SB Nation User Blog: calim

M's record when leading/trailing after each inning

calim — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 07:39:58 -0000

I've been doing this every night but don't really have time to do any bargain-basement analysis of the data, so I'm submitting this without comment.

Thru June 21

Overall: 35-34

Record by starter:
Felix 10-5
Bedard 6-5
Silva 3-3
Washburn 5-8
RRS 1-0
Jakabauskas 3-5
Vargas 5-3
Olson 2-3
Morrow 0-2

Record with lead
After 1: 10-6
After 2: 15-9
After 3: 18-9
After 4: 20-12
After 5: 24-9
After 6: 24-6
After 7: 24-5
After 8: 27-3
After 9: 31-0
After 10: 2-0
After 12: 1-0
After 15: 1-0

Record when tied
After 1: 18-17
After 2: 10-11
After 3: 7-10
After 4: 6-6
After 5: 5-8
After 6: 7-6
After 7: 6-4
After 8: 6-5
After 9: 4-4
After 10: 2-1
After 11: 2-0
After 12: 1-0
After 13: 1-0
After 14: 1-0

Record when trailing
After 1: 7-11
After 2: 10-14
After 3: 10-15
After 4: 9-16
After 5: 6-17
After 6: 4-22
After 7: 5-25
After 8: 2-26
After 9: 0-30
After 10: 0-3
After 11: 0-1

How have the M's done when behind/ahead after each inning?, part deux

calim — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 05:54:57 -0000

A couple of weeks ago, I gave a rundown of the M's record with a lead/deficit after each inning.

Those were much happier times. 15-10, coming off a 15-inning, heart-stopping victory over the A's — probably the day, unfortunately, that will be considered the high point of the year.

But this seems like as good a time as any to update the numbers, what with a couple of ninth-inning comebacks this weekend and a team that's somewhere in the neighborhood of .500 (though 25-26 would have sounded a lot better).

Thru May 31

Overall: 24-27

Felix 7-4
Bedard 4-5
Silva 3-3
Washburn 3-6
RRS 1-0
Jakabauskas 3-5
Vargas 3-1
Olson 0-3

Lead
After 1: 8-4
After 2: 12-7
After 3: 12-8
After 4: 12-11
After 5: 15-8
After 6: 16-6
After 7: 16-5
After 8: 18-3
After 9: 20-0
After 10: 2-0
After 12: 1-0
After 15: 1-0

Tied
After 1: 11-14
After 2: 6-9
After 3: 4-8
After 4: 5-3
After 5: 4-4
After 6: 5-3
After 7: 4-2
After 8: 4-3
After 9: 4-2
After 10: 2-1
After 11: 2-0
After 12: 1-0
After 13: 1-0
After 14: 1-0

Trailing
After 1: 5-9
After 2: 6-11
After 3: 8-11
After 4: 7-13
After 5: 5-15
After 6: 3-18
After 7: 4-20
After 8: 2-21
After 9: 0-25
After 10: 0-1
After 11: 0-1

Does anybody else think a team should be better than 12-11 when leading after four? Especially one whose strength is run prevention? Not really proud about that 18-3 when leading after eight, either.

One other thing I've been tracking is the M's record with each starter on the hill. Before the season, my dream world was to have Felix and Bedard win ~75 percent of their starts and the other three-fifths of the rotation win ~50 percent. Both are obviously far-fetched, but if we did it, that'd be .600 baseball. And the M's did do it, through the first month or so of the season. That, along with about everything else, came crashing down with the whole lose-9-out-of-10 thing.

Here's where it's at now:

Felix 7-4
Bedard 4-5
Silva 3-3
Washburn 3-6
RRS 1-0
Jakabauskas 3-5
Vargas 3-1
Olson 0-3

That's 11-9 for Felix and Bedard (only 55 percent, mostly not their fault), and 13-18 for everyone else (.419), also not even close to a high benchmark. Obviously bullpen and sample-size issues make this almost irrelevant, but like all the above info, it's compiled just for fun.

