Eminor3rd

QUOTE (hi8is @ Sep 8, 2014 -> 11:48 PM) Whining sounds a hell of a lot different than, "damn it." However, if you want to play the name game... I can go down that road. There's a lot of anger boiling in me at the moment, so... Let me remain calm, request you shut your almighty mouth, and just leave it at that. Poop

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 01:16 AM) http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/pos.../true/minpa/300 Who's going to improve on Flowers from all those catchers (and might legitimately be available)? Sure, Russell Martin, but there will be 10-12 teams after him. Then you've got names like Ruiz (too old for our window), Gattis (too expensive in terms of talent to acquire and so-so defense), etc. Flowers is out OPS-ing Jason Castro and that's yet another case of why would you give up something significant like Tim Anderson/Montas/Danish to acquire what might not even be an upgrade? QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 8, 2014 -> 10:10 PM) Isn't catcher a black hole all over baseball now? Fathom's point might have been that considering the crap at catcher throughout baseball, Tyler actually may be acceptable. At least he battles. Like I said I hope he flips off all fans, including me. You can tell he's a competitor. He probably actually gets the most out of his ability unlike guys like DeAza, Viciedo, etc. Well, Flowers is ranked 30th among catchers in the MLB in wRC+ (more accurate, league adjusted version of OPS). So, he's still substantially below average, no matter what you think of catcher offense. I'm not trying to crap on the guy -- I give him credit for turning into a decent backup -- but he still represents the most obvious spot in the lineup (along with Viciedo) to try to get a guy who is average or better.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 8, 2014 -> 09:51 PM) Flowers has gone out and earned the starting spot for next year. I have never been his biggest fan, but it's hard to argue against him when compared to starting catchers around the league. Idk. I mean if you look at the line, it still isn't really starting caliber. .241/.298/.382 (89 wRC+) might not KILL you at C, but it's still a hole that should be upgraded. ANd it's coming with a .352 BABIP, which would be normal-ish if not for that insane 900-BABIP April he had.

Tyler the Enigma strikes yet again.

Someone teach me to like Avisail Garcia. I really want to.

Jonah Keri on the White Sox as a 2015 "sleeper": http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-the-...kees-white-sox/

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Aug 30, 2014 -> 04:00 PM) Two too many in my world. In the entire system? We have three semi-legitimate 1B prospects across five levels of affiliated baseball, and that's two too many? You krazy, kitekrazy!

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Sep 7, 2014 -> 12:27 PM) So, who gets the title of Tank Commander this year? Last year it was Ax. Scotty Carroll

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 11:36 PM) If he's got a fractured hand, there's really no reason to play any more. The Royals likely will be playing for keeps that series and it's stupid for Paulie to risk hurting it more. Sure if he's healthy it'd be nice to play all four games and see if he can hit a homer on his final at bat. But why risk it? I guess if he wants to risk it, it's his body. But with this being a terrible team going nowhere and no reason to play, I'd just retire now if I was Paulie. You're right, I'd rather he rest up and be 100% for Spring Training next year.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 03:08 PM) I can buy this. I just think he would be a good guy to look into. We can buy low and it won't cost a draft pick because I can't imagine they will make him a QO. The guy is still uber talented and in 2013 was on pace for a 6 fWAR season before his injury. I think you buy low, if you can, and hope he returns to that type of player. Now if somebody wants to pay him $15 million per, it won't be and shouldn't be the Sox. Oh, defintely. I'm not saying he doesn't make sense theoretically. In fact, in a way, he makes perfect sense if we treat as something of a buy-low change of scenery candidate. I'm with you there for sure.

Victor Martinez is at the age and level of fragility that when he begins to decline, it will likely be a very sharp, immediate dropoff. Someone is going to pay him coming off a year that he isn't likely to repeat even if he stays completely healthy. And it's gonna cost a draft pick, and it's going to sacrifice flexibility on the bench. He fits somewhere that he can be the final piece. If we're spending money, we need to be shopping for building blocks. He's good, but it's just not the right move for us at this juncture.

I need to work on making up some flyers to campaign for Russell Martin. Does anyone realize how good he's been hitting? 2014 batting line: .288/.408/.415, 8 HR, (139 wRC+) on an elevated but not unreasonable .339 BABIP And did I mention he's an elite defender? He's on his second consecutive 4 fWAR season. His wRC+ could regress but 40 points and he'd still be great for us. He's going to cost more than most of us think, but he is the perfect target for this team. I hereby proclaim 2015 the YEAR OF MARTIN! WITNESS!

