Eminor3rd

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 11:33 AM) I like the trade Alexei part , though if you rid the Sox of Viciedo and Alexei . Abreu has no countrymen except Nieto who is most likely in the minors next year. Probably won't matter much to a hitter like Abreu but it's something to discuss. Alexei's coming off a good season and the time to trade him is now. Leury at SS though, yuckie ! Remember Jose Inglesias is coming back from injury next year ( http://www.sportsoverdose.com/mlb-players/jose-iglesias ) and that Suarez kid has looked pretty damn good at SS for the Tigers. Too bad its inter-division but Tigers might be willing to move one or the other now that Suarez has held his own. Not sure about the Russell Martin thing meaning highly doubtful we get him since so many other teams have deeper pockets and catching is at such a premium. Is this a career year for Flowers or has all the studying he's done of great hitters paid off into a league average catcher , which frankly, would be fine with me because... We need more a few more good relief pitchers. Is that altering the pitching plan ? Bottom feeding for pitchers isn't what I'd call a plan if you want to compete. Maybe Erik Johnson can rebound as a starter or try him in the pen. But Sox do have some great arms in the system but arrival time is so crucial when you have guys like Sale and Abreu . Can't wait too long . I was wondering what teams have benefited from that approach ? Maybe the Cubs come to mind but I'd like some from the AL because ,frankly , it's a different game in the NL . I'm always leery of getting NL pitchers. I wanted Ellsbury last year but I do like Sierra. The guy is a tool shed. Seems great ( or annoying depending how you respond to his love) in the dugout and has played well for the Sox . Sort of suffered since trying to build Viciedo's value. The Sox rebuild really suffered a big blow this year despite several guys like Abreu, Eaton and, Gillaspie all emerging but about 8 guys you wanted to see emerge sucking or getting injured. I'd like Saunders from the Mariners and hopefully they are willing to move him if they still want Viciedo ( ha right) . If the Sox do want to compete next year then a bat like VMart is a must. Again will probably be outbid but his numbers are astounding. How fast could he really fall off ? I think Abreu could deal with losing his Cuban countrymen if he had VMART next to him in the lineup. Try pitching around Abreu now suckers ! You get to face VMArt instead of Conor or Avi. If no VMart then the Sox seem to be putting a lot of weight that your favorite ( ) Avi Garcia will produce and/ or improve the defense and relief pitching a lot , which then might preclude trading Alexei. Of course we would need another quality starter then also. A lot of directions this can go. The 1st major trade or signing will point us to what Hahn has in mind . All good food for thought.

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 11:20 AM) for my part that will be a bad trade. what are the sox going for Crawford or Ethier? their contract is what in yrs and salary. there is no way that will be cost effective, even if the dodger help with the salary. the sox will be not to swift if that is all they want, they could be asking for a prospects as well. The idea is it would be mostly a wash. The reality is that we need a LF, so it would make sense for us if the money was close to even. But why would the Dodgers do it? Maybe if they think they can turn Danks into an effective reliever?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 11:29 AM) This is why I'm not that down on Flowers. Even with the highest career strikeout rate of all time, I think he provides enough to justify 400 or so plate appearances a year, the staff is comfortable with him, and he has turned into a really solid catcher. I think he's a really solid BACKUP -- maybe even an awesome backup. And, in general, an awesome backup is a guy you can live with as a starter if you absolutely have to. I'm with you there. But I also think it's the easiest and most substantial upgrade we can make on the roster. Except maybe LF.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 10:26 AM) I'll go with more general guidelines as opposed to more confined and restrictive moves you've made. QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 10:26 AM) YEPS 1) Do attempt to buy low on talented players. These are players who will be discounted somewhat who won't require long-term deals and can provide some insane value both for the Sox and on the trade market. The optimal guy on the free agent market is Colby Rasmus as he fits the Sox needs for another outfielder while offering insane upside to the Sox. He's very much a TTO player, which will turn a lot of guys off, but the upside is high enough to warrant a gamble. 