One Obvious Move Completed - Analytics Overhauled

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Iwritecode said:

I know that sentence is supposed to be "the worst season in baseball history to base the anger on" but I just have to say it's funnier as written. 🤣

Auto-correct has it's own sense of humor sometimes. 

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Snopek said:

Hey we agree! 

There’s a huge swath of middle ground between the two extremes of 1) instantly praising or trusting moves they make and 2) being proactively angry about any and every move.

I’m just wondering what big measures you’re realistically hoping to see this offseason.

Sure.  Most of us are at the "why believe anything they say, because they have fed us lines of s%*# for decades now.  Fool me one decade, shame on you.  Fool me two decades, shame on my, fool me 4+ decades..."

[southsider2k5]

25 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Realistically hoping to see big measures this offseason? None, because they're not well run enough to make a strong play to get better.

Would tolerate? Either get a strong return for Crochet early in the offseason (winter meetings time) or shut up and let someone else come to you because you're willing to hold the player if a strong offer doesn't appear. Don't play the "leak to our sycophants to generate a market" game the whole offseason before taking a weak offer, be willing to wait to the trade deadline if a market doesn't appear.

There's nothing they're going to do to dramatically change this team's direction without spending money, and like the owner in Major League they're not going to spend money that could threaten their ability to move the team. Fine, fair enough, if they're doing work to improve it will show up in a few years...but DON'T COME AND BRAG TO ME ABOUT THE POSITIVE WORK THEY'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AND THE GREAT PEOPLE THEY BROUGHT IN LAST YEAR WHEN THEY JUST LOST 121 GAMES WITH THOSE PEOPLE AROUND. This thread includes that.

I am told I am supposed to have confidence in Getz because of Barfield, for example and Barfield...was around for 2024 and couldn't tell him "Hey maybe that Maldonado deal, don't do that one, and maybe we should look into Vargas a little more than just listening to a guy in the middle of our coaching staff. People are trying to take victory laps based on an overhaul of the analytics group. This is the 4th one in 5 years!

The same Barfield that said to take Fletcher over McCarthy.

[WhiteSox2023]

12 hours ago, hi8is said:

Corny poop.

The very best kind.

[Snopek]

24 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

DON'T COME AND BRAG TO ME ABOUT THE POSITIVE WORK THEY'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AND THE GREAT PEOPLE THEY BROUGHT IN LAST YEAR WHEN THEY JUST LOST 121 GAMES WITH THOSE PEOPLE AROUND. This thread includes that.

 

24 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

People are trying to take victory laps based on an overhaul of the analytics group.

What's funny is that I think we're probably pretty close fundamentally in terms of being skeptical of moves, not giving the org the benefit of the doubt and needing to see actual improvement and results before feeling optimistic about the direction things are headed (aka standard "being a sox fan" stuff).

But then I see the bolded phrases above and wonder if we're even reading the same thread. I just reread the whole thing and don't see anything remotely close to people doing that.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

52 minutes ago, bmags said:

I'm not totally sold on Bannister. I don't think he's bad, I just don't know that he actually is better than what half the other organizations may already have.

I can't tell if what happened in the minors was more just the large addition of pitching prospects we acquired vs him doing specifically better than any other pitching coordinator or status quo.

The downside is just shock at how bad the bullpen was, and, I'm assuming, making decisions on who to cut bait with in apr/may that ended up being solid relievers vs. our trash.

I'm giving Bannister the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't making roster decisions on arm talent, because I know of him and his program/reputation outside of Sox baseball. I'd also argue the Sox lucked into Bannister because of the situation he wanted/required of his employer not working with some other orgs.

[Balta1701]

4 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'm giving Bannister the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't making roster decisions on arm talent, because I know of him and his program/reputation outside of Sox baseball. I'd also argue the Sox lucked into Bannister because of the situation he wanted/required of his employer not working with some other orgs.

Whether it's Thorpe or their bullpen decisions, either "they didn't actually talk to him about pitching decisions" or "they talked to him and he was on board with these ideas" or "They talked to him, he hated these ideas, and they ignored him" are the options I can come up with. None raise confidence.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 hour ago, bmags said:

I would say it's not that odd to wall off analytics from some departments like scouting. Astros did that to prevent the analytics from getting biased. Of course, it had a purpose so that's different than the sox.

One of the most overthought things in business is whether to make a service line a vertical or a horizontal. Irregardless of how you structure the business, the viability comes down to leaders utilizing the resources best for the business and not just best for them.

If you make analytics a vertical, you rely on leaders in other areas seeking out the insights even though the success of that department isn't tied to their team personally (meaning promotions, kudos, etc). If you make it a horizontal integrated in all service lines, you run the risk of your resource falling victim to bias or tunnel vision within their specific service line.

