Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 21, 2014 -> 07:30 AM) I would rather he have 20 or more really good starts with the 6 or 7 real clunkers, than have a consistent 5.00 ERA for all of his starts. The fact is, most of the time Danks did not suck, advanced stats be damned. And yet he DID suck plenty enough to single-handedly lose 6 or 7 games, which is tremendously significant. Think about the impact of seven guaranteed losses. And when he wasn't single-handedly losing the game, he came in as a mid-rotation starter giving up a little over 3 runs per nine innings. And you can't get those 25 middling starts without taking the 7 automatic losses. The reason 3.16 is a "good ERA" is because it assumes that you INCLUDE the clunkers. If a guy is allowing over three runs per nine when he's at his best, he isn't very good.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Oct 20, 2014 -> 05:53 PM) Also, since everyone loves when I cherry pick....Throw out his 6 truly dreadful starts and he had a 3.18 ERA for 26 starts (164 innings)....Call those innings luck if you must, but as a 4th/5th starter I'll take a guy who gets shelled once a month if he's also keeping us in games the other 4-5. His contract does change things a bit, so with that said I'm cool with trading him for a decent offer. Don't think we need to just dump him or that trading him should be a priority though. QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Oct 20, 2014 -> 11:05 PM) You make some very good points here. Obviously, when Danks was bad he was horrendous but a 3.18 ERA over 26 starts is pretty damn impressive. I knew he was pretty good outside of his bad starts but I did not think he was that good. Fwiw, I don't think you're cherry picking at all. But reality doesn't work that way, lol. He did NOT have a 3.18 ERA because he DID have 6 dreadful starts. EVERY pitcher looks good when you remove all their bad performances.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Oct 21, 2014 -> 06:11 AM) However, if they decide to wait one more year, doesn't a trade of Ramirez make sense? Personally, I think so.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Oct 20, 2014 -> 05:07 PM) I know alot of people on here don't want John Danks to be on the team, but getting rid of him for the sake of not wanting him on the team I don't get. He is mostly likely a former shell of himself and doesn't put up the prettiest numbers. Higher era and has a issue of coughing up the long ball. But you are also talking about the second most durable starting pitcher on the staff for this year. He did tied Quintana with 32 starts most on the team. Also had 193.2 innings pitched this year which is only 6.2 innings short of Quintana's at 200.1. The fact that he made it through the whole year with out going down helps that fact that in the first month of the season the Sox lost Sale, Johnson, and Pualino. Danks and Quintana were the only ones left from the opening day rotation at that time. For most of the year the Sox were trying to fill at least one spot in the rotation. Danks didn't do anything fancy when he pitched but what he did do was eat innings which is most you can ask for from a pitcher especially being the 5th starter. Losing most of your opening day pitching staff in the first 2 months doesn't help. Getting rid of Danks for the sake of not wanting him now opens up 3 holes in the rotations with not alot of back ups just for the 2 spots doesn't make sense. You would have to replace at least 190 innings and 32 starts which on the open market would be coughing up a chunk of change besides the fact you already have 2 open spots in the rotation. Your not likely getting much back for him even if you sending money with him. If you he puts up same amount of innings and starts with a era in the low 4s then I'm fine with that as the 5th starter. Also the thing about him winning 11 starts is him having career year I would take. Quintana only put up 9 wins in each of the last 2 seasons and danks was only one win behind sale this year. People talking about wanting McCarthy as he only put up 10 wins this year and which is the highest hes ever won and hes always injured. Innings are valuable, but replacement-level innings are not. We could get all of those innings out of Scott Carroll + Andre Rienzo for $480k, for example. We have plenty of guys that can be bad for us all year -- Danks is the only one that costs $15m.

All of those lists are pretty spot on, IMO. Only gripe I would have is Roostifier hanging #5 on Ravelo, which seems too aggressive to me. But, aside from that, seems like we're all on the same page.

