lasttriptotulsa

The reason that Danks was unacceptable was because he went into the season with expectations of being our 3rd best starter and was making $14 million. If Danks was a fifth starter making peanuts like Noesi, nobody would have any complaints. While I agree we should probably add another starter, unless Rodon is ready, Noesi was perfectly acceptable as a fifth starter. I would be perfectly content with my fifth starter putting up a 4.39 ERA over 166 innings.

My guess is that the job is Johnson's to lose. They seem to be really high on him and if he shows anything in spring training, I think he gets the job. I just don't think Sanchez will ever have the stick to be an everyday player.

Always thought K-Rod was kind of a douche, but for the money Id take him over Gregerson or Robertson.

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 02:41 PM) Hopefully they are selling him on a bullpen/setup role. No chance of that. He has too much talent for somebody to not give him another chance starting.

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 02:24 PM) Maybe his tweets self-destruct. Or maybe he's just a master troll.

Almost guarantee this ends up like a Santo situation. Minoso passes away in the next few years and then on the next ballot he gets in.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 09:36 AM) Gregerson is a guy that really, really scares me as a reliever. He doesn't feature big stuff, his strikeout rate continues to fall, and he's primarily succeeded with a BABIP that is way lower than expected. Unless they could sign him to a similar contract that Duke got - and that seems illogical - I'd stay away from him. I'd rather roll the dice on Gregerson at 3/20 than Robertson at 4/50. At 12.5 million per year you're basically paying Robertson to be a 2 WAR player, something he's done exactly once in his career. Four seasons ago.

This is the only Christmas song that matters.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 06:49 AM) Yes he can as a PTBNL Prospects of his caliber are never PTBNLs. I would have to think MLB would frown upon that as it's clearly just a way to try and circumvent the rules.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:49 PM) What data is that? You're suggesting that a pitcher who excels in getting outs on balls in play by using deception of movement and varying speeds is simply "lucky" and therefore not as valuable as a pitcher who strikes out a ton of guys. In reality that's not even close to the truth. Just look at how wildly inconsistent FIP is for sinkerball pitchers and guys like Jamie Moyer who don't strike a lot of guys out. In fact now that I'm reading it seems like your idea of thinking is pretty outdated and new formulas are suggesting pitchers have plenty of control of how hard and where a ball is hit. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article....articleid=15562 http://sabr.org/research/many-flavors-dips...ry-and-overview Uh, Jamie Moyer is a pretty good example of how ACCURATE FIP can be. At the end of his 25 year career, his FIP was 4.47 and his ERA 4.25. That is pretty damn close. He pitched 4074 innings and gave up 1926 earned runs. FIP says he should have given up 2026 runs. 1926/2026 is roughly 95%. So FIP essentially predicted his ERA within 5%. That is pretty good.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 12:09 PM) So you're telling me that you honestly don't believe a pitcher has a lot of control over what kind of contact a batter makes? Decades of data tell you that the vast majority pitchers do not have that much control over it.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 07:23 PM) People like you are why I hate that sabermetrics have become so household. You just regurgitate some number you vaguely understand and it's concrete fact in your mind. Please explain to me, in your own words, how Q was better than Hamels last year. Just because you don't understand a stat doesn't make it wrong or the people citing it wrong. Quintana and Hamels put up very similar FIP and xFIP numbers. The part that you are completely ignoring is that one pitches in the NL and one pitches in the AL (both pitch in hitter's parks so park factor is pretty much negated).

