PDA

View Full Version : BP's AL Central Breakdown


Sockinchisox
02-06-2008, 02:19 PM
It's a free article, it's a shockingly positive, saying KW should be commended for what he's trying to do.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7112

TheVulture
02-06-2008, 02:25 PM
This improved roster remains one top-tier starting pitcher shy of hanging with the top two teams in the division. They likely donít have the prospects left to trade for that guy, but itís the one move they could make that would change the discussion.
Sounds like the general consensus around here - hopefully one of the back 3 can step up and make it happen.

spiffie
02-06-2008, 02:26 PM
So if BP doesn't know anything about real baseball, as has been made clear to me many times on WSI, and they like the moves the Sox made this offseason, should I assume then that KW did a terrible job?

raven1
02-06-2008, 02:30 PM
After all the over-reaction this winter over potential free-agents, it's good to see this and other more level-headed and realistic assessments of the team.

kaufsox
02-06-2008, 02:51 PM
That was a pretty well-balanced piece. It wasn't completely sold on the Tigers and had reservations about the Indians lack of moves. Also, makes a really good argument that the Garland deal was a positive. One more starter is still a possibility before 3/31, so the major criticism from this article might be addressed yet.

batmanZoSo
02-06-2008, 02:58 PM
The one thing that makes you go hmmm about Cleveland is that they're bringing back the exact same team from a year ago. That's seldom a good thing and most often a bad thing. Of course we'll see how that pans out.

With Detroit, their pitching has a wide variance on paper. They could be very good or they could lose a lot of games 8-6.

With us, same as Detroit but probably with a better bullpen and less of an offense.

spawn
02-06-2008, 03:00 PM
Wow. An aritcle not harping on the FA's that didn't sign here? An objective article talking about the improvements that were made? I'm shocked! :o:

gogosox16
02-06-2008, 03:01 PM
Wow. An aritcle not harping on the FA's that didn't sign here? An objective article talking about the improvements that were made? I'm shocked! :o:
Probably first and last.

batmanZoSo
02-06-2008, 03:04 PM
So if BP doesn't know anything about real baseball, as has been made clear to me many times on WSI, and they like the moves the Sox made this offseason, should I assume then that KW did a terrible job?

Some of it's b.s., this one seems pretty fair.

doublem23
02-06-2008, 03:13 PM
They're lurking on our boards and messing with our minds.

champagne030
02-06-2008, 03:15 PM
So if BP doesn't know anything about real baseball, as has been made clear to me many times on WSI, and they like the moves the Sox made this offseason, should I assume then that KW did a terrible job?

Yes, this time BP is spot on and finally have an objective review of the ballclub.

batmanZoSo
02-06-2008, 03:24 PM
It's possible that some people there know what they're talking about. It's as certain as the sunrise that some of them know a lot more than some people here.

Nellie_Fox
02-06-2008, 03:26 PM
So if BP doesn't know anything about real baseball, as has been made clear to me many times on WSI, and they like the moves the Sox made this offseason, should I assume then that KW did a terrible job?No, you can instead assume the null hypothesis (of no correlation between BP analysis and reality) has not been rejected.

In other words, they might be right and they might be wrong, sort of like flipping a coin over and over.

munchman33
02-06-2008, 03:28 PM
You people all make me laugh so much.

:D:

MCHSoxFan
02-06-2008, 03:45 PM
The one thing that makes you go hmmm about Cleveland is that they're bringing back the exact same team from a year ago. That's seldom a good thing and most often a bad thing. Of course we'll see how that pans out.

With Detroit, their pitching has a wide variance on paper. They could be very good or they could lose a lot of games 8-6.

With us, same as Detroit but probably with a better bullpen and less of an offense.

I agree with the Sox/Tigers comparison. I also agree with the 2007/2008 Indians team being the EXACT SAME. Just look at us in 2006. Hell, people thought that we would be better and we placed third. We did win 90 games, though. It was still LESS than we won in 2005 and we were supposed to be BETTER.

LITTLE NELL
02-06-2008, 04:49 PM
Article states what Ive been saying, that we are 1 proven starter away from contending with Detroit and Cleveland. I still dont know where that starter is going to come from.

fquaye149
02-06-2008, 04:54 PM
You people all make me laugh so much.

