|
| |
September 2008 - Posts
-
Here is my 2008 compilation of NL reliever performance, based solely on leads
converted. For another example of this type of survey, check out the 2007 NL Reliever Index that I completed in May.
Reading the stat is quite easy. I constructed it like an ERA+ or OPS+ type
model, where I took the NL league average leads converted (HLD + SV)/(HLD + SV +
BLSV), and then divide every NL reliever's leads converted percentage by that
number; I multiply that number by 100 to create the index. (100 = average. So,
the 2008 NL Leads Converted % = .82912, meaning that above 100 is above 82.9%,
below 100 is below 82.9%).
I will be using this survey to then make some more in-depth corrections
beyond the simple point of leads converted (because I understand now, more than
in May, that leads converted% is a very small percentage of relief success).
A unique point: the 2008 NL leads converted% was down by almost 3%!
If games seemed more back and forth this year, more exciting, or more
frustrating, they probably were...
40 or more leads opportunities:
Brad Lidge, Phi: 41 leads converted (41 sv) 41 opportunities 120.6
Brian Fuentes, Col: 36 leads opportunities (30 sv, 6 hld) 40 opportunities 108.5
Brian Wilson, SF: 41 lead converted (41 sv) 47 opportunities 105.2
Jose Valverde, Hou: 44 leads converted (44 sv) 51 opportunities 104.1
Kerry Wood, ChC: 34 leads opportunities (34 sv) 40 opportunities 102.5
Francisco Cordero, Cin: 34 leads converted (34 sv) 40 opportunities 102.5
Salomon Torres, Mil: 33 leads converted (28 sv, 5 hld) 40 opportunities 99.5
Kevin Gregg, Fla: 33 leads converted (29 sv, 4 hld) 42 opportunities 94.8
296
leads converted
341 opportunities
104.7
These relievers are the top relievers according to usage and workload
pattersn in the NL. They are the closers used most regularly for the entire
season, or in some cases a jack of all trades eventually converted to closer
(like Salomon Torres). There are no exclusive set up men on this list.
Oddly enough, like 2007, five of the eight closers in this group performed
the average level of the group. That is, only three of the eight relievers in
this group actually performed better than the overall level that the aggregate
produced. Those three top relievers, then, were Brad Lidge, Brian Fuentes, and
Brian Wilson.
Below group average closers were Kerry Wood, Francisco Cordero, and Jose
Valverded, and two below average (overall) closers were Kevin Gregg and Salomon
Torres.
30-39 leads opportunities:
Carlos Marmol, ChC: 37 leads converted (30 hld, 7
sv) 39 opportunities 114.4
Trevor Hoffman, SD: 30 leads converted (30 sv) 34 opportunities 106.4
Brandon Lyon, Ari: 29 leads converted (26 sv, 3 hld) 34 opportunities 102.9
Tony Pena, Ari: 26 leads converted (23 hld, 3 sv) 31 opportunities 101.2
Luis Ayala, Was/NYM: 28 leads converted (19 hld, 9 sv) 34 opportunities 99.3
Kyle McClellan, StL: 31 leads converted (30 hld, 1 sv) 38 opportunities 98.4
Jon Rauch, Was/Ari: 24 leads converted (18 sv, 6 hld) 30 opportunities 96.5
Chad Qualls, Ari: 31 leads converted (22 hld, 9 sv) 39 opportunities 95.9
Billy Wagner, NYM: 27 leads converted (27 sv) 34 opportunities 95.8
Ryan Franklin, StL: 30 leads converted (17 sv, 13 hld) 38 opportunities 95.2
Jonathan Broxton, LAD: 27 leads converted (13 hld, 14 sv) 35 opportunities 93.0
Heath Bell, SD: 23 leads converted (23 hld) 30 opportunities 92.5
Manuel Corpas, Col: 23 leads converted (19 hld, 4 sv) 32 opportunities 86.7
366 leads converted
448 opportunities
98.5 20-29 leads opportunities
Matt Lindstrom, Fla: 19 leads converted (14 hld, 5 sv) 20 opportunities 114.6
Taylor Buchholz, Col: 22 leads converted (21 hld, 1 sv) 24 opportunities 110.6
Pedro Feliciano, NYM: 21 leads converted (21 hld) 23 opportunities 110.1
Damaso Marte, Pit: 20 leads converted (15 hld, 5 sv) 22 opportunities 109.6
Ryan Madson, Phi: 18 leads converted (17 hld, 1 sv) 20 opportunities 108.5
Will Ohman, Atl: 24 leads converted (23 hld, 1 sv) 27 opportunities 107.2
Doug Brocail, Hou: 24 leads converted (22 hld, 2 sv) 27 opportunities 107.2
J.C. Romero, Phi: 25 leads opportunities (24 hld, 1 sv) 29 opportunities 103.9
Joe Smith, NYM: 18 leads converted (18 hld) 21 opportunities 103.3
