Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Gustavo Chacin was uncharacteristically wild, walking a career high six batters in just five innings of work, and the bats couldn't get anything going against the immortal Aaron "Biggie" Small.

The Instant Replay has been transformed! It has undergone a metamorphosis!

Updated at 3:30 AM!

The Jays had two glittering opportunities to get back into this game, and each ended the same way. With one out and the bases loaded in the fifth, Frank Catalanotto grounded into a 6-4-3 double play. In the next inning, with one out and runners on the corners, Gregg Zaun hit into a 4-6-3 double play. The Jays stranded 9 baserunners. Was that the story of the game?

Well, the Yankees stranded 11 baserunners, and blew a couple of good opportunities the same way. In the very first inning, with two runs in and the bases loaded, Jorge Posada, with a chance to put the game out of reach, hit into an inning-ending double play. In the third inning, after the first two batters had reached, Hideki Matsui grounded into a double play, and the inning ended when Giambi flied out. The Jays only had their opportunities to get back into the game because the Yankees had missed their opportunities to put the game out of reach.

The Yankees got 19 men on base, the Blue Jays just 13. I think that was ultimately more significant than the double plays and missed opportunities, which were even on both sides.

And so, once more, the Jays were unable to salvage a victory after falling behind. Which brings us tonight's truckload of numbers, which of course inflates the Word Count, and makes me look so Very Industrious.

As promised, I was going to prepare a whole lot of data for you all. Because this is so much work, and I'm so tired when I've finished formatting the numbers, I hereby predict that I will provide a very quick and sketchy analysis of it all when I'm done.

I'm leaving that up to you guys!

First, let's look at how AL teams have done in coming from behind in the late innings, and, while we're at it, how they are holding on to a lead in the late innings. As some of you may know, the Toronto Blue Jays, after last night, are now 0-44 when they trail after six innings.

I assembled the data from the pre-game notes each team prepares, which are all posted at mlb.com - their handy-dandy press pass feature - however, some teams only provide this information for after the 7th and 8th innings. So that's what I'm going to use.

I honestly don't think this is the most significant information in the world, so I'm just going to present it with a minimum of comment. See what you think...

Coming From Behind
Trailling After 7 - After 8

CWS:       10-31    3-29 
NYY:       10-44    3-46 
LAA:        7-34    5-37 
MIN:        5-40    1-47 
OAK:        4-43    4-43 
TEX:        4-41    3-47 
BOS:        4-36    3-38
DET:        4-44    2-51 
SEA:        4-52    1-58 
BLT:        4-41    0,48 
CLE:        3-39    3-40 
TAM:        3-50    1-60 
KAN:        3-61    0-64 
TOR:        2-44    0-49 
Indeed, the Blue Jays rank dead last in coming from behind after 7, and are one of three teams who have yet to win when losing after 8. Still, most of the teams in the league do not pull off this type of victory very often - except for the Yankees and the White Sox. The Yankees are the third highest scoring team in the majors, and have some great veteran hitters. They have the weapons you think would be required. But Chicago's late inning performance is remarkable.

Everybody frets about the bullpen, and carries enough relief pitchers to make building a bench impossible. What has it accomplished?

Holding a Lead
Winning After 7 - After 8

NYY:    43-1      48-1
SEA:    36-1      42-1
CWS:    55-3      61-2
OAK:    45-3      52-2
MIN:    42-3      41-0
DET:    42-3      47-1
BOS:    49-4      54-2
TEX:    47-4      46-3
TOR:    46-4      49-1
BLT:    42-4      50-0
KAN:    31-5      34-1
LAA:    50-7      53-3
CLE:    46-8      50-5
TAM:    35-11     36-4
There is very, very little to choose from here. One wonders just how significant this information is. The Seattle Mariners are one of the best teams in the league at holding a lead, and the first place Angels are one of the worst. The Angels, however, are much, much better at getting a lead in the first place. Which is what it's all about. Pretty well everyone can hang on, once you're in front, except Tampa Bay, and suddenly we see documentation of exactly what Lou Piniella was talking about - the Devil Rays strange case of the Eighth Inning Blues.