Cespedes is very overrated.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Oct 18, 2014 -> 02:42 PM) WAR has its flaws and should be used as only part of evaluating a player. At some point common sense needs to be put into the equation. WAR puts way too much stock in flawed defensive metrics. If you trust WAR that much than that means both Zobrist and Alex Gordon were more valuable than Abreu last year. And I'm just not accepting any kind of argument that says this. Which is just you saying that you refuse to accept any argument that you may be underrating the value of defense.

Floyd is a candidate for a minor league deal, IMO. He had TJ that didn't "take," and was bleeding internally in his elbow by the end of his first start back. I just don't see any way I'd guarantee any number of millions to him until he proves his arm will hold together.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 12:21 PM) We may not have a problem dealing with Boras like we used to, but that doesn't change the fact that he typically takes his clients to free agency and attempts to get top dollar for them. And quite frankly, he's very successful at doing that. The reality is if Rodon is as good as advertised, he's likely going to get a contract in free agency that will be above our risk tolerance. I'm actually quite astonished this many people are finding this notion hard to believe. So what? 98% of big free agent pitcher contracts turn out TERRIBLE. Let's take his six best years and let some other team deal with him.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 12:25 PM) Just touching on Dayan's "room for growth" -- look at his comps through 25 on b-ref: Willie Montanez (971) George Hendrick (968) Jeremy Hermida (964) Rick Reichardt (958) Dick Kokos (955) Carmelo Martinez (954) Charlie Spikes (954) Andy Van Slyke (953) Cliff Floyd (950) Luis Gonzalez (949) Not exactly a row of guys that turned into average or even above average players. Hendrick had a nice career but he put together a season (124 OPS+) at 24 that Dayan could only dream about. Van Slyke obviously was on teh complete opposite side of the spectrum with defensive value. Dayan reminds me of Wily Mo Pena. Crap defense, crap running, solid power, even good power, but no on base skills, no contact skills. Mo washed out of the league after he proved he couldn't hit enough to stick as a regular. I can see Dayan going to Japan in a few years and having a good career, but I can't see him having a good career in MLB without a major, major jump in contact skill or patience. Things that just aren't likely to happen. Wily Mo is KILLING Japan right now, though!

Media memes die SO slow. Clearly, our team has no problem dealing with Boras at this point. We can all see that now, right?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 07:24 AM) But this team easily could compete for a division crown. You improve 3-4 spots on the team, improve the bullpen in general, and you could easily be talking about a 12+ win jump. With an estimated free agent value of $11 mill (the average of what Quintana qualifies for from the White Sox for his first 2 years of free agency), the White Sox have Quintana set up as 30%/49%/63%/80%, which even favors the player a little bit compared to the typical 40/60/80. Even if you assume Rodon's free agent value will be $15 mill, you're looking at this: Super 2: 0.5/0.5/4.5/7.5/9.5/12 = $34.5 Non S2: 0.5/0.5/0.5/6.0/9.0/12 = $28.5 $6 million is, in the long run, a very minimal amount extra Nice, repost this in the PHT thread where we're currently arguing about Rodon being in the f***ing bullpen or some crap.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 12:54 PM) Its management of resources, do you really want to invest a large share of your resources in a SP when you have one for free sitting in waiting? Personally I would rather invest that money in the lineup and in the pen and take a shot on reclamation guy that you can spin at the deadline - as the Cubs have done each of the last two years. Rodon isn't the only pitcher on the horizon, Bassit is not far away nor is Beck and Danish will probably be ready to break camp with the team in 2016. I just don't want to unnecessarily tie up payroll in duplicative assets when there are holes at 2B, LF and DH that need to be addressed. Volquez may not be the answer, but he is one of a bunch of guys on that list that have potential to take a step forward and provide the Sox some value at the trade deadline. Whoever the Sox get, I would not want them to go anything beyond a 1 year deal with an option, similar to the Paulio deal. Dude, killer use of "duplicative."

