Eminor3rd

The search for a left-handed bat is OVAAA

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 01:51 PM) Funny, you mentioned Steamer the other day when someone mentioned a player. You have amazingly interpretted my post as "Steamer is useless." You are incredible.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 01:54 PM) Another laugher considering you were the one mentioning a lack of comprehension. Go back to my posts when Balta asked me what I considered crazy when talking about his next contract. You will see $60-70 million guaranteed would have fit in my definition. Then what the hell are you arguing about? We'd all love him at some absurdly low contract figure that isn't realistic at all. Lol

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 11:23 AM) As I stated but you just ignored, if he put up his career average, we all would be happy. Just pointed out, since fangraphs WAR was so important to you, that their page is projecting a pretty nice season next year. So if you are going to use Fangraphs, you really shouldn't pick and choose which numbers to use. For his career his wRC+ is 125. I don't know if I'd be happy with a 125 wRC+ if we pay him $60-70m over four years or so. Maybe that's where we disagree. To me, his career average isn't enough to justify that price out of a DH, and it comes with more risk than average.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 11:23 AM) As I stated but you just ignored, if he put up his career average, we all would be happy. Just pointed out, since fangraphs WAR was so important to you, that their page is projecting a pretty nice season next year. So if you are going to use Fangraphs, you really shouldn't pick and choose which numbers to use. For his career his wRC+ is 125. Steamer is just the first system to come out for the coming year -- ZiPS is almost universally considered better, and Marcel is usually factored in as well, heavy-handed as that system is. Anyone at FanGraphs would recommend using several systems for context, so it isn't necessarily true to cite Steamer and say "See! FanGraphs says he's good!"

