Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 11:35 AM) It would be interesting to see the actual comments after these games. I bet there was more Ozzie was a genius than idiot. Probably more interesting would be the gamethread when El Duque shut down Boston. I know when he was trotting in I was WTFing, and when it worked out, I didn't think of Ozzie as a guy who made a dumb decision that somehow worked out. I wasn't thinking that either.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 11:33 AM) Too many variables involved. This is not strat-o-matic. According to what? How are there too many variable involved? What are they? What is the threshold for "too many?" There are always too many variables involved to predict the future with certainty. That does NOT mean you shouldn't use what you know to hedge your chances. Just randomly guessing when you don't have to isn't really trying very hard. There are too many variables involved in human biology to ever really get the field of medicine right. Should we stop trying? Has our incomplete picture of medicine NOT helped us increase the quality of our lives?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 11:25 AM) Considering you are using sabermetrics for your argument which is heavily dependant on math, I think you would have to agree the 1 in 1000 that the Sox bullpen implodes isn't anywhere near accurate. I would say there would be at least a 3% chance they implode. Probably nearly the same as the difference of the percentage of getting on base between the 3rd and 4th times through the order. You MIGHT be right, that sounds like a plausible number. But you might also be wrong. Might there be research that shows this so we can judge the accuracy or your estimate? Maybe a league-wide shutdown/meltdown ratio? Somebody put some effort into that stat a couple years ago.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 11:14 AM) That's not what I said. I literally have no problem whatsoever with the decision that Ozzie made. I said that, in hindsight, I would have taken Garcia out after 8 innings of game 3 to save his arm for a potential game 7. I absolutely do not care that he left him in and there was no incorrect decision to be made in that situation, only varying levels of correct. It worked out and they won and that's all I care about at this point. Maybe I would have cost the Sox the World Series because Vizcaino (and the subsequent relievers) would have allowed 7 runs. Given how well that team was playing, I have a significant level of certainty that I would not have. How many time in a row will you need to post this before Marty stops asking the same question?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 10:03 AM) How this offseason unfolds (keeping or dealing Quintana) may give a clue about who they think will be available at #3. I think there's just WAY too much that can change with the draft class next spring to be making moves now based on that. It's just weird because they still have a whole season that is going to happen before June.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 10:53 AM) The result is the only thing that matters. If you want to think Ozzie was a genius because he left his pitchers in, fine. If you want to think Ozzie was "not smart" for not yanking his pitchers, fine. The Sox won. Why have a problem with what was done 8 years later? I don't think we do. I mean that was started the argument, but I feel like both wite and I have been trying to steer it away from 2005 as much as possible. I only revived the thread because I saw that article that I thought was a much more complete and clear numerical argument than what we'd been referring to from FanGraphs. I'd rather discuss the merits of the short/long hook versus what Ozzie did. I'm glad we won.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 10:37 AM) The only difference it could have made would be not winning the World Series. At no point, has anyone argued that Ozzie should not have allowed his pitchers to throw complete games in the World Series. No one. At any point in this thread. We were arguing the general idea of the "genius," or lack thereof, of having a long hook on starters because greg associated it with Ozzie and his greatness.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 10:33 AM) And this is the problem with skimming. Nobody has said Ozzie got lucky in managing. I have suggested the fact that 4 guys in a row got complete games is lucky. I also said that I would have taken guys out in retrospect, but that it was a decision that ultimately made no difference. Read and comprehend, don't skim and jump to conclusions.

Extremely relevant, extremely data-heavy article on TTOP (times through the order penalty): http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article....articleid=22156 Summary section for those without BP subscription or those not interested in reading like 5000 words: Samples used in the article were all PAs ever and all PAs from 2000-2012.

QUOTE (Jillian Michaels' Abs @ Nov 5, 2013 -> 11:21 AM) Apparently? *Evidently!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 5, 2013 -> 11:50 AM) In each of his 3 Chris Sale-like fWAR seasons with the White Sox, Javy's ERA was higher on the road than at home. Taking a look, his HR/FB% was basically at its lowest with the White Sox, too. So strange diagnosing him. The only thing that really jumps out at a glance is pretty low strand rates.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 5, 2013 -> 11:27 AM) According to my BP, USCF, while a homer haven, is slightly better than neutral for hitting overall. Last year, the 3 year factor was exactly neutral. So if the White Sox stay away from flyball pitchers, they usually fare pretty well at home. Which was the difficulty with ol' Javy Vazquez, correct?

