Data, Development and the FUTURE of White Sox Pitching | The White Sox Podcast

[southsider2k5]

8 minutes ago, almagest said:

No, I’m saying the Sox got the better of the deal for sure, but Sale has overwhelming stuff. He’s hall of fame caliber. Guys like Davis Martin needs every advantage they can get, consequences be damned.

But you lose guys like Chris Sale too. Dude got 36 starts from 2019 to 2023 with the Red Sox.  It was 11 if you subtract out 2019.  And then you still have to find someone to cover those other starts.

The Dodgers do this with guys like Kershaw pitching half a season for a LONG time now.  They are willing to spend $150 million to get Glasnow for half a season.  That can't be us.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

42 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Yes it is. 

The example given in a previous interview was that a player would get promoted, and it would take days for his data to catch up to him, so the coaching staff would have literal days of starting from zero with this new guy until they had access to his data. Now the access is instant. One is clearly better than the other. 

I wouldn't think that in a "fluff" interview for general consumption the team will be revealing their proprietary models, or competitive philosophies. 

What is the value add of having access to data (not assessments, or scouting reports, or PD plans) three days early? Was there really such a lack in communication throughout the org that the only way to derive insights for promoted players was via data on a cloud? What organizational gain is being derived from that? Is it meaningless? I guess not. Is it adding anything to a given players expected outcome? Of course not.

Also,  what does it even mean to "reveal" a proprietary model? No one is asking them to release any information. How you speak about your usage of data and your evolution of it is very telling in regards to how you're leveraging it. This is a topic I am very fluent in, unlike pretty much everything else I talk about where I'm a complete moron. The examples they provided for data optimization and advancements were examples that would be provided by a first year analyst for a consolidation project.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 hour ago, almagest said:

I think have just been so atrociously poor at developing hitting that by comparison pitching looks good. It’s not like the Sox lead the league in pitching statistics every year. They’ve just hit big on three left handed starters.

Tihs narrative isn't true though. They've hit on more than Sale, Rodon and Crochet. The White Sox have a lot of success stories.

The Sox got 170 innings of a 3.8 FIP out of Phillip fucking Humber

They turned Mark Buehrhle into a borderline hall of famer.

They unlocked Gavin Floyd's talent that had remained hidden.

The acquired and turned Matt Thornton from an out-of-control reliever into one of the games best.

They converted Sergio Santos from a SS into a dominant closer with an elite pitch.

They acquired John Danks as a failed prospect and turned him into a viable ++ MLB arm prior to injury.

They took a guy released by the Yankees and turned him into one of the most consistent pitchers in MLB (Quintana) who went on to acquire Cease who you took from being a designated reliever (read every scouting report that exists prior to the trade) and turned him into an ACE.

They acquired Gio and Lopez when their stock had tanked and rebuilt Giolito.

They developed Bassit and then gave him away for Bum Samardzija.

They reinvented Nate Jones and Hector Santiago and made them both viable big leaguers (Jones was +++ before injury). They did the same with Kahnle.

That's just me pulling cases from the top of my head without looking at all the details. Claiming the White Sox only developed Rodon, Sale and Crochet is nonsense.

Edited June 25 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[Bob Sacamano]

44 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

But you lose guys like Chris Sale too. Dude got 36 starts from 2019 to 2023 with the Red Sox.  It was 11 if you subtract out 2019.  And then you still have to find someone to cover those other starts.

The Dodgers do this with guys like Kershaw pitching half a season for a LONG time now.  They are willing to spend $150 million to get Glasnow for half a season.  That can't be us.

I don't even buy that these guys (Snell, Glasnow) couldn't pitch right now. It feels like they're saving their arms for second half/post-season.

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

What is the value add of having access to data (not assessments, or scouting reports, or PD plans) three days early? Was there really such a lack in communication throughout the org that the only way to derive insights for promoted players was via data on a cloud? What organizational gain is being derived from that? Is it meaningless? I guess not. Is it adding anything to a given players expected outcome? Of course not.

This truly puzzles me that you're asking this. 

Coaches are a limited resource. 13-15 pitchers on a team, it's helpful to hit the ground running rather than starting from zero. You really don't have to pretend that any advancement in the organization is negative and unnecessary. Yes, the Sox' development procedures have been abysmal, from how they're described. They're trying to get the infrastructure up to where everyone else is. That's not bad. If you're tired of hearing it, don't listen to the interviews. 

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Tihs narrative isn't true though. They've hit on more than Sale, Rodon and Crochet. The White Sox have a lot of success stories.