The other thing I promised to examine this week was team hitting with runners in scoring position, and in scoring position with two outs. So, first, here are the basic team hitting numbers. decided to rank them by Runs Created rather than actual runs scored. The main reason is because I want to get a measure of how well teams have performed in these situations, rather than how many opportunities they have had. Boston's hitters have had roughly 150 more at bats with runners in scoring position than Washington's batters. Of course the Red Sox have plated more runners in those situations. But have they actually hit better in those situations? (Well, yeah. They have.) Having used Runs Created (the basic version, by the way) for the situational numbers, I used it to rank the overall numbers as well - mainly in the interests of consistency, but it's always interesting to see where the formula varies with the actual offensive production. Hello, Baltimore.

So, first overall offensive numbers:

    TEAM          G   AB   R    H  2B 3B  HR   TB RBI  BB  BAV  OBP  SLG  OPS  RC
1   Boston	107 3718 595 1046 229 15 128 1689 566 442 .281 .360 .454 .814 604
2   Texas	107 3766 571 1012 199 18 176 1775 548 389 .269 .331 .471 .802 599
3   NY Yankees	106 3651 576 1003 180  9 148 1645 552 415 .275 .354 .451 .804 574
4   Cincinnati	109 3682 551  978 232 12 149 1681 526 389 .266 .339 .457 .795 564
5   Baltimore	108 3720 503 1019 205 22 144 1700 488 300 .274 .331 .457 .788 558
6   Chi Cubs	108 3744 488 1021 224 17 135 1684 468 288 .273 .328 .450 .778 547
7   St. Louis	108 3665 549  991 194 20 121 1588 514 363 .270 .341 .433 .774 534
8   Milwaukee	109 3689 505  971 230  7 125 1590 481 367 .263 .337 .431 .768 525
9   Arizona	109 3750 471  969 206 19 120 1573 454 413 .258 .334 .419 .753 522
10  Cleveland	109 3728 494  986 211 21 122 1605 476 334 .264 .328 .431 .758 522
11  Phil.	109 3690 508  988 173 21 106 1521 477 420 .268 .346 .412 .758 521
12  Tampa Bay	109 3723 505 1031 192 29 100 1581 484 287 .277 .332 .425 .757 520
13  Atlanta     109 3646 507  963 206 27 120 1583 480 347 .264 .330 .434 .764 519
14  Florida	106 3589 486  999 204 21  91 1518 460 327 .278 .343 .423 .766 514
15  Detroit     107 3703 490 1020 195 35  96 1573 457 272 .275 .328 .425 .753 511
16  Toronto	107 3693 528  998 200 33  96 1552 503 323 .270 .336 .420 .756 511
17  Oakland	108 3741 519  992 211 15  93 1512 495 370 .265 .334 .404 .738 501
18  NY Mets	108 3672 492  961 199 20 115 1545 466 327 .262 .325 .421 .745 498
19  Chicago Sox	107 3618 527  958 166  8 136 1548 505 299 .265 .326 .428 .754 497
20  San Diego	108 3694 475  957 178 27  94 1471 456 407 .259 .335 .398 .733 489
21  Colorado	107 3641 466  968 191 23  98 1499 441 319 .266 .330 .412 .742 487
22  LA Angels	108 3741 499  999 188 25  91 1510 475 289 .267 .321 .404 .725 483
23  Minnesota	108 3699 468  962 184 21  98 1482 441 338 .260 .327 .401 .727 477
24  LA Dodgers	108 3615 459  935 187 12 107 1467 439 336 .259 .328 .406 .734 472
25  Houston	108 3617 463  933 198 22 105 1490 439 305 .258 .322 .412 .734 470
26  San Fran.	107 3642 462  972 210 14  82 1456 442 302 .267 .326 .400 .726 470
27  Kansas City	108 3662 473  958 199 25  88 1471 437 282 .262 .319 .402 .721 462
28  Pittsburgh	109 3690 440  935 198 25  89 1450 421 332 .253 .320 .393 .713 457
29  Seattle	107 3643 472  942 189 21  90 1443 447 294 .259 .317 .396 .713 453
30  Washington	108 3571 411  908 198 24  75 1379 396 328 .254 .324 .386 .710 437

