Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Mar 13, 2014 -> 09:29 AM) I would like to start a discussion about working baserunning statistics into other more commonly used stats, rather than a conversion to Runs and ultimately WAR. Specifically, I'd like to see baserunning applied to slugging percentage, a stat that resonates across generations. The idea is this: A single plus a stolen base is a certain % of a Double, a double plus a stolen base is a certain % of a triple, etc. Neglecting the effects of pitchers' pick-off throws, distraction to pitchers/distraction to hitters that a basestealing threat causes, the factors I've thought of so far that would determine the percentages are as follows: 1. The value of a stolen base after a single is less valuable than a double because a single moves baserunners less than a double, therefore yielding fewer RBI. How much value does this remove? 2. The value of a stolen base after a single is less valuable than a double also because the stolen base always happens later in the inning than the single did. This brings in a different type of base stealing efficiency in that not only does the success % matter, but also how many pitches to home plate were required before the SB took place. Just as a leadoff double is more likely to cross home plate than a two out double, the lesser the portion of the inning that transpires during the SB process the more valuable the SB is. This factor can easily be determined by looking at a single pitch as a typical portion of an inning. A single pitch is probably something like 1/18th or 1/20th, 5 or 5.5% 3. Similarly, how many outs are left in the inning when the SB or CS takes place, affects the value of each. 4. How to account for SB's added to a walk, within this framework. And there's countless other factors, that I undoubtedly haven't considered. Like many of you, I'll ballpark ratios in my head, such as K/BB for pitchers just by eyeballing the raw core numbers. Hypothetically, let's say Eaton steals 40 bases this year and gets caught 10 times for a clean 80%. 20 successful steals while being caught 10 times would have put him at the 66% threshold (roughly 2/3rds), leaving 20 SB's to the positive. Multiplying that 20 by the percentage determined from the factors described above yields a number that can be added to total bases, and an easy modification of slugging. No solutions here, just spitballin'. And if all this exists already, well, I'm a goof , but I want the saber movement to evolve toward the most accessible stats whenever possible. Very interesting ideas. Regarding #1 and #3, they usually get around this by using linear weights. So the value of the extra base is the average run value of the event in all possible situations, weighted by frequency of occurrence. I would guess that the difference in baserunning movement between a single and a double is negligible. RUnners in scoring position will score anyway, except in a few instances of a short or infield single, and scoring from first on a double is probably similarly rare. Further mitigating factors would be the amount of "stress" added to the pitcher (your factor #2) for having to worry about the runner on first before he steals. No idea how to quantify this, but I'd guess that the combination would make the gap between the single/SB and the double much smaller, maybe even negligible. I'm wondering if a simple "start" to something like this would be to add SB to a players Total Bases, and then calculate SLG as you normally would. This new Stan Bahnsen Slugging Percentage (sbSLG) wouldn't totally account for the #1 factor, but if I'm right that the difference is small, it might be a good approximation. As good, at least, as OPS as a proxy for wOBA, I'd think.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Mar 13, 2014 -> 09:44 AM) I love the thought but's let remember how greg was 100% anti-Rios immediately and as a result he looked like an absolute genius during the "all-in" year. There was no need for him to have been negative then, he should have been supportive. But still maybe you're right, and he was negative about Rios then because he needed to join the party, needed to get as many people on his side as possible for what was soon to become his Alamo for Ozzie. But Greg is terrific regardless and it is important to remember all the great things he's said about Mark, AJ, and the Hawkaroo over all these years. And if those comments were meant for balance then what a sad f***in state man, seriously. It's not about being "right," it's about being contrary.

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Mar 13, 2014 -> 08:52 AM) Has him at 12/1, sounds reasonable. http://www.csnchicago.com/white-sox/oddsma...young-candidate But Buccholz at 10/1 is patently ridiculous - those are the odds that he'll make 20 starts in any season for the rest of his career. It sort of makes sense if you think that the record of the team significantly affects the voting. If so, Buccholz would get a ton of bonus points simply by being the best pitcher on the reigning champs.

What if greg775 was just one of Hahn's Assistant GMs trying to neutralize the PR around all the worst things that happen to the White Sox? Think about it: he supports everything the rest of us hate, and dumps on everything we like. He's not a troll, he's an entity of universal balance.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Mar 13, 2014 -> 08:20 AM) #1) People within the Sox organization are aware of this board and do read these threads, but Rick Hahn is not one of them. He doesn't say "Hold on Kevin, I've got to check Soxtalk to see what those guys think I should do." This is a fun thing to think about. "Ok, ok, greg775 likes him, so we know we'll have the fans from Lawrence behind us. Ahh s***, here's a lengthy one from witesoxfan, get ready for a dumpfest. WHo gave that asshole access to FanGraphs anyway? Oh it's free? Oh. Well whatever."