:D:

Preach on, fearless prognosticator.

Nearly every pundit says that although the White Sox won't compete next year, KW should be commended for his offseason moves.

I can think of maybe three who say Kenny's done a ****ty job: Phil Rogers, Jay Mariotti, and you.

Jjav829
02-06-2008, 05:03 PM
Yeah, but what did they say before 2005?

munchman33
02-06-2008, 05:05 PM
Yeah, but what did they say before 2005?

Yeah well before 2005 I was pretty excited about the team.

fquaye149
02-06-2008, 05:11 PM
Yeah, but what did they say before 2005?

I heard a rumor about the games being played on paper. Can you confirm or deny this rumor?

Also: if you could inform re: why they play the games, let me know :wink:

munchman33
02-06-2008, 05:14 PM
Preach on, fearless prognosticator.

Nearly every pundit says that although the White Sox won't compete next year, KW should be commended for his offseason moves.

I can think of maybe three who say Kenny's done a ****ty job: Phil Rogers, Jay Mariotti, and you.

Well, unlike those pundits, I am not happy with simply being "improved" over last year.

Flight #24
02-06-2008, 05:39 PM
Article states what Ive been saying, that we are 1 proven starter away from contending with Detroit and Cleveland. I still dont know where that starter is going to come from.
http://assets.espn.go.com/i/mlb/profiles/players/65x90/7297.jpg
I'll give you proven!

FarWestChicago
02-06-2008, 05:44 PM
I can think of maybe three who say Kenny's done a ****ty job: Phil Rogers, Jay Mariotti, and you.How can you forget shoelessshaun? :o:

Jjav829
02-06-2008, 05:47 PM
I heard a rumor about the games being played on paper. Can you confirm or deny this rumor?

Also: if you could inform re: why they play the games, let me know :wink:

The answer to the first question - Denied. Games are decided based on what happened in 2005.

The answer to the second question - "That"

santo=dorf
02-06-2008, 06:12 PM
How can you forget shoelessshaun? :o:
Not all of us have access to a jibberish translator. So that's what Shaun was saying, eh?

FarWestChicago
02-06-2008, 06:26 PM
Not all of us have access to a jibberish translator. So that's what Shaun was saying, eh?Well, I think something along those line. :dunno:

fquaye149
02-06-2008, 06:45 PM
Well, unlike those pundits, I am not happy with simply being "improved" over last year.

If only sox management had hired someone with as high of standards as you!

Only munchman continues in his tireless quest for excellence. Kenny, JR, and the rest of us actively SEEK mediocrity under the guise of "simply being 'improved' over last year."

It has nothing to do with what options are available and what are the smart baseball moves to make. No, Kenny, like the rest of us, didn't WANT to field a playoff team by signing crippling contracts with mediocre CF's, procuring a non-existent starting pitcher, and whatever other stupid moves you're suggesting. He merely wanted to be "improved over last year"

What a schmuck he so clearly is!

FarWestChicago
02-06-2008, 06:50 PM
What a schmuck he so clearly is!The problem is he traded DLS. munch will rage until the end of time over that. :nod:

fquaye149
02-06-2008, 06:54 PM
The problem is he traded DLS. munch will rage until the end of time over that. :nod:

jeremybmunch

FarWestChicago
02-06-2008, 07:03 PM
jeremybmunchPerfect! :yup:

munch better hope he has better luck than jeremyb did. :smile:

fquaye149
02-06-2008, 07:08 PM
Perfect! :yup:

munch better hope he has better luck than jeremyb did. :smile:

I'm sure DLS won't be a 2 year flameout. But that doesn't make obsessing over someone who's projected as a #3 starter in 3-4 years any less lame

chisox77
02-06-2008, 08:31 PM
BP gives a fair assessment. However, I'm one who believes in KW's ability to get that extra pitcher. I think the 2008 White Sox will be an interesting and fun team to watch - they have a chance!



