Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Monday, October 29, 2007
Predict-A-Matic Results
Let's see how the Predict-A-Matic did with the World Series:
The Predict-A-Matic did not foresee a sweep. Actually, the likelihood of a sweep was 13%. However, two of the games were one-run victories, including game 4, where it thought Colorado had the best chance. I'd give the Predict-A-Matic a "B-" in this category.
The Ortiz assumption was good, but Ellsbury hit first, not second, in the Colorado games. The Rockies changed their lineup more significantly in the Colorado games, as explained below.
Beckett did have a strong outing, going 7 innings and allowing one run on 6 hits. He struck out 9 hitters. As predicted, Francis did not make it 6 innings (he went only 4) and the 1/3 chance of giving up more than 5 runs came true. He walked three instead of two.
No system will predict a 13-1 blowout, but the system did give the Rockies the least chance of winning this game. Overall, I'd give the Predict-A-Matic an "A" on this game.
Schilling did not pitch 6 innings (5 1/3), and he was better than predicted, giving up only 1 run. He had 2 walks instead of one, but the strikeouts were as rpedicted. Jimenez did not make it out of the fivth inning. He walked five and struck out only 2. However he only gave up two runs.
Boston won the game by one, but it was a low scoring affair. The Predict-A-Matic gets a "C" on this game. Maybe even a "C-".
Dice-K didn't make it out of the sixth. He gave up 2 runs on three hits. He walked three and struck out five. Fogg did not make it out of the third inning, walking 2 and striking out two. He gave up 6 earned runs, which did not surprise the Predict-A-Matic.
It was a high scoring affair. Colorado had a chance after scoring three in the seventh, but Boston pulled away.
Note: Colorado altered its lineup, putting Matsui in the leadoff spot, Tulowitzki second and Sullivan eighth. Boston, as predicted, kept Ortiz in the lineup, but Ellsbury hit first instead of second. Plugging the actual lineup into the Predict-A-Matic would not have significantly changed the prediction, except that Colorado's chances of winning dropped to 40%.
The Predict-A-Matic was pretty weak on the pitching results, but pretty good on the game results: "C+".
Lester was much better than expected. He did walk three (and struck out only three), but he gave up no runs. Cook's prediction was almost perfect, except he gave up no walks.
Colorado lost 4-3, instead of winning 5-4, but as I mentioned, Boston was almost even money to win it. Even though it picked the wrong winner in a close contest, I still think the Predict-A-Matic did pretty well. Also, the bad Lester grade is offset by the excellent good Cook grade. I'll give game 4 a "B".
Note: More lineup changes for Colorado, where Spilborghs hit sixth and Hawpe was pushed to seventh. This would have made little difference. Lester's chances of having a horrible game decreased, but since he gave up no runs, it does not matter.
This obviously never happened.
***
The Beckett MVP award was based on him pitching two games, which did not happen. However, Mike Lowell won the actual MVP award! I think Papelbon deserved it more, but nevertheless, the Predict-A-Matic pegged that one. Also Taveras did kill Colorado at the plate, but so did some other Rockies. Matsui was weak. Until their home runs, Hawpe and Atkins were weak. Predict-A-Matic gets a "B" here.
The Predict-a-Matic unfortunately predicts a Boston championship, 4 games to 1. It predicts that Colorado wins game 4. Colorado also has a good shot in game 3, so it could go 6 games.
The Predict-A-Matic did not foresee a sweep. Actually, the likelihood of a sweep was 13%. However, two of the games were one-run victories, including game 4, where it thought Colorado had the best chance. I'd give the Predict-A-Matic a "B-" in this category.
Some notes. I have assumed the same lineups in games 1 and 2. In games 3 and 4, I put Ortiz at first and hit Ellsbury in the 2d spot. In game 5, Youkilis gets the start at 1b and hits in Ortiz' spot (3rd).
The Ortiz assumption was good, but Ellsbury hit first, not second, in the Colorado games. The Rockies changed their lineup more significantly in the Colorado games, as explained below.
Game 1: Beckett has a strong outing, striking out 6 and allowing only 2 runs on 6 hits in about 6 2/3 innings. There's about a 1/3 chance Beckett will strike out at least 9 batters. Francis fails to make it through 6 innings, and gives up at least 4 runs, with about a 1/3 chance of giving up more than 5 runs. Neither pitcher walks a significant number of batters (Beckett 1; Francis 2)
Boston wins by a score of something like 7-4. I give Colorado a 25% chance of winning this one.
Beckett did have a strong outing, going 7 innings and allowing one run on 6 hits. He struck out 9 hitters. As predicted, Francis did not make it 6 innings (he went only 4) and the 1/3 chance of giving up more than 5 runs came true. He walked three instead of two.
No system will predict a 13-1 blowout, but the system did give the Rockies the least chance of winning this game. Overall, I'd give the Predict-A-Matic an "A" on this game.
Game 2: Schilling goes about 6 innings and gives up 3 runs, with a walk and 4 strikeouts. Theres a 1/3 chance he gives up 4 runs or more. Jimenez also gives up 3, but does not make it out of the 5th inning, walking three and striking out 4. There's a 1/4 chance he gives up 5 runs or more.
