Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Jun 24, 2014 -> 07:18 AM) Forget OPS. It's all about the wRC+. Haha, beat me to it.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 24, 2014 -> 07:11 AM) Eaton needs to be a 750ish OPS guy to have the type of major impact we need in the leadoff spot. He's at 703 this season, and 705 for his entire major league career. However, in five minor league seasons, he was at 949. We're not going to get a 900 type of player, but we expected 750-825. Adam needs to be more of a threat on the basepaths as well as cleaning up some of his throws in the outfield...sometimes he hesitates or peers in for a step before throwing, and his throws have been pretty inconsistent, but the main positives he brings are his speed/hustle/attitude, not his arm. Plus, we desperately need a leader on this team (among the position players), and Eaton's the best candidate since Abreu's the "strong and silent follow my example" type, much like Konerko. I think this is an instance where wRC+ does much better job of putting his contributions in perspective than OPS does. Right now, he's at 94 wRC+, where a league average CF so far this season is 96. Remember that wRC+ is league-adjusted, park-adjusted, and is scaled so that a league average hitter, regardless of position, is 100. Each point represents a percentage point. So, essentially, Eaton has been an average hitter for a CF even when you include park effects. Considering this will be his first full season in the Majors, and he's had injury issues that aren't likely to linger, I'm very alright with that performance. I do think he needs to improve and that he WILL improve. But, even now, he's a handful of walk and doubles away from being a 100 wRC+ guy, which is tremendously valuable in CF.

Who was saying we don't need to try anymore reclamation projects in the bullpen?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 23, 2014 -> 04:56 PM) He has had 2 TJ surgeries. This. I'm not TRADING anything of value for a 2 TJ guy. Cheap, upside signing? Sure. Not using a trading chip, though.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jun 23, 2014 -> 01:44 PM) Which one of those guys do you feel confident playing major league shortstop? Everyone but Johnson, based only on what I've read. There's also Leury Garcia.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jun 23, 2014 -> 02:09 PM) names??? If its Alexei, who do you feel confident replacing him with? If its Beckham, what is a realistic return? Yep, those are our middle infielders. Replacements in AAA: Marcus Semien, Carlos Sanchez, Micah Johnson, Tyler Saladino. As far as Beckham's return: I'm not sure; it's an interesting question. No one is dumb enough to ignore his last four years, but he has the tantalizing pedigree that makes you think he might be on the Alex Gordon development schedule. I guess it'll depend on how many buyers are in on 2B, but if it's 2-3, I'd think we could get something decent, though probably not "exciting."

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 23, 2014 -> 01:39 PM) What is going to make next years Sox team any better than this one? Looking at what is available in FA, they won't likely be heavily involved. Garcia will be an upgrade offensively in RF, but the pitching problems will still be an issue as well as production at LF, and C and a likely downgrade at 2B, DH. Yes, it is a gamble to trade for prospects, but, you have to gamble a little to get rewards. If your goal is "make next year's Sox team any better than this one," your answer should not be "trading top contributors for prospects."

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jun 23, 2014 -> 01:03 PM) Who could be traded from the major league roster that would bring back a decent return without creating a hole somewhere else? Middle infielders

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 23, 2014 -> 10:29 AM) Interesting. I still put him at 3 or 4 right now, behind Rodon, Anderson, possibly Hawkins. I think people are forgetting about Johnson's defensive woes. That's my thought , too. Anderson has defensive warts, too, but the ceiling is higher. Still, the guy is close. I think it's definitely defensible to slot Johnson #2.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 23, 2014 -> 09:55 AM) That wasn't the plan originally. It became the plan because there were no better options. How do you know that?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 21, 2014 -> 10:06 PM) So it's been relatively static since 2002? Yep: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...=&players=0

