Who do you most want to keep after the Core 4?

[LDF]

Jose Valentin was also a better fielding shortstop too.

 

was it jose v that did a check swing on purpose and hit the ball in the minn dougout like several times?

I believe they were making fun of him or something.

[LDF]

For the World Series champion 2005 team, Podsednik had an 86 OPS+

 

Eaton is currently sitting on a 105 OPS+

 

forgive me here but what is the point????

 

is eaton 105 good or bad????

[LDF]

OPS+ is adjusted by league and ballpark factors. An OPS+ of 100 is said to be league average. Anything over 100 is above average and anything below is below average. Considering that Eaton is a leadoff hitter and has one home run, an OPS+ of 105 is very strong for him because he tends to slug less because of his profile. That being said Eaton does offset his lack of home runs with his ability to hit triples. So yes, an OPS+ of 105 is good for Eaton, if a guy like Jose Abreu had an OPS+ of 105 I wouldn't be too happy with his performance. More importantly, Eaton is trending up and had an injury that made his stats much worse so it's conceivable that his OPS will improve with a larger sample size.

 

so when someone mention S Podsednik during the WS run he was below league average yet he perform

well.

 

doesn't that contradict each other?

 

btw thanks

Edited June 26, 2014 by LDF

[Vance Law]

forgive me here but what is the point????

 

is eaton 105 good or bad????

 

Did you read the post to which I was replying?

[LDF]

Did you read the post to which I was replying?

 

did you read the post in which raBBit explained it to me?

[LDF]

Podsednik was a darling here and on other Sox boards in a time where advanced statistics were less utilized. He also played in a time where steroids were used much more so his OPS+ would be less than Eaton's even if they had the same OPS because the league average would be much higher. Podsedinik's game was also more tied to his ability to steal bases. Where Eaton brings better on base skills, defense and base running away from stealing bases. There are many factors that come into play when comparing the two so I am not sure why the two were compared other than that Podsednik (in '05 and '09) was the last decent leadoff hitter we have had other than Juan Pierre in 2010.

 

a very good point, I would like the add, we need that sp leadoff hitter that can get the game going. a real impact

player.

[Vance Law]

did you read the post in which raBBit explained it to me?

 

I did read it.

 

But did you read the post to which I was replying? If you had, I would assume it was pretty evident "what is the point???" I was making.

 

But I suppose I'll use a few more words to make my point more clear.

 

I replied to the statement: "Eaton needs to be a 750ish OPS guy to have the type of major impact we need in the leadoff spot."

 

This comment in particular and other comments of its type often don't make much sense to me.

 

I then pointed out that the White Sox won a world series with a leadoff hitter who had a much worse OPS than Eaton currently does as support of my position that Eaton does not NEED to be a .750ish OPS guy. Eaton is not one of the top ten biggest problems with the team. A .700 OPS in 2014 is way, way better than a .700 OPS (what Pods had) in 2005.

[Eminor3rd]

so when someone mention S Podsednik during the WS run he was below league average yet he perform

well.

 

doesn't that contradict each other?

 

btw thanks

 

The 100 number represents LEAGUE average, and thus doesn't account for positions. The average CF is a below league average hitter, typically. Good defenders at premium positions can be below average hitters and still be tremendously valuable if they compare well to others at the same position.

[Eminor3rd]

I did read it.

 

But did you read the post to which I was replying? If you had, I would assume it was pretty evident "what is the point???" I was making.

 

But I suppose I'll use a few more words to make my point more clear.

 

I replied to the statement: "Eaton needs to be a 750ish OPS guy to have the type of major impact we need in the leadoff spot."

 

This comment in particular and other comments of its type often don't make much sense to me.

 

I then pointed out that the White Sox won a world series with a leadoff hitter who had a much worse OPS than Eaton currently does as support of my position that Eaton does not NEED to be a .750ish OPS guy. Eaton is not one of the top ten biggest problems with the team. A .700 OPS in 2014 is way, way better than a .700 OPS (what Pods had) in 2005.

 

And the issue of comparing OPS from different offensive environments is one of the best reasons to use wRC+ instead, because it is adjusted for that.

 

2005 Podsednik: 88 wRC+

2014 Eaton: 105 wRC+

[Feeky Magee]

Yup, wRC+ is the king of offensive stats, right now

[witesoxfan]

Yup, wRC+ is the king of offensive stats, right now

 

I much prefer RBI as it's not what you hit, but when you hit it.

[Eminor3rd]

I much prefer RBI as it's not what you hit, but when you hit it.

 

Show me a good seventheighthanninth hitter and I'll show you a good hitter.

Edited June 26, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[LDF]

I did read it.

 

and I say it again, you guys who knows all these stats and how to gage players is truly great. but I only

know the old stuff, rbi's, hits, K's. the other stuff I am too old and other things associated with it to learn.

[caulfield12]

There's another problem with Eaton, just highlighted in tonight's game.

 

Leaping at the last second for the 1B bag when he's running down the line. Just knocked him out. All these little injuries mount over the course of a season for a player that size.

[GreenSox]

I think we ought to see what teams will give for Quintana. Don't trade unless it's a big premium price, but I'd take a look.