Boston wins by a score of 6-4 or 6-5. I give Colorado a 30% chance of winning this one.
Schilling did not pitch 6 innings (5 1/3), and he was better than predicted, giving up only 1 run. He had 2 walks instead of one, but the strikeouts were as rpedicted. Jimenez did not make it out of the fivth inning. He walked five and struck out only 2. However he only gave up two runs.
Boston won the game by one, but it was a low scoring affair. The Predict-A-Matic gets a "C" on this game. Maybe even a "C-".
Game 3: Matsuzaka goes 6 and gives up 3 runs on 6 hits, but there's a 40% chance of 4 runs or more, and a 1/4 chance of 5 runs or more. He walks 3 and strikes out 7. Fogg goes a little more than 5 innings, walking 3 and striking out 3. He gives up at least 3 runs, but there's a 50/50 chance of more than that, and a better than 1/4 chance he'll give up more than 5 runs.
Boston wins in a high scoring affair 6-5 or 7-5. I give Colorado a 45% chance of winning this one. This could be the game that results in a 6 game series instead of a 5 game series.
Dice-K didn't make it out of the sixth. He gave up 2 runs on three hits. He walked three and struck out five. Fogg did not make it out of the third inning, walking 2 and striking out two. He gave up 6 earned runs, which did not surprise the Predict-A-Matic.
It was a high scoring affair. Colorado had a chance after scoring three in the seventh, but Boston pulled away.
Note: Colorado altered its lineup, putting Matsui in the leadoff spot, Tulowitzki second and Sullivan eighth. Boston, as predicted, kept Ortiz in the lineup, but Ellsbury hit first instead of second. Plugging the actual lineup into the Predict-A-Matic would not have significantly changed the prediction, except that Colorado's chances of winning dropped to 40%.
The Predict-A-Matic was pretty weak on the pitching results, but pretty good on the game results: "C+".
Game 4: Lester goes a little more than 5 innings, striking out 5 and walking 3, while giving up 3 runs. There's a 1/3 chance of 4 runs or more, and a 1/4 chance of giving up 5 runs or more. Cook goes 6 innings, gives up 7 hits and 3 runs. He walks 2 and strikes out 2. His chances of giving up 4 runs or more are about the same as Lester's.
Colorado wins 5-4 in a tight contest. Boston has a 45% chance of winning this one.
Lester was much better than expected. He did walk three (and struck out only three), but he gave up no runs. Cook's prediction was almost perfect, except he gave up no walks.
Colorado lost 4-3, instead of winning 5-4, but as I mentioned, Boston was almost even money to win it. Even though it picked the wrong winner in a close contest, I still think the Predict-A-Matic did pretty well. Also, the bad Lester grade is offset by the excellent good Cook grade. I'll give game 4 a "B".
Note: More lineup changes for Colorado, where Spilborghs hit sixth and Hawpe was pushed to seventh. This would have made little difference. Lester's chances of having a horrible game decreased, but since he gave up no runs, it does not matter.
Game 5: Beckett repeats his game 1 performance, but is slightly better, with a few more strikeouts. Francis improves his game 1 performance (helped by Ortiz' absence), but not enough to win the contest.
Boston wins 4-3 or 5-4. Colorado has a 40% chance of winning this game.
This obviously never happened.
***
Beckett wins the MVP, though Mike Lowell will also play a big part. Taveras and Matsui kill Colorado at the plate. Atkins will be better than expected.
The Beckett MVP award was based on him pitching two games, which did not happen. However, Mike Lowell won the actual MVP award! I think Papelbon deserved it more, but nevertheless, the Predict-A-Matic pegged that one. Also Taveras did kill Colorado at the plate, but so did some other Rockies. Matsui was weak. Until their home runs, Hawpe and Atkins were weak. Predict-A-Matic gets a "B" here.
World Series MVP
I don't think there's any question that Jonathan Papelbon should be the World Series MVP. The other plausible choice is Mike Lowell.
For a short series like this, it isn't enough to just look at stats. You need to measure when those stats took place, particularly when there is a 13-1 blowout game like game 1. Contributing after the game is out of reach isn't worth much. Contributing while the game is on the line is key.
That's what Win Probability Added measures. Fangraphs keeps track of this stuff. If you add the WPA from the games in which they appear, Papelbon leads the Red Sox, followed by Lowell. That means not only that Papelbon pitched well, and Lowell hit well, but that they did so at key times during games. As you know from other posts, a save is not an indicator of the pressure of the situation. Saves are sometimes available without much pressure.
However, Papelbon's contributions in the Series were at key times, particularly in games 2 and 4.
For a short series like this, it isn't enough to just look at stats. You need to measure when those stats took place, particularly when there is a 13-1 blowout game like game 1. Contributing after the game is out of reach isn't worth much. Contributing while the game is on the line is key.
