White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
GO SOX! DSNB!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 11-19-2017, 01:00 AM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is online now
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 32,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kittle42 View Post
Here is another article showing 2016.

Lip's point that context and comparators are not needed is completely illogical, sorry. To put it another way, I could tell you that the Sox hit 186 homers last season, with no other data. You might say, "Wow, that is a lot of home runs."

But really, you wouldn't have any idea whether that number was any "good" unless you knew what other teams did in the same metric.

Same idea here. If you tell me the Sox lost players to the DL 23 times last season, I would say man, that sounds like a lot! Something is wrong!

But when you look at the numbers in the context of MLB as a whole, not so much.
Kittle 186 home runs IS a lot of friggin' home runs. Not as many as the Sox have hit at times in the past but given the history of this franchise (how's that for context) that's A LOT of home runs.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-19-2017, 04:48 AM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 3,602
Default

Looking at the numbers only is the easy way out. Looking at numbers over a one year period tells the statistically minded individual nothing about tendencies or trends.

Breaking out the numbers by type of injury at the MLB and MiLB level would lead into greater inquiry why these issues happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Kittle 186 home runs IS a lot of friggin' home runs. Not as many as the Sox have hit at times in the past but given the history of this franchise (how's that for context) that's A LOT of home runs.
Wow, context.

Thanks Lip.
__________________
ďThere were a few hard rules, but everybody was unique, and he understood that. Georgeís great strength was he didnít overcoach. Thereís no place for panic on the mound.Ē - Jim Palmer on George Bamberger ďArms and the man,Ē Sports Illustrated, April 19, 2004
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-19-2017, 06:45 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 19,482
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Itís pretty well established that with Herm Schneider at the helm, the Sox have fared well, losing fewer players to injuries than most other clubs over the long term.

However, injuries - particularly some bad injuries - can be completely random. Ozzie Guillen lost almost a full season when he and Tim Raines collided.

2004 may have been derailed by both Ordonez and Thomas getting injured.

2008 may have been derailed by Quentin punching his bat.

But overall, the Sox have been healthier than most teams, losing fewer players over fewer games than most teams.

Now, all teams have seen increased use of the DL since the conversion from the 15-day to the 10-day DL.

Also, and this is where Lip has a good point: because the way the Sox have chosen to do business (some of which I think is fair to say is changing, and some where the jury is still out), they rarely have been able to cover for the injuries they do suffer, and so an injury to even one or two key players can devastate a whole season.
__________________
The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-19-2017, 08:59 AM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 22,667
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Kittle 186 home runs IS a lot of friggin' home runs. Not as many as the Sox have hit at times in the past but given the history of this franchise (how's that for context) that's A LOT of home runs.
The history of the franchise is not good context in determining whether 186 is a lot of home runs for the 2017 season. Looking at what the other 39 teams did in 2017 is the proper context, generally, dependent upon the question, of course.
__________________
Ridiculousness across all sports:

(1) "You have no valid opinion because you never played the game."
(2) "Stats are irrelevant. This guy just doesn't know how to win."
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-19-2017, 09:03 AM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 22,667
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grzegorz View Post
Looking at the numbers only is the easy way out. Looking at numbers over a one year period tells the statistically minded individual nothing about tendencies or trends.

Breaking out the numbers by type of injury at the MLB and MiLB level would lead into greater inquiry why these issues happen.
You say looking at the numbers only is an easy way out, but then propose looking at the numbers. Also, why certain injuries happen to players isn’t what we were discussing - it’s whether the Sox have more injuries than other teams, thus creating a “problem” that the Sox need to address.

I feel like this is an easy concept and maybe I’m just getting trolled here.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-19-2017, 10:41 AM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 22,667
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SI1020 View Post
I think you provided a link that produced a lot of serious debate. What more could you ask for?
A cogent point on the other side?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-19-2017, 11:07 AM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is online now
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 32,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kittle42 View Post
The history of the franchise is not good context in determining whether 186 is a lot of home runs for the 2017 season. Looking at what the other 39 teams did in 2017 is the proper context, generally, dependent upon the question, of course.
You completely lost me with this one. AS A FRANCHISE the Sox have not been known for hitting home runs. They hit 186 in a season...somehow that doesn't matter OK then...

I'm done here.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-19-2017, 11:32 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 19,482
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
You completely lost me with this one. AS A FRANCHISE the Sox have not been known for hitting home runs. They hit 186 in a season...somehow that doesn't matter OK then...

I'm done here.
Of course that is significant in the history of the franchise.

But absent context of the number of home runs hit by every other team, the fact that the Sox hit 186 doesnít tell you much about the Sox 2017 performance.

Some of us only care about the Sox in the context of their franchise history. And thatís OK.

