Eminor3rd

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 01:30 PM) I think they've done quite a bit of this and it's where they derive the statistics from. So many of these variables show such little significance towards the runs scored with such high variability that it's impossible to say that one is more important than the other, but it essentially follows basic guidelines and sounds logic. 1) A strikeout is the best guarantee for an out. 2) A walk is never an out. 3) If the batter hits it, you prefer it to be on the ground because it's almost never a home run and the batter will usually not advance beyond 1B. 4) A flyball is preferable to a line drive, but those can be dangerous. 5) You do not ever want to give up line drives. Your ideal pitcher is one who has good command, gets a fair amount of strike outs, and keeps the ball on the ground. I'd argue that the best pitcher - starter or reliever - of the modern era is Mariano Rivera. His numbers: 8.22 K/9 2.01 BB/9 52.5% GB% Those can be supplemented, and you can be great without 1 of them, but I generally think you need at least two of them to be a great pitcher. You left out most shocking number: 0.50 HR/9

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 01:00 PM) I know that GB% alone isn't a key factor. Maybe it's K/BB or K% and GB%. I think the best place to start is to look at the pitchers who gave up the least runs and do a step wise linear regression to see what factors pop up. Well, K and BB are two of the pillars of FIP. That's not to say GB isn't important, it's just that it's context-dependent and thus a relative factor. DIPS theory is essentially trying to give you as complete a picture of the pitcher alone as it directly contributes to runs saved. Other important metrics are derived statistics and are critical for seeing how a player fits into your own situation, but aren't useful in comparing players in an absolute sense.

That last thing Gary Sanchez needs to do is sacrifice an ounce of anything to gain some pop. I would read any weight gain on his part as a big negative until he demonstrates otherwise. He's another hacker with whose defensive improvements have "impressed" Yankees scouts. Maybe it's real, maybe not, but he seems like he's got a ton of the flaws that we already have in abundance on this team.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 12:19 PM) Would you take Arrieta and Strope or Avisail Garcia? Garcia. Please explain the relevance of this random question.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 12:23 PM) Why would this be a need? Its definitely an option, but far from a certainty. Gillaspie is likely the opening day 3B, it would seem there are other options to be sent to AAA that would not require exposing anyone to waivers. Bench: Konerko Catcher Keppinger De Aza Problems: No backup SS, no room for any prospects to make the team. The more I think about it, though -- why not wait for your promising callups to miss the Super Two deadline? Might be that's when the "odd man out" gets dumped.

QUOTE (Nunnigan @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 10:54 AM) It would surprise me if that happened. As it stands now, the Sox would likely carry only 11 pitchers into OD. The positional roster needs to be at least reduced by one in order to protect the pitching staff from wearing down as the season progresses If the Sox can get rid of Kepp, with Phegley in the process, its a no brainer Yeah, as it stands, Gillaspie will need to be exposed to waivers unless the Sox are planning to DFA Keppinger if they can't move him.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 09:51 AM) I really don't know why the Sox would want to rush Semien. I agree. If you have to pay Keppinger anyway, why not use him to buy some time? Unless Semien just shreds ST, it makes sense to start him in AAA.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 09:49 AM) I was looking at it from the pitching aspect of GB% not the hitting. Still seems to be that good pitching beats good hitting especially in the post season. If LD rate is correlated to BABIP, it makes sense that a high GB% or lower LD rate would be correlated with better pitching and poorer hitting. I need to find the numbers though. Keep in mind that high GB% correlates strongly with higher BABIP, so a GB pitcher will be expected to give up more hits but fewer homers. The addition of hits can be mitigated, of course, with a better infield defense. Theoretically, for GB% to be considered a thing to seek, you'd have to know you had a good infield, and, ideally, you'd have to play in a park where homers are a threat to be avoided at all costs. Historically, FB-heavy pitchers tend to be inconsistent because there doesn't appear to be much of any year-to-year correlation in HR/FB%. If you see a guy who looks amazing or horrible out of the blue, there's a good chance he had a big shift in his HR/FB% that will probably not holdover to the next season. There's been a lot of content recently online about using this as a factor to identify buy-low regression candidates. I can't find it unfortunately, but I read an article a couple years ago about how Mark Buerhle relied more on the defense of his teammates than any other pitcher at the time. This was derived from looking at GB%, BABIP, LOB%, and a bunch of other stuff that basically pointed to him being successful when positive things happened in the field of play -- partially from defenders sucking up a way above average amount of ground balls and working well with him to control the running game. It makes intuitive sense, of course, because he doesn't strike a lot of guys out. He's been an awesome pitcher, but he may have been significantly less awesome playing in front of a different team.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 09:44 AM) You need Dunn higher up to break up the big right handed bats of Garcia, Abreu and Viciedo. Yep, this. As currently constructed, I'd do this L Eaton R Garcia L Dunn R Abreu L De Aza/Gillaspie R Viciedo R Ramirez R Nieto/Flowers/Phegley/whatever R Beckham/Keppinger/whatever

