Game 124, Mariners at White Sox

DMZ · August 18, 2008 at 4:11 pm · Filed Under Game Threads 

Washburn v Buehrle, 5:11

I’m tired of everyone hating on Jarrod Washburn just because he’s bad.

Did you know that if you drop starts where he didn’t go six innings pitched while giving up three or fewer earned runs, he has a 100% quality start percentage? Like the win and the save, the quality start should be your arbitrary statistical measure of choice in evaluating pitchers.

Speaking of arbitrary measures, you may have not noticed that Washburn’s been doing quite nicely lately. Despite not doing anything at all differently — his pitches are the same, he’s slinging them right over the plate as usual (see that great Lookout Landing coverage) and yet the results have changed. The answer is obvious: Jarrod’s doing better in a way we just can’t see in the way he throws, the way the pitches move, or in any other way — so he must be doing something different that we can’t quantify, and that non-quantifiable difference is resulting in quantifiable results. Sometimes analysis has to bow down to analysis, and this is one of those cases.

Furthermore, did you know he’s now throwing a splitter? Yup. Just like Silva was and then wasn’t, it’s a key reason why Jarrod’s success is sustainable, a fact now recognized by others).

How good is his splitter? It’s that good. Look through the pitch logs and check it out. It’s crazy. It’s seemingly logged as a changeup, a cutter, and a slider! It’s so deceptive that it has essentially the same characteristics as other pitches. That’s what’s putting the fear into batters. How can they know if a pitch that looks the same has one of two different names? That’s messing with their heads.

9″ of break on that splitter — that’s more than a fastball!

And what about keeping hitters off balance? Since June, they’ve put up a .271/.332/412 line, where before they were hitting .318/.363/.528. That’s crazy improvement! Sure, you’re going to hear from some people who want to tell you that pitchers don’t have that much control over what happens when opposing hitters make contact, and point you to studies by some Voros guy, or Woolner, or whoever, but I’m going to point you to this:

.318/.363/.528
versus
.271/.332/.412

The results don’t lie: when you look at the season in which the first ten starts are weighed against the second part, Washburn has obviously learned how to control the game. You can make up a theory to explain away whatever, but given two theories: Jarrod’s better since a selected date and now because of reasons, and Jarrod’s better for no reason at all, the view brokered by all those people who hate Jarrod for personal or statistical reasons, well, it’s pretty obvious that the first one’s the right one.

Comments

134 Responses to “Game 124, Mariners at White Sox”

  1. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 4:18 pm

    It’s not working. He’s still here.

  2. khardy on August 18th, 2008 4:27 pm

    Derek,

    Jarrod is just as good as Felix. Calm down.

  3. PositivePaul on August 18th, 2008 4:29 pm

    Did you come to this conclusion by having insider access?

  4. That Bootleg Guy on August 18th, 2008 4:29 pm

    Just a brilliant, brilliant retort, DMZ.

  5. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 4:34 pm

    Anyone who says that Felix and Washburn are close to equivalent is using neither old fashioned scouting methods nor new statistical methods of analysis.

    This is one of those days when I just want to shoot myself. It probably just means that I need to get more sleep.

  6. The Ghost of Spike Owen on August 18th, 2008 4:37 pm

    Was Baker not like this in Toronto? I’m trying to figure out why there was such optimism and hopefulness for his tenure when he showed up? Surely, if he’d been putting out this kind of quality analysis at a previous stop we wouldn’t all have been as eagerly awaiting his arrival here, would we have?

  7. skjes on August 18th, 2008 4:39 pm

    But where this post fails is in looking at the ERA! You completely ignore the ERA in favor of other, more meaningful measurements!

    And I think you’re downplaying how well Jarrod is at controlling where his flyballs land. You think it’s easy to control a ball once it’s been hit into the air?

    (Yeah, I was waiting for this post as soon as he compared 21-year-old, still-improving Felix and 34-year-old, at-his-peak Washburn.)

  8. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 4:41 pm

    Baker wasn’t like this when he first arrived.

  9. Tuomas on August 18th, 2008 4:43 pm

    I kinda wish he’d link to you every time he tosses out the “those people” line, because it couldn’t be more obvious who he’s talking about.

  10. pakipaki on August 18th, 2008 4:43 pm

    I like the information Baker gets for us from the clubhouse and the front office, and the spring training stuff too. But if “Happy Jarrod Day” is his attempt at accurate statistical analysis…he should stick to getting us the little videos and pictures.

    I think he has been emotionally gnarled by having to pay such close attention to the Mariners this season.

    Just my opinion though.

  11. RaoulDuke37 on August 18th, 2008 4:43 pm

    DMZ,

    Happy Washburn Day.

    - The Good Doctor

  12. Willmore on August 18th, 2008 4:48 pm

    [nope]

  13. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 4:50 pm

    Perhaps we’ve all become emotionally gnarled (love that turn of phrase) and he’s only the most-gnarled because he’s not only been forced to watch the games and report on them, but also because he’s had to spend time inside the clubhouse – at this point the chemistry in a couple of quarters seems toxic, and no doubt produces strange thoughts.

  14. JMHawkins on August 18th, 2008 5:07 pm

    Sims on the pregame just said:

    “Washburn had that great stretch where he won two games…”

    and

    “…he’s got it [his ERA] under six now…”

    Good grief, Wash better start working on his Cooperstown speech.

  15. msb on August 18th, 2008 5:16 pm

    not to mention Raul is just two ticks away from batting .300.

    you know, Wash is also a darned fast worker, and even if you had to wait 30 days, and couldn’t put him on your post-season roster, why, he’d still be worth obtaining.

  16. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 5:17 pm

    And how much time did you waste writing this? No offense, I read both Baker’s blog and this one but wow, this is getting ridiculous. You guys both have good insights on different things but neither of you can admit the other has a good point. Not saying Washburn’s been a great pitcher but maybe, just maybe, numbers aren’t the end all be all. I wish you guys could support each other in this horrible season instead of making petty attacks. To end though, Felix is 20 times better than Washburn.

  17. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 5:22 pm

    neither of you can admit the other has a good point

    This is such utter bullshit.

    Go back through our posts. We’ve had nothing but good things to say about Baker’s news and interviews, we’ve talked about how much he’s improved the print coverage in the city, lauded specific articles, and this is your response?

    I don’t know why we bother.

  18. MarinerDan on August 18th, 2008 5:24 pm

    I don’t know why we bother.

    Because the sheer joy of writing about the Mariners is its own reward?

  19. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 5:26 pm

    I meant recently.

  20. JMHawkins on August 18th, 2008 5:30 pm

    You guys both have good insights on different things but neither of you can admit the other has a good point.

    and

    I meant recently.

    Has Baker made a good point recently? If he has, I’ve missed it.

  21. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 5:30 pm

    Hey, way to get in the spirit of arbitrary sample sizing to suit your point.

    What do you want here? Do you want us to agree with every third article he writes or find something to single out before we’re allowed to throw up something silly? Or just every two weeks or so? What if he only writes things we disagree with for a period of time?

  22. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 5:35 pm

    The way I see it, the problem is that Baker (a) isn’t qualified to do old-fashioned scouting and (b) isn’t qualified to do modern statistical analysis. The truth doesn’t lie somewhere in between Baker and the USSM/LL points of view; it lies somewhere between the scouts and the statheads, between the Braves and the Athletics. But despite its reputation, USSM has always sought this middle-ground between scouts and stats. Just read Dave’s last draft day post to see the kind of respect he gives to old-fashioned scouting.

    So I don’t see what Baker adds to things when he decides to do analysis. It’s not as if he has access to superior scouting reports or superior statistical methods. So what is he bringing? Superior access to the team? That’s not really important for either method. If Baker wishes to argue with USSM and LL, he needs to get on top of one of these two methods.

  23. Jeff Nye on August 18th, 2008 5:35 pm

    USS MARINER RULEZ, Baker’s Blog DROOLZ
    P.S. I HEART DMZ

    (yes, it’s a joke)

  24. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 5:35 pm

    I just want to read about the Mariners, not about how each other’s blogs are wrong. I respect both yours and Dave’s opinions and blog and I respect Baker’s writing. It was just this big, sarcastic article that pissed me off.

  25. Breadbaker on August 18th, 2008 5:37 pm

    Geoff in his blog said, “So, we know that two AL contenders thought enough of Washburn that they were willing to take on $13 million of his salary through 2009.”

    The fact is, all we know is that two AL contenders put in claims for him. While they were taking the risk that they could end up with his salary for the rest of this year and next, they also knew whom they were negotiating with. It’s like playing poker. There are times when you know your opponent so well you know your bluff will work.

    Isn’t this a likely scenario: you’re the Twins, you expect that the White Sox may put in a claim, and since today you’re behind them in the standings, if you put in a claim, you completely block the White Sox claim from being effective. But you know that the Mariners, particularly if they know two teams put in claims, will be saying essentially what Baker is saying, i.e., that there must be demand for Washburn. So you know you can lowball them in negotiations and they will withdraw him. You accomplished what you really wanted–blocking him from going to your division rival–with very little risk that your bluff would be called.

  26. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 5:39 pm

    But the big, sarcastic article was a long, detailed, and very, very sarcastic attack on THIS blog, its methodology and its conclusions. Baker wasn’t just disagreeing with USSM; he was digging at them. Derek’s response was appropriate, regardless of the merits of the arguments.

    And on the merits of the arguments, well, there’s no contest.

  27. Jeff Nye on August 18th, 2008 5:41 pm

    As much as people want to make this out as some sort of “blog war”, posts like this one happen because Geoff tries to engineer his attempts at analysis to support his pre-defined notions.

    He doesn’t simply DO the analysis and go with the conclusion that the analysis leads him to. Instead, he decides that, say, he thinks Washburn isn’t overpaid; and then he tries to find statistical analysis to support what he’s already decided that he believes.

    Believe it or not, I think that we’re still much better off with Geoff around than we were before he started writing and blogging for the Times; he’s definitely improved their online presence, and at least he helps create interest in this abysmal team.

    He’s just doing his analysis backwards. You evaluate the data first and THEN come to the conclusion; you don’t start with a conclusion and then try to find data that supports it.

  28. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 5:41 pm

    It was just this big, sarcastic article that pissed me off.

    If you’re not in the market for sarcasm, you may wish to block USSM immediately so you’re not exposed to this kind of thing in the future.

  29. ckseattle on August 18th, 2008 5:45 pm

    DMZ – great site that a lot of us depend on. A brutal season of biblical proportions. Let’s not all get too wound on a Geoff Baker article, of all things.

    Keep up the great work!

    Following the Ms this year – and this front office – is like watching an old man fall down a flight of stairs, continually.

  30. Mike Snow on August 18th, 2008 5:46 pm

    Hey, it’s not even the fifth inning yet.

  31. msb on August 18th, 2008 5:46 pm

    sarcasm is USSMs … um … idiom

    speaking of sarcasm, I was going to ask who the team was playing tonight in place of the Mariners, but those Mariners have come back.

  32. Evan R. on August 18th, 2008 5:47 pm

    If you’re not in the market for sarcasm, you may wish to block USSM immediately so you’re not exposed to this kind of thing in the future.

    Nah, much better to dictate to the (highly talented and insightful) authors the tone they should take with their writing.

  33. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 5:47 pm

    Ok, you’re right, Baker shouldn’t do statistical analysis and he was better earlier in the year, he has declined. I just didn’t see his blog today like that but I can see how it could be meant that way too. And while sarcasm is my second language, when I first read this blog today, I thought it was dripping with it. However, I was just reminded with that Swisher HR that Washburn indeed does suck and I rescind my earlier comments. Forget I said anything.

  34. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 5:48 pm

    Waiting for 09 said, “It was just this big, sarcastic article that pissed me off.”

    Sarcasm overload happens to all of us. I recommend sleeping it off. You’ll should feel better in the morning.

  35. OppositeField on August 18th, 2008 5:48 pm

    I think the sarcasm here is actually one of the most effective methods of exposing the flaws in conventional thinking that I’ve ever seen. Derek is exceptionally good at boiling an opposing viewpoint down to its essence, and then exposing the flaws and fallacies by framing it in a ridiculous but completely applicable context.

    And if anybody actually read that entire Baker article, well, you’re a more patient man (or woman) than I.

  36. MarinerDan on August 18th, 2008 5:49 pm

    However, I was just reminded with that Swisher HR that Washburn indeed does suck and I rescind my earlier comments. Forget I said anything.

    That is “results-based analysis.”

  37. msb on August 18th, 2008 5:49 pm

    Beltre still makes me happy.

  38. Mike Snow on August 18th, 2008 5:50 pm

    Oh by the way, according to Gameday that Swisher home run was off of Washburn’s “out pitch.”

  39. Jeff Nye on August 18th, 2008 5:52 pm

    The ch-utt-ider?

  40. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 5:55 pm

    What’s the “utt”?

    Edit: Nevermind. The cutter.

  41. Sinking Away on August 18th, 2008 5:56 pm

    Do we have to look at Griffrey’s mug every five minutes? He’s not even in the game yet.

  42. Jeff Nye on August 18th, 2008 5:56 pm

    I tried to come up with a more elegant name for it, but failed.

    Suggestions welcome!

  43. msb on August 18th, 2008 5:57 pm

    The ch-utt-ider?

    Matsuzaka is thinking of replacing the gyroball with the ch-utt-ider.

    dang. did anyone see China vs US in baseball today?

  44. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 5:58 pm

    Only three more innings to get that quality start, Jarrod! You can do it!

  45. Mike Snow on August 18th, 2008 5:59 pm

    The slangeutterve.

  46. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 6:00 pm

    It shouldn’t be elegant. I think that if we pronounce it “CHUT-uh-duhr” the name works fine. It suggests inconsistency.

  47. John in L.A. on August 18th, 2008 6:00 pm

    I think there is something very important that people are forgetting too often for such a vital election year, er, offseason:

    Just because there are two sides, does not make those two side equal.

    Dumb thoughts and bad ideas do not deserve the same time or respect as smart thoughts and good ideas. They just don’t.

    I’m not sure if that is officially a fallacy, but it should be. I see it all the time these days. And it can be f**king dangerous.

  48. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 6:00 pm

    According to Blowers, the White Sox came prepared to play baseball.

    Which is good, because if you show up with only your lacrosse gear, you have to forfeit.

  49. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:01 pm

    Do we have to look at Griffrey’s mug every five minutes?

    but surely Jr = Ratings, right?

  50. juustabitoutside on August 18th, 2008 6:01 pm

    I guess the mystery pitch could be called the sl-ut-chee.

    How does 7-11 feel about trademark infringement? How would Jarrod look with a porn mustache?

  51. Carson on August 18th, 2008 6:02 pm

    Do we have to look at Griffrey’s mug every five minutes. He’s not even in the game yet?

    You have to understand, the average fan with fond memories is going to want to see as much of him as possible, especially the casual fans. That’s how it works when a guy is an icon. They want to see him play, watch his reactions to stuff, and type his name over and over until they spell it right.

  52. MedicineHat on August 18th, 2008 6:04 pm

    I think the problem with what this guy is saying is…This blog is different than a newspaper article/Blog. Baker’s job is to cover the Mariners. He writes articles about them, sometimes expresses certain opinions about the state of the team and it’s players.

    This bog doesn’t cover the team…it covers all things Mariner…whihc means it covers the newspaper articles, the blogs, the games, the stats, etc… It’s job is to talk about anything interesting relating to the Mariners. Not report on a game or a specific aspect of the team or write feel good pieces, etc…

    Every time Baker writes an article (or any reporter for that matter), it’s possible this blog may comment on it, analyze it and offer a differing opinion. It’s also possible this blog may 100% agree with everything in a certain article. But what would be interesting about coming to a blog where it just posts links to articles and says…yep, we agree?

  53. gwangung on August 18th, 2008 6:05 pm

    Which is good, because if you show up with only your lacrosse gear, you have to forfeit.

    So? What are the Ms’ excuse?

  54. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:05 pm

    According to Blowers, the White Sox came prepared to play baseball. Which is good

    just ask Josias Manzanillo.

  55. Evan R. on August 18th, 2008 6:06 pm

    But what would be interesting about coming to a blog where it just posts links to articles and says…yep, we agree?

    This implies arguing for the sake of arguing, when in fact the authors argue for the sake of reality.

  56. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:09 pm

    you know, I think the 2nd inning is just another example of Jarrod’s fair and giving nature. He likes for the game to be played on an even playing field.

  57. JMHawkins on August 18th, 2008 6:13 pm

    Which is good, because if you show up with only your lacrosse gear, you have to forfeit.

    So? What are the Ms’ excuse?

    The M’s show up with their lacrosse gear, but they’re so incompetent, their lacrosse gear is actually baseball gear so the umps make them play the game anyway.

  58. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:14 pm

    Hey look, Ichiro is being selfish.

  59. JMHawkins on August 18th, 2008 6:16 pm

    Oh, BTW, got a little box in the mail from the M’s this weekend. It included a $25 gift certificate to the team store, and a coupon good to upgrade my season tickets for one game to Terrace Club seats.

    Only in my case, it would be a downgrade.

    But anywho, it seems they realize the fans are restless. I think I’ll send the stuff back with a note suggesting they send the swag to Dave as a wedding present, and maybe read some of what he writes if they really want to make the fans happy.

  60. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:17 pm

    So, did Beltre look as bad as it appeared on MLB Gameday?

  61. Evan R. on August 18th, 2008 6:18 pm

    Oh, BTW, got a little box in the mail from the M’s this weekend.

    Send it back with the disembodied noggin of a Yuni bobblehead.

  62. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 6:19 pm

    The M’s came prepared to play baseball but decided they didn’t really feel like it.

  63. Tuomas on August 18th, 2008 6:19 pm

    “They want to see him play, watch his reactions to stuff, and type his name over and over until they spell it right.”

    Well played, sir.

  64. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:23 pm

    31 strikes, 30 balls — that’s pretty good, right? Right?

    Edit: 31 and 31 now.

  65. Mike Snow on August 18th, 2008 6:24 pm

    Now that’s the Washburn fifth inning we’ve come to know and love.

  66. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 6:25 pm

    Jarrod doesn’t get a quality start? How can this be? I thought he was a new pitcher after May as long as you ignore starts where he didn’t do well.

  67. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:25 pm

    Five runs in 4.1 innings, that’s quality, right? Right?

    Is that one of those “quality fly balls” Baker was talking about?

  68. HamNasty on August 18th, 2008 6:26 pm

    Big surprise there, O Cabrera killing a Washburn pitch.

  69. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 6:27 pm

    One step closer to #1 Pick.

  70. JMHawkins on August 18th, 2008 6:27 pm

    Jarrod doesn’t get a quality start? How can this be? I thought he was a new pitcher after May as long as you ignore starts where he didn’t do well.

    Right. So you ignore this start. See? Easy.

    Besides, it was just one bad inning…

  71. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:27 pm

    Hey, there’s that splitter. And, boy, is it totally awesome.

  72. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:27 pm

    Well, to be fair, Cabrera is one of the greatest home run threats of his generation.

    Wait, he isn’t?

  73. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:28 pm

    Gameday lists the 2nd pitch to Quentin as a splitter. I can’t see, so tell me if Gameday is wrong.

  74. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:29 pm

    The splitter in the dirt is a well-known worldbeater. Everyone should have such an arrow in their quiver.

  75. cdowley on August 18th, 2008 6:30 pm

    Good God DMZ, did you really manage to write that and keep a straight face?

    Kudos for jumping all over the ridiculous blog post of Baker’s, it really deserved it IMO. Even earlier in the season, he wasn’t this bad. But as the year has gotten worse, so has his apparent ass-kissedry.

  76. juneau_fan on August 18th, 2008 6:30 pm

    Ah, yes, home for the fifth inning and the wheels falling off The Bus, right like clockwork as soon as whichever poor bastard is in the booth says, “And Raul’s given Washburn the lead here in the 5th…”

  77. Mike Snow on August 18th, 2008 6:31 pm

    Happy Jarrod Day indeed!

  78. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 6:31 pm

    He’s trying to get it all out of his system so he can rack up the quality starts the next few games.

  79. MarinerDan on August 18th, 2008 6:33 pm

    Happy Jarrod Day

    Translation: F*ck you

  80. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:33 pm

    Batista replaces Washburn. Out of the frying pan, into the fire.

  81. hititagainandagainandagain on August 18th, 2008 6:33 pm

    Not every team has multiple #5 starters waiting in the wings for middle relief. Go Batista!

  82. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:33 pm

    Whatever “it” is that he’s trying to get out of his system, he certainly does seem to have a lot of it.

  83. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:34 pm

    And Miguel’s got even more!

  84. cdowley on August 18th, 2008 6:34 pm

    Batista replaces Washburn. Out of the frying pan, into the fire.

    I just watched that happen and threw up a little in my mouth…

  85. Sinking Away on August 18th, 2008 6:34 pm

    Oh, Please…NOT Batista.

  86. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 6:35 pm

    Batista wants to break Dickey’s record.

  87. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:35 pm

    well, heck, Washburn could have done that.

  88. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:36 pm

    Ah, Miguel’s “ball in dirt” is called a changeup.

  89. pygmalion on August 18th, 2008 6:36 pm

    Happy Jarrod Day:

    Translation: Ingmar Bergman didn’t know how meaningless human suffering could be. If he were alive today and a fan of your Seattle Mariners, he would need to remake The Seventh Seal. If the flagellents were followed by Batista, then the knight would have given up his search for meaning altogether.

  90. juneau_fan on August 18th, 2008 6:36 pm

    Hell, Washbus could have done this….

    Wait, I guess we couldn’t expect him to get a ground ball for the DP. Although, I don’t expect Batista to do so either….

  91. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:37 pm

    HOF Dave: “and he hit him. oh, my, this is unbelievable.”

  92. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 6:37 pm

    Winning games: ur doing it wrong

  93. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:37 pm

    If only Silva was on the active roster and could then come in to replace Batista. Or does MLB have a rule about how many overpaid #5 starters can actually be used in a single game?

  94. Red Apple on August 18th, 2008 6:37 pm

    That was a message pitch.

    Message: “I’m not a good pitcher.”

  95. juneau_fan on August 18th, 2008 6:38 pm

    RE: Batista–what’s a demotion from the bullpen?

    (Brainshare, msb. Although I’m sure we were all thinking it.)

  96. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 6:38 pm

    This reliever’s not very good, maybe we should send him back down to AAA, oh wait…

  97. DMZ on August 18th, 2008 6:40 pm

    Past an immobile Jose Lopez and Washburn’s tagged with another run scored!

  98. dsmiley on August 18th, 2008 6:41 pm

    Batista has the Midas Touch…for the other team. Can someone look up the last game in which Batista started or even appeared that we won?

  99. Breadbaker on August 18th, 2008 6:41 pm

    Not every team has multiple #5 starters waiting in the wings for middle relief. Go Batista!

    You mean “multiple #1 starters”, don’t you? We have five number ones on our team.

  100. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:42 pm

    And that, my friends, is what kind of pitching you can get for $20 mil.

  101. juneau_fan on August 18th, 2008 6:42 pm

    I got home 1/2 hour ago, and there hasn’t been an out yet.

  102. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:44 pm

    It’s a good thing that Wash and Batista will be around next year. I mean, without pitchers like them, this game could have really gotten out of hand.

  103. Breadbaker on August 18th, 2008 6:44 pm

    Me, too, Juneau. At least Batista’s are on the ground. Hard hit on the ground, but not deep flies to the power alleys like Jarrod’s.

  104. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:44 pm

    dsmiley, we won against Minnesota August 4th, thanks to a strong start by Batista (6 runs in 3+ innings).

  105. PaulMolitorCocktail on August 18th, 2008 6:44 pm

    “You mean “multiple #1 starters”, don’t you? We have five number ones on our team.”

    You forgot Burke. He’s a #1 easily.

  106. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:45 pm

    how amazing is it that the Nats could somehow be 4 games worse than the Ms. In the NL, no less.

    so, just how much money did it cost to give up those 7 8 9 runs?

  107. dsmiley on August 18th, 2008 6:47 pm

    I stand corrected. Batista’s been great.

    Yankees, need some pitching?

  108. hititagainandagainandagain on August 18th, 2008 6:47 pm

    You forgot Burke. He’s a #1 easily.

    This game can only be interesting if Burke pitches.

  109. Breadbaker on August 18th, 2008 6:49 pm

    Yuni selfishly didn’t leave himself on base there.

  110. juneau_fan on August 18th, 2008 6:50 pm

    The good thing about our starters not making it past the fifth inning is, we have four more innings to make up all the runs they give up.

  111. Tek Jansen on August 18th, 2008 6:50 pm

    Those nine runs came at the expense of roughly 66 million total dollars. (39 + 27, right?).

  112. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:52 pm

    Well, yeah, but only about $19.3 mil of that is for this year. A bargain, considering.

  113. Swungonandbelted on August 18th, 2008 6:53 pm

    I am so effin’ glad that the M’s didn’t just give Washburn to the Twins or the Yankees…..

  114. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:53 pm

    boy, some smart GM should snap up that Ibanez kid this off season.

  115. naviomelo on August 18th, 2008 6:55 pm

    Wow. Raul’s batting .300 now.

  116. dsmiley on August 18th, 2008 6:57 pm

    @108: What about moving Joh from DH to catcher, forcing the pitchers to hit? That would be interesting. And give us an excuse to use Felix as a pinch hitter.

  117. msb on August 18th, 2008 6:57 pm

    every Jarrod Washburn start gives the Seattle blogosphere something new to ruminate about other than how its favorite team managed to lose that day’s game.

    like ruminating about how Jarrod Washburn will lose that day’s game?

  118. Steve T on August 18th, 2008 6:57 pm

    Wait — how is it that the White Sox have TWO pitchers who don’t totally suck that they can use in a game? I don’t understand — what do they know that we don’t? Isn’t there a rule or something?

  119. naviomelo on August 18th, 2008 7:00 pm

    Hard to believe, the M’s are batting .311/.347/.445 as a team in August.

  120. Waiting for 09 on August 18th, 2008 7:02 pm

    haha, the radio brodcast just said they thought they were in for a short game because of Burhle and Washburn but then they said well you have to get people out. That’s a good point.

  121. MattThompson on August 18th, 2008 7:32 pm

    HoRam? The Sox must feel some pity for the state of Mariner pitching.

    Or they’re just rubbing the Ms’ noses in it.

  122. Sinking Away on August 18th, 2008 7:36 pm

    No way HoRam gives up 7 in 1 and a 1/2. He’s no longer with us.

  123. b_rider on August 18th, 2008 7:38 pm

    I understand the fallacy of Baker’s article, and I agree that his analysis was terrible, but I have a question: Isn’t it true that “all fly balls are not equal”? The current system divides all batted balls in play into three categories, but there are harder and softer fly balls and line drives. How do the current statistics account for this? Or do they need to do so? If not, why not?

    Jeff S. mentioned this morning that we need a “hit FX” in order to achieve better analysis. How would that help?

  124. hititagainandagainandagain on August 18th, 2008 7:40 pm

    Batting practice has begun. I don’t see how we are going to make the playoffs if we don’t start pitching better.

  125. msb on August 18th, 2008 7:40 pm

    “Riggleman said he senses better times ahead. “We’re going to get it together and get it turned around”–Seattle Times.

  126. hititagainandagainandagain on August 18th, 2008 7:44 pm

    “We’re going to get it together and get it turned around.”

    Yes! Playoffs for sure. We can sign Sexson for a little extra punch in the lineup, he is available again.

  127. MedicineHat on August 18th, 2008 7:49 pm

    DMZ – If we use the Baker theory…Lopez is only immobile on balls he can’t get to.

    See, it’s refreshing.

  128. Sinking Away on August 18th, 2008 7:50 pm

    Clement’s swinging the bat well. I still don’t see the playoffs in the future.

  129. MedicineHat on August 18th, 2008 7:55 pm

    Washburn and Batista are thinking they are earning their money. You see, if they only gave up a combined 100 runs in a season for a combined $19M…then they are earning way too much at $190K per run given up. By giving up 200 runs they are making a modest $95K per run given up. Those numbers are examples, but you get the point.

  130. Dave in Palo Alto on August 18th, 2008 7:56 pm

    Wash . . .
    Batista . . .
    HoRam . . .

    Good lord Bavasi did a wretched number on this team.

  131. Carson on August 18th, 2008 8:48 pm

    All the way back up at #16:

    And how much time did you waste writing this?

    Really? You typed in the address, or clicked a link, for this blog and question why the blogger… blogged?

    This has got be getting close to the “not fun” part Dave and Derek have discussed.

  132. Mike Snow on August 18th, 2008 9:04 pm

    Jeff S. mentioned this morning that we need a “hit FX” in order to achieve better analysis. How would that help?

    Something that allows us to track velocity and trajectory off the bat, the way we now can from the pitcher’s release, would allow us to better judge when batters are hitting well as opposed to getting lucky.

  133. Gihyou on August 18th, 2008 11:52 pm

    I didn’t watch the game, but I see that Washburn performed poorly. Given that he has a new splitter that makes him a much better pitcher, I must assume he decided not to throw the splitter in this game. Why would he decide to do this?

  134. pygmalion on August 19th, 2008 5:50 am

    “Why would he decide to do this?”

    Because long ago Geoff Baker did him wrong, and now he is trying to get back at him?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.