Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Whew.


AJ Burnett, perhaps with a nod to the Jays last two performances at Fenway, decided that he would just shut the door himself as the Jays actually scored and took this one 3-0. This ended an ugly road trip in which the club went 2-7 and got outscored 36 to 24. They now head into a four game set with the resurgent White Sox this weekend at the Rogers Centre.

The Jays record right now stands at 12-17. Through these 29 games they've scored 119 runs and allowed 112, suggesting that they should be somewhere closer to one game over .500 as opposed to five below. Its not really something to put a lot of stock into at this point, as this early in the season a few blow outs knock everything out of whack. Or at least generally they do. In any event, this line of inquiry got me, well, thinking. The Jays haven't really been involved in that many blowouts. They've won two games by 8 runs each, against the O's and Red Sox. After that their next biggest margin of victory is... 3. Meanwhile on the defeat side, the Jays biggest loss, of 17 so far, has been by... 4, three times. Of the Jays 29 games so far then, 24 have been decided by 3 runs or less, which seems like an awful lot of close games.

A large reason for the Jays poor record so far has been their 2-8 record in 1 run games, which is more fluke than anything They've also gone 0-4 in 2 run games, but 7-2 in 3 run games. Here it is in graphical form.



Playing this many close games seems a little unusual. If we compare the Jays to the rest of the AL East, what do we get? Just for comparisons sake, Tampa has a run differential of +23, Toronto +7 Baltimore -8, and New York -12. Tampa is 2-4 in 1 run games, Toronto 2-8, Boston 7-2, Baltimore 7-2, New York 4-3.




The Jays have been in disproportionately small number of blowouts, at least compared to the rest of the AL East, especially on the loss side of the ledger. If you squint a bit you can see that the Rays are all over the map, while the Orioles have been knocked around a lot. Each of the other four teams has had a very wide array of outcomes. The Jays, however, have been ever so consistently just not quite in the positive half of the graph. The Jays are the outlier here. But what does it all mean, for the Jays at least? Well, probably not a lot. First of all, its 29 games, so it wouldn't be prudent to draw a whole lot of conclusions, and who knows what run differential even means on a game by game basis. Then again, what would be the point of this if not to speculate?

If I had to say anything, I would say that it reflects on the success of the Jays pitching staff and the failure of their hitters - if you have great pitching and poor hitting then you are going to end up in a lot of close, low scoring ball games, which is what the Jays have done. While I think this explanation is a little simplistic, it gets to the heart of the issue. Looking a bit further, I would say that, at the risk of going too far over the deep end and being positive about the club (not very de rigeur at the moment, I know) I think that this illustrates that no, hope is not lost, especially if the team starts hitting. There has literally been not one of twenty-nine games so far that the Jays could not have won with a few extra runs. While they haven't won those close games so far, there is no reason to expect them to keep up their present atrocious record of 2 and 12 in games decided by 2 runs or less. The losing has been a bit ugly so far this year, but on a more broad note, I think that there are positives to be drawn from this first month, especially if the team does better in close games, the results of which are more a factor of luck than skill.

Just for the sake of comparison, the Red Sox are 4.5 games ahead of the Jays, with a slightly worse run differential. If you look at the above chart, the Sox have played almost as many close games as the Jays - 22 of their 30 games have been decided by 4 runs or less. The only difference is that they went 11-4 in games decided by 2 or fewer runs, compared to the Jays at 2-12. Those are the breaks I suppose, but if we believe that close game records are as much a function of luck/flukes as anything else, can we really say that the Red Sox really been a far superior team so far?

As Douglas Adams, and more recently Magpie said,
Don't Panic.



TDIB 2 May 2008 | 44 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
brent - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 04:22 AM EDT (#184198) #

game 29- WPA heroes Burnett (2)*, Rolen (3)    WPA let downs Barajas (7), Stairs (7), Stewart (5)   

* means over .300

Burnett really stole the show posting over .400.

Jimbag - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 04:27 AM EDT (#184199) #
I absolutely agree with your conclusion -it's far too early to panic. It's been frustrating to see the team lose all these close games, and especially because of their tendency to lose close games in ways you wouldn't even dream of (defensive lapses, baserunning mistakes, etc.) but the simple fact is this team has been in pretty much every game so far.