2) Do whatever you can to trade John Danks. He's been discussed quite often, and at the deadline I was on the side of keeping him as it didn't make sense to eat money and get rid of him, but I think this team is a lot closer to competing than even I realized. They're likely going to end up eating most of his contract, but there are ways around that, primarily eating another bad contract that the Sox can find some value in. When looking at possible returns, I look at the Sox needs - outfielder, rotation arm, and bullpen arms - and figure out which is most a trade that can be made. I don't know the exact team, but someone with bad contracts and a need for starting pitching. My gut right now tells me Philadelphia is a possible place to trade with a guy like Domonic Brown coming back, but who knows. 3) In coordination with 2, do bring in a good starting pitcher. Again, this is not shedding all the prospects and bringing in a guy like Cueto or signing James Shields to a mega contract, but acquire a solid 3 WAR starting pitcher, essentially a quality #3. Even if you have to spend a bit of money, this will be worth it as the additions of Rodon and said guy can add a total of perhaps 6 WAR to the rotation. That is a team that is competing. NOPES 1) Do not spend a lot of money on part-time players. This includes relievers. With the amount of decent depth the club as well as the number of options the Sox should be able to acquire for cheap, there is no reason to give a Keppinger or Linebrink type of contract out this offseason. Just continue looking for talented non-tenders and waiver claims and keep moving forward. This does not mean don't show interest - there are guys out there who would be worth multi-year deals at the right price (such as Andrew Miller) - but be cautious. 2) Similar to 1 in the yeps, do not buy players at their highest value. This kind of works against Russell Martin, who I think is a special case, but in general, this will only result in negative cost-value. The Sox, currently, are not at a point where they need a guys such as that. Perhaps following the 2015 or 2016 season they can look towards those moves. 3) Do not "blow the load" this offseason. There is no need to spend a huge sum of money on a free agent, nor is there any reason to trade a huge package of minor leaguers for a major leaguer. Keep the ship steady, make incremental upgrades, and put forth the most talented roster you can without making brash or irrational moves. The Sox are not ready for that yet. Regarding Danks, I jsut don't see any situation where anyone would give up ANYTHING for him. He's damaged goods. Without his contract, he simply wouldn't be in the Majors right now. I can't come up with a scneario where some other team would want to invest to give him a shot, even if the money was covered. Like The Dodgers are better off using Ethier purely as a pinch hitter than having Danks in the mix. The Phillies might have an argument to give up Howard, but why the hell would we want Howard, and I'm not sure Danks would bring enough value to justify Amaro admitting his mistake like that.

QUOTE (Jake @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 10:27 AM) I'm very conflicted about what to do about catcher. If not Martin, who I think will ultimately be overpaid, then you're faced with guys who are probably not clearly better options than Flowers. While I can get behind investing in Martin, the main alternative I'd endorse pursuing is getting a younger guy in here. This might be a stipulation for trading Alexei. On the lower end, a guy like Wilin Rosario would be interesting to have in here - could be a Tank-Rosario swap? I agree with that -- I think the first thing you do the second the WS ends is get on the phone and try to get a good, controllable catcher. Russell Martin would be a back-up plan to that that I'd be very happy with if I was Hahn. And if he isn't going to cost me $100m or something insane. However, while I'd absolutely trade Viciedo for ANYTHING, I don't think Rosario should be our target. I'm of the belief that catcher defense is mroe important than we can quantify, and Rosario is barely a catcher. But yeah, if they'd take Viciedo for some reason...

