In which Cheat expresses mild disappointment

by The Cheat on Mar 26, 2008 11:33 PM CDT Comment 64 comments

It would be easy to say that Gavin Floyd got rocked in his final spring training start of the year. I don't know what my reaction would have been had I been able to watch the game in a form other than MLB's Gameday. But I can say this for certain, if Gavin Floyd is going to have a successful season, he'll need a selective memory to forget the poor results of a day like Wednesday. Because, judging completely on box score alone -- a dangerous proposition, I know -- Floyd had the right approach against the Brewers; he threw strikes (0 BB), missed some bats (7 K), but found himself getting hit around as well (9 hits, 2HR).

I'd rather see a game in which Floyd gives up 6 runs while pounding the zone, than one in which he gives up the same 6 runs but does so by by falling behind, nibbling, and walking guys. I know there's no way the latter version has a chance to succeed for long at the major league level, while the former at least stands a puncher's chance.

* * * * *

As spring training opened, I wrote a piece entitled The 5 things I'm looking forward to this spring training. Looking back on that piece, it was a disappointing spring on a personal level. Of the 5 things I mentioned, two of them, the Joe Crede trade and "the 6th starter battle," were complete non-starters, while two others were mildly disappointing.

The Crede non-trade was the biggest cock tease of the spring. I went from calling it the most obvious trade ever to a sort of resigned apathy about him being on the roster over Josh Fields. The best thing I can say about it is that it at least we've been able to see the non-move coming. Jack Egbert's sore elbow to start the spring and Lance Broadway's general ineffectiveness made the 6th starter competition nonexistent unless you count Nick Masset who gets the start Thursday and inexplicably has yet to be put out to pasture.

I no longer even remember the first televised game of the spring, even though I listed that at #1. I was starved for baseball. But spring baseball, when everything is distorted and nothing counts, quickly became mundane. Carlos Quentin, who entered spring competing for the LF job, at least in my mind, nursed his sore shoulder for first couple of weeks, all but handing the job to Jerry Owens. While it's now Owens headed to the DL and Quentin has performed well since being proclaimed healthy, it still appears like he's behind at least one of Brian Anderson and Alexei Ramirez. I should be happy that he's going to be on the roster. But for a player who I once called the key to the Sox season, being on the roster just isn't enough.

The saving grace of the spring has been Ramirez, who took Ben Sheets deep for a grand slam and his second homer of the spring. However, Sheets was not exactly having a good day, also surrendering two homers to Jim Thome and another to AJ Pierzynski. And I'm still not sure that I would go north with Ramirez were I making the decisions.

Poll

Our Community Projection ERA for Gavin Floyd was 4.98. After Spring Training, revise your projection: over or under 4.98?

Over

184 votes

Under

111 votes

295 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 64 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The 2008 season slogan

"Mildly disappointing" might be a good fit.

I don't expect the Sox to win much (I guess around the 75-80 range), so I doubt I'll be disappointed there. Even though everyone on the Royals blog is picking the Sox for the cellar, I think 4th is still more likely.

But I had hoped to see Fields, Quentin, and Richar get a bunch of at-bats. And I guess I still could, but I'll probably have to go to Charlotte to see it. Anyway, having Crede, Uribe, and a gimpy Owens in line for a lot of major league work definitely lowers my interest level. I actually like all 3 guys to some degree, but none really offers any hope of developing into a Very Useful Player. Also, the bullpen looks a lot less improved than I had hoped. So, I'm mildly disappointed that 2008 looks a lot like 2007.

Ramirez is definitely the bright spot. Not so much for his hitting in spring training as the fact that he can play SS and the Sox seem to possibly regard him as the SS for 2009. If that works out to mean the Sox let OCab go, get some picks, and clear $8.5M in salary that's a promising development for the future

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2008 12:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I am going to be a little reactionary and vote over

but I think I really only had him at about 4.9-5.0 anyway. I could see him going a little lower but who really knows until we see him when the lights go on.