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 5, 2013 -> 10:44 AM) Right now, out of all of the FA, AJ Pierzynski is the best option we have. Out of all FA, AJ might be the WORST option. I can think of NO reason we wouldn't get someone who at least has a CHANCE of becoming a long-term option, even if it's a reclamation project.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 5, 2013 -> 09:43 AM) I think this coming year is a transitional year or whatever you may want to call it, but I also think that Hahn isn't willing to go into the year with a position like catcher unaddressed. If, as we think, they don't see much room for improvement from what was literally league worst from those two...I think he'll pursue short term options. That is, he'll pursue short-term options if he doesn't like any of the long-term ones. No reason to be horrible for s***s and giggles. You're not going to give a guy like AJ an amount of money that will make you think twice and at his age, you'll want to give him more rest anyway. I don't necessarily believe that having him or someone similar around precludes seeking a young, long-term replacement They'll get a catcher somewhere. The only question is if it's going to be someone like Salty or someone like Brayan Pena, Kurt Suzuki, or Geovany Soto. I'm guessing McCann is almost a 0% chance at this point.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 05:09 PM) It's a real shame The Grandy Man was offered a QO today because he sure does seem like a super likable guy.... http://www.csnchicago.com/blackhawks/curti...s-ice-potential From what I understand, he's one of the nicest guys in the sport. Big believer in charity, etc. One of my best friend's used to work at Niketown and helped Curtis with a bunch of Christmas shopping one year. He said he was just the coolest, most humble guy. Made him feel like a peer. Brian Urlacher was a total asshole, apparently, lol.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 04:23 PM) But by how much? Gillaspie was a rookie and we're literally already paying for a guy who should be an ideal platoon partner for him. Gillaspie has some room for improvement as well, particulalry if he's used right. I'm seriously not interested in "slight upgrades" here - what we have ought to pencil in to a low .700's OPS at 3rd right now. Lawrie switching ballparks would project to a low .700's OPS if he repeated his last season. You're paying for an improvement in the potential ceiling but Lawrie, if he does what he did last year...basically adds 10-20 points of OPS to what that platoon should in theory do. That's simply not good enough. And with the rest of your guys...you're still counting on "imporvement from guys we already have". If we don't get that, then we have a crappy offense even with these guys. Yeah, if the Sox FO think Lawrie is close to his ceiling, it makes no sense to get him.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:57 PM) Here's my biggest problem with this thinking. Gillaspie was only a small amount worse than Lawrie at 3b as a rookie. Can't I also write "Phegley/Flowers, Abreu, Semien/Beckham, Viciedo, and Gillaspie/Keppinger could all be better than last year's production at their respective positions" and still have Santiago in my pocket and an extra $10 million saved on Salty? For that to be a solid offense...you are requiring significant growth on the part of several people. But...if that growth happens amongst the guys we already have, then we get a solid offense without those additions. The only things that really obviously change is that yes, Lawrie has a much higher ceiling than a G/K platoon and yes, Salty has 1 season where he has a stronger record of production than the younger guys we have. Again, for that to be a solid offense...we need the guys we already have to step up, and trading Santiago and signing Salty does nothing to change that. If the guys we already have struggle...we make those trades, have 1 fewer pitcher, $10 million fewer dollars to spend, and we still have a terrible offense. For Lawrie versus the field, comes down to upside to me. You can hope that our revolving door of platooners regress and get acceptable, and you might be right, but if you get Lawrie, it's so you can roll the dice on him being a star, assuming that his downside is similar to what you can get for the other guys. As for C, I don't think there's hope for a full-time C out of what we have now. Salty is probably at his peak, but he's a legitimate solution that is young enough to make an impact for years to come. Throwing in Phegley as a B piece in a trade over the offseason and running in with a Saltalamacchia/Flowers platoon makes a ton of sense to me.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:20 PM) So you're saying C - Saltalamacchia 1B - Abreu 2B - Beckham/Semien SS - Ramirez 3B - Lawrie LF - Viciedo CF - De Aza RF - Garcia DH - Dunn is a legit offense? It's an improvement, but I still have my doubts as to whether that offense would score 650 runs. BUT it would be a substantial improvement on last year and it's something that you can add to over the next couple years. That would be a better team that was made WITHOUT sacrificing the future.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 01:58 PM) You really take the stats thing personally, eh? Yeah, sorry, lol. I guess I kinda do. I mean, it really isn't about the stats, it's about the mindset. My brain can turn it into a massive philosophical and socio-political argument in like 15 seconds if I'm not careful. Sometimes i just gotta CHECK MAHSELF before I WRECK MAHSELF

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 01:50 PM) I think he could still get more than that on the open market (or perhaps get the Yankees to sign him to a 3 year deal before the accept/decline deadline). I'd probably be willing to part with a 2nd round pick for him at 2/$20. That feels like throwing money into a fire to me. Granderson is a short term upgrade, sure, but not a massive one. I just think whatever we spend money/draft picks on needs to have upside that could be useful 3 years from now. We're at the point where we need to prioritize surplus value over anything. Market rate value does us no good and it's easier to come by later.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 01:49 PM) He should accept the offer. I agree that the new system hurts the player, not only does a team lose a draft choice, but they have to pay enough to compete with the qualifying offer. They should have looked at a tiered system where a player like Grandy would cost a team their second or third round pick instead of their first or second pick. It's supposed to hurt the player -- it's designed to give the team enough leverage to retain its best players. The tiered system was abused for profit by teams like the Blue Jays and Rays, and Elias' ranking system was hopelessly obsolete.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 01:37 PM) Let's get rid of that POS shortstop! Any metric that gives value for defensive contributions is WRONG

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 11:52 AM) Yeah, I'm not big on McCann. I certainly think he could be a very good and valuable piece to have, but, to me, it's just as likely that he turns into a big pile of bust. If the Red Sox want to sign him, they can go right ahead. I think he's sneaky valuable, but it's becoming clear that he's going to be in way more demand than I'd hoped a few months ago. Like the skillset, not going to like the contract at all.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 09:59 AM) When is the pitching fwar title parade? Another really awesome contribution to a discussion, brought to you by Dick Allen™

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 10:07 AM) Next week I believe They postponed it until the week of Thanksgiving. Some stupid alderman s***.