Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Dunt @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 04:31 PM) I really dont understand the Peter Bourjos dicksuck fest. I get he is a great defender, but come on. I think the Bourjos thing has a lot to do with context. An elite defender in CF was what they needed most, and what they needed second most was room for Wong in the infield. They essentially handled their (admittedly small) entire offseason wishlist in one fell swoop.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 03:59 PM) I think that's his ultimate role and I think he has the stuff to be a good one. Still, I'd keep him in the rotation for now and keep him starting and stretched out. I think he can be a starter, but he REALLY needs to work on his command. I would love to see him in AAA learning how to keep the breaking ball down.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 04:16 PM) I would pass. His velocities and stuff didn't impress me when I saw him pitch, and his minor league numbers in the higher levels are pretty mediocre. I think the Sox already DFA'd Liam Hendriks, and then picked him back up. We call him Dylan. Imagine that 1-2 punch at Charlotte though!

Also in the Honorable Mention: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-best-tr...014-off-season/

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 04:11 PM) We would be his 4th team this offseaaon. Nobody wants this guy...or everyone does depending how you look at it. But we seemingly had 2 chances at him befire. What changes now? Nothing, perhaps.

It's AL, so we get priority, right? He hasn't done well in the Majors at all, as we know, but he did destroy the minors. Championship for Charlotte, worst case!

I subscribe to the Szymborski/Sullivan school of pitcher risk: we should always be scared of all pitchers getting injured all the time.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 03:23 PM) Dad's a top shelf mechanic truth be told. A cooper comparison perhaps. Haha, we're driving this one into the ground. Pun intended.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 03:53 PM) So Paulino is blocking Rienzo. Who would have though that? Seriously though, they should groom Rienzo as a set up guy. So we should sign ANOTHER pitcher!

No one mentioning what happened in the session...

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 02:38 PM) On the flipside, a friend of mine bought his son a used car 20 months before his 16th birthday and it's running 6 years later. Low mileage then. Sounds like Abreu, not Santana. Also, Santana will be collecting more miles while you wait for your driver's license.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 01:46 PM) Really think that $48M is going to make a difference between outspending the top tier or not? I don't, but if it did that is the definition of albatross contract. Maybe or maybe not alone. But combined with a couple similar deals, and yes. And the problem with building through free agency is that you have to keep paying those prices. So if Santana adds 2 wins for us in 2015 at that price, where are you going to get the rest? You can only pay market rate for talent so many times before you're bogged down. 31 year-old 3 starters just aren't it for us right now. Maybe they will be in a year or two. But even if we bought now to prepare for a year or two, we're then buying the decline years at the price of the prime years.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 01:35 PM) I am really concerned about the international signing period. The Yankees are supposed to break the bank this summer, go way over their limit and take the penalties that go with it. I read where they basically have already agreed to contracts with 4 or 5 of the top guys. Hopefully that is just rumor, but if true, that is punch to the gut of the White Sox. This concerns me too. Hopefully the Sox will at least be able to focus on one or two guys and leverage their relationships.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 01:35 PM) Now younger pitchers on the market are going to cost a lot more than that. It's doubtful that the Sox can outbid the big spenders for that type of pitcher. Made much MORE doubtful if the Sox spend the money they do have on mediocre guys just for the sake of spending it. That's what I mean when I say that $48m alone won't sink us, but we'll sure wish that $48m was available when we want to get a guy that will really move the needle.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 01:28 PM) What pitcher do you think is worth $48M over the next 4 years to the Sox? None that are available. Theoretically, younger guys with a balance of some established track record and enough upside to mitigate risk.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 01:09 PM) Don't use El Duque. He was pretty awful as a White Sox. He did have one incredible inning. And Freddy when he came back was mediocre at best. If Santana put up the numbers these guys did, if the Sox signed him, you would point out how awful he was. I like Jimenez better than Santana, but Santana eats innings. One thing your saber cohort ripped me for was valuing IP, but a guy that gives you 200 IP near the bottom of your rotation does wonders for your bullpen. IP is a critical input for fWAR. I don't think any SABR-apologists would rip you for valuing it.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 01:15 PM) I've said it countless times because the prices are likely to go up. Be proactive and in the process save money. If Abreau had signed a 6y/$68M deal somewhere else, I'm convinced people would have been happy about it. Some of the same people who think it was a great signing by the Sox. It's not the idea of signing a guy now because he won't be available later that is giving us problems, it's the guys that are available. Abreu is 26 and fills a huge organizational hole at 1B. Santana is 30 and represents a slight short-term upgrade and a very likely long-term problem. I think for the right guy, we wouldn't have issue at $48m + draft pick for a pitcher, but the guys on the market are just not the right guys. If they're the best available over the next few years, then we need a different strategy. If you needed a bullet proof vest but there was no kevlar around, you wouldn't use toilet paper just because it was the best option available for a vest -- you'd try to find a different way to avoid getting shot.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 12:50 PM) Rienzo is going to be in the pen. Paulino, Surkamp are not as good as Santana. We've already established a $48M contract for the Sox is not an issue. But what you HAVEN'T established is why the best use of the $48m (plus an extremely early 2nd round pick) is an aging, inconsistent pitcher on a 99 loss team.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 12:54 PM) Tell me more about the Rays and their success in spending in the draft. It's a damn shame when the Sox can't afford to outspend the Rays . . . As far as the Yankees, Red Sox, and Dodgers go, pay no attention to the money they spend on payroll. Also pay no attention to the trades they make or the fact that a lot of that international money IS part of the payroll. I'm not understanding what argument you're trying to make here.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 12:47 PM) Lol. Why so angry? Who the f*** is John McDonald? I like the "towards the end of his career" lay down. So, you're saying Griffey regressed as he aged and was riddled with injuries? Brilliant. What else? My original Yankees post specifically was in regard to the "last decade," and I said as much. You know who I would take over Jeter? Ozzie Smith. A premium defender, at a the most premium position that could also hit a little. Griffey fluctuated between "below average" and "horrendous" defensively for the last THIRTEEN YEARS of his career. Jeter vs. Smith is an interesting debate. Jeter wins by fWAR, but only by 6-8ish after this year, and defensive wins are much less reliable pre-UZR, so there's a good chance Smith defense was either under or overvalued.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 12:33 PM) E) None of the above. This. Keep your draft pick, overspend on the draft/international markets, and put the $35m+ toward a better player when you're closer to contending

