Part of

« Sunday chat: Phillies-Mariners finale; Vic en vogue | Main | Off-day chat: The Phillies' toughest NL competition? »

Monday, June 20, 2011


off day on BL. this should be fun.

(especially after yesterday's loss and fun filled thread)

I was traveling all weekend and didn't get to catch any of the games until the 6th inning yesterday... When I saw yesterday's lineup I just shook my head.

valdez, ben fran and mini-mart? why not shift mini to center and let oswalt handle left? at least he's played there before...

to be clear, this isn't me ragging on ryan howard. don't shoot the messenger:

"Ryan Howard is tied for the lead in Just Enough home runs this year. Last year, his Just Enough percentage was also rather high at 42%. His HR/FB ratio is already on a 3-year decline, but a fly ball rate at its highest since 2007 has led to a slight rebound in ISO. After hitting 12 homers against lefties last year, he has 0 in 86 at-bats this season. Many have predicted a sustained decline for Howard and his home run power turning into doubles power and complete lack of punch against lefties this season is making the pessimists look quite good. The days of 40+ home runs look to be far back in the rearview mirror."

conshy, why are you ragging on Ryan Howard like that?

a fangraphs article citing a stat they created by themsevles to predict the future using data from another website used to bash Ryan Howard?

I never thoguht I'd see the day.

since we lost yesterday, it's fair to do some more complaining, right?

Raul Ibanez (YTD)

18 BB
56 K
.304 wOBA
-1.2 WAR
50.5% GB (vs. career 43%)
15% LD (vs. career 19%)
30% o-swing % (vs. career 21%)

and that's just his offensive game. he needs to pick it up or Rube will likely be forced to find an alternative.

hugh - but i wasn', forget it.

The stats shown here are top notch! Thanks

I didn't know that others were making the comparison, but I when watching Ackley I noted something similar between his batting style and Utley's.

Yeah, conshy, I noted those numbers on Raul yesterday. Lots less line drives and lots more ground balls means one more thing: lots more weakly hit balls. And he's swinging and missing a lot more (9.6% vs. 8.1% for his career, I think). Basically, he doesn't walk at all, swings at everything, swings and misses a lot, and makes a lot of weak contact.

I see no reason to be optimistic about the remainder of his season. He shouldn't be the starting LF for this team after the trading deadline, unless they really want to handicap themselves down the stretch run.

Can't be too down about losing 2 out of 3 this weekend. Historically they are bad in inmterleague play. As Weitzel noted they just finished playing 4 games in 48 hours just about, including one extra inning game. Then had to fly all the way across country and play a tough young Mariners team with good pitching. I think they come back fresh tomorrow and they may catch a break with Pujolsgetting hurt. Hopefully the big guy is all right though because he's an unbelieveable ballplayer.

I note that Chase and Dustin share preppy white guy names.

BB: both their last names end in "ley", as well.

I've been out of town and didn't see the Friday or Sunday games. Was able to watch Saturday's game online.

I understand that this is BL and that there is always a fair amount of hand-wringing, but we had a discussion on Thursday after the FLA game as to what to expect in Seattle.

Many here, myself included, looked at the pitching matchups and said that if they took one of three games in Seattle it would be OK. I still stand by that.

Friday's game - a still not 100% Oswalt vs. Pineda in that ballpark - was 'advantage Mariners. They won.

Saturday's game - King Felix vs. Vance Worley, the Phils' 7th starter, in that ballpark - was 'HUGE advantage Mariners'. The Phils' won. Did any rational and reasonable person expect that?

The third game - Hamels vs. Vargas in that ballpark - was 'advantage Phils'. The Phils lost.

So, they lost one game in which they had a pitching disadvantage, won a game in which they had a cavernous pitching disadvantage, and lost a game in which they had a pitching advantage.

That's baseball. Sh8t happens. That's why even the best starting pitchers still lose.

Oh, and in case anyone expected them to score a ton of runs yesterday in that ballpark with the POS lineup that Charlie ran out there, I respectfully suggest that you temper your expectations next time.

awh, I don't think anyone is really broken up about the series loss i Seattle. This team is going to lose a series here and there. Happens to the best of teams. They are still 5 up and heading to a place where they play well, and where possibly the best player in baseball won't be there to hurt them.

