Gene Honda Civic Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...cago-white-sox/ Solid F'n preview.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Tight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 That's a damn good preview, graphs and stats that are actually quite easy to follow. They've done their homework alright, and they're quite correct when saying starting pitching will probably make the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 12:21 AM) That's a damn good preview, graphs and stats that are actually quite easy to follow. They've done their homework alright, and they're quite correct when saying starting pitching will probably make the difference. That is why i read them daily.. they know what they are talking about 99.7% of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 (edited) Easily the best preview I've seen thus far. Some previews I saw didn't even include our entire offseason aquistions, and even though a lot of the sabermetric crowd tends to hate on Kenny, good to see someone give him some props. Over the past week, more and more I've read THT. Some really enjoyable reads on that site, too... EDIT: And I also just got to reading his predictions for Iguchi, and man -- Gleeman made an awesome prediction as far as Kaz Matsui last year. The only thing that he was really off in was SLG%. Just thought that was really neat... I think I'm going to send him an email. I've really enjoyed reading a couple of his articles... Edited March 28, 2005 by CWSGuy406 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 You weren't lying, Cheat. Great article. National writers assessing our offseason are often unfamiliar, or bewildered, with the motives behind our acquisitions. Trading Carlos Lee and allowing Ordonez to leave were the sexy moves writers often questioned. Someone did their homework. Besides the "Cell Phone Field" comment, which may have been an honest mistake, "Studes" covered all offseason acquisitions and their potential impacts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 28, 2005 Author Share Posted March 28, 2005 I wrote something in my blog on this, but it won't publish.... :finger Blogger, you're gone by the end of the week ... Anywho, here's part of it.. Two things really stuck out for me in that recap: When discussing the Sox OBP and subsequent RISP avg., where the Sox were either really good or really bad, depending on your perspective, Studes brings up this:In fact, if you look at the number of times Sox batters actually reached base (OBP without the home runs), the Sox were virtually last in the league with a .305 figure. Tamp Bay was last at .303. I had never thought of subtracting HR from the equation before. I don't know why, and I feel stupid for not thinking of it first, but this actually helps illustrate why the Sox offense shouldn't face the drop-off that lesser columnists are predicting. I don't think they'll hit the 242 HR that they reached last year, but I'd eat my hat if they don't break 200 this season, and they should make up for the lost modest loss of HRs by getting more guys into scoring position the conventional way(hitting) and the hard way(stealing) In question number four, when talking about the bullpen studes introduces this: P All Sox 0-0.1 4.22 4.43 0.1-0.2 3.98 5.05 0.2-0.3 3.75 4.70 0.3-0.4 3.57 7.70 ...Mo s t team s bring in their be s t pitcher s when the game i s on the line, which i s why their FIP decrea s e s a s their P increa s e s (doe s that s ound funny, or i s it ju s t me?). The S ox, on the other hand, had a 7.70 FIP when the game wa s in it s more critical juncture s . That' s ju s t not good, and need s to improve in 2005. Studes doesn't fully explain what the numbers on the left represent, but I'm reasonably sure that they represent the difficulty of the situation the reliever inherited. The most difficult situation would be bases loaded, nobody out; and last year we all know what that meant... Thriller. Studes attributes the high FIP for the Sox in the most critical situations to Marte's down year, and he's probably partially right, but I know of at least 2 occasions where first pitch "fastballs" got a one way flight to the outfield seats for a grand slam last season care of Thriller. I can think of another that went for a bases clearing double. Plus we had a half season of Billy Koch. The bullpen will be even more improved than Studes numbers indicate simply with the departure of these two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevHead0881 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Wow, a well-done preview. They seem to be few and far between this year. I guess this guy didn't get the "Scott Schoenweis was moved to the bullpen" memo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 I'm sceptical about the hitting analysis. Getting runners into sp is so much a function of obp, and our obp was just awful at the end of last season. Using that as a standard (eg, comparing Dye to Joe B/Timo) is just setting the bar awful low. It's also a little odd to read about the park, etc, and no mention of the loud proclamation that smallball has come. Maybe they believe it's mostly rhetoric. Unfortunately, I think the pitching analysis is spot-on, and that's really what'll make or break us this year. Good depth in the pen, but a starting 5 with a lot of questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 I'm sceptical about the hitting analysis. Getting runners into sp is so much a function of obp, and our obp was just awful at the end of last season. Using that as a standard (eg, comparing Dye to Joe B/Timo) is just setting the bar awful low. It's also a little odd to read about the park, etc, and no mention of the loud proclamation that smallball has come. Maybe they believe it's mostly