Brian Shouse, Mil: 17 leads converted (15 hld, 2 sv) 20 opportunities 102.5
John Grabow, Pit: 20 leads converted (16 hld, 4 sv) 24 opportunities 100.5
David Weathers, Cin: 19 leads converted (19 hld) 23 opportunities 99.6
Tyler Walker, SF: 19 leads converted (19 hld) 23 opportunities 99.6
Takashi Saito, LAD: 18 leads converted (18 sv) 22 opportunities 98.7
Scott Schoeneweis, NYM: 16 leads converted (15 hld, 1 sv)20
opportunities 96.5
Bob Howry, Chc: 16 leads converted (15 hld, 1 sv) 20 opportunities 96.5
Aaron Heilman, NYM: 18 leads converted (15 hld, 3 sv) 23 opportunities 94.4
Chad Durbin, Phi: 18 leads converted (17 hld, 1 sv) 24 opportunities 90.5
Saul Rivera, Was: 17 leads converted (17 hld) 23 opportunities 89.1
Eric Gagne, Mil: 17 leads converted (7 hld, 10 sv) 24 opportunities 85.4
Matt Capps, Pit: 21 leads converted (21 sv) 26 opportunities 80.8
Jason Isringhausen, StL: 14 leads converted (12 sv, 2 hld) 21 opportunities 80.4
421 leads converted
506 opportunities
100.3
I put the 30-39 and 20-29 reliever groups together because I did so for the
2007 survey, and these two groups are usually indicative of the troubles and
successes in the middle innings. In 2007, the 30-39 group was better, but that
fate reversed in 2008 -- in 2008, for whatever reason, the relievers that found
a workload of 20-29 opporunities were better as a whole.
My speculation is that the group of 20-29 relievers were better because they
were main set up men, and also, replacements for the failing or injured
relievers that were in the 30-39 group (like Billy Wagner).
In these two groups, there is a lot of potential for further analysis, and a
lot of interesting tactics can be used to further distinguish between these
relievers: dividing relievers by IR/IS, dividing relievers by role, dividing
relievers by the main inning in which they enter the game, or dividing relievers
by their flexibility for entering games in different innings.
The best of these lists are Carlos Marmol, Matt Lindstrom, and Taylor
Buchholz, with Trevor Hoffman, Pedro Feliciano, Damaso Marte, and Ryan Madson
not far behind.
10-19 leads opportunities:
LaTroy Hawkins, Hou: 13 leads converted (12 hld, 1 sv) 13 opportunities 120.6
Arthur Rhodes, Fla: 12 leads converted (11 hld, 1 sv) 12 opportunities 120.6
Joe Beimel, LAD: 12 leads converted (12 hld) 12 opportunities 120.6
Carlos Villanueva, Mil: 12 leads converted (11 hld, 1 sv) 12 opportunities 120.6
Jeff Bennett, Atl: 18 leads converted (15 hld, 3 sv) 19 opportunities 114.3
Ron Villone, StL: 17 leads converted (16 hld, 1 sv) 18 opportunities 113.9
Tom Gordon, Phi: 16 leads converted (14 hld, 2 sv) 17 opportunities 113.5
Wesley Wright, Hou: 13 leads converted (13 hld) 14 opportunities 111.9
Mike Lincoln, Cin: 10 leads converted (10 hld) 11 opportunities 109.7
Renyel Pinto, Fla: 17 leads converted (17 hld) 19 opportunities 107.9
Randy Flores, StL: 15 leads converted (14 hld, 1 sv) 17 opportunities 106.4
Russ Springer, StL: 15 leads converted (15 hld) 17 opportunities 106.4
Mike Gonzalez, Atl: 14 leads converted (14 sv) 16 opportunities 105.5
Hong-Chih Kuo, LAD: 12 leads
converted (12 hld) 14
opportunities 103.4
Geoff Geary, Hou: 12 leads converted (12 hld) 14 opportunities 103.4
Jared Burton, Cin: 11 leads converted (11 hld) 13 opportunities 102.1
Chris Sampson, Hou: 11 leads converted (11 hld) 13 opportunities 102.1
Mike Adams, SD: 10 leads converted (10 hld) 12 opportunities 100.5
Guillermo Mota, Mil: 12 leads converted (11 hld, 1 sv) 15 opportunities 96.5
Blaine Boyer, Atl: 15 leads converted (14 hld, 1 sv) 19 opportunities 95.2
Tyler Yates, Pit: 15 leads converted (14 hld, 1 sv) 19 opportunities 95.2
Jack Taschner, SF: 14 leads converted (14 hld) 18 opportunities 93.8
Chris Perez, StL: 13 leads converted (7 sv, 6 hld) 17 opportunities 92.2
Joe Nelson, Fla: 12 leads converted (11 hld, 1 sv) 16 opportunities 90.5
Joel Hanrahan, Was: 12 leads converted (9 sv, 3 hld) 16 opportunities 90.5
David Riske, Mil: 13 leads converted (11 hld, 2 sv) 18 opportunities 87.1
Cla Meredith, SD: 11 leads converted (11 hld) 17 opportunities 78.0
357 leads converted
418 opportunities
103.0
This list might be the most interesting, if only because there are so many
reasons these relievers have received less of a leads opportunity workload.
