OmarComing25

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 02:46 PM) Yeah...he figured that the best QB of all time can make a good coach look like a genius. I'm fairly certain if you gave Aaron Rodgers to Lovie, he'd look like a genius too, same with a lot of other coaches. Not knocking Bill, but I tend to believe he gets more credit then he deserves. The Pats have made their fare share of bad moves, including the Chandler Jones trade. They also let Wes Welker walk to sign Amedola and in hindsight I think that was a poor move. I tend to think that Belichick makes Brady look better more than the other way around. The Patriots went 11-5 without Brady in 2008 and went 3-1 in the games he didn't play in this year. There's no one better at turning castoffs and nobodies into good players. Would Brady have been the GOAT with another coach? I don't think so.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 11:57 AM) The path doesn't mean anything until the proper development occurs. If the goal is to suck to be better, the Pirates and Royals took 30 years. The Jags have been in the top 10 of the NFL draft for how long? What about the Browns? Jimmy Butler could retire in 10 years with the Bulls hovering around the .500 mark each of those seasons, and they still might be closer. One guy in the NBA can make all the difference. In the next 20 years, the Bulls may have a shot or two at one of them. In the NBA if you aren't one of the top 3-4 teams you basically have no shot at all of winning it all. In the MLB and NFL all you really need to do is be a playoff contender and then get hot at the right time. It's much easier to become a playoff contender than it is to become a top 3 team in the NBA. Especially the MLB, where due to general variance a true talent 78-81 win team can sneak into the playoffs if a couple things go right, and at that point it's basically a crapshoot. Just look at how many different teams have won a title. Only 11 different teams in the NBA have won a title since 1980. In the MLB 11 different teams have a won a title since 2001. And with the second wildcard it's never been easier to make the playoffs, which is all you really need to do to have a shot to win a title.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 7, 2017 -> 12:46 PM) Considering the hard caps on international spending, the way the draft works, and given the White Sox current payroll, Robertson's paycheck isn't going to cause any strain on JR's wallet or cause the team to spend less on prospects. There is absolutely no reason for a salary dump unless you just think he is going to be awful. Either get something interesting back now or wait. No pressure at all on RH to rid himself of Robertson. Agreed, a pure salary dump doesn't make sense because there's really nowhere else that money can go at the moment.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 09:41 PM) What was Avi's in 2015? Avi was -11 DRS in 2015.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:36 PM) Lol, yes, very generous indeed. The Garcia thing is the biggst head-scratcher, but: 1. Geovany Soto is not ">>" than any catcher in the MLB, lol. I like him but come on. 2. OP is either drastically underrating Kiermaier (who put up 3-5 WAR each of the last three seasons) or is very VERY high on Charlie Tilson. EDIT: just saw the admission on Garcia. But still, Kiermaier. I think it's because he was only comparing the bats without defense included. If we included defense the Rays' position players easily outclass ours.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 11:34 AM) I actually think the Rays and A's will be better than the Sox this year if they trade Q. I think they're better right now.