Both pose risks. I'd prefer a vertical with leaders in other segments being intelligent enough to utilize the findings so that the analytics directive originates from a singular point as opposed to it being disseminated across all segments.

[almagest]

16 minutes ago, Snopek said:

 

What's funny is that I think we're probably pretty close fundamentally in terms of being skeptical of moves, not giving the org the benefit of the doubt and needing to see actual improvement and results before feeling optimistic about the direction things are headed (aka standard "being a sox fan" stuff).

But then I see the bolded phrases above and wonder if we're even reading the same thread. I just reread the whole thing and don't see anything remotely close to people doing that.

We're not, apparently, and that's been the major argument on this board for weeks. It's frustrating when people are just confirming their biases and not actually reading what you say, but also it's fun to pop in here sometimes and say "you know that could potentially be a not half bad move" and watch as people absolutely lose their MINDS.

[caulfield12]

58 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Plus two high upside teenagers, yes. 

Albeit with limited tools...

 

If they signed a veteran in Adames Kim or Torres to lead the team and play SS...heck, someone exactly like Edman would be fine, because it better not to Amaya or Baldwin.  But those guys all have too many better options.

It's not going to be Soto or Alonso, that's for sure.

There's just no way JR will spend the money for anyone beyond DeJong and Kevin Newman retread types that are well under $5 million.

Lopez's $3.8 million seems like the ceiling here.

[Y2Jimmy0]

13 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Beyond Vargas, they should also be studying the Burger/Eder trade, Santos to SEA, Fletcher instead of McCarthy and the process behind each one of these heretofore "bad" trades...trying to ascertain exactly where things went wrong in the evaluations.

For example, Fletcher had more years of control and wasn't in ARB yet, was that the main factor...but why identify players already in their mid 20's when they will be well past their prime years of production when the team is next competitive again?

 

Not trading with any other Central teams other than KC?

How in God's name was that logical/reasonable...when the Sox won't be a factor in the division until at least 2027, and that's at the earliest, the way things are looking right now (barring another Skenes being available 1-1 in the 2026 draft)?

 

And why bring back CLEVINGER when the entire goal the last two years was ridding the team of "bad influences/bad clubhouse/chemistry guys"?????

 

4 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Nothing Jimmy loves doing more than telling you how the current guys in charge is competent and doing everything they can. All their failures are the owners fault. 

Celebrating Chris Getz, the guy who set the MLB record for incompetence, tearing down and rebuilding another department is hilarious. The only person more incompetent than Rick Hahn is Chris Getz.

I don't think I've celebrated Chris Getz. I just don't knee jerk react to everything. He's made some very questionable trades but I think the front office hires have made sense and revamping the way organization operates makes sense as well. Ultimately though, they need to find good players. 

55 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

One of whom was on the IL already.

I'm aware. 

17 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Whether it's Thorpe or their bullpen decisions, either "they didn't actually talk to him about pitching decisions" or "they talked to him and he was on board with these ideas" or "They talked to him, he hated these ideas, and they ignored him" are the options I can come up with. None raise confidence.

Brian Bannister lobbied heavily for Drew Thorpe from what I understand. He'll be a significant part of their rotation moving forward. 

[WhiteSox2023]

1 hour ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Plus two high upside teenagers, yes. 

A good GM would have been able to acquire those two prospects for Kopech alone and traded Fedde for something better than Vargas.

Edited 21 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[Y2Jimmy0]

3 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Albeit with limited tools...

 

If they signed a veteran in Adames Kim or Torres to lead the team and play SS...heck, someone exactly like Edman would be fine, because it better not to Amaya or Baldwin.  But those guys all have too many better options.

It's not going to be Soto or Alonso, that's for sure.

There's just no way JR will spend the money for anyone beyond DeJong and Kevin Newman retread types that are well under $5 million.

Lopez's $3.8 million seems like the ceiling here.

They both have really solid hit tools and they both control the zone. The White Sox are also going to lose 100+ games again. There's really no way around it. 

[bmags]

so there you go re: bannister and personnel.

[Y2Jimmy0]

6 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

A good GM would have been able to acquire those two prospects for Kopech alone and traded Fedde for something better than Vargas.

For sure. That trade was at least one player short and I said it at the time. 

[caulfield12]

4 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

 

I don't think I've celebrated Chris Getz. I just don't knee jerk react to everything. He's made some very questionable trades but I think the front office hires have made sense and revamping the way organization operates makes sense as well. Ultimately though, they need to find good players. 

I'm aware. 

Brian Bannister lobbied heavily for Drew Thorpe from what I understand. He'll be a significant part of their rotation moving forward. 