:cool:

gf2020
02-06-2008, 09:01 PM
This may be small, but the all mighty BP cited the Twins record incorrectly. They were 79-83, not 80-82 last year. That's just lazy. But I guess you get what you pay for.

munchman33
02-06-2008, 11:25 PM
I'm sure DLS won't be a 2 year flameout. But that doesn't make obsessing over someone who's projected as a #3 starter in 3-4 years any less lame

His ceiling is a #1.

kaufsox
02-06-2008, 11:44 PM
BP gives a fair assessment. However, I'm one who believes in KW's ability to get that extra pitcher. I think the 2008 White Sox will be an interesting and fun team to watch - they have a chance!



:cool:

As long as their still in the race when September rolls around, I'll feel pretty good. I'm feeling good about this year.

fquaye149
02-07-2008, 01:50 AM
His ceiling is a #1.

His ceiling is #1, but BA's, for instance, ceiling was perennial all-star.

He's projected at middle-of-the-rotation

rdivaldi
02-07-2008, 08:38 AM
He's projected at middle-of-the-rotation

By whom?

fquaye149
02-07-2008, 08:40 AM
By whom?

baseball america, for instance:

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/265531.html

Projected 2011 lineup:

#1 starter: Gio Gonzalez
#2 starter: Brett Anderson
#3 starter: Fautino De Los Santos
#4 starter: Joe Blanton
#5 starter: Trevor Cahill

rdivaldi
02-07-2008, 08:45 AM
baseball america

The only thing I've seen is their suggesting that he will be the 3rd starter in 2011. I wouldn't call that projecting him to be a middle of the rotation starter, especially considering that would probably be his 2nd full year in the majors.

fquaye149
02-07-2008, 08:46 AM
I'm sure DLS won't be a 2 year flameout. But that doesn't make obsessing over someone who's projected as a #3 starter in 3-4 years any less lame

This was my original post for some context

any more questions?

rdivaldi
02-07-2008, 08:50 AM
Being concerned over losing a power pitcher with great movement sounds pretty legit to me. Projecting him to be in the HOF, okay that's over the top. DLS could end up the next Pedro, the next Juan Cruz, or worse.

fquaye149
02-07-2008, 08:53 AM
Being concerned over losing a power pitcher with great movement sounds pretty legit to me. Projecting him to be in the HOF, okay that's over the top. DLS could end up the next Pedro, the next Juan Cruz, or worse.

It's a legit concern, but it's not an off-season defining move until the player's a little less than 4 years from the peak of his potential, is my point. At this point we traded an arm. Even if he does become successful in Oakland ( and I think it's fairly likely he will) a lot of that will have to do with Oakland's development of him.

Why not worry every draft pick we lose? Lots of good things to say bout DLS, but he's so many years away that his superstar potential has to be taken with a grain of prospect salt. I'd be more concerned about Gio who is MLB ready, give or take a few months.

cards press box
02-07-2008, 09:05 AM
Article states what Ive been saying, that we are 1 proven starter away from contending with Detroit and Cleveland. I still dont know where that starter is going to come from.

If Crede is healthy, then maybe San Francisco or the Los Angeles Dodgers.

Craig Grebeck
02-07-2008, 09:10 AM
If Crede is healthy, then maybe San Francisco or the Los Angeles Dodgers.
Have you ever heard of Andy LaRoche?

San Francisco won't give up a quality starter for a 1 year rental with back problems.

cws05champ
02-07-2008, 09:51 AM
I read BP analysis, but to be honest...I don't care what they say. Whether they say we would finish 1st or last, it doesn't matter. Why? Because if you denounce their predictions in the past (2005, 2007) that were negative then you can not in the same breath say that you care one way or another what they have to say this year.

fquaye149
02-07-2008, 10:01 AM
I read BP analysis, but to be honest...I don't care what they say. Whether they say we would finish 1st or last, it doesn't matter. Why? Because if you denounce their predictions in the past (2005, 2007) that were negative then you can not in the same breath say that you care one way or another what they have to say this year.

True. But beside the prediction there's the analysis.

We can make much ado about the fact that they predicted, say, the 2005 team to finish 4th, but the analysis said their success would be contingent on a number of factors, some of which our success was actually contingent on.

Likewise, in 2007, even if they hadn't been right about our record, their analysis that we were in a bad position because of unproven arms and aging bats wouldn't have been that asinine would it?

I do think the analysis in this article is generally good, though I don't particularly put much stock in it, to say nothing of their predictions