I'm coming around to the Sox starting with the team it has now

[michelangelosmonkey]

13 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

So now you’re just moving the goalposts?  I want him in the rotation because I believe in the talent and hope that Katz find a way to unleash it, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t bad last year.  And it wasn’t just his command (which was horrible), he also has a very low active spin rate which makes it harder for his 4 seamer to miss bats.  Hopefully he finds a way to fix his mechanics to improve command and reduce the cut on his fastball, but until he’s a complete wild card coming off a really bad year.

I'm not moving any goalposts.  You stated how many competitive teams are relying on starters with a 6.5 and 7 5 FIP.  I merely said they arent...they are relying on Cease and Kopech who have TOR stuff...and FIP is a measuure of what should have happened but when measuring what actually happened, ERA, Cease was at 4.0 and league average was 4.4...and he was only 24 year old.  So to say he was horrible just wasnt true.  

[Chicago White Sox]

6 minutes ago, michelangelosmonkey said:

I'm not moving any goalposts.  You stated how many competitive teams are relying on starters with a 6.5 and 7 5 FIP.  I merely said they arent...they are relying on Cease and Kopech who have TOR stuff...and FIP is a measuure of what should have happened but when measuring what actually happened, ERA, Cease was at 4.0 and league average was 4.4...and he was only 24 year old.  So to say he was horrible just wasnt true.  

He was horrible by every important metric including K rate, BB rate, HR rate & hard hit rate.  His expected ERA per Statcast was 6.65, which considers the quality of contact against him.  It’s cool his ERA wasn’t horrible, but that has nothing to do with the primary things he controls and everything to do with him being lucky.  I watched almost every single one of his starts and it’s amazing he didn’t get lit up each time he took the mound.  Everything was bad last year except for the velocity.

[fathom]

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

He was horrible by every important metric including K rate, BB rate, HR rate & hard hit rate.  His expected ERA per Statcast was 6.65, which considers the quality of contact against him.  It’s cool his ERA wasn’t horrible, but that has nothing to do with the primary things he controls and everything to do with him being lucky.  I watched almost every single one of his starts and it’s amazing he didn’t get lit up each time he took the mound.  Everything was bad last year except for the velocity.

And it can’t be said enough, he did this bad against some awful offenses.

[Chicago White Sox]

Just now, fathom said:

And it can’t be said enough, he did this bad against some awful offenses.

Yup and I’m not trying to be a negative douche, but the only positives that came out of Dylan’s 2020 season was elite velocity and the fact he made every start.  I truly think Cooper fucked up the majority of our young arms, so there is plenty reason for optimism but he’s got to make some serious changes or it’s going to be an ugly 2021 for him as well.

[South Side Hit Men]

Setting aside pitcher development, I’m just grateful Cooper won’t be handing out COVID this season.

 

 

[VAfan]

6 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

You are assuming injuries don’t happen and that’s the problem.  It’s only 10 starts from Lopez if everyone else is healthy & productive.

I'm not assuming that. I just think you can cover for it in other ways than signing a $10M pitcher you don't know what to do with if our top 3 don't get injured and Michael Kopech is ready. 

[michelangelosmonkey]

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Yup and I’m not trying to be a negative douche, but the only positives that came out of Dylan’s 2020 season was elite velocity and the fact he made every start.  I truly think Cooper fucked up the majority of our young arms, so there is plenty reason for optimism but he’s got to make some serious changes or it’s going to be an ugly 2021 for him as well.

No you arent one of the negative douches and I largely agree with you...Im just saying we can't completely ignore the old stats.  TA was REALLY lucky in 2019 and better in 2020.  Maybe part of Ceases ERA success was he has a skill of escaping jams.  Lopez it seems was the opposite...he breezed along and then had adversity and fell apart.  I really think Cease and Kopech at 4 and 5 for this team is OK.  

[tray]

Yup, Cease and Kopech at 4 and 5 with ReyLo and Rodon as starting depth.

Instead of throwing 40 Million at Bauer, save that money to extend Lucas Giolito.

Fired up...ready to go. Fired up...ready to go, Fired up...ready to go.

 

[FriendlyNorthsider]

13 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

He was 100% lucky and if you actually watched his starts or look at any of his stats other than ERA you would know this.  He was horrendous last year and his luck would have almost certainly run out over a full 32 start season.

I posted this on another thread:

If he has one project this year it should be Cease. The analytics show that he has PLUS stuff but cant generate swings and misses. His awful swing/miss and chase peripherals remind me of 2018 Gio which makes Cease such a break out candidate IMO. 

