SS? It's actually kind of sad. He looks kind of like Hunter Pence, like he's out of some early N64 baseball game with blocky, polygon graphics. The mildest way to put it is probably that he makes routine plays look very difficult, and difficult plays look like miracles. He came up this year for a bit and surprisingly kind of held his own. And everyone was impressed, but in the way you're impressed with something that you assumed was total garbage when it turns out to be anything more than that. I think most of Mets fans, at least, are kind of waiting for the other shoe to drop on his SS defense. Like, it's cool that he's been able to defy the odds, but you can't expect to keep making these plays when your feet and arms move the way his feet and arms do. EDIT: Here's a PERFECT example: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/wilmer-flor...-shortstop-yet/ Notice his footwork in the third GIF down. I dare you to watch that and not laugh.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 04:43 PM) Refresh my memory on Semiens D at SS...passable? Passable, probably. But it seems like we'd rather use Sanchez there and leave Semien at second.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 03:07 PM) I agree. Whether they can get it done is another question. Here is an article the saber guys might like: http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2014/11/5/71...defying-outlier I think this is the TL;DR crux of the article: He's definitely a fascinating case. Is Vlad Guerrero a good comp? I'd hate to set expectations against an n of 1, though. I might be worse than an n of zero.

I think Hamilton is a disaster, and I would want to punch myself in the face watching him flail away at literally every pitch thrown to him. I don't have high hope for Danks either, but at least he's only got a couple years left on the contract.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 02:23 PM) Ethier has though See, even Dodgers Digest has talked about it: http://dodgersdigest.com/2014/11/03/mailba...n-trading-puig/ (this was also mentioned in the comments for the FGs article The Dodgers still have too many outfielders.) I think that is the most logical move the Sox can make while gambling on Danks' value. If the Sox have to include a piece or the Dodgers do or the Dodgers have to eat some salary, so be it. However, I think they can save more money and get more value personnel-wise by moving Kemp or Crawford, and I think they'll continue using Ethier as a very expensive 4th outfielder unless someone is willing to eat his whole salary. Yeah, I imagine that Danks/Ethier has already crossed Friedman's mind, but that it's probably plan C or D. My guess is that Plan A is to trade Kemp for some real value. But, I'm in support of the swap if it goes that far. That said, I also expect Friedman to be aggressively lowering payroll when each of these OFs move, so if we're eating the difference, we better not be sending any talent back. Ugh, Friedman. Ok, now I'm just afraid of Friedman and his dark leprechaun trading ways. I don't want him to fleece Hahn.

Crawford surprisingly hasn't been as useless as Danks, unfortunately.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 12:39 PM) Fair enough. I mean assets are assets, whether it be cash or talent. Ultimately, this will vary by suitor. In our situation, I would think we would focus on taking cash over giving talent, not simply because of our payroll commitments but because of our relatively bare cupboards of talent. If their preference is on talent rather than shedding cash, I think we probably become less than an ideal suitor to them. The most valuable asset I might consider actually moving is Quintana. Don't get me wrong -- I'm with you on the talent/money thing. If we can eat the whole contract and give up nothing but spare parts, I'd prefer it. I wouldn't move Quintana, though. I value him higher than any of our prospects individually, save Rodon.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 12:25 PM) But why would we cant them to cover half? We'd rather eat the money and keep our talent, don't you think? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean THEY are willing to make that move. Dick Allen pointed out that the trade can be framed as either change in direction or a salary dump. They're in a position where they don't NEED to frame it as a salary dump for the very fact that he is such a tantalizing bounceback candidate coming off of just one down year. So it may be safe to assume they say, "Hey, we're not looking to dump him, we need some talent back. But we understand the risk, so we're willing to cover a substantial chunk of his salary. Call us back if that makes sense to you."

It's probably true to say that the Rockies are NOT looking for salary relief, and are willing to send money to get talent. Let's say they cover half. What do you think it takes from us to get it done at half salary?

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 08:05 PM) It says more about Flowers than it does Montero. I'm just reminding people that Normal Luck Tyler Flowers is still probably a bad player. Obviously any Montero deal would depend on how much money they send and who we send. I'm with you there. I still think that C is the easiest big upgrade for us to make on the position side, after LF.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 10:26 AM) I would put the chances of the White Sox acquiring Shuck with the intention of him being the regular LF at 0%. For sure -- this is a depth play. If Shuck is the primary starter out of ST, something went wrong.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 10:15 AM) This is why we keep you around here. QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 10:23 AM) Eminor, you've become one of the best posters on this site. Great post.