Some, like David Riske and Mike Gonzalez, were injured. Others, like Chris
Sampson and Carlos Villanueva, jumped between rotation and bullpen. Others
simply suffered from ineffectiveness, while others still performed in incredibly
specialized roles (see Arthur Rhodes, Joe Beimel, and Wesley Wright, among
others).
This group of relievers is interesting because in 2007, some of the top
relievers in the 10-19 group saw their success translate to a larger workload.
This occurred with Carlos Marmol, Brian Wilson, Doug Brocail, Will Ohman, Damaso
Marte, and Joe Smith, with Carlos Villanueva and Joe Beimel producing
successfully in a similar role for a consecutive season.
I find this development to be promising, because it leads me to the
hypothesis that workload does not necessarily correlate to success, and vice
versa. I.e., we should not write-off replacement relievers simply because they
only saw 10-19 leads opportunities, or were used with a relatively light
workload in the previous season.
This is especially important given the number of top workload relievers from
2007 that regressed, were injured, or hardly performed whatsoever: Kevin Gregg,
Takashi Saito, Heath Bell, Jon Rauch, Chad Cordero, Billy Wagner, Derrick
Turnbow, Jason Isringhausen, Manuel Corpas, Matt Capps, Tony Pena, Bob Howry,
Brad Hennessey, and Rafael Soriano, just to name a few. Others, like Francisco
Cordero, Brandon Lyon, and Brian Shouse also regressed, but their regression was
masked by the overall NL regression, and their overall scores look good.
I find this to be incredibly promising for designing, advocating, and
building a bullpen with players that have been developed internally, maybe eased
into a high leverage role overtime, and exhibited success in that role (my best
examples here are Brian Wilson and Carlos Marmol, and my target for the future
is Carlos Villanueva)....
...more and more I am convinced that the high priced arms should be avoided,
and that there are more innovative and business-savy ways to build a
bullpen.
-
This was just posted by Dan on the main site, and I wanted to post it here as well. Enjoy! *** The Brewers are
going to the playoffs for the first time in 26 years! Now, I’ve
celebrated about 1,000 times now by listening to and replaying Uecker’s
Game Recap, which sends chills down my spine and leaves me grinning
from ear to ear every time. This is a special accomplishment for a team
that went through its rebuilding phase, worked through some difficult
growing pains once the talent was there, came short a couple of years,
and for that, for their hard work, this playoff berth is so much
sweeter. Congratulations, Brewers, you deserve it for your
perseverance, exciting play, and years of hard work!
But now let’s get to the real fun – we finally have two generational Brewers playoff teams
to compare! On the surface, our last two playoff teams are markedly
similar. Both are the type of rough and tumble, slugging teams that Milwaukee fans love,
and both have an uncanny style of procrastination. Could it have
occurred any other way, that the ’82 Brew Crew clinched on the last day
of the season, and the ’08 Brewers did exactly the same? Say what you
will, both teams had their style, and preferred to enter the playoff
scene fashionably late.
Beyond these surface
similarities, there are a lot of differences between these two teams,
and utilizing historical stats, and league average stats, we can find
the most valuable players of both teams, and the value of all the main
contributors in general, in order to compare both teams.
The biggest
difference is that the 1982 Brewers slugged away during an era that was
less inclined to offense, so the ’82 high output offense was much more
valuable in that year than the ’08 Brewers’ offense was this year.
Subsequently, the pitching climate was more difficult in 2008, and
above average pitchers become more valuable in this post-steroids era
than they were in ’82 – or rather, I should say that above average
pitchers look different now.
Here are the climates that each team played within:
1982 AL Offense (Park Adjusted): .257/.320/.391
2008 NL Offense (Park Adjusted): .269/.341/.429
1982 AL Pitching (Park Adjusted): 3.80 ERA
2008 NL Pitching (Park Adjusted): 4.35 ERA
These climates will shape the value of the players, and how we compare them across 26 years of baseball.