Despite the Chicken Little mindset of a lot of fans, I have no reason to think the team won't start hitting. The starters have been solid so far, and the bullpen (other than a few queasy efforts from Accardo) has been very good.
 
The win-loss record so far doesn't reflect the team's play - by the end of May we're likely to see a record that reflects the teams overall performance.  One decent winning streak will change the landscape enough, I would think. At least enough to silence all the doubting Thomases (or at least those who doubt Thomas's release).

zeppelinkm - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 07:42 AM EDT (#184200) #

Far from certain, this team is certainly better equipped to go on a long winning streak then any team since 2002.

Look at the guys who got the majority of starts each year since 2002:

2002: Doc, (He Who Shall Not Be Named), Pete Walker (with 20 starts??), Justin Miller, Steve Parris, Chris Carpenter
2003: Doc, Escobar, Lidle, Hendrickson, Davis
2004: Doc, Lilly, Batista, Hentgen (V 3.0), Bush, Towers
2005: Doc, Lilly, Chacin, Towers, Bush
2006: Doc, Lilly, Burnett, Chacin, Towers, Jannsen
2007: Doc, Burnett, McGowan, Marcum, Litsch, and unfortunately, Towers, Ohka, Zambrano
2008: Doc, Burnett, McGowan, Marcum, Litsch

When I think of big winning streaks I think of great pitching combined with timely offence (there's a concept that seems very foreign right now...) bailing out the odd stinker the starting rotation puts up. None of those staffs, till 2008, give you the confidence that over 20 games your pitchers are going to keep you in it, every time.  This staff does. It is not hard to envision Doc, Burnett, McGowan, and Marcum each stringing together 3 or 4 good starts in a row. Then you get Litsch to throw in a couple good starts, combined with the offence bailing out the team once or twice, and bam, you've gone 16 - 4 or 17 - 3 or 15 -5.

Now, this was all very easy to write out, let's see what happens in the Real World.

But I agree with a lot of what's been said here. This team looks like it should be doing a lot better than it is. They don't look like a bad team they just keep getting out. As demoralizing as the last two weeks, I still go into each game, every night, thinking "This is the one where we turn it around". There's hope yet.

FisherCat - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 10:17 AM EDT (#184205) #

...the Sox have played almost as many close games as the Jays - 22 of their 30 games have been decided by 4 runs or less. The only difference is that they went 11-4 in games decided by 2 or fewer runs, compared to the Jays at 2-12.

I think this comes from more than just "luck".  This comes from an attitude of confidence and winning, which the Red Sox have a recent history of doing, so it comes naturally and allows you to make your luck.  Until the Jays become more successful in these games, they'll subconsciously feel as if they're going to lose before the game is even over.

Another view shows even more similarities: both teams lost their 3rd baseman for a month, each DH hit under 0.200 for April, each lost a key starter before opening day (i.e. Schilling & Jansen) and each offense has been anemic.  My observation is that even though the Sox' offense (Ortiz in particular) has been struggling; they've gotten the hits and/or RBI's at the right time.  I mean Ortiz is batting under 0.200 and still has over 20 RBIs!  This (along with Manny’s 20) would be tops on the Jays.  So even though the Sox aren’t “clicking”, their big guys are still clutch!  The Jays have yet to see CLUTCH!

Smithers - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 10:47 AM EDT (#184207) #
The Jays have yet to see CLUTCH!

I will have to respectfully disagree.  One week ago tonight I turned on the TV and CLUTCH appeared before thine eyes in the form of Scott "Jesus" Rolen.  Perhaps it is that he hasn't been with the team long enough to become tainted, but his early results have been most impressive.  Maybe there actually is something to the whole "intangibles" aspect of ballplayers, because Rolen has been nearly magical the last week.  He, Rios and Stairs will be the players to bust this team out of the funk it's in.
subculture - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 11:17 AM EDT (#184210) #

I've heard a bunch of people on the Fan590 recently talk about how the Jays have no options for a leadoff hitter, and were pining for Kenny Lofton, Reed Johnson, etc. 

