Walks way too many.

His lifetime walk rate is a bit misleading. He had a ton of intentional walks charged to him.

The way Jones finished last year, he was a reasonable option as a placeholder, at least, and possibly better. He just hasn't been healthy, but it's still early.

 

Possibly better???? Reed had 40 saves last year on one of the worst teams in basball. Those 40 saves ranked him 7th overall in saves. You are dreaming if you expected Jones to be better. Jones , healthy might get 20 saves. I have no problem with the trade since the Sox needed to rebuild, but Reed will be very difficult to replace.

Edited April 24, 201411 yr by SCCWS

Possibly better???? Reed had 40 saves last year on one of the worst teams in basball. Those 40 saves ranked him 7th overall in saves. You are dreaming if you expected Jones to be better. Jones , healthy might get 20 saves. I have no problem with the trade since the Sox needed to rebuild, but Reed will be very difficult to replace.

I meant better than a typical placeholder type, not better than Reed.

With Peavy and Santos/Reed, it's an 82-84 win team, maybe maybe maybe 86. And still probably 2-3 games short of the wild card.

 

But that means no major injuries, so knock that back down to 80-82 with the injuries they've already succumbed to (and with everything riding on a healthy Chris Sale returning).

 

Obviously, long-term, the Garcia move will probably turn out to be the right one, crosses fingers.

 

And whether we could afford Peavy and Santos, well, we COULD have afforded Tanaka...but an 82-84 win team puts us right back in the middle of 2009-2013 mode, and 2012 showed that's not even enough to boost attendance or even keep it falling again year on year after a terribly disappointing "all in" 2011 season (Dunn acquisition).

Edited April 24, 201411 yr by caulfield12

The Sox know their bullpen is bad, that is why they have lottery tickets with Guerra, Boggs and Francisco. They can't be flipped for anything useful no matter how well they perform.. The loss of Jones was a blow, but some of the others simply haven't been good enough. There was a miscalculation. If the bullpen was better, the team would be better. The more games you win, the more confidence you gain. Up until this point, I am sure Hahn is a bit embarrassed the bullpen has struggled as much as it has. And if Detroit doesn't get theirs straightened up, they will be more than vulnerable.

And it's looking like Scott Downs is this year's version of Jeff Keppinger, without the long-term payroll ramifications.

 

 

Possibly better???? Reed had 40 saves last year on one of the worst teams in basball. Those 40 saves ranked him 7th overall in saves. You are dreaming if you expected Jones to be better. Jones , healthy might get 20 saves. I have no problem with the trade since the Sox needed to rebuild, but Reed will be very difficult to replace.

2013 Nate Jones:

FIP - 2.64

xFIP - 2.77

SIERA - 2.56

 

2013 Addison Reed:

FIP - 3.17

xFIP - 3.77

SIERA - 3.19

 

Why couldn't he get a similar amount of saves?

I think Daniel Webb is better than Addison Reed is. Just sayin.

Possibly better???? Reed had 40 saves last year on one of the worst teams in basball. Those 40 saves ranked him 7th overall in saves. You are dreaming if you expected Jones to be better. Jones , healthy might get 20 saves. I have no problem with the trade since the Sox needed to rebuild, but Reed will be very difficult to replace.

 

Reed was 6th in baseball in save opportunities and finished 7th in saves, also 2nd in blown saves. How is that irreplaceable? If Jones were to receive 48 Save opportunities just like Reed did, how many saves does he get? I would imagine 40.

 

Reed was 6th in baseball in save opportunities and finished 7th in saves, also 2nd in blown saves. How is that irreplaceable? If Jones were to receive 48 Save opportunities just like Reed did, how many saves does he get? I would imagine 40.

 

 

Well in his career Jones has never had a save. He has had 8 blown saves in his career. But you think in 48 chances he gets 40???? I'll stick w 20 at best.

Well in his career Jones has never had a save. He has had 8 blown saves in his career. But you think in 48 chances he gets 40???? I'll stick w 20 at best.

Middle reliever save vs. blown saves are always blown out of proportion. They don't get save opportunities, but are usually in blown save opportunities. You can't judge a middle reliever by his save percentage.