1. Offense
Harvey’s Wallbangers were especially known for one thing, and that was putting up power, slugging the ball all around County Stadium
with a high octane offense lead by Robin Yount, Cecil Cooper, and Paul
Molitor. While the 2007 Brewers posted similarly historical HR totals,
the 2008 Brewers fell off the power slightly, and were not as explosive
with the slugging bats. This makes for a unique comparison.
C: Jason Kendall (151 G, .246/.327/.324; 72 OPS+) vs. Ted Simmons (137 G, .269/.309/.451; 112 OPS+)
2B: Rickie Weeks (129 G, .234/.342/.398; 93 OPS+) vs. Jim Gantner (132 G, .295/.335/.369; 99 OPS+)
SS: J.J. Hardy (146 G, .283/.343/.478; 113 OPS+) vs. Robin Yount (156 G, .331/.379/.578; 166 OPS+)
CF: Mike Cameron (120 G, .243/.331/.477; 108 OPS+) vs. Gorman Thomas (158 G, .245/.343/.506; 137 OPS+)
Up the middle, it’s easy to see the strength of Harvey’s
Wallbangers. Robin Yount produced at a phenomenal level at shortstop,
providing an anchor for the Brewers’ offense at a traditionally
defensive position (or rather, a position not known for its offensive
contributors). But anyone that thinks it was Cal Ripken, Jr. that
spurred the “big hitting SS” should take a look at Robin Yount’s prime
numbers, including 1982.
Similarly, J.J. Hardy
was the most valuable producer up the middle for the 2008 Crew,
although Mike Cameron's production was not far behind in centerfield.
Yet another advantage
for the 1982 Brewers came behind the plate and in centerfield, with Ted
Simmons and Gorman Thomas crushing the ball. Along with Yount’s
production, it’s easy to see where Harvey’s Wallbangers gained their advantages on offense.
1B:
Prince Fielder (159 G, .276/.372/.507; 128 OPS+) vs. Cecil Cooper (155 G, .313/.342/.528; 142 OPS+)
3B:
Bill Hall (128 G, .225/.293/.396; 78 OPS+) vs. Paul Molitor (160 G, .302/.366/.450; 129 OPS+)
LF:
Ryan Braun (151 H, .285/.335/.553; 127 OPS+) vs. Ben Oglivie (159 G, .244/.326/.453; 118 OPS+)
RF:
Corey Hart (157 G, .268/.300/.459; 96 OPS+) vs. Charlie Moore (133 G, .254/.299/.360; 85 OPS+)
At the corners, the
1982 Brewers once again take the advantage with Cecil Cooper and Paul
Molitor, and Ben Oglivie is not far behind.
As a historical
comparison, it should be interesting to note that Fielder’s OBP and SLG
combination are very comparable to Cooper’s (.372 vs. .342, and .507
vs. .528), and their overall OPS is almost exactly the same. However,
because of his offensive era, the value of Cecil Cooper’s production is
higher than the value of Prince’s production. Coop vs. Prince might be
the best concrete example of comparing the effects of historical era.
Here we can see some
real weaknesses at the corners for the Brewers, with Bill Hall and
Corey Hart finishing the season with slightly-below-average to
below-average production at 3B and RF, respectively, two important
offensive positions. While the 1982 Brewers did not have a great bat in
RF, they certainly had one at 3B with Paul Molitor.
As another unique
comparison, Ryan Braun’s bat in 2008 produced at almost exactly the
same value above average as Molitor’s in 1982: Braun’s .285/.335/.553
is worth almost exactly the same in 2008 (127 OPS+) as Molitor’s
.302/.366/.450 in 1982 (129 OPS+). That should be another good
indicator of how the historical eras have changed.
Now that we see that
the 1982 Brewers have the thorough advantage in offensive value, here
are two brief lists that compare the most valuable producers. I chose VORP (value over replacement player) and PMLV
(Positional Marginal Line UP Value) because these stats compare
players’ production against average over a period of time (i.e., the
number of plate appearances).
I’ve provided links,
but here’s the cheat sheet: VORP basically measures the runs produced
by a given player compared with an average replacement player; it’s
basically the player’s runs produced above average. PMLV takes a
measure of the batters’ value in the line up (normal MLV,
which has several models), and analyzes the player by his position on
the field. Thus, PMLV basically measures the number of runs produced by
a given player against an average player at the same position.