While the entire lineup is mostly slumping now, I have to disagree strongly with that comment.  Not since Devon White/Rickey Henderson have they had 2 established lead-off hitters in Stewart and Eckstein... and Rios has shown he can handle that role as well.  Unless both Stew and Eck have turned into pumpkins, it's just a matter of them starting to actually hit and get on-base.

Having said that, I'm really at a loss to understand where Vernon should be hitting in this lineup... it seems Rios, Stairs, Rolen are better suited for those RBI positions.. I know there was limited success with having Vernon bat leadoff last year, but then again he was injured and we can only hope he's fully recovered.  What I did see last year at the leadoff spot from him was more patience, and a willingness to at least consider going the other way.  Should the Jays try this again now, at least against LH pitching? 

Or is it a batting coach issue?  It seems to me that the Jays are often fooled quite badly on pitches... like they expected a fastball strike, and swing/miss at an offspeed ball.  Then, the next pitch they expect another offspeed ball, and watch a fastball strike.  Then it's 0-2 and maybe after a couple foul balls, they hit a weak grounder somewhere or just miss as they get fooled on another pitch. 

I know catchers will, among other things, look at the body language of a hitter before calling a pitch.  Is it possible that Vernon, maybe other Jays, are giving away what they expect to see?  Like a pitcher tipping a pitch, are they tipping what they expect the pitch to be?  If so, can a batting coach train a struggling batter to use this to their own advantage?

 I'll hang-up now and listen to your comments ;)

Mike Green - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 11:45 AM EDT (#184211) #
One of the little things that the club is doing right is holding baserunners, last night's balk notwithstanding.  The catchers have thrown out 29% of baserunners, a titch above league average.  Barajas throws much better than Jason Phillips, and this has helped considerably, but Zaun's rate has returned to more normal levels after 2 difficult years.  McGowan and Burnett particularly have obviously worked during the off-season on moves and delivery speed.
Magpie - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 11:49 AM EDT (#184212) #
Okay, the losing streak is over but the damage is done, right? Seriously - when was the last time any team goes out and loses eight games out of nine, and then recovers? To win 90 games? To make the post-season? How far back do we have to look?

And we step into the Way-Back Machine, and we travel far, far, far back in time....

To 2007? (Angels and Yankees)

FisherCat - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:02 PM EDT (#184214) #

Okay, the losing streak is over but the damage is done, right? Seriously - when was the last time any team goes out and loses eight games out of nine, and then recovers? To win 90 games? To make the post-season? How far back do we have to look?

Yes, but in order for them to hit 95 wins (which we all assume necessary to win the AL wild-card), they need to win 83 times in the next 133 games...2 LESS than this very same team could muster thru 162 games last year.  A VERY tall task is ahead for this team.

ChicagoJaysFan - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:04 PM EDT (#184215) #
And we step into the Way-Back Machine, and we travel far, far, far back in time....

To 2007? (Angels and Yankees)


It can be overcome, but you need some great performances.

Looking at the Yankees, they immediately followed their bad stretch in April by going 7-2 over their next 9.  Then in June, they had a 9 game win streak.

The Angels immediately followed their bad stretch in April with a 10-2 streak.  They then had an 11-2 stretch in May.

So while it's not impossible to come back from those games - the teams that did it last year recovered by having some very long streaks of very successful ball.
Mick Doherty - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:09 PM EDT (#184216) #

Okay, answer this question as if it were March 15:

On May 1, Toronto will have the same number of wins as the Braves and just one less than the Rockies and Padres each have. They will be just 1.5 GB the Yankees. Do you take that?

FisherCat - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:10 PM EDT (#184217) #

The Jays have 30 games in May and IMO they need a minimum of 20 wins to put some serious life into this team & fanbase AND save Gibby's job.  18-12 is OK, but that just puts them at 0.500 which on June 1st is ehhh.

FisherCat - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:18 PM EDT (#184218) #

Okay, answer this question as if it were March 15:

On May 1, Toronto will have the same number of wins as the Braves and just one less than the Rockies and Padres each have. They will be just 1.5 GB the Yankees. Do you take that?