Cease's O-Swing% (Swings on pitches outside the zone) was 26% (8th lowest among 81 pitchers with 50IP) and his swing and miss % was 9% (18th worst). He also had a first pitch strike percentage of 54% (7th worst). 

In 2018 Giolito's O-Swing% was 24%,  his Swing and Miss % was 8%, and his first pitch strike % was 55% . In 2019 that went to 32%, 15%, and 62% respectively. Jake Arrieta, another guy who had a rough MLB start but had plus stuff had similar changes in those percentages. Both made minor adjustments on mound positioning and increased first pitch strike % significantly.

Having plus stuff doesnt mean shit if youre behind in the count. His swing % was 41% which was sixth lowest which makes sense he started as many counts 1-0 as nearly any pitcher in the league.

_______________________________________

The point is that I think, yes, he was lucky he didn't do worse this year, BUT, there is very real upside because if he's able to get to make some mechanical changes to improve his command

[shakes]

16 hours ago, fathom said:

And it can’t be said enough, he did this bad against some awful offenses.

I'm really surprised how many people just accept that Cease is fixed by Katz. That should be the hope with him as the 5th starter, with other in house backup plans, but they absolutely need to sign another starter or the rotation depth tells me they aren't serious about a world series run.

There's was till time and options but it's thinking out.

[Chicago White Sox]

4 hours ago, FriendlyNorthsider said:

I posted this on another thread:

If he has one project this year it should be Cease. The analytics show that he has PLUS stuff but cant generate swings and misses. His awful swing/miss and chase peripherals remind me of 2018 Gio which makes Cease such a break out candidate IMO. 

Cease's O-Swing% (Swings on pitches outside the zone) was 26% (8th lowest among 81 pitchers with 50IP) and his swing and miss % was 9% (18th worst). He also had a first pitch strike percentage of 54% (7th worst). 

In 2018 Giolito's O-Swing% was 24%,  his Swing and Miss % was 8%, and his first pitch strike % was 55% . In 2019 that went to 32%, 15%, and 62% respectively. Jake Arrieta, another guy who had a rough MLB start but had plus stuff had similar changes in those percentages. Both made minor adjustments on mound positioning and increased first pitch strike % significantly.

Having plus stuff doesnt mean shit if youre behind in the count. His swing % was 41% which was sixth lowest which makes sense he started as many counts 1-0 as nearly any pitcher in the league.

_______________________________________

The point is that I think, yes, he was lucky he didn't do worse this year, BUT, there is very real upside because if he's able to get to make some mechanical changes to improve his command

Very nice post

[shago]

"This is your team"

- Coach Dale

[Dick Allen]

23 minutes ago, shakes said:

I'm really surprised how many people just accept that Cease is fixed by Katz. That should be the hope with him as the 5th starter, with other in house backup plans, but they absolutely need to sign another starter or the rotation depth tells me they aren't serious about a world series run.

There's was till time and options but it's thinking out.

The good news is we know it’s there. Remember when he dominated the intrasquad game, and we were putting him in the HOF? He gets some command, he will be the best #4 starter in baseball, and could become an ace. He doesn’t, he is one of the most disappointing pitchers in White Sox history. He is still very young, and has a lot of time to figure it out. Rick Sutcliffe called him the best Cubs pitching prospect he had ever seen. 

[Rounding_Third]

2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

The good news is we know it’s there. Remember when he dominated the intrasquad game, and we were putting him in the HOF? He gets some command, he will be the best #4 starter in baseball, and could become an ace. He doesn’t, he is one of the most disappointing pitchers in White Sox history. He is still very young, and has a lot of time to figure it out. Rick Sutcliffe called him the best Cubs pitching prospect he had ever seen. 

Was he sober when he said it?

[poppysox]

15 hours ago, tray said:

Yup, Cease and Kopech at 4 and 5 with ReyLo and Rodon as starting depth.

Instead of throwing 40 Million at Bauer, save that money to extend Lucas Giolito.

Fired up...ready to go. Fired up...ready to go, Fired up...ready to go.

 

Very few teams have a #4 and #5 with TOR potential.  I think it would be malpractice not to explore that potential.  By the way...are you fired up and ready to go??

[VAfan]

The addition of Rodon may not move the needle for the naysayers, but it is inexpensive competition for Lopez until Kopech is ready. Between those 2, I'm slightly more optimistic that Rodon will figure it out enough to carry a 5th starter role.  The key for him is to be healthy and stay healthy. If the Sox also sign Folty, especially if it is on a minor league deal, all the better. 

My post was not against adding depth. It was about not adding dubious vets who block playing time for Vaughn, Kopech, and Collins. 

