Feeky Magee

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 05:47 PM) De Aza let a ball bounce off his head for a home run last year. They both suck De Aza is nowhere near as bad in the field as Viciedo. That's so obvious.

Where's the dude who told me that I can't say Viciedo is a bad outfielder until I've seen him in person and he's just as good as De Aza

Kenny Beck ‏@kennybeckWXII 1h BREAKING: LHP Carlos Rodon (3rd overall pick of MLB draft) will be activated for tomorrow's noon Winston-Salem Dash game vs Frederick. Kenny Beck ‏@kennybeckWXII 1h It is unclear when Rodon will make his Dash debut, but it will be out of bullpen, not as a starting pitcher. Spencer D. Turkin ‏@Turkin35 54m #Source Carlos Rodon WILL pitch tomorrow for Class-A Advanced Winston-Salem vs. Frederick. #whitesox #wsnc #mlb #milb #baseball

Forgot Dykstra was a senior sign. I'm still taking him over Bassitt. I like Bassitt too. Let's see.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 02:05 PM) Danks pitched 7 innings last time out and gave up 4 runs, but actually pitched well. Sometimes QS is a QS, sometimes it's not and vice versa. To tweek it and say it matches what "should" happen to me is just coincidence. We don't know what "should" happen. If we did, there would be no reason to play the game. I have always loved stats. I used to play Stratomatic and one of my favorite parts was doing the stats. (Now it's done on a computer for you). But I am starting to agree with the poster who said the advanced stats are taking the joy out of it. If a guy has a good game, some stat that has nothing to do with hits or outs or strikes or balls or errors or pitches or runs will say, no that's a bad performance, and then you can have the Jeff Samardjiza performance last year where he was yanked after giving up 7 runs in 4 innings, but had a lot of K's so his xFIP that game was 3.70 or something like that , and no, he didn't pitch bad. Look how hard he threw and how many strikeouts he had. Forget everything else. A soft tosser like Danks, it's the opposite. Forget all the outs he got and the lack of runs. He didn't strike nearly enough out. He was only throwing 89. That's not a good performance. The fact is Danks is on pace for close to 200 innings pitched and most of the time pitches a pretty solid game. If the peripherals say he's one of the league's worst pitchers, the peripherals are wrong. He's no ace, but he's no bum. This whole thing started by people stating Danks had a lot of quality starts this year. I pointed out that if you tweaked quality starts to mean an official start with less than 4 ERA (which is I think a fairer definition than the current one which allows 4.50 ERA starts to mean a quality start), his rate this year wasn't very good at all, and didn't compare to his years when he was actually pitching well. I'm not sure what that has to do with peripherals. In any case, the point of peripherals is more about being predictive than to say what has happened. If Samardjiza kept making that amount of strikeouts, he wasn't going to let that amount of runs score. Lo and behold, that happened. And by the way, even by straight ERA, Danks ranks 78th of 92 qualified starters in the league.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 01:38 PM) It doesn't paint the picture. It's a different measurement. What do you think about the difference in the quality starts stats when you tweak the definition of quality starts?

QUOTE (oldsox @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 01:30 PM) How long did it take you to do the math? Probably shorter than it took me to do mine. In my defence, it's raining.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 02:21 PM) It's too early to rank Dykstra in the top 15 or even top 20. He's only pitched 20 innings above Low A so far and turns 24 at the end of the year. Given he's a sinker baller with good command, you would like to see if he can continue to miss bat while maintaining the same command in the upper levels before really believing in him. Hitter are hitting in the .260's against him this year, that's a split between mostly Low A and High A. While Bassit has limited his opponents to a BA of .220's in his career. I also wouldn't bank on Dykstra's keeping up K%. It's easy to get the less experienced hitters to strikeout in the lower level with good command of your pitches, but without any true "out" pitch or any plus offerings, I highly doubt that he can keep up that K%, unless he takes a giant step forward in his secondary offering. I'd like to see more from him in Double A next year before putting him in the top 15, as we have plenty of guys who are more accomplished than him or has a higher ceiling in the system. He's only pitched that much above low-A because he was a senior draftee and pitched late ino his senior year, plus I think the Sox were a little too slow to move him up to high-A. This is his first proper year in pro baseball and he was exceptional at low-A and has been even better at high-A. And he has improved his secondary stuff, as I said his change-up is getting good reviews and Stoltz thinks his curve can be his best pitch. He's already been getting buzz as a fringe prospect in scouting circles, more so than Bassitt. I'd be surprised if he didn't put up better numbers than Bassitt in Birmingham when he goes up.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 01:48 PM) I am surprised to see some guys put Dykstra over Bassit on their list or leaving Bassit off entirely. Bassit is almost 2 years older than Dykstra, but has proven he can handle Double A, and is generally considered to have better stuff. I'd be surprised if he doesn't get invited to ST to battle for the 5th starter spot next year along with Beck, Snodgress and Johnson. Dykstra was the much higher draft pick, is 2 years younger, and his K:BB rates are incredible. Last year in A+, Bassitt, struck out 22.8% and walked 9.5%, at the same level this year Dykstra is striking out 23.8% and walking 2.4%, after putting up pretty much the same ratio at Kanny. When Bassitt was the same age as Dykstra is now at the same level, he struck out 18.6% (5.2% less) and walked 13.4% (11% more). As for stuff, Dykstra sits 91-93, has a sinker with good sink, has a much improved changeup, a decent curve and immaculate control. Bassitt has about the same velo (maybe tops out higher but also occasionally seems to sit lower), has a good slider to righties, an inconsistent curve to lefties, doesn't really throw a change and has decent control. I don't really see the gap in stuff that makes up for the gap in performance.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 01:18 PM) You forgot Matt Davidson Aw nuts. Put him in aaaat... 10?