QUOTE (glangon @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 11:02 AM) Yeps 1) Bring in a proven closer - A proven closer will set up the guys we already have to roles in the pen. We don't need to do a lot to the pen, but bringing in a closer would put the likes of Putnam, Petricka and Guerra in proper roles in the pen rather than being shuffled about to fill in. 2) Sign 1 big name starter - The rotation next year looks to be Sale, Q, Danks and Noesi. Bringing in one big name righty starter would put Q to 3, Noesi to 4 and Danks to 5. We're stuck with Danks contract, we may as well make the best of it 3) Sign a Left Handed Left Fielder - More than likely, Tank will play DH next season with Jordan Danks / Moises Sierra likely to be the back up outfielder, one outfielder should be enough with Eaton and Avi in the outfield already Nopes 1) Don't bring in a proven catcher. Flowers has done the job this year and seems to handle the pitching staff well and with Nieto / Phegley as back up, we aren't too bad going forward. If we are trading pieced away, then I'd rather see us bringing in young talented catchers to come through the system. 2) Don't put Rodon in the rotation. I'd like to see him as either a leftie in the pen or another year in Charlotte before he comes up to give him some more experience. 3) Don't trade away Alexei. His defense has been great this year and with Carlos Sanchez at 2nd base and Marcus Semien as the utility guy, our infield looks and can hit better than when we had Beckham. Plus. I would like to see Micah spend some more time in AAA Lol, this one is funny to me because it's almost literally the exact opposite of mine. It's almost as if you took direct counterpoint to everything in my post. Not saying your ideas are bad, maybe you have the right plan. But I must say: with all due respect, I could not possibly disagree more with the plan you laid out. Also, did you vote YES on independence?!

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 10:58 AM) Agreed with everything except for Martin. If Martin would cost 15M per year then I would have to say no. I would rather stick with Flowers and use spend that 15M per year on a couple of nice relievers for the pen. I guess my thinking is Flowers plus two solid relievers makes the team better than one Martin. I'm not sure who replaces Alexei. Could try to sign Steven Drew on the cheap and use him to bridge the gap to Anderson while Drew uses the Sox to rebuild his value. Drew would give the Sox another lefty bat in the lineup while providing some decent defense. Otherwise I like where you're coming from on this upcoming off season. I love the idea of 4 OF's to rotate with the DH. Should the Sox decide to put Semien at 3rd, Gillaspie could become apart of that 4 man rotation and allow Ventura to use Gillaspie mostly against RHP. Assuming Tank would be traded, there would still be room to bring in a higher salary player via trade to fit into that 4 man OF rotation of Gillaspie, Eaton, Avi and whomever. I actually kind of love the idea of throwing Stephen Drew in the mix in the event of an Alexei trade. Drew has been so abjectly bad that (1) there's no way he'll get paid anything significant and (2) there's no way he won't accidentally be better. That would be the type of signing where if one of the kids comes up and grabs the ML SS job by the nuts in the spring, you're fine just DFA'ing Drew.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 09:25 AM) 1) I think we're going to get priced out of the Russell Martin sweepstakes by a team like the Dodgers. We very well may get outbid on Martin, I agree. If it gets into the $80m range, we should bow out. And it may. Also, I think what you seem to be implying about 2015 is it may be a "domino issue," in that if you decide to do one move, a bunch of others need to follow. I think that makes sense. LIke if you sign Shield or VMart, you should also try to sign the other, and you should also not trade Alexei, etc. QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 09:30 AM) Bravo, bravo! Thanks, friend! QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 09:32 AM) I've been high on VMart and if they can get him for 2 year with an option for a 3rd I'd do it all day. I can really care less about the inability to have a rotating DH. You have a rotating DH when you don't have a good DH. I think VMart has at least 2 good years in em. There's just no way he's going to come at 2 years. QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 09:39 AM) I don't see a SS in the minors until Tim Anderson that I think can match 80% of Alexei. I still think we should hold on until then and "get nothing". I just don't think Leury's bat out of SS is going to ruin this team the next year or two if you're right and no one in the minors can stick at SS. A good bat at SS is a luxury but not a requirement. The DEFENSE is a requirement, and I think Leury has it. I'm okay with that floor in the worst case.