Tin from W, good post. Good perspective.

R.I.P. Ryan Dunn

Fatti, I realize that, but some of the comments I've read seem to indicate that that particular poster expects a win every game.

Hey, they've won 5 of their last 7, and 8 of their last last 10.

Personally, I feel badly for Cole Hamels, who must look at the lineup card on the days he's pitchinga nd figure he has to be perfect in order to win the game. That's the second or thrid time Charlie has done that this season.

In fairness, Charlie doesn't have a lot of options.

OTOH - constructive criticism: Charlie is the one, ostensibly, who wants a AAA bench player on his team.

some things to be positive about:

bastardo > johan santana - it's official now.

herndon > baez

victorino > all CF's except Kemp

hamels/halladay/lee > all SP's except Verlander and Weaver (and that's debatable)

phillies > every other team in baseball (somehow)

***Charlie is the one, ostensibly, who wants a AAA bench player on his team.***

I'm a mid-level supervisor at my work...lots of times my manager comes up with ideas that I completely disagree with. Oftentimes, I will voice my opinion to him behind closed doors but then defend the same terrible idea as if it was my baby to my team of subordinates.

Just sayin'.

Vic's a much better defender than Kemp. But then, most CFs are much better defenders than Kemp. Kemp would make one hell of a LF.

"phillies > every other team in baseball (somehow)"

conshy, no "(somehow)" about it.

You identified "how" in the point right before that:

Pitching, pitching, and more pitching.

NEPP - agreed, but Kemp's offensive #'s this year are off the charts good.

Just want to point out that Brown has an incredibly bad BABIP so far this year, which is contributing to his underperformance. Assuming he'll regress, we should expect to see a nice uptick from RF going forward.

NEPP, hence my use of the word "ostensibly".

NEPP, one other thing:

If Charlie disagrees with the FO about mini-mart being on the roster he could refuse to play him. That's the best way to send a message to the FO, without publicly disagreeing with them.

But wasn't Charlie quoted earlier this season as syaing he wished he could get mini-mart MORE playing time?

Dont get me wrong, Kemp is much better than Vic due to his ridiculously good offensive numbers. And he's still officially a CF...just as Ethier is a RF despite similar range issues.

I think Halladay is better than Verlander and Weaver...They are really good tho. Best in the AL

Halladay is the best pitcher in baseball and he has been for several years.

Its not just about the lowest ERA or best ERA+ or SO numbers. Going deeper into games than any other pitcher by a good margin is a very valuable skill. Doing it AND being near or at the top of every statistical category is just incredible.

Fun with BABIP and other hidden stats:
The Phils have a pretty average offensive team in the ML this year (despite playing in the NL) scoring 299 runs (avg 301) to date. They're walking more than average (8.7% to avg 8.4%), which is offsetting extremely poor BABIP (.279 to .291 avg).

As a team, despite playing in CBP the HR/FB% is below average (8.2% vs. 8.75% avg). Otherwise LD/GB/FB percentages are right in line with ML averages.

Just in the NL East, it's a poor hittin' division, with BABIP averaging only .285, mostly because the mets have an high .303 (yes, the mets will likely get WORSE as the season goes on). The Braves are right there with the Phils at .277 BABIP, but their superior 10.6% HR/FB% helps them (though they still have fewer runs than the Phils).

Overall, it's hard to see the Phils not improving in offense over the rest of the season, and while the Braves will get better in BABIP, they'll likely get worse in HR/FB%, so that might mitigate it a bit. The only team in the NL Easy with more runs than the Phils are the Mets, which as I said is driven by a likely unsustainably high BABIP.

At the end of the day, the Phils have the best or just about the best offense in the NL East, and combined with our pitching should run away with the division this year.

NEPP - you'll get no argument from me regarding Halladay. but i will point out that Verlander leads all of MLB in IP (120); however, he has one more start than Halladay (112 IP). Verlander also has a .85 WHIP.