    AVERAGE	108 3680 498  979 199 20 111 1553 474 340 .266 .328 .422 .750 510
As mentioned, the teams are actually ranked by Runs Created - which is the number of runs we could reasonably expect a team to score with these offensive components. What this suggests is that the Blue Jays have had an efficient offense, at least in terms of getting a maximum number of actual runs on the scoreboard given what their hitters have actually done. (Sometime down the road, I hope to look at another efficiency issue - have they distributed these runs most usefully so as to get the maximum number of actual wins out of this production.) Other offenses that have scored significantly more runs given their offensive output: the White Sox, Oakland, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh. With the exception of the White Sox, these variations are generally within the normal 5% margin of error that Bill James always liked to use with respect to his Runs Created formula. Notable underachievers: Baltimore, the Cubs, and the Diamondbacks. The Cubs and Orioles are underachieving by signifcantly more than 5%. There seems to be something seriously disfunctional about those two offenses.

Here is how teams have performed with Runners In Scoring Position. You will notice that the general hitting performance changes very slightly; however, the OBP increases significantly, as pitchers presumably tend to nibble a bit more and work around certain hitters:

    TEAM	  G   AB  R   H  2B 3B HR  TB RBI  BB  BAV  OBP  SLG  OPS RC
1   Boston	106 1028 452 300 61  5 39 488 424 155 .292 .378 .475 .852 188
2   St. Louis	107  942 405 269 53  4 30 420 371 142 .286 .377 .446 .823 159
3   Phil.	107  965 401 266 42  6 31 413 370 158 .276 .373 .428 .801 156
4   Florida	104  954 393 272 64  6 25 423 367 117 .285 .359 .443 .803 154
5   Tampa Bay	108  935 395 269 47  5 33 425 374 107 .288 .357 .455 .812 153
6   NY Yankees	105  956 427 251 46  3 43 432 403 137 .263 .354 .452 .806 153
7   Toronto	106  950 428 260 53 11 32 431 404 103 .274 .342 .454 .795 149
8   Cincinnati	106  918 388 238 60  1 37 411 363 146 .259 .358 .448 .806 148
9   LA Angels	104  901 391 266 49  7 24 401 367 103 .295 .360 .445 .805 147
10  San Fran.	105  901 371 258 60  4 27 407 351 103 .286 .357 .452 .809 146
11  Chi. Cubs	107  920 348 246 52  0 37 409 328 116 .267 .344 .445 .789 143
12  Texas       105  880 364 240 49  5 37 410 344 100 .273 .345 .466 .811 142
13  Detroit	106  933 377 258 52  8 23 395 345 108 .277 .344 .423 .767 139
14  Atlanta	108  925 372 232 50  9 32 396 345 140 .251 .345 .428 .773 138
15  Minnesota	106  909 369 248 42  3 27 377 342 128 .273 .361 .415 .775 137
16  Oakland	107  985 394 268 56  3 19 387 371 120 .272 .346 .393 .739 136
17  Pittsburgh	107  854 352 236 47  7 25 372 334 119 .276 .360 .436 .795 136
18  Houston     105  900 342 244 46  7 26 382 319 108 .271 .348 .424 .772 133
19  NY Mets	107  930 359 239 53  7 24 378 333 131 .257 .342 .406 .748 132
20  LA Dodgers	107  895 351 233 53  5 27 377 331 122 .260 .347 .421 .769 132
21  Baltimore	106  878 355 226 48  4 33 381 340 115 .257 .338 .434 .772 131
22  Milwaukee	106  901 365 219 59  1 29 367 342 143 .243 .347 .407 .755 127
23  San Diego	106  920 357 238 44  6 20 354 339 138 .259 .348 .385 .732 126
24  Seattle	105  890 372 237 57  4 21 365 347 103 .266 .339 .410 .749 125
25  Chicago Sox	105  817 374 220 40  1 30 352 353  95 .269 .339 .431 .770 122
26  Kansas City	106  880 358 237 45  9 19 357 322  95 .269 .335 .406 .740 122
27  Arizona     109  954 345 225 44  4 27 358 328 145 .236 .332 .375 .707 121
28  Cleveland	107  902 353 232 47  7 19 350 335 111 .257 .334 .388 .722 119
29  Colorado	106  925 326 234 42  5 15 331 301 114 .253 .339 .358 .697 111
30  Washington	107  865 319 212 58  8 11 319 305 133 .245 .350 .369 .719 110