A different take on an offseason thread that I hope will invite some thoughtful responses. The rules: First name three moves the Sox absolutely need to MAKE this offseason, then name three moves the Sox absolutely need to AVOID this offseason. To wit: Three YEPS: 1. Sign Russell Martin at anything up to 4yr/$60m -- He will NOT ever be as good at the plate as he was this year, but that's okay because he was a MONSTER this year and doesn't need to be to make the deal worth it. He has a career high 145 wRC+ this season, but all we need from him is about 100, and his career line is 106. THat would make him an elite defender with a league average bat who also happens to bring Veteran Leadership™ to the table. Even if his bat begins to decline immediately, game-calling and pitch-framing tend to improve with experience, and having that kind of glove back there witha bat that doesn't kill you is worth its weight in blood diamonds. Admittedly, this was a much more attractive option when I first started clamoring for it midseason before the national media caught the scent, and he's going to be expensive as a result, but when you take a look around at the free agent classes of the next couple years and try to find ones that are going to pay dividends both immediately AND going forward, this is one of the few that jump out. And if paying Martin $14m a year is your big money acquisition, you're not really risking much, especially with our current payroll commitments being so low. 2. Trade Alexei Ramirez, probably to the Yankees -- I love Alexei. I really do. I have bragged about Alexei being the most underrated player in the game to all my friends for about four years now. But there are two reasons that it's time to move on: (1) he will be 33 years old, meaning that his defense will most likely decline as soon as next season, meaning that he will NOT be the player he is today when we need him the most a couple years down the line, and (2) we have a glut of MI prospects in the advanced levels of our minors, all of whom need a shot to stick at the majors. It is the position we are best able to fill with AT LEAST a stopgap. The market will be ripe this offseason as several big names will be looking for a SS, most notably the Yankees (who not only want a SS, but also one that will be an immediate contributor but won't require a long-term commitment, which is EXACTLY what Alexei is), who just happen to have a bunch of extra decent catching prospects laying around, which just happens to be exactly what our system needs. Even if none of the guys in the minor can cut it at SS, we have Leury, who can hold the position down admirably on defense until Tim Anderson or whoever is ready. Alexei is great, but he's not likely to be a part of our next contender, so it's time to move him while he has value and we have the in-house candidates to replace him. 3. Acquire TWO corner outfielders -- It is time for Dayan Vicedo to go. I have always, ALWAYS been down on Viciedo and have always been willing to go down in flames if he broke out. Remember when I agreed you guys could stone me if he was good? Well he's not. He sucks. He has to go. "But Eminor, he hit a few homers the other day!" Yeah, look at his line this year: .231/.281/.405 with 21 HR (87 wRC+). "But Eminor, right-handed power is at a premium!" Yeah, but when you do everything else like a minor league utility player (except defense, which you do like Carlos Lee), you do more harm than good. Just for reference, 87 wRC+ is 13% below league average, and is exactly equal to the average MLB shortstop. We should give him to Seattle or something for anything in return. But he should be replaced with TWO OFs, at least one of which needs to be left-handed. What this does is make our team more like Oakland in that it will allow us to play match-ups like crazy. THIS is what the rotating DH should look like: four starting outfielders, and extra starting caliber corner infielder, mixed handedness, use DH to make sure the best/hottest guys are in the lineup every night, maximizing platoon advantage and ensuring good health. Giving Abreu some days off, too. I think we sign one (maybe a mid-tier guy, maybe a reclamation. Probably not Markakis even though he makes sense in every way except price) and trade for another. Another guy like Eaton would be ideal but let's not kid ourselves. If we spend more on the FA, maybe the trade is for the reclamation guy. Dominic Brown? I don't know, but we need two. Three NOPES: 1. Do NOT sign James Shields -- He has been a great pitcher, had a cool career, he's eaten us up, I get it. But he's going to be 33 and is already experiencing the effects of a natural decline. His velocity is down and he's now relying much more on contact than before, which has kept his K/BB rates good, but cannot go on forever. Also, it's risky because you rely more on