Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 10:18 AM) I fully grasp the above concept and have always understood moneyball with the impression that it wasn't that walks and homers were king, it was really more that walks were being extremely underrated and under valued in relation to their importance to their game and I have never had a problem with sabs it is more that I Think a lot of people severely misuse them and don't have a thorough enough understanding of the limitations of various aspects (but that is another debate and I will also say I guarantee there are some stats that I once went into in depth that have since been revamped and I may not be aware of that). I However, I think a similar approach is still being taken by a lot of people in certain areas and if you look at the difference in runs between the Royals and Sox defense, you are talking about nearly a run per game difference. That is insanely huge, especially in an era where there are few elite hitters. The reality is, when it comes to helping the net run differential, if I'm the Sox, I might be able to make far bigger impacts by cleaning up my defense and pitching staff then I can by acquiring bonafide impact bats (and I say that because there are just so few of them available). I think that's an argument I can get behind.

QUOTE (LDF @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 10:35 AM) so does that mean you and Eminor3rd are not keen on signing him? Haha, I just don't want to pay him in line with his success in 2014, because I don't think it's likely to repeat. If the market values him as a 1yr/$7m guy and we haven't found anything better, I don't mind taking a flyer.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 09:07 AM) Sounding like Viciedo from the reports we have is a GOOD thing. Viciedo is an incredibly talented hitter - quick wrists, big power, and great plate coverage. He struggles recognizing pitches and, from what I can tell, with his hand-eye coordination. He's shown flashes in the past where he's willing to work the count and he absolutely tears it up, but those are so few and far in between that it's hard to count on anything but a free swinging strike out machine. If you get a guy with Viciedo's talent at the plate or even a level below that but who is capable of recognizing pitches and/or having good hand-eye coordination, you have a fantastic hitter. But hand-eye coordination is a CRITICAL component and should be considered more of a tool than a skill. If reports of his shortcomings are similar to those of Viciedo, those shortcomings act as the best proxy we have in assuming he has the same types of "tool" issues, including but not limited to hand-eye coordination. I mean, at the end of the day, who knows? But there seems to be big bust potential if he's like Viciedo, because Viciedo is a bust.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 01:54 PM) Jerk I don't dislike metrics I just a lot more has to be thought of then just spitting out the metric. I also still think defensive metrics have their flaws, but they have been improving significantly and the value of defense is at an all time high over the past 20 years given the fact that we appear to be in a low scoring era. I also think a lot of the general saber themes have to be revisited (e.g., playing for the long ball, etc) as a lot of those decision points likely change given that in general, the value of a run is more important now than it was 5 years ago. The bolded is 100% true. The frustrating part is that they all HAVE been revisited and rethought, but the mainstream media still cling to every conclusion from Moneyball, clearly having missed the ENTIRE idea of the book, which was NOT "steals are bad, bunts are bad, defense is overrated, homers are king, walks are king," but rather "use sabermetrics to identify over and undervalued skills in the current marketplace/run environment, and acquire/punt skillsets depending on conditions." That those aforementioned concepts happened to be the overvalued and undervalued skills/strategies in 2002 has been the bane of the SABR-friendly fan over the last seven or eight years. Because people like Hawk and Joe Morgan were offended by Michale Lewis' tone as it was filtered through the media and never bothered to read any of it in the first place. Not a criticism against you at all, but the mainstream in general.

Generally speaking, I think the market is ripe to bust with Cuban players. The next wave all sound a notch or two below their predecessors and the dollar figures seem to be about as high as they're going to get. I think it's a good time to let some other teams take these risks.

QUOTE (LDF @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 08:32 AM) with the advance stats, i can not make a counter, i am not smart enuf. but with regression, that can be said with almost every pitchers. Certainly -- any pitcher (any PLAYER really) is always a risk of turning into garbage due to a lot of factors relating to changes in ability (injury, age, etc.). But what the peripherals say about Volquez is that even his performance assuming the same level of skill is not likely sustainable. This is all just based on correlations of what typically happens when we see these factors. So I think what I should have said as that there is a very strong case that Volquez is significantly more likely to regress than the average pitcher.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 08:21 AM) mmmmm pi