NO, because IMO the Rockies were a flash in the pan having got hot in the right month last season.  The Padres had an offense just as bad as us last year.  Finally, most of us expected the Yankees to be a shadow of their former selves this year.

ChicagoJaysFan - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:26 PM EDT (#184220) #
On May 1, Toronto will have the same number of wins as the Braves and just one less than the Rockies and Padres each have. They will be just 1.5 GB the Yankees. Do you take that?

No - because standings are irrelevant at this time of year.  All I care is the pace the team is on. 

At the start of the year, my hope was that come May 1, the Jays have 15 wins or more and a pythag of 15 wins or more.  Boston, Tampa, ChiSox, Angels, and A's all have this right now, so it's not that high of a bar.


John Northey - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:31 PM EDT (#184221) #
Actually, I said back in the pre-season that if the Jays are 500 or better by June 1st we should be happy.  Why?

April - 2 days off
May - 1 day off

That, my friends, is a tough schedule.  No rest, no breaks, no chance to recover until June gets rolling (4 off days).  July also has 4 plus the 3 day all-star break.  August gets hard again with just 2 off days while September has 3.

Now, who do the Jays play with just that one day off this month?
Boston: 1 game (won it)
ChiSox: 4 games (not the pushover we hoped for)
Tampa Bay: 3 games (not the pushover we hoped for)
Cleveland: 4 games (division winner last year)
Minnesota: 3 games (2006 division winner)
Philadelphia: 3 games  (division leader at the moment)
Angels: 5 games (division leader)
Kansas City: 4 games and a hot pitching staff
Oakland: 3 games (division leader)

Oy vey.  May could be very, very ugly.  The Twins and KC are the only teams that look weak at the moment.  KC has Zack Greinke who we gotta hope the Jays avoid.  The Twinkies aren't too bad and aren't too good.

If the Jays pull off an 18-12 May I'll be very, very happy with it.

Magpie - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:33 PM EDT (#184222) #
In baseball, you don't know nothing, quoth the philosopher (that would be Yogi, natch.) We think we know all kinds of things, but happily they still have to go out and actually play the games.

It's also extremely likely that a team puttering around .500 or slightly below in June will still win 90 some odd games and end up in the post-season. Because that also happens most years.

Youneverknow.

Mylegacy - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:38 PM EDT (#184223) #

The real problem with May is that we actually have to play the 30 games - and win on occassion - before we can put a check in the win column. To win a game we need at least one hit per game - we need at least 30 hits in May. Can we do it? If only Eckstein gets hot - red smokin' hot - that should give us at least 3 hits this month.

The only guys I have ANY confidence in offensively now are the RRS gang - Rios, Rolen and Stairs. This month - indeed this season - depends on Lind, Wells, Overbay and Hill. How do I feel about that? To quote the Pope - Alexander Pope that is, in his "An Essay on Man" I say - "Hope springs eternal!" 

uglyone - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:39 PM EDT (#184224) #
So is Carlson now officially the LOOGiest of our bullpen lefties?
uglyone - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 12:51 PM EDT (#184225) #

I think this comes from more than just "luck".  This comes from an attitude of confidence and winning, which the Red Sox have a recent history of doing, so it comes naturally and allows you to make your luck.  Until the Jays become more successful in these games, they'll subconsciously feel as if they're going to lose before the game is even over.

Another view shows even more similarities: both teams lost their 3rd baseman for a month, each DH hit under 0.200 for April, each lost a key starter before opening day (i.e. Schilling & Jansen) and each offense has been anemic.  My observation is that even though the Sox' offense (Ortiz in particular) has been struggling; they've gotten the hits and/or RBI's at the right time.  I mean Ortiz is batting under 0.200 and still has over 20 RBIs!  This (along with Manny’s 20) would be tops on the Jays.  So even though the Sox aren’t “clicking”, their big guys are still clutch!  The Jays have yet to see CLUTCH!

 

I have to disagree here.....it looks to me like the biggest difference has been that the Sox' bench stepped up bigtime in the place of those injuries/slumps to the starters.