The simple fact is in spring training we can only take so much, good and bad. For pitching most of the time its just k/bb ratios or ks in general. And even then its filled with contradictions. You really have to go with history or unless something dramatic (like adding a pitch) happened to change it. Floyd's performance was way down and then up by the end of the season. Can he build off it or was it an end of the year fluke?

by Tdogg on Mar 27, 2008 6:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Consider on spring training stats- A couple of leaders.

J Peavy 9.39 ERA 15.1 23 hits
B Webb 8.50 ERA 18 IP 34 hits

by Tdogg on Mar 27, 2008 6:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Consider on major league stats

J Peavy 3.31 ERA
B Webb 3.22 ERA
G Floyd 6.30 ERA

i understand what you're trying to say about ST but your point about history is the salient one. we've seen little from floyd this ST to think the future will be much different from the past.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 8:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ooooooo burned

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's not a burn

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No I very much understand that

I wasnt trying to imply Floyd should be compared to Peavy or Webb. I was simply saying ST has little to do with reg season. Floyd's history overall is bad. He had a good Sept. I hope he does decent this year but I wouldnt put money on it.

by Tdogg on Mar 27, 2008 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

For what its worth

His 2007 spring stats 19 IP 10k, 9bb
2008 22 IP 17 K and 5bb

Hopefully his crap about "I feel more confident" translates to him attacking the strike zone. Sort of like Cheat mentioned above. As his k-bb ratio widened last year his performance dramatically improved (as it would for any pitcher). I do of course realize the sample size is small.

If all else fails hopefully Coop will at least continue to emphasize that to him.

by Tdogg on Mar 27, 2008 9:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

which is why i said i understand what you were saying

you don't need to re-explain things to me.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Larry

is ready for the season to start!

JRE yesterday and Tdogg today.

"Jenks, who was never afraid to say "no" to a hamburger..."

by BobbySouthSide on Mar 27, 2008 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

personal perspective...

if not for the fluke of '05s harmonic convergence, followed by the tease of the 90 win'06, I'd be looking forward to this season happily. As a Sox fan, all one could EVER hope for was an entertaining season, and maybe to catch lightning in a bottle and make the playoffs every decade or so. Now the desires are higher and disappointments greater.
They can't possibly suck as much as last year, so I'm resigned to look at the glass as half full (does that mean 81 wins?) and enjoy it as it is. F the rest of the ALC! F the Cubs! We've had many pathetic teams and supported them all.
Go Sox go!

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Mar 27, 2008 8:55 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

but... but....

I want more pie!

The goooood news is that once the clock runs out on the Tigers in a couple years when Maggs, Pudge, Guillen, Sheff, etc move on then it should be a two team race between the Indians and White Sox. That is, hoping that the Sox can replenish their farm system by then and the Twins don't have some miraculous turn-around.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 9:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dig the avatar!

speaking of shoeless joe, I saw this on THT/B-R the other day:

Something I just learned
by Dave Studeman
March 26, 2008

How many players have finished their careers by posting an OBP over .400 in their final season? Here's the answer, for now. Hat tip, Stat of the Day.

