Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 02:40 PM) The 2005 White Sox were 17th in MLB in wRC+. This year's team is 29th. We were 8th in 2004. We are currently 28th in UBR (ultimate baserunning, which assesses the amount runs earned/given up on the bases via speed, stolen bases, blunders, etc). We were 12th in 2005. 16th in 2004. The 2005 club led baseball in pitching WAR. We are third in baseball this year. We were 17th in 2004. In 2005, we were 8th in team UZR. This year, we're 23rd (worth mentioning we were 10th last year, so there is a reason to believe we can field a decent fielding club). 5th in 2004. We have the pitching it takes to win a WS. We don't have the position players. The players who have cost us most defensively, per UZR: Dunn, De Aza, Viciedo, Konerko, Keppinger, Beckham. As you make Dunn your DH and eventually get rid of him, we should improve defense at that position. Konerko also gone. Crazy that we've given away well over twice as many runs with 1st baseman defense than any other position, relative to the average defenders at those positions. I think De Aza has had a weird season and we can reasonably assume he improves defensively, since he has been an average centerfielder throughout the rest of his career. Viciedo was better last year as well and I think he will continue to just be a slightly negative LF. Keppinger is not going to continue to play much second base for us, where he's cost us the most runs. Beckham has never been looked upon kindly by UZR, but his poor defensive play when he came off the DL has dropped it much lower than normal. I'd expect that to pick back up. Worst baserunners, per UBR: Konerko, Keppinger, Dunn, Flowers This entire stat is weighed down by PK, who's had one of the worst UBR seasons I've ever seen. Keppinger is well below career norms, not that anyone here would shed a tear if he were moved. Dunn is slow. Flowers won't be running the bases for us much in the future. Worst hitters, per wRC+: Keppinger, Phegley, Gimenez, Flowers, Ramirez, Konerko Keppinger's season has been really dreadful. The Phegley/Gimenez/Flowers trio has been really bad and Flowers has been the best of the bunch. I think we're all hopeful and somewhat confident that Phegley eventually outproduces all of them and maybe by a great deal. Let's hope. Alexei is Alexei - his offense among shortstops isn't all that bad, 17th out of 26 SS w/ 250 PA's and is of course leading our team in WAR on the strength of his defense. Paulie sucks, I think you see a theme here. I think as we break it down, we see where to seek improvement. We need to get Dunn off first base where his defense is nearly canceling out his offense. We need Paulie to retire. Keppinger has to either be his old self, go, or ride the pine. We need production out of the catching position. Those are the most efficient places to improve the team. Unfortunately, our top prospect plays the same position as the guy tied for the lead on our team in WAR. This is why you can't simply dump Rios, you need to try to move Rios' production to another position(s). Avisail can be pretty good in RF and it won't improve our team because we have to subtract our best player to get Avisail out there. Nice post

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 02:15 PM) One thing worth thinking about though is that "No plan at the plate" is a mental issue that can be changed with coaching. A guy can develop a plan at the plate. Paul Konerko dramatically improved his plan at the plate with time. "No plan at the plate" is being stated there like it's a genetic issue, like one of his arms is 30 centimeters shorter than the other one. You are right. However, I think that poor plate discipline can be either "no plan at the plate" or "cannot recognize pitches fast enough." The former is coachable, the latter may not be. I personally struggle to be able to tell which one it is when watching guys on TV. Presumably, the coaching staff has a way better idea of this from talking to the players and seeing them practice, but if they think they are getting guys that can be coached out of their hackiness, it sure doesn't seem to be working

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 02:15 PM) There's also a great future Sox board which I rarely check. Some fans (the baseball draft is a snoozefest IMO) don't see much difference between the first pick and the third or fourth. I'm tired of the jokes about getting the No. 1 pick like you guys are of me blasting Rios.To want the team to lose and to mention the season ending series with Houston like it's a big deal is pretty strange to me. I care about the games in August and September not the draft. Even Strasburg, the great American hero, has been human. No one pick is going to excite me that much. You're right greg, maybe everyone here should try to post what you want to read.

