Eminor3rd

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 05:30 PM) I am NOT saying that he took and special vitamins, but all he needed to do is take it last yr so he can max out his contract. after that is done, he doesn't take it again. "oh well his age took over for his lower offensive stats" I don't think it was drug-related at all, I think he just had a really awesome, non-repeatable year. He IS a really good hitter, but it's just impossible to rationally argue he's THIS good. And unfortunately, the level of his recent performance is going to drive his salary requirements, and his age make him a higher risk than normal anyway. I mean someone else around here said it perfectly a while back: Oh, he's a really good hitter though? So was Paul Konerko. Eventually, age catches up. If Victor had put up another 125 wRC+ and was looking for 2/24m without draft pick compensation, then I think he'd be a really reasonable risk to take. But if all these rumors are true, 4/65m or whatever is just such a huge gamble for a guy that has a lot of red flags and, to be honest, isn't likely to "put us over the top" at this point anyway.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 01:58 PM) I don't want anything to do with him. Bad age, bad injury history, definite draft pick compensation, position limited, and coming off the best year of his long career in a time when there is certainly no reason to believe his skills have suddenly blossomed. No reason to believe he can repeat what he just did, but he'll get paid like he's expected to do just that. Let's let some other team make that mistake. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:38 PM) Considering he had his finest season at 35 I wouldn't put much into what typically happens. He was down the first half of 2013 after missing 2012 but has been on fire the last year and a half. Sure there is risk. But this gamble makes sense as long as it doesn't go crazy. And 35-year old 125 wRC+ DHs get like 2yr/$24m. If that's where we are, then it's a different discussion. Before last year, Victor Martinez's career, offensively, spanned from 86 wRC+ to 130 wRC+. Last year, he put up 166 wRC+. That's SO much better. Even if you ignore the possibility of age-related decline, you have got to be suspicious at a guy who suddenly hits 40% better after 12 years of remarkably consistent performance. So when you say it's "worth the risk," I really don't understand. I mean EVERY free agent presents a risk, I'd argue that if one was worth the risk, it wouldn't be one that DOESN'T have so many obvious signs that his performance was flukey. I'm not saying we all wouldn't like 2014 VMart in our lineup, but that's just not what is going to happen if we sign him. It's the same thing with Shields. They've been awesome, but we can't afford to push the chips in on guys that are obviously riskier than the others.

QUOTE (woods of ypres @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 12:00 AM) Just say no to Vmart. Amen

He's a platooner who shouldn't get much money. These guys are undervalued, and we need an undervalued lefty bat that can take time away from Viciedo. I'd love to have him, to be honest, so long as getting him doesn't preclude Hahn from continuing to look for bigger fish on the trading market.

I don't want anything to do with him. Bad age, bad injury history, definite draft pick compensation, position limited, and coming off the best year of his long career in a time when there is certainly no reason to believe his skills have suddenly blossomed. No reason to believe he can repeat what he just did, but he'll get paid like he's expected to do just that. Let's let some other team make that mistake.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 09:15 AM) You shouldnt have to wonder. I don't, actually.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 08:58 AM) Maybe the Sox should consider talking Jeter out of retirement. He has a ton of playoff experience. I wonder if A Rod is available

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 02:26 PM) Quintana >>> Ventura or Duffy Pretty much, though I'd probably say Quintana > Ventura Quintana >>>>> Duffy

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 07:13 AM) If you could sign Josh Johnson to a non-guaranteed contract, I'd be OK with it, but nothing beyond that. I'd be okay if he is this year's Felipe Paulino. That said, the fact that his $4m option was declined may be telling RE: his health