Verlander is doing it so far this year. Dont get me wrong, I love Justin Verlander as a player and have for years. He's very underrated (probably from playing in Detroit and not having the most obvious big stats as his ERA is always a bit inflated) but Doc does it consistently year after year. That's the mark of true greatness.

Verlander is a guy I would love to see in red pinstripes.

Cholly has to play the cards he is dealt. Contrary to what he said about getting Mini Mart more time in spring training, his actions show the opposite. When Vic went down in May, it was Mayberry who became the starting CF. Not Mini-Mart.

He's only started 3 games this month and likely will only start 1 game max this. Basically will finish with 18-20 ABs this month. If Gload could actually play in the field or run, Mini-Mart would get even less PT.

Cholly knows Mini-Mart isn't very good and has used him pretty sparingly.

Re: Halladay v. Verlander. I went over this a couple weeks ago, and it's no slight to Verlander, who's been fantastic this year and is a great pitcher, but he's not as good as Halladay. A look at the peripherals:

Player: SO/9, BB/9, GB%, BAbip, LOB%, xFIP, HR/FB

Doc: 9.13, 1.12, 52.8%, .308, 78.8%, 2.31, 7.4

JV: 8.2, 1.94, 41.5%, .214, 77.3%, 3.08, 8.4

Both players have been slightly lucky with HRs, and both have stranded about the same amount of runners. Doc strikes out more, walks less, but most importantly, induces a lot more ground balls. Ground balls do not turn into homeruns, and results in double plays. Doc is the perfect pitcher. High strikeouts, low walks, lots of ground balls (kind of like Cole this year). JV is really good.

Also, that BAbip of JV is not going to hold up.

Doc is the better pitcher, clearly.

Fatalotti: The amazing thing about Doc is his high BABIP. Can you imagine if he went on a tear where his BABIP was as low as JV? His era would be about 1.0 (not kidding).

Trader Jack

80-year old McKeon is now the interim manager of the Fish? 7:05 starts won't infer with with is 5 PM early bird specials but it will interfere with Matlock and his 9:30 PM bed time.

DIP, Doc's BAbip is slightly higher than his career average, but not that much of a jump. Basically, he's close to the pitcher he should be. Verlander is pitching above his head a bit.

But I agree, if Doc got Verlander's good fortune for a few weeks, we'd see something really special (not like we don't already :))

Glad I have Halladay and Verlander on my fantasy team

Fat - good #'s. interesting comparison between the two.

Verlander has better pure "stuff" (eyeball test), which could be the reason for his lower BABIP. harder to make solid contact. or it could be luck induced. or the defense he has behind him, although i admittedly know little about Detroit's defense.

either way, it's splitting hairs. someone should tell Ruben that there's an ace out there that he hasn't acquired yet. Verlander would be a nice upgrade over Blanton/Kendrick/Worley.

Halladay is due for a CGSO

GRAB - i've got Verlander and Felix, Bautista and Miggy, and I'm in last place.

Ryan shift this past weekend:

Played Ryan to the SS side of 2B but had Ackley shifted over as far as I have ever seen a 2B against Howard. He was also playing pretty deep too. At least 3-4 steps out on the grass in LF. 1B was pretty close to the line too.

Guess they thought that Ryan has incredible range to his left (which he does) and that Ackley has his share of range too.

geez...thats rough. How's that happen?

conshy, I had Verlander and Bautista last season and came in tied for last. You never know.


Is it me or is Utley pulling almost every single ball he hits this season so far? Yeah he is a pull hitter but it seems like every ball he hits is to RF.

Conshy, Verlander is really good, but I don't know much about Detroit's defense either. Verlander's career BAbip is .288. It's really hard to see him maintaining a BAbip this season of .214. There's probably a good amount of fortune involved there.

Usually, extreme groundball pitchers will outperform BAbip averages by a good amount, especially if they have a good defense. Tim Hudson is a pitcher like that. But Verlander isn't an extreme GB pitcher, or even an average one. Something amiss about his BAbip if you ask me. He'll likely regress.

But, I wouldn't mind him being our 5th starter in the least. Hell, I'd take him over Oswalt at this point.