If his short stint at the MLB level ruined him then Fulmer was never going to make it anyway. He's a not in the top 100 anymore but he's still likely a top 150 prospect, his stock is definitely down but he's not a lost cause yet.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 02:37 PM) How are they going to be terrible if Robertson, Frazier and Abreu all rebound? Seriously that's like 4 wins if those guys "raise their value by the deadline", if Tilson can do anything positive in CF that probably makes up for losing Eaton by itself. Yea they'll get worse losing Sale no doubt but they wont completely fall to being one of the worst three teams in baseball. For them to win fewer than 70 games not only will Frazier, Abreu and Robertson not rebound, it'll probably means they got worse. Or worse yet Rodon and Anderson fall apart. Or nightmare scenario Q gets hurt. That's just as a team managing to """achieve""" a win total. If you want to talk about the offense falling into the woeful Philles/Brewers/Padres nightmare tier, especially with the great Minnesota Twins rotation serving up meat for 19 games, we are talking a cataclysm on offense. Like an absolute bloodbath where nobody is hitting anything. If that happens then you can bet there wont be much value getting improved for the deadline. Nobody seems willing to rectify this at all. Everyone just seems convinced that all the players they want traded will have MAGICAL years of resurgence and value raising, and that Rodon will have a massive season and that all their losses will become of the GRR VILLIANS like Avi and Tilson. Its all fantasy, its trying to convince yourself that what you want to happen for the Sox will happen. It's really hard to take you seriously when you continue to say things like this. C'mon man. And you're way overestimating the amount that Frazier/Robertson/Abreu need to rebound to improve their value. You're the only one saying they need to have "magical" years to raise their value, when in reality they only need mild improvements. Even if all of them rebound the way we hope, it won't add more than a couple of wins, because we'll also be trading them at the deadline in this scenario and then replacing them with garbage for the rest of the season.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 02:06 PM) That is exactly what people are saying when they think the loss of Adam Eaton will cause them to tumble in RS standings in 2017. Not really. People are saying that the gap in offensive ability between Eaton and Tilson is significant. You seem to think Tilson will be a league-average hitter, but it's likely that he'll be much worse.

If you include baserunning value Eaton was 46th in offensive value in baseball in 2016, that's pretty good. No one is saying Eaton was an elite offensive force but he was a solid hitter who can get on base and a great baserunner and those guys aren't easy to find, as we all know from the last decade of offensive ineptitude. To say Tilson could come close to matching that is utter nonsense.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 12:26 PM) How do you know this is Robertson's low point? But you've already said that we couldn't get anything more than a salary dump for Robertson right now. So worst case scenario is we have to eat the money if he ends up being really bad, which really isn't that big of a deal. If all we're risking is the money, then it's a risk worth taking.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 11:39 AM) I dont how it stacks up against other guys but my gut tells me its bad for a closer to give up runs in 20% of their appearances. That's 1 in 5 times he's out there struggling. Since we've been doing the Allen-Robertson comparison Allen gave up runs in 14 out of his 67 appearances, which is... 21%.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 11:26 AM) How to Talk Baseball in 2017: 1) Pull up Fangraphs leaderboards 2) Regurgitate Allen definitely isn't an elite closer, but he's also definitely better than Robertson and no WAR figure calibrated to evaluate starting pitchers will convince me otherwise. Robertson had 4 games in 2016 where he gave up more than 1 run, Allen had 3, including his own KC-esque meltdown against our very own White Sox in August. Robertson allowed a .247 wOBA in high-leverage situations (30 IP) and a .277 wOBA with runners on base. Allen allowed a .306 wOBA (23 IP) in high leverage situations and a .283 wOBA with runners on base. I think Allen is better too, but those numbers don't support your theory that Robertson doesn't have the makeup to be a closer or tends to unravel when he gets into tight situations.

Also you still haven't really explained why Robertson is so bad anyway. Yeah his walk rate was really high last year but according to Pitch F/X he actually threw more pitches in the zone in 2016 than he did in 2014 and 2015, where his walk rates were 3.22/9 and 1.85/9. Seems pretty clear he was hurt a lot by our s***ty framing catchers. He's not an elite closer, but he's still a decent reliever.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 10:50 AM) That is one massive assumption for a pitcher who is very bad. If you think he's very bad then no team is going to want him anyway, so there's little downside to holding on to him until the deadline to see if he improves even marginally. So what's the problem?

