Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 4, 2013 -> 10:37 PM) And guess who has the higher career OPS yet is considered a bust. And guess which one has demonstrated he has a clue at the plate. And can make contact regularly. Oh, wait, that's definitely NOT Viciedo. MLB Averages: O-Swing = 31.0%, Z-Swing = 65.5%, Z-Contact = 87.0% Anthony Rizzo: O-Swing = 30.0%, Z-Swing = 66.5%, Z-Contact = 89.1% (102 wRC+) Dayan Viciedo: O-Swing = 42.5%, Z-Swing = 73.5%, Z-Contact = 82.9% (96 wRC+) One of those lines looks like a Major League hitter, the other looks like a minor leaguer being challenged by stuff way above his skill level.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 1, 2013 -> 04:11 PM) That's a lot of high K% rates. Our trademark

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 3, 2013 -> 05:07 PM) I'd put the Mets and Giants with those 5 to make it 7. And now the Marlins: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/10/marl...riel-abreu.html

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 3, 2013 -> 04:05 PM) None of these Sox players came up through the system and learned how to win and play the game the right way fundamentally...as a group. No offense intended, caulfield, but this "knowing how to win" thing is such garbage, IMO. Guys that don't have the balls to perform under pressure and/or don't do what their coaches ask them don't stick in the Majors. The fact is that event sequencing is impossible for individual players to control in baseball, so everyone has to just do their part and hope that the team performs the rest. It makes causality hard to determine, but "good guys" don't will wins into existence with their attitudes. team chemistry is something, but I don't think you can pick guys that haven't wound up winning teams and conclude that they are bad for chemistry.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 1, 2013 -> 06:24 PM) For the first little bit of Contreras' White Sox career, and when El Duque was here, I was starting to wonder if it was a rule in Cuba that the count must reach 3 and 2 with every batter. Haha yeah. It seemed like Darvish went through a similar thing, where he needed to adjust to the overall better plate discipline of the MLB compared to the NPB. For the first year he throw nothing in the zone and walked WAY too many batters. But then he realized his stuff was good enough to get strikes in the zone too, and now he's amazing.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 10:01 PM) DeAza is another guy who tends to annoy. 675 plate appearances this year and 147 strikeouts? Just 50 walks for a leadoff hitter. 20 stolen bases and caught 8 times. 17 homers and 62 ribbies. His extended two-year tryout has resulted in an average hitter. Because of all his blunders this year, I'd suggest he'll be shown the door with Tank and A. Garcia 2/3 of the outfield and a newcomer taking over in center. The problem is that all those numbers you cited have him among the top two or three on the team. It's not so much that De Aza is great but that that almost every other player is way worse. And since De Aza is cost controlled and under market value (free agency tends to pay ~$5m per WAR), you'd be nuts not to keep him and spend your time and money upgrading everywhere else.

lol

QUOTE (ChiSoxFan05 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 10:40 PM) Screw WAR, I'll take Markakis over Rasmus any day. Rasmus is too injury-prone and lacks defense. Markakis is solid all around Markakis, rofl. You'd take an 87 wRC+/-14.1 defender over a 130 wRC+/+12.1 defender who is several years younger?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 04:14 PM) Why is it that only an untouchable prospect would be worth $30M? You won't even be able to get Abreau for that. Abreu is 26, whoever pays up for him will be doing so because they see him as a Major Leaguer.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 04:06 PM) lol we've been doing that a lot lately.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 03:57 PM) If they are offered the right prospect why not, right? But who would offer a prospect to the White Sox for taking on a bad contract anyway? Let alone the ype of guy that would make this worthwhile -- we're talking like Taillon or Buxton or some other untouchable.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 03:42 PM) They should be getting these guys in addition to trying to get another top young hitter. Of course they should.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:45 PM) I went with whatever the "stock" number of PAs, which looking at it now is "qualified". When switching it to 200 abs things made more sense. Phegley claims the #2 spot right behind AJ with a 46.4% O-Swing% (Flowers is 55th with a 37.2) Avi, our new golden boy, shows up in 11th with a 42.9% Dayan then shows up at #13 with a 42.5% Lexi's 41.8% is #16 So that is 4 of the Sox 9 regulars that are in the top 20....That's pretty alarming. That sounds more like the team I saw this year, lol.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 02:09 PM) It's pretty simple: Sign Abreu and McCann or AJP; McCann long term; AJ one year if can't get McCann. Then trade Hector and Beckham for a third baseman. Let Semien play second. Now you then sign Granderson or Choo while trading DeAza for whatever you can get for him. You now have better hitters in the lineup than this year: McCann, Grandy, Abreu, Semien and A. Garcia. That's a pretty fricking good upgrade and IT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED. How much money are you going to have to give McCann to choose us over Texas or Boston? You comfortable going up to 5/100 for Choo? Can you afford both of them and still find $70m for Abreu? Which third baseman is available for Beckham and Hector? I don't know, that sounds like a tall order to me.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 01:02 PM) So you are taking a chance either way. I'd rather they took a chance using money in 2014 & 2015 on a player who might be around to contribute in 2016 and beyond then spend money in 2014 and 2015 on a player who will contribute those years, but isn't likely to contribute much after that. Just personal preference I guess. The chances are not at all equal. You are much much more likely to get what you paid for, at least in the short term, with a free agent, than you are to ever get any value from a prospect. I'm not advocating building the team via free agency, I'm just saying that buying prospects at free agent prices is even worse.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:54 PM) Free Agents best years are often behind them when they sign with their new team. Prospects' best years often never come when they are acquired by their new team.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:12 PM) Of course buying prospects isn't the way to go ordinarily, but the Sox farm system is near the bottom of MLB at a time when they are embarking on a rebuild. The resource they do have is money and they should use it even if they have to pay a premium for said prospect(s) in order to shorten the process. Signing a free agent for $30M over the next 2 or 3 years does nothing for the years this team should be pointing to which is 2016 and beyond. But the only reason the prospect creates value is because he DOESN'T cost what a free agent costs. Because you need a ton of those prospects in order to ensure that enough will pan out. It only works because you can afford to have a ton of them. If cost is equal, a free agent is a better bet to provide value than a prospect. If you don't think a $30m free agent will help now, you're better off putting it in the bank and buying the free agent when you need it then you are spending the money on a guy now that has a ~5% chance of working out at all and may or may not be ready when you actually need him.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 30, 2013 -> 11:00 PM) This is honestly the first time I've ever seen the stat. I assume a high percentage is bad right, so I think I mean worst in O-Swing. AJP is worst at 47%, Ramirez is 7th at 41%. and PK is 89th at 28%. With all the talks of the Sox being free swingers, and swinging at pitches outside the zone, you'd think there's be a lot more Sox in the top 100. PK in the top 100 might surprise some (greg) as well. Your understanding is correct, but I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers. PK's 28% is better than league average (31%) according to FG's table of Pitch F/X data, so I'm not sure how PK is in the bottom 100. Do you have a high threshold for minimum PA's or something?