Fata -- re: J.V.'s BABIP. I just bet that his ridiculously low BABIP stays just that, as long as that freak reaches back and hits 100mph at will with his ridiculous breaking stuff.

BABIP is one of the more misused stats on Beerleaguer. With pitchers, there is a general (though not universal) tendency for all BABIPs to fall between around .290 and .300, regardless of whether the pitcher is a star or a fringe major leaguer. Hence, if a pitcher's ERA is unusually high, and his BABIP is .337, it's reasonable to conclude that bad luck is probably playing a role in his struggles.

With hitters, there is enormous individual variation. Ryan Howard has a career BABIP of .326 because he hits the ball hard whenever he makes contact. Without that type of high BABIP, he wouldn't be able to survive as a major leaguer while striking out in 1/3 of his ABs. Pedro Feliz, on the other hand, rarely struck out but rarely made strong contact. He had a .265 career BABIP, which was the reason he was always a below average offensive player, despite putting the ball in play a lot.

Hence, it's a logical fallacy to conclude, "So-and-so has a .270 BABIP; hence, he's hitting into bad luck." That .290-.300 range is only a norm for pitchers, not hitters. For hitters, you need to look at the individual player's career BABIP. If his seasonal BABIP is low compared to his career norms, THEN you might be able to conclude that he's hitting into some bad luck. Of course, it could also mean that he's simply not hitting the ball as hard as he used to. Jimmy Rollins' career BABIP is .289. This year, it's .269; last year, it was .246; in 2009, it was .251. Which is the more probable explanation? That he has he just hit into bad luck for 3 straight years, or that he no longer makes as much good contact as he once did?

GRAB - mostly, bad luck. H2H league, and i keep drawing the hot team. Ubaldo Jimenez is not helping...

And, for clarity, that last post was in reference to DIP's 11:08 post, in which he compares the team BABIP of Phillies' hitters to the leage-wide average BABIPs. It's a totally meaningless comparison. It's like saying Ryan Howard's striking out 30% of the time and the league average is 15% (or whatever); therefore, he's having bad luck.

For pitchers, on the other hand, BABIP is a useful (though not perfect) tool for identifying good & bad luck, since most pitchers tend to have similar BABIPs.

BAP, very true. And since pitchers face batters of all BAbip tendencies, their BAbip numbers will normalize within the .290-.300 range. Some pitchers have made careers out of outperforming that range, though, because their batted ball splits are so good. When Hudson is inducing 65% of his balls to be ground balls, that means he's inducing a lot of weak contact, resulting in lots of easy outs, thus his BAbip will be abnormally low. Verlander is not doing that, as his LD rate is pretty standard for his career and for the league.

There is obviously some good fortune going on there. Even without that good fortune, he's a terrific pitcher, as evidenced by his 3.08 xFIP. With that good fortune, he's in the discussion for best pitcher in baseball.

And he has done what he's done this year, and accolades and praise should be based on what HAS happened, not what "should" have happened. But, if predicting future performance, I think it's prudent to look at the peripherals, and those tell me that Verlander should regress a bit, while Doc should get a little better or, at least maintain status quo.

Cut (and Fat) - it will be interesting to see how Verlander fare's from here on out. i was saying the same thing as Cut last year regarding Jimenez, and things evened out quite a bit with him. who knows, Verlander seems to have the stuff to put together a historic kind of year, but Fat is likely correct that some regression is coming.

BAP, when I analyze a hitter's BABIP, I generally focus on what they are doing compared to their career average BABIP, and also see if their LD/GB/FB % has changed. If consistent, I generally conclude any wild swings of BABIP is just luck, and generally that's a safe assumption.

As far as Jimmy, it may be he no longer makes good contact, but I think it is still more probably luck than that, as he's pretty close to his career average.

Pitchers BABIP will fluctuate depending on their GB/FB/LD% given up, but certainly a .214 is unsustainable for anyone!

Look, sometimes great pitchers can just have "that" kind of season, where their BAbip is really low. In 2000, Pedro Martinez had a BAbip of .236 (career .279), and based on his batted ball numbers for the rest of his career, he wasn't an even average ground ball pitcher. But, he had one of those season where, by either fortune, or skill, balls put in play just didn't fall in for hits that often.

