[I can't take it anymore...]

"This team isn't that good"

 

Kiss my ass.

 

This team still as the 4th best record in the MLB.

 

I didn't expect to win this series, but I expected us to win on Friday.

 

Detroit lost 3 in a row to Texas, and traded for Neifi Perez. I like the direction they're going, but right now I'm in a "meh" mode about ours.

Let see what happens this week.

 

It's not even Detroit anymore.

 

It's the Twins who have suddenly starting scoring and have the best ERA since the break. Not to mention the best all around bullpen.

 

I agree the whole "isn't good" approach is a little too far, but I'm not convinced we are any better than the Twins or the Tigers at this point in the season. They are pitching, we are not. They're even starting to score at the same rate we are. There is plenty to worry about.

[Ozzie Guillen's in-game managing]

the biggest issue here isnt anything ozzie did ...the biggest thing is that garcia has completely lost the ability to shut any offense down, period....it seems to me that he has completely lost the ability to shut a team down and give up less than 2 runs through 7 innings....at least not an AL team

in addition, hawk used to rave about how freddy was a winner and pitched just well enough to win....well tonight, and in most of his recent starts, he has pitched just well enough to lose.....i really wish they had traded him at the deadline, because they wont be able to move him for much this offseason

 

While I do agree Garcia is a huge problem this season, I'm not going to back down on Guillen at all.

 

Both of these players have hit LH pitchers exceptionally well this season, Cuddyer a bit better, but that is NO EXCUSE to out another runner on base, especially in a sitauation that usually scores a run. It was a terrible move and it came back to bite us.

[Stolen Bases]

And yet, it doesn't matter at all.

 

Exactly.

 

If anything we benefit from not trying to steal as much.

[Dye V Maggs]

I still don't understand why nobody ever talks about Jermaine when discussing possible MVP candidates? He's the best hitter on the team that's scored the most runs, and he's not too shabby in RF either.

 

Probably because he's still been overshadowed by Thome.

 

I agree completley, I'm all over the JD for MVP thing, but Thome still has a higer OBP and OPS.

 

Plus, he doesn't have a nickname like "Big Papi" or "A-Rod" or "ManRam" to really grab the attention of the newsmedia.

[Is Scotty Pods underrated?]

I watched Saturday's game and caught myself wondering why I dislike

Pods so much. His batting average isn't horrific and he swipes bases.

He takes pitches and seems to have a clue at the plate.

So is he underrated? Do you all like him and think he should be

our leadoff hitter the next couple seasons? Or do you find yourself

like me disliking the guy for some reason?

 

Yea mean Overrated. Yes and to the fullest extent.

[I Miss Smartball]

I don't miss the constant sac bunting and caught stealing though.

[Joel Zumaya]

I had no problem with it, it was a huge strikeout in a huge game. Zambrano goes too far though, he pulls that stuff in the second inning.

 

Yea, exactly.

 

Let him celebrate, it was a big K in a close game. Jenks does the same stuff, so do many other pitchers for that matter.

[sox in run for soriano]

Sorry, not a chance. Not after what Ozzie has said about Pods and his defense.

 

I'd hope your right.

[sox in run for soriano]

I'd surely be an interesting deal. Kiss McCarthy goodbye, and porbably another upper-tier prospect too.

 

It'd be nice to have him at US Cellular Field to where he could hit pretty well. Whats suprised me is that RFK stadiumhasn't supressed his offense a bit (.293/.380/.646, 16 homers at home).

 

I'd say No, even with my desire to rid the White Sox of players such as Podsednik. They'd probably end up moving Pods to CF anyway.

[Dontrelle Willis almost a White Sox?]

Are you saying they are lackluster compared to his minor league K rates? Because McCarthy's career K/IP is just 7% lower than Willis', and about 100 of Dontrelle's career 540 strikeouts are against pitchers. McCarthy also has a better BB/IP rate than Willis. This is all without the luxury of being granted a permanent position in the starting rotation to improve himself.

 

I should have made myself a bit more clear with the word "lackluster". I was merely comparing his minor league K totals to his major league K totals. Not that they should be the same, but there is quite a gap between the K/9 of the two (over a 40% decrease).

 

Your argument that McCarthy has better BB/9 than Willis over their career's is also true, but with McCarthy's sample size so small I basically avoided it all together, there's really no point to using it, unless he puts up the same numbers with 200+ IP's there is really no point to comparing McCarthy, a RP, to Willis a SP.

 

But if you want to get into sample sizes, McCarthy's BB/9 this season is 3.05, just OK really.

 

Willis in 06: 2.89, a bit bitter.

Willis in 05: 2.09, a lot better.