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 09:49 AM) Yet you do the same thing you are ripping me of when you clamour for Russell Martin. GMAB. Adding mediocre players to a roster is not the way to win. Nothing suggests Victor Martinez is a mediocre player. I don't understand. Russell Martin is four years younger than Victor Martinez, and he derives most of his value from defense. How is that similar at all?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 09:33 AM) A lot of people around here were very happy with the 2012 Adam Dunn. Martinez is a far better hitter than Dunn was with the White Sox, and 120 is probably the bottom of what he will put up if he is healthy the next couple of years. IMO it is far riskier spending money on guys like Keppinger and Belisario and Downs and Paulino than guys who can actually help like Martinez. I understand some here either think they are heirs to JR's fortune or want to be the poster that pointed out a bargain that worked out spectacularly, but sometimes the answers are obvious. I enjoy looking at most of those, but think the end result would usually be dissappointment. There were a couple of posts about Torii Hunter. If Martinez gets a 3 year deal, at the end of the 3 years he will be younger than Hunter is now. He didn't fall off a cliff offensively. I pointed out several in another thread who hit well when they were 38 years old. Eventually, if the White Sox want to win, they are going to have to look for something other than bargains. And I pointed out I wouldn't pay Martinez thinking he will repeat his 2014 for 4 seasons. If someone does, and I suspect they might, then I understand, but thinking this guy is going to fall off a cliff because......Paul Konerko, is pretty short-sided. They are different people, different hitters, with different skills and approaches, and different bodies. I think the Sox should examine the medicals and give more than a grab and a cough physical as well. But if those check out, there is no reason not to give him basically what you gave Adam Dunn except maybe for 3 years other than 4 with incentives that make it 4. Were YOU happy with 2012 Adam Dunn? Do you recommend we should try to buy 2012 Adam Dunn at $15m per year for four years? Also, it's NOT riskier trying to buy low on short term guys (excluding Keppinger from your example because he does not fit the mold in any way) because if the worst happens, you can see how easy it was to get those guys off the books. We tried with them, they failed, and they're gone. Our commitments to them have not prevented us from doing anything else. It is, by definition, LESS risky. But it's a strawman to compare the two anyway -- you're not arguing with people who don't want to spend money, you're arguing with people who don;t want to spend money on Victor Martinez. The choice is not "VMart or Felipe Paulino" like you're suggesting. You are correct in saying that eventually the Sox will need to step up and take some risk, but that does NOT mean that we should act like money is burning a hole in our pockets. No one gives a s*** how rich JR is, but we ALL KNOW that there is a cap on the total amount of money the team is going to spend, like it or not, and so we want them to spend it wisely. RE: this line: "but thinking this guy is going to fall off a cliff because......Paul Konerko, is pretty short-sided." Give me a break. Are you going to suggest that Paul Konerko is the only example of late 30's age-related decline?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 06:24 AM) Amazing how you try to spin this. His 86 was when he was injured in 2008. Other than that year and 2013 when he was coming back from missing a season due to an offseason injury and struggled to start but hit .361/.413./500 the second half, his wRC+ has been over 120 every year since 2004 when it was 119. A consistently good hitter who Steamer is projectimg to put up a 139 next year. I am getting this stuff for Fangraphs. I thought you would be impressed, you aren't going to tell me they are full of s*** are you? Dick Allen, please try to read and comprehend my entire argument instead of picking one word out of the first sentence and going on a tangent. The 86 was just factually his lowest, it had almost NOTHING to do with my argument. I did not make an argument that the guy might put up an 86 wRC+ any time soon. I have accepted that the guy has been around 120 his entire career and stated it plainly. He IS a consistently good hitter. But according to everything on the internet so far, he's not commanding a contract in line with a 120 wRC+ DH. That's that's the issue. I don't hate the guy, I just don't want to pay him like he's going to put up a 166 wRC+ for four years when he isn't even likely to do it once.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 05:30 PM) I am NOT saying that he took and special vitamins, but all he needed to do is take it last yr so he can max out his contract. after that is done, he doesn't take it again. "oh well his age took over for his lower offensive stats" I don't think it was drug-related at all, I think he just had a really awesome, non-repeatable year. He IS a really good hitter, but it's just impossible to rationally argue he's THIS good. And unfortunately, the level of his recent performance is going to drive his salary requirements, and his age make him a higher risk than normal anyway. I mean someone else around here said it perfectly a while back: Oh, he's a really good hitter though? So was Paul Konerko. Eventually, age catches up. If Victor had put up another 125 wRC+ and was looking for 2/24m without draft pick compensation, then I think he'd be a really reasonable risk to take. But if all these rumors are true, 4/65m or whatever is just such a huge gamble for a guy that has a lot of red flags and, to be honest, isn't likely to "put us over the top" at this point anyway.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 01:58 PM) I don't want anything to do with him. Bad age, bad injury history, definite draft pick compensation, position limited, and coming off the best year of his long career in a time when there is certainly no reason to believe his skills have suddenly blossomed. No reason to believe he can repeat what he just did, but he'll get paid like he's expected to do just that. Let's let some other team make that mistake. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:38 PM) Considering he had his finest season at 35 I wouldn't put much into what typically happens. He was down the first half of 2013 after missing 2012 but has been on fire the last year and a half. Sure there is risk. But this gamble makes sense as long as it doesn't go crazy. And 35-year old 125 wRC+ DHs get like 2yr/$24m. If that's where we are, then it's a different discussion. Before last year, Victor Martinez's career, offensively, spanned from 86 wRC+ to 130 wRC+. Last year, he put up 166 wRC+. That's SO much better. Even if you ignore the possibility of age-related decline, you have got to be suspicious at a guy who suddenly hits 40% better after 12 years of remarkably consistent performance. So when you say it's "worth the risk," I really don't understand. I mean EVERY free agent presents a risk, I'd argue that if one was worth the risk, it wouldn't be one that DOESN'T have so many obvious signs that his performance was flukey. I'm not saying we all wouldn't like 2014 VMart in our lineup, but that's just not what is going to happen if we sign him. It's the same thing with Shields. They've been awesome, but we can't afford to push the chips in on guys that are obviously riskier than the others.

QUOTE (woods of ypres @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 12:00 AM) Just say no to Vmart. Amen

He's a platooner who shouldn't get much money. These guys are undervalued, and we need an undervalued lefty bat that can take time away from Viciedo. I'd love to have him, to be honest, so long as getting him doesn't preclude Hahn from continuing to look for bigger fish on the trading market.

I don't want anything to do with him. Bad age, bad injury history, definite draft pick compensation, position limited, and coming off the best year of his long career in a time when there is certainly no reason to believe his skills have suddenly blossomed. No reason to believe he can repeat what he just did, but he'll get paid like he's expected to do just that. Let's let some other team make that mistake.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 09:15 AM) You shouldnt have to wonder. I don't, actually.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 08:58 AM) Maybe the Sox should consider talking Jeter out of retirement. He has a ton of playoff experience. I wonder if A Rod is available

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 02:26 PM) Quintana >>> Ventura or Duffy Pretty much, though I'd probably say Quintana > Ventura Quintana >>>>> Duffy

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 07:13 AM) If you could sign Josh Johnson to a non-guaranteed contract, I'd be OK with it, but nothing beyond that. I'd be okay if he is this year's Felipe Paulino. That said, the fact that his $4m option was declined may be telling RE: his health

