When is the last time an NL player got better with Sox?

[Vance Law]

Rather than the question being asked, I'd be more interested to know how all players fare upon switching from one league to the other. Not interested in what it kinda sorta seems like players do, but rather actual data on the topic.

[SCCWS]

Rather than the question being asked, I'd be more interested to know how all players fare upon switching from one league to the other. Not interested in what it kinda sorta seems like players do, but rather actual data on the topic.

 

 

A little dated( 2011) but it shows both hitters and pitchers

 

https://www.fanduel.com/insider/2011/08/02/...s-for-pitchers/

Edited June 28, 2015 by SCCWS

[caulfield12]

A little dated( 2011) but it shows both hitters and pitchers

 

https://www.fanduel.com/insider/2011/08/02/...s-for-pitchers/

 

 

With how baseball has changed so much the last past 1 1/2 seasons, I'm not sure how helpful those numbers would be...but at least you'd have some sort of benchmark, and it would be a lot more reliable than interleague play results.

[caulfield12]

Ding ding ding.

 

 

Except as a cumulative or composite whole, that's not telling you anything, either.

 

You'd have to look at each individual, their age at the time they switched leagues, their relative or weighted "expectations" (for example, isn't it reasonable to assume LaRoche, Samardzija or Dunn should produce XYZ result, compared to, say, Bonifacio or Jennings?)

 

If we keep saying almost all of the players who have left the White Sox have failed to play well for other teams, it's not a coaching problem, it's a talent/ability one....but how can that always be the case if those players don't perform as expected when they were acquired in the first place?

 

"On paper, they all SEEMED like great moves..." only gets you so far when the results are "embarrassing" in the minds of numerous scouts and front office personnel for other teams.

[Vance Law]

Except as a cumulative or composite whole, that's not telling you anything, either.

 

You'd have to look at each individual, their age at the time they switched leagues, their relative or weighted "expectations" (for example, isn't it reasonable to assume LaRoche, Samardzija or Dunn should produce XYZ result, compared to, say, Bonifacio or Jennings?)

 

A good point. It would tell you something if there were some very clear trends with one league or the other or with all players faring poorly at first for example. I wouldn't expect to find that. If there were any trends for particular teams I would assume that the richest teams who pay out the most exorbitant contracts get the best results in the immediate years. And also those contracts are virtually always a complete disaster in their final years.

 

I do not assume that White Sox free agent signings fare any worse than other teams relative to their reasonable expectations. I think in some White Sox fans minds, anything bad (Adam Dunn's horrible 2011) disproportionately contorts their perception and remains while anything that counters that (Adam Dunn's 41 home run .800 OPS 2012) is immediately discarded.

 

And how is this accounted for in that fan's narrative? "White Sox sign a free agent and he is immediately terrible because he's on the White Sox and only bad things happen to my team. The White Sox coaches and the ballpark and bad karma and the temperature of the locker room and the GM's poor decision making conspire to make that player instantly terrible. And when in the next season he hits the 6th most home runs in the history of the ball club, that is explained by what? In the offseason he talked to his old coaches from another team who reminded him how to be good at hitting and to do the opposite of what White Sox coaches were telling him?

Edited June 28, 2015 by Vance Law

[caulfield12]

We can simply toss out 2011 (which, as you noted, no White Sox fan can do) and simply look at 2012-2014.

 

.214 avg, 772 OPS, 32.3 homers, 82 RBI's, 84 walks per season, 190 strikeouts.

 

Every year from 2007-2010, he was at an 889 OPS or higher (in the NL).

His average was 914.5.

 

So you're talking about a 16% decrease in performance, once again, throwing out 2011...so the question becomes, if you looked at those numbers (for three years), the fact that it was for a DH who lowered the DRS numbers whenever he took the field, how much would you be willing to pay for that level of production?

 

$6 million? $8 million? $10 million?

 

Would you even want that player at all?

 

 

 

 

[Vance Law]

We can simply toss out 2011 (which, as you noted, no White Sox fan can do) and simply look at 2012-2014.

 

.214 avg, 772 OPS, 32.3 homers, 82 RBI's, 84 walks per season, 190 strikeouts.

 

Every year from 2007-2010, he was at an 889 OPS or higher (in the NL).

His average was 914.5.

 

So you're talking about a 16% decrease in performance, once again, throwing out 2011...so the question becomes, if you looked at those numbers (for three years), the fact that it was for a DH who lowered the DRS numbers whenever he took the field, how much would you be willing to pay for that level of production?

 

$6 million? $8 million? $10 million?

 

Would you even want that player at all?

 

So you have a high strikeout slugger in his 30s who never hit for average who saw a decline in his final 4 years before retiring.

[caulfield12]

So you have a high strikeout slugger in his 30s who never hit for average who saw a decline in his final 4 years before retiring.

 

 

Not the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. No.

 

On the other hand, 2011 did happen...and if that was his 2014 season instead (which would have been the natural or expected career progression), it wouldn't have mattered so much to the franchise.

 

Or, if he he didn't slump at the end of 2012 and they had made the playoffs instead of tanking/tiring/choking, a lot would have been forgiven for that as well.

 

Perception is always more important than reality with most fanbases.

Edited June 29, 2015 by caulfield12

[kitekrazy]

Rather than the question being asked, I'd be more interested to know how all players fare upon switching from one league to the other. Not interested in what it kinda sorta seems like players do, but rather actual data on the topic.

 

I think AL pitchers do better in the NL. They basically have to pitch to 8 guys.

 

[Balta1701]

I think AL pitchers do better in the NL. They basically have to pitch to 8 guys.

It's probably less these days because of offense being down and the extra intraleague games but in about 2008 the average was that when guys went from the AL to the NL their ERA dropped by about 0.75 and vice-versa.