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Mar 13, 2014 -> 07:49 AM) Sox are trying to compete now? With who, the Twins? Astros? This team doesn't have a shot. Don't forget that the FO needs to make the player believe they are trying to compete. I know I'm usually the guy that poops all over the "veteran presence" type of stuff, but if the FO believes that Dunn is a good clubhouse presence and/or leader, they are also aware of the message that is sent to the young guys when you dump a big name guy for nothing right before the season starts. He has value to the roster because he does make it better this year, but more importantly he make the players THINK the roster is better. I would not be in favor of ACQUIRING Dunn to do this at his price. But since we've already committed to pay him, I don't see an issue with keeping around to do it. This is assuming that he isn't taking PT from a kid who legitmately needs PT. It's a complicated equation, this having Dunn-ness, and I could probably be convinced that dumping him has more pros than cons, but I don't think it's an obvious black-hole negative like you do. There are arguments to keep him, it's just not easy to figure out which arguments are the best because they all include intangibles.

QUOTE (glangon @ Mar 13, 2014 -> 05:12 AM) Dear Seattle, Please will you trade James Paxton for Dayan Viciedo. If you need more outfielders, we can throw in Keenyn Walker, Jared Mitchell and Trayce Thompson. If you need more pitchers, we can throw in Deunte Heath, Nestor Molina and Dylan Axelrod. yours hopingly Rick Hahn Thanks to injuries (Iwakuma, Walker), it looks like they need James Paxton in the OD rotation much more than they need Viciedo, unfortunately.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Mar 12, 2014 -> 03:39 PM) I'm sure I could have bolstered my point by using some statistic, but I did not feel it necessary. As a result, no one believed you.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 12, 2014 -> 02:01 PM) I'm hopeful that the Steverson hiring is the first step in an orgnazition-wide hitting philosophy. Doesn't have to be as extreme as the Oakland A's Moneyball-era philosophy either, but simply determine the high-level traits you want in a hitter and start coaching them toward those goals at a young age. Obviously every player is different, but I think it's pretty clear that even a naturally aggressive hitter like Viciedo should have spent more time working on his selectiveness in the minors even if he was otherwise successful offensively. Now he's facing really good pitching and is forced to make significant adjustments to his approach at the major league and that is usually a recipe for failure. Preach the right traits, coach them early, and hopefully you avoid extended growing pains and have less prospects ultimately flop. The problem is he was hitting well in AAA. I think it's hard to get a guy to commit to a change when he's seeing success with his bad habits.

What are the knocks on Gatewood? Every time I see a write-up, he sounds like a monster, yet some people are showing him falling to like 20.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 12, 2014 -> 12:53 PM) One of my worries coming into this season is that since Garcia actually hit "well" in Chicago he won't feel like he needs to change his approach at all. You and me both. This was on my mind a lot at the end of last season, but it seemed cruel to rain on everyone's parade by whining about it on here, since we all had so little to be excited about. Unfortunately, it might be that he has to crash for a couple months first before he's willing to really listen much. I'm jsut as worried that HE thinks he needs to change nothing than the management.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 12, 2014 -> 12:24 PM) I think Steverson is the real wild card here with Viciedo. He preaches selectiveness and his experience is working with young players. Whether or not he can get through to him remains to be seen, but I truly believe he is the right man for the job and would like to see him given the opportunity to work with Dayan in 2014. I've said it before, but even small improvements in selectiveness could do wonders for Viciedo's offensive game. This is, IMO, the best reason for hope for both Viciedo and Garcia. Sort of like a change of scenery came to them instead of the other way around. Maybe this dude gets through to them -- it's refreshing, at least, to see Hahn making a good assessment of the type of message his hitters need. It at least shows that he has a good grasp of his team. Seems like there are several front offices that don't have a clue.

