Eminor3rd

EJ needs his velocity back

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 29, 2014 -> 08:11 AM) By that logic, he won the game, so he did his job.

We really have no payroll issues at all. We have only one bad contract (Danks), and he's managed to remain effective enough to at least hold down a rotation spot. That we could simply cut Keppinger is evidence that the front office agrees. Anyway, the effect of that should be that the front office should NOT feel pressured to eat salary. It should all about maximizing talent this year.

On a podcast last week, Jason Parks said that as of that day, he'd prefer Nola over Kolek, citing two primary reasons: 1. People assume too much that it's a given that someone as raw as Kolek can develop the "pitchability" to become a frontline starter 2. People are underrating the quality of Nola's stuff -- touches 96, sits 93/94 and has three good pitches

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 28, 2014 -> 04:33 PM) I see what you did there. I am absolutely shocked the moderators will let that slide. It is kind of funny the saber boys are ignoring his advanced numbers. His FIP xFIP and WAR don't suggest in the least he would hurt the Sox chances of competing. Why are you ignoring those numbers? Are you referring to his significantly worse-than-average 4.22 FIP? Or his slightly less, but still worse-than-average 3.97 xFIP? Is it the worse-than-average 1.82 K/BB? The reliever-esque 4.50 BB/9? Is it his declining K rate? Or that he's averaging 5.6 innings per start? Oh, it must be the 2 MPH drop in his average fastball velocity. Honestly, Dick Allen, I can't even squint and find a reason to argue he isn't having a bad season. I'm sure you'll find some way to continue arguing, though.

QUOTE (Jake @ May 29, 2014 -> 06:32 AM) Yeah he's looked fine. Sample sizes, people. This is the hilarious part of all this discussion. A guy has one or two good/bad outings, and we want to annoint or write him off for 2 f***ing innings. Put that in perspective in your head, people of Soxtalk. A starter can throw five good innings and then give up a couple runs in the sixth. Should that guy immediately lose his rotation spot? It takes a closer 6 games to get even THAT much exposure. This is why reliever performance is so volatile -- we just don't see enough of them to know what we're going to get out of them until practically the end of the season. It takes a pretty extreme set of performances to know what to do with a guy after 25 innings or whatever these guys have accumulated thus far.

QUOTE (Wanne @ May 28, 2014 -> 03:43 PM) If I'm talking to Cashman...Gary Sanchez better be in the discussion. I bet it'll be more like Aaron Judge. Alexei's age won't do us any favors, and his price will ultimately be determined by how many motivated bidders there are. The Yankees make more sense than anyone else at this juncture.

QUOTE (greg775 @ May 28, 2014 -> 02:43 PM) Somebody should be accountable when a team wastes money on a pitcher who is absolutely horrible. It's Rick Hahn. If he misses more than he hits, he'll be fired. Put the pitchfork away and save it for situations that will actually affect our ability to compete. Like if we had signed Ubaldo or something.

Keep us going, glangon!

This post, to me, looks like you made a statement: QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 28, 2014 -> 01:46 PM) Isn't $68 million the biggest contract the White Sox have ever handed out? I would think that means he's considered a slam dunk. I think every team offering him 8 figures for 5 or 6 years thought he would be really successful. ...and then went out and found evidence directly to the contrary: QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 28, 2014 -> 01:46 PM) "We signed Alexei Ramirez in '08 for 4.25 [million dollars]," Hahn pointed out. "We signed Dayan Viciedo a year later for 10. In 2012, [Jorge] Soler goes to the Cubs for 30, and then Puig goes for 42 right away. Now Abreu. The escalation was so quick in this market for this type of player. Contracts went up 15-fold almost since '08. There is something about Jose having not played in the States that ultimately made people shy away, and you completely get that. In retrospect, thus far, it looks like it's going to be a sound deal. But you still had that unknown." Am I reading this wrong?

QUOTE (scs787 @ May 28, 2014 -> 02:59 PM) Dodgers might make some sense, for Pederson though?? Idk about that. I think I'd throw on the Soxman mask and wear only body paint and a sock on my dong and run laps around the cell if they were able to get Pederson for Lexi even straight up. Yeah I think they see Pederson as the replacement for Kemp. I have to think the Dodgers would rather move as much of that salary as possible and re-allocate it to a Hanley extension.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 28, 2014 -> 03:02 PM) Also, it's cool to see this: http://www.fangraphs.com/zonegrid.aspx?pla...10&view=bat Considering his perceived strengths and weaknesses, you'd think he'd be getting busted in more often, but they are really trying to go down and away. Good amount of meatballs, too. I wonder if those are mostly breaking balls.