rhetoric. Unfortunately, I think the pitching analysis is spot-on, and that's really what'll make or break us this year. Good depth in the pen, but a starting 5 with a lot of questions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Once Frank is healthy, Dye will likely be batting 5th or 6th. That's a far cry away from having Borchard/Timo in RF and batting anywhere in the lineup everyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 QUOTE(Jabroni @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 07:03 AM) Once Frank is healthy, Dye will likely be batting 5th or 6th. That's a far cry away from having Borchard/Timo in RF and batting anywhere in the lineup everyday. It may be better than the overall average of Magglio-Timo-Borchard that we had last year, but not by much. Figure Dye has about a .330 obp. Magglio was at .350 (which was flukey low), and Timo's about .290. Borchard, well, we all know -- .260 (I'll be generous). But I discount Joe's numbers somewhat -- he was basically playing in a try-out, and if the games had counted he would have been hitting a lot less. Then if Everett gets displaced it hurts us some more -- he's hard to place, but I'd guess around .340, roughly his average over the last 2 years. Plus, "once Frank is healthy" is key -- he was very important when healthy last year. I wish the chart would be consistent with the discussion. Just talking about the 2nd half team while using a chart with season averages might be somewhat misleading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 It may be better than the overall average of Magglio-Timo-Borchard that we had last year, but not by much. Figure Dye has about a .330 obp. Magglio was at .350 (which was flukey low), and Timo's about .290. Borchard, well, we all know -- .260 (I'll be generous). But I discount Joe's numbers somewhat -- he was basically playing in a try-out, and if the games had counted he would have been hitting a lot less. Then if Everett gets displaced it hurts us some more -- he's hard to place, but I'd guess around .340, roughly his average over the last 2 years. Plus, "once Frank is healthy" is key -- he was very important when healthy last year. I wish the chart would be consistent with the discussion. Just talking about the 2nd half team while using a chart with season averages might be somewhat misleading. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How can you discount Borchard's at bats from the overall production in RF last season? It doesn't matter that he was "trying out." He still got the at bats and hurt the overall offensive production from our RF position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 28, 2005 Author Share Posted March 28, 2005 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 01:19 AM) It may be better than the overall average of Magglio-Timo-Borchard that we had last year, but not by much. Figure Dye has about a .330 obp. Magglio was at .350 (which was flukey low), and Timo's about .290. Borchard, well, we all know -- .260 (I'll be generous). But I discount Joe's numbers somewhat -- he was basically playing in a try-out, and if the games had counted he would have been hitting a lot less. Then if Everett gets displaced it hurts us some more -- he's hard to place, but I'd guess around .340, roughly his average over the last 2 years. Plus, "once Frank is healthy" is key -- he was very important when healthy last year. I wish the chart would be consistent with the discussion. Just talking about the 2nd half team while using a chart with season averages might be somewhat misleading. The collective line of our RFers last year was an abysmal .256/.315/.414 -- Dye is a substantial improvement over that. There were about 450 non-magglio ABs in RF last season. It actually amounted to about 75% of the ABs from our RF. That's statistically significant enough for me. Pierz > C 2004 Uribe > JV 2004 Iggy ~ WH 2004 Crede should improve (hopefully) Pods I don't actually think Frank's health is that important... I think Jurassic is gonna have a first half like he did in '03.. I don't have anything to back that up, I just feel that he has a short attention span when it comes to being the best player he can be, and it looks like we should get his best effort to start '05. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 (edited) Okay, I did the research. These are the numbers of each respective player while playing in RF last season... Magglio Ordonez 173 AB .318 AVG 55 Hits 8 HR 34 RBI 15 BB 16 SO Joe Borchard 187 AB .176 AVG 33 Hits 8 HR 19 RBI 15 BB 53 SO Timo Perez 164 AB .274 AVG 45 Hits 4 HR 28 RBI 11 BB 16 SO Ross Gload 57 AB .281 AVG 16 Hits 1 HR 11 RBI 4 BB 11 SO The total offensive output from all four of the above RF'ers of last season was: 581 AB .256 AVG 149 Hits 21 HR 92 RBI 45 BB 96 SO I think Dye has a great chance to outproduce all of these numbers. The RBI's may be hard to match though. The article in the start of the thread even mentions that Dye is a good flyball hitter... But Dye is a righthanded flyball hitter who fits the Cellular moldDye has always hit well at the Cell and hitting flyballs is actually a good thing there. He could have a monster season. Edited March 28, 2005 by Jabroni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Quality write up. I don't mind things being said about this team, good or bad, I just like to see that someone did his research. This guy looks like he could work in the Sox front office with his knowledge of this team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 07:51 AM) The collective line of our RFers last year was an abysmal .256/.315/.414 -- Dye is a substantial improvement over that. There were about 450 non-magglio ABs in RF last season. It actually amounted to about 75% of the ABs from our RF. That's statistically