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 02:10 PM) Manto has presided over Adam's K rate declining in consecutive seasons. Well, in 2011, it declined from a career worst 35% to a second career worst 34%, and 2012's 29% is still higher than every year before his disastrous 2010. Also, while his K rate has technically declined, Manto has also presided over Adam's OBP and overall offensive production declining.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 01:55 PM) It's difficult to be this bad. With Sale sucking today you have to wonder what is going on. You guys are ridiculous with this draft talk. It's embarrassing IMO. I was telling a group of sports fans about this board and how Sox fans are all excited about getting the No. 1 pick and they laughed their asses off. Who cares about the baseball draft when our team is shockingly terrible? I'm sure Cleveland fans feel the joke is on them after sweeping us again and being a game out. I love you Jose, but that's grade school. I think everyone is half-joking. Those that aren't are just looking for a silver lining. Is there anything wrong with that? You should stop accusing people of wanting the team to be bad, because it isn't true. Everyone here wishes we were contending.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 01:54 PM) While I do think it would be hilarious if people cheered at the park for the Astros, it would also be disgraceful Would it be more disgraceful than the team's performance though? I'm not sure. The franchise may be maxed out on disgrace by then.

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 01:44 PM) Joke is on you Cleveland you will win nothing this year whereas we are headed for that Big Draft Pick in the Sky Dreaming of that BDPitS

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 12:04 PM) As bad as our offense has been, I have a hard time truly feeling like he should go. Before he came, players like Dunn and Rios were among the least valuable assets in MLB. Beckham had had his third straight declining season. Now those guys have become legitimate pieces again. The jury is out on a guy like Dayan, where the way he finishes this season could have a profound effect on the way we view his development. Our most significant decline this season is PK, and I'd like to find the person that believes that is the fault of the hitting coach and not father time. If the White Sox continue to prioritize tools over skills at all costs, though, we're going to need someone that will teach the kids to stop swinging at bad pitches. And considering he was able to convince Adam Dunn, reigning emperor of TTO, to start swinging at anything that appeared to be middle in, regardless of count or pitch type, I do NOT think Manto is the guy to teach that plate discipline.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 01:32 PM) Thank you. I saw it go out over Twitter and some responses I saw made me think at least some people thought it was real. And I figured there was a chance that Hawk was hamming it up for them. But still seemed unlikely. How sad is it that I thought there was a small chance he actually said those things? Not sure if that is bad for me, or bad for Hawk. I think it's bad for Hawk, lol. I mean this seems believable to you because he has said nearly all of these things, verbatim, except about sabermetrics.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 01:19 PM) You are just being ridiculous. What proof do you have that he is as talented and sought-after as you think and the only reason he isn't running a team is because he wants to spend time with his family? You didn't answer that when I asked. You like Keith Law, I do not. Let's just leave it at that. Every claim you can make that I have no idea what I'm saying, I can throw right back at you. So this is all pointless. No, because as I said a couple posts ago, I'm NOT making a claim that he could run a baseball team. You and wite were arguing over whether he was good or sucked, and you backed your argument that he's bad up by saying, "if he was as good as you say, he would be working for a baseball team." All I'm saying is that that argument makes no sense at all. That would be like me saying "If you had the ability to accurately assess Keith Law's ability, you would be his manager!" I have no idea if Keith Law is good enough to contribute to a Major League team, or if he's better or worse than current ML scouts. If you think you do, you need to make a better argument than, "he wouldn't be working at ESPN." I'm just asking you to back your opinion of him up -- because so far, the only thing that seems to be floating out there about his ability is "he was wrong about Chris Sale" which isn't even true.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 12:21 PM) Yep; that's the way they used to do it. Hawk must have slept through the Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s.... That was when he was GM right? So yeah, he definitely was sleeping then

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 12:19 PM) I know Hawk is old-timey and all, but... can that be for real? I mean, did he really, actually say those things, or is this some sort of comedy? This is NOT real. I edited the post to be more clear.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 12:01 PM) Better sources than the sources that told you Alex Rios was worth something in trade. You did not answer the question.

Lot of soft stuff up in the zone. It worked because he changed speeds, but I don't think it's sustainable. Hopefully he gets that stuff down.