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 02:33 PM) When you state that a team who went out on two separate occasions to try and acquire a player does not like said player, you are wrong. If they didn't like him, KW never would have picked up the phone and given the Cardinals a call. Maybe they didn't like him enough to give up what they would have had to give up, but that's far different than stating that they did not like him. I'm saying that we don't know that they tried and failed to acquire him. All we know is that there are rumors that they discussed him. Maybe they liked him on paper but then got more intel about his personality and balked. Who knows? I certainly don't. But I DO know that is a rare occasion in which we were involved in a three way deal WITH said player we were rumored to like, WHEN we desperately needed a CF, and when the centerpiece of the trade came from us -- and we still didn't end up with the guy. It's not often you know for a fact that you have what it takes to get a guy because another team got the guy on your assets. We DID give up what we had to give up, minus a couple random relievers, and we got some org filler and the right to not pay Mark Teahen instead. Given how small that return is, it's hard to believe that they weren't willing to trade it for a young pre-arb CF with upside, unless they found something out about that player that made them believe he wasn't worth the trouble. Neither you or I really know how they feel or what really was discussed in the room, I'm just saying this is WAY more evidence than we almost ever have that the Sox were able to get a guy that made sense but chose not to do it. Given that Rasmus is a substantially less attractive asset than at any time in the past, it seems to me that the ship has sailed. But we'll see -- I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if he suits up with us.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 01:35 PM) The best thing for the Sox is probably Detroit resigning VMart to a 4 year or more deal for over $60 mil. They already have a lot of money committed to Miggy and Verlander who will soon under perform the value of their contract. Add in a bad contract to VMart and perhaps to Scherzer or Price, they would soon become the Yankees of this division. Until the Rangers take the contract off their hands, lol. It still makes me angry that Texas made that Fielder deal. If I'm Dombrowski, I give him the curse of the QO and leave a two year deal on the table for him after he tests the market. Very few AL teams will give up a first round pick for the right to pay a 37 year old DH with bad knees for 3 years. Red Sox and Yankees certainly won't. A's and Rays certainly won't. Indians? I bet he'd choose the Tigers if it's close.

I'm just going to place this right about... right about here: http://www.fangraphs.com/library/the-begin...suring-defense/

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 11:51 AM) Football during baseball season!!!??? Must be a communist conspiracy

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 10:11 AM) Being able to beat an offer and willing to beat an offer are two different things. Doing a quick Google search, I found numerous articles stating that the Sox were also in talks after 2010 to acquire Rasmus and that Quentin was part of the proposed deal. So you're notion that they did not like him is just wrong. Again, actions speak louder than words. If you want to cite some trade rumors as making me "just wrong," you can, but the reality is we had the bullets to get him (the centerpiece of the deal WAS our bullet) and we moved $10m of dead weight contracts instead. If he wasn't worth Edwin Jackson and a couple of relievers to us before, he isn't worth anywhere close to his free agent contract to us now that he's older and more disappointing. When presented with "Colby Rasmus or $10m," we chose $10m.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 09:38 AM) According to most reports, the Sox were interested in Rasmus at the time and KW basically confirmed their interest. I remember hearing talks that KW was actually a big fan of Rasmus and had his eye on him for awhile. Who knows what else the Sox were willing to offer STL. It's not like the Jays ended up getting him straight up for Jackson. They got him for Jackson and two platoon relievers, and they got a bunch of random other relievers back. We could have beat the offer. I think this is a case of "actions speak louder than words."