[Dontrelle Willis almost a White Sox?]

As much as I don't like to say it White Sox fans to have a tendancy to overrate Brandon McCarthy.

 

He is a young promising arm that did post very impressive minor league numbers. He is young and there is upside.

 

But in the eyes of other teams, he's not what so many of us see. They see a young 22-year old that could be good, but has posted lackluster strikeout rates in his major league career, and could use a bit more work on the control. not that his control is terrible, but not great.

 

He's certianly no Liriano, and certianly not good enough for me to decline on Dontrelle Willis.

 

Willis is getting hit harder this year, and is issuing more walks than his '05 campaign, but he's better than McCarthy at this point, and in my opinion, better suited in the longrun.

 

Now if the Fish are interested in McCarthy + Tracey + Fields, etc. Then the issue gets a little iffy for me. But Brandon McCarthy hasn't done enough for me to label him as an untouchable at this point.

[Jon Garland, back to form?]

Boston doesn't seem to use it as much and I wasn't aware of the Yanks using it. But ya, Depodesta used it sucessfully, but it doesn't hurt when you have Ortiz and Manny in the middle of that lineup and at the time a pair of aces like Schilling and Pedro.

 

Epstien and his enitre organization, from Henry, to James to McCraken are really into it. Not that thats all they abide by, to run a good baseball team you need both a good scouting organization and advice from statheads, but they definately are saber geeks.

 

It doesn't take a saber nut to realize Ortiz, Manny, Schill and Pedro are good pitchers though, thats for sure.

[Jon Garland, back to form?]

Maybe I'm missing something... but his K rate is pretty much what it was last season. His K/BB ratio is slightly lower than it was in 2005 but still greater than it was in other years.

 

Yea, and thats just something we have to live with. He's not going to strike people out.

 

 

At the same time, its a downfall in a way. Striking out people is a really good quality, and he doesn't have it. It was part of the problem for him a while ago, and it still is to an extent. When you pitch for contact, good things can happen, but it also opens the door for a lot of mishaps.

 

His control is still great, and he kind of "makes up" for his low K rates with it. But his lack, and I mean lack, of ability to strike people out isn't something good, and it migt catch up to him, if he doesn't get the big outs when he needs to, like in 2005.

 

I understand the luck charm but I think in general that gets evened out over teh course of a season. Some games some bleeders fall, ohter games some frozen ropes find the mitts.

 

And trust me, I'm not about to go heavy into this. I respect the Sabr methods. I may not agree with them but I respect that train of thought and its obviously worked semi sucessfully in Oakland.

 

I think its worked pretty damn well in Boston and NY too.

[Jon Garland, back to form?]

That's because he was getting smoked at the beginning of the season, it wasn't bad luck.

 

No, there were a lot of balls "finding those holes too."

 

Not that he wasn't getting smoked, but he was getting "too smoked" if you know what I mean. Certianly more "smoked" than he should have been lol. Not saying he wasn't bad, but he was indeed unlucky too, a combination of both.

 

All I can tell you was early in the season he was leaving everything up and thats why the hits were there. But than again I'm about as anti stat as it gets and prefer to watch the games because I think that tells you a lot more about a player.

 

And thats fine. I don't need another one of these arguments. But yea, everything is down now too, and as a result, his GB% (groundball %) has gone thru the roof. Another good sign.

[Jon Garland, back to form?]

He was simply unlucky at the beginning of the season. His BABIP was crazy high, now its starting to go down a bit, as a result so are his H/9 and ERA. Good stretch here Jon.

 

He's not out of the woods yet thouugh. The hits are still going to come, and it'll be tough for him to dominate against lineups such as NY or Boston. His K rates are just to low.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

SABR,

 

You haven't defended your position as much as repeat the same things over again in between insulting me once every three sentences.

 

From now on, if you are not going to contribute anything to the thread whatsoever, and you just want to take personal shots at me, feel free to do it via pm rather than forcing the entire Soxtalk.com community to read it.

 

Haha, I'm not going to Pm any personal insults or anything like that.

 

I'm not a real bad guy over here.

 

I've been insulted too, but lets just end it.

[Duaner Sanchez]

What numbers are you using?

 

Sanchez 5-0, 39.2 IP, 39 H, 13 ER, 3 HR, 22 BB, 39 K, 2.36 ERA, 1.23 WHIP, .228 BAA

Heilman 0-3, 51.2 IP, 50 H, 26 ER, 5 HR, 18 BB, 41 K, 4.53 ERA, 1.32 WHIP, .256 BAA

 

Looks to me like:

 

Sanchez numbers >> Heilman's

 

No. Heilman's periheral stats, his DIPS stats are better.