    AVERAGE	106  917 373 246 51  5 27 389 350 122 .268 .354 .424 .778 138
The Blue Jays have hit quite well with runners in scoring position - in particular, their power production increases. It's good to know, but I don't know that it explains why they've scored a little more than the Runs Created formula suggests. The Blue Jays variation is not really statistically signifcant. And I certainly don't think performance with runners in scoring position accounts for the under-achievement of the Cubs and Orioles.

Finally, Runners In Scoring Position with 2 outs. Here we find a significant drop in batting average, and an even larger drop in slugging percentage. The On-Base remains relatively high - presumably the result of more nibbling:

     TEAM	  G  AB  R   H  2B 3B HR  TB RBI  BB  BAV  OBP  SLG  OPS RC

1   Boston	104 478 182 124 25  4 15 202 169  85 .259 .373 .423 .796 75
2   Cincinnati	106 440 179 116 36  0 14 194 166  81 .264 .380 .441 .821 73
3   Houston	104 442 169 121 27  2 16 200 159  57 .274 .368 .452 .821 71
4   Phil.	106 467 182 118 20  3 16 192 168  84 .253 .372 .411 .783 70
5   St. Louis	105 445 162 109 21  3 15 181 144  74 .245 .359 .407 .766 64
6   LA Angels	104 415 156 113 24  3 11 176 146  54 .272 .355 .424 .779 63
7   Texas	105 428 155 110 19  3 19 192 145  44 .257 .333 .449 .782 63
8   San Fran.	105 425 146 106 29  1 13 176 140  66 .249 .359 .414 .774 62
9   Detroit	105 425 145 111 23  4 13 181 131  49 .261 .347 .426 .773 61
10  Colorado	106 458 155 121 23  2 10 178 142  54 .264 .353 .389 .742 61
11  Minnesota	105 418 152 107 21  1 14 172 138  63 .256 .363 .411 .774 61
12  Florida	103 451 145 112 30  3 10 178 136  62 .248 .349 .395 .744 60
13  Oakland	106 458 167 120 28  0  9 175 158  58 .262 .350 .382 .732 60
14  Milwaukee	106 431 155 101 32  1 13 174 148  72 .234 .352 .404 .755 60
15  Atlanta	107 432 152  98 25  6 14 177 142  70 .227 .343 .410 .752 59
16  Chicago Sox	104 405 155 107 25  1 11 167 145  55 .264 .359 .412 .771 59
17  Tampa Bay	108 433 157 109 19  1 14 172 148  58 .252 .349 .397 .747 59
18  San Diego	105 447 149 107 24  3  9 164 140  72 .239 .347 .367 .714 57
19  Pittsburgh	107 415 139 108 19  4  8 159 131  61 .260 .358 .383 .741 56
20  Arizona	109 473 149 104 24  3 11 167 140  84 .220 .341 .353 .694 56
21  LA Dodgers	107 434 135 104 20  3 14 172 130  56 .240 .332 .396 .728 56
22  Baltimore	103 411 142  96 26  0 14 164 133  60 .234 .333 .399 .732 54
23  NY Yankees	104 439 145  99 17  1 14 160 135  75 .226 .345 .364 .709 54
24  Seattle	103 420 150 101 31  2  9 163 141  54 .240 .328 .388 .717 53
25  Cleveland	106 455 154 110 23  4 10 171 146  45 .242 .318 .376 .694 53
26  Chi. Cubs	106 433 130  97 21  0 14 160 120  69 .224 .332 .370 .702 53
27  Toronto	106 415 151  98 17  3 13 160 141  53 .236 .331 .386 .717 52
28  Washington	105 426 137  95 29  4  4 144 130  82 .223 .359 .338 .697 50
29  NY Mets	105 416 120  94 20  3  9 147 109  67 .226 .335 .353 .688 49
30  Kansas City	106 408 136 100 16  7  6 148 114  43 .245 .320 .363 .683 47