BABIP luck and good defense to get by. Shileds would be good next year, but already worse than this year, and it'll keep going downhill as his velocity goes. Given what he's going to cost (I'm guessing roughly 5yr/$100m plus a draft pick), we just are not ready to mortgage our future for 2015. It's just the wrong time, both for us and him. 2. Do NOT sign Victor Martinez -- This dude is about to get PAID. He's also really old, really injury prone, and really REALLY unlikely ever to touch what he did this year again. I'm not saying he's going to be useless, but guys at his age are one knee injury from becoming bums (see Carlos Beltran), and even if he stays healthy, you're not going to get that value back to justify the cost of what this season si about to earn him. He may be in line for 3yr/$60m. Also, locking up the DH spot with a one-dimensional player takes away our ability to do my rotating DH/platoon OF thing. This is money that can go toward Russell Martin! 3. Do NOT alter the pitching plan -- It didn't work out this year. With the exception of Noesi, all of our bullpen and rotation upside plays busted. That is NOT likely to happen again. It's a process that has worked wonders for several franchises in our position. We need to do a better job of selecting them, but the plan is sound. Do not let Felipe Paulino cloud your judgement, Hahn. Continue to leverage your pitching development staff, continue to find assets that can be moved if necessary, continue to find assets that don't block anyone, and continue to fish for upside.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 08:23 AM) $9 million for Denard Span is a steal. He'd get $12-15 mill per year on the free agent market. Was about to post the exact same thing; remembered to scroll down and see if you already did this time. Good for me.

He just looks like he's guessing on every pitch. IMO, if he is going to be a guess hitter, then we're probably seeing his ceiling right now. That said, he's still young and just missed a season. There's no reason to "give up" on him yet, but he's going to have to show substantial improvement in his pitch recognition and his approach to hitting next year if we're going to be able to depend on him as a future piece of the core.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 21, 2014 -> 12:48 PM) I have zero interest in the MLB Draft but I am outnumbered on this board. Don't care. Could have fooled me.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Sep 20, 2014 -> 11:12 PM) Don't trip hommie. Just because one person can't seem to get through your posts doesn't mean others do not benefit from them. Even if the entire world overlooked your writing, it's still a moot point. This site is here as a forum for your expressions. If you enjoy having that outlet, then I'd encourage you to keep doing what improves the quality of your life. My choice here is to utilize the space to be light hearted, idiotic, witty, sincere and at times analytical. Most of the times thou, it's just idiocy. Which is absolutely needed in my life. Kids, wife, business, house payments, emotions, family, friends, clients, obligations... Yea. There's a definite need in my life, for a place like this, where I can poop on s***. Again, I'd encourage you to continue exploring your passions and may also suggest you lighten up a bit? Sorry you took my idiocy in a personal way. It was intended to make myself and others laugh. At the time I wrote it, I believe my wife had just snapped at me for feeding the baby and giving her a kiss on the cheek. Yes, postpartum is a challenge and Soxtalk just happens to be the small corner in my small universe where I can be the class clown. Bottom line: don't let an idiot discourage you. Poop.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 20, 2014 -> 10:00 AM) Sorry, I meant the last few weeks it seems he's not chasing pitches as much. When he returned from the injury, his timing was so off he was swinging at everything. Are there stats to show his swing percentage by month? Good question, I'm not aware of how to do it, but I'll dig around and try to find something.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 20, 2014 -> 08:15 AM) I still think Avi should be used as a trade chip if there is a team out there that projects him as a future star. I've watched all of his at bats closely this year, and it's amazing how much he struggles to square up any pitch over 90 mph. I'm not sure if it's due to the labrum injury, but he's going down the same path as other previous Sox youngsters like Josh Fields. I've been impressed by his ability to work the count, as he's not chasing a lot of pitches out of the zone. This is false, unfortunately. Both Pitch F/X and BIS show him with a substantially above average O-Swing% this year, which the the percentage of out-of-the-zone pitches he swings at.