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 10:26 AM) Will he rank Kopech if he thinks he's a reliever? He had Kopech ranked #45 at midseason last year, and wrote that after seeing him in the AFL that he showed top of the rotation potential, so I don't think he sees Kopech as a reliever.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 10:05 PM) There's being a front office apologist and then there's defending the Shields trade. Even Rick Hahn's dog knew that was a bad trade the instant they made it, let alone now. You guys just aren't thinking long-term enough, the Shields trade will end up being one of Hahn's best moves. Hahn knew that Shields is set to have the worst season of all-time in 2017, where he'll give up at least 4 runs in every start (with the lone exception of him inexplicably dominating the Cubs again and striking out Bryant 4 times, but thankfully we still lose due to a badly misplayed flyball by Avi) and the Sox will lose every single game he starts. On the back of Shields' historic awfulness, the Sox and Padres will be tied going into the last game of the season. Moncada goes 5-5 and hits for the cycle but Big Game James comes through in the clutch again with a 4 HR performance. Despite being so young, Tatis Jr. has surprisingly tore up the minors and has earned a September call-up. The Padres enter the 9th inning down a run but start a rally with 2 outs. Tatis Jr. becomes a White Sox hero when he knocks in two runs with the game winning single, securing the #1 overall pick for the White Sox. He goes on to become a solid regular but Sox fans quickly forget about him when Seth Beer becomes the first non-Trout AL player to lead the league in WAR in nearly a decade in his rookie year, leading the Sox to the playoffs.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 04:01 PM) I don't even need the predictions threads. If you're willing to bet that the garbage over 30's vets inundating the Sox roster will GAIN value by the deadline then you're betting on some massive performances. Betting on mild improvements from Abreu/Frazier/Robertson isn't betting on massive performances. They don't need to be MVP-level to gain value. And if you really believe these players are garbage over 30 vets, then they currently have no value anyway and won't do much to help the team win, so holding on to them until the deadline is basically a wash anyway.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 10:50 AM) Does it look like they are trading everyone still? Also it was more like a month ago that I said that. If they do still unload everyone I'll go back to thinking they could have a high 2018 draft pick, but right now this is probably a 75+ win team. I'm just confused as to how you think Frazier/Quintana by themselves are the difference between 75 wins and a potential 120 loss season. Even with Quintana projections have the Sox as the 3rd worst team in baseball at the moment. That might be a bit low considering the impact Moncada/Lopez/Giolito could have when they come up, but I don't think it's far off. This team is bad, and as things stand I'm not sure any other AL team should be considered below us, even the Twins. In the NL I think the Padres, Reds and Brewers are the only teams I'd really put us above right now, but with the relative weakness of the NL I'm not even that confident about it.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 10:43 AM) Its time to let go of this delusion. Sox will be picking ~10th again. A week ago you were saying if the Sox traded Frazier and Quintana they would challenge the 2003 Tigers' record and now you're saying with those two they'll be picking 10th?

Can someone post his writeup of Tatis?

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 04:41 PM) Q is a #1 on many but not sure most teams. I would think the heavy favorites to meet in the 2017 World Series are the Red Sox and Cubs. Q is a #3 on both of them. Well he'd definitely be the #1 on KC, Minnesota, Toronto, Baltimore, Seattle, Oakland, LAA, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Miami, San Diego, and Colorado for sure. That's already half of the teams. I'd also put him #1 for Arizona, Pittsburgh, Houston, Tampa Bay and NYY (though they each have arguments the other way) and you could make a case for Texas as well. Detroit is not out of the picture too if Verlander is more like 2014-15 than the 2016 version. I'd say he's comfortably the #1 for most teams.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 08:54 PM) One guy has a reputation as being a great teammate and one has a pretty awful one Right, and it was a verbal disagreement, who cares. It's not like Frazier shanked Eaton.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 01:42 PM) I normally agree with this but I actually think it's wrong. Three 55 FV bats seem to have much higher value on marketplace. I agree, and I think it was Fangraphs that put out an article about how if you put prospects into buckets of 10 (1-10, 11-20, etc.), pitching prospects have historically been as valuable as hitting prospects ranked in the next bucket down due to the increased risk. So a 55 FV bat might well be as valuable as a 60 FV pitcher.

I'm a peak guy too, so Pedro is easily my #1. Longevity is nice and all but for best ever I think peak should win out.