And no, I don't think their bench is any better than ours on paper, even though they've killed ours so far this year.

 

  • S.Casey: 52ab, .886ops
  • K.Cash: 32ab, .801ops
  • J.Lowrie: 35ab, .705ops
  • C.Crisp: 62ab, .679ops
  • B.Moss: 17ab, .690ops
  • A.Cora: 3ab, 2.000ops

Quickly eyeballing that gives us what? a .775ish ops in about 20% of the team's total at bats so far? that's fantastic performance from the bench....and not exactly expected. Sure Casey can have a hot streak (although it's well timed for sure), but Kevin Cash with an .800+ ops? come on.

compare to the Jays:

  • Inglett: 33ab, .745ops
  • Stewart: 59ab, .559ops
  • Barajas: 40ab, .550ops
  • Scutaro: 62ab, .593ops
  • McDonald: 18ab, .508ops

What's that? about a .575ops in 20% of our team's total at bats this year from our bench?

 

 

greenfrog - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 01:34 PM EDT (#184227) #
The losing bothers me less than the poor execution (baserunning gaffes, defensive lapses, useless situational hitting) and the way they've been managed:

- Eckstein hitting 1st and 2nd instead of 9th
- Not using McDonald properly (ie, as a late-inning sub and occasional starter)
- Putting too many weak hitters (Scutaro, Stewart, Barajas and Inglett) in the lineup at one time
- Batting Wells too high in the order against RHP
- Leaving Lind in AAA for too long

It annoys me when people say that the story begins and ends with a weak offense. True, the offense has been the main problem so far, but the Jays have simply played poorly. We still have lots of time to turn it around, but every game counts and even with the feckless offense, the Jays' record should be much better than it is.
The_Game - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 01:34 PM EDT (#184228) #
For the Jays, it doesn't really seem to matter who is a "good" or a "bad" team. They seem equally capable of beating anybody and losing to anybody. So for that reason, the schedule doesn't scare me this month.
Mike Green - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 01:47 PM EDT (#184230) #
The Yankees' situation does look more serious this year than last.  Their pitching has been about as good as one could reasonably expect it to be the rest of the year, unless Phil Hughes makes a remarkable recovery.  The drags on the offence have been Cano and Jeter.  Cano can be expected to be much better; his W/K has been typical and he has been dragged down by a .160 BABIP.  Jeter, on the other hand, may be entering a decline phase.  His HR/fly has been declining for several years and has fallen to nothing so far this year.  Absent power, his W rate is way down.  I'll venture a guess that he does improve some over the remainder of the year but that the years of him consistently putting up 800 OPS and higher are over. 

And believe it or not, things can get worse for them.  Rivera and Chamberlain have been lights out so far this season.  The odds that both continue to be so good are not terrific. 






Mylegacy - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 02:33 PM EDT (#184231) #

Couple of ob-ser-vations:

The Jays this year are 251/339/363 with 119 runs. Chicago is 242/335/415 with 134 runs. Our slugging is awful.

To make matters worse our next two games are against lefites Mark Buehrle and John Danks - both of whom have been pitching reasonably well lately - we used to crush lefties (where is Glaus when you need him?).

Mylegacy - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 02:35 PM EDT (#184232) #

Couple of ob-ser-vations:

The Jays this year are 251/339/363 with 119 runs. Chicago is 242/335/415 with 134 runs. Our slugging is awful.

To make matters worse our next two games are against lefites Mark Buehrle and John Danks - both of whom have been pitching reasonably well lately - we used to crush lefties (where is Glaus when you need him?).

Dan Daoust - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 03:34 PM EDT (#184233) #
The thing is, yeah, it's early in this season, but it's not at all early for this lineup.  How long have we been sitting around waiting for Wells to blossom into a superstar?  How long have we been waiting for Overbay to bust out of his slump (I mean, hello, he's our first baseman.  Kind of an important power position.)?  Does Alex Rios really have it in him to hit 35 home runs in a season?   Where is the power out of the DH slot?  I feel like these questions have been asked and unanswered for a lot longer than just April 2008.  So why would things suddenly turn around now?
Mike Green - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 04:00 PM EDT (#184234) #
Power is down throughout the league.  League average slugging is .397; HR/fly rates are down to 10% league-wide.  It probably is due to weather factors.