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 01:11 PM) listen, let's just squash EVERYONE'S dreams. we're not get Scherzer. if we're didn't give Chris Sale a max deal, there's NO WAY in hell Hahn & Co. will pony up the ~$25M Scherzer will be asking. Sale's and Scherzer's situations are not comparable. Scherzer is a free agent, Sale still had 4 years of team control left when he signed. The idea behind Sale's contract is to pay him well more than you would have to in his pre arbitration and 1st year arbitration years to save money in his later years.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 2, 2014 -> 12:07 PM) Yeah I would call them again. Mine points directly into a huge Oak tree and its fine. My Dish Network dish seems to do the same. I've always been a bit skeptical about Directv claiming to not be able to find a sightline. It was about 3:00 in the afternoon on New Year's Eve when the installer came to try to install. I always thought he was just looking for an excuse to get out of there. Maybe if Dish does lose CSN I'll try Directv again. I've always preferred Directv anyways.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 2, 2014 -> 11:58 AM) When is the last time you asked Directv to see if it was available? I thought they launched a few more satellites so they could provide more coverage About 3 years ago. They came out to the house and told me at the time that if I cut down the tree in my front yard they could probably get a good enough signal. It's about a 60 foot tall maple that I just don't really have the $1000 or so to cut it down.

I've been worrying about this ever since I first saw the news about the possibility of Dish losing CSN. It is my only option to watch the Sox, Bulls and Blackhawks (aside from the few games shown on WGN, ESPN, etc.). I live in a town of 1000 people and we do not have access to the big cable providers and due to sight lines I am unable to get Directv. Hopefully they come up with a long term contract otherwise I'm screwed.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Dec 2, 2014 -> 07:31 AM) I do know the Top 10 second basemen all finished higher than .975. So a minor leaguer fielding at .950 has a long way to go. Without context, fielding percentage means next to nothing. Let's compare Derek Jeter and Jose Valentin just for fun. As most probably remember, Jose Valentin made a lot of errors but had great range. Let's use 2004 as an example. This was the first year that Derek Jeter won the Gold Glove. Jeter made just 13 errors (good for a .981 fielding percentage), his range factor per 9 was 4.46. If he were to play all 1458 innings that year he would have had 723 chances and his .981 fielding percentage would mean he was successful on 709 of them. Valentin made 20 errors (good for a .965 fielding percentage), his range factor per 9 was 4.91. If he were to play all 1458 innings that year he would have had 795 chances and his .965 fielding percentage would mean he was successful on 768 of them. So despite the fact that Jeter had a higher fielding percentage, Valentin actually would make an additional 59 plays over the course of the year that Jeter's limited range would not allow him to even field. Yet because people still like to just look at archaic stats like fielding percentage, Jeter wins the Gold Glove.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 2, 2014 -> 06:59 AM) This will likely be regarded as heresy, among the White Sox faithful, but I don't regard Tim Anderson as anywhere near untouchable. If he were an elite defensive shortstop, with a strong arm and great hands, I would value him as much as most seem to. However, the reality is that he has an average, to below average arm, and just average hands. His 31 errors in 302 chances, last year at Winston Salem, validate the scouting reports that question whether or not he will be able to stick at SS. Being able to "stick" at SS is not the question for me. My question is; does he have the ability to provide elite defense at SS? The answer to that question is, most likely, no. This is critical, because if he moves to another position, his offense has to play better, in order for him to retain the same value. He probably lacks the arm strength for CF, which is the only good fit in the outfield, as he doesn't have the power to play a corner outfield position. Ok, so let's say that he moves to 2ND. There, his arm would be more than adequate, but his best defensive tool, which is his great range, would be of much less value. Moreover, his hands would still limit his ability to provide more than average defense. He seems to be a very athletic, speedster, who has a lot of natural ability to hit, but even there, still lacks good pitch recognition, plate discipline, ideal mechanics and power. Sox fans have seen this "movie" all too many times before. Very athletic kid, from another sport, who has some great tools, but not much background as a baseball player. Joe Borchard, Jared Mitchell, Trayce Thompson and the like, have not fulfilled the promise, and I fear that Anderson may be yet another in that mold. I'd much prefer to have an elite defensive SS, who learns to hit and get on base. Omar Vizquel is the ideal model, for that scenario. He could always field, but started very poorly, with the bat. In time, he became a very good hitter. I'm hoping that Rondon is closer to that kind of player. I think that it's more feasible to take an elite defensive SS and teach him to be a decent contact hitter, than it is to take a natural, albeit raw, offensive talent, and teach him to become an elite defender at SS. I don't think anybody is really saying he's untouchable, it's just that most aren't willing to give up a guy who should be a top 100 prospect this year and key figure in our future plans, for one year of control on a starter who has only had one good year.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 29, 2014 -> 02:01 PM) Can someone get me up to speed on where the Upton rumors are coming from? I don't think anyone's said that it was a 3 way deal but reports are that both the Sox and braves are discussing deals for Samardzija with Upton and or Gattis involved from the Braves end. People are just putting two and two together.

I have a feeling this is going to be a three team deal with the braves. Sox end up with Upton, Oakland ends up with Gattis, Braves end up with Samardzija. Not sure what the pieces going from the Sox would be but this is the only way it makes sense to me. I just dont see the Sox giving up much for one year of Samardzija unless they could extend him but I think if they're going to spend big time bucks on a starter it isn't going to be Samardzija.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:56 AM) Nope. I would hope for 5-11 but I assume that's pretty close to impossible because someone has to win when they play each other, though I haven't looked at the schedule so who knows. It's possible. Falcons - 1-4 is very realistic. They have Arizona, Green Bay, Pittsburgh, New Orleans and Carolina. New Orleans - 2-3 or 3-2 is more likely. They have Pittsburgh, Carolina, Chicago, Atlanta and Tampa Bay. Carolina - 2-3 or 3-2 is more like likely. They have Minnesota, New Orleans, Tampa Bay, Cleveland and Atlanta. Tampa Bay - 0-5 is pretty likely. They have Cincinnati, Detroit, Carolina, Green Bay and New Orleans. If ATL beats NO and loses the rest they are 5-11. If NO beats CAR and loses the rest they are 5-11. If CAR beats ATL and loses the rest they are 4-11-1 It's not very likely but it could happen (it would require TB to actually win a couple). I think 6-10 is likely going to win it with tie breakers. New Orleans is in the drivers seat as the only above .500 team they play is Pittsburgh, while Atlanta has to play Arizona, Green Bay and Pittsburgh.

QUOTE (daggins @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 06:48 AM) A reliever and a non-prospect will not get Betts. If we're getting Betts then we're giving Sale or Quintana. End of story. Victorino will cost a bag of balls compared to Betts and has a history of being adequate. I'd rather they just pony up for Melky, honestly. The Red Sox don't have a great fit that can be realistically acquired. Not that I think Montas + Beck will get Betts, but Montas is not a reliever. The guy has top end of the rotation potential and is just 21 years old.

I like the move. To me it proves they plan on competing this year. I really see at least one more big move coming. Whether that be a SP, a trade to pick up Kemp/Ethier/Crawford, etc I think Hahn definitely has another move or two planned.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 03:51 PM) It's not though. It's a low risk low reward move. At best, he's a solid reliever (aka 1.5 WAR), at worst, he's not even a passable reliever and he gets cut (they eat 10 million). If the downside is "eating 10 million" and the upside is "1.5 WAR reliever" it's the def of a low risk low reward move. Middle case is he's a 1 WAR reliever and everyone goes home happy. Yea the 3rd year is a bit much but whatever, it's a 3rd year at 5 million. This also begins their push for more org pitching depth at the high minors and AAAA level. That's just as important as whatever Duke gives them IMO. They need more non replacement level relievers seeing time and this helps. You do realize WAR is essentially a counting stat right? 1.5 WAR for a guy who is only going to pitch 60 innings is pretty respectable.

Player A) 3.38 ERA, 167.67 IP, 1.229 WHIP, 2.70 K/BB, .604 OPS Player B) 3.28 ERA, 129 IP, 1.264 WHIP, 2.74 K/BB, .663 OPS One guy comes at 3/15 the other at 4/40+. Who do you take?