Verlander may be doing that this year, but I'll wait until well after June 20 to compare Verlander to one of the greatest pitchers of all time, and one of the greatest seasons of all time.

Verlander is likely having a career year where it all comes together. It will be more impressive if this is simply his breakout year from good #1 starter to ridiculously unhittable Ace pitcher. If he goes on a 5-6 year tear, he'll be a HoF.

Detroit is lucky to have him under team control through 2014 at a reasonable salary ($12 million this year and $20 million per the next 3 after). His deal was backloaded so he's getting 75% of his total contract salary in the final 3 years of the 5 year deal.

Phils have never won an interleague series on the west coast (0 for 6).

Phils have also not been swept in a 3 game series this year (Braves only other team to avoid that).

Now that Jack is headed back to managing, will he be posting less on Beerleaguer?

Pedro in 2000 was just fun to watch. If you watched a lot of his starts that year, the hitters looked defeated before they even stepped in against him.

Opposing hitters hit .167 with a .473 OPS against him. Basically, he turned every team in the AL into 9 Michael Martinez's.

DIP: Yeah, I agree that .214 is unsustainable for any pitcher. And, yeah, BABIP is generally more helpful (for both hitters & pitchers) when considered in conjunction with LD%. But with any particular hitter, his BABIP is totally meaningless when compared to league-wide norms. It has to be compared to the hitter's own personal norms and, even then, it can change dramatically for reasons having nothing to do with luck.

"...I generally conclude any wild swings of BABIP is just luck, and generally that's a safe assumption."

Dan, counldn't is better be described as "variance in probability" or something like that?

Seriously, if we're going to ascribe to the SABR doctrine that a player's career stats "normalize" at some point, couldn't the variance in performance - such as swings in BAbip - be chalked up to the fact that a player's performance varies (greatly in some cases) over the course of a season(s), and not to something as undefineable or measurable as "luck"?

Good bounces, bad bounces, errors, great fielding plays, LD%, etc. pretty much all average out, don't they?

If that's the case, then why use the term "luck" at all when trying to statistically analyze a player's performance?

Also, one of the things I've never seen any statistical work on, or at least referred to on this site, is the role of defensive range, and good or bad defense in BAbip. (I'm sure it's probably been done, but I've never seen it.)

For instance, hypothetically, wouldn't a team(s) have a lower BAbip on balls hit to LF if the LF were Carl Crawford as opposed to Raul Ibanez? And if so, how much would "luck" really have to do with the fact that Crawford is a far superior fielder to Ibanez?

awh, they've done that type of work, and I think it's reflected in DIPs theory of xFIP calculations, taking team defense into account. Not sure, but I know that soem SABRists have tried to do exactly what you've alluded to.

"In 2000, Pedro Martinez had a BAbip of .236 (career .279), and based on his batted ball numbers for the rest of his career, he wasn't an even average ground ball pitcher. But, he had one of those season where, by either fortune, or skill, balls put in play just didn't fall in for hits that often."

FAtti, to my previous point, I'm sure some of that had to do with Pedro's ability to get hitters to swing at 'his' pitch. But What was the defense like behind him?

awh, I don't remember that team that well, but in 1999, Pedro had a BAbip of .323. In 2001, he had a BAbip of .307.

I don't know why the swings between those three years are so radical, and I doubt the defense changed that dynamically, but, either by skill or luck, balls put in play against Pedro just didn't fall in for hits in 2000. He had terrific years in 1999 and 2000 despite higher BAbip, and I'm not taking a thing away from Pedro in 2000. he was absolutely filthy that year, but was aided by a significantly low BAbip.

Was it skill? Was it luck?

I don't know, especially we don't have batted ball splits from that year, but it's an intersting talking point.

awh, the reason baseball lends itself so well to maths is because of the large sample size = we can generally ignore defense played against.

