The Ultimate Champion

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 23, 2014 -> 09:47 AM) You can see his stress of approach versus what we have seen in years past. I wonder if past hitting coaches spent more time on the mechanics of the swing, than the psychology of the swing? The difference this year in so many of our hitters is just shockingly drastic. Dunn, Flowers, Viciedo, Ramirez, etc... they have plans up there this year. When they see a pitch, they seem to recognize the pitch, AND have an idea what they want to do with it. I'm not sure that was happening before. Yeah I think they were probably getting either too much information or too much contradictory information. Like, instead of someone saying "Do this but don't do that and on some occasions do this," Steverson is just telling them "This is what you are, this is what you do." Sometimes it can really be that simple. I had a pitching coach once years ago just talk to me about something, like my approach and stuff, and in the same side session I went from everywhere and scary to hitting spots immediately. Sometimes the ability is there but it has to be focused the right way, I think that's what Coop is best at. That's all that happened with Thornton. I just love Steverson's philosophy about how hitters are hitters and pitchers are pitchers. Pitchers are there to throw strikes, hitters are there to hit the baseball. Get what you want and be aggressive, and don't be afraid to take it if it's not what you're looking for. You don't need to go into protect mode until you have two strikes but sometimes it's like our hitters have looked like they were in protect mode early in the count, or that somehow they felt like they always had to take a pitch no matter what, which just gets them to that point quicker.

BTW I'm not saying the numbers aren't going to be useful but they probably shouldn't be used to try to get a complete picture of a hitter. At least not yet until the process becomes more sophisticated.

Ok as simply as possible. You're talking about measuring an event (outside zone swings) and recording it as generally a bad thing/undesirable result, completely ignoring that it in some situations it may be a very, very good thing and doing so selectively may be an indication of excellent strikezone judgement and plate discipline in a hitter. I think that's dumb.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 23, 2014 -> 09:14 AM) Most of the "fan base" would LOVE the idea of Konerko replacing Dunn for the remainder of the season. Doesn't mean it makes sense performance-wise, but that is the perception. There's also the really nice idea of Viciedo adjusting to a full-time DH role. PK can play more, Tank can see the OF less. It's always been clear that Viciedo's bat was going to make or break his Sox future, but now it's also I think become pretty clear that it'll have to be as a DH. I think we've hit a point where you can't look at the arm as an excuse for keeping him out there anymore.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:54 AM) Go up to the plate with a plan. This guy likes to work the outer half of the plate with breaking balls and bust you in with fastballs, or he throws first pitch fastball 86% of the time, or whatever. Know what to expect and what to look for, kill it when you get it and don't even swing when you don't. Right. But be ready to adjust as well. The whole reason you love to see hitters go up the middle and the other way is that, regardless of the result (out, hit, whatever) you feel confident in that batters ability or at least readiness to adjust to multiple pitch speeds, types, and locations.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:52 AM) You can see heat zones and where guys hit the ball, FGs and Brooks baseball are both good for that (as well as any other number of sites). But why would you want to subjectively change the strikezone when [theoretically] the strike zone does not change? In a vacuum, swinging at pitches in the zone is good, swinging at pitches outside of the zone is bad. There are always going to be examples of times it works out the opposite way - just like you prefer hitting line drives over anything else, but there will be times that ground balls end up as triples and line drives end up as outs. Over time, those trends to even out. From a pitcher's point of view, they would prefer those heat zones. It would be interesting to see some of it - maybe a guy should be looking at balls here and maybe he should figure out a way to handle breaking balls on the outer edge a bit better - and I do believe they have some of it, but from the viewpoint of swinging at pitches in the zone or not (or not swinging at pitches in the zone or not), those just don't make as much sense. The strikezone really exists in the mind of the hitter more than it does on paper. That's the whole reason pitchers can get a guy fishing going further and further away, or get them to climb the ladder, etc. The Michael Young example is one where the pitch that establishes the inside part of the strikezone is probably something like 2" over the inside corner of the plate, which allows the batter to extend his coverage area to an area off the plate. The whole reason the on-paper zone can work is if the whole thing is being used, but a hitter who doesn't have to look in can look away, and a hitter who doesn't have to look away can pull his hands in and pull something out of the park that otherwise may have clipped him in the other extreme. The zone is really relative to the pitch sequence and location, not just to some imaginary box somewhere. It's why Hawk is always talking about pitching in, because when the Sox don't do it they get hurt. Another example is the gopher ball Sale served up to Delmon Young vs. the Tigers in one of those many key Sox-Tigers games in 2012. I think that was a slam? There were runners on, I remember that. Sale went low, lower, lowest but at the same speed and break, turning an unhittable pitch into one that went over the fence. You can extend a hitters strikezone or restrict it by confusing him or being unpredictable. Anyway the point is that the zone is relative to the pitch and sequence as well as hitter strength. It's like, the high fastball Alexei isn't going to be able to hit over the fence all the time, just sometimes when the pitcher makes him ready for it. But Alexei at least can do that sometimes, Josh Fields never could, so you don't ever want to see someone like that doing the same thing. You just have to apply context, and again, K'ing through a borderline pitch in protect mode isn't necessarily "giving up an AB" if the pitcher is just on, but "working" a 2-0, 3-0, 3-1 count and swinging at something you can't hit anyway, outside the zone or not, is kind of "giving up an AB" because if you're out then you've gotten yourself out without making the pitcher do it. The total set of numbers would be useful I'm sure and the larger the samples the better but they still need to be separated by context. And I think the most important result that you would want to measure or monitor would be how often a hitter takes himself out of an AB, not how often he goes out of the zone.

