Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 11:36 AM) Which is what I posted in post 151 which started all of this. I said stretches and said I wouldn't call his 2011 a "complete aberration" because he still hits like that for long periods of time in each season since. I wasn't talking total season stats. I was talking the level of performance and not just for a week or two here and there. It is still quite prevalent. Yeah we've been arguing semantics for the last 500 pages. We clearly all agree on what you're claiming about Adam Dunn's skillset -- but we disagree on the definition of "aberration."

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 11:24 AM) All hitters have stretches where they struggle. I understand that. And my original point was Dunn still plays at his 2011 level for long stretches, quite often. 2011 was historic how bad it was. I get that, but he still is capable of that type of performance for a good part of the season, which to me says it is not quite a complete aberration when discussing that particular level of play. He still gets there. It is exactly what I originally posted in post #151. Every year, Adam Dunn hits poorly, and hits well. 2011 was the ONLY YEAR where he only hit poorly and did not also hit well. Therefore, Adam Dunn's 2011 was an aberration.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 10:23 AM) 2011 was a sign of decline as well. He still doesn't have a .200 average in a White Sox uniform, the advanced metrics article I read pointed out that his 40 homer 2012 was the second least productive 40 homer season in history. Granted even the least productive 40 homer seasons still provide value. Look at his numbers June 1, 2013, It was like 2011 all over again. And his September was one for the books. Even when people are satisified with Adam Dunn, he is just as bad as he was in 2011 for half the year. He goes bad for months at a time. He had crazy monthly splits. He was either an All Star or a guy that should be selling beer in the stands. The only aberration was that in 2011 it lasted the entire season. The performance that occured then is not a complete aberration. It still occurs just as often as when he is productive. wat

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 09:48 AM) Each of the past 2 seasons, he has been 2011 awful or close to it for 3 months out of 6. So he has been just as awful the last 2 seasons as he was in 2011 half the time. In fact his last 2 seasons look like an aberation if you look at the first 10 or 11. I hope he is the June, July, August of 2013 Adam Dunn next year, but chances are, for at least half of next season, just like in 2012 and 2013, he will perform just like the performance you call a complete aberration. It's a common fallacy to assume that events are evenly distributed. The fact is, Adam Dunn's seasons are not unlike any other players' seasons in that they are composed of hot streaks and cold streaks that end up averaging into his end of the season lines. He may be streakier than average, but pointing out his cold stretches does nothing to explain his 2011. Your argument is evidence that he's declining. His 2011 was a complete meltdown. The fact that his last two seasons have been substantially better than his 2011 is the best argument that 2011 was a "complete aberration." If 2011 was his true talent level, than his season averages would be looking like 2011, regardless of hot and cold streaks. That doesn't mean you have to think he's good, but I'm not sure there's really any rational argument against the notion that his 2011 was an aberration.

QUOTE (RegionSox @ Sep 30, 2013 -> 02:56 PM) If our top prospects are flawed, why would other teams want to trade for them? Wouldn't we just get other flawed prospects back? Flawed does not mean useless. It just means not untouchable.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 04:00 PM) That doesn't seem right at all, he's had at least 4+ seasons since he became arbitration-eligible according to B-R. Even counting the time spent on the DL he was a full free agent in 2011 but signed with the Indians for a decreased amount in 2012. he then got $5 million to rehab and play 0 games in 2012. I don't know if they're somehow allowed to make him the $13 million qualifying offer but I can't imagine they would. That's what I'm saying. They have better info than anyone, and they aren't even offering him a minor league dea despite showing no indication of "giving up on him." He's unemployed.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 03:26 PM) Are these suggestions that Sizemore's knees are shot, based upon anything that has been reported, or is this just speculation? Look, if you guys are correct, and he can't play because he is permanently impaired, then of course it would make no sense. I'm sure that he will be well examined by any team that considers signing him. What I had read is that he was taking his time to be sure that he was completely healthy. I have not seen any reports saying that he will not be able to run well, much less, play center. Who else is out there who could be a stop gap center fielder? I mean someone who can provide solid defense. The best in house guy is probably Jordan Danks. I would hope that longer term, Thompson, or Hawkins will be able to fill that need. If he could play, he'd be under contract with the Indians.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 01:23 PM) Now we have returned to the land of reality in fantasy trade theater. Closer to this land, yes, but why would the Dodgers want Danks?