[pcq]

To play on words I accept this team for starters but not for the season. We have been let down either through perception or reality of legitimate pandemic distress. The window is open and this is not the time to be clipping coupons. I am mostly pro-owner but the Sox should not be tightening belts. Surely their equity and market value can withstand and maintain some short-term spending for long-term gain. 

[Eminor3rd]

21 hours ago, michelangelosmonkey said:

and FIP is a measuure of what should have happened but when measuring what actually happened,

I just need to point out that this is not true.

FIP is measure of what actually happened without the influence of defense. Depending upon how you're using the number, this can be construed as what the pitcher "deserved," to happen in terms of run prevention, and in that it has been proven to be a better predictor for future ERA than past ERA is, it can sometimes be considered a suggestion of "what should happen," but there is a common misconception that FIP is some kind of projection that lives in the realm of theory and that isn't true -- it is a measure of actual descriptive events that occurred on the field.

[michelangelosmonkey]

1 hour ago, Eminor3rd said:

I just need to point out that this is not true.

FIP is measure of what actually happened without the influence of defense. Depending upon how you're using the number, this can be construed as what the pitcher "deserved," to happen in terms of run prevention, and in that it has been proven to be a better predictor for future ERA than past ERA is, it can sometimes be considered a suggestion of "what should happen," but there is a common misconception that FIP is some kind of projection that lives in the realm of theory and that isn't true -- it is a measure of actual descriptive events that occurred on the field.

FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP))-(2*K))/IP + constant

That's the formula.  If it actually measured the influence of defense it should show, for instance, every Pirates pitcher with a much lower FIP than ERA like Musgroves (actually without Musgrove 2020 Pirates FIP = ERA).  It punishes people that give up home runs and walks and don't strike out many.   If you give up a ton of singles, doubles and triples, allow 9 runs to score but walk none and strike out 7...you are a GREAT FIP pitcher and ERA hates you.  If you walk four, strike out four and give up two runs on solo home runs in 9 innings ERA loves you and FIP hates you.   This is not science and FIP > ERA.   The ERA stuff actually happens...the guy that actually gave up 2 runs and the guy who actually gave up 9...which is my argument.  The FIP argument is the low walk high strikeout guy will eventually become a great pitcher and the High FIP low ERA guy will eventually have to pay the piper.  I went back ten years and twelve years and found a few guys with a FIP 1 run lower than his ERA and really saw no breakthroughs.   Maybe there is evidence. It is true that over time FIP generally is very close to ERA but to loudly say one is truth is just not so.  

[Eminor3rd]

2 hours ago, michelangelosmonkey said:

FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP))-(2*K))/IP + constant

That's the formula.  If it actually measured the influence of defense it should show, for instance, every Pirates pitcher with a much lower FIP than ERA like Musgroves (actually without Musgrove 2020 Pirates FIP = ERA).  It punishes people that give up home runs and walks and don't strike out many.   If you give up a ton of singles, doubles and triples, allow 9 runs to score but walk none and strike out 7...you are a GREAT FIP pitcher and ERA hates you.  If you walk four, strike out four and give up two runs on solo home runs in 9 innings ERA loves you and FIP hates you.   This is not science and FIP > ERA.   The ERA stuff actually happens...the guy that actually gave up 2 runs and the guy who actually gave up 9...which is my argument.  The FIP argument is the low walk high strikeout guy will eventually become a great pitcher and the High FIP low ERA guy will eventually have to pay the piper.  I went back ten years and twelve years and found a few guys with a FIP 1 run lower than his ERA and really saw no breakthroughs.   Maybe there is evidence. It is true that over time FIP generally is very close to ERA but to loudly say one is truth is just not so.  

Look up Voros McCracken and DIPS theory, then get back to me.

The reason FIP is based on strikeouts, walks, and homeruns is because those are pitching-exclusive events that Voros McCracken determined are statistically stable year over year. Hence "Defensive Independent Pitching." He scaled his totals to ERA, then tested and proved that FIP on year is more predictive of ERA the next year than ERA is. I'm not making this up, Voros McCracken did this work, and published the research. FIP is a FanGraphs stat that stands for "Fielding Independent Pitching." This statistic exclusively measures "things that happened." You can anecdotally look around at things if you want, but these are facts.

Edited January 31, 2021 by Eminor3rd

[michelangelosmonkey]

10 minutes ago, Eminor3rd said:

Look up Voros McCracken and DIPS theory, then get back to me.