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 05:29 PM) Question for you...have fly balls always been as dangerous as in recent history (say the last 20 years), or is that a more recent phenomenon brought about as a result of the newer, smaller ballparks and the steroid era? Interesting question, not sure if we (the public) has access to the data to find out. FG shows league-wide HR/FB% back to 2002, and it is always around 10-11% during that period. Not sure how far you havve to go back to see a significant change, though.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 05:06 PM) Well I could argue at length about the artificial nature of food resources and the like, and how fragile the economy really is and how devastating some of these things can be on the majority of the world's citizens who were not fortunate enough to have been born into a first world country propped up by third world labor under deplorable living and working conditions and so on... but I'll choose to stick to baseball and your & wite's belief that John Danks is going to become a bad pitcher because he gives up a lot of flyballs currently - if that's what your point is I guess. I can't believe you would honestly believe that billions of people on this planet live and work under desirable conditions but whatever, baseball...... Yeah, totally. On average, I'd say people would choose to return to the days of the bubonic plague, when lifespans averaged 25-30 years, and when insane religious-driven governments ran Inquisitions and committed mass genocides unchecked across the developed world. Because, you know, progress isn't worthwhile unless it instantly creates Utopia. But baseball... QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 05:06 PM) I think the right way to look at John Danks is this: going into the year we had 2 questions, 1) is John Danks going to return to the old John Danks, and 2) If not, will he still be able to become an effective Major League pitcher? The answer to #1 is no. #2 we're waiting to see how this all turns out. Can John Danks generally become a 30+ start, 200IP+ starter with an ERA roughly at 4.00 or below on an annual basis? I don't know. It's been done before, but nobody really knows. He's been giving up flyballs but he hasn't been giving up many runs lately. He's been, by his own admission, rededicated to the finer points of pitching and spends a lot of time studying hitters and hitter tendencies. Rather than look for a reason to be pessimistic I would look at his recent success as a reason for optimism. In a vacuum, can John Danks give up flyballs forever and not have bad starts because of it? No. But what do the flyballs look like for one, how is he getting them for two, are the hitters coming close to squaring the ball up off him and just missing or is Danks doing a much better job of keeping them off balance? Further, again, the outs are what is important. He needs to keep getting outs, and yes, he will give up HRs but that means it's more important he keeps the walks way down. Will John Danks continue to put up an ERA of 1.50 or whatever it was that Balta posted re: his last 5 starts? No, he's not Sale. But ERA below 4.00, 200IP, can he do that? Let's not be Negative Nancies around here please? No dark clouds here, just at WSI. The original point that wite was making is that we have information that tells us that his results have not lined up with his batted ball profile, which is a sign of impending negative regression. It was not that Danks is a garbage pitcher.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 05:46 PM) Forgive my ignorance, but are FIP & xFIP really going to be predictive when using a 13 inning sample? Well, maybe not, but if so, it means his ERA is equally non-predictive. Basically, what we know is that his performance hasn't "earned" him the ERA that got him DFA'd. As far as those numbers informing that he'll continue doing what he been doing from a FIP perspective, yeah we don't know.

I'm down, with those peripherals.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 02:04 PM) Meaning don't get too wrapped up in their predictive values, because they are still ideal results. With all the respect due to an ultimate champion, I could not possibly disagree with a statement more. What you just uttered is antithesis to the Enlightenment values that propelled our race into the Industrial Revolution that gave rise to global economy, food surpluses, and advances in medical technology that has increased the quality and length of life of billions of the world's denizens. I shall pray to the pantheon of Abrahamic god figures that, for as long as you hold the belief you just described, you NEVER take up gambling.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 02:33 PM) I think oftentimes too much is made of flyballs. Flyballs are just perfectly fine as long as they result in outs. Hard hit flyballs are different but flyballs themselves are often just a product of using more of the strikezone, i.e. the upper parts. You don't need a blazing FB to effectively pitch up in the zone. As long as the hitters are off balance I really don't care where they hit the ball, in the air or on the ground. Well, yeah.