    AVERAGE	105 435 152 107 24  3 12 172 141  64 .247 .343 .396 .739 59

The Blue Jays have not hit well in this particular situation, but I really don't think it means a hill of beans. Well, maybe more than that, but not a whole lot. Mostly, though, I think it's just One of Those Things. Houston hits very very well with runners in scoring position and two outs. Unfortunately for them, the Astros haven't hit particularly well with runners in scoring position and zero or no outs. Toronto's case is the reverse - they appear to have hit very very well indeed with none out or one, and not so well with two outs.

Jays 2, Spawns of Satan 6: Coming From Behind & Hitting with RISP | 18 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Rob - Friday, August 05 2005 @ 10:50 PM EDT (#124833) #
Wilner just pointed out that the Jays are playing .600 against bad teams. Maybe there is nothing to this myth of playing to the opposition.

The records:
BAL 5-5
BOS 8-3
CWS 2-4
CLE 1-2
DET 0-0
KCR 4-2
LAA 3-0
MIN 2-4
NYY 2-3
OAK 5-5
SEA 4-2
TBD 8-5
TEX 3-7

And 8-10 versus the National League. Not sure if that Yankees record counts today; if not, it's 2-4.
King Rat - Friday, August 05 2005 @ 10:55 PM EDT (#124834) #
Well, that was frustrating.

League looked very good in his first two innings of work, though, and while the two runs that scored in the eighth count, obviously, I thought it was the best outing of his that I can remember this year. And Russ Adams is starting to look even better than Hill did right when he came up. Finally (and, I swear, this is the absolute last time I will ever think this,) maybe Hinske's got it figured out.

I'd prefer to start forgetting everything else about this game, if no one minds.
NDG - Friday, August 05 2005 @ 10:56 PM EDT (#124835) #
One issue with that list Rob is that when the Jays played their first series with Oakland and their series with Houston, they were among the worst teams in the league. So if you consider their record now, it looks like they lost to good teams, but in reality they lost 5 of 6 to two of the worst teams in the majors. Not sure how big a difference this makes but it should be considered.
Keith Talent - Friday, August 05 2005 @ 11:14 PM EDT (#124836) #
Ah, but there the crux, the beauty of baseball, Houston and Oakland were just awakening to their true potential when they played the Blue Jays then.

Alas, tonight's pitcher Small, Joe Journeyman, could have been throwing the game of his life. You just never know, that's why you play the games.

I've been trying to find an eloquent way to put this sentiment, but it's tough. But, in baseball, study of the numbers is so important, yet in the same breath the numbers can be completely brushed aside as irrelevant as the moment is bringing you something entirely new and different, perhaps the beginning of a new direction, or a once-in-a-lifetime occurence that nobody could have anticipated. Scott Downs could throw a perfect game tomorrow.

I'm starting to make myself gag, I promise I'm not the sort to wax on about "the thrill of the grass" and all that sentimental claptrap. I'll stop.

What I like most about study of numbers, is how Wilner put it (if I haven't said it before: Wilner is very, very good): facts -i.e. numbers- often show that things are different than they seem.

Tonight was a pretty dull game to attend in person. I'm skipping tomorrow, back on Sunday; hoping for a better outing then.
smcs - Friday, August 05 2005 @ 11:44 PM EDT (#124837) #
One quick thing about Rios error I noticed at the game, I'm not sure if this had already been pointed out on television, it wasn't completely Rios fault. Koskie was stuck at second base puting on the huge shift for Giambi. He didn't have time to get over to third. Matsui noticed that and went to third. League, went over to cover the throw to an empty third base, but wasn't looking at the ball. It rolled right past him and to the wall allowing Giambi to take second.