Tigers win crazy one, take two of three from kU

calim — Sun, 10 May 2009 22:19:49 -0000

Tigers win crazy one, take two of three from kU

Had 6-1 lead, let kU pull within 9-7. Led 12-7, let kU score five in the ninth after a grand slam. But Ryan Ampleman's one-out homer in the bottom of the ninth gives Mizzou a 13-12 win, a series win against the chickenhawks, the 30th win of the year and a 16-11 Big 12 record.

How have the M's done when behind/ahead after each inning?

calim — Mon, 04 May 2009 06:52:12 -0000

So, with too much time on my hands on a Sunday night (I get three-day weekends every so often followed or preceded by just a Sunday off) and still buzzing from the high of this afternoon's game, I put together a little info on the Mariners have fared when ahead, behind or tied after each inning. Essentially useless, especially with a small sample size, but still fun to look at.

Overall: 15-10

When the M's are:

Leading
After 1: 6-1
After 2: 9-2
After 3: 8-2
After 4: 9-4
After 5: 12-4
After 6: 11-1
After 7: 11-2
After 8: 12-1

Tied
After 1: 6-7
After 2: 2-3
After 3: 2-4
After 4: 2-1
After 5: 1-1
After 6: 2-2
After 7: 2-0
After 8: 2-1
After 9: 2-0
After 10: 1-0
After 11: 1-0
After 12: 1-0
After 13: 1-0
After 14: 1-0

Trailing
After 1: 3-2
After 2: 4-5
After 3: 5-4
After 4: 4-5
After 5: 2-5
After 6: 2-7
After 7: 2-8
After 8: 1-8

Besides the obvious (wonder when the trailing-after-8 win was), here are a few highlights:

— Game 7 (Bedard beats Outman 1-0 in Oakland) was the first time a game was still tied after second inning. In the first six, there had been scoring in one of the first two innings.

— The Mariners had the lead after four innings in each of their first three losses. Conversely, they won the first two times they trailed after 4.

— One old adage that rings true: Score first. Seattle is 6-1 when leading after one, 9-2 after two Then again, it's 3-2 when trailing after one.

— In fact, the M's have been doing OK playing from behind early in games, but the winning percentage drops off dramatically if they're trailing after 5 and even more so after 6. Random but fun.

— I'm going to try to update this every few weeks as I have time.

Baseball sweeps Nebraska

calim — Sun, 03 May 2009 21:48:29 -0000

Baseball sweeps Nebraska

This time 12-9 after 8-4 on Friday and 6-3 yesterday. Today we scored nine runs in innings 6-8 and then held on in the ninth.
Rachel Phelps watch? down to five, right? NCAA tourney, here we come!

Calipari reportedly on way to Lexington...

calim — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:27:57 -0000

Flight left at 5:15 central time, about an hour long.

This, of course, could set off a domino effect that would leave Mike Anderson with three choices — Georgia for ~$2M a year, Missouri for ~$1.5M, and Memphis for who knows how much (though I'm guessing it'd be more than either of those two).

Not enough words, so blah blah blah blah blah blah blah why isn't this enough words there we go

Anderson to Alabama? Not so fast

calim — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:43:38 -0000

From this morning's Star notebook:

Missouri officials won’t comment, but sources have told The Star that MU coach Mike Anderson and athletic director Mike Alden are talking about a contract extension. Internet speculation continues that Alabama might offer Anderson up to $2 million to lure him back to his native state. Anderson currently has a base salary of $850,000 a year in the third year of a contract signed in 2006.

It'd be nice to get this thing done quickly so we can focus on this year's team in March and not coaching speculation.

Snaer eliminates Mizzou

calim — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:26:17 -0000

With the early signing period beginning tomorrow, I'll let the Bearer of Bad News (Lawrence Journal-World) bring some more: Michael Snaer is picking Wednesday, and it ain't us.

I suppose this doesn't sting as badly as Hansbrough leaving his home state, but I know we were on Snaer from the beginning and that he had attended several of our camps, so it sucks to let him get away. Hopefully he chooses Florida State or Marquette instead of haunting us for the next (two? three?) years.