OmarComing25

So every single Cubs starter is down at least 1.5 ticks in velocity, with Hendricks and Arrieta down almost 3, and all 5 are in the top 20 in the MLB for velocity loss compared to last season. It seems pretty odd that all of them would experience such a big dropoff, so it has to be intentional, right? Are they easing everyone in after the long playoffs last year so that their arms are fresher later in the season?

What I love about BCS is that even though the Breaking Bad universe has had its share of scumbags/lowlifes/absolutely terrible people that have done things way worse than Chuck has, none of them have left as much of a visceral negative impression on me as he does.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 16, 2017 -> 08:28 PM) As much as I want to see Vintage Shields, dude has a 1.69 era and a 5.28 FIP. That walk total has to come down by like half if he is going to be decent this season. EDIT: just saw that was only his first two starts, and not including today. My guess is that five hits and three more walks isn't going to help that FIP at all. Hits don't factor into FIP unless they're homeruns. But that actually brings up a question, as I'm not sure if inside the park homeruns factor in because they're in the field of play. Does anyone know?

Both HRs were at 109 mph exit velocity.

To those mentioning his contract even if Anderson completely busts it's not like his contract will be a problem, a minor inconvenience at worst.

I still don't understand why people think Beckham was rushed. It's not like he was overmatched when he came up, he hit .270/.347/.460 in his rookie season in over 400 PA.

Final line is 5IP, 5H (all singles), 1ER, 1BB, 9K. Nice bounceback, the lack of walks is especially nice to see after that first start.

Through 5 Hansen has 9K and only 1 walk.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Apr 11, 2017 -> 10:42 AM) I'm not complaining just to complain, but thank you for your feedback. You seem to admit that he's a warm body, but when I say a different warm body would help us either lose more or win more, you seem to take exception to that. A worse minor league would help us lose more. Do you dispute this? A proven ML free agent would help us win more. Do you dispute this? Since it's the DH position, literally ANY ML free agent who was at the end of his career, or fourth outfielder type, or fifth infielder type, or.....anyone would have been fine. My point is that the the TYPE of player he is is WRONG FOR OUR PARK. Could you please respond to THAT POINT? Thank you. It's hard to take your complaints seriously when you can't even name one player you'd rather see on the team than Asche. You have yet to even give one name.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Apr 10, 2017 -> 03:36 PM) I've been asking that for a month. There no upside. He fulfills none of the requirements for being on this roster. He's not someone who can be peddled; nor is he someone who has a future. I think it's likely an extension of a FO bad habit of loving proven veterans, no matter how bad they are (although they usually favor the ones who were good at some point in their career; not always though - they had a long love affair with DeWayne Wise, e.g.). Who should get his roster spot instead?

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Apr 10, 2017 -> 03:01 PM) I think you are missing the point here. I have no problem losing; I have a problem not getting quality development FOR that losing. Asche has dead end written all over him, mainly due to his # of years of ML experience. He has a pretty long track record at this level already. He's not blocking any development though. Who do you think should be getting those ABs instead?

QUOTE (Soha @ Apr 9, 2017 -> 09:33 PM) I guess, but it also seems to count strikeouts, which aren't anymore 'in play' than home runs. The formula for BABIP is (H-HR)/(AB-K-HR+SF)

I'll go with 68 wins. If we do somehow win 75+ hopefully it's because Moncada/Giolito/Lopez/Burdi/Abreu/Anderson/Rodon/Frazier/Quintana are vastly exceeding expectations and not because we got some run differential luck.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 04:36 PM) A .500 team is not a playoff contender. That is what everyone on Soxtalk has said about every single season for years now. Why is it different now? This year Baltimore, Detroit, KC, Anaheim, Texas, Seattle, NYY are all .500 teams and one or more of them is going to make the playoffs. I'm not saying put your bets on the 2019 playoffs (2020 is obviously what we should shoot for) but just saying it's not that crazy of a scenario, especially if the division is as bad as I think it's going to be.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 04:11 PM) Within a few games of .500 either way seems realistic to me for 2019. And a .500 team in an awful division only needs a few things going right to be a playoff contender. I know that's been the slogan of the past few years but the difference here will be that we're an up and coming team centered around youth and not patchwork mediocre veterans.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 04:01 PM) I'm not saying payoffs in 2019, but it is not out of the question. Detroit is getting old and does not have much of a farm system. Cleveland is in it's prime right now. Kansas City's prime is ending. The Twins are stuck rebuilding, but I like the Sox farm better. The weakness of the division is probably the best reason we might have a shot in 2019. If the rebuild is going well we should be a roughly .500 team, and our division is probably going to be awful. KC and Detroit are probably going to be rebuilding, the Twins still don't really have a path to get pitching, and Cleveland will probably be in its decline phase by then. I wouldn't be surprised if the ALC is by far the worst division in baseball in 2019.