Usually, the ball flies out of the RC in April particularly due to the dome being closed and the humidity.  Not so this year.  When the dust settles, the Jay offence (including Wells, Rolen, Lind, Rios, Stairs, Overbay and Hill) is not likely to suffer from a power shortage, although the HR total may be a little below league average.  The power on the team may not be deep, but it is wide.

The number to watch is the team OBP vs. league average.  They need to be significantly better than league average in this department.  It would help if the team's BABIP climbed from its current .276, and the odds are good of that happening.

Chuck - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 04:07 PM EDT (#184235) #
Does Alex Rios really have it in him to hit 35 home runs in a season? 

Does Alex Rios need to hit 35 home runs in a season? There's absolutely nothing wrong with his 320/395/485 line.
Dan Daoust - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 04:27 PM EDT (#184236) #
Chuck, on its own that is of course true, but the problem is that we get nothing out of any and all the power positions.  1B, DH, LF and CF are all black holes.  So yeah, Rios is fine, he's great, but he is an outfielder, and somebody has to start mashing on this team.
uglyone - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 04:39 PM EDT (#184237) #

This lineup is never going to be a top slugging team, but there's certainly enough slugging on this team from 1-8 that they should be able to be at least average in that area, which combined with a likely top-notch team OBP, should give us a solid offense, if players perform to an expected level.

We just haven't been getting the typical slugging from these players that we should expect.........yet.

 

Sherrystar - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 04:43 PM EDT (#184238) #

I find the people on this board very knowledgeable and enjoy reading the posts with respect to the batting order. Seems like most people agree that hitting Eckstein #1 or #2 is a mistake.

So can someone please explain to me why J.P. (through Gibbons, who is his puppet manager) is so insistent that Eckstein bats #1 or #2 in the order when clearly his career line (avg, obp) show him to be best suited for the #9 slot? How is this allowed to happen? Is it ego? Ignorance? Stupidity?

I've heard the "scrappy" "dirt-bag" stuff too much and so far, it just isn't working!

greenfrog - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 05:13 PM EDT (#184240) #
Joe Sheehan on John Gibbons (from his May 1/08 chat transcript on BP):

'What's interesting is that two years ago, Gibbons was pretty aggressive about using B.J. Ryan in the eighth inning. I wonder if the lesson he learned was, "I break guys that way." In any case, Gibbons is not part of the solution, but there's only so much to be done with that roster. Too righthanded, too slow. All the pitching and defense in the world--they have about 22% of it, actually--won't help.'
Magpie - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 05:31 PM EDT (#184241) #
So can someone please explain to me why J.P. (through Gibbons, who is his puppet manager) is so insistent that Eckstein bats #1 or #2 in the order when clearly his career line (avg, obp) show him to be best suited for the #9 slot?

Because in each of the past three seasons he's had on OBP better than .350? And unlike the player son this team who can match that, he has no power at all, so you don't want him in an RBI spot anyway?

And how do you know who's a puppet? You been talking to someone?
scottt - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 07:33 PM EDT (#184247) #
I find the people on this board very knowledgeable and enjoy reading the posts with respect to the batting order. Seems like most people agree that hitting Eckstein #1 or #2 is a mistake.

I might be wrong, but I'd assume all the people on this board amount to zero Major League coaching experience. You can argue that Gibbons has no clue how to construct a lineup, but Mike Scioscia and Tony La Russa are two of the most recognized coaches in professional baseball. They both played Eckstein almost exclusively in the lead up spot.




greenfrog - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 07:49 PM EDT (#184249) #
Marcum just looks nasty through 3.
grjas - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 07:56 PM EDT (#184250) #
A large reason for the Jays poor record so far has been their 2-8 record in 1 run games, which is more fluke than anything.

Oh come on now, how can we say this. The reason we have lost a lot of close games is because we have got generally excellent pitching and poor hitting. We can't lose by 5 runs when our pitchers only give up 3 or 4.

