https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=tYWOb782T_mR-S2G0xFuKZg&hl=en#gid=0

groundwork: gb%, k/9, -- i chose these two metrics and gave equal weight to each because i think they both good hard measures of a pitchers ability to dominate hitters, plain and simple.

take the product, multiply by innings pitched, and finally, divide by WHIP (xFIP).

the scores:

1 felix 316.15

2 lester 272.09

3 liriano 239.15

4 sabathia 212.14

5 lee 199.07

6 price 146.49

all data taken from fangraphs 9/24/10

edit: full disclosure, i am a twins fan.

today there is another article describing how this year, the "year of the pitcher," is shaping up: strikeouts are on the rise, at least in the NL (holding constant in the AL). overall, there have been the fewest earned runs allowed since 1992. hitters are hitting home runs are at a 1961 pace.

besides the elimination of steroids, there is another explanation for the decline in offense: catchers are calling for more junk.

Continue reading this post »

here is my entry for the twins print contest. the idea is very simple: vote on your favorite at-bat music from the following list of twins (with links to listen):

Continue reading this post »

ESPN looked at 230 "close calls" in instant replay from 184 games played between june 29 and july 11. the authors determined that 46 of the calls were wrong, and 32 were inconclusive. there were 1.25 "close calls" per game on average, including .25 missed calls per game, and .18 inconclusive calls per game.

maybe the most publicized close call (my determination - i dont have the espn data) during the 184 game stretch was a july 5 game between the mets and reds. it was in the fifth inning, with mike pelfrey of the mets pitching to the reds' scott rolen on a 2-2 count. the bases were loaded, and the game was tied 1-1 with no outs. rolen half-swung at a pelfrey delivery, appearing to foul-tip the ball, which was caught by the catcher. home plate umpire jerry meals ruled the batter out on strike three, but second base ump Dan Iassogna summoned a 3-minute meeting and eventually overturned the call, awarding rolen first base and HBP-ing in the go-ahead run.

similarly, during the rays' 10th of the july 1 twins' game, gardy was ejected after arguing the kelly shoppach "no-tag" call (again, i am assuming that this call was included in the espn study).

in both cases, the calls had what i would call primary consequences - immediate, logical results of a close ruling. in the mets' case: a manager ejection, a HBP, 1 run scored against. in the twins' case, a managerial ejection.

and there were what i would call secondary consquences of the close calls -events that cannot be directly linked to the calls, but which can be considered on their own as critical to the progression of the game and tangentially linked to the primary consequences. in the mets' case: 5 additional reds' runs in the inning, a mike pelfrey yank after 4.2 and raul valdez relieve, and zero runs scored against the reds the rest of the game.

for the twins, a guerrier yank after 0.2 and duensing relieve, no additional rays runs scored, and zero twins runs scored in the bottom of the tenth.

so my question for twinkietown is this: do these secondary consequences of missed or inconclusive calls count in assessing the impact of close calls? in other words, can an umpire derail a game from its natural trajectory, or is it entirely incumbent upon the manager and players to make appropriate adjustments? what is the correct managerial reaction to close calls? what is the correct umpire reaction to a colleague's ruling on a close call when he desputes it?

was anyone else struck that in yesterday's dodgers-giants game, an ESPN Sunday Night Baseball broadcast, the day after ted lilly was traded to the dodgers, that home plate umpire joe west waited till the top of the 2nd inning when casey blake came up to bat, took the bat out of blake's hands, and used it to show him that the lines of the batter's box were crooked?

coincidence? i think not,  because earlier this year, after the dodgers faced lilly in chicago, blake called lilly out to the press for pitching from in front of the rubber. lilly had responded to the incident with the following:

Sometimes a batter will get in the box and he'll step out, and behind the box, and on the lines... I don't think he's trying to cheat. It might not be intentional.

is there a term for this type of lunacy? or are joe west and ted lilly just really good buddies? or does joe west have it out for casey blake?

yesterday joe morgan commented "if you [the hitter] were to draw 'this is where the pitch came,' then you would be thrown out," but i think that only scratches the surface of the meaning behind it - if i were casey blake, i would be relieved to have ted lilly on my team - because i would never again face him with joe west behind the plate.

fire joe west facebook group