Five Most Valuable Players (VORP; 1982, 2008)
Ryan Braun (43.5) Robin Yount (103.8)
Prince Fielder (39.7) Cecil Cooper (55.8)
J.J. Hardy (38.9) Paul Molitor (54.2)
Mike Cameron (22.3) Gorman Thomas (39.2)
Gabe Kapler (14.3) Ted Simmons (25.6)
Five Most Valuable Players by Position (PMLV; 1982, 2008)
Ryan Braun (22.5) Robin Yount (84.2)
J.J. Hardy (21.8) Cecil Cooper (32.4)
Prince Fielder (13.8) Paul Molitor (27.0)
Gabe Kapler (8.1) Gorman Thomas (24.7)
Russell Branyan (6.9) Don Money (15.9)
This should provide a valuable snapshot of the advantage of the best 1982 producers.
2. Pitching
If Harvey’s
Wallbangers gain the advantage on offense, the 2008 Brewers will need a
pitching staff to compete with them, and that is just what they have.
While the 2007 Brewers appeared to be a slugging team with
average-to-below-average pitching, a pitching staff that did not even
reach 80 quality starts, the 2008 Brewers improved greatly on the
mound, probably due mostly to Ben Sheets’ highest workload since 2004,
a great improvement by Dave Bush, and of course, the midseason
acquisition of C.C. Sabathia, along with some excellent mid-season work
by Manny Parra and Seth McClung.
Ben Sheets (3.09 ERA, 198.3 IP, 158 K/47 BB; 141 ERA+) vs. Mike Caldwell (3.91 ERA, 258 IP, 75 K/58 BB; 97 ERA+)
Dave Bush (4.18 ERA, 185 IP, 109 K/48 BB; 104 ERA+) vs. Pete Vuckovich (3.34 ERA, 223.7 IP, 105 K/102 BB; 114 ERA+)
The top rotation pitchers, noted here by their IP totals, display more differences between 1982 and 2008. Whereas Harvey’s
Wallbangers featured two pitchers with more than 220 IP, the 2008 Crew
did not have one pitcher reach 200 IP (Sabathia pitched more than 200
IP in 2008, but not as a Brewer).
The production of the
2008 Brewers’ top rotation, as a whole, is favorable to the ’82 Crew
because of the strength of Sheets’ season and his very valuable 3.09
ERA. Sheets produced a more valuable ERA than both Vuck and Caldwell,
and Dave Bush’s strength was in his slightly-above-average ERA. While
Vuckovich was a more valuable pitcher in 1982 than Dave Bush was in
2008, the comparison is not that far apart, and Bush’s 4.18 ERA in 2008 is not terribly far behind Vuckovich’s 3.34 ERA in 1982.
Jeff Suppan (4.96 ERA, 177.7 IP, 90 K/67 BB; 88 ERA+) vs. Moose Haas (4.47 ERA, 193.3 IP, 104 K/39 BB; 85 ERA+)
Manny Parra (4.39 ERA, 166 IP, 147 K/75 BB; 99 ERA+) vs. Bob McClure (4.22 ERA, 172.7 IP, 99 K/74 BB; 90 ERA+)
C.C. Sabathia (1.65 ERA, 130.7 IP, 128 K/25 BB; 245 ERA+) vs. Don Sutton (3.29 ERA, 54.7 IP, 36 K/18 BB; 115 ERA+)
In the middle
rotation/mid-season acquisition department, the 2008 Brewers once again
gain a slim advantage with Suppan and Parra, who ate innings in the
middle of the season for the Brewers and produced some quality starts
while they were at it. Both of these pitchers compare favorably with
Haas and McClure, even if it’s marginal.
Sabathia’s
acquisition in July was the sparkplug for the rotation, and his
production, coupled with Sheets and Bush, gives the 2008 Brew Crew the
true advantage. While Sutton is a legendary midseason acquisition in
his own right in Milwaukee sports lore, Sabathia had the chance to establish his legend in Milwaukee with more starts, more IP, and a much more valuable production than the Wallbangers’ midseason acquisition.
Carlos Villanueva (4.07 ERA, 108.3 IP, 93 K/30 BB; 107 ERA+) vs. Jim Slaton (3.29 ERA; 117.7 IP, 59 K/41 BB; 115 ERA+)
Seth McClung (4.02 ERA, 105.3 IP, 87 K/55 BB; 108 ERA+) vs. Randy Lerch (4.97 ERA, 108.7 IP, 33 K/51 BB; 76 ERA+)
The low rotation /
swingman / middle relief finds the 2008 Brewers with an advantage in
numbers. Even if Jim Slaton’s production was more valuable than Carlos
Villanueva’s work between the rotation and bullpen, the combination of
Villanueva and big Seth McClung provide an aggregate low
rotation/bullpen swingman advantage over the ’82 Brewers (especially
Randy Lerch).
