iamshack Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:41 PM) I'm not sure I want Jeff Keppinger to be our starting 3B for more than a year or two... What do you see changing between now and a year from now that would suggest we'd have someone better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:41 PM) What do you see changing between now and a year from now that would suggest we'd have someone better? A miracle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Did the Sox just sign a 33 year old utility infielder to a three year deal? And is said utility infielder going to start at 3b? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 It's at the very bottom of that first table, in the Career row. Oh, a career row that includes all positions and not just 3B. OK. Well let's just say he'll be bad at playing 3B because he sucks at Monopoly. It's about the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 FanGraphs' take: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/w...an-ball-return/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:46 PM) Oh, a career row that includes all positions and not just 3B. OK. Well let's just say he'll be bad at playing 3B because he sucks at Monopoly. It's about the same. Please see post #96: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...t&p=2733259 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Please see post #96: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...t&p=2733259 I saw your post and I'm not buying it. Being bad for several years at positions he isn't going to play is not more significant than being good for one year at the position he is going to play. If you think his sample size at 3B is too small, that's fine, but then don't quote UZR at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:33 PM) I would rely more on one season's worth of numbers at the position he's going to play over career numbers at positions he isn't going to play. QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:33 PM) I get that, but I'm not sure it's fair to say he's a bad defensive 3B just because he's a bad defensive SS and 2B. There's a huge difference in the demands of the positions, specifically range. It's that his ratings are consistently so low (at least -10 defense runs per year at SS/2B/1B), not just slightly below average, everywhere else that it would be unlikely he's significantly better at one position. Plus, the aging curve for fielding starts to decline earlier than for batting. We'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:50 PM) FanGraphs' take: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/w...an-ball-return/ I think that's probably the best way to put it. Beggars can't exactly be choosers right now with 3B. Hopefully the Sox draft a good 3B prospect in the next 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 It's that his ratings are consistently so low (at least -10 defense runs per year at SS/2B/1B), not just slightly below average, everywhere else that it would be unlikely he's significantly better at one position. Plus, the aging curve for fielding starts to decline earlier than for batting. We'll see. What data supports that claim? Lots of players are much better at one position than others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:55 PM) I saw your post and I'm not buying it. Being bad for several years at positions he isn't going to play is not more significant than being good for one year at the position he is going to play. If you think his sample size at 3B is too small, that's fine, but then don't quote UZR at all. His career UZR numbers suggest a guy who has below average range, arm, and hands. I agree with you that third is easier and you can't expect a direct correlation, but there is no reason to believe he will be a plus defender. When I originally made the post "-17.7 career UZR," it was in response to the question, "where is this notion that he's a sub-par defender coming from?" And, his career UZR is where the notion of him being a sub-par defender comes from. I stand by that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 His career UZR numbers suggest a guy who has below average range, arm, and hands. I agree with you that third is easier and you can't expect a direct correlation, but there is no reason to believe he will be a plus defender. When I originally made the post "-17.7 career UZR," it was in response to the question, "where is this notion that he's a sub-par defender coming from?" And, his career UZR is where the notion of him being a sub-par defender comes from. I stand by that. He has a season's worth of being a plus defender at 3B, so there is some reason to believe that he might be. He was signed to play 3B, so that is the context of the question but apparently not your answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justBLAZE Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 (edited) White Sox talked with Chavez before signing Kepp, Chavy preferred Arizona. per DKnobler. Edited December 5, 2012 by justBLAZE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:02 PM) White Sox talked with Chavez before signing Kepp, Chavy preferred Arizona. per DKnobler. From California, doesn't surprise me at all. Glad they kicked the tires on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:01 PM) He has a season's worth of being a plus defender at 3B, so there is some reason to believe that he might be. He was signed to play 3B, so that is the context of the question but apparently not your answer. Right, there is some reason to believe he MIGHT be, but UZR historically doesn't become a reliable indicator of true talent until about three seasons of data. So pick your poison -- small sample of numbers not nearly enough to show the whole picture, or larger sample of numbers that can show a related picture but isn't exactly what you want to see. Again, the truth is somewhere in between. My point on the UZR data from third is that that number doesn't do much for us. I'm more confident that he'll be better at third because I believe it is an easier position, not because of small sample UZR data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:58 PM) What data supports that claim? Lots of players are much better at one position than others. They are, but not typically when the positions in question