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 06:12 AM) Other than Ramirez and Danks, we don't have anyone who has experienced the playoffs as a member of the White Sox. Seven years is now quite far removed from 2008...it doesn't necessarily HAVE to be a playoff veteran, but that helps when you have it on your resume. Other than Adam Eaton, there aren't many leaders on this team. With Konerko finally gone, hopefully Sale and Abreu will start to take on more of that responsibility. We also don't have a manager who has ever made it. That's one of the pluses that hiring guys like Francona and Maddon provides. I don't know if Bill James would agree with the idea of "overhyping" something just because it's not measurable or easily quantifiable. The Royals didn't have hardly anyone with playoff experience either.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 04:13 PM) One, you should rework your definition of rotten. From 2005 to 2014 the Sox bullpen ranked 2, 10, 12, 8, 8, 5, 9, 8, 11, and 14 in ERA in the AL. Typically middle of the pack, and that in a stat that puts a team playing in US Cellular Field at a disadvantage. Two, it's beside the point anyway, because from 2005-2007, the three years prior to their turnaround, the Rays bullpen ranked 13th, 12th, and 14th in the AL. The year before that they were 3rd. The year before that they were 8th. The year before that they were 13th. Bullpens are volatile. I know you aren't a stats guy but hear me out on this, it doesn't use any sabermetrics, just a little statistical jargon. From 1998 to 2012 I looked at each AL team's bullpen ERA. I picked those years because the Brewers switched in '98 and the AL had 14 teams the whole time, so it made things easier on me. I compared each bullpen's ERA to its ERA in the previous year and got the R-squared value, which basically tells us how predictable something is. If every team's bullpen finished with the same ERA every year (Yankees 4.25, A's 3.33, Sox 4.00, etc.), that number would be 1.0. Instead, it was .136. That means you can predict about 14% of a bullpen's performance by looking at the previous year; the rest is due to other factors. It means it is extremely difficult to predict how a team's bullpen will do based just on the previous season. I did the same test for starting ERA and got .319. With runs scored, it's .312. There are always teams that surprise in any avenue, like the Sox offense going from dead last to middling from 2013 to 2014, or the starters' ERA going from first to middling from 2005 to 2006. But with bullpens it really happens constantly. Insanely low correlation. Turnover is a factor, but that doesn't explain all of it. The fact is these guys pitch low number of innings, and weird things can happen in low numbers of innings. Bullpens are unpredictable. You get a bunch of good arms and hope it works out.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 11:49 AM) There really is no reason why I am not in. I'll let caulfield introduce me. It will leave me about 30 seconds for my speech. I would drive up to Cooperstown for that.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) Hopefully by then, Montas and/or Danish will be ready and the Sox will be able to skip paying heavily for a starter. Which is part of the reason you want to wait. I'm not opposed to spending on pitching, I just think it's the last thing you do.