 

Heilman has pitched more innings and his ERA is inflated becuase of a few bad innings. Not that we should take them away, but RP's can look bad real quickly.

 

BTW, Sanchez' BABIP is pretty low, his aready high H/9 rate are in danger of going up. Heilman's BABIP is too high, his H/9 are going to decrease.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

What are you talking about?

 

Perhaps if you would just stop insulting me for one second, go back and look at my posts, you would see that I never argued that what "I see on tv" is all that matters. You are being so incredibly stubborn because you don't agree with me that you haven't even actually absorbed anything I have said. Do you normally debate people by completely and utterly misstating their position and misunderstanding their arguments? What you are arguing against I would be willing to argue against as well.

 

Please, take some time to go back and comprehend what has actually occurred in these threads.

 

For all the time you have spent responding, one would think you would at least want to understand what you are responding to.

 

I knwo you didn't, thats all an assumption based on your anti-stat posts.

 

I know what I was responding to, someone who doesn't like stats. I defended my position, you defended yours. It should have been over a while ago.

[Duaner Sanchez]

Sanchez stuff >>> Heilmans

Sanchez Upside >>> Heilmans

 

Sanchez has the ability to be a dominant reliever, Heilman has the ability to be a solid to mediocre starter or reliever.

 

Heilman's numbers >> Sanchez

 

I think you know with who I'm going with.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

Where have you gotten the impression that I don't believe that statistics or numbers mean anything? I have not said that once, and I don't advocate that position currently.

 

What I am arguing is a combination of both schools of thought. Using the most accurate statistics available as well as what common sense and keen observation make clear to produce the best possible strategy for playing the game. If you have read any of my posts on other threads you will see that I often make statistcally-based arguments when referring to how to evaluate a player, so I am not sure why you think I am this old curmudgeon who refuses to see the light of day.

 

The one thing you are correct about me though, it that yes, I WILL NEVER ADMIT THAT STATS DON'T LIE. Because the sure as hell do. Stats are the best way that people can translate experience into numbers. If you think that every statistic that is currently used is the best way to do that, you are flat out insane. Numbers lie all the damned time.

 

In terms of arguing with you, you are under absolutely no obligation to respond back to me, especially if I am just ignorant, arrogant, and stubborn as you claim me to be. Ignore me and my posts all you wish to, becuase no one is holding a gun to your head asking you to respond. Besides, I am not even arguing with you personally, I am arguing with your way of thinking.

 

We have gone back and forth a few times now though, and it seems as though you make several incorrect assumptions about me and make this a lot more difficult than it has to be. I am not against the basics of much of what you believe. However, I think much of sabermetrics is in its infancy still, and has a long way to go. Whereas many firm believers believe that the best models and stats have been designed already and are ready to be applied now.

 

You are not arguing for both schools of thought. You are arguing that what you see on T.V. is what you see, and what you see in numbers is falwed, when its clearly the opposite.

 

I'm not going to call you stubborn, ignorant, etc, but it is pathetic that you don't take numbers into account. How old are you, ten? Did you fail algebra and avoid numbers or something? Are you even an adult? Or do you just follow baseball like a kid? Most people around here, and well everywhere, that are adults put some consideration into stats, like OPS, you should take a note.

 

And don't tell me you put consideration into those stats, becuase thats what we've been arguiung this whole time. I haven't brought up a "Saber" stat once.

 

And I'm not talking HR, BA, SB's, conditional ones, but clearly the important runs, the ones that relate to scoring, like OPS and ones that prevent it, you ignore.

 

Don't slam me for arguing that Podsednik sucks. Numbers prove he does depending on how you look at things, and you need to realize that.

 

Just don't call me ignorant and don't say I need to put the shoe on the other foot, becuase I played baseball, and I looked at baseball in a style like you did, and its not good. Not saying you need to embrance Sabermetrics or stats even to the extent I do, but you need to look at them, becuase even though you "claim" you do, you've certianly done a good job making it clear that they're not important, at least not as imortant as watching games in drawing conclusions, which is what 8 year olds do.

 

I'm not against the basics completely, but I'm certianly not for them completley either. As a die hard saber fan I actually realize the basics are flawed in many ways. And I could give you some good reading, some good articles on how, but you probably wouldn't read them or even understand them, becuase you wouldn't make an effort to.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

Are you blind? Are you even reading my posts or just responding to them angrily without thinking? You can expect all the runs you want over the course of a season. I have absolutely no qualm with that sort of theory. I understand that it has been proven mathematically that playing the game in a certain manner is likely to produce the optimum number of runs. I understand! I play blackjack using basic strategy! I am not opposed to the power of mathematics and computers!