There's no way way in hell we'd win the bidding for Cueto. Someone will pay more than we can pay. I know I'm a buzzkill but man it's true. It's not even plausible. I've spent a big portion of my life steeling myself from being let down, and maybe I've paid for it emotionally and I don't have as much fun as I could. Is it worth it to sacrifice the highs to avoid the lows? Sure doesn't sound like it when you put it THAT way.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 01:23 PM) IT'S NOT THE RESULT THAT MATTERS. IT'S THE PROCESS. Good god. If I drive my car 90mph through a red light and I don't hit anyone and I get to work on time can anyone in their right mind possibly say "it's the result that matters"? When I get pulled over I'll tell the cop "well I didn't hit anyone officer". QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 01:24 PM) If you are this results oriented in everything that you do, I would love to get in a big poker game with you sometime. This is the crux of the matter.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 09:51 AM) If you fired a GM for a bad trade, it would be the job with the most turnover . Hahn stole Eaton . I just can't understand why people still say it was the right move when it clearly is apparent Davidson isn't what was advertised. He still has 30 HR potential but it is rather unlikely. If Hahn traded him for a closer making close to minimum now I doubt anyone still saying last year's trade was right would say trading him for a closer now would be wrong. He wasn't what he was supposed to be. That is obvious. He really wasn't a top 100 prospect. Because we're judging the move itself, not the result. Yeah, you can make the case that the scouts are to blame for missing on Davidson, but you can't make much of a case that a solid late inning releiver shouldn't be traded for a high-end 3B prospect on a team with no 3B solution.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 10:10 AM) Do you think Rick will switch things up this year and try to trade a package including several young players to try to fill a big league role? EYE think that he'll be open to anything. I don't think he "strategy" will be based on where or how he acquires his talent, just that he know what type of talent he needs.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 09:26 AM) Yeah it would be a stat IMO you'd use more like WAR or something, as a starting point, and then you'd dig deeper from there. A lot of the major stats are really just starting points of the discussion IMO and then you would want to look at things situationally and so forth and get video on things. For us as fans we don't have time or access for all the really deep analysis and all that but for a Major League organization that, even when they make relatively "small" player personnel decisions such as bringing in a veteran bench bat or signing a middle reliever, are literally talking about margins of error that cost millions of dollars. Eric Surkamp is at least as capable if not more so than Scott Downs is right here in 2014, and the difference there is what almost $4M or $3.5M or something? You can't win 'em all but any time you'd want to make a major decision you'd want to look into it as much as possible & pay the right people to analyze everything. It's crazy to think that Scott Downs vs. Surkamp is a $4m decision that is kinda like "meh oh well," when there's probably a sales guy in the organization somewhere just BEGGING for a $5,000 increase on his base pay.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Sep 18, 2014 -> 10:53 PM) I was thinking earlier today while I was taking a s*** about how a good way to quantify a teams pitching performance might be to compare total batters faced to total outs recorded in the full season, and then just comparing that figure to the league averages. You need to face a minimum of batters anyway, but how many extra PA are we allowing beyond what is necessary and how does this compare to the league average? Then just go down the list, each pitcher gets a ratio of batters faced to outs recorded, each number is compared to league averages, and we base our decisions (i.e. the Danks decision) on this. Rather than money. Anyway stats are great in theory. But you want as many useful ones as possible and you want them to be as unique as possible so you can find different opportunities in them and so on. It would be an interesting stat. But you'd also have to control for quality of defense and quality of opposition somehow.