That's what Win Probability Added measures. Fangraphs keeps track of this stuff. If you add the WPA from the games in which they appear, Papelbon leads the Red Sox, followed by Lowell. That means not only that Papelbon pitched well, and Lowell hit well, but that they did so at key times during games. As you know from other posts, a save is not an indicator of the pressure of the situation. Saves are sometimes available without much pressure.
However, Papelbon's contributions in the Series were at key times, particularly in games 2 and 4.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
McCarver's Keys to Success
How are these "keys to success"?:
1. Red Sox want to close it out and sweep the Series; and
2. Rockies must win tonight.
1. Red Sox want to close it out and sweep the Series; and
2. Rockies must win tonight.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
World Series Prediction
The Predict-a-Matic unfortunately predicts a Boston championship, 4 games to 1. It predicts that Colorado wins game 4. Colorado also has a good shot in game 3, so it could go 6 games.
Some notes. I have assumed the same lineups in games 1 and 2. In games 3 and 4, I put Ortiz at first and hit Ellsbury in the 2d spot. In game 5, Youkilis gets the start at 1b and hits in Ortiz' spot (3rd).
Game 1: Beckett has a strong outing, striking out 6 and allowing only 2 runs on 6 hits in about 6 2/3 innings. There's about a 1/3 chance Beckett will strike out at least 9 batters. Francis fails to make it through 6 innings, and gives up at least 4 runs, with about a 1/3 chance of giving up more than 5 runs. Neither pitcher walks a significant number of batters (Beckett 1; Francis 2)
Boston wins by a score of something like 7-4. I give Colorado a 25% chance of winning this one.
Game 2: Schilling goes about 6 innings and gives up 3 runs, with a walk and 4 strikeouts. Theres a 1/3 chance he gives up 4 runs or more. Jimenez also gives up 3, but does not make it out of the 5th inning, walking three and striking out 4. There's a 1/4 chance he gives up 5 runs or more.
Boston wins by a score of 6-4 or 6-5. I give Colorado a 30% chance of winning this one.
Game 3: Matsuzaka goes 6 and gives up 3 runs on 6 hits, but there's a 40% chance of 4 runs or more, and a 1/4 chance of 5 runs or more. He walks 3 and strikes out 7. Fogg goes a little more than 5 innings, walking 3 and striking out 3. He gives up at least 3 runs, but there's a 50/50 chance of more than that, and a better than 1/4 chance he'll give up more than 5 runs.
Boston wins in a high scoring affair 6-5 or 7-5. I give Colorado a 45% chance of winning this one. This could be the game that results in a 6 game series instead of a 5 game series.
Game 4: Lester goes a little more than 5 innings, striking out 5 and walking 3, while giving up 3 runs. There's a 1/3 chance of 4 runs or more, and a 1/4 chance of giving up 5 runs or more. Cook goes 6 innings, gives up 7 hits and 3 runs. He walks 2 and strikes out 2. His chances of giving up 4 runs or more are about the same as Lester's.
Colorado wins 5-4 in a tight contest. Boston has a 45% chance of winning this one.
Game 5: Beckett repeats his game 1 performance, but is slightly better, with a few more strikeouts. Francis improves his game 1 performance (helped by Ortiz' absence), but not enough to win the contest.
Boston wins 4-3 or 5-4. Colorado has a 40% chance of winning this game.
Game 6 (maybe): With all the same lineups and back in Boston, the Predict-a-Matic won't stray far from game 2. Boston scores a few more runs, though, so Colorado gets a 33% chance of winning this one, if it gets that far.
***
Beckett wins the MVP, though Mike Lowell will also play a big part. Taveras and Matsui kill Colorado at the plate. Atkins will be better than expected.
Some notes. I have assumed the same lineups in games 1 and 2. In games 3 and 4, I put Ortiz at first and hit Ellsbury in the 2d spot. In game 5, Youkilis gets the start at 1b and hits in Ortiz' spot (3rd).
Game 1: Beckett has a strong outing, striking out 6 and allowing only 2 runs on 6 hits in about 6 2/3 innings. There's about a 1/3 chance Beckett will strike out at least 9 batters. Francis fails to make it through 6 innings, and gives up at least 4 runs, with about a 1/3 chance of giving up more than 5 runs. Neither pitcher walks a significant number of batters (Beckett 1; Francis 2)
Boston wins by a score of something like 7-4. I give Colorado a 25% chance of winning this one.
Game 2: Schilling goes about 6 innings and gives up 3 runs, with a walk and 4 strikeouts. Theres a 1/3 chance he gives up 4 runs or more. Jimenez also gives up 3, but does not make it out of the 5th inning, walking three and striking out 4. There's a 1/4 chance he gives up 5 runs or more.
Boston wins by a score of 6-4 or 6-5. I give Colorado a 30% chance of winning this one.
Game 3: Matsuzaka goes 6 and gives up 3 runs on 6 hits, but there's a 40% chance of 4 runs or more, and a 1/4 chance of 5 runs or more. He walks 3 and strikes out 7. Fogg goes a little more than 5 innings, walking 3 and striking out 3. He gives up at least 3 runs, but there's a 50/50 chance of more than that, and a better than 1/4 chance he'll give up more than 5 runs.