We MIGHT sniff the top half on SOME lists. We've improved vastly, yes, but do not forget the depths from which we've climbed. Wite is right: adding 16 year-olds won't move the needle at all this year or next, in terms of system rank. They might turn into guys that make a huge impact later, but not now.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 10:54 AM) That's not history, that's a small sample size under different circumstances. You're going to take 2 years of Hahn's tenure and use it as a manifesto on his philosophy as a General Manager. You're then going to compare this "philosophy" against Kenny's body of work, even though both men were never working with the same set of circumstances. You want to bring up 2007...2007 came off a 90 win season and is a year removed from a WS Championship. A completely different set of circumstances than that which Hahn found himself in in 2013. Then you sort of fail to mention that the 2008 team made the postseason, which, to me, pretty much validates what Kenny did between the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2008. Meanwhile, Hahn worked for Kenny during this time, and Kenny now influences Hahn today...trying to separate and compare their tenures, especially considering Hahn's has been so brief, is pretty much impossible IMHO. This^ Also, I think that all wite is saying is that he likes the thought process behind how Hahn is handling this rebuild. That means he DOES like moves like Paulino, because the risk/reward made sense at the time even though it didn't ultimately work out. This is in contrast to a lot of the moves under KW, which received a lot of criticism at the time form those of us who couldn't see the upside and thought the cost was too high -- like Hudson for Jackson. That Hudson ended up hurting himself and having no career doesn't absolve criticism for the move at the time. You can say it was too much value for an upgrade that didn't seem like it would move the needle enough, and it ultimately didn't. But, iamshack's point is important: the situations were not similar. And to TUC's related argument, there's a reason that KW got "promoted (read: demoted)" and not fired -- I'm not sure that JR found much fault in his decision-making. He had different task, made moves that ownership supported, and when it didn't work, it was time to move in a different direction. It's entirely possible to think both that Hahn can be the better guy for this rebuild and that KW did a fine (or at least passable) job during his tenure. I just think we have to remember that all of the player decisions these guys make come with the probability for success and for bust, and the GMs know it when they make a move. It isn't fair to expect guys to be able to scout so well that they should be 100% right about 100% of players. When you think of Paulino, you should think of it like this: $1-2m for a lottery ticket that has a 5% chance of being a 2-3 starter, 15% chance of being a 3-4 starter, and 80% chance of being a reliever or useless. Don't knock Hahn because it landed in the 80%, knock him if you thought the gamble wasn't worth a million bucks in the first place. Same thing goes with KW: JR should judge him on the moves, not necessarily the outcomes.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) However, if this is the "guy who might be better than Puig" we've heard about the last few months, Puig will be the precedent for his salary whether we like it or not, and the successes of Puig and Abreu will almost certainly push his contract past that of Jose. There's a difference between the posturing of the media and the conclusions that are made by front offices. I would hope that GMs won't actually base their valuations solely on the fact that one pop scout said "might be better than Puig" two years ago -- but the bloggers and 670 Scores of the world very well might.

To me, there's way too much in these threads about "earning" and "winning" and "fickle fans" and "excuses" and justice and righteousness and crap. The bottom line is this: the Sox are in the entertainment business, and if people aren't watching, they need to do something different to make them watch. They don't "deserve" fans. It doesn't matter what happens in Milwaukee or whatever. They're a business on the south side of the city of Chicago, and their market is made up of people that live on the south side of Chicago. So they need to get creative to produce a product that will appeal to those people to the degree that those people will consume the product in a profitable manner. All this "shaming" crap has got to stop. We make the team sound like a book store whining about the Amazon Kindle. "Well I just don't know why people don't enjoy the FEEL of a real book like EYE do! I just shake my head at kids these days! This generation just doesn't have GOOD taste!" No, the reality is the world doesn't bow to your whim. Just because you make a book doesn't give you the right to be paid handsomely for it. This is how capitalism works. There are people and they have money, if you want that money than you must do something that convinces them to give it to you. Changing nothing and whining because people don't mold their desires around YOU does nothing but put you out of business. "Poor musicians" are the same way. You actually DON'T have the right to live your dream; what you DO have is the right to attempt it unimpeded. No one is going to write you a check in the event that you didn't do something that anyone gave a s*** about. If attendance is really an issue, the Sox need to be willing to discard the model of how a team gets people in the stadium and replace it with one based on Chicagoans in 2014. Between the constant evolution of technology and pop culture, the answer to "what people want" is always changing and always will. Discovering and executing this is the very nature of private business.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 09:32 AM) I would say we have gotten $10 million worth out of him for sure. Yeah, that's true. Another thing to note regarding Tomas: look at those numbers and compare them to Abreu's. This kid is an advanced prospect, not someone who is likely to step in and be a star from day one. Not saying we shouldn't want him, just saying that Puig set a dangerous precedent. What he has done should not be considered standard.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Jun 20, 2014 -> 09:24 AM) Exactly. Would rather risk money on younger talent than middle aged vets. The question is "can we get in enough due diligence to properly assess the risk and upside?" It's much harder with younger guys than with vets, but like SS2k5 said, I'll give the Sox the benefit of the doubt here. The biggest bust so far is $10m or whatever to Viciedo, and while he's bad, he's at least a ML player.

I don't think that gets the deal done in the first place, and I don't think we even want Price given that (1) we wouldn't likely be able to extend him and (2) I'm not sure i Want to extend him anyway, given how his velocity has already fallen.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jun 19, 2014 -> 09:52 AM) Ha! I've reached my quota in terms of talking about poor attendance. I simply cannot take on another team's problems. But I'll join you anytime for a game out there, and at least help the S.I. Yanks with their attendance issues! Check your PM box