None of this matters right now. By the time Rodon is testing free agency, our situation will be drastically different. We cannot predict what we'll need or not need in 6 years. Right now, it's this: Keeping him down for two weeks delays his free agency by a year. Keeping him down for three months avoids Super Two. It costs SO little to get that extra year of control that we should definitely do that, almost no matter what he does in the Spring. Beyond two weeks though, we should let his development dictate his promotion path. Avoiding Super Two saves us maybe $5-6m if everything goes right all the time with his career, and if everything goes right all the time, we'll gladly pay an extra five million bucks. I cannot see any argument at all to stick him in the bullpen for any amount of time, other than Steve Stone frequently mentions that it was a common practice in the 70's or whatever.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 10:18 AM) I fully grasp the above concept and have always understood moneyball with the impression that it wasn't that walks and homers were king, it was really more that walks were being extremely underrated and under valued in relation to their importance to their game and I have never had a problem with sabs it is more that I Think a lot of people severely misuse them and don't have a thorough enough understanding of the limitations of various aspects (but that is another debate and I will also say I guarantee there are some stats that I once went into in depth that have since been revamped and I may not be aware of that). I However, I think a similar approach is still being taken by a lot of people in certain areas and if you look at the difference in runs between the Royals and Sox defense, you are talking about nearly a run per game difference. That is insanely huge, especially in an era where there are few elite hitters. The reality is, when it comes to helping the net run differential, if I'm the Sox, I might be able to make far bigger impacts by cleaning up my defense and pitching staff then I can by acquiring bonafide impact bats (and I say that because there are just so few of them available). I think that's an argument I can get behind.

QUOTE (LDF @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 10:35 AM) so does that mean you and Eminor3rd are not keen on signing him? Haha, I just don't want to pay him in line with his success in 2014, because I don't think it's likely to repeat. If the market values him as a 1yr/$7m guy and we haven't found anything better, I don't mind taking a flyer.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 09:07 AM) Sounding like Viciedo from the reports we have is a GOOD thing. Viciedo is an incredibly talented hitter - quick wrists, big power, and great plate coverage. He struggles recognizing pitches and, from what I can tell, with his hand-eye coordination. He's shown flashes in the past where he's willing to work the count and he absolutely tears it up, but those are so few and far in between that it's hard to count on anything but a free swinging strike out machine. If you get a guy with Viciedo's talent at the plate or even a level below that but who is capable of recognizing pitches and/or having good hand-eye coordination, you have a fantastic hitter. But hand-eye coordination is a CRITICAL component and should be considered more of a tool than a skill. If reports of his shortcomings are similar to those of Viciedo, those shortcomings act as the best proxy we have in assuming he has the same types of "tool" issues, including but not limited to hand-eye coordination. I mean, at the end of the day, who knows? But there seems to be big bust potential if he's like Viciedo, because Viciedo is a bust.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 01:54 PM) Jerk I don't dislike metrics I just a lot more has to be thought of then just spitting out the metric. I also still think defensive metrics have their flaws, but they have been improving significantly and the value of defense is at an all time high over the past 20 years given the fact that we appear to be in a low scoring era. I also think a lot of the general saber themes have to be revisited (e.g., playing for the long ball, etc) as a lot of those decision points likely change given that in general, the value of a run is more important now than it was 5 years ago. The bolded is 100% true. The frustrating part is that they all HAVE been revisited and rethought, but the mainstream media still cling to every conclusion from Moneyball, clearly having missed the ENTIRE idea of the book, which was NOT "steals are bad, bunts are bad, defense is overrated, homers are king, walks are king," but rather "use sabermetrics to identify over and undervalued skills in the current marketplace/run environment, and acquire/punt skillsets depending on conditions." That those aforementioned concepts happened to be the overvalued and undervalued skills/strategies in 2002 has been the bane of the SABR-friendly fan over the last seven or eight years. Because people like Hawk and Joe Morgan were offended by Michale Lewis' tone as it was filtered through the media and never bothered to read any of it in the first place. Not a criticism against you at all, but the mainstream in general.

Generally speaking, I think the market is ripe to bust with Cuban players. The next wave all sound a notch or two below their predecessors and the dollar figures seem to be about as high as they're going to get. I think it's a good time to let some other teams take these risks.