Salomon Torres (3.49 ERA, 80 IP, 51 K/33 BB; 125 ERA+) vs. Rollie Fingers (2.60 ERA, 79.7 IP, 71 K/20 BB; 146 ERA+)
Guillermo Mota (4.11 ERA, 57 IP, 50 K/28 BB; 106 ERA+) vs. Dwight Bernard (3.76 ERA, 79 IP, 45 K/27 BB; 101 ERA+)
Brian Shouse (2.81 ERA, 51.3 IP, 33 K/14 BB; 155 ERA+) vs. Jerry Augustine (5.08 ERA, 62 IP, 22 K/26 BB; 75 ERA+)
In the main relief
department, although the ’82 Brewers had the advantage at closer with
the Hall of Famer Rollie Fingers, while the ’08 Brewers were working
with Salomon Torres as a stopgap, the main short relievers for the 2008
Brewers performed well, and perhaps provided more depth than the 1982
relief corps.
Of course, these
bullpen comparisons are almost meaningless, given the fact that the
1982 Brewers had a lot more innings eaten by the rotation, and did not
need the various relief positions that the 2008 team featured. Fingers
gives the 1982 Brewers an advantage, although the ’82 Crew did not have
another short relief combination that produced at the level of
Guillermo Mota and Brian Shouse.
Now that we have the
idea that the 2008 Brewers have the better pitching staff, if only in
the rotation, here are two brief lists that compare the value of these
pitchers. I chose VORP again, this time for pitchers, as well as RP (Runs Prevented) because both of these stats compare the value of a pitcher’s production over a period of time (like IP).
VORP for pitchers
works on the opposite assumption of the position players’ stat, and is
based around how many runs a starting pitcher prevents against an
average replacement. RP is the basic raw statement of how many runs a
pitcher has prevented against an average replacement, without the
additional calculations of VORP:
Five Most Valuable Pitchers (VORP; 1982, 2008):
Ben Sheets (52.4) Pete Vuckovich (38.0)
C.C. Sabathia (52.2) Mike Caldwell (34.1)
Dave Bush (26.5) Rollie Fingers (24.0)
Seth McClung (19.9) Jim Slaton (21.2)
Carlos Villanueva (15.7) Moose Haas (14.3)
Five Most Valuable Pitchers (RP; 1982, 2008)
C.C. Sabathia (36.7) Rollie Fingers (16.3)
Ben Sheets (29.0) Pete Vuckovich (13.1)
Seth McClung (7.8) Jim Slaton (9.2)
Brian Shouse (7.7) Don Sutton (5.5)
Yovani Gallardo (7.5) Mike Caldwell (5.3)
This should indicate
just how much pitching value has changed over time. Notice that the
1982 Brewers do not have one pitcher approach the level of value that
Sheets and Sabathia reached, and I personally find it hilarious that
Dave Bush in 2008 and Rollie Fingers in 1982 are of comparable value.
Never would have guessed that!
***
Now, who wins? Well,
I’m not exactly sure. But what I wouldn’t give to see the top rotation
of the 2008 Brewers take on the 1982 sluggers. What a game that would
promise to be! Until such a game happens, we can replay it over and
over in our minds, remembering and praising those excellent teams we
got to watch – or for some of us, the excellent 2008 team we were lucky
to watch and the 1982 team that we are too young to remember.