Check out these new heatmaps: http://www.fangraphs.com/zonegrid.aspx?pla...10&view=bat Interesting to see that Abreu's batting average is so much higher middle out -- even to the point of being out of the zone. Up and away, really. This seems to support the narrative I've been building in my head that his "sweet spot" is shifted further out than most. Then if you switch over to ISO/P, you see that the power is everywhere. One might even say "errrrywhere." Monster pop, dudes. Monster.

The Sox didn't know anything anyone else didn't know regarding Abreu, they were just in the best position to sign him. No one needed him more, and teams that could outspend them already had long-term 1B solutions.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 28, 2014 -> 02:15 PM) How about a potential deal starting with Baltimore and Dylan Bundy? He is now throwing in the low 90's in extended spring training. I think he goes to the Scrubs in a Shark deal.

Yeah Yankees in the offseason is still my guess. They'll be expecting to buy 2-3 years in Alexei, which is exactly enough time to turn over the farm on a crop of infielders again. He's the perfect productive stopgap for them.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 28, 2014 -> 11:18 AM) It seems peculiar to me that the guy who runs Fangraphs which claims Alexei's performance last year was worth $15.6 million and his performance this season has already been worth $9.8 million, and whose worst performance of his career was worth $8.5 million, doesn't think he has the correct skills to bring back anything major when he is owed $10 million next year with a $10 million option with a $1 million buyout for 2016. Seems he isn't buying what his site is selling. You're completely, completely misinterpreting what he meant. But that's understandable because I'm assuming you don't consume a lot of the site's content. He means that the market pays more for dingers and ribbies, and that guys that hit doubles and play defense are typically underpaid for their contributions. He's essentially saying that we should expcet that Alexei will not return as much as we think is fair.

Holy s***, what a matchup

We all need to remember that hindisght is 20/20. You have to evaluate these decisions based on the information we had when they were made. Like TUC can admit that Dunn has been good and still think it was the right idea to cut him. Like wite can admit Paulino blows and still think it was the right idea to sign him.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 28, 2014 -> 11:27 AM) LOL, so fired up. Easy fella. TUC is all gas ALL THE TIME

I really thought Trayce would take a step forward.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 28, 2014 -> 10:41 AM) That contract scares the s*** out of me. I was nervous about a five, or more, year deal anyway. Seven years is f***ing scary. It's the opt out that makes it a disaster. Basically, the ONLY way it goes to seven years if if he sucks or is hurt. Otherwise they have to give him more to keep him. Crazy bad contract, ESPECIALLY before he threw a pitch in the MLB.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 28, 2014 -> 10:30 AM) If 27 starts over 2 years is being a great pitcher over a long period of time, I think Jimenez and Santana have pretty much blown that away during their careers. We will see the numbers at the end of the season. One thing we know, Paulino isn't helping anyone win this year. The other 2 still have a chance and each have had several good starts. They aren't even the same types of transactions -- the Sox decision NOT to go for Santana/Jimenez was completely unrelated to their decision to sign Paulino. Paulino was a shot-in-the-dark reclamation project. Santana/Jimenez were budget-blowing "final piece of contender" free agent moves. That the latter two have been mostly bad at such high pay rates is indicative of the level of risk inherent in the deals. That combined with the fact that a LOT has gone right with our offense this year even to put us in around .500 is why they were NOT good risks for us to take. It's not like Hahn had the benefit of hindsight. To me, this has been reasonably close to best-case-scenario for the season so far. If this is really a .500 team, then we are ready to start adding pieces as soon as next offseason. I'm not looking at this like I'm disappointed that we didn't take more risks, I'm looking at it that I'm pumped that the guys they got look to be good investments. They had to figure out what they had before risky FA deals on old guys, and thusfar it looks like we're figuring out that we have some real talent.

Santana, Jimenez, and Paulino have all ranged from mediocre to vomit-inducing. They were all gambles to be decent at varying odds, none of them anything like safe. Two of them cost tens of millions of dollars and draft picks, one was practically free. We gambled on the one that was free.