Boston wins in a high scoring affair 6-5 or 7-5. I give Colorado a 45% chance of winning this one. This could be the game that results in a 6 game series instead of a 5 game series.
Game 4: Lester goes a little more than 5 innings, striking out 5 and walking 3, while giving up 3 runs. There's a 1/3 chance of 4 runs or more, and a 1/4 chance of giving up 5 runs or more. Cook goes 6 innings, gives up 7 hits and 3 runs. He walks 2 and strikes out 2. His chances of giving up 4 runs or more are about the same as Lester's.
Colorado wins 5-4 in a tight contest. Boston has a 45% chance of winning this one.
Game 5: Beckett repeats his game 1 performance, but is slightly better, with a few more strikeouts. Francis improves his game 1 performance (helped by Ortiz' absence), but not enough to win the contest.
Boston wins 4-3 or 5-4. Colorado has a 40% chance of winning this game.
Game 6 (maybe): With all the same lineups and back in Boston, the Predict-a-Matic won't stray far from game 2. Boston scores a few more runs, though, so Colorado gets a 33% chance of winning this one, if it gets that far.
***
Beckett wins the MVP, though Mike Lowell will also play a big part. Taveras and Matsui kill Colorado at the plate. Atkins will be better than expected.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
ALCS Game 7, 5th Inning
Cleveland ought to be tied right now, and if the game ends up a one-run victory for Boston, it will be a travesty.
In real time, Lofton appeared to me to be out at second trying to stretch for the double. But I'm watching from a distant camera, from the perspective of home plate. The ump is behind the play (the outfield side). That's the better angle, and he shouldn't have missed it.
What fooled us the first time is the glove hitting the bag...we thought it hit Lofton. From behind, that's clearly not true.
Plus, the umps are supposed to be better than me, even though it was bang bang.
There was no argument from either Lofton or Wedge, however, so if they don't care, why should we?
In real time, Lofton appeared to me to be out at second trying to stretch for the double. But I'm watching from a distant camera, from the perspective of home plate. The ump is behind the play (the outfield side). That's the better angle, and he shouldn't have missed it.
What fooled us the first time is the glove hitting the bag...we thought it hit Lofton. From behind, that's clearly not true.
Plus, the umps are supposed to be better than me, even though it was bang bang.
There was no argument from either Lofton or Wedge, however, so if they don't care, why should we?
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Going to a game 7
Oh, you Indian fans, you better watch Major League 2 if you want to see your Indians win the pennant. You also better have Wild Thing going in game 7. "Forget about the curve ball Ricky, give him the heater."
Cast of Major League 2
Charlie Sheen ... Rick 'Wild Thing' Vaughn
Tom Berenger ... Jake Taylor
Corbin Bernsen ... Roger Dorn
Dennis Haysber ... Pedro Cerrano
James Gammon ... Lou Brown
Omar Epps ... Willie Mays Hayes
Eric Bruskotter ... Rube Baker
Takaaki Ishibashi... Isuro Tanaka
Alison Doody ... Rebecca Flannery
Michelle Burke ... Nikki Reese
David Keith ... Jack Parkman
Bob Uecker ... Harry Doyle
Steve Yeager ... Coach 'Duke' Temple
Anything can happen with a one-game playoff but the big "Mo" seems to be on Red Sox side. Can the Red Sox do anything easy? Don't be suprised if the Indians counter with El Presidente up early out of bullpen if the Sox jump on Westbrook.
Parting quote from Major League 2.
Harry Doyle-"Parkman leads the league in most offensive categories, including most nose hairs."
Cast of Major League 2
Charlie Sheen ... Rick 'Wild Thing' Vaughn
Tom Berenger ... Jake Taylor
Corbin Bernsen ... Roger Dorn
Dennis Haysber ... Pedro Cerrano
James Gammon ... Lou Brown
Omar Epps ... Willie Mays Hayes
Eric Bruskotter ... Rube Baker
Takaaki Ishibashi... Isuro Tanaka
Alison Doody ... Rebecca Flannery
Michelle Burke ... Nikki Reese
David Keith ... Jack Parkman
Bob Uecker ... Harry Doyle
Steve Yeager ... Coach 'Duke' Temple
Anything can happen with a one-game playoff but the big "Mo" seems to be on Red Sox side. Can the Red Sox do anything easy? Don't be suprised if the Indians counter with El Presidente up early out of bullpen if the Sox jump on Westbrook.
Parting quote from Major League 2.
Harry Doyle-"Parkman leads the league in most offensive categories, including most nose hairs."
Ken Rosenthal vs. Craig Sager
Tale of the tape for Fox's sideline reporter and TBS' sideline reporter:
It's not that I like Craig Sager. It's that I cannot figure out who is doing the auditioning at Fox. Ken Rosenthal is literally reading scripts from the sidelines, and he has nothing interesting to add. You get the impression they write his material before the game, and then go to him every couple of innings so he can read the prompter. What is the point? Why do something like that?
The same reason local news reporters go "live" at 11:00 from their t.v. studio parking lot about stories that happened at 4:00. Because we want to pretend something is happening, even when it isn't.