Moncada seems like a pipe dream just because of the implications. Also, our front office doesn't seem like the type to sacrifice future signings for a specific guy.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 07:12 PM) Make Smart Decisions... Meaning dont trade away prospects, especially for horrible contracts. Acquire more ML ready prospects. Sign pitching depth in both the bullpen and the rotation. (Especially guys that I can flip at the deadline for prospects a la the Cubs.) Put everyone of value on the block to see what offers are out there. Just make smart baseball and fiancial decisions. And who replied with a +1, this isn't Reddit. Lol, who ever replies "+1" on Reddit? I got in the habit of replying +1 on older forums that wouldn't let you simply quote a reply and not add any text. So you weren't exaggerating when you said your whole plan was just "do good things"? If you don't want to be exposed to ideas more precise than that, this probably isn't the thread for you. Also, regarding trading prospects: I think there can definitely be situations where this team is ready to trade prospects. However, they have to be situations where we are acquiring ML players with a significant amount of controlability and, if not upside, at least evidence to suggest that their performances are sustainable over several years. It's totally fair if you think Carlos Gonzalez is a bad idea because you think he's overrated, but the idea of trading prospects for a guy who is 28, has a star-level track record, and may come at a discount because of his contract and injury history DOES make sense on paper. So the response to that should not be "NO THAT IS DUMB THING," but rather, "Carlos Gonzalez is a bad idea because I think his injury issues are real and there's a lot of reason to believe his numbers are propped up by Coors and that his best years are behind him.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 07:49 AM) Whoever wants Russell Martin, he will now cost a draft pick. MLB Daily Dish @mlbdailydish · 13h 13 hours ago #Pirates to extend qualifying offer to Russell Martin http://sbnation.com/e/6755584 Yeah, knew it would happen. The dream is dying :'(

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 07:25 AM) He had his best season in years this year, he's a righty, he has been inconsistent enough that he's not going to get a long term commitment from most teams, IMO the Pirates probably won't keep him, he won't get a qualifying offer so he won't cost a draft pick, his main issue has been control and so slight improvements on that could push him into the realm of a really good starter for several years. You're right there's some "Coop'll fix em" built into that last part, but he's also shown this year that the right pitching coach can help him get into a really good groove. Not my preferred option but I get it. It is worth noting that Volquez is a MAJOR candidate for regression by his peripherals, in a very similar way that Hector Santiago was last offseason. - 3.04 ERA / 4.15 FIP / 4.20 xFIP - LOB% = 77.5% vs career 71.7% - K rate = 6.54/9 vs career 8.07/9 - BB rate = 3.32/9 vs career 4.49/9 - HR/FB rate = 9.1% vs career 11.4% - BABIP against = .263 vs career .298 A LOT of things went right for him this year in terms of batted ball distribution, homerun rate, and strand rate. All of these things are considered among the least stable metrics for pitchers. Additionally, he struck out fewer batters than ever before (a rate that has been trending down for four seasons now), and made up for it by producing the lowest walk rate of his entire career (which is still pretty high), which is a thing I'm not sure he can repeat. If Volquez came on a 1 year pillow contract, I'd be for it. But since he is coming OFF of such a year and will demand a multi-year commitment based on what looks like a very fortunate and non-repeatable season, I've got to hope we stay away from him. Based on his numbers, he is very likely to disappoint.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 06:08 PM) Some times I really hate advanced stats, because there is no way those two are in the same stratosphere offensively or defensively. Though those numbers are distorted by going two years instead of one. I don't know about defense, but Markakis is projected to be worse by advanced defense at least. I think it's at least worth considering that because of the nature of De Aza's mistakes, we all have the perception that he's much worse than he really is. Offensively though,VL has a great point. Steamer has Markakis projected for 109 wRC+ and De Aza projected for 106 wRC+. Going to a three year sample (because 2012 was ADA's first full season with us), you have this: Markakis 2012: 126 2013: 88 2014: 106 De Aza 2012: 106 2013: 98 2014: 94 I don't think that anyone disagrees that Markakis is better, but it isn't by nearly as much as you'd think, at least from an overall production standpoint. All of that said, the minor difference probably says much more about us underrating De Aza than it does about us overrating Markakis. To me, Markakis is a good play if and only if you think his defense is at least average. Steamer has him projected as a slilghtly below average player next year because it has him projected at 10 runs below average on defense. If you assume he plays scratch defense, all of a sudden you're in the realm of 2.5 - 3 fWAR, which is a nice, above-average player. Which, consequently, is what De Aza was most of his time with us.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 05:23 PM) You know, if you are going to insult SoxPride and his ideas, the least thing you could do is come up with something better than this when asked to show off your own foolproof plan. +1

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 03:10 PM) Thank God you are not the GM, and you don't want Cargo the millionth f***ing time, he makes no sense for the Sox and he is the definition of a bad contract. He's not even a guy you could buy low on and take a risk since the contract is so big. Lol, I'm not sure I agree with all of it, but I thought it was a pretty reasonable set of ideas at fairly realistic costs. Assuming rational cost, what is your plan that is so drastically different than this?

