lasttriptotulsa

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 11, 2016 -> 03:23 PM) Just wondering something silly - do sports books actually add things up to make sure that the total league wide wins and losses match, or do they adjust total numbers of wins based on how much people are betting on each team and just let the total number of wins float based on what people are betting? Without knowing 100% I pretty sure the lines just move with the bets so half the money is on the over and half on the under.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 11, 2016 -> 02:40 PM) I know the Sox need to improve defense, but I have a really hard time stomaching a FA deal for a guy whose offense is so bad. Yea I'm not so sure about Desmond either. I mean shortstops that can give you 20-25 HRs, 30 2Bs, 80 RBIs, 20 SBs and play solid defense grow on trees right?

QUOTE (MnSoxFan @ Feb 11, 2016 -> 08:30 AM) Where did you get 22.6, those add up to 17.6 for those 5 starters for 2005? Maybe you used the stat for starts by all starters that year but you only use 5 starter projections for 2016. Not sure where he got it from unless he accidentally double counted Garcia. Those 6 starters he listed did, believe it or not, make all 162 starts for the Sox that year. So the combined WAR of Sox starters was 18.6 in 2005.

QUOTE (knightni @ Feb 11, 2016 -> 07:54 AM) Surprising to see Buehrle having the same WAR as Sale. You also have to remember that WAR is a counting stat and Buehrle was a work horse in his prime. Sale's projection is for 210 innings. In 2005 Buehrle pitched 236.2 innings. Use Sale's projection and project that for an additional 26.2 innings and he jumps up to 6.6 WAR. Still comparable but a somewhat significant difference.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 07:34 AM) But the article isn't about that. There is a poll/survey at the end and the "fans" chose the Astros, Blue Jays and Tigers. The individual writer ranked them all and wrote individual summaries. Where is he wrong? You're telling me that the Future Sox writers or mods here would write the same article and put the Royals 10th just to get revenge and couldn't put aside their individual biases to write a fair and balanced appraisal? I'm sure at least ten here could, if not twelve. When you write an article about who the Royals biggest challengers are and you refer to the Royals as "us" your opinion has lost all credibility. And why would anybody here give a f*** who a Royals homer, wanna-be writer thinks the Royals biggest challengers are? And why is it posted in a thread about Ian Desmond and Austin Jackson. And as far as the poll at the end, it is on a Royals fan website. The readers are Royals fans. Would Royals fan give any credibility to a poll on Soxtalk. I highly doubt it.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 08:00 PM) Latos didn't sign for that kind of money, without some kind of guarantee to get plenty of innings. That's fine, as he is probably a better pitcher than E. Johnson. Nevertheless, the Sox need the depth. They didn't have a single starter lose significant playing time, last year. It would be unusual to go two years in a row, with all 5 starters not having any down time. Come to think about it, I don't remember any Sox starter missing a lot of time in 2014 either. Sale had that ankle injury in Spring training last year, but he didn't miss much time. That is the only instance that I can remember, in the last two years. Am I forgetting something? Sale missed about 5 weeks in 2014.

I would still be a Sox fan so long as they kept the White Sox name. If it were an Expos/Nationals type situation I'm not so sure what I would do. I'm not from Chicago and have never lived in or near Chicago so I don't really have a connection with the city other than the White Sox/Bulls playing there so I don't think it would be near as hard for me to remain a fan as it would for some others who live in Chicago and have season ticket packages and what not. I still would not be very happy about it though.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 3, 2016 -> 07:57 PM) Lol Rogers suggested maybe targeting BJ Upton. Surprisingly he was pretty good last year with a 1.6 fWAR over just 87 games played. But with a total of $31.9 million due to him over the next two years I think I'll pass. Were he a free agent he might be a guy worth taking a flyer on a cheap one year deal.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 3, 2016 -> 11:22 AM) Nobody has answered my question. Lets just pretend that we added Ethier to the team for a minor leaguer. vs RHP 1. Eaton CF 2. Ethier RF 3. Abreu 1B 4. Frazier 3B 5. Cabrera LF 6. Lawrie 2B 7. LaRoche DH 8. Avila C 9. Saladino SS vs LHP 1. Eaton CF 2. Cabrera DH 3. Abreu 1B 4. Frazier 3B 5. Lawrie 2B 6. Garcia RF 7. Navarro C 8. Sands LF 9. Saladino SS This team would have a bench of Sands, Catcher Spot, Sanchez, and Garcia. It doesn't work. One of Garcia or LaRoche has to magically go somewhere if they add Ethier and they'd need a RHH OF. Sands doesn't have a place on this team. Replace him with Shuck. Shuck actually has reverse splits for his career so he can play against LHP. Sanchez has actually hit LHP better too in his short career so you have the option of playing him with one of Frazier or Lawrie moving to DH for that game. Very few teams can put out a lineup of 9 good hitters. With the majority of our power coming from the right side we can afford to have a weak spot or two in the lineup vs LHP.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 3, 2016 -> 11:02 AM) I saw an interesting comment on MLBTradeRumors. It said something along the lines of Danks and Putnam for Ethier and $10 million...then that $10 million could be used for Latos. It probably isn't realistic, but I'd be ok if that sequence of moves happened. They aren't going to take on Danks's full contract and send $10 million unless they get a lot better piece than Putnam back.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 3, 2016 -> 10:05 AM) Dodgers aren't going to want depth pieces. They've got TONS of depth. They're going to want prospects. But if they want any sort of decent prospects for Ethier they will either have to send a boatload of money or take one of LaRoche or Danks back.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Feb 2, 2016 -> 01:55 PM) Hillary "won" and we're hearing nothing about the 6-for-6 coin flips. Hilarious. If Bernie had won there's be coin flip mocking going on and investigations. It's her turn to be president for 8 years, folks and there's nothing anybody can do about it. Hope you Hillary backers realize you're setting it up so nicely on a tee for Chelsea to succeed mom. I don't understand why our country wants the Clintons so badly. Tell me I'm wrong about the coin toss scandal. Six for six? Sure. You're such a drama queen.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 2, 2016 -> 11:34 AM) He could've hit 40 homers in '08 if he hadn't broken his wrist acting like an idiot. It's a shame that injuries derailed his career so much. He would have won the MVP if he didn't break his wrist.

