As opposed to the high-K, high velocity types, I feel that Hahn and the front office have shifted their focus towards finding groundball pitchers, regardless of swing and miss stuff and velocity (though both are still preferred).

 

The Sox have added Belisario and Downs in the past month. Here are their numbers

 

Belisario (missed 2011)

2010 - 61.3% GB

2012 - 64.5% GB

2013 - 61.4% GB

 

Downs

2011 - 63%

2012 - 60.4%

2013 - 64.3%

 

This is in addition to Lindstrom's career 1.55 GO/AO and 50.7% GB in 2012 and 55.6% GB in 2013. Nate Jones was at 45.5% in 2012 and 50.5% in 2013.

 

On the flip side are the two pitchers the Sox have traded, Santiago and Reed. Santiago was at 38.2% in 2012 and 36.4% in 2013, while Reed was at 32.9% in 2012 and 33% in 2013.

 

Does this give any indication to you on who they could inquire on next? Who still may be available? What say you in general? Is it "wite, shut the hell up!"?

As opposed to the high-K, high velocity types, I feel that Hahn and the front office have shifted their focus towards finding groundball pitchers, regardless of swing and miss stuff and velocity (though both are still preferred).

 

The Sox have added Belisario and Downs in the past month. Here are their numbers

 

Belisario (missed 2011)

2010 - 61.3% GB

2012 - 64.5% GB

2013 - 61.4% GB

 

Downs

2011 - 63%

2012 - 60.4%

2013 - 64.3%

 

This is in addition to Lindstrom's career 1.55 GO/AO and 50.7% GB in 2012 and 55.6% GB in 2013. Nate Jones was at 45.5% in 2012 and 50.5% in 2013.

 

On the flip side are the two pitchers the Sox have traded, Santiago and Reed. Santiago was at 38.2% in 2012 and 36.4% in 2013, while Reed was at 32.9% in 2012 and 33% in 2013.

 

Does this give any indication to you on who they could inquire on next? Who still may be available? What say you in general? Is it "wite, shut the hell up!"?

 

Nah, it's nice catch Wite, for me. Not insignificant. Fly ballers will always be somewhat dicey in our park.

 

Eric O'Flaherty? Last year he had a GB percentage in at 60 something

 

Funny thing is he was on the list with guess who? Downs and Lindstrom

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/02/2014...ree-agents.html

 

 

Edited December 19, 201312 yr by Baron

Cooper should GM the bullpen at this point.

Is that a good thing considering how awful the defense was last season?

Nah, it's nice catch Wite, for me. Not insignificant. Fly ballers will always be somewhat dicey in our park.

 

Oh, I agree, but I was getting kind of long winded and I like making fun of myself.

 

FWIW, here are the numbers of other candidates for the bullpen and pitching staff in general (and I wouldn't even put these down, except that ground ball rates stabilize quickly, so these are going to be pretty indicative of the type of pitcher they are)

 

Webb - 56.3%, 11.1 IP

Petricka - 62.9%, 19.1 IP

Veal - 52.6%, 29.1 IP (and 47.1% over 58.2 career IP)

Leesman - 57.4%, 15.1 IP

Rienzo - 47.8%, 56 IP

Johnson - 46.4%, 27.2 IP

Edited December 19, 201312 yr by witesoxfan

Is that a good thing considering how awful the defense was last season?

 

I think much of that was incredibly fluky, and the team should still be solid defensively, but the point behind having a lot of ground ball pitchers is that ground balls do not do a lot of damage, even though, of the 3 batted balls, they provide the second highest average (line drives > ground balls > fly balls).

I think you're onto something.

Look at what Hahn said re the Bellisario signing:

"He is a power arm with plus stuff who profiles well for our ballpark."

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/cws/white-...p;vkey=news_cws

I also think this was something Williams got away from in previous years, instead going for big names, big stuff, and sexy strikeout numbers. That wasn't all bad - Crain gave the Sox 2 and a half great years - but Matt Thornton was a gas can by the end and Jake Peavy gave the Sox 1 good year out of 4. Those ground ball guys, especially if they can strike a fair number of people out, should improve the quality and consistency of the pitching staff.

 

Now, pay more attention and increase the number of infield shifts you use, and we'll really be cooking with peanut oil.

Oh, I agree, but I was getting kind of long winded and I like making fun of myself.

 

FWIW, here are the numbers of other candidates for the bullpen and pitching staff in general (and I wouldn't even put these down, except that ground ball rates stabilize quickly, so these are going to be pretty indicative of the type of pitcher they are)

 

Webb - 56.3%, 11.1 IP

Petricka - 62.9%, 19.1 IP

Veal - 52.6%, 29.1 IP (and 47.1% over 58.2 career IP)

Leesman - 57.4%, 15.1 IP

Rienzo - 47.8%, 56 IP

Johnson - 46.4%, 27.2 IP

 

 

The other 47% of Veal's left the park.

Didn't the Pirates also use this theory last year? Somewhat with their starters? I know they employed a lot of defensive positioning as well.

Didn't the Pirates also use this theory last year? Somewhat with their starters? I know they employed a lot of defensive positioning as well.