I like it. Even if Anderson doesn't hit, his speed and defense alone should make him worth the contract.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 03:18 PM) If you get 4 prospects that are currently viewed as 50-60 FV, that can have just as much of an impact as 1 player who is viewed as a 65 FV player. 50-60 FV prospects are very good prospects though, I think the better depth argument is if you'd rather have a bunch of 45 FV prospects (which I consider "B" prospects) over a couple 55 FV guys, and I don't think I would. And I think this fits, as looking at the Fangraphs rankings the Yankees have 1 more 50+ FV prospect than we do but a lot more 45 FV prospects, so their depth basically comes from that 45 FV range.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 02:55 PM) Depth has been our exact problem for the last 10 years. True but I still think you're more likely to get more overall value from a handful of A prospects than you are a bunch of B prospects.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 02:26 PM) When I looked at it, the Yankees top half of position prospects is better than any prospect the White Sox still have in the minors that was acquired any later than the 2016 draft. Even past Torres/Frazier, you look at Rutherford, Mateo, Andujar, Judge, Garcia, McKinney, etc, and those guys who have all been top 3 prospects for the White Sox in the 2015-2016 off-season. These are all really good prospects. We probably aren't talking about superstar ceilings, but a lot of solid to good players that will give you a positive impact year in and year out. Just because a guy is rated #10 in the Yankees system, and not a top 100 guy, doesn't mean there aren't some very good major league players to be found there. McKinney isn't even in the Yankees' top 30 prospects anymore for either Fangraphs or MLB.com, the guy's stock is way down.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:58 AM) Rodgers is closer than Rutherford, Rodgers played a full season of A ball this season and dominated Rutherford hasn't played above R ball and is the same age. Pint is a younger version of Kopech, with a huge fastball that needs to refine his command to be successful. With the Sox track record of developing pitching he is very intriguing. To me Rodgers/Pint > Rutherford/Frazier. Rodgers status as an up the middle player is huge and the Pint/Sox combo sets the bar really high. Rutherford is a corner OF with high bat upside but the lowest floor of any of the four players discussed. Frazier has lost quite a bit of luster with his struggles (SSS) in AAA. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-consens...ct-katoh-hates/ This article would make me nervous about acquiring Rodgers as a centerpiece. So Rodgers did dominate but he also played in an extremely friendly hitter's park, basically Coors on steroids and he didn't hit well on the road.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:57 AM) I think Brewers are going to have a nice jump this year to 75 wins, even in that division. Padres I see being one of those teams that has an abysmal first half and people stop paying attention then have a surprisingly competent second half that takes them out of last place. I still think last place could be a team nobody suspects (like last year) and I'd put it on the marlins. Yeah Padres are definitely the favorite to finish with the worst record but if I were a betting man I'd probably take the field over them.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 04:43 PM) You missed the key "good pitcher AND hitter" QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 04:52 PM) I get what he's saying. If you're a good hitter and good pitcher, your average is likely higher. Example: 2.50 era and .300 batting avg. I thought the reason it was noteworthy is because batting average can't go above 1 while ERA can. So a .300 batting average is equivalent to a 0.30 ERA, not a 3.00 ERA.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 03:40 PM) To be fair, if you're a good pitcher and hitter, your batting average SHOULD be better than your ERA. Explain? So a good pitcher should have an ERA well under 1?

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/ Moncada is at #1, the only one given a 70 FV. #19 Giolito #21 Kopech #28 Lopez #94 Collins #98 Fulmer And Burdi was on his "under consideration" list.