Another thing is that Reed Johnson seriously misplayed the one shot off the wall, he mistimed his jump. Not Jeter's triple in the first. I believe it was Sheffield's single in the third.

Nice to see a large crowd at the RC, too bad it was filled with loud, obnoxious, annoying fans.
kpataky - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 12:07 AM EDT (#124839) #
Spawns of Satan? Come on - I thought that was the Red Sox.
Named For Hank - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 12:24 AM EDT (#124842) #
I'd prefer to start forgetting everything else about this game, if no one minds.

I will forever take one thing away from this game: in the eighth inning, when the Yankees fans in our section started to become jackasses (and really, the drunks that come out to Yankees games here give New Yorkers a terrible name), Toronto Dan turned to me and uttered this immortal line:
"They're probably from Mississauga."
I laughed until I had tears in my eyes. The lady in front of me asked what was so funny and I told her, and she laughed and told all the people she was with.

I think that the best putdowns are the ones that the subject doesn't even understand, but that everyone around them does. Good work, Toronto Dan.

And I won RBI pool again, thanks to the fine work of young Russ Adams. Four bucks! It would have been five, but I'm not going to try to collect a dollar from my wife. There's too much downside.
VBF - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 12:48 AM EDT (#124845) #
I'm Back! Yes sir, I'm back prematurely and will be at the next couple of games if not the next 6.

Hey! I'm from Mississauga, however I do agree with you. We are abnoxious. How many Yankee fans were there?

Okay, I have some long notes about the last series. I'll put this as short as possible.

-Cleveland is a very nice city, and if there wasn't a Toronto, you'd find me there. A+ of cities!
-The Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame is missing ALOT.
-The second most frightening thing to see on tv is "Plane Crash". The first most frightening thing is seeing "Live in Toronto". My heart dropped when I heard this. Props to TFD.
-Tour Areas of Chicago are excellent. I had a sneaky suspicion though that 5 blocks East of Michigan Ave. would be much different.


The Game:

-U.S. Cellular is clearly underrated by MLB and Sox fans.
-It's not great, but certainly better than what I was told it would be.
-Its food is the same as the Dome, with funnelcakes.
-The crowds, while loud for the players intros, were no louder than the equivalent number of Blue Jays fans during the game.
-The player intros are *cool*. The crowd gives them a standing O to the tune of "Thunderstruck".
-Don't even think you're going to get away with any cowbell or flags of the opposing team there. The fans are very protective.
-Left my sign in the car, no room anyways, as the facing of the Upper Deck bears ribbon board.
-Excellent Sightlines
-Met Pete Walker before Thursday's game. He says keep up the good work to Cheer Clubbers.
-Russ Adams is a monster. Good show!
-Tickets are slightly more, try to go on a Monday when tickets are half price.
-Iguchi is known as "The Gooch".
-Saw a solid number of Jays fans, in the stadium and even around the city.
-Seat hopping is quite easy to do. My ticket was checked once before I had even entered the concourse and that was it.


-The best part of the trip was hearing this....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, please welcome your 2005 PRIDE CREW!"

Yes! They also have a Mickey Mouse gang dancing, t-shirt throwing, dugout dancing goofballs. Except they have a much more homosexual name. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I rate U.S. Cellular a '8' and a '9' to the City of Chicago on a scale of 1-10.



Grimlock - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 01:01 AM EDT (#124846) #
Me Grimlock was in 130A tonight, and a section over, some Blue Jays fan REALLY got into it with our Yankee fan guests. He got three separate death threats from three different guys. And the Yankees fans started chanting "We Hate You" to him. Good times!