Well in his career Jones has never had a save. He has had 8 blown saves in his career. But you think in 48 chances he gets 40???? I'll stick w 20 at best.

 

By this logic, I will never be able to drive a boat. I have never done it in my life, but I also have had 0 opportunities to do so.

 

You are also suggesting that if he got 48 save opportunities, he'd only get 20 saves. That implies that he'd have a save percentage of roughly 40%. By the averages of baseball, that would not happen.

 

Saves are a result of getting opportunities. I can pretty safely guarantee that if Nate Jones were given 48 opportunities, he'd have right around 40 saves. Possibly more, possibly less, but it'd be right around 40.

By this logic, I will never be able to drive a boat. I have never done it in my life, but I also have had 0 opportunities to do so.

 

You are also suggesting that if he got 48 save opportunities, he'd only get 20 saves. That implies that he'd have a save percentage of roughly 40%. By the averages of baseball, that would not happen.

 

Saves are a result of getting opportunities. I can pretty safely guarantee that if Nate Jones were given 48 opportunities, he'd have right around 40 saves. Possibly more, possibly less, but it'd be right around 40.

 

On the bright side, you have also never crashed a boat, so you should be awesome at it.

Using the "useless stats for middle relievers" argument, Nate Jones was 8-0 in 2012. Kid's a born winner. Should be our no.1 starter.

Using the fact that a middle reliever has 8 blown saves vs 0 saves as evidence against his abilities to close might very well be the most asinine argument I've ever seen on this board.

On the bright side, you have also never crashed a boat, so you should be awesome at it.

 

God you're right. I'm going right now

 

/crashes, dies

Using the fact that a middle reliever has 8 blown saves vs 0 saves as evidence against his abilities to close might very well be the most asinine argument I've ever seen on this board.

 

I don't know what you guys see in Nate Jones that encourages you. If he's a successful closer I'll be stunned. He's way too wild.

I don't know what you guys see in Nate Jones that encourages you. If he's a successful closer I'll be stunned. He's way too wild.

 

He was at 3 BB/9 last year. He's really not that wild. There are times it gets away from him, but guys that throw 97 have that happen to them now and then.

I don't know what you guys see in Nate Jones that encourages you. If he's a successful closer I'll be stunned. He's way too wild.

Nate Jones walked 26 people in 78 innings last year. Addison Reed, who you believe would save this season, walked 23 people in 71.1 innings last year.

 

If each of them pitched 100 innings, that is a difference of...1 walk.

Nate Jones walked 26 people in 78 innings last year. Addison Reed, who you believe would save this season, walked 23 people in 71.1 innings last year.

 

If each of them pitched 100 innings, that is a difference of...1 walk.

Yeah but what if that player that walked tripped on his way to first base and Jose Abreu tore his ACL trying to avoid him and the White Sox injected him with horse placenta to try to cure him and he had an allergic reaction and died. Are you trying to tell me that you don't care about Nate Jones inevitably murdering Jose Abreu?

Yeah but what if that player that walked tripped on his way to first base and Jose Abreu tore his ACL trying to avoid him and the White Sox injected him with horse placenta to try to cure him and he had an allergic reaction and died. Are you trying to tell me that you don't care about Nate Jones inevitably murdering Jose Abreu?

He was at 3 BB/9 last year. He's really not that wild. There are times it gets away from him, but guys that throw 97 have that happen to them now and then.

 

2013 Addison Reed 2.9 BB/9

2013 Addison Reed 2.9 BB/9

 

2013 Aroldis Chapman 4.1 BB/9

It seems the argument isn't whether Jones COULD get to 40/48 with that many SVO.

 

It's simply the fact that he (argumentatively, and nobody knows for sure how he will react) would go all Lindstrom in the closer's role and have the position taken away from him before he could get even close to those numbers.

Nate Jones walked 26 people in 78 innings last year. Addison Reed, who you believe would save this season, walked 23 people in 71.1 innings last year.

 

If each of them pitched 100 innings, that is a difference of...1 walk.

 

Do you really like Nate Jones as a prospect? If so, I defer, but what makes you think he will be adequate to special? I know you guys love stats but Nate truly truly does not pass the eye test. I can't remember too many guys I've deemed eye test failures who ended up good. Hopefully I'm wrong.