The Sox got 170 innings of a 3.8 FIP out of Phillip fucking Humber

They turned Mark Buehrhle into a borderline hall of famer.

They unlocked Gavin Floyd's talent that had remained hidden.

The acquired and turned Matt Thornton from an out-of-control reliever into one of the games best.

They converted Sergio Santos from a SS into a dominant closer with an elite pitch.

They acquired John Danks as a failed prospect and turned him into a viable ++ MLB arm prior to injury.

They took a guy released by the Yankees and turned him into one of the most consistent pitchers in MLB (Quintana) who went on to acquire Cease who you took from being a designated reliever (read every scouting report that exists prior to the trade) and turned him into an ACE.

They acquired Gio and Lopez when their stock had tanked and rebuilt Giolito.

They developed Bassit and then gave him away for Bum Samardzija.

They reinvented Nate Jones and Hector Santiago and made them both viable big leaguers (Jones was +++ before injury). They did the same with Kahnle.

That's just me pulling cases from the top of my head without looking at all the details. Claiming the White Sox only developed Rodon, Sale and Crochet is nonsense.

I agree with pretty much all of this. Sometimes, upgrading the infrastructure of a successful department and keeping it successful is the low hanging fruit. 

[Bonerko4Konerko]

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

What is the value add of having access to data (not assessments, or scouting reports, or PD plans) three days early?

What value is there in having access to data whenever possible? Is this a serious question?

[almagest]

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Tihs narrative isn't true though. They've hit on more than Sale, Rodon and Crochet. The White Sox have a lot of success stories.

The Sox got 170 innings of a 3.8 FIP out of Phillip fucking Humber

They turned Mark Buehrhle into a borderline hall of famer.

They unlocked Gavin Floyd's talent that had remained hidden.

The acquired and turned Matt Thornton from an out-of-control reliever into one of the games best.

They converted Sergio Santos from a SS into a dominant closer with an elite pitch.

They acquired John Danks as a failed prospect and turned him into a viable ++ MLB arm prior to injury.

They took a guy released by the Yankees and turned him into one of the most consistent pitchers in MLB (Quintana) who went on to acquire Cease who you took from being a designated reliever (read every scouting report that exists prior to the trade) and turned him into an ACE.

They acquired Gio and Lopez when their stock had tanked and rebuilt Giolito.

They developed Bassit and then gave him away for Bum Samardzija.

They reinvented Nate Jones and Hector Santiago and made them both viable big leaguers (Jones was +++ before injury). They did the same with Kahnle.

That's just me pulling cases from the top of my head without looking at all the details. Claiming the White Sox only developed Rodon, Sale and Crochet is nonsense.

It's telling that more than half these guys were somewhere between 13 and 25 years ago. That was a completely different org and league at that point.

Let's stick to the last 10 years, which is somewhat modern. In that time, you have Cease, who is definitely NOT an ace. He had one ace quality year and regressed due to the same command issues that have plagued him throughout his career. 

You have Lopez, who failed as a starter here, turned into a decent reliever, then caught lightning in a bottle last year in Atlanta. Hardly a victory lap.

You have Giolito, who was probably the worst starter in baseball, then went outside of the organization to Katz who helped refine his mechanics (which I'm sure helped Katz get the job after they fired Cooper). Then Giolito turned in three years of #1-#3 starter quality before he fell off a cliff. Victory for sure, though he's the only big value they got out of that trade. Assuming Eaton didn't get hurt, they might've just been better off keeping him.

You have Bassitt, who barely pitched in the majors here, so who knows how well he would've developed after his rookie season. Trading him for Samardzijia was still incredibly stupid but I'm not giving the Sox credit for a major league career he didn't have on their team.

Kahnle was a good pickup, but who knows how much his struggles were due to the Coors effect and playing for the only org that rivals the Sox in shittiness. He's also a reliever. They're wildcards.

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Tihs narrative isn't true though. They've hit on more than Sale, Rodon and Crochet. The White Sox have a lot of success stories.

The Sox got 170 innings of a 3.8 FIP out of Phillip fucking Humber

They turned Mark Buehrhle into a borderline hall of famer.

They unlocked Gavin Floyd's talent that had remained hidden.

The acquired and turned Matt Thornton from an out-of-control reliever into one of the games best.

They converted Sergio Santos from a SS into a dominant closer with an elite pitch.

They acquired John Danks as a failed prospect and turned him into a viable ++ MLB arm prior to injury.

They took a guy released by the Yankees and turned him into one of the most consistent pitchers in MLB (Quintana) who went on to acquire Cease who you took from being a designated reliever (read every scouting report that exists prior to the trade) and turned him into an ACE.