QUOTE (LDF @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 08:32 AM) with the advance stats, i can not make a counter, i am not smart enuf. but with regression, that can be said with almost every pitchers. Certainly -- any pitcher (any PLAYER really) is always a risk of turning into garbage due to a lot of factors relating to changes in ability (injury, age, etc.). But what the peripherals say about Volquez is that even his performance assuming the same level of skill is not likely sustainable. This is all just based on correlations of what typically happens when we see these factors. So I think what I should have said as that there is a very strong case that Volquez is significantly more likely to regress than the average pitcher.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 08:21 AM) mmmmm pi

Moncada seems like a pipe dream just because of the implications. Also, our front office doesn't seem like the type to sacrifice future signings for a specific guy.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Oct 16, 2014 -> 07:12 PM) Make Smart Decisions... Meaning dont trade away prospects, especially for horrible contracts. Acquire more ML ready prospects. Sign pitching depth in both the bullpen and the rotation. (Especially guys that I can flip at the deadline for prospects a la the Cubs.) Put everyone of value on the block to see what offers are out there. Just make smart baseball and fiancial decisions. And who replied with a +1, this isn't Reddit. Lol, who ever replies "+1" on Reddit? I got in the habit of replying +1 on older forums that wouldn't let you simply quote a reply and not add any text. So you weren't exaggerating when you said your whole plan was just "do good things"? If you don't want to be exposed to ideas more precise than that, this probably isn't the thread for you. Also, regarding trading prospects: I think there can definitely be situations where this team is ready to trade prospects. However, they have to be situations where we are acquiring ML players with a significant amount of controlability and, if not upside, at least evidence to suggest that their performances are sustainable over several years. It's totally fair if you think Carlos Gonzalez is a bad idea because you think he's overrated, but the idea of trading prospects for a guy who is 28, has a star-level track record, and may come at a discount because of his contract and injury history DOES make sense on paper. So the response to that should not be "NO THAT IS DUMB THING," but rather, "Carlos Gonzalez is a bad idea because I think his injury issues are real and there's a lot of reason to believe his numbers are propped up by Coors and that his best years are behind him.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 07:49 AM) Whoever wants Russell Martin, he will now cost a draft pick. MLB Daily Dish @mlbdailydish · 13h 13 hours ago #Pirates to extend qualifying offer to Russell Martin http://sbnation.com/e/6755584 Yeah, knew it would happen. The dream is dying :'(

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 17, 2014 -> 07:25 AM) He had his best season in years this year, he's a righty, he has been inconsistent enough that he's not going to get a long term commitment from most teams, IMO the Pirates probably won't keep him, he won't get a qualifying offer so he won't cost a draft pick, his main issue has been control and so slight improvements on that could push him into the realm of a really good starter for several years. You're right there's some "Coop'll fix em" built into that last part, but he's also shown this year that the right pitching coach can help him get into a really good groove. Not my preferred option but I get it. It is worth noting that Volquez is a MAJOR candidate for regression by his peripherals, in a very similar way that Hector Santiago was last offseason. - 3.04 ERA / 4.15 FIP / 4.20 xFIP - LOB% = 77.5% vs career 71.7% - K rate = 6.54/9 vs career 8.07/9 - BB rate = 3.32/9 vs career 4.49/9 - HR/FB rate = 9.1% vs career 11.4% - BABIP against = .263 vs career .298 A LOT of things went right for him this year in terms of batted ball distribution, homerun rate, and strand rate. All of these things are considered among the least stable metrics for pitchers. Additionally, he struck out fewer batters than ever before (a rate that has been trending down for four seasons now), and made up for it by producing the lowest walk rate of his entire career (which is still pretty high), which is a thing I'm not sure he can repeat. If Volquez came on a 1 year pillow contract, I'd be for it. But since he is coming OFF of such a year and will demand a multi-year commitment based on what looks like a very fortunate and non-repeatable season, I've got to hope we stay away from him. Based on his numbers, he is very likely to disappoint.