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ Feb 26, 2014 -> 08:22 AM) New York post says the White Sox are scouting Yankees' back-up catchers -- Cervelli, Romine and Murphy. Speculates that the Yankees could have interest in Beckham or Keppinger. http://nypost.com/2014/02/25/yanks-can-use...ss-other-needs/ I have a Francisco Cervelli bobblehead on my desk next to this monitor, lol. I'd give up Keppinger for one of those in a heartbeat. Even Beckham might have more value than those guys at the moment, though.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 25, 2014 -> 05:36 PM) Someone tell the bat boy to get out of the picture! https://twitter.com/CPHSox/status/438432960002260992/photo/1 Holy god he's bigger than Dunn

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 25, 2014 -> 04:58 PM) I understand the GB is dependent on the defense, however has it shown that the GB rate has an influence on runs scored. There cannot be a direct correlation due to the variability of events however is there a place that lists the GB% and runs scored. This summer this will be a project to research. I second that this would be interesting research.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 25, 2014 -> 04:54 PM) To what are they trying to correltate LD Or GB? I'm looking for some type of correlation with winning games. I know they aren't consistent from year to year but niether are wins. Canthey use a pearson or rho correlation to find GB with wins in a given year? I don't have the answers and I cant find much from anyone else either. Well, LD rate correlates very highly with high BABIP, which correlates highly with successful hitting metrics in general. So you can't link LD rate directly to wins, but you can link it directly to good hitting and then link good hitting directly to wins. The reason it's important to find year-to-year correlations is to help you evaluate if a hitter's success is sustainable. Again, it's trying to boil down metrics to representatives of "true talent," which should be less likely to disappear.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 25, 2014 -> 07:28 AM) Shin Soo-Choo Chin-Sin Choo*