I don't think there's really much of an argument for Minnie, at least in terms of his onfield performance. Dick Allen, though, has a real shot. He's a classic borderline guy -- but if Jim Rice is in, Dick Allen should be a no brainer.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 10:56 AM) Next someone will say that Bumgarner's sample in the post-season isn't large enough...that it's the equivalent of saying David Ortiz is "clutch." QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 11:02 AM) Bumgarner is a very good pitcher who went on an incredible run in the World Series this year. If you give him another 120 or so innings, I'm guessing his ERA will be around 2.50-3.00 for his post season career because that's about his true talent level. Wite's got it exactly. It ISN'T long enough. Do you think he's a true talent 0.81 ERA pitcher now? Saying the sample is small isn't taking anything away from the player's performance. Dude pitched lights out and earned a WS ring. But it's not PREDICTIVE of his future performance. He's not the greatest pitcher of all-time now that he threw 50 incredible innings in the postseason.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 09:59 AM) And yet, in your heart of hearts, you would never start Quintana over Ventura in a must-win World Series game for the White Sox. I would choose Quintana every time, because he's better.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 09:40 AM) I would take Ventura over Quintana in a heartbeat because you simply can't teach a 97 MPH average fastball velocity. He has much better stuff and is going to get better and better unless he gets injured, whereas Quintana's already reached pretty close to his peak. I would probably take Duffy over Quintana as well...but it would be VERY close. In the end, Ventura had proven he can be the "ace" in a World Series at his young age already...and Quintana's not the type since his elite run at the very beginning of his career in 2012 where he will consistently put up shutouts or only give up a single run or maybe two. The problem is that velocity does NOT improve with age. It typically peaks around age 22 and declines steadily. Ventura will have to learn how to be as good as Quintana as he loses velocity on his fastball. Quintana on the other hand, is already Quintana. As for the Proven Ace™ by throwing some good games in the postseason: this is simply bad logic, caulfield. How do you know that Quintana "isn't the type?" He's never been IN the postseason. Also, over the relatively small number of post-season careers that comprise large enough samples to be predictive, they ALL regress to career averages. Ventura's "ballsy" performance is comendable, but simply NOT predictive. And finally: Taking Duffy over Quintana is insanity.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 10:21 AM) Except it's really NOT THAT EASY, especially when you're looking for a LF who can hit AND field and is not on the wrong side of 30 and declining. For example, LF and DH. Once you get past the headliners in Martinez/Ramirez/Sandoval, then you enter the abyss of guys like Markakis, Cabrera, Rasmus, Morse, Butler, Kendrys Morales, Lind, LaRoche, etc. It's a complete crapshoot....predicting what any of them will do. Who really has a clue how Flowers, or Gillapsie, or Avisail will do in 2015, or if Eaton can even stay healthy? If it was easy to find those offensive pieces, then the Mariners would have been in the playoffs last season. There's a very good chance that Viciedo has a better season than half the guys on that list...but does it for another team. Which is completely unrelated to the point you were arguing. The Royals were obviously a better team than the White Sox this year. The whole point about pitching rotations was that greg mentioned that the Royals rotation was something that was good enough that it would be a difficult factor for us to surmount going forward. I just wanted to point out that that is not true, that I'm not even sure it's better than OUR rotation, which isn't even good. You could definitely argue that the Royals rotation is better -- you just have to say that depth is more important than peak talent. Our depth sucks and it's a huge issue. But there isn't ANYONE who would take any of the Royals pitchers of either Sale or Quintana. The point is it's arguable either way and therefore they do not have some juggernaut rotation.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 08:59 AM) Most here say Sale's better than Bumgarner....while someone else said the Giants were a juggernaut (the same team that Ventura easily beat twice in the span of a week)...and if Quintana's better than Shields/Duffy/Ventura, then the White Sox should be in the playoffs on a regular basis. Yet they're not even close. So, of the combined 50 players on each team, you're comparing five of them and concluding that there's a paradox? Also, if a pitcher beats a team, every other better pitcher should always also beat that team? Who is making this argument?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 08:23 AM) And since Ventura just beat a juggernaut TWICE in the span of a week, and Quintana's better...then the White Sox should have the best pitching staff in the American League. I'm assuming you're being sarcastic, but I'm missing the point.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 07:37 AM) This. The Royals were the Wild Card and they are most likely losing this performance. It is pretty laughable anyone really thinks making the WS propels them to perrenial greatness. It will be interesting to see if this postseason takes a toll on their bullpen next season. Of course, many here posted 2015 was over when the Tigers traded for David Price. Probably the bullpen will regress simply because bullpens regress.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 05:34 PM) Except that it looks like Ventura is better than Shields. Right, and Sale and Quintana are better than both of them. My point there was simply that their pitching is NOT something that's going to hold us down against them. Our rotation is already better, and it's not even very good.

I honestly think that pitching is the final piece of the puzzle in today's run environment. High end guys are expensive and risky, so it is crucial to make sure you strike when the iron is hot to maximize the chance that you'll get what you paid for. In the mean-time, effective short-term stopgaps are more prevalent than ever. We shouldn't be rushing out to buy and extend 30 year old starters now. That's nothing against Samardzija, it's just making sure we don't put the cart before the horse. We can spend some money and put together a quality pitching staff on relatively short notice, but developing the cost-controlled core of everyday position players is trickier.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 10:31 PM) f*** the Royals. SF had a really likable team and wow, what a coming out party for Bumgarner. With Lincecum and Cain around, he always had to share the spotlight. Not this time. Unforgettable playoff performance.

Also, Gordon Beckham is terrible.