Jump to content

Sox exercise buyout on Thomas' contract


Steff
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(3E8 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 01:58 AM)
giles.jpg

 

Just for fun, I layed U.S. Cellular's dimensions on top of Petco's dimensions with Giles 2B's, 3B's, and flyouts charted on top.  I marked balls that would be a home run in the Cell with a yellow circle.  I put 2 circles by the upper right-hand power alley because there are two flyouts superimposed on each other.

 

It's kinda hard to see, but the Cell's wall is the dotted line. 

 

Looks like Giles would have had 16 more home runs (but about 10 less doubles and triples) if Petco had U.S. Cellular dimensions.

Haha, wow man, props to you for doing that but yeesh to much time on your hands?. :P

Edited by Rowand44
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 03:05 AM)
Haha, wow man, props to you for doing but yeesh to much time on your hands?. :P

It's not too hard. I didn't actually put all those flyouts and hits on that chart, it came that way. Takes a couple minutes total with the wonder that is Microsoft Paint ©.

 

:)

Edited by 3E8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 05:06 AM)
you also have no facts which makes you irresponsible. That means you have no credibility (ouch, using a Mariotti line)

Am I writing an article for a newspaper here?! good god. How many people have physically shrunk in the last few years [after looking like freaks of nature] along with some of their big power numbers? Giles is one of them.

 

The point is I'd stay away from a guy like him. And if you don't like my posts due to my being "irresponsible", stay away from them in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 01:29 AM)
But Giles also had a .333/.463/.545 line in those away game, with a 70/24 BB/K ratio, and 26 doubles. Compare that to say Paulie who had 8 more HR's in away games, but 12 less doubles and a much worse K/BB ratio.

 

Giles doesn't have to hit for massive amounts of power to be successful.

 

Last yr, Giles had a higher SLG % at home.

 

Whatever the reason, I don't think Giles will hit for over a .600 SLG like he did in Pitt a few yrs back. Add in the fact he wants to play on the west coast, all this talk about him playing for the sox in 2006 is just fiction anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(beck72 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 10:34 PM)
Last yr, Giles had a higher SLG % at home.

 

Whatever the reason, I don't think Giles will hit for over a .600 SLG like he did in Pitt a few yrs back. Add in the fact he wants to play on the west coast, all this talk about him playing for the sox in 2006 is just fiction anyway

Everyone knows the chances of us signing Giles are minute at best, we're just debating how much he's actually worth based on his stats.

 

As for this year SLG%;

HOME - .417%

AWAY - .545%

 

Even if Giles doesn't hit for a SLG% over .600, his home SLG% will surely go up if he leaves San Diego. And so long as he keeps the patient approach, the OPS will probably go up, depending on how much he's got left in the tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(3E8 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 01:58 AM)
giles.jpg

 

Just for fun, I layed U.S. Cellular's dimensions on top of Petco's dimensions with Giles 2B's, 3B's, and flyouts charted on top.  I marked balls that would be a home run in the Cell with a yellow circle.  I put 2 circles by the upper right-hand power alley because there are two flyouts superimposed on each other.

 

It's kinda hard to see, but the Cell's wall is the dotted line. 

 

Looks like Giles would have had 16 more home runs (but about 10 less doubles and triples) if Petco had U.S. Cellular dimensions.

 

That's a nifty chart. Good job on that, but I doubt it takes into consideration trajectory. Most of those balls right by the wall? I venture to guess that they probably hit the wall and are not hrs. Then you should also factor in the beauty of the unbalanced schedule. The AL Central ERA: 3.61 (Cle), 3.71 (Min), 4.51 (Det), 5.49 (KC) vs. the NL West: 4.33 (SF), 4.38 (LA), 4.84 (Arz), 5.13 (Col). That's a 4.33 (AL so you should minus .3 which = 4.03) average vs. 4.67.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(beck72 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 11:34 AM)
Last yr, Giles had a higher SLG % at home.

 

Whatever the reason, I don't think Giles will hit for over a .600 SLG like he did in Pitt a few yrs back. Add in the fact he wants to play on the west coast, all this talk about him playing for the sox in 2006 is just fiction anyway

 

Did you read 3E8's chart at all? 16 more homers!!!!!!

 

Then again, maybe someone like Christian Guzman would be a better fit...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 01:56 PM)
Did you read 3E8's chart at all?  16 more homers!!!!!!

 

Then again, maybe someone like Christian Guzman would be a better fit...?

But keep in mind some doubles and triples would be subtracted (and that my chart isn't very scientific). He wouldn't slug over .600 at the Cell. But that's something that's damn hard to do. Ortiz barely made it (.604) with 40 2B's and 47 HR's. I do think he would be a great fit here but it's probably a moot point since I don't really see us getting into a bidding war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 6, 2005 -> 06:56 PM)
Did you read 3E8's chart at all?  16 more homers!!!!!!

 

Then again, maybe someone like Christian Guzman would be a better fit...?

 

The chart just hurt my head.

 

As for Mr. Guzman....there's a comedian in every bunch. :D I still think he'll play better than '05

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(beck72 @ Nov 7, 2005 -> 12:49 AM)
The chart just hurt my head.

 

As for Mr. Guzman....there's a comedian in every bunch.  :D  I still think he'll play better than '05

 

LOL, beck, I'm sure you can go back and find something dumb I said in the offseason if you really felt like it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

f anyone gave us a World Series, it was Kenny Williams. He was the one with the foresight to put together the collection of different players that made us what we were. He will decide what pieces we need in '06 to defend our title, whether that includes Konerko or not.

 

I agree, except I guarantee you he would "include Konerko" if he was given the money. If Reinsdorf doesn't give him a similar offer as the Angels after Paulie giving him that ball ... he is truly an ingrate. I'm just saying the one poster wanted to dump Paulie and give Giles only two mill less. That is stupid. Pay the extra couple million, espeicaly when Forbes just said our franchise was worth some astronomical figure.

It's all monopoly money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(greg775 @ Nov 7, 2005 -> 12:16 AM)
I agree, except I guarantee you he would "include Konerko" if he was given the money. If Reinsdorf doesn't give him a similar offer as the Angels after Paulie giving him that ball ... he is truly an ingrate. I'm just saying the one poster wanted to dump Paulie and give Giles only two mill less. That is stupid. Pay the extra couple million, espeicaly when Forbes just said our franchise was worth some astronomical figure.

It's all monopoly money.

 

OK, I hope Paulie is back, but I have to point something out here. What a business or operating unit is worth in sale value has almost ZERO to do with how much money they have to spend. The Sox may be worth $300 million, but if they are only breaking even or even losing money (which some MLB teams are, though not the Sox), then they aren't in a position to just throw free cash at someone. The important numbers are revenue, cost and operating profit.

 

Here is an example. Right now, United Airlines is worth many hundreds of millions of dollars, just because of the gate rights and flying stock they own. Does that mean they have the cash to spend an extra $20 million on another executive, when they are losing hundreds of millions a year?

 

It just doesn't work that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 7, 2005 -> 06:59 AM)
Here is an example.  Right now, United Airlines is worth many hundreds of millions of dollars, just because of the gate rights and flying stock they own.  Does that mean they have the cash to spend an extra $20 million on another executive, when they are losing hundreds of millions a year?

That hasn't stopped any company in this country from giving those executives $20 million raises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...