-
He's ready. Here comes Wuertz with a 3-1. INSIDE! BALL FOUR! And the game is tied! -Jim Powell ***
All right, here we go with Ryan Braun. The pitch to him...SWING AND A DRIVE! LEFT CENTER AND DEEP! GET UP! GET UP! GET OUTTA HERE, GONE, FOR RYAN BRAUN! AND THEY'VE GOT THE LEAD! WOAH, WHAT A SHOT BY BRAUN, IT'S HIS 37TH OF THE YEAR! -Bob Uecker *** Everybody in this place is standing. 45,299. Sabathia sets, here it is.... SWING and a bouncer! Double play ball! J.J. - second, RELAY! DOUBLE PLAY! HEY! THEY WIN! WOAH, WHAT A FINISH! C.C. SABATHIA BEING MOBBED BY HIS TEAMMATES! HE THROWS A 4-6-3 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS DOUBLE PLAY BALL TO BIG DERRICK LEE, AND THE BREWERS HAVE BEATEN CHICAGO! WOW, WHAT A GAME! WHAT A PERFORMANCE BY SABATHIA! -Bob Uecker ***
Let me first say that I couldn't be happier right now. Today was the best day I've ever had as a baseball fan, and the most fun. -Mets/Brewers: Since I moved to Chicago, the Crew have an awful record in televised games that I have access to. I believe I have only watched 2, maybe 3 victories on TV since I moved. So today after supporting the PAWS walk at Montrose Park, my partner and myself sat and watched the Shea game with Uecker on MLB Radio -- it worked out because she also believe that she is bad luck when the Crew are on TV, so we made every effort not to jinx the game. It was so much fun watching the games because not only did the season come down to the last day, but it came down to the last day and 7+ innings! -How excellent were the bases loaded walk by Counsell and the advance to third by Durham? Two exceptional situational plays by two of our veterans. Excellent presence in the line up, and although Durham's play won't show up in the box score, I believe it was a crucial baserunning effort. -STAT OF THE SEASON: In 2007, the Brewers' starters pitched 76 quality starts, and the team won 83 games. In 2008, the Brewers' starters pitched 83 quality starts, and the team won 90 games. A very tangible statement of improvement in 2008: the Brewers starting pitchers were the backbone for this team in 2008 with a declining bullpen and a very solid, but streaky, offense. Dave Bush and Ben Sheets both improved their quality starts totals to 16 and 18 (respectively), giving the Crew 5 extra quality starts, and C.C. and Suppan both pitched 14 quality starts for the Brewers. Parra pitched 10, McClung 5, and CV and YoGa pitched 3 each. -C.C. Sabathia should win the NL MVP. While I believe that the Cy Young should go to a pitcher that pitched the entire season in the NL because of the counting stats produced (IP, K, etc., and those voters' stats like W-L) and the overall value generated from an entire season with one team, Sabathia's performance is best captured and rewarded by the MVP award. Since coming to Milwaukee, Sabathia has prevented more runs in the NL than most other pitchers in the MLB during their entire season campaigns. That's right! C.C. is a runs-preventing maniac in 2008, standing behind only the best of the best Cy Young candidates in both the NL and AL. The fact that CC has pitched more complete games with Milwaukee than a good number of MLB teams have produced on the whole, and the fact that CC's level of production and the value of that prodiction against league average was so high solidify CC's place as a solid MVP candidate. Of course, it doesn't hurt that his team finished in the playoffs. -How about the home runs this week? The offense is suddenly charged: Prince, Ryan, Rickie, and Ryan once again provided four crucial home runs, without which I am not certain the Crew make it to the playoffs. -Fun with the rotation: C.C. wants the ball on 3-days' rest once again, and said so himself on ESPN after today's game. "No doubt," he said. With that, my guess is Bush goes in Game One, Sabathia in Game Two, and then some grouping of Suppan or Parra work in Games 3 and 4, unless Bush can go on short rest in Milwaukee for Game Four...
-
-I forgot how much fun Yovani Gallardo is. He's such a smart, composed young pitcher. I particularly love how he pitches backwards around his fastball, utilizing his curveball and other pitches (2-seam, change, slider) to set up his fastball -- the manner in which he throws curveballs in fastball counts is a brilliant strategy becuase then he has that 91-93 MPH fastball sitting in his back pocket. That's a pretty good fastball to begin with, but it must look even faster with his simple over the top delivery and smooth mechanics -- and that 76-78 curve cannot help but make it appear faster. I liked YoGa since I watched his first start, and that's why I have been so nervous about his return. He has an excellen future ahead of him, and last night he showcased one of the reasons why. -Sveum's gambles are paying off, but I wonder at what price. He has utilized the same bullpen arms night in and night out, which makes me question their availability for the Cubs series. Now, I understand why Sveum needs to keep defecits close, ties tied, and leads in tact, but there has to be a way to work other relievers back into the fold to rest the main arms (especially the surging Mota and Gagne). -Here is an excellent excerpt from an Official Site article about Sheets and Bush pitching Saturday, from the omnipresent Adam McCalvy:
Sheets will have to "impress" Sveum by Friday if he wants to start on Saturday.
"You're going to have to look in his eyes," Sveum said. "A lot of times
people are going to say, 'I want to pitch,' because of the nature of
athletes, but he's going to have to be really honest with this one.
That game is going to mean everything in the world."