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 06:12 AM) Other than Ramirez and Danks, we don't have anyone who has experienced the playoffs as a member of the White Sox. Seven years is now quite far removed from 2008...it doesn't necessarily HAVE to be a playoff veteran, but that helps when you have it on your resume. Other than Adam Eaton, there aren't many leaders on this team. With Konerko finally gone, hopefully Sale and Abreu will start to take on more of that responsibility. We also don't have a manager who has ever made it. That's one of the pluses that hiring guys like Francona and Maddon provides. I don't know if Bill James would agree with the idea of "overhyping" something just because it's not measurable or easily quantifiable. The Royals didn't have hardly anyone with playoff experience either.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 04:13 PM) One, you should rework your definition of rotten. From 2005 to 2014 the Sox bullpen ranked 2, 10, 12, 8, 8, 5, 9, 8, 11, and 14 in ERA in the AL. Typically middle of the pack, and that in a stat that puts a team playing in US Cellular Field at a disadvantage. Two, it's beside the point anyway, because from 2005-2007, the three years prior to their turnaround, the Rays bullpen ranked 13th, 12th, and 14th in the AL. The year before that they were 3rd. The year before that they were 8th. The year before that they were 13th. Bullpens are volatile. I know you aren't a stats guy but hear me out on this, it doesn't use any sabermetrics, just a little statistical jargon. From 1998 to 2012 I looked at each AL team's bullpen ERA. I picked those years because the Brewers switched in '98 and the AL had 14 teams the whole time, so it made things easier on me. I compared each bullpen's ERA to its ERA in the previous year and got the R-squared value, which basically tells us how predictable something is. If every team's bullpen finished with the same ERA every year (Yankees 4.25, A's 3.33, Sox 4.00, etc.), that number would be 1.0. Instead, it was .136. That means you can predict about 14% of a bullpen's performance by looking at the previous year; the rest is due to other factors. It means it is extremely difficult to predict how a team's bullpen will do based just on the previous season. I did the same test for starting ERA and got .319. With runs scored, it's .312. There are always teams that surprise in any avenue, like the Sox offense going from dead last to middling from 2013 to 2014, or the starters' ERA going from first to middling from 2005 to 2006. But with bullpens it really happens constantly. Insanely low correlation. Turnover is a factor, but that doesn't explain all of it. The fact is these guys pitch low number of innings, and weird things can happen in low numbers of innings. Bullpens are unpredictable. You get a bunch of good arms and hope it works out.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 11:49 AM) There really is no reason why I am not in. I'll let caulfield introduce me. It will leave me about 30 seconds for my speech. I would drive up to Cooperstown for that.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) Hopefully by then, Montas and/or Danish will be ready and the Sox will be able to skip paying heavily for a starter. Which is part of the reason you want to wait. I'm not opposed to spending on pitching, I just think it's the last thing you do.

I don't think there's really much of an argument for Minnie, at least in terms of his onfield performance. Dick Allen, though, has a real shot. He's a classic borderline guy -- but if Jim Rice is in, Dick Allen should be a no brainer.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 10:56 AM) Next someone will say that Bumgarner's sample in the post-season isn't large enough...that it's the equivalent of saying David Ortiz is "clutch." QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 11:02 AM) Bumgarner is a very good pitcher who went on an incredible run in the World Series this year. If you give him another 120 or so innings, I'm guessing his ERA will be around 2.50-3.00 for his post season career because that's about his true talent level. Wite's got it exactly. It ISN'T long enough. Do you think he's a true talent 0.81 ERA pitcher now? Saying the sample is small isn't taking anything away from the player's performance. Dude pitched lights out and earned a WS ring. But it's not PREDICTIVE of his future performance. He's not the greatest pitcher of all-time now that he threw 50 incredible innings in the postseason.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 09:59 AM) And yet, in your heart of hearts, you would never start Quintana over Ventura in a must-win World Series game for the White Sox. I would choose Quintana every time, because he's better.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 09:40 AM) I would take Ventura over Quintana in a heartbeat because you simply can't teach a 97 MPH average fastball velocity. He has much better stuff and is going to get better and better unless he gets injured, whereas Quintana's already reached pretty close to his peak. I would probably take Duffy over Quintana as well...but it would be VERY close. In the end, Ventura had proven he can be the "ace" in a World Series at his young age already...and Quintana's not the type since his elite run at the very beginning of his career in 2012 where he will consistently put up shutouts or only give up a single run or maybe two. The problem is that velocity does NOT improve with age. It typically peaks around age 22 and declines steadily. Ventura will have to learn how to be as good as Quintana as he loses velocity on his fastball. Quintana on the other hand, is already Quintana. As for the Proven Ace™ by throwing some good games in the postseason: this is simply bad logic, caulfield. How do you know that Quintana "isn't the type?" He's never been IN the postseason. Also, over the relatively small number of post-season careers that comprise large enough samples to be predictive, they ALL regress to career averages. Ventura's "ballsy" performance is comendable, but simply NOT predictive. And finally: Taking Duffy over Quintana is insanity.