Eminor3rd

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:10 AM) He was purposefully put into situations where he was made to "fail" from a statistical standpoint in order to build up his arm to become a full time starter. It was truly a unique situation where a former full time reliever was built into a full time starter in mid-season, at the major league level. If the goal had been "winning" or keeping his numbers good, he wouldn't have pitched in many situations last year that he gave up runs in. I think I see what you're saying -- if your claim is that our expectations of Noesi's performance this year should be based on more than his performance last year because he was often fatigued from being "stretched out," then I think that's a plausible/reasonable argument. You could strengthen it if you found some evidence that he wore down later in the season or, if you wanted to argue that he'll improve in 2015, that he was bad after the fourth or fifth inning early on but began to show signs of greater endurance as the season progressed.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:08 AM) I don't know the stats, but it seemed like when he did start, it was Danks starts last season. When he was good, he was real good, and when he was bad, he was real bad. Yeah I agree that it seemed that way. We could test it, but it would require actually doing some math and research instead of just looking it up on Baseball Reference or FanGraphs. I'm not sure it matters much though -- like many have pointed out, everybody looks good on their best days. If we're thinking about what we're going to get from either Noesi or Danks next year, we have to take the bad ones in order to get the good ones.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 11:04 AM) Right, but not "one of the five worst pitchers in baseball." Ok, I agree that there are pitchers that are literally worse that are in the minor leagues mostly. But if we agree that "baseball" means Major League baseball, and that "pitchers" means "pitchers who pitched enough to be considered active Major League baseball players in 2014," I think the claim stands.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 10:52 AM) Situations like Noesi's last year are exactly why there is more to baseball than stats. I agree that there is more to baseball than stats, but what do you mean by this in regards to Noesi? That he's a better pitcher than his stats indicate because it "felt" like he gave up fewer runs than he really did?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 10:12 AM) That Samardzija article called back to mind the interaction of a "stat geek" and Hosmer/Moustakas. http://www.hardballtimes.com/learning-the-...-the-clubhouse/ There's a steep learning curve for the "sabes" (I love that Greg-ism) people to go through when interacting with professional athletes using their statistics-driven language. Athletes can sniff out a "poser" a million miles away, and they're often not as nice as someone like Mark Teahen or Jim Thome would be about it. You have to build a relationship and get respect from an athlete first..or at least give them some pertinent statistical information which helps them improve their games (rather than criticizing it). Eno is a great guy. Met him at the Winter Meetings last year.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 10:46 AM) and in some way the sox still don't except for the bull pen. however starting a new season, and hoping that the main core of pitchers can really pull it out, it is kind of exciting. Right. No question the top three are great, but this is one of the main reasons that the projections/skeptics are further down on the Sox' chances than we want them to be. Most teams get significant innings out of about 8 starters each season, and our top 8 include Danks, Noesi, Brad Penny, Erik Johnson, and like Scott Carroll or something. Certainly we have high hopes for Rodon and he could be difference maker, but he's a still a prospect.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:33 AM) When Danks had a quality start: 20 games, 130.2 innings, 2.48 ERA (team record 10-10, 1-6 in no decisions) Without quality starts: 12 games, 63 innings, 9.43 ERA #1 positive--he made his starts. No DL time. #2 positive--he's another year away from surgery, which could help him #3 positive--he's playing with a better offense to support him He'll be fine. QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:35 AM) If that were true, then why did Noesi qualify? He's got no big contract, we could have tossed him away at any time. The reason is because they'd have to be replaced. Danks qualified because if he weren't throwing those innings, somebody like the guys on that list would have been doing it instead. He may not deserve credit for having a big contract, but he deserves credit for putting up .8 WAR in those innings instead of 0 or less. Also, yes, he made his starts. He gets credit for his 0.8 fWAR over a full season -- which is a bad number. Substantially below average. He gets credit for giving us 200 innings of bad pitcher.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:35 AM) If that were true, then why did Noesi qualify? He's got no big contract, we could have tossed him away at any time. The reason is because they'd have to be replaced. Danks qualified because if he weren't throwing those innings, somebody like the guys on that list would have been doing it instead. He may not deserve credit for having a big contract, but he deserves credit for putting up .8 WAR in those innings instead of 0 or less. Because we didn't have anyone better, which is the point. We don't have any decent pitching depth. Hector Noesi and John Danks were terrible pitchers last year.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:26 AM) You mentioned that they both qualified but then discarded the inherent value of that. If you're on the qualifying list and your WAR is higher than 0, then there are probably at least ten guys I'd take after you. Here's a handful of them, for example: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...0&sort=17,d But all that really mean is that they threw a lot of innings. That's both where the "qualified" comes into play, AND it's an input of fWAR. The ONLY reason John Danks "qualified," for example, was because of his massive contract. I don't think he deserves credit for that.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) I'm guessing that much of this is spring training fluff pieces, so I'm not reading too much into it, but the quotes say that they believe in Noesi. The numbers indicate that there's nothing special about him, and that's how I feel about him, but perhaps there's genuine talent change on the way. Noesi was a fairly well regarded prospect so I wouldn't completely rule out the idea of him turning a new leaf over and being a legitimately good pitcher, but I'm not holding my breath and he's a replaceable piece at the moment. I think it's true that Noesi could have some upside left, and I've always liked him, even when he was on the Yankees. He was a long-time favorite sleeper of mine. But let's stop pretending that he's been a good pitcher so far, haha. That's all I'm saying.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) Danks had 20 quality starts last year. Where was he ranked in the league on that? Lol, I don't know. Why? EDIT: I found a site that measures it! The answer is 41st. Of course, by QS, Alfredo Simon was better than Chris Sale. So if QS makes John Danks NOT terrible, then maybe we have no hope against the Tigers.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 08:22 AM) Well he didn't suck for the White Sox last year but alright. QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 24, 2015 -> 08:35 AM) No I don't think John Danks sucks either. He just makes too much money and was way better before. Of those that qualified for the ERA title last year: By ERA, the fourth worst pitcher in the majors was Hector Noesi. The fifth worst was John Danks. By FIP, the third worst pitcher in the majors was Hector Noesi. The fourth worst was John Danks. By xFIP, the second worst pitcher in the majors was John Danks. The tenth was Hector Noesi. By fWAR, the sixth worst pitcher in the majors was Hector Noesi. The ninth was John Danks. TL;DR No matter how you slice it, both sabermetrically and traditionally, John Danks and Hector Noesi were among the bottom ten pitchers in the entire major leagues last year.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 11:11 PM) not only Sir Charles but Jeff Samardzija not a big fan of analytics as well. http://www.prosportsdaily.com/articles/whi...ics-342924.html That's not what I got out of the article at all. He was asked if Don Cooper is out of touch because he isn't into sabermetrics (which is a pretty loaded question), and he said: “Sabermetrics, nyeh. Sounds like a lot of hot air,’’ Samardzija said, smiling. “I think there are definitely positive aspects to it. I think there is some information you can take from it that’s important. But ultimately from a player’s point of view, you want a coach that can relate to you. Can help you with adjustments mid-game. “I think preparation with numbers and stats and all that’s great, but when the bullets are flying, you need a guy that knows your personality, can relate to you and get you to change or fix what’s going wrong. If you don’t respect the guy that’s telling you that information, you’re not going to listen to him.’’ Sounds like he's just defending Don Cooper, and echoing what many believe about coaches, which is that managing personalities is their most important job.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 08:41 PM) You might want to read his "interests" under the profile page. Lol. That guy.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 27, 2014 -> 08:49 AM) TUC sent me a message to deliver to the soxtalk world Is he banned currently?