Here's a summary, Marty: Bernstein's idea would be bad for the White Sox because: The whole reason prospects are so valuable is because they are cheap. This is why people reference 'surplus value.' If you pay $30m or whatever for the prospect, the prospect is no longer cheap. You have forfeited the surplus value. You would be better off signing a free agent because while there may be less upside, there is tremendously less risk. Bernstein's idea would be bad for the dumping team because: If a team is losing and wants to dump its overpaid veterans, that team is "rebuilding" and needs to horde prospects rather than give them away. The only way this would make sense is if a team is in danger of bankruptcy and needed to desperately shed debt. There would be no baseball reason to give away present and future talent solely for salary relief. There is no salary cap.

QUOTE (champs2005 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 10:35 AM) I think James Loney is a FA after this year, I'd like to see the Sox go after him this off-season. Just like we went after Keppinger? Lol Man I don't get what black magic TB uses to make players play out of their minds for one year before turning back into a pumpkin the minute they leave. But it feels like it's happened enough that you can't help but wonder if there's a real reason for it. Keppinger, Kotchman, Farnsworth, Wright -- and current candidates Rodney, Young, and Loney.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Oct 1, 2013 -> 11:27 PM) When he gets denied arbitration this will show Sox do not value him either. If the Sox non-tender De Aza this season, it either means he's a criminal and we don't know it yet, or that Rick Hahn should be immediately fired. This is why fans can't be GMs, too much emotion involved in the decisions we make. No reasonable argument I can make will change your mind that De Aza at ~$3m is a no brainer on this team, but it isn't because the argument isn't good, it's because you don't like him.

QUOTE (JoshPR @ Sep 29, 2013 -> 12:45 PM) What makes Cuba different? Don't we already got 2 free swingers that are from Cuba? I'm just saying that's the typical aggressive type. Hey if the sox get the guy great, but with Latin players it's difficult to call This is true, from what I understand. You need Pitch F/X data to really tell without watching him consistently. An unusually high number of Latino pitchers end up as relievers in the MLB, and many scouts (at least the media scouts whose podcasts keep me entertained during workouts) believe this is because the players are encouraged to take advantage of bad mechanics to maximize their velocity and stuff in showcases. The result is a delivery that is difficult to repeat and thus below-average control. So if you assume that pitchers in the Cuban league throw a lot of bad pitches, you could speculate that Abreu's successful high-OBP approach may not translate to the MLB. However, that's more of an argument to throw out his good numbers than to suggest he has a bad approach. We may not be able to prove he ISN'T a free swinger, but there doesn't appear to be any evidence whatsoever to conclude that he IS a free swinger.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 1, 2013 -> 05:22 PM) The article was that the Sox rebuild might follow a model that has not been seen in MLB before, taking on bad contracts for prospects. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/08/07/ber...e-sox-optimism/ This is stupid. No team has ever done this because teams that are in a position to dump overpaid veterans for underperformance are the same teams that also need prospects to rebuild. This is the type of idea someone would get when they don't understand how professional sports work.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 30, 2013 -> 09:07 PM) It seems like both the Indians and the Red Sox went from worst (or close t worst) in the al this year. It's happened 11 times in baseball history, obviously more frequently since the leagues began splitting into divisions.

Is this the same Bernstein that published the article about how the Sox should take advantage of the growing trend to be given interesting prospects in return for taking on bad contracts? Because I don't think that Bernstein really follows baseball. He may have sources, but he's shown no indication of understanding what people tell him.