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Sep 18, 2014 -> 10:46 PM) I agree, I even said that WAR has a lot of very practical uses. But it and others are also overused a lot, and used inappropriately a lot, and some of these other stats really aren't any better than the ones currently being shat upon (which themselves are actually useful, like BA). Ideally you want access to a lot of different and unique stats which are valuable because they tell a very small but specific part of the overall story. The more things you can try to quantify and define, the more possible puzzle pieces you have to work with. At the end of the day you want to piece together the big picture. That is how you make the best decisions. But focusing on one puzzle piece and trying to replicate it in as many places as possible doesn't add detail, and it doesn't make the larger picture even possible. This isn't even about WAR. It's not even related. My entire argument is about trying to use the right stat for the job depending upon the question that's being asked. This is what I'm talking about: sometimes everything that comes out of my mouth (fingers?) gets turned into "CHOOSE THE WS CHAMPION BY WAR WE HAVE EVERYTHING FIGURED OUT." The crux of my argument is you must choose the information that best answers the question you are asking. If you have the right tool for the job, that tool is NOT being "overused." Look. Here's the question: Is player X good at hitting? So, what does batting average tell you that OBP doesn't? It implies a factor of "extra damage" -- if a guy has more hits, he has more chances for extra base hits and to move runners around. But it's lacking there because it doesn't tell you anything about how many of those hits actually DO end up being extra base hits. It also doesn't tell how often those runners ARE going to move up. But we have something that does! SLG is measurement of total bases. When shown next to OBP, it paints a vivid picture! Here's how often this guy gets on base and then here's also how powerful those "times on base" are! OBP is better than BA at showing how often a guy does something positive, and SLG is better than BA at showing how much of an impact those positive things have. What is left for batting average? If you're trying to evaluate how much a guy is gonna help your team, what does it tell us that the others don't? Now, if the question is "is this dude a contact hitter," or "is he going to put a lot of balls in play" or "is his success going to be partially dependent on his speed," batting average would be a useful number to cite! Because it's a different question we're asking, and batting average would be the right tool. The problem, in general, with stats (not just in baseball) is their rampant MISUSE. People cite part of the story when they want to support a narrative they've already decided upon supporting at all costs. Like Dayan Viciedo. When the questions is "is Viciedo good and worth having on the team," the refrain will always be, "but he's only X years removed from hitting 25 homers!" This is dishonest because it intentionally warps context to make it sound like the guy had a good season. It was a terrible season! It was only "good" under the lens that it hopefully didn't represent his ceiling. He did EVERYTHING else poorly at the plate, on the basepaths, and in the field. If someone makes that argument, you have to come back with the information that tells the true story about how he performed that year. Part of being able to make a complete argument is selecting the information that is applicable to the argument. This means ignoring information that does not get you closer to the truth. Greg argues that, if you want to know if a hitter is making a positive contribution, batting average is always going to get you closer to the truth than OBP/SLG and his evidence is that he sees batting average more often on TV. Greg is flat-out wrong. And it has nothing to with WAR, it has to do with common sense.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 18, 2014 -> 11:50 PM) The first 11 words of your post usurp the meat of your post and are kind of gross IMO. QUOTE (hi8is @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 06:38 AM) Poop. lol

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 18, 2014 -> 04:39 PM) Also as far as the people who care about draft picks, I told some huge baseball fans about people on this message board wanting the Sox to lose to improve draft stock and ALL OF THEM said, "In baseball? They care about the draft?" They laughed heartily. Then go back and hang out with your meatball friends. Baseball is more to us than an excuse to drink beer. We actually want to follow the team's quest to contention.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 18, 2014 -> 11:48 PM) Then why were the stats used in the article? The reporter used them with confidence. But Zona willingly made the trade. Hmmm... do they know more than Buddy Bell? You like this trade? This is a results business. We gave up a strong closer candidate (he figured to be mighty comfortable in the role again this year on the South Side) for a guy who does not look like a prime prospect anymore. Maybe he'll be great. Did the Dbacks figure he was a strong candidate to be a bust? I happen to think a GM, if he is doing his job, at least has a closer in waiting if he trades a decent closer. I know, I know ... Nate Jones. You continue to operate from the perspective that it is KNOWABLE how players will pan out, and if a GM is successful, it's because they have a crystal ball. This is completely delusional.