 

What I am saying is that the game is much, much more complicated than just putting the best OPS guys possible out there and letting them do their thing. Yet you are just blatantly refusing to admit that.

 

Th game is more complicated than watching it.

 

THATS ALL YOU BASE THE GAME OFF OF.

 

It's quite pathetic actually. Sabermetrics isn't just calculators and numbers. I watch games, as much as I can. I love going to games. Hell, I even like to watch Pods steal.

 

But when you don't take stats into account, your making a mistake. Stats are definite, whether your stubborn and arrogant like yourself or whether you actually believe so like me.

 

You refuse to admit that stats do not lie.

 

I'm done arguing with you. I could give you a metric on how the White Sox should have won a WS and you probably wouldn't beleve it.

 

Here's an idea: Don't argue with me. I don't like wasting time. I'm sick of your BS "Stats don't mean s***" Becuase they do, and most members around here would agree.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

Here's some work a friend of mine has done about productive outs:

 

Knowing some of you, you probably won't understand, or you'll just say that the White Sox won a WS on productive outs so they must work....

 

Anyways...

 

http://www.geocities.com/[email protected]/PROD.htm

 

http://www.geocities.com/[email protected]/PRODA.htm

 

http://www.geocities.com/[email protected]/Havoc.htm

 

This guy actually has some real good stuff.

 

 

It isn't a jab as much as it is a truism.

 

Do you not see all the complexities and intricacies of a major league baseball game? Yet some people want to explain EVERYTHING that occurs on a major league baseball stadium with their calculator- dismissing all other elements.

 

That's just amazingly silly to me.

 

No it a jab alright.

 

There's nothing wrong with explaing the game thru stats. Quite more objective then explaining he game with your eyes, or personal expiereces for that matter.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

See, this is exactly what I am referring to.

 

Your counter-argument is the usual arrogant bs attitude that so many people that happen to be believers in sabermetrics seem to have.

 

Simply because I don't agree with your research and theory, I am dumb and wrong, and the topic is no longer open for discussion.

 

If what you say is true, how are teams that are not "stats based" being so successful in the postseason, ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BALL?

 

And you will give me the argument that all saber people give when something occurs which cannot be explained with their calculators- "small sample size."

 

Newsflash, Sabr. Elite pitching shuts down all hitting. Runs are tough to come by. Outs must be productive and runs must be manufactured . Teams that play station-to-station all season long are not accustomed to manufacturing runs and thus are shut down. And then they lose.

 

Or it can be put a more simple way, as your hero BB said it: "My s*** doesn't work in the playoffs."

 

Oh- and I can live without your condescending, patronizing attitude in the future.

 

Have you ever seen an expected runs chart?

 

Probably not. Your statement is false. Productive outs are not productive, they hurt run scoring.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

See, this is exactly what I am referring to.

 

Your counter-argument is the usual arrogant bs attitude that so many people that happen to be believers in sabermetrics seem to have.

 

Simply because I don't agree with your research and theory, I am dumb and wrong, and the topic is no longer open for discussion.

 

If what you say is true, how are teams that are not "stats based" being so successful in the postseason, ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BALL?

 

And you will give me the argument that all saber people give when something occurs which cannot be explained with their calculators- "small sample size."

 

Newsflash, Sabr. Elite pitching shuts down all hitting. Runs are tough to come by. Outs must be productive and runs must be manufactured. Teams that play station-to-station all season long are not accustomed to manufacturing runs and thus are shut down. And then they lose.

 

Or it can be put a more simple way, as your hero BB said it: "My s*** doesn't work in the playoffs."

 

Oh- and I can live without your condescending, patronizing attitude in the future.

 

 

Tell me how you figure: The offenses that score the most runs usually aren't the most efficent. Pleasem that makes as much sense as listening to high school baseball cocaches: None at all.

 

When did i say Eilte pitching doesn't shut down great bats. If there's one thing the rest of the Saber Community and I don't agree on its that 3/4 of baseball is pitching. I believe so, and i've been slammed for it, but hey to me its true.

 

and enough with the, your hero BB s***. Stop being a dickwad. Just becuase i have sme sort of statistical information to explain things and you don't doesn't mean you have to slam me for it. Stats don't lie, only morons like yourself do.

[Idea: Vazquez and Pods for Gordon and Abreu]

Linear in terms of run production over the course of a 162 game season, perhaps, yes.

 

But the most efficient offense is not necessarily the one that scores the most runs over the course of a full season.

 

Lol. About 95% of the time, your second statemnt is one of the dumbest any baseball fan can say.

 

You are wrong. End of story.