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 08:32 PM) I don't make up anything, and don't twist words. The fact is Paulino is 31, hasn't thrown a pitch in a major league game since Paul Konerko had an 1.100 OPS and anyone thinking he will make career highs in starts and innings and be better than he ever has been before, isn't using reality coming up with those thoughts. He may or may not, DA. It's a shot in the dark. The Sox believe he hasn't reached his upside and they are not insane to think so. He's never even managed to pitch a full season because of injuries. No one knows what a healthy season looks like from him, but I'll trust the professionals to evaluate his health and potential before I'd trust you or anyone else here. And if the Sox want to risk one ninetieth or whatever of their payroll because they think he might be a good trade chip, then what the hell is the downside? I'd be livid if they gave him a huge contract, but they didn't. It's not even a SIGNIFICANT contract. QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 08:13 PM) Many posters here think it's a win if a player outperforms their contract regardless of whether the team is any better. There's something wrong with an acquisition when the best thing that can be said is if he is awful it doesn't hurt the rebuild. Low reward move that in the end does nothing. Marty, you're ignoring posts again. You're the only one that believes "the best thing that can happen is if he's awful he wont hurt the rebuild." Stop pretending five people haven't explained that AND given an example of the best case scenario that happened within the last two years. If you think teams acquire players based on track record and NOT on potential, you haven't been paying attention to ANYTHING that's happened around baseball the past five years.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 06:27 PM) Scott Feldman is going to get you more in a trade than Felipe Paulino. Feldman had enough suitors last offseason to command $6M. Unless Paulino throws up ~120 innings of 3.8 ERA. A rental is a rental. GMs don't choose players based on name value.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 05:52 PM) More like no reward signing You'd look like a damn fool trying to sell Paulino for much at the deadline. Even in a best case scenario, the other GM will say "yes, but it's Felipe Paulino . . ." This low reward signing just spinns the wheels of the rebuild. Yeah, for sure. It reminds me a lot of when the Cubs did the exact same thing with Scott Feldman, signing him to a low-risk, one year contract hoping he could recover from a couple consecutive injury-riddled seasons and show some of the upside that made him attractive before. When the deadline came around, all they were able to do with him was flip him for a former top prospect showing signs of rebound (Jake Arrieta) and a fireballing, pre-arbitration reliever (Pedro Strop). If you told me that one year, $6m contract was only going to return two promising, controllable pitchers and ~120 innings of 3.86 ERA production, I would have been really upset as a Cubs fan. But, I just chalk it up to typical "Hail Theo" crap. Definitely no precedent for this type of a thing working out.

1. Draft 2. The pros/cons of our under the radar types (Engel, May, etc.)

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 04:54 PM) Not that this should be a determining factor, but I think it is interesting how big a crowd there is to fit onto Charlotte's roster in terms of pitchers. Assuming Paulino is in the rotation and Webb takes the open bullpen slot, with Veal taking the LOOGY spot, here are the pitchers you'd assume would be in AAA: Andre Rienzo* Eric Surkamp (L)* Charlie Leesman (L)* Spencer Arroyo (L) Stephen McCray Jake Petricka Deunte Heath Brian Omogrosso David Purcey (L) Taylor Thompson Evan Crawford (L) Nestor Molina Zach Stewart Matt Zaleski Scott Carroll Salvador Sanchez Ryan Kussmaul Parker Frazier Tony Pena Jr Dylan Axelrod Frank De Los Santos (L)* That's about 9 guys too many to fit. And if the Sox have to go with only 6 in the pen, it gets tighter. Again, don't misunderstand, I'm not saying this should effect who makes the team because it absolutely should not. But it is worth noting that you have about 10 starters and 11 relievers there. The ones with an asterisk are on the 40 at this time. There are even more guys who, under normal development, may also be at AAA (Vance, Mabee, Remenowsky). As they did last year, I predict they will use the DL for capacity, citing dubious "injuries". Wouldn't they just cut like half of those guys to free up a spot? Seems like dumping someone on the DL would be more harmful because of missed playing time.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2014 -> 03:54 PM) Why is signing over 30 year old pitchers a bad idea, yet so many expect an over 30 pitcher who has pitched a combined 37 innings the last 2 years to suddenly set a career high in IP? Are you serious? Because there's quite the difference between "managing to pitch three quarters of a season" and "sustaining a level of play to justify $12-15m and the loss of a draft pick for four years."

I don't think it makes sense to look at past stats for Kazmir at this point. He's pretty clearly a different pitcher now than he was when he used to be good and when he used to get ripped in the bush leagues. It stands to reason that his valuation is based on the market's impressions of his current stuff and its sustainability. Not saying it was a good deal or not. I don't know much about him, honestly, other than he got a lot of his velocity back.

If things go according to plan, I expect Paulino to start running out of gas at ~150 IP and for callups to start getting his starts in August/September. I also expect them to choose a longman (Leesman?) who can make spot starts for SPs that have non-DL injuries, and for Hahn to rely on jerking Axelrod up and down if someone hits the DL in the first half.

The problem with Bauer is that his disappointment so far is not at all indicative of characteristics of a typical number 3 pick. Tons of players went after him that are way better prospects right now. His situation is an outlier because of his makeup.

I wouldn't mind more draft coverage, considering we're choosing so high.