1 Joe Jackson .444 649 1920 30 CHW AL 146 570 105 218 42 20 12 121 56 0 14 7 16 0 0 9 12 .382 .589 1.033 *7
2 Nick Johnson .428 628 2006 27 WSN NL 147 500 100 145 46 0 23 77 110 15 99 13 2 3 12 10 3 .290 .520 .948 *3
3 Richie Ashburn .424 473 1962 35 NYM NL 135 389 60 119 7 3 7 28 81 2 39 0 1 2 4 12 7 .306 .393 .817 897/4
4 Will Clark .418 507 2000 36 TOT ML 130 427 78 136 30 2 21 70 69 3 69 7 0 4 7 5 2 .319 .546 .964 *3/D
5 Hank Greenberg .408 510 1947 36 PIT NL 125 402 71 100 13 2 25 74 104 0 73 4 0 0 16 0 0 .249 .478 .886 *3
6 Doc Gessler .406 553 1911 30 WSH AL 128 450 65 127 19 5 4 78 74 0 0 20 9 0 0 29 0 .282 .373 .779 *9/73
7 Johnny Bates .404 442 1914 31 TOT ML 126 353 55 98 13 8 3 45 67 0 36 8 14 0 0 10 0 .278 .385 .789 *87/9
8 Billy Hamilton .404 425 1901 35 BSN NL 102 348 71 100 11 2 3 38 64 0 0 4 9 0 0 20 0 .287 .356 .760 *8/9
9 Roy Cullenbine .401 607 1947 33 DET AL 142 464 82 104 18 1 24 78 137 0 51 0 6 0 10 3 2 .224 .422 .823 *3
10 Dave Nilsson .400 404 1999 29 MIL NL 115 343 56 106 19 1 21 62 53 6 64 2 2 4 7 1 2 .309 .554 .954 *2/D

by The Wizard on Mar 27, 2008 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow.

I had forgotton about Will Clark.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've actually...

been fairly impressed with Floyd this spring. As The Cheat said, he didn't walk guys, which is really the key to him having any sort of career in the majors.

I'm not expecting a whole lot from him, as I don't expect a lot from any fifth starter. If he can put up numbers as good as or better than what he did last year for a whole year, I'll be happy.

The guy who I have high hopes for, in the long run at least, is Johnny Danks. I'll be pretty disappointed if he doesn't take at least a small step forward.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 27, 2008 9:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Right on....I agree.

by dantesox on Mar 27, 2008 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The five starters in ST.

IP 97.6
ER 52
H 98
SO 84
BB 29

Peripherals are fabulous.

Was that a ground out to 2nd for Owens?

by ballyb on Mar 27, 2008 10:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The Dodgers wanted Uribe?

Don't jump on me if this has been posted already. I just read this...

Mark Gonzales wrote:

Uribe was named the club's starting second baseman less than one week after the Sox placed him on waivers. Two scouts said the Dodgers put in a waiver claim on him, but the Sox needed Uribe's experience.

I would have sold Uribe for whatever the Dodgers would have been willing to give up (except for Pierre). Hell, I would have let the Dodgers simply claim Taz. Then, just start Ramirez at 2B and keep Ozuna and Bourgeois on the bench. I'm not sure why Kenny wasn't willing to dump Uribe, even after learning about Richar's injury.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2008 10:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, what's the point

Why not just keep Uribe and see what happens? You dump him now and you don't really gain anything besides having Ramirez play everyday at 2B which might not be the best option right away.

You can always move him later.

I would have liked for the Sox to 1) not have signed Uribe in November. 2) tried to trade him early on in ST to get Ramirez familiar with 2B...but now, I think you need him for insurance and he actually might turn out to be a decent 2B for the short term.

"Jenks, who was never afraid to say "no" to a hamburger..."

by BobbySouthSide on Mar 27, 2008 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Because we already know what Uribe is...

a .700 OPS out-of-shape underachiever. I would rather see what Ramirez can do since Uribe is gone after this season anyways.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2008 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What if Ramirez

is a butcher at 2B and K's every third at-bat?

I agree with wanting Ramirez to get settled in at 2B...but just throwing him in there from day one with only Pablo Ozuna as a backup is a big risk.

"Jenks, who was never afraid to say "no" to a hamburger..."

by BobbySouthSide on Mar 27, 2008 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Go with Bourgeois then...

Is his offense going to be any worse than Uribe's?

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2008 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

could very well be

and it's not likely to be much better, either. and we know what his defense is like. uribe > bourgeois. that's a no-brainer.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 10:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bourgeois...