Said Sheets: "I don't know, deep down, which way I'm going to go." I love this exchange for so many reasons. It catches the absolute need for Sheets to pitch, or the need for Sheets' willingness to pitch, but also the need for him to be effective if he does pitch, given the magnitude of the game. I am guessing from Sveum's comment that Sheets said he will go, but Sveum is not certain of his effectiveness. I will also guess that Sheets, deep down, is not certain of his own effectiveness at the moment. I know it is disappointing that Sheets left the Chicago start early, but given his contract push, the injury must be really bad if he has not been able to pitch through it with the playoffs and a contract on the line. His ineffectiveness hurts the Crew, his resting hurts his contract; right now I can imagine that Sheets is a very conflucted person, and I can imagine just how difficult it is to admit a playing ability that is less than full strength. Contrary to popular belief, Sheets is tough. Sheets pitched through awful back pain in 2004, requiring surgery in the offseason, and he has pitched through vestibular neuritis at times, admitting to the press at one point that when the vertigo hits him on the mound from the inflamed ear, he looks into the stadium lights to set himself straight. He also pitched through the early portion of this elbow injury, and has pitched through moments of ineffectiveness due to injury in 2005-2006, which resulted in starts in which he was knocked around. The trouble with Saturday's start is that the Brewers can ill-afford a 3 IP, 5 R outing from a Sheets with an 88 MPH fastball and a flat curve. That's the brilliance of Sveum's quote -- he captures the need for Sheets to want to go and help the team to the playoffs by pitching effectively. Now is not the time to simply gut it out without consequence. That's why the gambles with short rest for pitchers accustomed to regular rest are tough -- same with the YoGa gamble. I feel for Sheets decision, and will stand behind him if he says that he cannot pitch effectively on Saturday. It must be an awful position, and a difficult decision to make. But there is nothing to worrry about -- without Sheets' early performance, the Brewers do not energize their rotation and spark the run that resulted in Sabathia. Along with an improved Bush, a solid Parra, a spectacular Sabathia and a good stop gap in McClung, Sheets is an integral part of the Brewers 2008 success, and before you chastise him for not pitching hurt, just think about where we would be without his efforts in 2008. I'll take an effective Sheets on Saturday, but I'll also understand if he is not physically able to succeed. Right now the Brewers need to gamble with relative certainty, not uncertainty.
-
I'm not a fan of Dale Sveum's rotation and bullpen plan. -Short rest: Pitching Sabathia on short rest today commits Sveum to pitching Bush on short rest again, if he wants to use him again during the regular season. I understand why Sveum would like to utilize the two pitchers that are pitching the best at the moment, although Sabathia hasn't exactly been effective in his last two starts, and while Bush pitched well against the Cubs on short rest, the rest pattern also forced him into a shorter start with a low pitch count.... Bush (career 3 days rest): 7 GS, 37.7 IP, 40 H, 30 R, 24 K/11 BB; 7.16 runs average Sabathia (career 3 days rest): 2 GS, 10.7 IP, 8 H, 5 R, 8 K/3 BB; 4.21 runs average What's the big deal? These guys don't pitch on 3 days rest enough to make it a sound strategy that promises the effectiveness the Brewers need on the mound to get into the playoffs.
-Bullpen: ....which means that the bullpen needs to be used more. Sveum is going all in with the bullpen, and I'm not sure why. Whether or not the game is a 1-run defecit, a 4-run lead, a tie, or a SVO, Sveum is pitching his big guns. Sveum will need to change his bullpen usage, otherwise he won't have one should the Crew make the playoffs. -Gallardo: Someone in the Brewers' PR office needs to coordinate Sveum's, Powell's, and Gallardo's statements...from the article on the official site: YoGa says: "I haven't swung the bat, I haven't ran the bases, so starting is kind
of 'out there.' We'll see. I just hopefully want to go out there and
hopefully get a couple innings and help them out".... ....and (my emphasis): "As far as pitching, my arm is in shape, so I guess that's pretty
good," Gallardo said. "Fielding your position, covering first base,
that's the way that [the injury] happened, so that was going to be a
little bit of a challenge for me to get over it. I feel confident. It
was a main focus to take more [fielding practice] and cover first base." Sveum says: "[Gallardo] is built up enough to do whatever we want from him," Sveum
said. "We'll make those decisions as the next few days unfold." From Powell's 5th inning chat (my emphasis):
| Q:
|
Tony
from Beaver Dam -
Are the Brewers possibily mortgaging the future by bringing Yo back so
soon. Most ACL injuries are related to contact sports but coming back
in 5 months seems pretty quick. |
|
Jim: |
No I don't think so, Tony. The knee is sound if sore. The Brewers are
well aware that Gallardo is the next ace of this staff and doing
something that would hurt him could kill next year's team. They have
proceeded with great caution and will continue accordingly. I think he
can help as long as they don't ask too much of him. I'm glad to see him
back, personally. |
So how sore is the knee? Like, "I just bumped my knee on the coffee table" sore, or "I haven't completely rehabbed a severe knee injury and that could force me to compensate in my pitching delivery and hurt something else" sore?
Hm. I sincerely hope Gallardo's ride to the stadium gets lost in West Allis for the next 5 days.
More Posts Next page »
|
|
|