[BlackSox13]

I think we ought to see what teams will give for Quintana. Don't trade unless it's a big premium price, but I'd take a look.

On a rebuilding team with two holes in the rotation already? I understand the haul would have to be big but the Sox have enough pitching problems as is.

[cabiness42]

I did read it.

 

But did you read the post to which I was replying? If you had, I would assume it was pretty evident "what is the point???" I was making.

 

But I suppose I'll use a few more words to make my point more clear.

 

I replied to the statement: "Eaton needs to be a 750ish OPS guy to have the type of major impact we need in the leadoff spot."

 

This comment in particular and other comments of its type often don't make much sense to me.

 

I then pointed out that the White Sox won a world series with a leadoff hitter who had a much worse OPS than Eaton currently does as support of my position that Eaton does not NEED to be a .750ish OPS guy. Eaton is not one of the top ten biggest problems with the team. A .700 OPS in 2014 is way, way better than a .700 OPS (what Pods had) in 2005.

 

Two big differences between Eaton and Podsednik:

 

1) Podsednik was a LF (and barely an average one at that) while Eaton is a CF. The league average offensive production for LF is higher than that for CF.

 

2) While both profile as speedy leadoff guys, Podsednik slugged .349 in 2005, which means he was getting very few doubles/triples. Eaton is slugging .385 so far this year (in an admittedly small sample size) and that is a big difference.

 

[southsider2k5]

I think we ought to see what teams will give for Quintana. Don't trade unless it's a big premium price, but I'd take a look.

 

Teams will ask for him, and Rick will give him a ridiculous price. Nothing will come of it.

[cabiness42]

Teams will ask for him, and Rick will give him a ridiculous price. Nothing will come of it.

 

Has probably happened a dozen times already.

[Eminor3rd]

I think we ought to see what teams will give for Quintana. Don't trade unless it's a big premium price, but I'd take a look.

 

There isn't a realistic return that would make sense for us.

[harfman77]

There isn't a realistic return that would make sense for us.

 

Thats why you need to see if you can get an unrealistic return. If you can plug three holes moving Q, you need to really consider it. A deal like Bethancourt, Hursh, and Costanzo from the Braves would be a fit as you would replace Q in the rotation with Hursh get your C of the next 7 years, and get an OF with a plus hit tool. This team has to find a way to fill multiple holes in the roster and the Sox have always struggled in FA so that leaves the trade market.

[Eminor3rd]

Thats why you need to see if you can get an unrealistic return. If you can plug three holes moving Q, you need to really consider it. A deal like Bethancourt, Hursh, and Costanzo from the Braves would be a fit as you would replace Q in the rotation with Hursh get your C of the next 7 years, and get an OF with a plus hit tool. This team has to find a way to fill multiple holes in the roster and the Sox have always struggled in FA so that leaves the trade market.

 

By saying "realistic," I'm saying that if you go and shop him, none of the offers will be like that. Yes, I think we'd all be in favor of our GM being open to trades in which the opposing team offers so much that the trade only exists outside of the fabric of reality, but I don't think that it warrants actual discussion.

[harfman77]

By saying "realistic," I'm saying that if you go and shop him, none of the offers will be like that. Yes, I think we'd all be in favor of our GM being open to trades in which the opposing team offers so much that the trade only exists outside of the fabric of reality, but I don't think that it warrants actual discussion.

 

Kinda like the Shields trade? That was pretty far-fetched until it actually happened too. The return the Cubs got for a half of a season of Garza? That was out there as well. The most far-out deal is the rumored package that the Cubs are attempting to acquire from the Jays for Samardjzia. Given Q's ability and contract, he should pull in a similar deal.

[Eminor3rd]

Kinda like the Shields trade? That was pretty far-fetched until it actually happened too. The return the Cubs got for a half of a season of Garza? That was out there as well. The most far-out deal is the rumored package that the Cubs are attempting to acquire from the Jays for Samardjzia. Given Q's ability and contract, he should pull in a similar deal.

 

Shields is better than Quintana, and perceived to be MUCH better than Quintana. I would say that is not a realistic return for Quintana.

 

And I wouldn't trade Quintana for the Garza package, which is kind of the major point. Quintana is, essentially, EXACTLY what you hope that one guy in a prospect package turns into. A solidly above average contributor who is young and controllable and open to signing a team-friendly extension, which Quintana has already done. He is the definition of a building block. The chance that we'd end up with multiple guys like that out of a realistic trade package is like 1%, and if you throw in the fact that it pushes the contention window far enough into the future that you will be wasting good years of the other controllable pieces we have now, you have what I think is a completely indefensible trade. It would be cutting off the nose to spite the face. It would be like selling a box of sandwiches for a loaf of bread and some lunchmeat with the idea that if you can come across some condiments down the road, you might end up with a few more sandwiches.

[oldsox]

Kinda like the Shields trade? That was pretty far-fetched until it actually happened too. The return the Cubs got for a half of a season of Garza? That was out there as well. The most far-out deal is the rumored package that the Cubs are attempting to acquire from the Jays for Samardjzia. Given Q's ability and contract, he should pull in a similar deal.

What have the Jays offered for Samardjzia?