No we are losing a lot of close games because the hitters are not producing, same as last year. This is no fluke.
Magpie - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 08:26 PM EDT (#184251) #
No we are losing a lot of close games because the hitters are not producing, same as last year.

They had a winning record in one-run games last year, and had one of the best record in the AL in close games. (Boston, by comparison, went 22-28.) Only one team in the majors won more games by one run, in fact. Team records on close games are fluky, do not reflect a team's quality and do not hold up from year to year. That wasn't the problem.
grjas - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 08:46 PM EDT (#184253) #
That wasn't the problem.

Interesting data, actually Magpie. I guess I stand corrected.

Out of curiousity, where do you get this info?
Magpie - Friday, May 02 2008 @ 09:53 PM EDT (#184256) #
That (here's the link) was from the ESPN standings page. This is always available if you click on Expanded (you have to select the year of course.)

The Blue Jays record in close games has long been something we've followed around here, mainly because of their unbelievable record in those games back in 2005 (16-31). Which prompted numerous attempts to delve into Just How It Had All Happened.

Anders - Saturday, May 03 2008 @ 12:10 AM EDT (#184259) #
Yeah I should have thrown this up earlier, but the fantastic Dave Studeman has a primer on one run games.

He quotes no less an expert than Bill James, who suggests that "Winning or losing close games is luck. Teams which win more one-run games than they should one year have little tendency to do so the next year."

Anyway, the Jays win 2-0 today, their first 2 run victory of the season. We'll check back in another month to see how things are going.

grjas - Saturday, May 03 2008 @ 11:21 AM EDT (#184265) #
Thanks guys, interesting stuff. Let's hope we go 8-2 for the next 10 one runners.

(Of course some offence would help!)
Rob - Saturday, May 03 2008 @ 02:01 PM EDT (#184269) #
Depressing news out of the Mexican League.

Magpie, got seven thousand words ready on this one?
Timbuck2 - Saturday, May 03 2008 @ 08:50 PM EDT (#184283) #
English translation for those who don't speak spanish  ;)

(Tigers Club) .- This Wednesday at the end of the second game of the series of Tigers face Petroleum, the Dominican July Franco announced the directive feline his retirement as a player definitely active.

After analyzing the situation with the family, the Dominican puts an end to a 26-year career as a player where harvested a batting title with the Texas Rangers, most valuable player in the American League in 90, three sets of stars and two batting titles in Mexico.

Franco has a very clear objective, directing a team and continue in baseball, the feline directive lets you open the invitation to join the coaching staff he nevertheless analyze their near future along with his family in the United States.

July battle with its offensive in this season for hitting at .250 with a career vuelacercas and 15 towed, the situation also shores to make this decision as to their point of view was not providing what is necessary for the benefit of the team.

It is a great baseball, and with the Tigers organization and its fans will always be remembered for his two seasons batting above .400, including .437 in 2001.

Likewise the directive of Tigers announced that on Thursday will reach the Puerto Rican Edwards Guzman, who will take the fourth place of foreigners of all feline.

Guzman has a great versatility on the defensive and even can play all positions including the receiver. He has participated in the Mexican League with teams Pericos Puebla and Chihuahua Dorados.
Magpie - Saturday, May 03 2008 @ 10:45 PM EDT (#184286) #
Magpie, got seven thousand words ready on this one?

No. I'm in mourning. Geez, he's only 49 years old. But the batting average had fallen to .250. Edgardo Alfonzo plays on his team as well, and he's hitting .367.

In Franco's final game, he flied out and grounded out in his first two at bats. But in the seventh, with the Tigers losing 2-0, he walked and moved up to second on a base hit. He then stole third base and scored on a sac fly. He led off the bottom of the ninth, was hit by a pitch, and erased on a force out. But the team rallied for two to win it.

Adios, Julio! It was fun.
John Northey - Saturday, May 03 2008 @ 10:48 PM EDT (#184287) #
I still hope someone signs him for September (ideally Atlanta or Cleveland) and gives him a final ML game (perhaps pinch hitting) where he can walk away with a smile having achieve the one game at 50 that he wanted.
TDIB 2 May 2008 | 44 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.