BTW what I'm saying above is basically what Steverson seems to be preaching, don't help the pitcher out but get your pitch and be aggressive when you get it. Great approach for really anyone but especially flawed hitters.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:37 AM) Assuming 3.5 P/PA (Viciedo is at 3.69 right now) and 600 plate appearances, that's 2100 pitches over the course of a season that a hitter will see. There will be some times where a player will swing and protect at a pitch technically out of the zone, and that's not a bad thing, and there will be times he'll let a pitch on the black go even though it's in the zone. That's all fine. But, over the 2100 pitch sample size, those will all even out. That's why these are indicative of trends and why you can say "swinging out of the zone is a bad thing." I see that but with all the machines tracking things now I think some kind of hot zone type stat would work better to account for context. IE Michael Young IIRC used to always murder Buehrle in Texas on the outside fastball, he'd reach out and hit the ball well outside of the zone and lace it down the line just because Mark wasn't getting in on him enough. The pitch sequence and batter strengths in general combine with the umpires judgement on the day (tight, wide, idiotic, etc.) to create an intelligent strikezone that doesn't necessarily match the zone on paper. IE that low and away change in the zone, just let it go by if you're not ready for it because 1 K isn't as bad as a DP. But that high fastball when you're geared up for it in a hitter's count with men on? Alexei can hit that thing out just fine, has done so many times over.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 23, 2014 -> 08:20 AM) 100 YEARS, $1 TRILLION DOLLARS AND THE ASTEROID BELT Or Leury Garcia's brother, that works too. Seriously though, it's the perfect fit. Texas would need to wait X amount until the draft is done then pay X in cash for Morales (and probably have a small bidding war vs. 1-2 other teams) and still, whoever gets Morales is probably going to have to send him to extended and then some MiLB assignment for a while. Dunn OTOH costs a whole lot less than the draft pick is worth & the Sox can just eat the whole thing for a better prospect. You guys were right, I admit it. I'm still not happy we had to f*** over our OFers to put this guy on the roster but when Avi went down Dunn actually became useful. Maybe we'll get something out of this guy now.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ May 22, 2014 -> 01:15 PM) Yeah, I know it's not something we had so much data on until recently, but what is advanced about it? We got new technology, not some kind of awakening. WHOA IT'S ALMOST LIKE WHEN HE SWINGS AT BAD PITCHES, WORSE THINGS HAPPEN! There's a difference between swinging through a hard-biting breaking ball when you are in protect mode vs. chasing something you can't hit 0-0 or ahead in the count. In fact swinging at a good pitch out of the zone 0-2 is better than swinging at a pitcher's pitch inside the zone up 2-0 with another strike left. I'm not sure how you're figuring that stuff but I'm hoping you stat pickles are accounting for that in your evaluations.

I think it's cool that stats people actually argue context now. Stats are getting better and the pendulum is starting to swing IMO, instead of stats making the game dumber they're starting to make it smarter. Fans are still dumb though (except me). It used to be like "f*** you his OPS is better" and that was the argument from the statheads.

Didn't read it but we should trade him to Texas now though.

QUOTE (Señor Ding-Dong @ May 23, 2014 -> 02:02 AM) Random question: Does anyone have any idea how "Cleuluis" is pronounced? Every time I say it in my head I just know I'm butchering it. Clay oo as in goo (Sweet) Lou eace like in peace Clay oo lou eace Ron Doan

Where's Buckets of Semien to weigh in on this one?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 22, 2014 -> 04:11 PM) C'mon, you honestly don't think Don Cooper had any opinion about Gio TWICE? Wasn't familiar with him at all? That KW just went all rogue twice and traded him without any commentary from the best pitching coach in baseball? The point is that we also have to hold someone accountable for misjudging talent, if we're going to give Cooper all the credit for choosing to protect Quintana over Santiago (and trading Santiago wasn't even an option, in all likelihood), then who do we blame for Mark Teahen or Nick Swisher? Picking Anderson over Brian Young? Mitchell over Trout, etc.? Davidson looking like he's a bust so far? Ozzie Guillen? Buddy Bell? Why wasn't Cooper able to see that Danks/Floyd would break down and that Buehrle would be a 8-1 and 2ish ERA in 2014? If we want to ascribe all these magical powers to Cooper for the Santiago trade, then shouldn't he also get the blame for Danks/Floyd never taking the next step after 2008 and then breaking down? With the Sox cutting ties to Mark Buehrle when they would have been better off giving Mark $17.5 million per season than Danks $13.5 million? Is Cooper also responsible for Paulino being atrocious, and Erik Johnson regressing? Shouldn't Cooper have been able to see that Zach Stewart and Nestor Molina wouldn't ever amount to anything? We can't just selectively credit Cooper. You're assuming a lot of things. But we all kind of have to assume things. Kenny did shop Hudson pretty hard, tried to send him to MIL in a Prince deal, he was talked about in the Adrian Gonzalez & Peavy discussions with SD, he went to the DBacks but only after the Nationals wouldn't take him, etc. Now you can say that's just Kenny trying to win (I think that's the case) but it wouldn't be surprising if Coop did point something out beforehand. I don't know if there's been any actual info on that though, I haven't seen anything but speculation.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ May 22, 2014 -> 02:09 PM) I think you're drastically overestimating the value of his time. Oh wow this is interesting. The Ultimate Champion ™: 1,600 posts (2.38 per day) Hickory Huskers: 5,868 posts (5.37 per day) It's shouldn't be surprising that Hickory Huskers has to more than double his daily post count in order to keep up with The Ultimate Champion ™, reason being that on average the quality of Hickory Huskers posts are roughly 50% lower.

