Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 08:04 AM) With all the caveats said though...that low number for Eaton does mean that he didn't tear CF apart when he was out there. He could rapidly improve, that number could be dominated by a few mistakes...but it's not 100% useless. Correct. It isn't that UZR isn't "accurate" at small sample sizes, it's that it isn't "predictive" at small sample sizes.

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 06:49 PM) I see, thanks guys. What about defensive WAR? Defensive WAR is calculated using UZR

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 04:22 PM) The biggest area of concern is not enough quality innings from the starters. I think there are a TON of unknowns on this team -- I'd put Sp, bullpen, offense, and defense as equally concerning. Lots of new players, lots of guys expected to bounce back to some degree. It's really a huge unknown.

It CAN contend. It just probably won't. But there's a chance, and that'll make it fun to watch. Better still, you'll be able to enjoy it knowing that the team on the field is going to keep getting better instead of falling off a cliff as a last hurrah like last year. Next year is going to be a better year for the fans, very little doubt in my mind.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 17, 2013 -> 12:58 AM) Japanese pitchers tend to do better outside of the spotlight. Irabu ended up killing himself, Igawa was a disaster in NY, Hideo Nomo was successful for a couple of seasons until hitters figured him out. Then you have the Dice-K fiasco. The under-the-radar guys like Iwakuma with the Mariners have tended to fare better. Of course, it helps to pitch at Safeco or in the NL West. Kuroda's been decent, but the only contract that has worked out (so far) was Darvish, and it's not like he's single-handedly led the Rangers back to the promised land, either. One thing he has done was improve...instead of starting off well and then nosediving or getting injured. There's not anywhere near enough of a track record to make a generalization like that.

http://www.fangraphs.com/not/gavin-floyd-m...vyawn-floyawnd/

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 06:05 PM) I thought he improved a bit in the 2nd half, but definitely a work in progress. Until the Morneau deal, I thought they might move him to 1B, but it seems the Rockies believe he can be adequate. The bat will play somewhere. Indeed, but with our roster, we really, really need it to play at C

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 05:45 PM) Looking at Javy's WAR numbers versus what we all saw in his performance will make one question the very concept of WAR. I happen to think the FG method overvalues/assumes luck a bit too much, and that the "truest" performance evaluation is somewhere in the middle. It is, and they adamantly and frequently admit that. But it is the most accurate system that exists currently; there are fewer outliers like Javy Vazquez than exist with others.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 04:30 PM) What's the consensus here? If we had to pick one, Grandal or Rosario? Grandal for me. Lots of new attempts at measuring C defense have rated Rosario as either one of, or in some cases, the absolute worst defensive C in baseball.

It's difficult to argue that the Sox shouldn't be heavily involved in due diligence for Tanaka. He should be considered an option. Whether or not they choose to enter the bidding depends ENTIRELY on their internal assessment of his abilities and upside -- an assessment to which we have no insight and which may or may not be completely different from public or even internal club consensus. If they don't get him, it won't necessarily be because they didn't think they had the payroll space.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 17, 2013 -> 10:00 PM) I'm really starting to like the idea of Jason Castro. A solid left handed catcher that could hit too all fields and good defensively. What would Sox have to give up to get him? There's just absolutely no reason for the Astros to move him. He is the thing they need the most -- an MLB-ready building block with several years of team control.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 03:07 PM) I was thinking it was different in the past. Oh well, not the first time I've been wrong. But undoubtedly the last!