Tough game all around. They hit into some TIMELY double plays that really prevented from making a game of it in the middle innings, Reed looked totally lost in RF and truth be told, me Grimlock thought he could have made a catch on that fly ball in left that dropped for a single in the 8th, Chacin had trouble throwing strikes (was he getting squeezed by the HP ump?), Cat looked terrible in all three of his at-bats, and was there a more frustrating inning than when they went down three-up, three-down, all by foul out?
The_Game - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 01:29 AM EDT (#124847) #
Disappointing game to be at as we had so many chances...

Frank Catalonnato seems to have lost his swing after this recent neck injury, though it's only one game I admit.

A funny thing that happened a few seats in front of me, was that these 3 Yankees fans got kicked out for bringing bottles of liquor into the stands. From what I understand, they were ratted out by someone in the box above me (I was in the level 200 outfield seats).
VBF - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 01:35 AM EDT (#124849) #
Yankee fans in their Stadium are tough, but I just dealt with a few thousand Sox fans in their house. We can conquer these guys.

Public meeting. 518. Take back our house.
The_Game - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 03:59 AM EDT (#124853) #
"but I just dealt with a few thousand Sox fans in their house. We can conquer these guys."

I guess KC and Colorado fans are nice compared to those Sox fans over in Chicago. They didn't give me any problems when I was cheering for Toronto(But, of course I wasn't cheering for Toronto agaisnt Colorado, and who knows, maybe at that altitude, some of the Rockies fans might get unruly with me if I cheered for the team agaisnt them).
rtcaino - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 10:10 AM EDT (#124857) #
Hey guys, BRUTAL game. Mainly in light of the expectations I held going in.

I would have visited 518 but the RC it seemed packed everywhere and not good for traveling. Plus, I was a few rows behind home plate. And plus I was in low spirits due to two inning ending double plays with one out and runner in scoring position.

I Know the Jays are pretty much middle of the pack in terms of GIDP. But it seems an awful lot of them occur with runners in scoring position.

I'm going up north for a reunion. Have a good one boys, GO JAYS.
VBF - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 10:26 AM EDT (#124858) #
Yea, if I were to wear a Minnesota jersey at the Sox game, nobody would've had a problem with me. I was sitting in the first row of section 508 on Tuesday, so 20 rows of Sox fans (and one Jays fan wearing a Catalanotto jersey) saw me wearing my Wells jersey. After the Dye incident, the casual mocking of the Jays turned into "I'm going to kill you" and "Somebody needs to kick your head in". Of course, we won, so I had the final say.
Dr. Zarco - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 01:19 PM EDT (#124861) #
VBF, I was looking for you on Tuesday. I was in 528, so quite a ways away. I was wearing my Halladay jersey and didn't take too much crap. The Dye incident did make me a little nervous though. Too bad you forgot your sign, I was looking for it all game. There were far more Jays fans there than were at Wrigley in June. I even saw whole families of Jays fans in from TO. And yes, the funnelcakes are wonderful.
Dr. Zarco - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 01:24 PM EDT (#124862) #
Magpie, this is great work. Thanks for putting it all in one place. I'd be interesting to see last year's #'s for the 2-out hitting. Is Houston just lucky? Or do their hitters actually have this as a skill?

It is interesting that the Jays have scored more runs than would be expected. One would think that a low HR team would usually score less.

One more thing...Boston can MASH.

Magpie - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 01:46 PM EDT (#124864) #
I'd be interesting to see last year's #'s for the 2-out hitting. Is Houston just lucky? Or do their hitters actually have this as a skill?

I just took a very quick peek at last year's numbers (I've got to get out the door in a few minutes) - but Houston did quite well with RISP and two outs in 2004 as well. (So did the Sox, White and Red.)

I hate to read anything into what is really an aggregation of very small sample sizes... but you might expect good veteran hitters to do well in such a situation and the Astros and Red Sox have no shortage of veterans...

VBF - Saturday, August 06 2005 @ 10:02 PM EDT (#124885) #
I think I saw you then after the game while I was walking by the parking lot. There couldn't have been too many Halladay jerseys.
Jays 2, Spawns of Satan 6: Coming From Behind & Hitting with RISP | 18 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.