Sure Craig Sager interviews old ladies and celebrities from the stands, but at least the whole thing is not rehearsed. At least he is real.
Category KR CS
Human or robot Robot Human
Looks comfortable? No Yes
Interesting comments? No No
Easygoing style? No Yes
Appears intelligent? Yes No
Can improvise? No Yes
Complexion Normal Orange
Clothing Wall St. Zoot suit
Activities in 1970s GI Joe TBS reporter
Activities in 1980s Beating off TBS reporter
Activities in 1990s Chess club TBS reporter
It's not that I like Craig Sager. It's that I cannot figure out who is doing the auditioning at Fox. Ken Rosenthal is literally reading scripts from the sidelines, and he has nothing interesting to add. You get the impression they write his material before the game, and then go to him every couple of innings so he can read the prompter. What is the point? Why do something like that?
The same reason local news reporters go "live" at 11:00 from their t.v. studio parking lot about stories that happened at 4:00. Because we want to pretend something is happening, even when it isn't.
Sure Craig Sager interviews old ladies and celebrities from the stands, but at least the whole thing is not rehearsed. At least he is real.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Beckett in Game 5
Why on Earth is Francona sending Beckett out to pitch the 8th inning? Here are the facts:
1. Beckett has already thrown 96 pitches.
2. Boston leads 7-1.
3. Beckett sat on the bench for 20 minutes while Boston was at bat.
4. Boston has the best setup man in the AL in Okajima.
5. Boston has one of the best closers in MLB in Papelbon.
6. Beckett will not pitch Game 7, no matter what.
Only #6 would be an excuse to run Beckett back out there, but what about injury? Becket has been known to stiffen up, particularly his back. Why send your best player out to the mound when his arm is cold and at least somewhat fatigued, when you have a six run lead and a great bullpen?
Could it be that this is a game that does not fit the paradigm of setup man in the 8th and closer in the 9th because no one can get the save, and therefore like most MLB managers, Francona is just lost?
1. Beckett has already thrown 96 pitches.
2. Boston leads 7-1.
3. Beckett sat on the bench for 20 minutes while Boston was at bat.
4. Boston has the best setup man in the AL in Okajima.
5. Boston has one of the best closers in MLB in Papelbon.
6. Beckett will not pitch Game 7, no matter what.
Only #6 would be an excuse to run Beckett back out there, but what about injury? Becket has been known to stiffen up, particularly his back. Why send your best player out to the mound when his arm is cold and at least somewhat fatigued, when you have a six run lead and a great bullpen?
Could it be that this is a game that does not fit the paradigm of setup man in the 8th and closer in the 9th because no one can get the save, and therefore like most MLB managers, Francona is just lost?
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Fox Cutaways
Cleveland wins game 4 to take a 3-1 lead. The players and fans are celebrating. The Red Sox are downcast. An exciting moment
Fox cuts away to Mark Shapiro, the Cleveland GM, celebrating, kissing his wife, hugging some other people. Then a quick shot of the Indians celebrating. Then back to more Shapiro.
Just like Fox. Give the props to the corporate guy sitting behind a bullet (ball) proof shield.
Fox cuts away to Mark Shapiro, the Cleveland GM, celebrating, kissing his wife, hugging some other people. Then a quick shot of the Indians celebrating. Then back to more Shapiro.
Just like Fox. Give the props to the corporate guy sitting behind a bullet (ball) proof shield.
AL Gold Gloves: Pitchers
I really, really don't care whether a pitcher gets a gold glove. They don't play enough defense to register on the Win Shares scale, except in hundreths of a decimal point. Only a few register Fielding Runs Above Average.
Fausto Carmona has 3 FRAA, as does Jake Westbrook. Chien-Ming Wang has 3. Pettitte has 2. Halladay and Litsch have 2. Jamie Shields has 2. Steve Trachsel has 2.
That's slim pickens.
Of those, Pettitte ranks the highest in Win Shares, followed by Wang and Carmona. There's no way to choose among them.
Pettitte will win the actual award. I'm okay with that.
Iron glove? Who knows? Kevin Millwood and Jeremy Bonderman are godawful at getting off the mount. I'll give it to Millwood. A former Brave should know better.
Fausto Carmona has 3 FRAA, as does Jake Westbrook. Chien-Ming Wang has 3. Pettitte has 2. Halladay and Litsch have 2. Jamie Shields has 2. Steve Trachsel has 2.
That's slim pickens.
Of those, Pettitte ranks the highest in Win Shares, followed by Wang and Carmona. There's no way to choose among them.
Pettitte will win the actual award. I'm okay with that.
Iron glove? Who knows? Kevin Millwood and Jeremy Bonderman are godawful at getting off the mount. I'll give it to Millwood. A former Brave should know better.
AL Gold Gloves: Outfield
Here are the AL Gold Glove candidates for the outfield. I'll evaluate them using Fielding Win Shares and Fielding Wins Above Average (derived from fielder runs above average on BP, divided by 9).
Unlike the real voting process, I like to give the three gold gloves to three different outfield positions.
