SB Nation User Blog: fjm235

Pythagoras Unbound

fjm235 — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 07:18:26 -0000

After winning another series despite being outscored, the D'backs are closing in on an amazing record. They are now 11.6 wins above where the Pythagorean formula (which really has nothing to do with Pythagoras) says they should be. Since 1901, only 3 teams have finished the season with a bigger (positive) differential than that: the 1905 Tigers (14.0), the 2004 Yankees (12.2) and the 1984 Mets (11.8). With 32 games remaining, if they maintain their current pace they will finish with 91 wins. That would put them 14.4 wins above where the formula says they should be.
What I find truly amazing is that this is the 2nd time they've done this in the Melvin era. In 2005 they finished 11.2 wins above Pythagoras at 77-85 despite being outscored by 160 runs. That's the most wins ever by a team that was outscored by 100+ runs, to say nothing of 160. Maybe there is something to this Mad Professor business.

"Smart" Standings are Stupid

fjm235 — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 08:04:04 -0000

I decided to check out the new playoff probabilities after last night's win. The D'backs chances increased to 39.7% while the Padres fell.... to 54.2%! The gap is the same if you look at winning the division alone: 26.8% to 41.3%.

What is wrong with this picture? The D'backs have a 2 game edge in the standings, so why are they the underdog? Strength of remaining opponents, perhaps? Nope. The same site clearly shows our schedule is slightly easier (.491 to .499). Home vs. Road games? No, we have 3 more at home, they have 3 more away. Any ideas?

Poll

What do you think the D'backs chances of making the playoffs are?

75% +

0 votes

0 to 24%

0 votes

25 to 34%

1 votes

35 to 44%

1 votes

45 to 54%

10 votes

55 to 64%

5 votes

65 to 74%

9 votes

26 votes | Poll has closed

The most unhittable pitches in baseball

fjm235 — Tue, 01 May 2007 07:37:12 -0000

sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-behindthestats&prov=ap&type=lgns

If you haven't already done so, check out this article from Yahoo Sports. It was published April 19, but I just came across it. Without giving too much away, 2 D'backs are mentioned prominently in the article. One of them may surprise you.

Leading Off

fjm235 — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:11:09 -0000

I posted the following in Seth's comments section over the weekend. He suggested I find a larger audience for it, so here it is.

You want something to complain about? How about this: The Twins have the 2nd worst OBP in the league by their leadoff batters, an awful .322. (Surprisingly, Billy Beane's A's are the worst at .317.) And for once Shannon Stewart isn't to blame. His .355 is the only reason we aren't dead last in this category. Mind you, .355 isn't anything to brag about either. If the Twins other #1 batters matched that, we'd still only be tied for 8th place in the AL --- tied with the Royals, I might add. OTOH, we'd be only 1 point behind the Tigers and 2 points behind the White Sox.

So, if Stewart isn't at fault, who is? Well, Gardy's disastrous experiment with Lew Ford leading off had a lot to do with it. He ranks dead last out of 22 batters who were given at least 75 PA's in the #1 spot with a putrid .273. But the biggest out machine for the Twins is the incumbent, Luis Castillo. He ranks 19th with a .313 OBP. But he has nearly 200 leadoff PA's. Among those with 150 or more, he is 16th and last. (BTW, Stewart is 11th in this category.)

Why is Castillo doing so poorly? This might have something to do with it. In AB's where he puts the ball in play on the first pitch he is batting an incredible .143! The rest of the team is at .364. Even The Cuban Dictators were around .200. This guy should go up to the plate with the take sign on every time. (Ironically, he's second only to Morneau when hitting with an 0-1 count (.471), so taking a strike shouldn't hurt too much).

So, what should be done? Get him out of the leadoff spot immediately. He was doing all right in the #2 spot (.357), but not nearly as good as Punto (.394). Among all Twins regulars, Mauer is tops in OBP (.446), but of course he shouldn't lead off. So, who is second best at .414? None other than Mr. Leadership Jason Bartlett, now buried in the #9 hole. Simple solution: switch #1 and #9 and watch the offense take off.

Thinking the Unthinkable

fjm235 — Sun, 23 Jul 2006 17:09:39 -0000

After yesterday's game Gardy announced that Scott Baker would miss his turn in the rotation because of the off-day next Thursday. That sets up Liriano, Radke and Santana to face the Tigers next weekend. That's smart, although I think it would have been even smarter to skip Silva. Without his sinker he might as well be throwing batting practice. His ERA as a starter (7.33) is a full run worse than Baker's. Moreover, Silva presents an alternative that Baker apparently does not: he can pitch out of the bullpen. His ERA as a reliever is 1.29!

Regardless of who it is, I do believe one starter needs to be dropped from the rotation. But not just for one start, because of an off-day. It should be permanent! That's right, I'm saying the Twins should go to a 4-man rotation for the rest of the season (and the playoffs, of course). IMHO, that's the only way we make the playoffs. I know all the arguments against it, but I don't believe they apply here. Three of our four starters are young enough to get by on 3 days rest occasionally; only Radke might be a bit overworked. That can be control with strict adherence to a pitch count. With our outstanding bullpen (including Silva) that should not present any problems.

Poll

Should we go to a 4-man rotation?

Yes, drop Baker

4 votes

Yes, drop Silva

34 votes

No

47 votes

85 votes | Poll has closed