I just realized I probably played against JB Shuck in High School

The problem is that Beckham isn't even versatile enough to make sense there. Shuck is at least left-handed, and Bonifacio can essentially play every position other than catcher. If you're afraid Bonifacio can't play SS well enough, then Leury Garcia is a better option than Beckham.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 02:12 PM) lets not talk about Hudson, mmmk? The Sox rightfully cut bait on him He's got the same amount of Tommy John surgeries as Brandon Beachy!

QUOTE (Jake @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 01:58 PM) I've been waiting 11 years for official membership Haha, well maybe that's because you're From: Reality

Edwards is the one I don't get. He doesn't seem any more appealing than Montas.

QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 01:44 PM) Cool. I thought with the comment kinda going by the wayside that the board believed that Vegas sets win totals to projections. Whew! You're not TRULY a member of the board until you've gotten an official misconduct warning from a moderator based on a conversation you've had with greg.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 12:38 PM) i believe you are missing Edinson Vólquez -sp. but the point i have always said, get another sp who is quality, who is experience, to help eat innings. to help protect the sox top 3 sp's. and if needed to step in, in case of injury. the sox top 3 sp's and the lineup is tough, bring in Rodon who will be developing and the pen will be 1 tough sob group to beat. 1 yr contract, when jeff s goes, and this other pitcher, the sox have rodon stepping in and then the other prospects the sox have deverloping. Volquez signed 2/20 or something.

I don't think it's at all unreasonable to have passed on paying $2m to a guy who will, best case, pitch a half a season.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 09:58 AM) BAKE SALE!!! This post is so much better because of your avatar pic

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 23, 2015 -> 09:30 AM) Where does that extra $30 million penalty go to? Bud Selig's pension? An MLB fund designed to funnel the money into administration of international talent acquisition. It's been an interesting point of controversy -- league officials have said that the fund was never designed to be even a fraction of what it's become. Many speculate that the money will be used to implement an international draft ASAP.