Not many left fielders to choose from, and a couple of surprises. Teahen is a contender in right field, after a move from third base. Hard to trust Win Shares when Markakis is rated the same as Ichiro.
My guess is that Gary Matthews, Curtis Granderson and Torii Hunter win, though Suzuki may get the nod over Matthews.
Coco Crisp easily gets my Gold Glove in center. No one is close. In left, my only choices are Willits and Payton, and Willits is clearly better. Right is tight, between Rios and Teahen.
I'll resolve right field with the composite method (described in the NL Catcher's post), using 2.6 as the average fielding win shares for an outfielder.
Mark Teahen gets it. I guarantee you he won't win the real award (nor will Willits). Crisp at least has a shot.
Iron gloves to Jose Guillen in right field and Raul Ibanez in left field. You'd think Suzuki would be gobbling it up in center with those two statues flanking him. Jerry Owens (he plays for the White Sox), gets it in center field.
Unlike the real voting process, I like to give the three gold gloves to three different outfield positions.
Outfield FWS FWAA
Crisp 8.5 2.6
Wells 6.4 -0.2
Granderson 6.3 2.0
Matthews 5.4 0.5
Cabrera 4.9 1.4
Rios 4.9 0.3
Teahen 4.0 1.3
Willits 3.5 1.0
Suzuki 3.3 1.5
Markakis 3.3 0.9
Cuddyer 3.1 0.3
Payton 2.8 0.7
Not many left fielders to choose from, and a couple of surprises. Teahen is a contender in right field, after a move from third base. Hard to trust Win Shares when Markakis is rated the same as Ichiro.
My guess is that Gary Matthews, Curtis Granderson and Torii Hunter win, though Suzuki may get the nod over Matthews.
Coco Crisp easily gets my Gold Glove in center. No one is close. In left, my only choices are Willits and Payton, and Willits is clearly better. Right is tight, between Rios and Teahen.
I'll resolve right field with the composite method (described in the NL Catcher's post), using 2.6 as the average fielding win shares for an outfielder.
Mark Teahen gets it. I guarantee you he won't win the real award (nor will Willits). Crisp at least has a shot.
Iron gloves to Jose Guillen in right field and Raul Ibanez in left field. You'd think Suzuki would be gobbling it up in center with those two statues flanking him. Jerry Owens (he plays for the White Sox), gets it in center field.
AL Gold Gloves: Shortstops
Here are the AL Gold Glove candidates at shortstop. I'll evaluate them using Fielding Win Shares and Fielding Wins Above Average (derived from fielder runs above average on BP, divided by 9):
This is an interesting list. Cabrera will win, because of his superior hitting stats.
Peralta is a surprise. Cleveland has never liked his defense, but tolerated him because of his bat. Here, he shows up as a solid 2d or 3d in gold glove merit.
My gold glove to Juan Uribe, a small bright spot on the southside of Chicago.
Iron glove is difficult. Win Shares has Lugo ranked 6th. BP has him as one of the worst in the league. Visually, I'd side more with BP. Fortunately for Julio, his replacement in Tampa, Brendan Harris, fares poorly -- very poorly -- in both systems. Think Josh Wilson is better than Harris? Nope, he just plays less.
Shortstop FWS FWAA
Uribe 9.3 1.5
Cabrera 9.2 1.4
Peralta 8.4 1.6
Pena 8.4 1.4
This is an interesting list. Cabrera will win, because of his superior hitting stats.
Peralta is a surprise. Cleveland has never liked his defense, but tolerated him because of his bat. Here, he shows up as a solid 2d or 3d in gold glove merit.
My gold glove to Juan Uribe, a small bright spot on the southside of Chicago.
Iron glove is difficult. Win Shares has Lugo ranked 6th. BP has him as one of the worst in the league. Visually, I'd side more with BP. Fortunately for Julio, his replacement in Tampa, Brendan Harris, fares poorly -- very poorly -- in both systems. Think Josh Wilson is better than Harris? Nope, he just plays less.
AL Gold Gloves: Third Base
Here are the AL Gold Glove candidates at third base. I'll evaluate them using Fielding Win Shares and Fielding Wins Above Average (derived from fielder runs above average on BP, divided by 9):
Lots of disagreement between WS and BP on this one. WS likes Punto, Gordon and Blake. BP thinks they were about average. But, BP thinks nearly all the third basemen are about average.
This is a contest between Lowell and Inge. Lowell has the reputation and will win it.
Using the composite score method (see the NL Catcher's gold glove post), based on an average third baseman achieving 2.0 fielding win shares, Lowell has a very (very) slight edge over Inge. I like it whent he unknowns win. My Gold Glove goes to Inge.
The iron glove goes to....hold your hat....
Eric Chavez! Can that be true? The former gold glove winner? To say this wasn't his year is an understatement.
Third base FWS FWAA
Lowell 6.0 1.4
Inge 4.7 1.8
Punto 4.6 0.0
Gordon 4.1 -0.3
Blake 3.8 0.4
A-Rod 3.7 0.4
Lots of disagreement between WS and BP on this one. WS likes Punto, Gordon and Blake. BP thinks they were about average. But, BP thinks nearly all the third basemen are about average.
