thxfrthmmrs

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 26, 2013 -> 05:44 AM) How does Axe deserve an F? He is a minor league pitcher who earned four wins at the major league level. That's overachieving in my book. Jesus Christ, are people still using wins as a measurement in 2013? On one hand people say Sale deserves Cy Young recognition even though he's below .500, on the other Axe gets a pass for earning a whopping 4 wins as a minor league level pitcher. Sounds like double standard to me. Axe definitely gets an F in my books. He has just been god awful since May, with an ERA over 7. His overall ERA and FIP is also in the mid 5, which won't cut it at any level. Let's just say that I don't think the Sox expect opponent to hit over .300 against him. Also, Fathom's grades are WAY too generous. How can a 100 loss team has more A's and B's than D's and F's? How can Crain and Peavy's contribution to the team be graded as A and B, respectively, when they both missed significant time?

This will be a small move, but I wish we can flip Tank for Chris Denorfia of the Padres. Our outfield defense as it stands now is terrible, and as Tank and Garcia put on more weight as they mature, it's only going to get worse, and will carry very little speed to speak of. Denorfia is currently .270-10-50-10 player in Petco park, and the numbers can improve quite a bit moving into the Cell. He's a very good defensive player from the Cubs games I saw him play this year, and according to the numbers as well. An outfield of Denorfia, Ellsbury and Garcia, or Shoo, Denorfia, and Garcia will give us a very good chance to compete.

Defense has been pretty hard to watch thus far under Marc Trestman. Tr secondary is being picked apart by a very average receiving group

Interesting RV pulled Sale after only 97 pitches, bring in Nate Jones to face Austin Jackson, who hits .200 against lefties and .300 against righties.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 18, 2013 -> 06:00 PM) The Colts are not gonna be a playoff team this year, so it's likely a top 15, maybe top 10 pick too. You must be joking. The AFC Wildcard is wide open. I don't think Steelers or Ravens are good enough to be locks for either spots. Colts were an 11-5 playoff team last year, without a running back like Richardson. With addition of Richardson and a break out year from Hilton, they have a the best shot of getting a Wildcard spot. Not to mention Andrew Luck is looking a lot better this year already. As for the pick, I think it's more close to the 20-22 range.

I've always feel he's overrated. I think the Browns are unloading him while he's still worth what they paid for him

I am also confused by the fast count and the second ref coming out during the match. I thought it would turn into a controversial victory for Orton and Bryan gets another rematch at the next PPV. Doesn't make sense to have this Bryan vs Corporate angle to shift that quickly after just one month. I am interested to see the aftermath on Raw tonight.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 13, 2013 -> 12:24 PM) Michael Beasley is a big fat negative, and anyone who argues differently needs to stop watching the NBA (or start watching it much more closely). And anyone who only reports out of their ass and has as many drunk posts as sober ones should not question other people's basketball knowledge. By the way, here is an interesting tidbit on how small market teams and teams who are strapped financially can make moves to improve themselves. I am not a fan of watching movies with the same ending. And I reiterate, I don't think Beasley is necessarily the right answer for this team. But signing him to a minimum deal, make him earn his playing time, is well worth the use of the roster spot, more so than guys like Patrick Christopher and Kalin Lucas, IMO. I think we need to give some young, talented guys a second chance, whether be it Beasley.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 13, 2013 -> 11:59 AM) The front office isn't doing all it can do. That doesn't mean that Michael Beasley is the answer. I think you kind of hit on it accidentally, but Thibs would never play the guy anyway. I dont think Beasley is necessarily the answer. But I think he, along with a few other players that were in free agency, is worth the gamble, with little to no risk involved. It's just mind boggling to see how the best team has the chance to get much better, yet we are not taking these chances to get a lot better.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 13, 2013 -> 10:48 AM) Sure Beasley would score 18. He'd give up 30 on the other end of the floor though. Chicago has already been through Beasley, only back in the day we called him Eddy Curry. Except Curry was a center who can't move and jump over a pile of big macs, and Bill Cartwright left every single clue he has about defense back in his playing days. We also have a guy like can score 18 and give up 30, we call him Carlos Boozer. We've also had guys like Nate Robinson, Marco Belinelli, Kyle Korver, Radmanovic, etc. Heck our third string PF is absolutely a worse defensive talent than Beasley. We didn't mind taking those guys in. We don't need a team full of defensive aces, we have enough to be a great defensive team. Beasley is still only 24, definitely has more defensive potential than Boozer. To think that he can't improve defensively under Thibs tutelage and that he can't be motivated by the drive of Joakim and Derrick, and the Chicago brand of basketball, is frankly ludicrous, and a very lazy excuse for the Bulls not to go pursue these players.