QUOTE (Lillian @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 10:06 AM) Josh Hamilton missed 3 consecutive seasons, while dealing with alcohol and drug abuse, and then only played half of his first season back, and he tore up the League, when he did. Isn't is feasible for a guy to come back after missing extensive playing time, if he is healthy and in good shape? I read where Sizemore will likely sign a minor league contract. What is the risk? There's a difference between something that's possible and something that you gamble millions of dollars on. One example of something working out against the odds does not serve as a practical reason to expect things to continue to happen against the odds.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 04:57 PM) Wait, I just went to fangraphs and this isn't true. Here's his UZR by year: 3.7 -3.5 -10.3 1.2 -0.2 4.0 7.6 6.1 Yeah, I didn't realize the FG began listing FLD as a position-adjusted version of UZR. My mistake. His numbers look worse because of the penalty.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 9, 2013 -> 04:44 PM) He's 29 turns 30 around May I think .He won't get a lot of years or dollars since so few ( judging by this board) don't want 1stbasemen who don't hit for (as much as you all want) power. I don't think his UZR paints much of a picture at all. Texeria, generally considered an above avg. 1st baseman is the only guy who saved more runs than Loney since 2008 and only by 2 runs. If his ex manager Joe Torre says hea a good fielder I'll take his word for it rather than the woefully inadeqaute UZR which seems to only rewardplayers at premium position. What exactly about UZR makes it woefully inadequate?

James Loney just had his career year at 2.7 WAR, and he's poised to be overpaid. Also, despite his reputation for being a high end defender, he has managed a negative UZR literally every year of his career. Sure, UZR can be wonky from year to year, but six consecutive years of below average numbers paints a pretty compelling picture. At his best, he's a touch above an average player, and he's about to be overpaid to enter his decline years.

Forcing Viciedo into a difficult defensive position so that he can use his good throwing arm is just so backwards.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 04:56 PM) Any chance a decision won't be announced until after the playoffs? I could imagine if the Red Sox had the winning bid, they might not want Napoli to find out he's being replaced mid-playoffs. It won't be announced until after the playoffs, but that's because the MLB doesn't want big news taking away from the games.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 04:08 PM) I think you mean 3. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...ion=OF#fielding I've never seen an outfielder make 15 errors in a season. Looks like he was referencing the Assists column. Whoops. 15 assists is awesome.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 01:52 PM) I never said Garcia was competent in CF. People see he can run and throw, and hope or assume he can play CF because of that. The fact is, if he does play CF for the White Sox, odds are totally stacked against it being a long term thing. First off, while he has nice tools, he isn't great defensively now, and he is more than likely going to get bigger, and there aren't many 250 pound long term CF in the history of the sport. I don't think it will require any more to see that Garcia isn't going to be a Gold Glove CF, just like we knew right away that Viciedo wasn't going to be a Gold Glove LF. If the Sox put Garcia in CF, it will be because of a team need, not because he is a long term solution in CF. I agree here. He's not even a good RF yet, and by the time he learns to be a good OF, he projects to be relegated to RF anyway. I'd like to see him learn to walk before he learns to run anyway. He should get comfortable in RF.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 01:35 PM) How many major league ABs will it require to tell if Jared Mitchell can hit in the big leagues? I'm guessing less than 31. Most players don't get an opportunity to get 31 AB at the major league level. I bet of the 1000s who did not, there probably were a handful that would have turned into productive players. There are some guys you can tell right away aren't going to make it. See, this is one of those things where I feel you argue JUST for the sake of arguing. Clearly he's talking about something else entirely -- if the guyis good enough to earn a look at the big league level, 31 AB isn't enough to tell you anything, because both the hitter and the pitchers and random luck have lots of adjustments to make. The same thing applies to any hitter (Jared Mitchell included) at whatever their appropriate level is. The whole point that was being made was that Garcia hasn't been around long enough to tell what he is going to become, not that every single hitter might be good at hitting even though he sucks in the Pioneer League.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 10:53 AM) Eithier is not worth Santiago if the Dodgers pick up Eithier's entire contract. I think the Dodgers would very much like some team to pick up Either's contract and might be willing to give a pretty good prospect. I hear they like Cano. Marty what are you basing this on? This notion is insane. They have already budgeted for Ethier's contract -- it's a sunk cost. They knew that Cano would be a free agent in 2013 when they extended Ethier. They are not going to give their prospects away for money.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 8, 2013 -> 09:42 AM) I would counter that most guys would look clueless getting reads off the bat if they are in a position they haven't played before. That's fair, but I think he's looked just as clueless in RF. That's what is making me unusually judgmental about his chances in CF given the small amount of time I've seen him out there.

It's not his body or tool box that worries me, it's that he looks clueless going after fly balls. I'm sure he'll get better at wherever they stick him, but I think some guys just don't have the instincts to man CF - you need to get good reads, good jumps, and take good routes to cover all of that ground well.

Game used picture, eh?

Rangers @ 6/80

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 7, 2013 -> 06:44 PM) I like this idea. Take Eithier's entire contract if they throw in Joc Pederson. Can we keep this insanity in only one thread?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 7, 2013 -> 06:44 PM) I like this idea. Take Eithier's entire contract if they throw in Joc Pederson. lol

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 7, 2013 -> 04:36 PM) At least Franco makes a fair amount of contact and he was tearing the minors apart at a young age. This isn't Avisail Garcia who we think is a good prospect but has still been rather mediocre and hasn't put up a lot of great peripherals. Yeah, I'd love to see plate discipline numbers with him, but going off of a pretty lengthy Jason Parks piece on a podcast, he's a hacker. He has made good contact so far, based on his K rates, but it's one thing to make contact on bad minor league pitches, and entirely another against MLB stuff.