QUOTE (Knuckles @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 03:18 PM) Give him the Beckham treatment. Keep him around forever no matter what he does?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 01:59 PM) Javy Vazquez is my favorite pitcher to look at Yeah -- Matt Cain, Ricky Nolasco, Zack Greinke are fun ones, too.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 01:48 PM) When used to describe performance, I have no problem with it whatsoever. You just have to realize that is all it's doing - for the most part, it doesn't care how you got to that 2.75 ERA, just that you got there. fWAR says "HOLD UP YOU LUCKY f***" and does some correction for luck It's more accurate, I think, to describe it as attempting to strip influence of defense. Which, it is lucky to have a good defense, but it's more than just normalizing BABIP. Because FIP based metrics are more stable, they correlate better year to year, and are thus a better measure of a pitcher's true talent. If you're evaluating player value for the purposes of rosterbation, fWAR is the way to go. If you want to find out who contributed most on the field whether they earned it or not, use bWAR.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 01:40 PM) Or because it is easily accessible due to b-r. It's not any more or less accessible than FanGraphs. But don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing you of anything, I was just trying to defend Chili's blanket hatred of bWAR.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 15, 2013 -> 12:49 AM) This is exactly who Frank Thomas was to the fans who followed him closest. I'm sure many of you can attest as well with similar stories. Frank was the reason I became a Sox fan. Being a born and raised Southern Californian, there really was no other reason for a 7 year old boy to latch onto the Chicago White Sox. All it took was one ESPN highlight of him mashing a Mike Mussina meatball out to the left field concourse. And so a childhood obsession began. Whenever the Sox were in town playing the Angels, my dad took work off... Bringing me with him for a series long indulgence of modern day Cracker Jack glory. My pops was a pretty smart guy - the first thing he taught me about the spectator side of Baseball was, "get to the park early." Real early. Four hours early. We would wait for players to arrive and get their signatures with a black felt tip Sharpie pen. It was a crap shoot I'd soon learn. Some players would quickly sign for a couple of people without breaking stride or taking their sun glasses off. Others would treat fans as if they where air and walk right by. The first time I saw Frank Thomas walk up with his six foot five frame holding two hundred and something pounds of muscle - I figured it would be a tough autograph to pull off. He always was dressed as a consummate professional. A full suit with a coat. Nice slacks and a fleece sweater. Not flashy or arrogant but rather, as a man who was there to do a job. Being that he was one of the most talented players on the planet - I expected him to just blow by all the fans. They swarmed up quickly... Clearly everyone had really been waiting for him. It was a shock seeing what happened: Frank walked up to the entrance door. Removed his glasses. Turned around and smiled. He said two words, "Line up!" and then resumed back to smiling. About fifty or a hundred people would stand in a single file line. We all fell into formation. The Big Hurt stood there and signed every autograph. He shook any outstretched hand. He posed for any picture requested. He treated everyone as if they where equals. The respect we had for him as a baseball player was returned to us tenfold as fans. The first time I saw this system - I figured we just came on the right day. Got lucky. It was a priceless moment. I've no clue who won or lost the actual game but I'll never forget that moment. After the stadium emptied, my dad turned to me and asked if I wanted to wait for the players again - this time catching them as they exited. To a seven year old, "sure!" is the only possible response. And so we waited. About two hours later, Frank appeared at the player door, yet again in his professional attire. Everyone saw him and lined up. The man signed autographs for at least another hour. Amazing. And so began a family tradition. For nearly the next decade - we always saw the Sox play in Anaheim. More often than not, Frank would sign for hours before or after a game... Sometimes both. Unbelievable. Consistent. Humble. Amazing. Powerful. One of a kind. Those are words that not only define his career on the field but they also are appropriate descriptions of his character. Two years ago, right before getting married and starting a family of my own - I had a chance to save up some cash and surprise my dad with a trip to Chicago. It was our first trip to The Homeland after all of those years on enemy grounds. I wrote to Brooks Boyer and told him a little about my Dad and his selfless dedication to me during all of those Sox away games. After so many years waiting around for autographs and seeing the Angles beat our Sox - my pops was finally treated to a surprise on a new level. Brooks instructed me to meet him at the field on our last game of a 7 game set. We arrived an hour before gates opened to the public. He greeted us - shook my dads hand... And walked us into the executive offices. He walked us down under the stadium, by the players locker rooms, and up through the umpire tunnel. We arrived behind home plate. The look on my Dads face was priceless. He had no clue any of this would happen. Standing behind home plate, on the dirt of US Cellular Field... My old man cracked a smile like Frank Thomas always showed and teared up a bit. Bad. Ass. Thanks Frank Thomas for introducing me to the White Sox. Thanks for absolutely crushing baseballs. For inspiring me to play the game. For showing me how to handle success with grace. For affording me the opportunity to know gratitude and show appreciation on a Big Hurt scale. Thanks for leading me to the best organization in all of sports. An organization where everyone from the top down treats each other like a family. Thanks for being a legend of mythic proportion that can now be passed down to a son of my own once he's born this March. He'll be three weeks old when the 2014 season opens this year. He'll be wrapped in his first Sox jersey - watching his first game with Daddy. Here's to hoping that by 2021 - when I go wait around with my boy at first first ball game - that some now unknown player will treat us with so much dignity. I doubt there will ever again be a player of such a Big Hurt magnitude. But hey, here's to hoping... Right. Frank Thomas is already in the Hall of Fame to me. Period. So this is what happens when hi8is doesn't just reply with "Poop."