My biggest problem with Thorpe is the Padres have had a TON of pitching prospects go in and out of that system and none of the starters traded have done a thing but Gore and Quantrill and Weathers to a lesser extent...

Gore was pretty much the equivalent of a Giolito, already a well known quantity, traded for one of the biggest stars in the game.

Now the Pads have given up a helluva former bullpen of studs.  Just not many starters have made it.

(Ofc you can argue Thorpe is more a Yankees' prospect if that makes one feel better.)

[Balta1701]

10 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Brian Bannister lobbied heavily for Drew Thorpe from what I understand. He'll be a significant part of their rotation moving forward. 

[Y2Jimmy0]

2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I think Drew Thorpe is good. We disagree again which doesn't surprise me. 

[caulfield12]

8 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

They both have really solid hit tools and they both control the zone. The White Sox are also going to lose 100+ games again. There's really no way around it. 

I mean...are they dynamic or athletic players who can run and throw exceptionally and flash at least 3/4 out of the five traditional scouting tools???

Or have the potential to at the very least?  Projections...?

Solid to above average hitter still might be a major victory for the Sox.

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

I think Drew Thorpe is good. We disagree again which doesn't surprise me. 

The best I can say about Drew Thorpe this year is "Thank God he was hurt". Because if that's the pitcher he is long term, maybe he can be a decent receiver?

[Quin]

4 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Nothing Jimmy loves doing more than telling you how the current guys in charge is competent and doing everything they can. All their failures are the owners fault. 

Celebrating Chris Getz, the guy who set the MLB record for incompetence, tearing down and rebuilding another department is hilarious. The only person more incompetent than Rick Hahn is Chris Getz.

I mean, James tries to give a holistic picture. 

Yes, I know they got two teens in the trade, but they also gave up three useful pieces - and after Zavala, I've got 0 confidence they can develop these teens that Getz acquires. Is that fair? Not really, but Getz is what turned me from an eternal optimist into a "f*** them, they don't give a s%*# about fans."

Getting 29-year-old Edman would have been ripped like getting 29-year-old Wilson. But it's been infuriating to watch a World Series team get a closer and NLCS MVP-starting shortstop in return for Miguel Vargas and two fliers. 

You've got people in this thread that for years have derided analytics suddenly blaming Hahn (who, according to actual reporters with seemingly no agenda, pushed for analytic) for poor analytics. What is it? 

Getz has done f***-and-all to inspire confidence. Bannister actually demonstrated some knowledge other than "throw a fastball kid" with the Giants, so yeah, he probably deserves some extra runway. Everyone else is meh.

I think that James ( @Y2Jimmy0 correct me if I'm wrong) is merely encouraging some patience to see if Getz will do things differently since he's changing personnel. A lot of us have just ran out of patience.

[bmags]

I am just saying even if Getz understands the ingredients he needs for the cake, he has no idea the amounts  or process and it will still end up a disaster and then people will be like "see, analytics didn't work" and I'm saying people to avoid elder abuse but I just mean Jerry. Shoot...I did it again.

[WestEddy]

2 hours ago, bmags said:

I'm not totally sold on Bannister. I don't think he's bad, I just don't know that he actually is better than what half the other organizations may already have.

I can't tell if what happened in the minors was more just the large addition of pitching prospects we acquired vs him doing specifically better than any other pitching coordinator or status quo.

The downside is just shock at how bad the bullpen was, and, I'm assuming, making decisions on who to cut bait with in apr/may that ended up being solid relievers vs. our trash.

Bannister doesn't have to be the best pitching developer ever. He just needs to develop our pitching. He is. 

The perception of "solid relievers" on another team isn't the same as solid relievers on the Sox. Many tears were shed for Declan Cronin, like he would have added 10 wins, and Cronin's numbers are basically the same as John Brebbia's. 

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, almagest said:

We're not, apparently, and that's been the major argument on this board for weeks. It's frustrating when people are just confirming their biases and not actually reading what you say, but also it's fun to pop in here sometimes and say "you know that could potentially be a not half bad move" and watch as people absolutely lose their MINDS.

GETZ-LOVER!!! GETZ-LOVER!!!

 

[bmags]

46 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Bannister doesn't have to be the best pitching developer ever. He just needs to develop our pitching. He is. 

The perception of "solid relievers" on another team isn't the same as solid relievers on the Sox. Many tears were shed for Declan Cronin, like he would have added 10 wins, and Cronin's numbers are basically the same as John Brebbia's. 

Declan cronin was pennies and they paid john brebbia $4 million. Those are the kinds of decisions the sox are constantly bad at.

Bannister, and the white sox, in fact do have to be better than other teams and be the best at a few. Our pitching can develop and still be the worst in baseball.

It's that pathetic attitude that has led to this organization turning to rust.