ptatc

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 11:46 AM) People who live in cities should have their votes count less than those living in more sparse areas, got it. No but all interests should be represented. This is why I prefer the electoral college and the representative democracy the US has as opposed to a true democracy where only the most populist views are heard.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 11:54 AM) But then if you look at how many people vote that way in the state, more people vote democrat. Correct, thus the areas with less people don't get heard. All policies would be driven by cities without regard for issues in rural areas.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 10:25 AM) We are in IL, not much matters because its almost always the same color. This goes to the point of the representation. It's not that IL votes that way it's the city of Chicago and the surrounding area. If you look at the state as a whole the larger geographic area doesn't vote that way.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 10:42 AM) I disagree. I just think it's luck or age, or just trying to do too much. Frazier and Dunn played in Cincinnati, a very similar launching pad to USCF. This is part of what I was saying. I don't think it's luck that they all become bad all of a sudden. None of them showed signs of age until they showed up in Chicago. It's probably due to switching to the AL and some combination of mental approach changes.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 10:33 AM) His BABIP will stay that low because he either pops up, K's, or homers. Nothing in between. This is the issue with all of these NL hitters that come to the Sox. For some reason they see Comiskey and think it's easy to hit it out so they alter their swing. They do hit HRs but it messes everything else up.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 10:32 AM) Because that's the whole point of leaving the eu, and the eu isn't going to give Britain even more favorable terms than they already had. They will be interesting negotiations that's for sure.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 09:48 AM) Yeah, this has been a disaster. Makes my excited catcher SoxNet article from the winter look dumb. Another KW/Hahn front office (notice both names) plan that looked good on paper but has fallen flat on it's face, so far.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 10:19 AM) I'm pro electoral college myself...I don't want a few states controlling the will of the entire nation (which they already almost do). Also, as our nation moves closer to the idiocracy it's becoming (people usually know very little about what they're voting for or why), I prefer having such a safeguard. Agreed. Growing up in a small town, no voice would ever be heard with the overwhelming populations of the large cities/states. Many different issues that would never be heard or considered in the larger populated areas.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 10:06 AM) There are more ways to reform things that suck then to blow it all up. Britain will undoubtedly be poorer for the future. Their "half-status" actually came with quite a bit more perks than other states in that system. There are a lot of faults with the EU. There was also a lot of benefit. England had a lot of firms locate there for access to an integrated euro market while paying lower English taxes. That gets split. Their military power is not nearly big enough to matter as much foreign policy wise. THey just ensured they have less influence. Destroying things that aren't always optimal but are stable and serve millions is actually fairly remarkable in global historical politics. But old people are scared of Polish people. So we all should be punished. But does this prevent them from creating something better? Status quo isn't always the best option just because it's stable.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 09:53 AM) The FS Draft Tracker is up to date. Stats: 28 signed 2 still playing 7 won't sign 4 open questions: Madden (25th - no idea on him), Bossard (31st, but I'm guessing he isn't signing or would have by now), Cooley (36th, told me directly that he and his family are discussing it), and Puglielli (who emailed Future Sox to say he has a commit to Barry University, but didn't say if that meant he was sticking with it) So really, Madden and Cooley are the ones I am trying to get info on. Where's the outrage of the Sox drafting a kid of a staff member? Or does that only apply when it's KW or Ozzie's kids?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 09:38 AM) I noticed that closed-off start too, like Robbie Gould on the mound. But I am not sure that's a real health issue, is it? Just getting that trunk rotation earlier. The low slot is more my concern, but you tell me. The only health issues would be the hip or back may be the shoulder if he drags the arm too far behind with fatigue depending on how consistent he is with it. There is only a couple of pitches on the video. It's more a command issue with all of the extra twisting. that's a great deal of extra motion to control, of course it could also be the extra force he generates to throw that hard. The low arm slot is always a debate. Mechanically it does but more stress on the elbow which he does not dissipate with the lack of follow through. With the odd beginning of the motion it may change this. i have no idea as I've never seen anyone start like that and haven't studied anything like it. Theoretically if he keeps his torso closer to his arm, it would decrease some of the forces in his arm. I'll be interested to see more video. I can see why there was a reluctance to start him in the past. I bet when he fatigues his command goes quickly.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 23, 2016 -> 10:01 PM) The 26th overall pick, flame-throwing Zack Burdi, made his one-and-out pro debut in AZL yesterday. Our writer, Kim Contreras, was there, and got video and took some notes. This is FS-exclusive stuff. Here is the article with video embedded. He throws hard. Also FYI he's already on his way to full season ball, should be in Kanny or W-S tomorrow-ish. I'll try to chat with him if he arrives while I'm still down here. what is it with the sox and drafting pitchers with really odd mechanics. This guy starts with both feet on the rubber and his a$$ facing the hitter. Also another guy with no follow through and a low arm slot. Not a big fan of that.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jun 24, 2016 -> 07:58 AM) Now this will be interesting. Yes. I think in the long run the Brexit will be fine. If Scotland leaves the UK, that cold cause some interesting problems.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 23, 2016 -> 05:08 PM) Here we go...nobody can even figure out who to blame, as it's really genius in terms of front office construction to insulate both KW and Hahn from criticism. No, it's not that hard. Why do you insist on blaming a person. These decisions aren't made by one person. They work together blame them both. This is not insulating THEM from criticism. Criticize the moves from the FRNOT OFFICE and bring out the fire and pitch forks to fire BOTH OF THEM. If you blame KW, Hahn is off the hook. In reality neither should be insulated from criticism but by blaming one, you are doing that.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Jun 23, 2016 -> 05:03 PM) That is KW fault yet he still is employed Unbelievable........