 

They believe in ground ball pitchers quite a bit, but yes, that's exactly what I had in mind.

Those ground ball guys, especially if they can strike a fair number of people out, should improve the quality and consistency of the pitching staff.

 

Now, pay more attention and increase the number of infield shifts you use, and we'll really be cooking with peanut oil.

Groundball guys are great if you have the infielders to move and catch them and if you have a OF's who don't have to play at the wall all game.

I wonder what the numbers are in our park for doubles and triples. The gaps seem to play incredibly small. I actually think it's a good park for fly ball pitchers because the gaps balance out the HR's. I have no evidence to back this up; just thinking aloud.

Edited December 19, 201312 yr by TaylorStSox

Now, pay more attention and increase the number of infield shifts you use, and we'll really be cooking with peanut oil.

 

Funny you mention this. As soon as I read the original post, it got me thinking of that article about the Pirates employing a strategy on their staff of learning/throwing the 2 seam fastball and then employing the most shifts in MLB aside from one or two teams. I would love to see the Sox jumping into the 21st century of pitching to contact and inducing more ground balls. It may help keep pitch counts lower and even improve defense and the fielders will be ready at all times and not get caught back on their heels.

I wonder what the numbers are in our park for doubles and triples. The gaps seem to play incredibly small. I actually think it's a good park for fly ball pitchers because the gaps balance out the HR's. I have no evidence to back this up; just thinking aloud.

 

Obviously, some of it is the quality of the team, but it had the fewest amount of doubles - 213 (PetCo was next at 225, Fenway led with 348), second fewest amount of triples (Dodger Stadium had 11, USCF had 12, Camden Yards had 14), while allowing the 6th amount of home runs (179).

 

In 2012, it was 22nd in doubles with 255 and 21st in triples with 23 while being 3rd in homers with 228.

In 2011, it was 28th in doubles with 242 and 25th in triples with 19 while being 10th in homers with 166.

 

I think there is some credence to what you are saying, but a lot of times, you can't control how far fly balls fly. USCF, compared to Dodger Stadium which is a similar sized park, tends to see balls fly out to left field instead of having the wind push it back into the stadium.

 

Obviously, some of it is the quality of the team, but it had the fewest amount of doubles - 213 (PetCo was next at 225, Fenway led with 348), second fewest amount of triples (Dodger Stadium had 11, USCF had 12, Camden Yards had 14), while allowing the 6th amount of home runs (179).

 

In 2012, it was 22nd in doubles with 255 and 21st in triples with 23 while being 3rd in homers with 228.

In 2011, it was 28th in doubles with 242 and 25th in triples with 19 while being 10th in homers with 166.

 

I think there is some credence to what you are saying, but a lot of times, you can't control how far fly balls fly. USCF, compared to Dodger Stadium which is a similar sized park, tends to see balls fly out to left field instead of having the wind push it back into the stadium.

Interesting. I've always thought it was a terrible park for line drive hitters and a great park for HR hitters. I've always been in favor of the Sox loading up on power hitters for this reason.

Now, pay more attention and increase the number of infield shifts you use, and we'll really be cooking with peanut oil.

You think Ventura is down with that?

Peavy was much more of a groundball pitcher pre-White Sox. His sinker really quit sinking post-surgery.

They're really going to have to be careful about who they employ at SS if this is the case.

 

If Ramirez is traded, Sanchez is the one with the best defensive profile for that position.

 

Now that 2 of the top 4 FA's (position players) for next season are probably no go's for the Sox (Headley and Sandoval), Hanley Ramirez becomes the most interesting candidate for SS, but he's not really a full-time SS at this point in his career, unless you are willing to only get 100-120 games out of him.

 

That said, offense wise, he's far and away the most interesting FA target because of the hit tool he brings to the SS position.

 

It's going to be an interesting decision to invest the next big contract numbers into C, SS or the starting rotation.

 

 

As far as Peavy goes, I'm willing to say he gave us a good 1 1/2 seasons out of 4...

Edited December 20, 201312 yr by caulfield12

They're really going to have to be careful about who they employ at SS if this is the case.

 

If Ramirez is traded, Sanchez is the one with the best defensive profile for that position.

 

Now that 2 of the top 4 FA's (position players) for next season are probably no go's for the Sox (Headley and Sandoval), Hanley Ramirez becomes the most interesting candidate for SS, but he's not really a full-time SS at this point in his career, unless you are willing to only get 100-120 games out of him.

 

That said, offense wise, he's far and away the most interesting FA target because of the hit tool he brings to the SS position.

 

It's going to be an interesting decision to invest the next big contract numbers into C, SS or the starting rotation.

 

 

As far as Peavy goes, I'm willing to say he gave us a good 1 1/2 seasons out of 4...

 

Garcia. I haven't seen enough him to really know how good he is, but my god that kid's got some tools.

You think Ventura is down with that?

 

Frankly, if Clint Hurdle, who is the oldest of the old school, is down with it, then I have no doubt Ventura would get on board. It's a matter of whether the White Sox will get on board.

Peavy was much more of a groundball pitcher pre-White Sox. His sinker really quit sinking post-surgery.

I hadn't noticed this. Was it this or did he stop throwing it?