Question for you Sabermetricians out there

[The Voice of Reason]

Were the White Sox just lucky as the attached article and the stat geeks at Baseball Prospectus are implying or is sabermetrics (gasp) overrated?

 

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9833787/

[minnesotacubsfan]

rather be lucky then no good....

[CuseCubFan69]

They won 99 games in the regular season and went 11-1 in the playoffs. I think they were pretty good.

[goonys evil twin]

they were lucky in the sense that everything worked out for the best for them this year. Record in 1 run games is not something that carries over from year to year, and some of their pitchers will regress a bit. It was their year, they deserved everything they got, but I would never choose to model my team after them, leaving so much to chance. They could be just a few over .500 next year without losing much.

[CuseCubFan69]

they were lucky in the sense that everything worked out for the best for them this year. Record in 1 run games is not something that carries over from year to year, and some of their pitchers will regress a bit. It was their year, they deserved everything they got, but I would never choose to model my team after them, leaving so much to chance. They could be just a few over .500 next year without losing much.

 

I wouldn't model a team after them but I would like to have 5 solid starters and a very good pen. You may be right about the pitching dropping down a notch but having a good, healthy starting 5 is always a good thing to have for a successful season. I've always believed that you need 7 good starters to be covered for the season and that is not easy to find. I just hope that Hendry, by drafting so many pitchers, will have that covered in 2006 because I have no faith that Wood will be back to start 30 or more games.

 

Also, don't jump on me about hitting being needed too young man because I understand the Cubs need that as well! :D

[BigbadB]

They were both lucky and good. They didn't have major injuries, they had good years from unexpected players, etc....

 

But, as bad as their offense was at scoring runs and putting runners on base, at least they weren't sticking below .300 OBP guys at the top of the batting order. They had respectable OBP's hitting the most often (top of the order) and also right in front of their most productive bats.

 

The pitching is what made them win more than anything.

[goonys evil twin]

and despite what the myth makers in the press would like us to believe, they relied heavily on the homerun to get them where they are.

 

BbB makes a great point about the lack of truly craptaculiar hitters. They were upper half in the league in OBP from the 1/2 spots. They had one crappy position, LF, compared to the Cubs who stunk it up across the board in the OF, and were at the bottom in SS until Nomar returned.

 

 

But above all it was about great pitching, and they got career years out of multiple guys, including Politte who went from a near 6 ERA in Toronto to a 2.01 this year, and Hermanson who sucked in SF but had a 2.04 this year and Cotts who went from 5+ last year to 1+ this year. And something they did not do was walk a lot of guys as a staff.

[cubbieinexile]

Yeah they sured small balled there way through the playoffs, just the Angels a few years back.

[BigbadB]

If you want to really put OBP into perspective, the difference between the Cubs and White Sox this past year is a perfect example.

 

Derrek Lee hit .325 AVG in the 3 spot with a 1.058 OPS. He had 81 RBI's in 510 at bats.

 

Frank Thomas, Carl Everett and Aaron Rowand combined for 557 at bats and had AVG's of .218/.249/.266 and had 97 RBI's combined in the 3 spot.

 

As a whole team hitting 3rd in the order, the Cubs had a .308 AVG and 93 RBI's. As a whole team hitting 3rd in the order, the Sox had a .234 AVG and 103 RBI's.

 

I'd say the #1 thing the Cubs need to address this offseason is the .299 OPB lead off spot and the .317 OBP #2 spot in the order. The White Sox had a .338 and .335 OBP from their top two spots.

[CuseCubFan69]

Just call it clutch hitting BbB! :D

 

What was Walkers OBP last year? I really hope things change this off season.

[imb]

Goony makes a good point. Calling them lucky does nothing to take away the fact that they played very well this year. The luck part is derived from getting so many good pitching performances out of so many, heretofore mediocre pitchers (aside for Buerhle). The starting pitching and the out of nowhere good bullpen, coupled with a weak division covered their horrible offense, and, as we all know, strong pitching dominates in a short series, so they capitalized and blew away the competition.

[AI]

Goony makes a good point. Calling them lucky does nothing to take away the fact that they played very well this year. The luck part is derived from getting so many good pitching performances out of so many, heretofore mediocre pitchers (aside for Buerhle). The starting pitching and the out of nowhere good bullpen, coupled with a weak division covered their horrible offense, and, as we all know, strong pitching dominates in a short series, so they capitalized and blew away the competition.

 

The Sox won games this year Earl Weaver style. Pitching, defense and the three run homer.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

The folks on BP wrote about the SOX today.

 

Here's something from Prospectus Notebook:

 

Oh, this is how you confuse a 100 win team for an 82 win team. Everyone performs up to their 90th percentile projection for ERA, except that slacker Garcia, who only lives up to his 75th percentile projection. Everyone exceeds their 90th percentile for innings pitched. All that repeated "underestimated his defense" comes to roost in these numbers, since the White Sox pitchers allowed batters to put a fair number of balls in play. The White Sox ranked 13th in the majors in strikeout rate. The nearly eight games this unit picked up over their projected performances more than cleared the disappointing showing of frequently-injured oldster Orlando Hernandez (28.9 VORP projected, 6.1 actual).

 

More can be found here.

 

 

I found Joe Sheehan's comments in chat today to be even more interesting:

 

Joel (Washington, DC): Well, it's safe to say you won't be touting your 2005 White Sox write-up on the back of the 2006 Baseball Prospectus annual. Is it too early to draw any important analytical conclusions from their improbable championship? What are your immediate thoughts?

 

 

 

Joe Sheehan: Lots of questions in this vein, both here and in my inbox.

 

To address the question seriously...the real question the '05 White Sox raise for me is how to measure defensive improvement over an offseason. It's fairly simple to see how a team is going to improve/regress at the plate or on the mound, but when the Sox added a second center fielder and upgraded second base, giving them above-average defense at four spots and no worse than average gloves everywhere, I missed that.

 

Their pitchers became much better at throwing strikes and keeping the ball in the park, to be sure, but it's that defensive improvement that drove the run prevention.

 

So the question becomes, how do we evaluate defensive improvements accurately across seasons? How do we see the next White Sox coming?

 

The other thing of note is lineups. The Sox had a worse offense in 2005, but because they put their limited OBP in front of their power, they were able to convert the components into runs. Compare the OBPs of their top two spots in 2004 and 2005, and you see where they made up some ground. So evaluating gains in that area should be part of the process.

 

We can always learn more.

 

That chat can be found here.

[Proven Veteran]

I liked this comment in the Sheehan chat:

 

"Glenn (NJ): Will Jose Reyes ever justify 600 PAs in the leadoff spot?

 

Joe Sheehan: I doubt it. Drop him to sixth and let him get on with his career before you Patterson him. His steals would have more value from that spot, too. "

[bc2k]

and despite what the myth makers in the press would like us to believe, they relied heavily on the homerun to get them where they are.

 

The home run was a big part of the Sox's success, but you can't discount the rest of their offense as "myth." I've watched portions of many Sox games this year, and smallball is just as much a part of their offense as longball.

 

The portions of Sox games I liked to watch were the 1-2-3 hitters--especially the first time around--so I can tell you that they do have a smallball-minded philosophy.

 

The first half of the season, Podsednik would get on first, Iguchi (the greatest #2 hitter I've ever seen) would take pitches and strikes to allow Pods to steal second base. Iguchi would then either bunt Pods to third or unofficially sacrifice himself with a ground ball to the right side of the infield, sometimes getting a hit. Then with Pods on third, Everett (who had a ton of RBIs for his at bat total) would plate Pods with a sac fly or hit.

 

I can see why my Sox friends talked about it so much; it's exciting baseball.

 

 

Podsednik's value went down when he hurt his groin/leg? and when he came off the DL, he was caught stealing at a much higher rate than before he was injured.

 

I've read articles by statheads arguing that Podsednik's value is not good because of his end-of-season stolen base statistics. What they overlook is that in the first half when healthy, his stolen base success rate was much higher than post injury. It is no coincidence that the Sox got out to such a great first half lead because of Pods's smallball contributions, and lost much their lead when he wasn't healthy enough to do what he could in the first half.

 

So my point is, just because every guy in the lineup couldn't bunt, steal and run, that doesn't mean they were not a good smallball playing team. Don't forget that the Sox had some ridiculously high number of outscoring opponents in the first inning throughout the season. That first inning scoring ratio is a result of successful smallball.

[Careless]

I liked this comment in the Sheehan chat:

 

"Glenn (NJ): Will Jose Reyes ever justify 600 PAs in the leadoff spot?

 

Joe Sheehan: I doubt it. Drop him to sixth and let him get on with his career before you Patterson him. His steals would have more value from that spot, too. "

that made me feel like your avatar