Some of us only care about how this yearís team will compete against other teams this year. And thatís OK, too.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-19-2017, 11:36 AM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is online now
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 54,521
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
You completely lost me with this one. AS A FRANCHISE the Sox have not been known for hitting home runs. They hit 186 in a season...somehow that doesn't matter OK then...

I'm done here.
I think it's pretty obvious what he's getting at. All data points need to be put in reference to the season they are in. And honestly, Lip I think you know that over the last 20+ years the Sox have regularly been in the leaders of home runs hit also in part because of the stadium they play in and in part because of their philosophy in acquiring players. Comparing a team from the 1950's or 60's to the team in 2017 doesn't matter as much as comparing them to one from say 1997 and obviously doesn't matter as much as saying the Sox hit 186 home runs last year but the league average was 195 so they were below average (just making an example. I have NO idea what the actual numbers are).

Multiple years of data is even more relevant. Saying "the Sox averaged 186 HR over the last 5 years while the league average was 195" (again, just examples) would be even more statistically relevant.
__________________

Riding shotgun on the Sox bandwagon since before there was an Internet...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-19-2017, 11:43 AM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is online now
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 54,521
Blog Entries: 9
Default

To go further on this point, Last year the Sox hit 186 HR, but that ranked them 25th in MLB.

In 2016 they hit 168 ranking 22nd.
2015 136 26th
2014 155 8th
2016 148 19th
2012 211 3rd
2011 154 15th
2010 177 7th
2009 184 8th
2008 235 1st (BY 21!!! )

For most of the years preceding that and as far back as ESPN has data posted the Sox were regularly in the top 5...

I could go on but I think the point is made. Last year may seem like a lot of HR by historical averages but it actually wasn't when compared to the league totals.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-19-2017, 03:47 PM
Brian26's Avatar
Brian26 Brian26 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 31,586
Blog Entries: 52
Default

The history of the franchise can be eliminated in terms of context automatically because the team changed parks from one of the largest to one of the smallest.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-19-2017, 04:18 PM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is online now
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 54,521
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian26 View Post
The history of the franchise can be eliminated in terms of context automatically because the team changed parks from one of the largest to one of the smallest.
Not to mention the change in baseballs, mound height, the steroid era, smaller lighter bats, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-19-2017, 05:06 PM
asindc asindc is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 8,576
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
Of course that is significant in the history of the franchise.

But absent context of the number of home runs hit by every other team, the fact that the Sox hit 186 doesnít tell you much about the Sox 2017 performance.

Some of us only care about the Sox in the context of their franchise history. And thatís OK.

Some of us only care about how this yearís team will compete against other teams this year. And thatís OK, too.
I find it difficult to understand how any fan would not care about the bolded part above.

This is a simple concept, really. Do the Sox suffer more injuries than average, or at least an average number of injuries? If so, it should be addressed. If not, then it is perhaps better to spend time, effort, and resources on areas where they are subpar.
__________________
"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)


"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." ó George Orwell
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-19-2017, 05:36 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 19,482
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
I find it difficult to understand how any fan would not care about the bolded part above.

This is a simple concept, really. Do the Sox suffer more injuries than average, or at least an average number of injuries? If so, it should be addressed. If not, then it is perhaps better to spend time, effort, and resources on areas where they are subpar.
I think there are some people who, because they either don’t pay attention to - or don’t enjoy - how the game is played (both on the field and off) today, consciously or unconsciously attribute the team’s failings to the fact that they don’t play baseball the same way the team did in a previous year.

I find this to be true in other sports as well.

If Socrates was alive today, he’d probably say something like this:

“In my day, players played through pain. Pitchers threw complete games and we didn’t have five man rotations and eight man bullpens. Catchers weren’t given Sundays off. We ran the ball 45 times and played tougher and tackled better and they didn’t call ticky tack pass interference and linebackers didn’t get fined for sneezing on the quarterback. And kids paid attention to the game and listened to their parents, and they didn’t pass out participation trophies, and school was harder and we got jobs and worked hard and didn’t complain. And it was better then, and we had just two uniforms - home and away - and nobody wore teal or purple or black - and we won more games and we were all grateful and we liked it.”
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-19-2017, 06:03 PM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 3,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kittle42 View Post
You say looking at the numbers only is an easy way out, but then propose looking at the numbers. Also, why certain injuries happen to players isnít what we were discussing - itís whether the Sox have more injuries than other teams, thus creating a ďproblemĒ that the Sox need to address.

I feel like this is an easy concept and maybe Iím just getting trolled here.
The disabled list, especially this year with the ten day, has been used to rest players. You must look at the reasons why these players end up on the DL.

That is if you want to approach the debate with rigor.

https://www.southsidesox.com/2017/10...ured-white-sox

https://www.southsidesox.com/2017/5/...dy-in-contrast

https://southsideshowdown.com/2017/0...-south-siders/

The White Sox have had a number of players on their roster this season with legitimate physical injuries.

It's a real problem that the team needs to address.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:03 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.