are 2B/3B. The positions share many of the same skills needed to be successful. There are differences, more range helpful at 2B, better arm helpful at 3B, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 They are, but not typically when the positions in question are 2B/3B. The positions share many of the same skills needed to be successful. There are differences, more range helpful at 2B, better arm helpful at 3B, etc. There are plenty of good 3B who weren't or likely would not have been good 2B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (3E8 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:21 PM) They are, but not typically when the positions in question are 2B/3B. The positions share many of the same skills needed to be successful. There are differences, more range helpful at 2B, better arm helpful at 3B, etc. Orlando Hudson was a pretty severe drop defensively from 2B to 3B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Right, there is some reason to believe he MIGHT be, but UZR historically doesn't become a reliable indicator of true talent until about three seasons of data. So pick your poison -- small sample of numbers not nearly enough to show the whole picture, or larger sample of numbers that can show a related picture but isn't exactly what you want to see. Again, the truth is somewhere in between. My point on the UZR data from third is that that number doesn't do much for us. I'm more confident that he'll be better at third because I believe it is an easier position, not because of small sample UZR data. Fine, then point out the small sample size for UZR, but don't quote overall UZR that covers multiple positions. That's just as if not more misleading than using the UZR for 3B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco72 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 03:09 PM) Right, there is some reason to believe he MIGHT be, but UZR historically doesn't become a reliable indicator of true talent until about three seasons of data. So pick your poison -- small sample of numbers not nearly enough to show the whole picture, or larger sample of numbers that can show a related picture but isn't exactly what you want to see. Again, the truth is somewhere in between. My point on the UZR data from third is that that number doesn't do much for us. I'm more confident that he'll be better at third because I believe it is an easier position, not because of small sample UZR data. You can't trade one statistical issue for another and say one is ok and the other isn't. A small sample size means that you might not be observing the actual relationship (thus, the combined 'full season' of 3B datapoints might not be accurate until we get more data). However, it is also statistically incorrect to conflate data gathered at other positions as evidence of a true relationship at a different position. Your point is no more statistically correct than those wanting to use the 3B data only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2nd_city_saint787 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:20 PM) He was pretty good during those 50 games though. All he needs to be is average defensively. If he puts up his career offensive #s, he'll be an average 3B, which is very well worth the $4 million we're paying him. He's not an ideal #2, but he's a much better fit for that spot right now than anyone else we have. I like the deal. If he puts up the numbers he did last year he most certainly is. High obp/good contact, a little more speed would be nice but I think he's a good fit. Speaking of where he's gonna hit, Madden hit him in every spot but leading off. ABs Batting #2 13 Batting #3 11 Batting #4 77 Batting #5 124 Batting #6 105 Batting #7 47 Batting #8 6 Batting #9 2 Joe Madden is one crazy SoB. Edited December 5, 2012 by 2nd_city_saint787 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (Disco72 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:27 PM) You can't trade one statistical issue for another and say one is ok and the other isn't. A small sample size means that you might not be observing the actual relationship (thus, the combined 'full season' of 3B datapoints might not be accurate until we get more data). However, it is also statistically incorrect to conflate data gathered at other positions as evidence of a true relationship at a different position. Your point is no more statistically correct than those wanting to use the 3B data only. I don't understand why you think I'm arguing that. Once again, someone asked why people think he's a sub-par defender, and I said it's because he has a -17.7 career UZR. That's the answer. You're right that we can't transfer that data over to third and know for sure, and I feel like I've said that in every post I've made. But, if an infielder is bad at a blend of 2B/SS/3B, I would argue it's more likely he's bad at 3B than it is that he's good at 3B. If you disagree, that's fine -- we really don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:34 PM) I don't understand why you think I'm arguing that. Once again, someone asked why people think he's a sub-par defender, and I said it's because he has a -17.7 career UZR. That's the answer. You're right that we can't transfer that data over to third and know for sure, and I feel like I've said that in every post I've made. But, if an infielder is bad at a blend of 2B/SS/3B, I would argue it's more likely he's bad at 3B than it is that he's good at 3B. If you disagree, that's fine -- we really don't know. His metrics at 3B were also pretty bad until last year. I'm sure the Sox will take average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knackattack Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Honestly if he is even close to league average offensively and defensively for the amount they're paying him and the other available options, I'll be happy with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (Knackattack @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) Honestly if he is even close to league average offensively and defensively for the amount they're paying him and the other available options, I'll be happy with him. Yeah, for sure. I think that's the key in evaluating this deal. Considering context, it was a significant improvement at a low cost. 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.