SB Nation User Blog: Matt in LA

Draft Reviews: Cleveland Indians

Matt in LA — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:55:45 -0000

Draft Reviews: Cleveland Indians

2009 Draft Slot: 15th overall
Draft Preference (2006-08): Definitely college players
MLB Club Need: Pitching, Pitching, more Pitching, and Third base
Organizational Need: Center field, Right field, LHP Pitching, RHP Pitching
Organizational Strength: 1B/LF, Third base
Notes: The club has not really made a splash with its first overall pick in quite some time… although Chisenhall could change that. The club is picking in the middle of the first round, so a lot is up in the air… but you have to figure the club is leaning to a college pitcher, unless a good (college) bat finds its way to them.

Magic Number Thread

Matt in LA — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:59:17 -0000

Not sure if I'm figuring this right, but I believe that a combination of 29 Indians wins and 1st place teams losses would catapult the Tribe into the postseason.

Of course, with 19 games remaining, that means going undefeated requires an 8-10 finish for Chicago.

I think our biggest enemy is the 3 game series between Minnesota and Chicago. Is it possible for them both to lose? With some help from a surging Royals team, it could happen.

Go Tribe!

Barry Bonds

Matt in LA — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:08:46 -0000

No, I'm not here to say we, or anybody, should sign him. Every so often when I'm on Baseball Reference, I end up on Bonds' page to make a comparison.

Today, for the first time, I used the "neutralize stats" stats tool that allows you to normalize all stats to a specific environment. The high end option is the 2000 Rockies.

Bonds' numbers, legit or not, are always mind-blowing and today they were even more so. Converting his numbers to that 2000 Rockies standard of a 162 game season, with an average team scoring 6.25 runs per game, Bonds projects to hit 100 home runs. (To say nothing of his also hitting .400 and driving in 196 runs)

100 home runs! That that is even projectable, by any player placed into any environment, absolutely blows my mind. For comparison's sake, Babe Ruth tops off at 75, Maris 77, Sosa 81, and McGwire 90.

Andy Marte

Matt in LA — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:19:49 -0000

Yeah, he's finally getting his at bats.

No, he's not producing.

What gives?

Looking over his stat line, it's not surprising to see why his numbers are so low: a BABIP of .221.

In 2006, in the same numbers of at bats he has YTD, he put up a respectable 707 OPS at the age of 22. Has he really regressed that far?

In 2006, he had an XBH in about 1 of 8 at bats. This year, it's more like 1 in 18.

Walks are down slightly, from few to very few, while Ks have held steady.

His LD% is the same and he's hitting fewer grounders, but the flyballs aren't flying enough.

Even in 06 his BABIP was unusually low at .264, about .030 lower than expected, and this year it's more than 40 points lower.

So is it just prolonged awful luck, small sample size (he's approaching a full year's worth of PA for his career) or can he just not hit?

Tigers pass Tribe

Matt in LA — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:33:00 -0000

Tigers pass Tribe

Time to throw weight *ahem*CC*ahem* from our sinking ship? If we're sellers, the longer we wait, the less valuable our assets.

LGT worth $124,000

Matt in LA — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:52:08 -0000

LGT worth $124,000

SELL! SELL! SELL!

CC to San Fran (speculation, for fleerdon)

Matt in LA — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:58:06 -0000

It's still pretty dumb, but my early season suggestion that the Giants could hang around long enough to have an interest in CC is a little more viable today than it was last week or last month.

They just completed a sweep of the division leading, earth scorching Diamondbacks: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=280529129, and now the Padres, a struggling division rival, is up next.

They're still 7 back, but if they made it through June where they are or slightly better, wouldn't they have to have an interest in bringing back the Cy winning local product?

Since I doubt they'd give up Lincecum, who do they have that we might want?

SIGN BONDS!

Matt in LA — Wed, 21 May 2008 16:28:13 -0000

I know I'm not the first to mention this, but given our offensive ineptitude, it bears repeat mentioning:

Barry Bonds, the greatest hitter of all time, is available.

Hafner is showing signs of waking up and with Ben Francisco plugging along, there is one less outfield spot available. Bonds is not a guy's guy and Eric Wedge won't give the time of day to anybody who won't go for a steam with him. Third dumb argument blah blah blah.

The Indians need to be exploring ways to jump start the offense and reaching out the Bonds definitely falls into the scope of due diligence in that respect. I know we're not throwing a ton of money at him. I don't care that he might not be fan friendly. But he can hit, and he might just be willing to do it on the cheap for a team with a shot at a ring. Shapiro is obligated to make that call to Jeff Borris if nothing else.

Poll

Would you be open to signing Barry Bonds?

Yes

69 votes

No

42 votes

111 votes | Poll has closed

2008 WPA

Matt in LA — Mon, 19 May 2008 21:23:39 -0000

2008 WPA

I just wanted to point out that Sowers is top 5 in batting WPA for this year's team.

Also, Hafner, shockingly, is #2.

Prescient typo

Matt in LA — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:11:19 -0000

Anybody think CC is going to take the home town discount?

No, not for Cleveland - for Oakland. Well, somebody at ESPN does - at least subconsciously.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/notebook?page=bbtn/080416

Check out the chart for "Most Consecutive Decisions Lost to Start a Season". That's right, CC followed up his Cy Young campaign with 3 straight losses as a starter for the A's.

If the writer/typo-ist IS psychic, at least we can have faith that CC is going to bounce back strong for another Cy.