The reason FIP is based on strikeouts, walks, and homeruns is because those are pitching-exclusive events that Voros McCracken determined are statistically stable year over year. Hence "Defensive Independent Pitching." He scaled his totals to ERA, then tested and proved that FIP on year is more predictive of ERA the next year than ERA is. I'm not making this up, Voros McCracken did this work, and published the research. FIP is a FanGraphs stat that stands for "Fielding Independent Pitching." This statistic exclusively measures "things that happened." You can anecdotally look around at things if you want, but these are facts.

The weirdness of FIP is that the theory goes that there are three reasons why ERA and FIP are different...sequencing, defense and luck.  But sequencing and defense should be the same for all pitchers in an organization (roughly, over a large sample size like a season).  So to say Musgrove over his career has a FIP half a run lower than his ERA...but the other pitchers on his team had no difference in their FIP and ERA over the same time...must mean either that Musgrove is terribly unlucky...and we should value him more highly than conventional (ERA) stats or maybe there is something he does that makes his FIP good but his ERA bad.  It doesn't really explain that...and that would seem to be important.  

[Chicago White Sox]

42 minutes ago, michelangelosmonkey said:

The weirdness of FIP is that the theory goes that there are three reasons why ERA and FIP are different...sequencing, defense and luck.  But sequencing and defense should be the same for all pitchers in an organization (roughly, over a large sample size like a season).  So to say Musgrove over his career has a FIP half a run lower than his ERA...but the other pitchers on his team had no difference in their FIP and ERA over the same time...must mean either that Musgrove is terribly unlucky...and we should value him more highly than conventional (ERA) stats or maybe there is something he does that makes his FIP good but his ERA bad.  It doesn't really explain that...and that would seem to be important.  

Pitchers have different batted ball profiles, so they would not all have the same benefit from defense.

[Eminor3rd]

1 hour ago, michelangelosmonkey said:

The weirdness of FIP is that the theory goes that there are three reasons why ERA and FIP are different...sequencing, defense and luck.  But sequencing and defense should be the same for all pitchers in an organization (roughly, over a large sample size like a season).  So to say Musgrove over his career has a FIP half a run lower than his ERA...but the other pitchers on his team had no difference in their FIP and ERA over the same time...must mean either that Musgrove is terribly unlucky...and we should value him more highly than conventional (ERA) stats or maybe there is something he does that makes his FIP good but his ERA bad.  It doesn't really explain that...and that would seem to be important.  

I believe general consensus is that the ability to limit damage on batted balls is a real skill, but it is much rarer than people think and we don't have a good way to isolate and measure it. The only way we know if a pitcher is a legit "FIP-beater" is if he continually beats it for a bunch of years in a row. And then, by the team we feel confident about it, there's a good chance the pitcher's skills have declined or changed, and so it's still precarious to predict it going forward. I think Matt Cain was the big posterboy for this effect. He beat his FIP significantly like seven years in a row or something -- and then one year he just started getting shelled and never bounced back. The knee-jerk reaction was "oh see well he was just lucky for really long but it caught up with him," but the truth is more likely just that he declined with age and lost whatever skill made him successful.

Like any stat that serves as a proxy -- which is nearly all of them -- there's a tremendous amount of information you can get from it, but it doesn't explain everything, and so it's important that we pay attention to nuances and try to resist using the stat in a context it wasn't meant to be used. That's all I'm trying to say, really.

[michelangelosmonkey]

43 minutes ago, Eminor3rd said:

I believe general consensus is that the ability to limit damage on batted balls is a real skill, but it is much rarer than people think and we don't have a good way to isolate and measure it. The only way we know if a pitcher is a legit "FIP-beater" is if he continually beats it for a bunch of years in a row. And then, by the team we feel confident about it, there's a good chance the pitcher's skills have declined or changed, and so it's still precarious to predict it going forward. I think Matt Cain was the big posterboy for this effect. He beat his FIP significantly like seven years in a row or something -- and then one year he just started getting shelled and never bounced back. The knee-jerk reaction was "oh see well he was just lucky for really long but it caught up with him," but the truth is more likely just that he declined with age and lost whatever skill made him successful.

Like any stat that serves as a proxy -- which is nearly all of them -- there's a tremendous amount of information you can get from it, but it doesn't explain everything, and so it's important that we pay attention to nuances and try to resist using the stat in a context it wasn't meant to be used. That's all I'm trying to say, really.

Nicely stated.  

[FLsoxfan]

The Nats proved you only need 3 stud pitchers in the playoffs, our 1-3 in the rotation is strong and our bullpen should be dominant. The offense is legit. This is a team that, if they get to the playoffs, can definitely win it all. More pitching would be great but as it stands now I see this team as a world series contender.