QUOTE (Andy the Clown @ May 22, 2014 -> 01:40 PM) They're both roster fillers, and aren't worth the time it took you to write this post. Yeah but no though.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 22, 2014 -> 01:10 PM) I don't think there is any question that Santiago has higher upside. The problem is what are the odds of his actually getting it all together and getting to that upside? Rienzo has a higher floor, and no where near the bust factor that Santiago has. Santiago blows away his ceiling. Can a pitching coach get him there? Seems Don Cooper was ready to give up on him seeing as he was traded this off season, and not someone else. Do we know this though? Coop (after the Santiago deal, in ST) did a prolonged interview with Comcast where he specifically cited the joys to be found in working with guys like Santiago as well as the other bigger names like Sale and Buehrle which are always focused on. As far as I know, all we can assume is that 1) Sox needed to trade pitching, 2) they had 4 lefties which represented an obvious area of strength from which to deal, and 3) Santiago for a number of very easy to identify reasons was the odd man out. I'm not sure we can assume Coop had anything to do with that.

People really think Rienzo has more upside than Santiago? Rienzo has looked good but if one of them has a shot at being a #3 in MLB on talent alone it's Santiago. A few months ago had the Sox done Eaton for Rienzo instead of Eaton for Santiago I imagine that would have been quite the headscratcher to most Sox fans wondering why the DBacks would give Eaton away like that, as it was the trade looked pretty even.

Yeah you don't sit this guy. If they aren't going to clear a spot for him by jettisoning a vet then he needs to play every day in Charlotte. I mean not only is he not getting PAs but he's accruing service time. Why? Sox are idiots good % of the time these days.

Well let's see, one is a Major League player who keeps improving and the other is a minor league player who has just gotten worse.

Alright so I admit I haven't been following these guys but there are always former top prospects out there who have either fallen on hard times (Noesi) or haven't taken steps forward as anticipated (Gillaspie) which can be acquired cheaply or even for free. One player that comes to mind as a "cheaper" type potentially might be Mike Montgomery?? I'm thinking here, this guy looked awesome with the Royals but in the Shields deal his inclusion was almost more of an afterthought and Odorizzi was considered the better get even though Montgomery from what I'd seen of each looked a whole hell of a lot more talented than Odorizzi ever was. So what happened to this guy, did he lose his stuff or something? Checking B-R he's been at the Triple A level for parts of 4 straight seasons, 2011-now. These are the kinds of players we should look into acquiring. Also I would be very interested in offering Rienzo to the Angels for Santiago back. Not sure they'd seriously consider that but if they did I'd be all like f*** yeah and stuff because I still like Hector & think he just probably needs real coaching not that psuedo coaching s*** that goes on on teams like the Angels where everybody is making $40M a piece and no one has any balls. So else is out there? Some buy low type of arms, and an OF too, that's really what we need.

QUOTE (JoshPR @ May 18, 2014 -> 04:06 PM) Let's see how many excuses rongey lol There are only two reasons to listen to the postgame show, 1) you've fallen and you can't get up, 2) you're looking for that beggars pizza gift card.

QUOTE (Dunt @ May 18, 2014 -> 04:01 PM) That's called the Golden Shower right? Golden sombrero. Golden shower is what Dunn is giving to an especially thirsty Jerry Reinsdorf & Sox FO. Obviously they like the flavor since they're actively choosing to let it continue.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Mar 18, 2014 -> 11:58 PM) They have a Dunn: Chris Carter It's a long shot but if Houston is *really* down on Chris Carter (sure sounds like it) then Dunn + total salary relief + a reasonable prospect like Carlos Sanchez for Chris Carter would be an interesting proposition. Carter is a Steverson guy from his A's days and although Carter is basically a mirror of Dunn offensively, he'll be 27 this year so there's at least a shot he'll continue to develop into something better. If not, what do you lose, a UT player prospect? You could offer the same type of deal with a relief prospect or somewhat interesting but far away SP spect. But again Houston only does that if they're completely sure they want out on Carter.