Thing about Markakis: I legitimately don't think we know if his defense is elite or noticeably below average. There's a MAJOR disconnect between his reputation and the advanced stats. He's been CONSISTENTLY below average by 5 or more runs for five of the last six years by UZR, which is more than enough of a sample. I tend to feel like reputations die slowly, so I think I side with the defensive metrics in this case. Having obviously not seen nearly enough of him to have an opinion of my own.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 04:03 PM) Jay Bruce would be a nice piece to buy low on. He's a 30 HR left-handed bat that owns a 9.4 BB%. His defense is all over the place, sometimes good, sometimes bad. He strikes out more than you'd like, but he also won't clog the bases. He is owed $12M, $12.5, and then has an option for $13M in 2017. He was worth -1.1 WAR last year, 4.0 WAR the year before, had a career high of 4.9 WAR at age 23, and will turn 28 right after the season starts next year. Like I said, the Reds MAY be willing to sell low on him and want to move that money. The only problem is that their OF is already pretty weak with Billy Hamilton being the only longterm piece there. Their other OFers include Ryan Ludwick and Skip Schumaker. However, 2 of the Reds 3 top prospects are OFers, so they may be willing to let one of those guys replace Bruce next season. Yeah I threw his name out there in another thread, so I'm on board with the thought. His deal is backloaded and the Reds may be looking to rebuild. The only issue is I realyl have NO idea how to gauge his value. Idk if it's a buy low or not. But yeah, he's a guy whose tires must be kicked! Upon. Or whatever.

I have an irrational love for Tabata, so I would totally be down with that. Having said that, losing both Tabata AND Snider depletes their depth quite a bit, so I'd expect them to be happy to move one, but probably not both.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 02:59 PM) I knew someone would catch that as soon as I posted it. Nah, one decade is fair for "the model." They failed for longer than that, but this current GMDM attempt is closer to a decade.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 03:35 PM) Im saying no to giving up that type of package and taking all that money on top of it. As others have pointed out, CarGo is injury plagued and that is a lot for a guy that cant play 150-162 games. I'm just saying it would get it done. I'm on the fence as to whether or not it's good for the team. Our front office would have to have reason to feel good about his medicals, of course.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 02:15 PM) I don't think there is anyway the Rockies take that offer. None of those guys are blue chip prospects. To get CarGo, you may have to build a package around Tim Anderson, someone they may like when they want to trade Tulo eventually. I think it's a viable offer if you assume you're taking all the money off of their hands.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 02:17 PM) Fielding percentage is a horrendous metric to evaluate defense. Using advanced defensive metrics, the Sox this past year, ranked 28th in team defense (Astros / Indians were worse) with our defense costing us 48 runs. The Royals defense ranked 1st and saved 74.8 runs.

Yeah, our defense is GARBAGE in the corners. Abreu, Gillaspie, Garcia, Viciedo. Yikes.

IMO, the Royals are clouding our judgement, everyone. The reason they are winning is because they are currently doing EVERYTHING better than everyone. To me, we should think of our priorities in terms of the holes we need to fill, and we should fill the holes with guys that are good at as much stuff as we can afford. A run scored is a run saved. vice versa. Priority 1 = corner OF bat, preferably left-handed. Ideally, it replace Viciedo. If not, it platoons with Viciedo. Move Garcia from RF to LF if necessary. Priority 2 = acquire many pitchers, both starting and relieving. Reclamation projects with upside, young castoffs with upside, undervalued assets, etc. To me, we have only two guys locked in the rotation next year. Noesi, as much as we're impressed, ended up with a 4.75 ERA (4.83 FIP). Danks can be DFA'd for all I care. We'll find a place for Rodon when we're ready. For the reclamation model to work, you need to bring in four guys for two spots so that when you end up with Felipe Paulino, you have Jason Hammel to use instead. Same with RPs: the list of guys who are good relievers for more than a few years is extremely, saddeningly small. Get good, cheap arms with warts and expect 25% of them to stick under your tutelage. Priority 3 = acquire good catcher that is here for several years. Flowers will make a good backup. Prioritize defense/handling over offense. It can be a veteran or a young guy, whatever.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 10:00 AM) Well, Hawk the idiot, who the game has passed by, said KC had the best bullpen in the league in March. They have had a great bullpen for a few years now. But that was when it included Soria and when Tim Collins was a monster. Hawk didn't see Wade Davis coming.

KC also BARELY made the postseason. I think any time you come to a conclusion where you say any of pitching/hitting/defense/baserunning is any more important than the rest, you're overthinking it and you're not making a useful conclusion. A good team needs to be able to do all of those things, and if they don't they're going to struggle to overcome it. KC's weakness is offense, and because of that they snuck in with the wild card. Now, during the postseason, they have more homeruns than EVERY other team. The pitching in defense isn't trumping offense in the postseason -- it's being tacked onto a monster offense that didn't exist before. KC is a solid team that is playing hot at the right time.