His biggest positive is his ability to play multiple positions. He's not the kind of player you hand a starting job to.

I don't think Uribe as the starting second baseman is really that bad a thing. It's really not like it's preventing something better from happening.

They brought him back because at the time they needed to make sure they had at least one shortstop, but I think the team won't be too patient with Uribe. He did what he needed to in Spring Training to keep a job, but if he deviates too far from that course, he'll be benched, or gone.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 27, 2008 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

uribe is pretty much preventing something worse from happening

ozuna, bourgeois, ramirez - these are a bunch of untested and/or ungood players. one is a career utility player, another is a career minor leaguer, and another is a career cuban league player. none should really be starting for a serious baseball team at this time. if we were in the rebuild mode many of us wanted, sure, go right ahead and throw ramirez or maybe even bourgeois out there to see if they stick. but the sox aren't doing that.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh huh

we may as well accept the notion that the sox want to compete this year. everyone on here who has wanted to has made their objections to such a course of action clear. as such, starting the season with an unknown and untested commodity who is just learning to play 2B is really, really stupid and no sane organization would do it. people need to get over their hate of uribe and realize that, while he has his flaws, you know what you'll get and that's the smart way to go.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep...

I am definitely letting my hate for Uribe overshadow his abilities as a player. I have grown to hate his Tasmanian Devil corkscrew swing and eating habits, especially after he was so productive in 2004 (.833 OPS!!!). I'm not even asking for a .833 OPS but a ~.750 OPS would be nice. I simply have no faith in fatty anymore.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2008 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i don't have much faith either

"abilities" is maybe a stretch, too. but i have less faith, at least at this point, in the other options. i'm pretty much certain, however, that ramirez will be playing over uribe in two or three months if he shows even marginal acumen at the major league level.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think...

Owens's injury nixed that idea. They wanted Ramirez to be a backup in center field as well.

I think they like the idea of Ramirez as a super-sub. I think they'll get Ramirez his ABs, one way or the other.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 27, 2008 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

Not too optimistic about Gavin and really pissed about Fields send down.

But look at the bright side . . . . Jose's split-finger is back!

That has to amount for something, right?

by Option27 on Mar 27, 2008 10:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

We can all gripe as much as we want...

but Kenny and Ozze value Uribe and Ozuna, for whatever reasons they may be, and we are stuck with them until an offer presents itself. Really doesn't do any good to keep griping about that fact. They don't read this site, (at least pretty sure Ozzie doesn't or can't) and it will do no good.

I think if any of us were running the Sox we'd do things differently. To me, Bourgeois is a cheaper Ozuna, and Ramirez is a cheaper more flexible Uribe with less glove. The difference in wins is maybe 1 game.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Haha...how can you honestly believe that?

I think you are putting way way too much stock into Ramirez's ST performance.

"You might be impressed with your analysis, but I am not. Stop wasting my time." - Chris De Luca

by BoKnows on Mar 27, 2008 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Are you saying...

That I esteem Ramirez too highly or I sell him short?

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm saying that you can't really judge either way at this juncture.

Nobody knows what they are going to get with Ramirez. He's the wildcard. So to make a judgement on the number of wins a combo of players will net the Sox is premature.

"You might be impressed with your analysis, but I am not. Stop wasting my time." - Chris De Luca

by BoKnows on Mar 27, 2008 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Basically saying that it's a win...

Is saying that there won't be much a difference. That's my opinion. Baseball Prospectus predicts Ramirez over 505 PA to hit 14 HR's with a .295/.342/.452 line. I'm much less optimistic, but I still think he'll be better than Uribe at the plate. In the field is a different story. It'd be hard to be worse than Uribe at the plate.

Now we know what we have in Ozuna and Bourgeois. Bourgeois is a slight upgrade there, IMO. Feel free to disagree there.