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 08:39 AM) The fact that Rasmus has now "fallen out of favor" with a pair of teams is probably going to be a big hint. We had our shot at Rasmus and passed when the front office decided they'd rather use Jackson to dump Teahen's contract. We're not going to get Rasmus, the org clearly doesn't like him.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 11:09 PM) Garcia would bat am second because he is a patient hitter, although he has been a bit aggressive since his return from injury, and he is one of the best pure hitters on the team and he is also a run producer. The article said: 'Lesson: bat your best overall hitter – perhaps the one with the highest OPS (OBP plus SLG) or SLG – second in order to drive in more runs over the course of a season.' While that guy would be Abreu it would be better for him if he bats third, so you can sandwich him between Garcia and Martinez. Connor would bat 5th because he has batted 3rd for a good portion of the season, while he dosent steal bases, he dose get on base at a good clip, he's a contact hitter and hits at a high average. QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 12:20 AM) The guy who bats second gets the most plate appearances. Dear Joshua Strong, You won't find a bigger batting order geek than me, and so I wholeheartedly appreciate your sentiments. While the article you cited is kind of a poor summary that makes some conclusions that are behind the times, it references some really excellent Tom Tango research from years ago that I think makes a ton of sense. The idea has merit, even if the article kind of misses the mark. All of that said, you are making some bizarre claims here. First, regarding Avisail Garcia: He is not and has never been anything remotely close to a patient hitter. In fact, his inability to recognize pitches and be patient very well may be the only thing stopping him from being great right now. His lack of patience is his biggest flaw. You're right that while walks are a good proxy for patient hitters, they do not define them. What does define a patient hitter is his ability and willingness to choose the right pitches to swing at. An average hitter swings at around 31% of pitches outside the strikezone. Avisail Garcia, this year, swings at 41% of pitches outside the strikezone. The year before? 43%. The year before? 48%, which is totally bonkers. I've never seen an O-Swing figure that high. Not even Dayan Viciedo has reach that stratosphere. In fact, he even swings at more pitches IN the zone than average (74% to 65% avg). Patient he is not. Secondly, the 2nd batter does not get the most plate appearances. Perhaps you meant he gets more than the 5th batter? Finally, regarding Conor Gillaspie: low power is the LAST thing you want in the three hole. The third batter bats with 2 outs and the bases empty more than any other slot, and this is the situation where a homerun is most beneficial. The one thing Conor cannot do is hit homeruns, and so he is most effective in situations where he can drive in runs on singles and doubles. This makes him better sutied for the 2 or 5 slots, but definitely NOT the 3 slot. Thanks for bringing this up, I've done it before and mostly people made fun of me. But it's fun to talk about.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 08:54 PM) Did you? 5th: Complete the “heart” of the order; a good power hitter........ Conor Gillaspie doesn't appear to be a good power hitter. 2nd: Guy who can drop a bunt or draw a walk. Never seen Avi lay down a bunt, but he sure doesn't seem like a guy who will draw a walk that much. No thanks on Gillaspie to LF. I know it's done for defensive purposes, but I'd rather see Semien in LF and Gillaspie stay at 3B. With those guys and using that format the lineup should be... 1 Eaton 2 Semien 3 Martinez 4 Abreu 5 Garcia 6 Gillaspie 7 Ramirez 8 Johnson 9 Flowers Which would be a damn good lineup, esp. if Semien can translate his ability to take a walk to the bigs. Eaton, Semien, and Martinez would be on base a lot in front of Abreu. Lol, you very clearly did NOT read the article, since you are citing the part of it where he is describing the traditional batting order roles that he spends the rest of the article arguing are wrong.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 04:12 PM) Would this help at all? http://www.mymlbdraft.com/MLB-Mock-Draft I thought it was interesting enough for now. Bregman at 4? Wow.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 02:33 PM) I feel the same way and you worded it much better than I did. I think where we disagree on this one is that I don't think the Sox would have any problem giving Stanton $25 mill a year. Thanks to the contracts they've signed with Sale and Quintana (assuming you didn't use Quintana to acquire him), they've gained some leeway in giving out extra money, and he'd clearly be worth it. Beyond that, I think he's the type of player who you can trade too if you need to recoup some value. He's also a very good candidate for an opt out after 4 years, which hurts the club long-term but assures you get more than the initial service time guarantee. Again, all hypothetical, but it's fun to try and quantify the value of certain players on the team. Yeah, I mean I think on paper they absolutely could give him that, just like you say. It's just so completely bigger than anything they've ever done, that at some point you really do have to wonder if the level of risk tolerance is a mandate from ownership. But you're right: in theory, that's exactly the luxury that those below-market extensions afford. Then again, they also just dished out the largest contract in international free agent history this winter. Regarding his eventual annual salary -- I think there's a huge difference if he gets extended or if he hits free agency. Either way, teams have shown willingness to take on years to deals rather than increase annual salary past the 'ceiling' of 25-30m. In free agency, I don't think there's any doubt he's on track for 30m+, but in the event of an extension, I think he'll be more concerned with the grand total than the yearly rate, and a team will ultimately tack on a few more years to keep it in the mid 20s per year.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 02:48 PM) And what makes you believe the White Sox, as of right now, or going into this off-season, would be in a position to convince him to sign that type of long-term extension to a 95% degree of certainty? I don't believe that. I was just commenting on the notion that someone wouldn't give up those prospects for him. The answer is they WOULD if the situation was right, which is one where they have some sort of preliminary communication with Stanton's agent about his willingness to extend (essentially in return for getting out of Miami) and that the White Sox understand and are comfortable with their projections about what it's gonna take to get it done. The Sox can't get him anyway, and that's because another team can easily outbid our best offer, assuming that offer does not include Sale/Abreu, which it shouldn't and never would.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 01:59 PM) No, I wouldn't. Because we'd still be left with our crappy crappy bullpen that lacks any leadership, Ventura as manager, expected/predictable below-average offensive production from every position in the line-up going into 2015 but Stanton/Abreu/Eaton and maybe Ramirez and Avisail Garcia...stuck with John Danks in the rotation for two more years and also not 100% sure what Noesi's going to produce, and lacking plus defenders all around the diamond and not an extraordinary amount of team speed or fundamentally-inclined players. Heck, we don't even have any type of guarantee that Rodon's going to be a #2 as early as 2016. Assuming Micah and Semien both played a lot and gained experience in 2015, they'd have enough speed finally...which means that acquiring Mike Stanton would be the ultimate "win now/all in" move for one season only, 2016, even moreso than Adam Dunn was. If I firmly believed that Anderson was going to be a franchise player and cornerstone to build around and would stick at either SS or 2B, there's just no way I'm making that gamble if I'm Hahn. It's only an interesting question because of that final 2016 contract year. That's where the calculus of risk of NOT doing anything significant and having Abreu/Sale/Quintana/Eaton/Avisail get injured starts to weigh on your mind as a GM. However, it's not the kind of move that fits Hahn's suggested pattern of "sustainable success" by any sort of definition. Giancarlo Stanton is 24. You would only make this move if you felt 95% sure you could extend him, and there's no way that would be less than a seven year deal at the absolute minimum. That would absolutely be a better bet for production than all of those guys. Can you think of a better and more likely sourced of sustained production than Stanton's age 25-32 seasons? I like Anderson, but I'd be shocked if the chances he ever becomes as productive as Stanton are more than 1%.