QUOTE (Jake @ Sep 13, 2013 -> 11:12 AM) Only on Soxtalk do the Bulls get criticized for not picking up guys that totally f***ing suck and lack any evidence to suggest they could be anything different Then we pick up a reclamation project like Nate Robinson and he gives us a huge level of excitement...and nobody gives a s*** That was a great deal for us last year. We took a guy who was a defensive liability, a signing no one was too fond of, and it paid off for us big time. Had Robinson not turned out well for us last year? No big deal, there was no commitment. I don't see why we should stop signing those guys this year. Do we need a better back up big? Yes. Do we need another guy who can score? Hell yea. This is suppose to be the year we can finally contend, yet we stay put. So yes, go sign guy who totally f***ing suck last year to a minimum deal, because he has more talent than our 6 through 10 players, and give him a chance. And oh yea, Thibs is a guy who wouldn't let anyone out of his dog house if he doesn't think they can positively contribute. I don't see how a signing like Beasley or anyone else would hurt the team financially or basket wise. If you honestly think the FO is pulling everything out of their pocket to make this team a championship team this off season, you are highly delusional.

I am willing to say most everyone here would be delighted if we picked up Beasley. To beat on the point over and over again, our FO is uncreative and lacks the balls to take any risk. If we go out and sign any of these reclamation projects like Oden and Beasley, there's a chance they can provide value for way more than they cost under the right coaching. At worst, you are paying these guys minimum deals. Oh, and if Beasley gets to play with Lebron, Wade, and Bosh, it's not a stretch to think that he can at least shoot 45% and average 18 pts / 40 minutes

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 9, 2013 -> 09:12 AM) Wow, ok, so there's not a single team in the bottom 15 in the playoffs then, and 66% of the top 15 are in the playoffs. Ergo, I conclude it's somewhat easy to build a contending team when you have pitching and darn near impossible when you don't. My next question is...which is easier to fix, lineup and defensive deficiencies or pitching deficiencies? The Cubs actually signed a free agent pitcher last year, Jackson, and that didn't help them, and they basically have no pitching on the way up. The White Sox have money to spend at positions where there are lineup contributors available as free agents. I judge it's much easier to fix a lineup through free agency than it is to fix a rotation. Furthermore, the White Sox in 2012, with many of these same players, were a positive fielding team, with a 1.3 UZR/150. Thus the numbers show that there's little reason to think the White Sox should be nearly as bad of a fielding team as seen this year. The Cubs will need to add >10 WAR to their pitching staff to be competitive. The White Sox need to add something like 15 WAR to their offense to be competitive while getting their defense back to 2012 levels. I clearly think the latter is much, much easier. One issue is the checkbook. The Cubs will always have more money to spend than us. I don't think it would be hard to for them to go out and sign a pitcher or two. Another issue is prospects. In 3 years, the Cubs offense could be one of the best in the league, if Baez, Soler, Almora, and Bryant pans out, with Jimenez knocking on the door. I don't think they would have to drastically upgrade their pitching to be competitive. While I don't see any of the Sox position prospects being able to contribute significantly in 3 years. Last issue is defense. As it looks now, our outfield defense is brutal. Rios was one of our better defenders for the past two years, and now we are replacing him with Garcia, who is a terrible defender as is it now, and doesn't project to be an above average defender in the future, won't solve our defense shortcomings like you think it would, in the short run. Last last issue, which is debatable. If you want Theo or Rick to run a rebuilding franchise, personally I would take Theo 4 times out of 5.

uh oh, we have a one page game thread, and it wasn't moved to the archive section the day after.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Aug 30, 2013 -> 04:27 PM) That's ridiculous. There's only 15 SP in MLB with K/9 at 9 or higher. He gets plenty of strikeouts and you're projecting him to get plenty of strikeouts. Averaging close to 1k/ inning in the minors is far from indicating he would do the same in the majors. There's usually a 15% drop off between the two numbers. If you think he can average a K per inning or close to it, that's even more ridiculous. I do think he can average 7K/9. If that's a strikeout pitcher to you, then we just have different scales. There's a reason he's always been viewed as a mid rotation starter, not an ace. His stuff is above averaging. He's had a great season, but we shouldn't have unrealistic expectations for him.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 30, 2013 -> 11:30 AM) AA will (or should) have no bearing on his rankings considering he struggled overall at A+ in what will end up being probably 3 times as many games. The AFL could be a factor, but I really think that if people are ranking him in the top 100, they're jumping the gun just a bit. The case for him to make the list is overall, he had a very good year. He was still hitting near .300 in WS not too long ago, but he had a really bad two week slump, which brought down his overall number a little bit. If he fares well in AFL, it will be more telling to us and the baseball world, in the sense that he will be facing more advanced pitching, versus A ball pitchers. It won't be easy for him to put on a strong showing, so this is a huge caveat. So if he plays well in AFL, overall, he will have as good a year as any prospect in the Sox organization, and he has enough skills and tools to be considered a high floor guy which is why I think he has a chance to make the list.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 30, 2013 -> 10:42 AM) I don't think Micah Johnson gets anywhere near a top 100 list. Semien definitely will. Anderson could, but I am not going to count on that one. The only one I feel safely guaranteeing ending up in a lot of top 100 lists is Erik Johnson With his recent promotion to Double A, I think a strong showing in AFL will land him on some lists. In most people's eyes he's a good enough contact hitter, fairly good plate discipline, and has plus speed, which could lead to a pretty high floor. I think some analyst will be willing to overlook his defense at second base to put him on their list. QUOTE (ron883 @ Aug 30, 2013 -> 10:43 AM) He's averaging a strikeout and inning in AAA You can't just look at raw numbers and call someone a strikeout pitcher. He's getting guys out now based on control and command, but he doesn't have a big fastball or a wipeout slider that these prospect evaluators are looking for. He can get away with striking out almost a batter a inning now, but in the majors, I think he's more close to a 7K/9 inning guy. Personally I think he should be in the 40 range, but he will wind up ranking in the 50 range.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Aug 29, 2013 -> 09:54 PM) Where does EJ end up at on top 100 lists to start next yr? What a great season. My guess is around the 50-60 range. Many people will try to poke holes at his age and the fact that he isn't exactly a strikeout pitcher. I think Micah Johnson and Semien are on the bubble right now, but will crack the list depending on how they fare in AFL. Anderson will be in the 80+ range based on based, position, and his plus speed.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/...pitch-for-rays/ Not sure if anyone is still paying attention to this, but it looks like we will be luck to pick up cash from Tampa for this deal.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Aug 24, 2013 -> 10:08 AM) It's not as much age as it is the experience it implies. Give players out of high school 3 years to look at progress. The sox have a different approach then many other organizations, this may be why they don't produce hitters. Bell has stated that they are allowing Hawkins to do it his way and make his mistakes. If it works fine, if not then they will begin correcting his flaws. August stats seem to say that Hawkins worked on the his power but saw it didn't help his average. No he sacrificing some power and working on others things to help contact. Most of the first round picks, even high schoolers, start in Low A the next season if they played half a season at rookie ball after drafted. Hawkins is only 1 level ahead of his curve, and yet as many had point out, the difference between talent and experience is marginal between the two levels. 19 year old first round picks don't normally struggle like this, even if he is a bit inexperience for this level. Even if he was in rookie ball or Low A, once the pitchers start to exploit his weakness, he probably won't fare much better than he's doing now. I heard Bell's interview on the radio a few months back, and I strongly disagree with the approach. Given the Sox have nothing to show for in offensive development for the last 10 years, they shouldn't be continue to experiment this approach on a highly touted prospect, one that they, or anyone, have yet to have success with.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Aug 24, 2013 -> 12:13 AM) I don't know how he can say that while, at the same time, Hawkins is one of only like 3 guys his age in high A. It's so easy to jump on Hawkins these days I have been refraining myself from doing so for the past two months. But I wish people would stop using age as an excuse. The biggest reason Hawkins is struggling this bad is his inability to read and hit the breaking bad. Pair that up with a long and lousy swing, and poor hip rotation, he has no chance to make any contact with the ball. He had an impressive debut last year, but I believe pitchers didn't figure him out at that point. Almost every pitcher Hawkins faced this year in High A have been exploiting his weakness for breaking ball. Check out Nathaniel Stoltz's video scouting on Fangraph. Using the logic that people keep throwing around, that there isn't that much of TALENT difference between High and Low A, would you think Hawkins would have fare much better in Low A? Heck, if words got out last year that he can't hit the breaking pitch at all, I don't think he would have gotten out of rookie ball. We get that he's still 19 years old. But in the history of the minor leagues, there's probably only 1 player who had the strikeout rate that Hawkins has, and a comparable batting average, who turned out to be a successful major leaguer. Even that player hit .210 that year, and that's like .030 higher than Hawkins this year.

Good footage. Thanks Balta

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 23, 2013 -> 12:49 PM) You may be thinking of Myles Jaye, who was at #9 on BPN when no one else had him T20. I did see one guy, can't remember who, who mentioned Bassitt as a darkhorse to watch this year. Yes, thanks for the correction. Bassitt was on the sleeper watch on Fangraphs earlier in the year. Looks like his projection was a late game reliever, but now it looks like he has a chance crack the rotation. With his quality fastball, I think he has to be a legit prospect.

I think one publication had Chris Bassitt as a preseason Top 10 in the org earlier this year, and I think he has to be sniffing Top 10 again, even though our system is much improved. At 6'5", he has the ideal frame for a major league pitcher, and he supposedly threw around mid 90's as a closer in college. He also just shut down a pretty impressive Tennessee offense. I think he has potential to be the next Andre Rienzo. Also, Jacob May has shown surprising power so far. I think he's at least a 3-4 tool player.

I don't see how this is news. ESPN uses bWAR and the stat can be found on ESPN since its inception last year. I do think bWAR place too high of an emphasis on park factor, that's why, according to them, Sale is the second best pitcher this season. Other than Derek Holland ranking ahead of Sale, I pretty much agree with what the fWAR numbers are suggesting.