Quentin was one of those players that I followed closely even after he left the Sox. It's a shame how hampered by injuries his career was. When healthy the guy could flat out rake.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 1, 2016 -> 10:52 AM) So we have been following a race for 9 months and today is only the first freaking primary. Iowa uses the caucus system instead of holding a primary.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 02:31 PM) Was that in Minnesota? Pretty sure I was at that game. Ugh. No, Cleveland, September 18th. He had a 9 R (8 ER), 3 inning start in Minnesota on April 30th. Maybe that's the one you were thinking of.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 02:22 PM) How did the guys reach base? I mean that is what fWAR is based on. That's why he's a 6 fWAR player. It focuses on FIP and Strikeouts. He had a 6 run inning in which the sequence went as follows. Flyout Single Reached on E4 K Single (1 run scores) Single (1 run scores) Walk Grand Slam Walk Groundout So Sale allowed 6 base runners that inning not counting the reached on error. Sure you can say those guys shouldn't have been batting because the inning would have been over after that K but that is part of pitching. You have to pitch over those things. How can you say a guy pitched a quality start when one error caused him to implode and allow 5 base runners and 6 runs the rest of the inning?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 02:13 PM) I get your point, but in reality, how many 4ER, 9IP games exist? It goes beyond that. Like Hatchetman said, last year Sale had a start in which he gave up 7 runs and got a quality start. Why? Because 6 of them were unearned. Would anybody in their right mind say that Chris Sale had a good start that game?

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 02:03 PM) So 4 examples in 40 years means it happens enough to make it a useless stat? There is a hell of a lot more examples than that. How does it make any sense at all that a 3 ER, 6 IP game is a quality start but a 4ER, 9 IP game is not? The first pitcher has a 4.50 ERA and the second pitcher has a 4.00 ERA. And why is a start in which a pitcher has an ERA nearly 3/4 of a run worse than league average qualify as a quality start? Shouldn't that be considered a below average start?

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 01:47 PM) Fair enough, though a quick check of Danks' game log shows that none of his quality starts involved any unearned runs. I also don't like it because it is a rigid 3 ER or less, 6+ IP. It has always been those numbers despite what the league ERA is that year. A 4.50 ERA in the late '90s to early '00s was pretty good. Now it's pretty bad. I think the stat should be adjusted to something resembling what the NHL considers a quality start for a goalie. A goalie gets a quality start if his save percentage is higher in that game the league's average for the season in games in which he faced 20 or more shots and has to be higher than 88.5% in games he faced less than 20 shots. Baseball could go to something similar to that. Keep the 6 inning minimum as I think that is a good number. But give the pitcher a quality start only if their runs allowed per nine (earned or unearned) are less than the league's average that year. That way the parameters for a quality start move along with the quality of pitching in the league. The better the pitching, the better you have to pitch to receive a quality start. If they went to something like this Danks would have about 5 less quality starts last year.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 01:34 PM) That was what I was getting at. Sure a 6 IP 3 ER start is a 4.50 ERA, but even so the worst possible "quality" start is far from worthless. From Wikipedia, here are some examples of why the quality start stat is worthless In July 2000, Mark Mulder went 6 2/3 innings, gave up 15 hits and nine runs — but only two were earned, so that was classified as a quality start. In June 1997, Randy Johnson struck out 19 in a complete game but allowed four runs. That was not a quality start. In July 1982, Mike Scott allowed seven hits and walked five in six innings, did not strike out anybody, gave up seven runs, but only three of those were earned. Quality start. In April 1974, Gaylord Perry went 15 innings and allowed four runs. Not a quality start

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 12:18 PM) 15 of his 30 starts were quality starts, and 1 of those other 15 he went 5 2/3 IP and gave up just 1 run against a pretty good Yankee lineup. But sure. I agree that Danks was not nearly as bad as people make him out to be but the quality start stat is pretty worthless.

1. Donaldson 2. Machado 3. Bryant 4. Beltre 5. Arenado (if his stats are legit and not a product of Coors) 6-10 can pretty much be in order with the 5 other guys they mentioned. Not a lot of difference between them.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 02:49 PM) Look at our lineup right now. Look at the ZiPS projections article on FanGraphs. Assess and formulate where you think our team is. Think about our competition. Think about how Avisail's projected 0 WAR fits into the plan. Now tell me: Would you rather have Dexter Fowler in that lineup, or would you rather have an extra draft pick after the first round during the draft this year? F*** those projections. When Avi comes out this year and puts up a 130 wRC+ we'll be glad we didn't sign Fowler and give up a draft pick.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 02:23 PM) Except we have learned he can't do that at the major league level. They chase way less garbage. Oh trust me, I don't want him in the bullpen next year. I was just surprised that he was still with the Sox and putting up decent numbers. Really last year was the best numbers he has put up in any extended period of time at any level of professional baseball.