This is a contest between Lowell and Inge. Lowell has the reputation and will win it.
Using the composite score method (see the NL Catcher's gold glove post), based on an average third baseman achieving 2.0 fielding win shares, Lowell has a very (very) slight edge over Inge. I like it whent he unknowns win. My Gold Glove goes to Inge.
The iron glove goes to....hold your hat....
Eric Chavez! Can that be true? The former gold glove winner? To say this wasn't his year is an understatement.
AL Gold Gloves: Second Base
Here are the AL Gold Glove candidates at second base. I'll evaluate them using Fielding Win Shares and Fielding Wins Above Average (derived from fielder runs above average on BP, divided by 9):
I think Polanco will win the real award, since he committed no errors. What's amazing is that he doesn't fare particularly well in either system. He may have made no errors, but Win Shares and BP think his range is less than optimal.
I give it to Ellis, with Cano second. Another easy call.
Iron Glove to Danny Richar, who is evidence of just how bad the White Sox are. Can't hit. Can't field. Luis Castillo could have earned it, but I felt sorry for him because he was hurt.
Second base FWS FWAA
Ellis 8.5 2.5
Cano 6.8 2.3
Hill 7.5 0.3
Pedroia 7.1 0.6
Polanco 5.5 1.6
I think Polanco will win the real award, since he committed no errors. What's amazing is that he doesn't fare particularly well in either system. He may have made no errors, but Win Shares and BP think his range is less than optimal.
I give it to Ellis, with Cano second. Another easy call.
Iron Glove to Danny Richar, who is evidence of just how bad the White Sox are. Can't hit. Can't field. Luis Castillo could have earned it, but I felt sorry for him because he was hurt.
AL Gold Gloves: First Base
Here are the AL Gold Glove candidates at first base. I'll evaluate them using Fielding Win Shares and Fielding Wins Above Average (derived from fielder runs above average on BP, divided by 9):
I don't trust WS in this case, because Matt Stairs was tied with Overbay and Millar in fielding win shares.
I expect Youkilis to win it, and he should. I'll give Pena the second spot in a nudge over Casey Kotchman.
Iron Glove is a tough call, as there are a lot of bad part time first basemen. Surprisingly, Mark Teixeira was bad, but he only played part of the year for Texas. I'll give it to Garko, the worst regular by quite a margin. If Teixeira had stayed with Texas, and played at the same level, he would have earned the Iron Glove. That's strange, because he has a good defensive reputation.
First base FWS FWAA
Youkilis 2.8 1.5
Pena 2.3 1.2
Kotchman 2.3 1.1
Sexson 2.0 .7
Millar 1.8 .9
Overbay 1.8 .9
I don't trust WS in this case, because Matt Stairs was tied with Overbay and Millar in fielding win shares.
I expect Youkilis to win it, and he should. I'll give Pena the second spot in a nudge over Casey Kotchman.
Iron Glove is a tough call, as there are a lot of bad part time first basemen. Surprisingly, Mark Teixeira was bad, but he only played part of the year for Texas. I'll give it to Garko, the worst regular by quite a margin. If Teixeira had stayed with Texas, and played at the same level, he would have earned the Iron Glove. That's strange, because he has a good defensive reputation.
AL Gold Gloves: Catcher
Here are the AL Gold Glove candidates at catcher. I'll evaluate them using Fielding Win Shares and Fielding Wins Above Average (derived from fielder runs above average on BP, divided by 9):
I expect I-Rod or Varitek to win it. There's no question it ought to go to Kenji Johjima.
Iron glove to Gregg Zaun.
Catcher FWS FWAA
Johjima 10.1 1.9
Mauer 8.9 1.1
V.Martinez 8.9 0.0
I-Rod 7.2 1.1
Varitek 7.2 1.0
I expect I-Rod or Varitek to win it. There's no question it ought to go to Kenji Johjima.
Iron glove to Gregg Zaun.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Closers = Wimpy
I've ranted about closers before, from the perspective of the manager who uses them only when they get their money stat, regardless of whether they could have been used earlier in a more crucial situation. It makes no sense to use a closer just so they can generate a stat. Unless you are the closer, since the save stat is what gets you the big contract.
Closers are viewed (by managers, fans, themselves) as the studs of the bullpen. Is it really that studly if you can't pitch more than two innings?
Francona pulled Papelbon after 33 pitches (not counting the three intentional walk pitches). Perhaps the rationale is that you have to use relievers more often; however, tomorrow is a day off. Why use the yet-to-be-effective Gagne?
Interestingly, Papelbon threw more than 30 pitches in a game only once this year. He averaged 15 pitches per appearance. But...he appeared on consecutive days only 8 times in 59 appearances! He is certainly being handled with kid gloves.
In 1974, Mike Marshall threw more than 200 innings. In relief! We don't have a reliable pitch count for Marshall that year, but he faced 857 batters. That's more than Papelbon has faced in his three year MLB career...and if Papelbon faces the same number next year as this year, he'll will have faced the number of batters in his career that Marshall did in 1974 alone.
