Jump to content

Tribune article about team being "underachievers"


kitekrazy

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 01:46 PM)
You can't count out a team that would start Peavy, Danks, Freddy, and either Buehrle or Floyd. s***, Dewayne Wise hit a big 3-run homer against the Rays last year and Geoff Blum put us ahead with a bomb in the WS. Anything can happen in the postseason if you have the starting pitching.

 

Starting pitching was never the problem this year. Defense, LOB, poor base running have been the constant all year. Oh and the other teams have starting pitching too.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jeremy @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 04:11 PM)
I don't really understand the article. Of course the team was legitimately flawed; that's why people expected them to contend to win a weak division and not a strong division or the wild card; that's why people hoped they could pull off 85 wins, not 95 wins.

 

I don't understand where you thought "why people expected them to contend to win a weak division and not a strong division or the wild card; that's why people hoped they could pull off 85 wins, not 95 wins". Most predictions before the season were 4th place, 90 losses. They still might have a chance at that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 05:51 AM)
Starting pitching was never the problem this year. Defense, LOB, poor base running have been the constant all year. Oh and the other teams have starting pitching too.

Phil Rogers had the numbers today that in 60 starts for the sox 4th and 5th SP's, the had a 15-27 reocrd, with a 4.90 ERA. The back end of the rotation was a problem this year. That even included Freddy Garcia's numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (beck72 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 04:58 PM)
Phil Rogers had the numbers today that in 60 starts for the sox 4th and 5th SP's, the had a 15-27 reocrd, with a 4.90 ERA. The back end of the rotation was a problem this year. That even included Freddy Garcia's numbers.

Is a 4.90 ERA for the 5th starter in the AL really that bad?

 

I'd say that's kind of what I'd expect at the back end of the rotation. The reason you wind up with a losing record though is that your offense and defense on top of that haven't been good enough to do anything with that kind of performance.

 

I have no idea how to compile that data without being paid to do so and spending a few hours on it, but here's some plausible example data from 2006.

 

After going through that procedure for all thirty MLB teams, we can make some generalizations. To start with, here are the averages for each rotation position:

 

Lg #1 #2 #3 #4 #5

MLB 3.60 4.14 4.58 5.10 6.24

AL 3.70 4.24 4.58 5.09 6.22

NL 3.51 4.04 4.57 5.11 6.26

 

What immediately jumps out at me is how high the #4 and #5 ERAs are. If there's one thing most people agree on when they talk about rotation spots, it's that a guy with an ERA over 5.00 ought to be your #5 starter. As it turns out, fewer than half of major league teams could claim an ERA under 5.00 from their #4 spot.

 

In fact, only three teams in baseball got an ERA under 5.00 from their #5 spot: the Tigers (4.48), the White Sox (4.99), and the Padres (4.91). And if we adjusted for park, the Padres would sneak over 5.00. Only two other teams--the Giants (5.18) and the A's (5.16) are under 5.50 from that position. Given the enormous difference between the best teams and the league averages, it's all the more apparent just how valuable rotation depth can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 08:09 PM)
Is a 4.90 ERA for the 5th starter in the AL really that bad?

 

I'd say that's kind of what I'd expect at the back end of the rotation. The reason you wind up with a losing record though is that your offense and defense on top of that haven't been good enough to do anything with that kind of performance.

 

I have no idea how to compile that data without being paid to do so and spending a few hours on it, but here's some plausible example data from 2006.

 

That's a great find Balta. Even if the numbers were significantly better league-wide in 2009, it still shows that "earned runs" were not a major issue for the 4th and 5th starters. However, we all know the unearned runs were; that's how Bartolo's ERA looked decent early on. The combination of incredibly shaky defense and pitchers without the ability to pitch over mistakes is what led to that terrible W-L record from the 4th and 5th starters. Adding Peavy + Garcia ought to fix the pitching talent issue, and now we have to see how KW handles improving the terrible defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...