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 08:38 AM) Just because you don't like a stat doesn't make it wrong. While I also like fWAR better than bWAR (especially regarding pitchers), the people who developed bWAR know a hell of a lot more about advanced statistics than some random guy on a message board and should not be discounted just because you don't like their methods. I think if you're going to use bWAR, especially for pitchers, you have to defend why it makes sense in context. Most of the time, when people use it, they do so because it's way higher or lower than the more commonly used fWAR number and so it fits their pre-determined opinions.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 12:57 PM) TRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADE

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 08:46 AM) It's one more piece of evidence. Not as valuable as others, meaningless when evaluating some pitchers as people have pointed out. But I wouldn't reject any facts. Especially when the wins do not flow with the rest of the stats. I think your premise is spot on, Tex, but the problem with W-L as a piece of evidence is that it tells you more about the team performance than the pitcher's performance. And if you spend time trying to analyze it with other numbers to try to strip defensive and opponent context, you quickly realize that the W-L number itself isn't adding anything to the conversation -- the other numbers are. It's more of an obstacle than anything. If every time you talk about W-L you immediately have to look at everything else to decide how 'accurate' an indicator of performance it is for a certain pitcher, by the time you contextualize the metric, you've done most of the work evaluating the pitcher -- you're really spending time evaluating the number rather than using the number as a tool. There's a ton of value in using all available information as evidence, but there's also plenty of bad information that translates to bad evidence. W-L is misleading, to some degree, almost every single time. It's bad information. It's easy to overlook, but remember that although a Pitcher Win is called the same thing as a Team Win, they are completely different metrics. Team Wins: "Number of times a team outscored it opponent over the course of a game. Ultimate decider of the champion" Pitcher Wins: "Number of times a specific starting pitcher, having pitched at least 5 innings in a particular game, left the game while his team was in the lead and able to ultimately win the game without subsequently giving up and regaining the lead later" To disdain the Pitcher Win is not to make an argument that other metrics are more important than Team Wins. Criticizing it feels like garbage because they are branded with the same word, but they are really entirely different things.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/12/phil...assignment.html He was just dropped for a reason -- he's had a couple disappointing seasons. But he's got a high pedigree and we have so little in the system that this is the most obvious fit of the offseason. When Rick Hahn acquires him soon, this will be the thread of discussion Have faith in the Hahn!

Dunn will probably have more trade value at the deadline than he does now

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 17, 2013 -> 03:33 PM) I think W/L still has some value. More often than not, due to rotations, good pitchers face other good pitchers. Despite overall numbers, some pitchers have the propensity to give up big hits. Some pitchers rise to the occasion better than others. Some guys are just "winners." Not everything in the game is tangible. There's no doubt in my mind that momentum exists in sports and there really isn't a stat to explain it. Occasionally you'll see pitchers that win a lot of games without the best peripherals. Some of those guys just know what it takes to get a win. You can measure a pitcher's propensity to give up big hits much more accurately by looking at his performance in high leverage situations. The problem with "just knowing how to win" is that it doesn't correlate year to year. Guys that get a lot of Ws despite pitching badly do not continue to do so, implying that their success was incidental. This is not surprising considering that W-L includes offensive and defensive performance that cannot be controlled by the pitcher. There are absolutely intangible qualities to good baseball players that cannot be measured. Meaning W-L is among that stats that do not measure them.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 17, 2013 -> 03:07 PM) So if there is a correlation between getting a win and pitching a good game, a lot of wins would indicate you pitched a lot of good games. There are also times guys give up 5 runs and pitch pretty well, and times when they give up 2 runs and don't pitch as well. EX. Wind blowing out a Wrigley, it's a bandbox, blowing in, it's tough to get it out of there. I believe it usually evens out, but occassionally it does not. I'll take a guy with 15 wins and a 5+ ERA. Generally that will be a #4 or #5 starter, and it shows you were probably over .500 in their starts. And it shows they probably went a decent length in the game resting the bullpen a bit.That's pretty good. Except when it's wrong about all those things. You can measure how well he pitched more accurately by using almost literally every other pitching statistic. Instead of settling for "probably went a decent length in the game resting the bullpen," for example, why not look at IP/GS and measure "definitely went a decent length in the game resting the bullpen." W-L is sometimes right about guys and it's just as frequently wrong. That would be fine if it was the best way we had to evaluate pitchers, but it isn't. Every single question you want answered by W-L can be answered better by another statistic.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 17, 2013 -> 02:39 PM) Because there is a correlation between a pitcher having a good game and a win and a pitcher having a bad game and a loss. However, that only makes it a useful stat if there aren't already better stats to evaluate whether the pitcher had a set of good games or bad games. This. The problem with W-L is that it tells us nothing about a pitcher's performance that other stats don't tell us with more precision and accuracy. Its day has passed.