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jun 23, 2016 -> 03:36 PM) Good call by Robin there, having him throw a sac fly instead of a grand slam. I would have called strikeout, though. I like the RV bunt call for Bradley.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Jun 23, 2016 -> 01:46 PM) Who was it? I must ridicule that meathead. Tim Britton

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Jun 23, 2016 -> 01:25 PM) Sexy bunt There is Boston reporter tweeting about eh game and made the comment the Eaton must feel good about himself bunting against a rookie 3B. I dislike people from Boston even more now.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 22, 2016 -> 09:59 PM) Quintana adding to his major league leading NDAR tonight. He pitches 7 he gets a win.....just saying

QUOTE (flavum @ Jun 22, 2016 -> 09:57 PM) 30-18 vs teams not called Indians, Royals, or Tigers. Only 13 of the next 57 are against the big bad AL Central teams, so this will set up a good tease before the final 33 where they play 20 of 26 against the Indians, Royals, and Tigers. ?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jun 22, 2016 -> 09:56 PM) This win sponsored by the Lovin' Spoonful " Do You Believe in Magic " Nicely played. I'm expecting a song for each win now.

QUOTE (gatnom @ Jun 22, 2016 -> 05:40 PM) I find it interesting that the sort of "statistics aren't everything" crowd are pointing to another statistic, wins, as some sort of indicator of the type of thing statistics can't depict. The thing is that the win statistic is so far removed from what the pitcher can actually control that it is essentially meaningless. It is impossible to parse out whether or not a pitcher consistently gets screwed by things out of control or if he legitimately just melts down in crucial situations. A lack of wins will happen in both of those scenarios. If you were to replace wins by saying something along he lines of scouting how the pitcher performs along with using the statistics for how he performs, I'd be able to go along with that argument. That is the point of the discussion. Believe it or not the point of the game is to win. There really hasn't been much evidence to show that any of the stats really show how much a pitcher contributes to a win. I think the SIERA is the closest. But what is the true measure of a pitcher's effectiveness? Wins are part of the formula.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 22, 2016 -> 03:38 PM) You're right, a small percentage of the "failed to get the bunt down" at bats probably do turn into productive outs/hits, but those also include times when the bunt was unsuccessful and resulted in a popup/foulout/otherwise out without advancing the runner. Statistically the bunts don't make much sense in many cases. However, with how bad the offense has been I don't blame them for just trying something to change it up.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 22, 2016 -> 04:15 PM) That is the point you aren't seeing. If you dismiss the ability to "win" as a skill than there will be no context we can provide that you simply won't either attribute to other factors or dismiss as not meaningful. Are there not some pitchers whose W-L record would belie some other more "contextual" stats which one could study to determine if they possessed some sort of inherent ability to retain a lead or simply to win? Dammit! I typed for 20 minutes trying to say something and you said it in a single sentence. I'm awful at articulating my thoughts in writing. can you edit my research papers before I send them to the journals?

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jun 22, 2016 -> 03:51 PM) Because I still can't think of an example where W-L record actually adds to the discussion. Looking at W-L record tells you nothing about how good a pitcher is. Yes, the good pitchers tend to have good records and the bad pitchers tend to have bad records, but there's way too many examples where it lies to be meaningful. Shelby Miller led the MLB in losses last year at 6-17 and yet was one of the best pitchers in baseball. Drew Hutchison had the 7th worst ERA last year among SP with at least 100 IP yet he had a 13-5 record. All the variables pointed out in this thread (how deep a pitcher goes into games, how he pitches in close games/high leverage situations, etc.) are important but can't be gleaned from a pitcher's W-L record (and for every example of a pitcher who didn't get wins because he didn't go deep enough into games or pitched poorly in close games, there's a counter-example of a pitcher who did the same but was bailed out by their offense). If a pitchers' W-L record tells me nothing about how well a pitcher pitched, then why bother with it? A pitcher can get spotted a 5-run lead, then immediately give up 6 runs the next inning, but then be bailed out by the offense and still get the win. On the other hand, a pitcher can throw a no-hitter and give up runs due to 2 errors by the defense and take a loss. It provides zero context. Give me a specific example where it provides meaningful discussion about a pitcher, because there haven't been any in this thread to this point. not sure where you get the Miller was one of the best pitchers as his FIP, xFIP and SIERA all have him around 50th. If you only look at the number you want you are always going to find what you want. The highlighted example is true. However it's true for all stats. You can make them valid or invalid in your view. take the example we discussed earlier using xFIP. Most people will agree it's a good measure of pitchers, yet you found an example where you didn't think it was. If you want a specific example where wins could help with your decision, look at Cueto and Lester this year. Most of the peripherals are fairly even. i would look at it and give Cueto the edge because of the wins. You will find soemthing else you deem more important to make the decision. you are giving many examples where wins are influenced by other factors, all of which is true. However, when it comes down to it all pitchers want to win and the win also effects all of those. In a tight game they pitch differently than in a blowout. Use the example of Sale he has said all he wants to do is pitch in the playoffs. This is predicated on him winning not having the best BABIP, HR%, FIP, WAR or anything else. He will pitch differently in all of those scenarios. So the win is actually determining his peripherals in many different ways. I think the overall issue is: How do you determine if a pitcher has pitched well? This is truly the discussion. Has he pitched well if he strikes out x number of hitters? walked fewer? To me a primary factor is did the team win the game. Did he contribute to the win. This is why I like the SIERA stat as it looks and many of the variables that the pitcher can control. So to answer your question, if you are trying to put wins in a true equation: Wins+FIPxFB/GB+(BABIP-OPS)= Cy Young, you probably can't. However, you also can't prove that any of the other stats are directly correlated to success either. However, I think the beginning and end of the conversation is how does he contribute to a win. If you can come of with an equation that determines that, now you've got something.