lol, POTY

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Mar 12, 2014 -> 07:09 AM) But he also hasn't shown the projected power yet either. Viciedo put up 25+ homers at age 23. ...and at age 24, gave us a clinic on how 20% HR/FB is not sustainable. Here is the list of players since 2000 that maintained a HR/FB rate of 20% or greater, min 600 PA: Barry Bonds Manny Ramirez I'm going to go out on a limb and bet you one hundred gazillion dollars that he never reaches that HR/FB rate again over a full season (500+ PA) -- which means that if he's going to get to 25 HR again, he will have to learn how to hit first. Which, consequently, also explains how he was able to hit 25 HR in this offensive environment and still manage a below-league average offensive year overall at 98 wRC+. By the way, I sincerely hope Viciedo has an offensive Renaissance and you guys feed me s*** all season.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 11:45 AM) Can you give me a link or description of where in in their website to go? I got to seasonal totals but couldn't figure out how to do it by position. If you prefer sortable rather than seeing them all at once: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...=1990&ind=0

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 05:43 PM) Garcia is in his age 23 season, do we really need to worry about him slowing down anytime soon? Besides, Garcia has proven he can carry a high average in the big leagues, something Viciedo has yet to even sniff. It's one thing to be a 290 hitter with little patience and mediocre power (as Garcia has been so far in his young career), it's another thing entirely to be a 255 hitter with little patience and mediocre power (as Tank has been so far in his young career). Garcia is not Viciedo and Viciedo is not Garcia, don't conflate the value of the two because they appear to have similar lack of patience. Oliver really likes Garcia, projecting him for over 12 WAR over the next 4 years. That's a pretty damn good player, if he has a good season this year trading him should be the farthest thing on Hahn's mind, he should thinking about locking him up long term. Garcia has proven he can carry a decent average (.283) over 250 PAs on the strength of a .319 BABIP. And still end up with a 97 wRC+ because of an ugly .309 OBP. Garcia has a ton of improvement to make, both offensively and defensively, to become a good player -- he hasn't "proven" anything. The difference is that he's got 1000 fewer PAs of bad than Viciedo. Basically, he hasn't shown an inability to adjust yet, so we can have more hope with him.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 03:35 PM) Yes. Garcia put up a .370 BABIP with the White Sox. He swung at a ton of bad pitches and blooped a lot of them over the 2b in August. In September, he put up numbers that were more "normal" for how he was doing; hit .256 with a .673 OPS. Now to be clear...you don't necessarily have to "take the walk" to be effective at hitting. You can be a free swinger, but you have to do so in areas close to the strike zone or areas where you can actually do damage. Yes! Keep preaching this!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 02:13 PM) Not even a tangible difference in the number of walks a guy gets? It believe -- don't hold me to it -- that in Baseball Between the Numbers they showed a significant difference in walks that a guy gets when they bat in front of a pitcher, but that was it. Look that up, wite! I'll forget when I get home.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 03:19 PM) http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/yea...e/type/expanded http://espn.go.com/mlb/player/stats/_/id/30103/dayan-viciedo 3.64 P/PA in the second half (post ASB) in 2012. It was 3.69 for all of 2012. It was up to 3.82 P/PA in 2013. This is why we keep statistics Nice! So he took more pitches AND swung at more garbage last year. Curious.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 02:42 PM) They're not going to challenge him until he can continously prove he's going to let pitches that are unhittable go past him. This ^

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 02:28 PM) This is the absolute most important part and about the only area where you and I disagree. I saw Viciedo as a patient hitter last year. It was only for about a 7-10 day stretch, but I saw it and it was amazing. And the only reason he was so patient was because it hurt to swing the bat, so he had to do it selectively. I'm sure they have, but why not try and work this method from that angle? "Pretend it hurts to swing the bat." He was taking pitches, popping outside fastballs to the right center gap, yanking inside fastballs down the line and into the outfield, and drawing walks when he wasn't getting those pitches. And then he suddenly feels better and OH YEA BRO I CAN JACK THIS BALL OFF THE GROUND INTO THE GULF swinging strike 3. I'm really, really, really hoping Abreu's mindset wears off on him a little bit. (oh, and obviously we disagree because you essentially do not believe he will while I do believe he will, but it's merely opinion and all we have to go on is the facts and the facts say he has gotten worse. I'm also a Bills fan, so eternally the optimist, always the loser) This is actually what makes me most afraid for him -- I believe I've seen him legitimately try to be selective too. 'twas most of the second half of 2012, when it looked, to me, like he was really REALLY trying to get deeper into counts. The problem was that it looked hapless. He was taking great pitches, then guess swinging at bad ones still. And it is THIS period of time that made me believe that it isn't a matter of patience with him, but rather a lack of ability to recognize pitches. If my hunch is correct, then he probably isn't even coachable. Anyway, I don't bring that up very often because I can't prove that he was actually trying to be patient, it just seemed like it to me. Do you know where to find avg. pitches per AB sortable by season splits?