And that year was only a little flukey for Marshall. From '71 to '76 he threw: 111, 116, 179, 209, 109 and 99 innings. Not a single game started. He got a lot of saves (for the time), but I bet he was used whenever the Dodgers and Expos really needed an out, regardless of whether he would get a save. In fact, he made 40 appearances in the 7th inning or earlier.
Final Marshall stat from 1974: he pitched on no rest 53 times that year. As mentioned above, the figure for Papelbon this year was 8.
Closers are viewed (by managers, fans, themselves) as the studs of the bullpen. Is it really that studly if you can't pitch more than two innings?
Francona pulled Papelbon after 33 pitches (not counting the three intentional walk pitches). Perhaps the rationale is that you have to use relievers more often; however, tomorrow is a day off. Why use the yet-to-be-effective Gagne?
Interestingly, Papelbon threw more than 30 pitches in a game only once this year. He averaged 15 pitches per appearance. But...he appeared on consecutive days only 8 times in 59 appearances! He is certainly being handled with kid gloves.
In 1974, Mike Marshall threw more than 200 innings. In relief! We don't have a reliable pitch count for Marshall that year, but he faced 857 batters. That's more than Papelbon has faced in his three year MLB career...and if Papelbon faces the same number next year as this year, he'll will have faced the number of batters in his career that Marshall did in 1974 alone.
And that year was only a little flukey for Marshall. From '71 to '76 he threw: 111, 116, 179, 209, 109 and 99 innings. Not a single game started. He got a lot of saves (for the time), but I bet he was used whenever the Dodgers and Expos really needed an out, regardless of whether he would get a save. In fact, he made 40 appearances in the 7th inning or earlier.
Final Marshall stat from 1974: he pitched on no rest 53 times that year. As mentioned above, the figure for Papelbon this year was 8.
Weird Batting Routines
From the team that brought you the obsessive-compulsive (and downright annoying) batting routine of Nomar Garciaparra:
1. Kevin Youkilis -- I don't recall having seen anyone dance in the box before. He moves his hands and his butt in opposite directions without moving his feet. This, by the way, is the way white guys dance even at clubs. He reminds me of that dancing baby that was one of the early "stars" of the World Wide Web.
2. Julio Lugo -- Money says someone told him to visualize hitting the baseball. After he adjusts his left sleeve, watch his eyes. Looks at the bat, then the pitcher, then the bat, then the pitcher, as if he is visualizing the ball making contact. Then he gets a creepy look on his face, like he is about to beat his wife.
1. Kevin Youkilis -- I don't recall having seen anyone dance in the box before. He moves his hands and his butt in opposite directions without moving his feet. This, by the way, is the way white guys dance even at clubs. He reminds me of that dancing baby that was one of the early "stars" of the World Wide Web.
2. Julio Lugo -- Money says someone told him to visualize hitting the baseball. After he adjusts his left sleeve, watch his eyes. Looks at the bat, then the pitcher, then the bat, then the pitcher, as if he is visualizing the ball making contact. Then he gets a creepy look on his face, like he is about to beat his wife.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Watchability
On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being highest), here is how interested I am in watching each of the players on the Diamondbacks hit or pitch (respectively).
I'm surprised it's that even. I expected the Rockies to be way ahead.
D-backs hitting averages 2.18. Rockies hitting averages 2.67. D-backs pitching averages 3.13. Rockies pitching averages 2.40.
So basically I want to watch the Rockies at bats against D-backs pitching, but not the other way around. It's also worth noting that the D-backs get a boost from Hudson and Randy Johnson, neither of whom are playing in the NLCS.
D-Backs Rating Rockies Rating
Snyder 1 Torrealba 2
Jackson 2 Helton 3
Hudson 3 Matsui 3
Reynolds 3 Atkins 4
Drew 3 Tulowitzki 4
Byrnes 3 Holliday 5
Young 5 Taveras 3
Quentin 1 Hawpe 4
Tracy 1 Spilborghs 3
Clark 3 Carroll 1
Montero 1 Iannetta 1
Hairston 1 Baker 1
Callaspo 1 Sullivan 2
Upton 5 Stewart 3
Ojeda 1 Smith 1
Salazar 1
Cirillo 2
Webb 5 Francis 4
Davis 3 Jimenez 4
Hernandez 3 Fogg 3
Owings 4 Cook 3
Johnson 5 Hirsh 3
Petit 2 Lopez 1
Valverde 4 Morales 1
Pena 4 Dessens 1
Lyon 1 Fuentes 2
Slaten 1 Corpas 4
Cruz 4 Affeldt 2
Nippert 3 Hawkins 2
Wickman 2 Julio 3
Herges 1
Speier 2
Totals 77 76
I'm surprised it's that even. I expected the Rockies to be way ahead.
D-backs hitting averages 2.18. Rockies hitting averages 2.67. D-backs pitching averages 3.13. Rockies pitching averages 2.40.
So basically I want to watch the Rockies at bats against D-backs pitching, but not the other way around. It's also worth noting that the D-backs get a boost from Hudson and Randy Johnson, neither of whom are playing in the NLCS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)