Fire Manto!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 11:27 AM) Rest assured, if Keith Law knew all the answers , he would be an employee of a MLB team whether you choose to believe so or not. How do you know this? What information do you have that no one else does?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 11:23 AM) Hah, I posted this yesterday in the HH documentary thread but it went unnoticed because of the deadline...pretty funny comparison. Oh, sorry!

http://www.fangraphs.com/not/ken-harrelson...nking-industry/ ***Just to be clear -- this is NOT real, it is a satirical article. Hawk did not really say these things.***

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 10:36 AM) All I said is if he was as great as he thinks, he would be working for a MLB team. You said the 80 hour a week thing made him walk away. If that is true, the guys working the 80 hour weeks should have a more informed opinion, correct? The 80 hour week thing was just an example of the type of thing that might prevent someone from accepting a job. I'm just trying to illustrate that it's erroneous to assume that he is incapable of taking a job solely because he doesn't currently hold that job. There are lots of reasons that people choose their jobs, they don't simply accept anything offered to them.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 10:30 AM) If you think writing a blog and doing a chat on ESPN.com shows he has the talent to work for a MLB team, you're wrong. I wouldn't dare make that claim, I'm not qualified to judge either way. You're the only one that's trying to tell us how Keith Law compares to ML scouts. I haven't interviewed him for a job -- have you?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 10:04 AM) If that job requires 80 hours a week, how could his opinion be informed when he's not working anywhere near that? Are there specifics examples over the years of Law's opinion being superior ? And if his opinions were superior working whatever he was working, I'm sure a team would offer him a job paying him more money, working the same amount of hours he's working now, for exclusive rights to those opinions. If you're asking me if he's the best talent evaluator in America, I would say that no one thinks that. But if you're implying that the fact he does not work for an MLB team is sufficient proof that he doesn't have the talent to work for an MLB team, you are wrong.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 08:38 AM) If he really was the player evaluating genius he thinks he is, he would be putting an MLB organization together, not doing chats for espn.com. This is absolutely not a valid argument. Working for a team and working in the media are drastically different lifestyles and it it not at all unreasonable to want to be ESPN's Keith Law rather than an anonymous member of the Astros working 80 hours a week.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 08:27 AM) It's ridiculous to want to have the worst record in baseball for several years or one of the worst because it usually won't work out in the end. People become so dissinterested in your team, if the players you draft turn out to be any good, you wind up unable to pay them. The last time the Sox went into a full rebuild, they struck it rich in the first round 4 years in a row. McDowell was the 5th pick in 1987. Griffey Jr. was #1, so it obviously paid off to be the worst team that year. The other 3 before McDowell weren't special, in fact, had the Sox had the 4th or 3rd pick, they really wanted Mike Harkey. In 1988, the Sox drafted Robin Ventura with the 10th pick. Look at the picks before him, and tell me how it paid off not to lose even more games. Frank Thomas was #7 in 1989. There were some decent players before him, Ben McDonald went #1, but if the Sox drafted higher, they really wanted Jeff Jackson, a guy who never played in the major leagues, and Frank obviously was ultimately the best player of that draft. They did get Alex Fernandez with the 4th pick in 1990 and there is where it may have paid off to draft that high, however, Mike Mussina was selected with the 20th pick. There are really good players in every draft outside of the top 5 picks. It took teams like Tampa and Pittsburgh many years before their draft positions really paid off, and even they have made mistakes. If losing 100 games nets you Tim Beckham, it makes zero sense to try embrace being bad. The Sox are going to draft high the next draft, but I think we all should hope its the last time they draft in the top 5 or 10 for quite some time. I don't think any of this changes the point I'm making, which is that each class is different. My point also doesn't argue against you saying that a team shouldn't tank every year. I'm not saying they should.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 08:36 AM) I highly doubt he will play CF at the Major League level. He is already huge and at 22 his body may not be done filling out yet. He is clearly destined for a corner. Lots of SS are destined for 3B too, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't play SS while they can. There's no harm in letting him fill a position he can handle now if the team needs it and its a way to get him in the lineup.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 03:50 AM) This thread is ridiculous. With our market/payroll, you play to win every year. I can't believe I'm reading people say, "I want to lose next year." I refer you all to the Pirates/Royals/Padres of the late 90s/00's. Handfuls of early 1st round picks, nothing to show for it. Look at 1st rounds in the last ten years. Your first five picks will produce 2-3 MLB starters and then the last 25 picks of the round will give you 4-5 major league starters. You play to win the game. Picking #7 as opposed to #17 rarely makes a difference. This isn't the NBA/NFL. No one WANTS to lose, that's why we want to get rid of our s***ty group of players and start building a better team so that we can win as soon as possible. It's more ridiculous to assume that rolling out the same set of bums again will yield different results.