Making judgement on players before the season starts is part of the process. It's called a prediction. We all make them.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And I choose to disagree with your so-called "process"

"You might be impressed with your analysis, but I am not. Stop wasting my time." - Chris De Luca

by BoKnows on Mar 27, 2008 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's fine.

But I will slam you the next time you make a prediction or judgement on a player before the games start on Sunday.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Go for It....

"You might be impressed with your analysis, but I am not. Stop wasting my time." - Chris De Luca

by BoKnows on Mar 27, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

BTW,

BP predicts Ramirez MLVr to be .062, over a 162 game season that's 10.04 runs over the average hitter. I forget how many runs the stat people equate to a win, but I believe that prediction is more than 1 win for Ramirez..

Uribe, however, has been negative each of the past 3 years and was -.170 last year. They predict him to be -.088 this year.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i would trust BP zero on this

they've got few comparables. it's a cute exercise they did with PECOTA and him but i'd call it largely worthless.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

All they have to go on...

are scouts and his numbers in Cuba compared to the average batter in Cuba.

I wouldn't call it worthless, but it is largely optimistic, IMO. Some may disagree.

Depends on how much value you place on BP predictions in the first place.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You can have a high faith in BP

Which I do, but still realize there is not a mlb history or large list of comparables on him for predictions. He is the very essence of wildcard.

by Tdogg on Mar 27, 2008 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

no it doesn't

i place a lot of value on their projections because, especially for hitters, they've proven to be quite good. but simply because their major league projections are good doesn't mean their projections for foreign free agents is good. they've got reams of data to go on for guys who've developed via the minor league system. they have literally no one - and i'm including pitchers - who has come over from the cuban leagues and started opening day.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wonder...

how they calculate that. Is there a Cuban League equivalency?

That seems like it might be guesswork to me.

larry put it best - it makes sense to hold onto Uribe until you know what you've got in Ramirez.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 27, 2008 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

IIRC...

I think they put the Cuban league level as something like high-A ball. Don't quote me, though -- I'm going off of memory. If I wasn't in a rush I'd google it real quickly and get a 'for-sure' answer, but...

by CWSKeith on Mar 27, 2008 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

from what i understand from talking to nate

and he's obviously not going to delve too deeply into this for obvious proprietary reasons, he based ramirez' projection on other cubans who have come over. i note that very few of said cubans have made the major leagues and none started right out at the major league level. thus, i'm not sure how much validity to attach to it.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would imagine they would compare...

his numbers to the average batter in Cuba, then equate Cuban ball to something like AA or something here. Then from there they can equate it to MLB level. That's probably how I would do it. But they may and probably have different methods.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

they certainly do

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure...

I agree with comparing him to other Cubans who have come over. That works until someone is totally unlike every other Cuban that has come over.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

and how is comparing him to other cubans who have never played in the major leagues any better?

the point is to project him in MLB, not in cuba.

and your last point is exactly what we've been talking about.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I imagine the exercise they used

for him is more subjective than other projection systems for more traditional players. At some point they have to take some sort of stock in how Cuban pitching and hitting compares to our Minor league teams. When you do that, you have to make some sort of subjective belief. That their pitching is worse, their hitting is better, conditions are worse, etc. It kind of makes the whole exercise somewhat futile. But fun nonetheless.

I'm not sure which method would be better. That's why I said I'm not sure. OBviously we need more time and a larger sample size.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Mar 27, 2008 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

no they don't do that

i thought i've made this clear by now but...

they compared him to other players who have come over from cuba. they take all of their stats - cuban and minor/major league - and come up with a projection. you want to compare like to like as much as possible. i have no idea what you're talking about with this other stuff. it's window dressing that does little to nothing for a valid projection. you need to know how guys who have had similar experiences reacted to minor/major league level ball. what level of play the cuban leagues are at isn't all that important. what's important is how to weigh that data and use it to project. and that's not hard to do once you start comparing performance there to performance here.

by larry on Mar 27, 2008 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs