Game 80, Rangers at Mariners

Jeff · July 3, 2005 at 12:50 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

8:5 odds — Rangers win
2:1 odds — Mariners win
Even — Kenny Rogers finds a 4 foot, nine inch groundskeeper to attack

1:05 p.m. start for the new-look M’s.


87 Responses to “Game 80, Rangers at Mariners”

  1. world series on July 3rd, 2005 3:13 pm

    Damn, if they didn’t cut away from the latest Kenny Rogers tirade.

  2. jared on July 3rd, 2005 3:14 pm

    it seems to me that sample size is the most commonly overlooked factor of statistics by sports announcers. to say kenny rogers is the only lefthander that ichiro doesn’t hit well when he has 30 ab’s is misleading, i think.

  3. Pilots fan on July 3rd, 2005 3:14 pm

    Well, let’s face it, this is what Willie brings to the team. Which is why I wouldn’t feel bad about him if he were our 25th man. The problem is, that is all he is and the M’s seem to see him differently. Case in point: Starting him in CF today. Why?

    Baserunning matters in a game like this, and Willie is handy *if used properly*.

  4. Shannon on July 3rd, 2005 3:17 pm

    Oh, darn… Kenny’s not gonna break anything… oh, maybe he’ll stalk off to the showers and rip out a shower head.

  5. LB on July 3rd, 2005 3:18 pm

    #52: I have read somewhere (probably Earl Weaver’s book) that 20 AB’s for a hitter/pitcher combination has useful predictive value.

    I wouldn’t say that Willie’s 4/6 against Rogers has predictive value, but if some hitter were 8/11 against a pitcher, I wouldn’t bother waiting for 9 more AB’s before concluding that somehow he could hit a guy pretty well.

  6. LB on July 3rd, 2005 3:21 pm

    Has Borders been hanging around Miguel Olivo to long? Grr.

  7. G-Man on July 3rd, 2005 3:22 pm

    Pat, the Ancient Mariner, he stoppeth one of three.

  8. Mr. Egaas on July 3rd, 2005 3:22 pm

    Surprirsed Reed isn’t in CF for defensive purposes. Willie made that look like an adventure.

  9. dw on July 3rd, 2005 3:22 pm

    Damnit Borders, you’ve been catching since Jesus was the closer. Why can’t you BLOCK THE PITCH IN THE DIRT?

  10. Pete Livengood on July 3rd, 2005 3:25 pm

    LB — The small sample size is key. While I concede that even poor hitters like WFB can do well against a particular pitcher, I still would guess that that kind of “advantage” won’t add more than .050 to his normal average, over a larger sample size. Since WFB’s line against lefties this season is .162/.200/.216 (though better over the larger prvious three-year sample — .284/.340/.407), even success against Rogers can’t fully explain or justify the decision to start Bloomquist over Doyle or even Jeremy Reed, who at least breaks the Mendoza line against LHP . . ..

    Can’t argue with the results (at least in the 8th), though. Those do justify the decision. 😉

  11. shane mikesh on July 3rd, 2005 3:29 pm

    Oh look, they are interviewing the HERO of the game!

  12. G-Man on July 3rd, 2005 3:32 pm

    I’d been thinking for awhile that WFB’s butt could be in jeopardy when callups were done, but he’s contributed enough today to remind me that he has some skills that come in handy at times. I now think he’s staying.

  13. shane mikesh on July 3rd, 2005 3:32 pm

    one of the most impressive stats for WFB is the FSN/OBP which currently at .980

  14. LB on July 3rd, 2005 3:32 pm

    #60: Should results justify the decision? I dunno. If you are playing blackjack and draw a 4 when you hit on 17, does that make it a smart play? (I assume you’re not counting cards; that’d be cheating.)

  15. Jake on July 3rd, 2005 3:33 pm

    Bavasi’s head reminds me of a tentacle-less squid.

  16. shane mikesh on July 3rd, 2005 3:35 pm

    re: 65
    yes but he has a very low drag coefficient

  17. Jake on July 3rd, 2005 3:37 pm

    He should have been in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. That has a Mariner tie-in.

  18. Pete Livengood on July 3rd, 2005 3:38 pm

    #64 – No. Hence the wink and smile.

    I do think that if I argued this point with Grover, though, that the he would make a point of both WFB’s (limited) previous history with Rogers, as well as the fact that he went 1-3 and scored the winning run. In fact, that seemed to be your point . . ..

  19. shane mikesh on July 3rd, 2005 3:42 pm

    all this talk about WFB? hey Moyer held them to 1 run. thats the accomplishment for the game

  20. LB on July 3rd, 2005 3:43 pm

    #68: I conceded the small sample size in #43 and sighed when he scored the in #47 because I lamented what was coming. I seem to have a peculiar form of dyslexia that prevents my seeing emoticons and thus missed your wink and smile.

  21. Tom on July 3rd, 2005 3:45 pm

    If Moyer is able to perform in the second half exactly the way he did in the first half and then end the season 14-6 with a 4.58 ERA, do you sign him to a one year contract for say $3 million? Assuming he wants to play for this abyssmal team for one more year.

  22. LB on July 3rd, 2005 3:45 pm

    #69: 1 run and the all-important 5 K’s that suggests maybe it wasn’t “luck” (aka non-repeatable skill).

  23. JeffF on July 3rd, 2005 3:46 pm

    #69. Absolutely. Moyer has had some bad outings, but when he’s on, he’s amazing–and to hold the Rangers to one run is spectacular. Drinks all around for Jamie.

    On to Kansas City, and I’m praying for some easy games.

  24. LB on July 3rd, 2005 3:47 pm

    #71: With a season K/9IP rate in the 4’s, no I do not re-sign Moyer. Today’s game with 5 K’s is probably just small sample size.


  25. shane mikesh on July 3rd, 2005 3:53 pm

    #74 all this talk about small sample size, just reminded me that I have my 6mo. post vasectomy check up this week. gota go study

  26. troy on July 3rd, 2005 4:06 pm

    75, I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say there, but whatever it is I have a feeling it was pretty funny.

  27. Saul on July 3rd, 2005 4:29 pm

    If Ichiro is selected to the All-Star game but not by the fan votes as a starter, he’s still considered an All-Star for five straight years right?

  28. Paul on July 3rd, 2005 4:41 pm

    Oh geez -THERE’S NO CRYING IN BASEBALL boonie. That’s gotta hurt.
    I can’t listen to it. Ugh.

  29. Laurie on July 3rd, 2005 4:45 pm

    I thought it was adorable.

  30. Paul on July 3rd, 2005 4:50 pm

    ow. Well no one can say he’s doesn’t care about the game here.

  31. Daaaan on July 3rd, 2005 5:32 pm

    Let’s hope today’s success does not incline grover to start spiezio in the 5 hole (!) and bloomquist in CF (!) on a daily basis.

    Yeah, i guess i dont get that. You have 5 OF’s on a team, 3 of which can play CF, and you use the utility player (and only backup middle infielder) to start CF. In a pitching matchup, none the less, where you might want to PR late in the game, and your utility player is also your best PR.

  32. Colm on July 3rd, 2005 5:37 pm

    Ahh, a win.

    I love Moyer almost as much as I loved Edgar. I wish he could still be good most of the time.

  33. Colm on July 3rd, 2005 5:38 pm

    Did Kenny Rodgers not panel anyone on his way out of the ground?

  34. Rusty on July 3rd, 2005 8:43 pm

    2:1 odds… hmmmm.

    I wonder what the odds were that the M’s would beat the Rangers with a score of 2 to 1? I assume those odds weren’t 2 to 1.

  35. mln on July 3rd, 2005 11:36 pm

    What are the odds that Kenny Rogers would throttle Matt Morrison like a chicken, if he repeated his signature catchphrase, “Gettin’ the job done,” one more time?

  36. Typical Idiot Fan on July 4th, 2005 12:14 am

    #60: Should results justify the decision? I dunno. If you are playing blackjack and draw a 4 when you hit on 17, does that make it a smart play? (I assume you’re not counting cards; that’d be cheating.)

    Not to tear apart a horrid analogy, but when the dealer has a 10 or Face Card showing, hitting a 17 isn’t entirely stupid. It’s what you have to do. If they have another face card under there, you lose anyway. So if you have nothing to lose, or rather a slim chance to win by doing something, do it.

  37. Dave in Palo Alto on July 4th, 2005 3:08 am

    #86. Yes it is entirely stupid. You must be offered comps from Glitter Gulch to Mandalay.