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 12:05 PM) Griffey wasn't a top defender? Arod wasn't a top defender? They were both among the most complete players of all time. Those are awful examples. Jeter's rings are mostly from when he was a decent defender, back when the Yankees weren't building teams on a calculator. Griffey was a top defender from about 94 - 97. After that he was a liability.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 11:55 AM) Can't win a game without scoring. One player effects a game on offense far greater than he ever could on defense and players have a hell of a better chance sticking in the majors by being an all bat, no glove player instead of an all glove, no bat player. I mean honestly, how many HOFers are there because of their defense? Even the ones that are, most were solid with the bat. Many, many HOFers are there solely because of their bat with no regards to their defense. While I'm not a Jeter fan, his bat was far more beneficial to the Yankees than his defense was detrimental and that's not even debatable. Hence the 73 career fWAR. That's one of the beautiful things about linear weights-based stats: they give us a common denominator for offense and defense. That's why it's so interesting to see Frank and Jeter almost identical with all of that applied.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 11:50 AM) Has anyone ever added up a team's individual WARs at the end of a season and posted the actual WAR standings? To me that would be the most interesting and would show how truly accurate WAR is as a major tool. I refer to it myself, but if it truly is accurate, the numbers should add up pretty close to actual results. No, it wouldn't work, because that ISN'T what it's trying to do. The purpose of WAR and its components are to strip context to get to something that resembles "true talent" for the purpose of finding a number that is more predictive. Actual records are (and should be) heavily context-dependent. The best way to compare and actual record with a WAR record would be to roughly identify who overplayed or underplayed their "true talent." This could imply either luck or something like poor roster construction, poor management, etc.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 19, 2014 -> 11:52 AM) Absolutely. My biggest problem with sabermetrics is how/when they are applied. Alright, I'll work on that tonight. The biggest thing to look into, IMO, is the concept of linear weights used to measure context-neutral events, as that is at the root of everything that goes into WAR.