significant enough for me. Pierz > C 2004 Uribe > JV 2004 Iggy ~ WH 2004 Crede should improve (hopefully) Pods I don't actually think Frank's health is that important... I think Jurassic is gonna have a first half like he did in '03.. I don't have anything to back that up, I just feel that he has a short attention span when it comes to being the best player he can be, and it looks like we should get his best effort to start '05. Dye was .265/.329/.464, which is certainly better than that line, but I don't think 65 points in ops is dramatic. And I still think you have to say that Joe B's abs were inflated because we were already out of it. Borchard had 94 abs in Sep + Oct of last year. There's no way the Sox would have sent him out there as often as they did in a meaningful situation. In that sense, the Sox haven't made a big improvement. Moreover, I'm not confident we won't get 25-50% of our rf abs from players other than Dye, anyway. He has to be right for a full season, which hasn't happened for a few years. I like the Dye signing, don't get me wrong. But imo the expectations should be tempered a bit. I agree with much of the rest of what you say, AJ is a big improvement, wait-and-see on Iguchi -- depends on how all these doubles hold up in the Cell. But Uribe isn't replacing anyone in the lineup, Carlos is a big loss, and I think Thomas's recovery is quite important (even though I'm optimistic about Everett, too -- and I'll take either half of 2003). Finally, w/ apologies to all, I'm very sceptical that a bunt-happy offense is a wise idea in this century, or the 2nd half of the previous one. The Sox are 2nd in the majors in sacs this spring, so I think that will be a big part of the strategy. Overall, I see the offense improving on the 2nd half offense, treading water compared to the season average, and definitely declining from the 1st half of last season. (And really, who wants ANY part of the 2nd half? -- That's what I meant by setting the bar low. That team is going to lose anywhere, so improving on that is faint praise.) Not that this is disastrous. Pitching is what failed us last year, and that has been improved. The only thing is that so much depends on 2 very shaky propositions, Contreras and Hernandez. If Hernandez can give us 125-150 ip, and Contreras can hold his era close to 5, then I think we'll be successful. O/w, we do have McCarthy and Hermanson, and maybe Adkins. So I'm very cautiously optimistic. I just feel that the offensive analysis is somewhat rosy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 I think the best part of the article was when he suggested we move the fences back. We have a team that wants to hit doubles, and a ballpark that doesnt allow it...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 This has been one of the better reviews I've seen so far. Great job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossarian Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Mar 27, 2005 -> 11:59 PM) http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...cago-white-sox/ Solid F'n preview.... I frequently complain about the state of sports journalism today. This article is solid and thorough. In fact I'm jealous. I wish I'd posted something like this here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 I like reading Studes, but I get irritated when everyone says Uribe only had a good first two months. He was actually very solid in August and especially September, where his OPS was over 1.000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottawa_sox Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 When analyzing our right field situation, Dye's numbers get immedietly plugged in. No doubt he will get the lion's share of work in right, but given his history of injuries and his age and the fact he hits right handed, it wouldn't surprise me if Everett ended up playing there more than most people think. It could be that an increased presence of Carl in right would increase the OBP and batting average of our number 9 position. Maybe Carl should play more in right on the road, given Dye's propensity for hitting fly balls, along with the Cell's jet stream towards left. On a similar note, Carl could end up increasing our number 7 production, if Pods struggles. I would certainly hate to see Pods as a healthy scratch, but Iguchi might end up being more seviceable as a lead-off hitter than anyone else this club has introduced in recent memory. And what a pinch runner we would have in Pods during his 'cooling-off' period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthraxFan93 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 The one thing that got a smile on my face is the last sentance.. I been asking for years, why move the fences in? It has been said that it is easier to win in a pitchers park than a hitters park.. Next year maybe they can do that... We will see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 There's no where to move the fences too without taking out seats. So if we wanna dump a few hundred in capactiy, maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 06:20 PM) The one thing that got a smile on my face is the last sentance.. I been asking for years, why move the fences in? It has been said that it is easier to win in a pitchers park than a hitters park.. Next year maybe they can do that... We will see. Someone asked a question to that effect at Soxfest, though I don't quite remember Kenny's response... (anyone?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 12:22 PM) There's no where to move the fences too without taking out seats. So if we wanna dump a few hundred in capactiy, maybe. In left field there is abouta 5 ft. gap between the seats and the wall. They could move it a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.