I enjoy a good philosophical discussion about BABIP and other such ideas very much, and it's good to have them sometimes. Here's some of the reasons I focus on the stats that I do: When looking at one hitter (or a group of hitters ie a team), it's good to look for changes in LD/GB/FB % from one year to the next. A decrease in LD% might mean poor contact is being made.

If such stats are consistent, fluctuations in BABIP might be ascribed to specific reasons, but overall will be better described as "luck" for lack of a better term, not that they are truly random at all! Rather consider baseball as being a truly effecient market (like the stock market) where all knowledge is perfectly known and shared. When a hitter changes his swing, and as a result his BABIP shoots up, pitchers know this right away, and adjust their approach to that hitter to bring him back down in line. Though we can call the change in BABIP "luck," it really isn't, but for purposes of our analysis you can't tell the difference from what's happening and luck.

This is actually one of my beefs with the saber community, they seem to often assume if they can't measure it, it truly is luck or doesn't exist. I happen to believe in clutch hitting (to take one hot topic) but believe our methods of evaluating it are too poor to be useful.

Though I often throw out ideas and topics as if I am being very cavalier about it all, I usually make statements based on quite a lot of reflection and study. I am not always correct, but that's the fun of it, isn't it?

Anyway, based on past history, it's very likely that the Phil's offense will improve, and I stand behind that statement very strongly.

Pedro also struck out 34.7% of all the batters he faced that year. He was the definition of unhittable.

The most amazing stat from that year from him is as follows:

1st PA in a game: .474 OPS
2nd PA in a game: .462 OPS
3rd PA in a game: .412 OPS

Batters didnt adapt to his pitches throughout a game, they simply got even worse.

How old is Jack McKeon?

"Now, not all 80-year-olds are created equal, but in major league history only one man has managed at that age: Connie Mack, and he was a manager in name only, letting his coaches take care of things."

"It’s been 38 years since McKeon first managed a major league game. Once he fills out his first lineup card of 2011, McKeon will have managed under eight presidential administrations. You want a complete list of others who still worked as a manager 38 years after their debut? OK, here it is: Connie Mack. "

"Thirty-eight years—that’s like Sparky Anderson lasting until 2008. Mike Scioscia would have to last until 2038. Anyone want to take odds on that happening? "

"Remember Sparky Anderson? He died last year of old age. That wasn’t too surprising: he always looked old. He looked old when he retired in 1995. He looked old when he won his last pennant in 1984. He even looked old when he began managing the Reds in 1970. As old as he looked and as old as he was, he was still four years younger than Jack McKeon."

"Speaking of the 1970s Reds: Anderson led them to the World Series, where they lost to the Baltimore Orioles managed by Earl Weaver. Weaver hasn’t managed in 25 years—and McKeon is only three months younger than Weaver."

I for one am kind of looking forward to the Fish-Phils series in a few weeks and seeing if McKeon has any of the feisty nature he had in his earlier years. Can you imagine McKeon coming out of the dugout to get in an ump's face to argue a call? Will the ump tend to shy away because of McKeon's advanced age or his overwhelming BenGay/Old Spice aftershave/cigar smoke smell that McKeon is bound to have.

NEPP - Yet the Yanks beat Pedro 3 out of 4 times in 2000.

I just remember the '00 Red Sox as one of the most unlikeable teams in recent memory. They already had 'Jurassic Carl' (Carl Everitt) and Offerman before the season began and added douchebags galore that season as Dan Duquette (ultimate Value Village GM the past 10 years) brought in more players than I could keep track of.

Brought in winners such as Bichette, Lansing, M. Alexander, Alcantara, and M. Alexander among others. It was a weird collection of rogues, jerks, cheaters, and scumbags.

***Yet the Yanks beat Pedro 3 out of 4 times in 2000.***

Ironically, Pedro had a 2.10 ERA vs the Yankees that year so it wasn't for lack of his effort against them.

"I happen to believe in clutch hitting (to take one hot topic) but believe our methods of evaluating it are too poor to be useful."