They acquired Gio and Lopez when their stock had tanked and rebuilt Giolito.

They developed Bassit and then gave him away for Bum Samardzija.

They reinvented Nate Jones and Hector Santiago and made them both viable big leaguers (Jones was +++ before injury). They did the same with Kahnle.

That's just me pulling cases from the top of my head without looking at all the details. Claiming the White Sox only developed Rodon, Sale and Crochet is nonsense.

And most importantly almost all of these guys turn their turns almost every single time.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

17 minutes ago, almagest said:

It's telling that more than half these guys were somewhere between 13 and 25 years ago. That was a completely different org and league at that point.

Let's stick to the last 10 years, which is somewhat modern. In that time, you have Cease, who is definitely NOT an ace. He had one ace quality year and regressed due to the same command issues that have plagued him throughout his career. 

You have Lopez, who failed as a starter here, turned into a decent reliever, then caught lightning in a bottle last year in Atlanta. Hardly a victory lap.

You have Giolito, who was probably the worst starter in baseball, then went outside of the organization to Katz who helped refine his mechanics (which I'm sure helped Katz get the job after they fired Cooper). Then Giolito turned in three years of #1-#3 starter quality before he fell off a cliff. Victory for sure, though he's the only big value they got out of that trade. Assuming Eaton didn't get hurt, they might've just been better off keeping him.

You have Bassitt, who barely pitched in the majors here, so who knows how well he would've developed after his rookie season. Trading him for Samardzijia was still incredibly stupid but I'm not giving the Sox credit for a major league career he didn't have on their team.

Kahnle was a good pickup, but who knows how much his struggles were due to the Coors effect and playing for the only org that rivals the Sox in shittiness. He's also a reliever. They're wildcards.

My guy, what are you talking about?

One, the game has not evolved significantly in the past 10 years. There's no reason to create these fake windows. 10 years is not long enough to evaluate development.

Giolito, Quintana, Cease, Rodon, Sale, Lopez, Bassitt and Crochet are still pitching in the MLB and with success. 12-25 years ago?? One won a cy young last year and the other may win one this year. 

4/5 of their last playoff rotation was home grown and the 6th one was Dane Dunning who was also home grown. 

Edited June 25 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[almagest]

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

But you lose guys like Chris Sale too. Dude got 36 starts from 2019 to 2023 with the Red Sox.  It was 11 if you subtract out 2019.  And then you still have to find someone to cover those other starts.

The Dodgers do this with guys like Kershaw pitching half a season for a LONG time now.  They are willing to spend $150 million to get Glasnow for half a season.  That can't be us.

I don't know who you're arguing with. We agree. Sale, Glasnow and Kershaw are guys who have enough talent to pitch at less than max effort and still get guys out reliably. I will caveat Kershaw, though. He was an incredibly reliable pitcher (200+ IP for 6 years, then 150+ IP for 4 years) before covid, age, and mileage on his arm caught up with him.

I'm saying more marginal guys need every advantage they can get, and that's who is going to continue to go after max effort strategies. They're the ones who will need TJ even if the more talented guys know when to dial it back, just like the only guys getting caught with steroids now are the ones who need them to move up in the minors/have a shot at an MLB roster.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

The White Sox would have the best starting staff in baseball TODAY if they kept their guys. I'm not sure why anyone is arguing their successes are in the past. 

The best starting staff by a mile too. Sale, Rodon, Crochet, Bassitt, Cease with reserves of Giolito, and Lopez. 

[almagest]

24 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

My guy, what are you talking about?

One, the game has not evolved significantly in the past 10 years. There's no reason to create these fake windows. 10 years is not long enough to evaluate development.

Giolito, Quintana, Cease, Rodon, Sale, Lopez, Bassitt and Crochet are still pitching in the MLB and with success. 12-25 years ago?? One won a cy young last year and the other may win one this year. 

4/5 of their last playoff rotation was home grown and the 6th one was Dane Dunning who was also home grown. 

Then the White Sox must be much better at hitting talent evaluation and development than we give them credit for, because that list is even better than the pitching one you gave. Look who came through the system from the late 90s on - Carlos Lee, Magglio Ordonez, Paul Konerko, Aaron Rowand, Joe Crede, Alexei Ramirez, Tim Anderson, Yoan Moncada for 9 WAR over 2 seasons, Eloy before injuries did him in, Marcus Semien, Fernando Tatis Jr

They had some stellar trades and FA acquisitions too. They recognized the value Jose Valentin represented (then fucked it up by replacing him with Royce Clayton, though Valentin was basically done after playing for the Sox), they turned Uribe into an incredibly valuable player for a WS run, they resurrected Jim Thome's career after a terrible, injury plagued 2005 in Philly and Jermaine Dye was mediocre in Oakland then put up incredible numbers in 2006 and won World Series MVP in '05.

If we're going back this far, then honestly we should be pretty happy with the results we've seen.

Edited June 25 by almagest

[southsider2k5]

19 minutes ago, almagest said:

I don't know who you're arguing with. We agree. Sale, Glasnow and Kershaw are guys who have enough talent to pitch at less than max effort and still get guys out reliably. I will caveat Kershaw, though. He was an incredibly reliable pitcher (200+ IP for 6 years, then 150+ IP for 4 years) before covid, age, and mileage on his arm caught up with him.

I'm saying more marginal guys need every advantage they can get, and that's who is going to continue to go after max effort strategies. They're the ones who will need TJ even if the more talented guys know when to dial it back, just like the only guys getting caught with steroids now are the ones who need them to move up in the minors/have a shot at an MLB roster.

But those aren't the only guys we are working with.  We literally just did alterations to both Schultz and Hagen Smith, who are in the Sale type league of arm talent.

[Chicago White Sox]

3 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

The job of data is merely to represent, statistically, the observations coaches and PD departments have been monitoring for years. Is it more exact? Of course. Has it revolutionized pitching in baseball? Not for the reasons you're citing. In fact, it has limited sustained success, dramatically decreased average innings pitched and tenures, all the while increasing injury frequency.

Also, decreasing the sample would just increase statistical noise. Using a 20 year window allows a long enough window to assess careers and the general impact of process/programs.

It's fascinating how I spend much of my days now telling people that data has become overvalued and overrated. The amount of people I've witnessed in my career who leverage data for pure stupidity and think, that, because they're leveraging data it's valuable, is endless. In my personal life I feel as though I spend half my days driving down Machine Learning (predictive models) and LLM implementations as oversold tools that should be a resource but not a decision maker, and the other half of my days implementing and selling the value of those products to businesses. I guess I'm part of the problem!

The Sox have shown zero examples, in my opinion, of the viability of their data usage. The examples I was given the other day were people that have accomplished nothing and actually have gotten worse YoY (Smith/Schultz and etc).

Again, using a 20 year sample is completely unreliable to evaluate how the org is doing today at something.  Pretty much every member of the org outside of Jerry is long fucking gone from the beginning of that sample.  I fully get there will be noise with shorter sample sizes, but that doesn’t change the fact that assigning credit to past leaders, processes, & outcomes is completely irrelevant to things today.  Again, name me all this pitching that we developed under Hahn and explain what we he was doing so differently from other orgs that made us industry leaders.

As for the data discussion, you are again missing the forest from the trees.  You are taking about machine learning when these fucks couldn’t do basic statistical analysis in house and were unable align specific definitions for fairly basic (but critical) advanced metrics and how to apply them.  Analysis paralysis is a thing, but utilizing bad data and applying the takeaways incorrectly is a dangerous fucking problem and has held us back for years.  At the end of the day, we need to learn the basics before we have to worry about any of the problems you are highlighting. 

[almagest]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

But those aren't the only guys we are working with.  We literally just did alterations to both Schultz and Hagen Smith, who are in the Sale type league of arm talent.

Those weren't alterations for velocity or improving pitch quality, though. Hagen Smith was for command, and Schultz they're trying to prevent him from relying on his cutter too much.

[southsider2k5]

9 minutes ago, almagest said:

Those weren't alterations for velocity or improving pitch quality, though. Hagen Smith was for command, and Schultz they're trying to prevent him from relying on his cutter too much.

Do you really believe we are separating these guys into haves and have nots as to what we are doing with them?  Do you have any actual support for that?

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

13 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Again, using a 20 year sample is completely unreliable to evaluate how the org is doing today at something.  Pretty much every member of the org outside of Jerry is long fucking gone from the beginning of that sample.  I fully get there will be noise with shorter sample sizes, but that doesn’t change the fact that assigning credit to past leaders, processes, & outcomes is completely irrelevant to things today.  Again, name me all this pitching that we developed under Hahn and explain what we he was doing so differently from other orgs that made us industry leaders.

As for the data discussion, you are again missing the forest from the trees.  You are taking about machine learning when these fucks couldn’t do basic statistical analysis in house and were unable align specific definitions for fairly basic (but critical) advanced metrics and how to apply them.  Analysis paralysis is a thing, but utilizing bad data and applying the takeaways incorrectly is a dangerous fucking problem and has held us back for years.  At the end of the day, we need to learn the basics before we have to worry about any of the problems you are highlighting. 

I doubt the Sox were applying much of their bad data to any decision making previously which is a lot better than applying data incorrectly imo. 

I've listed tons of pitching success stories so I'll spare you the repeat. 

[almagest]

11 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Do you really believe we are separating these guys into haves and have nots as to what we are doing with them?  Do you have any actual support for that?

They might. If a borderline guy has a mediocre fastball (which is like <95 now), but the Sox have some changes that could result in higher velocity, why wouldn't they suggest them to him? Also, these kinds of guys are going to search out that advice themselves. That's why I brought up the steroid example - any advantage they can find, even if it has bad effects longer term.

Someone like Smith or Schultz already has the stuff. They're not gonna mess with that unless there's a reason to.

[southsider2k5]

13 minutes ago, almagest said:

They might. If a borderline guy has a mediocre fastball (which is like <95 now), but the Sox have some changes that could result in higher velocity, why wouldn't they suggest them to him? Also, these kinds of guys are going to search out that advice themselves. That's why I brought up the steroid example - any advantage they can find, even if it has bad effects longer term.

Someone like Smith or Schultz already has the stuff. They're not gonna mess with that unless there's a reason to.

Again, that is a super definitive statement that I have yet to see any back up for, especially with as many injuries as we have seen in this system this year, including top guys.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

34 minutes ago, almagest said:

Then the White Sox must be much better at hitting talent evaluation and development than we give them credit for, because that list is even better than the pitching one you gave. Look who came through the system from the late 90s on - Carlos Lee, Magglio Ordonez, Paul Konerko, Aaron Rowand, Joe Crede, Alexei Ramirez, Tim Anderson, Yoan Moncada for 9 WAR over 2 seasons, Eloy before injuries did him in, Marcus Semien, Fernando Tatis Jr

They had some stellar trades and FA acquisitions too. They recognized the value Jose Valentin represented (then fucked it up by replacing him with Royce Clayton, though Valentin was basically done after playing for the Sox), they turned Uribe into an incredibly valuable player for a WS run, they resurrected Jim Thome's career after a terrible, injury plagued 2005 in Philly and Jermaine Dye was mediocre in Oakland then put up incredible numbers in 2006 and won World Series MVP in '05.

If we're going back this far, then honestly we should be pretty happy with the results we've seen.

Everyone i named has been effective AFTER the Sox won the World Series. 

I dont know why people refuse to acknowledge that the Sox have been very successful at developing pitching, but it is what it is. 

[almagest]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Again, that is a super definitive statement that I have yet to see any back up for, especially with as many injuries as we have seen in this system this year, including top guys.

You're assuming the injuries we've seen were due to things the Sox were telling them, though. You can't make that assumption.

We've heard nothing about the Sox coaching Schultz or Smith to gain velocity or make pitch shape adjustments that would lead to additional arm stress. It's also sensible to not try to make a guy who already has top tier stuff ever so slightly better. That's diminishing returns. You help them with consistency and with being able to endure a full season of pitching load.

[almagest]

8 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Everyone i named has been effective AFTER the Sox won the World Series. 

I dont know why people refuse to acknowledge that the Sox have been very successful at developing pitching, but it is what it is. 

Everyone I named was as well, except for Valentin. Looks like the Sox have been pretty good at identifying and developing hitting talent.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

9 minutes ago, almagest said:

Everyone I named was as well, except for Valentin. Looks like the Sox have been pretty good at identifying and developing hitting talent.

I'm not going to waste my time on you gaslighting me with nonsense. 

You know it's a laughable comp. For the third time, the White Sox would have the best rotation in baseball TODAY if they kept their guys. How you all have talked yourselves into believing the Sox needed to overhaul pitching development first I'll never understand. 

 

[southsider2k5]

17 minutes ago, almagest said:

You're assuming the injuries we've seen were due to things the Sox were telling them, though. You can't make that assumption.

We've heard nothing about the Sox coaching Schultz or Smith to gain velocity or make pitch shape adjustments that would lead to additional arm stress. It's also sensible to not try to make a guy who already has top tier stuff ever so slightly better. That's diminishing returns. You help them with consistency and with being able to endure a full season of pitching load.

So the Sox made all of these amazing positive changes, but none of them caused these injuries, even though we see it all over baseball?  That is awful convient.