QUOTE (Jake @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 12:12 PM) A player who has put up two full seasons of high 90s wRC+ is not exactly far from being productive. Dayan only has to get marginally better to be worth keeping around indefinitely. An infielder or elite defender that puts that up isn't far, sure. But a corner OF that is a defensive and baserunning liability needs to hit better than that. That's why that 96 wRC+ from last year, for example, led to a -0.1 fWAR. Also, barring stark improvement in his OF defense this year, the guy is destined to be a DH as soon as 2015. The AL league average DH last year was 111 wRC+. Also, this again ignores his startlingly declining plate discipline. His ticket to good playerdom must be paved with a change in philosophy, not simply a few more reps of his current plan.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 10:35 AM) So...lineup protection...some stat heads say that is a myth, but how can you know that? You can not correlate two unrelated situations as evidence, and since baseball is so situational, there are very few situations that are replicated for various players. I would agree that is has very little effect for elite players, but for marginal players I feel it is a very real thing. As a pitcher, there are certain players you want to beat you by putting the ball in play and others that you want to pitch around. If you have Beckham and Abreu coming up back to back, you are going to be more aggressive with Beckham as the result of contact is not as dangerous as if Abreu (theoretically) were to make contact. The research that has been done on this that debunks it has been centered on observing Pitch F/X data for players who have had large discrepancies in their "lineup protection" over short periods of time, typically in situations where a player is traded or lost to free agency. No one has been able to find any difference in the types of pitches that these players see. Here's a Dave Cameron article examining pitch types to McCutchen over four years: http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/...lb/refresh/true The general conclusion is that scary hitters are scary regardless -- that even with a good hitter behind him, you don't want to serve it up to a guy that can hurt you. Guys like Abreu don't see intentional gopher balls no matter who is behind them, because one swing can affect the scoreboard in every situation. HR hitters don't get fewer strikes with no protection because they are already getting the fewest strikes possible. Lineup protection is just another one of those things that makes sense intuitively, but for which no actual evidence exists. If you can show an effect for it, you'd be discovering something new. But for now, there's no evidence of anyone actually being pitched to differently based on who hits behind him (pitchers excluded). Seems like it should be there, but it just isn't.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 08:51 AM) Thats a little overly dramatic, he was tremendous vs LHP and had a lot of issues with RHP in his first full season. Last season he was greatly improved against RHP. The pieces are all there to show that he can be successful, he showed power two years ago, showed the ability to adapt his approach last season, now hopefully he can put it altogether. He is still fairly young and the indicators are that he is learning to play baseball at this level, and with that there will be growing pains. He is never gonna be a guy that has a good K/BB rate and he never has been. But as a rebuilding team, he is the type of player you need to keep until he completely flames out in case he is able to figure it out. And greatly, greatly horribad against lefties. As I stated a few posts ago, his improvement against righties went from "replacement level shortstop (72 wRC+)" to "slightly below league average (98 wRC+)." Meanwhile, his decline against lefties went from "MONSTER (173 wRC+)" to "Gordon Beckham (89 wRC+)." When he improved his splits, he didn't raise his performance against righties to meet his performance against lefites, he dropped his performance against lefties to match righties. Which was bad. Also, where are these sign that he adapted his approach? His O-swing, which was already bad, got WORSE last year. The average player swings at less than one third of the pitches he sees outside of the strikezone. Viciedo jumped three percentage points to 42.5% last year! If he's adapting, it's to swing at more bad pitches. Once again, I'm not saying he can't, but all the signs point to him NOT figuring it out. That's all I'm saying. You can have a good feeling about him, or you can think that he's worth a shot in the dark anyway, and I can see where you're coming from. I can even get behind the latter reason a little bit. But based on literally everything we can observe from the seats, it will be a reversal of ALL of his trends -- from pitch selection, to batted ball profile, to actual results on the field -- if he turns into an above average player.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 11, 2014 -> 07:03 AM) And being a converted 3B, it is possible Ravelo could become that. There just isn't enough data available to really evaluate his defense at first base yet, and he's still relatively new to the position. Also, he wouldn't need to be as good as those guys to be a very solid player.