Totally agree. The best the cyber community can do when it comes to clutch hitting are things like numbers with RISP or numbers in "late and close" situations. But I think of clutch situations as being synonymous with "pressure situations," and I rather doubt that hitters feel unusual pressure when they bat with RISP or in the 8th inning of a close game. Pressure moments are when the eame is truly on the line. But these types of situations don't really arise often enough to keep meaningful stats on them (and, if they did, they probably would cease to be pressure moments).

If it's a tie game in the bottom of the 9th in Game 7 of the World Series, I know precisely which Phillies I want at the plate & it's got nothing to do with their overall hitting abilities, their numbers with RISP, or their "late and close" numbers. It has to do with having watched a lot of Phillies games, & having formed a belief that certain guys have a knack for producing in pressure-filled moments.

And, to end the suspense, my number one choice for the guy I want at the plate in that 9th inning, Game 7 situation: Jimmy Rollins. My number two choice: Chooch.

NEPP, I think I read somewhere that, in 2000, Pedro had something like a 2.65 ERA in games that he lost.

Pretty ridiculous that the only way to beat Pedro was the basically shut out his team and hope you scratched a run across against him.

BAP, Stairs. I want Stairs at the plate.

He has one thing on his mind: big fly.

Pretty close, Fat:

Pedro in Losses (2000): 2.44 ERA, .496 OPS, 0.792 WHIP, 11.3 SO/9, 7.50 SO/BB.

What a freaking bum.

It should be noted that his offense saved him in his No Decisions as he was far far worse in that split than in Wins or Losses:

In ND: 4.55 ERA, 1.105 WHIP, .757 OPS in 5 ND.

He only gave up more than 3 ER twice that season and both times were ND. The other 3 ND were pretty solid efforts on his part.

NEPP, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that an ERA of 4.55 in 2000 was about league average. If that's the case, then Pedro at his worst in 2000 was a league average pitcher.

Freaking unreal.

Red-headed stepchild (again):

After the first set of interleague series it looked like the American League’s dominance over the National League might finally be coming to an end, but the AL went 29-13 over the weekend and is now 47-34 overall against the NL the season.

That works out to a .580 winning percentage, which is a 94-68 pace when converted to a 162-game season and fits right in with the AL’s long-running superiority:

2011 .580
2010 .532
2009 .548
2008 .591
2007 .544
2006 .611
2005 .540
2004 .504

The last time the National League had a winning interleague record was way back in 2003

DiP, I wasn't disagreeing with your prediction regarding the Phillies offense.

It's just that with all of the things in baseball which the SABR community deems as measureable, I am becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the term "luck".

"Bad" bounces for fielders happen, but it's a "good" bounce for the hitter. Was it lucky?

Has any SABR writer every actually looked at bounces? I'd wager to say that with the size of the samples, if anyone bothered actaully doing the research, they'd find that "bad" or "good" (or "lucky") bounces happen at a rate that is fairly predictable over the course of a season - and therefore have nothing to do with "luck", but more with simple probablility.

Just because we can't predict "when" an event in baseball will happen doesn't mean it's "lucky" when it does.

Pujols out 4-6 weeks.

awh, I wasn't disagreeing with you, either :)

BAP, I agree with you that watching a team/player thousands and thousands of times allows you to make an informed judgement even if you have no statisical evidence to back it up, which is what the sabers don't seem to get about managers. A good manager has seen and lived the experiences so many times it becomes ingrained within them and allows them to make snap decisions which will be analyzed for quite literally thousands of hours, and almost always make the correct one. It's quite a skill, for which they do not get as much recognition as they deserve.

Take a pitcher who is struggling. Should the manager take him out or leave him in? Simple question, but there can be hundreds of factors in play which may influence the decision, pitch count is usually all the sabers consider. But what about past history, matchups, bullpen availability, weather, past usage, future anticipated usage, ego management, needing to find out what the pitcher can give when he's spent, desire to end the threat now vs. future threats in the game, etc, etc, etc? These are things which must all be processed by the manager in a moment, and if he decides wrong he'll get treated like an idiot.

Managing is very hard, and there's a whole lot of people who wash out, just can't hack it. Charlie Manual says that an everyday player in the majors is a very, very special player. I contend that any sucessful everyday manager is a very, very special manager, as well.