1. Carlos Rodon 2. Tim Anderson 3. Micah Johnson 4. Francellis Montas 5. Spencer Adams 6. Tyler Danish 7. Rangel Ravelo 8. Courtney Hawkins 9. Trey Michalczewski 10. Carlos Sanchez 11. Adam Engel 12. James Dykstra 13. Jacob May 14. Kevan Smith 15. Micker Adolfo 16. Chris Beck 17. Mike Recchia 18. Cleuluis Rondon 19. Tyler Saladino 20. Adam Lopez 21. Andy Wilkins 22. Omar Narvaez 23. Tony Bucciferro 24. Chris Bassitt 25. Michael Taylor 26. Jake Peter 27. Trayce Thompson 28. Eric Surkamp 29. Keon Barnum 30. Brett Austin Other names of interest off the top of my head but not quite there/haven't seen enough/at too low a level: Taylor Thomspon, Jace Fry, Dane Stone, Luis Martinez, Brad Salgado, Jason Coats

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 12:04 PM) For a guy who complains when he thinks pitching moves are being based on ERA, you sure do mention ERA a lot. What I mentioned is take the 4 starts out of 21 where Danks got pummeled and gave up 7 or 8 runs. His other 17 starts , which include a couple of non quality starts produces an ERA of 2.89. His 4 worst games he allowed 28 runs in 19 innings. His other 112 innings, 36 ER. You can give me xFip SIERRA all that crap. What matters in the end is runs, and Danks usually does OK with that. When they hand out the trophy at the end of the year, you can't use a challenge and have them look at the xFIP replay. I've pointed out earlier that Danks's career ERA matches up well to his peripherals so it makes perfect sense to use it there. My problem with pitching moves based on ERA is within a season when a pitcher like Cleto has a low ERA but awful peripherals. And as others have pointed out, you can't just take a fifth of player performance away and say "look how good he is now!". And as I've pointed out, using a fairer definition of a quality start, Danks hasn't really limited his badness to a couple of performances all that dramatically.

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 11:46 AM) Also, as regards the whole 80% quality start thing, it's not like Danks has this magic ability to constrict all his badness into a few isolated starts and be great the rest of the time. 2013 he had a 4.75 ERA with 12 quality starts in 22 starts (55%) 2012 he had a 5.70 ERA with 4 quality starts in 9 starts (44%) 2011 he had a 4.33 ERA with 15 quality starts in 27 starts (55%) 2010 he had a 3.72 ERA with 23 quality starts in 32 starts (72%) 2009 he had a 3.77 ERA with 21 quality starts in 32 starts (66%) 2008 he had a 3.32 ERA with 24 quality starts in 33 starts (73%) 2007 he had a 5.50 ERA with 8 quality starts in 26 starts (31%) So before this year, in 84 starts in years where his ERA was 4.33 or higher, he had 39 quality starts (46%) In 97 starts in years where his ERA was 3.77 or lower, he had 68 quality starts (70%) In 2014 he has a 4.40 ERA with 14 quality starts in 21 starts. That's 66% (not 80%) and it's also inflated, because it includes 3 starts where he gave up the bare minimum 3ER in 6.0 IP, i.e. a 4.50 ERA. In fact, we see this repeated looking at his history. Of his 53 quality starts in years where his ERA was 4.33 or higher, 10 of them (19%) were 6.0 IP and 3 runs. Of his 68 quality starts in years where his ERA was 3.77 or lower, just 3 of them (4%) were 6.0 IP and 3 runs. tl;dr: Danks's quality start numbers this year are atypical to his career tendency to have way more quality starts in years where he's just generally better, and are also inflated by counting starts where his ERA is 4.50. Following on from this, if the stat for quality starts was 5.0-6.2 IP and 2 ER or less or 7.0-8.2 IP and 3 ER or less or 9.0 IP and 4 ER, (i.e. an official start with an ERA less than 4), Danks's quality starts numbers would look like this: 2014 (4.40 ERA): 52% 2013 (4.75 ERA): 36% 2012 (5.70 ERA): 33% 2011 (4.33 ERA): 52% 2010 (3.72 ERA): 72% 2009 (3.77 ERA): 60% 2008 (3.32 ERA): 64% 2007 (5.50 ERA): 31% So under a fairer definition of a quality start, Danks's ratio of quality starts actually matches up perfectly to the last time he had a similar ERA and doesn't come near his ratio of quality starts in years which he was actually good.

The thing that impresses me most about Brad is his control. Usually that's the big thing that players switching to the mound struggle with. Santos was walking well over 10% of batters until his breakout year in Toronto. Blanke is walking nearly 20% in his first go at rookie-ball. Brad is walking 1.6%.

Also, as regards the whole 80% quality start thing, it's not like Danks has this magic ability to constrict all his badness into a few isolated starts and be great the rest of the time. 2013 he had a 4.75 ERA with 12 quality starts in 22 starts (55%) 2012 he had a 5.70 ERA with 4 quality starts in 9 starts (44%) 2011 he had a 4.33 ERA with 15 quality starts in 27 starts (55%) 2010 he had a 3.72 ERA with 23 quality starts in 32 starts (72%) 2009 he had a 3.77 ERA with 21 quality starts in 32 starts (66%) 2008 he had a 3.32 ERA with 24 quality starts in 33 starts (73%) 2007 he had a 5.50 ERA with 8 quality starts in 26 starts (31%) So before this year, in 84 starts in years where his ERA was 4.33 or higher, he had 39 quality starts (46%) In 97 starts in years where his ERA was 3.77 or lower, he had 68 quality starts (70%) In 2014 he has a 4.40 ERA with 14 quality starts in 21 starts. That's 66% (not 80%) and it's also inflated, because it includes 3 starts where he gave up the bare minimum 3ER in 6.0 IP, i.e. a 4.50 ERA. In fact, we see this repeated looking at his history. Of his 53 quality starts in years where his ERA was 4.33 or higher, 10 of them (19%) were 6.0 IP and 3 runs. Of his 68 quality starts in years where his ERA was 3.77 or lower, just 3 of them (4%) were 6.0 IP and 3 runs. tl;dr: Danks's quality start numbers this year are atypical to his career tendency to have way more quality starts in years where he's just generally better, and are also inflated by counting starts where his ERA is 4.50.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 09:26 AM) Danks does the same. Javy Vazquez and Gavin Floyd didn't pitch up to their peripherals year after year after year. There are many examples where the peripherals didn't match the performance. People see 88 or 89 on the television screen and say Danks sucks. If it said 92 or 93 and the exact same things happened in the game, they would say something totally different. I've heard all these advanced stats are far better predictors of future performance, however, the people here how seem to exclusively use them and come up with their own projections over the past few years are no more accurate than anyone else. Danks does not do the same. Career stolen bases allowed: Danks: 84 in 1240.2 IP (1 every 14.2 IP) Buehrle: 58 in 3018 IP (1 every 52 IP) Total defensive runs saved (DRS): Danks: 20 in 1240.2 IP (1 every 62 IP) Buerhle 85 in 3018 IP (1 every 35.2 IP) That explains why Danks's career numbers match up almost exactly to his peripherals, and why Buehrle's do not: Danks career: ERA: 4.22 FIP: 4.33 xFIP: 4.21 SIERA: 4.23 Buehrle career: ERA: 3.81 FIP: 4.12 xFIP: 4.21 SIERA: 4.40

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 10:19 AM) Throw out his 4 worst starts, Danks' ERA is 2.98 the other 17. I think that is putting your team in position to win. Some get way too caught up in all the advanced stats. Of the 3, Javy Vazquez, Gavin Floyd and Mark Buehrle, if you had to win a game, who would you want on the mound? Who would you want on your team? I am guessing the guy with the worst career peripherals. Mark Buerhle career SIERRA 4.40 John Danks, so horrible, one of the worst pitchers in baseball 2014 SIERRA 4.51. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Advanced metrics favor hard throwers, no matter how many runs they allow. If Danks threw 5 miles an hour harder and had the same results, the peripheral people who can't tell if a player is effective without consulting Fangraphs, wouldn't tell you how horrible he is. Danks isn't what he was. But so far this year, 80-85% of the time he has been really good. And remember when he shutout the Yankees through 8 innings? Some people who are calling him terrible were calling Robin an idiot for yanking this terrible pitcher. Beli blew the game with 2 outs in the 9th. As I posted in the Tommy Milone thread, people need to stop using Buehrle as an argument against peripherals. He is freakishly able to out-pitch his peripherals because he's one of the best defensive pitchers ever and he completely shuts down the running game.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 01:27 AM) Aren't most catchers horses*** hitters in this day and age? Is Tyler really hitting .245? That's not bad for a good defensive catcher like him. It's a completely unsustainable .243, and it's also come along with a collapse in his power. If he produces the same whiff rates next year we should be looking at about a .200 hitter.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 07:55 AM) FIP and xFIP are not park and league adjusted. FIP- is and Kershaw just edges Sale out 49 to 58. Now if you want to look at what really happened on the field versus what some stats think should have happened, Sale beats Kershaw in both ERA- (47 to 50) and ERA+ (210 to 201). While I feel Kershaw is slightly better at the moment, it is because Sale has yet to peak. To say that Kershaw blows Sale out of the water is just blatantly false. Damn, I thought they were. However, looking at the park and league-adjusted stats tells us similar stories really. FIP-: Kershaw: 49 Sale: 58 xFIP-: Kershaw: 51 Sale: 72 SIERA (definitely park-adjusted, not sure if league-adjusted): Kershaw: 1.89 Sale: 2.58 "Blows out of the water" is obviously hyperbole, but he's been comfortably better. That's absolutely not to take anything away from Sale, who is amazing.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 28, 2014 -> 10:52 PM) Maybe if we just had a water feature out there somewhere, he'd be less aggressive. Why do you think the Royals are interested in him?

QUOTE (newguy @ Jul 29, 2014 -> 08:03 AM) Hello everybody. I am Brad's father. I will try to keep the emotion out of the discussion since I am obviously biased. I am only responding to this to provide some additional information. I certainly appreciate all of your positive comments & I hope Brad continues to improve & perform. Regarding the "velocity" concern. I was actually very happy to hear about all the movement of his offspeed pitches. I wonder if the person who wrote that was at the game? Anyway, regardling velocity, Brad typically sits around the 90-91 range, but on a few occasions this year, both at Great Falls & Kannapolis, he has been able to top out at 94. As you stated, more velocity will come as he continues to re-learn how to pitch. He hasn't pitched since his junior year of high school in 2009 & has only been a "pitcher" for about a year now. It was about this time last season at Great Falls that he actually got to pitch in games. Hope that info helps. Great to get the inside track. Let's hope for more of the same from Brad!

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jul 28, 2014 -> 09:19 PM) How the heck did he earn a promotion to AA? He wasn't that good with the Dash either. Performance doesn't seem to matter a whole lot to the Sox sometimes for promotions. That might be a bit of unfair stat scouting, but there's definitely cases of rushing guys performing relatively poorly whilst other guys with way stronger numbers are left too long.

Braulio "A Better Prospect Than Rangel Ravelo According To MLB.com" Ortiz walked 4 in 2 innings tonight, gave up 3 hits and a run with 2 strikeouts and lowered his Birmingham ERA to 11.25.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 28, 2014 -> 03:02 PM) Greg, you have to understand GPx99+, which factors in simulated metrics based on imagination. Basically, what would Beckham produce on a context neutral environment if we has credited with the runs he was "willing" to produce? Then, consider a typical aging curve, temper that with what you think his favorite color says about his personality type, and then scale it to 100. It's park-adjusted, league-adjusted, and bias-adjusted. GPx99+ has Beckham at 82.12, which is roughly equivalent to 3 imagination wins above what you'd expect if a hippo played the position. That's a B- ballplayer no matter how you want to slice it. And if you want to know what a hippo looks like actually playing a position, there's always Dayan Viciedo! Hey-o!

Micah 3-3, sac fly Davidson 0-4, now hitting .199