Fat, even more of Pedro's "poor performance ND" was as follows:

Gives up 6 ER in the first 2 innings and then shuts out the Royals for the next 6 innings for an 8 IP, 6 ER effort where the BoSox ended up winning 9-7 in the 10th. In his other poor start, he had a QS through 6 IP but then gave up 2 runs in the 7th for 5 ER in 6+ IP total. 134 pitches in 6+ innings so his control was probably just way off that night.

BB - nice scoop.

small fracture, apparantly. nice!

Good but not for my fantasy team

@Bap -- it says quite about about either the makeup of this team or how you feel about the core of the lineup when you think the current 8 hole hitter Chooch (or the person you think should be hitting 8th JROLL) are the two players you want up in that Game 7 situation.

(Also I'm not arguing with your choices either, those are the two I want up there.)

Just found it striking.

Yes, often what is called "luck" should really just be called "variance," though in practice is there any difference between the two?

And as awh has adriotly noted, while pitchers' BABIP should generally equalize out to around .290-.300 in the aggregate, it's not necessarily "luck" that drives one lower or higher--a big factor is the defense behind them. We consider that "luck" for a pitcher because it's beyond their control, but team-wide, it is a skill, not luck. The Phillies, for instance, have done a pretty poor job of turning balls in play into outs. While for our pitchers that's just poor "luck", for the team it's reflective of an overall lack of defensive range, which is something anyone can see, and is a tangible issue.

How many tens of millions has Pujols cost himself with this season from hell? Bad enough he had a very human .855 OPS so far...adding a major injury to the mix is just gravy.

No more predictions of 10 years, $300 million. At this point, he probably gets half of that.

NEPP: He was never going to actually get $300 million. And his "season from hell" was one slow month, in April. Since May 4th, he's hit .313/.396/.558, or pretty much exactly what you would expect him to hit once you adjust for lower offense league-wide.

If you think Pujols only gets 5 years, $150 million, that's the steal of the century. How bad would that make the Howard deal look?

Radio was talking about how Derrek Lee suffered a very similar injury that Pujols just has, and that his power was absolutely drained even after he recovered.

Just read this on David Herndon extended his scoreless streak to 12 innings since his recall

What's up with that?

Jack, someone will overpay Pujols this off-season but they'll probably regret it.

Though it is good to know that April doesnt count anymore.

lorecore, Pujols >>>> Lee. :)

awh, are you saying Pujols can throw 3 games and only give up 1 ER?????

Jack, I think Pujols would be satisfies with being the highest paid player in teh game on an annual basis. 7/210 (30MM yr) is probably something to which both sides could agree, IMUO.

Jack: "The Phillies, for instance, have done a pretty poor job of turning balls in play into outs"

What is the Phillies BABIP/xBABIP as a team? I didnt see anyone post it compared to the customary average of .290-.300

Pujols broke his wrist when a baserunner collided with him? That sucks. Did anyone see footage of the collision? Did it look terrible?

And...should we ban collisions by baserunners altogether? JK.

For some reason, today I hate Barry Bonds even more than usual...

DiP, exactly. Pujols is this generation's version of Babe Ruth.

Phils have actually been on Pujols worst teams to play against.

Has a career .829 OPS vs Phillies, his lowest vs any team with at least more than 40 PA by a pretty wide margin. He has a couple worst team splits, but they are basically all AL teams where he only has faced in about 9-10 games at the most.

.829 doesnt sound so bad, but thats over a .200 drop from his career OPS of 1.041.

GBrett, I thought the same thing.

I'll wait for the clamoring from the media to change the rules because Pujols got hurt.

I'd say Bonds is more like Babe Ruth and Pujols is more like Ted Williams.

Pujols stretched towards home for the throw and the runner hit his arm hard pulling it back and towards first. Pujols spun out and came up holding his arm in pain. Injury looked nasty, but the runner was in the basepath, did nothing to be banned.

Where was I when Busch Stadium was proved to be a pitchers park?!

Has a 95 multiyear factor and 1 year factor of 88 according to b-ref, a year where they are the best offense in the NL. And to put in perspective, Petco's multiyear is 91.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel