Game 87, Mariners at Athletics

marc w · July 6, 2011 at 10:53 am · Filed Under Mariners 

Mid-day game today, with Jason Vargas taking on Guillermo Moscoso of the A’s at 12:35.

Moscoso‘s got a shiny ERA and atrocious peripherals – his sub-3.00 ERA sits awkwardly next to his 5+ xFIP. A BABIP of .200 will do that. He’s a fly-baller that the M’s saw a few times in the spring, and while his results have been solid, he’s really just holding down the fort until Tyson Ross comes back from his oblique injury.

Josh Bard getting the start seems pretty much inevitable, given that Olivo’s just back from injury, it’s a day game after a night game, and Bard caught Vargas’ CG shutout 5 games ago.

Franklin Gutierrez had a well-timed single last night, but his slash line since June 1st is now .162/.194/.182. His last extra-base hit came 70 plate appearances ago. The M’s have jettisoned some of their worst hitters, got Gutierrez back from injury, brought up Dustin Ackley…and have seen their team wOBA go down. Yes, Halman and Peguero are falling off quickly, and Smoak had a long drought, but this offense needs *something* out of the CF spot. I’d chalk it up to Gutierrez rounding back into game shape, but he’s getting worse the more he plays. The M’s may need to reduce his innings substantially so that he can (hopefully) build some strength.

So, uh, go M’s!

Line-up:
1: Ichiro! (RF)
2: Ryan
3: Kennedy (DH)
4: Smoak
5: Ackley
6: Peguero
7: Gutierrez
8: Bard
9: Figgins

Comments

126 Responses to “Game 87, Mariners at Athletics”

  1. Westside guy on July 6th, 2011 3:37 pm

    This is interesting… are we just gonna sit Figgins?

  2. samregens on July 6th, 2011 3:38 pm

    Wedge better be careful.

    I think managers lose a lot of credibility among the players when they insist on playing favorites who suck.

    For Wak I think it was his blind love for Rob Johnson which contributed to players disdaining or losing faith in his “belief system”.

    Wedge better beware.
    He’s been pretty proactive in benching Figgins instead of running his incredibly underperforming ass out there every day just because he’s a “veteran”.
    However, his blind love for the woefully inadequate Peguero may be his undoing.

    As has been pointed out here and elsewhere, this lineup is much better with Peguero out of it and Cust in it.

  3. lamlor on July 6th, 2011 3:40 pm

    I have always believed that the biggest difference between good teams and bad teams (offensively) is what they do with their outs (productive outs as mentioned above). A great hitter will get out 67-70% of the time so what do they do with their other outs? Even more important for bad hitters (see Mariners).

    Of course, only getting two hits, and nobody to second I believe, doesn’t really matter about productive outs since there is nobody to move around the bases.

  4. Faceplant on July 6th, 2011 3:46 pm

    A great hitter will get out 67-70% of the time so what do they do with their other outs?

    A guy who makes an out in 67-70% of their plate appearances probably isn’t a great hitter. He isn’t even a good hitter.

  5. gwangung on July 6th, 2011 3:46 pm

    I have always believed that the biggest difference between good teams and bad teams (offensively) is what they do with their outs (productive outs as mentioned above).

    This is something you can measure, you know. For my curiosity, is there some empirical backup for this belief?

  6. Dennisss on July 6th, 2011 3:47 pm

    Jordan, I don’t suppose Wedge was trying to be funny, but that is a brilliant quote.

  7. lamlor on July 6th, 2011 3:49 pm

    As has been pointed out here and elsewhere, this lineup is much better with Peguero out of it and Cust in it.

    Win/Loss record when starting.

    Peguero – 25-14
    Cust- 28-29

    I personally think we need both out of lineup, but the record does speak for itself as painful as it might be to accept.

  8. lamlor on July 6th, 2011 3:51 pm

    A guy who makes an out in 67-70% of their plate appearances probably isn’t a great hitter. He isn’t even a good hitter.

    Unless my math is wrong, that would be a .300-.330 hitter, correct?

  9. samregens on July 6th, 2011 3:52 pm

    Ahem… “Chris Carter, the much-hyped product of the Oakland A’s system is finally healthy and he’s ready to dominate the AL. A clear step up from Daric Barton, he’ll carry the offense on his back for a while.”

    There. That ought to be enough to stick a fork in Carter for a month. Happy now?

    Great post Marc! And I do really hope you “finished” him.

  10. grjm300 on July 6th, 2011 3:55 pm

    M’s call up Seager. Yepez DFA’d. Holy crap!

  11. Westside guy on July 6th, 2011 3:57 pm

    Unless my math is wrong, that would be a .300-.330 hitter, correct?

    No, it would mean the guy has a .300-.330 on base percentage. The top of that range (.330 OBP) is roughly league average.

  12. RRR on July 6th, 2011 3:59 pm

    Lamlor, you’re close, but their OBP would also be .300-.330. I’d start your argument with a guy who makes an out 60% of the time is a great hitter. This imaginary ballplayer could potentially have a slash line of 300/400/800!

  13. samregens on July 6th, 2011 3:59 pm

    Win/Loss record when starting.

    Peguero – 25-14
    Cust- 28-29

    I personally think we need both out of lineup, but the record does speak for itself as painful as it might be to accept.

    Hey, I didn’t know that the win or loss of the team was solely dependent on Peguero or Cust. That’s some unprecedented heft.

    Seriously speaking, I think it’s more instructive to simply take a look at Peguero’s .248 OBP which is a whopping .111 points below Cust’s.

    .248 OBP!

    (And yes, sadly, Guti’s is even worse, which is why Halman probably should be getting more starts in center, since playing a lot doesn’t seem to be fixing Guti, as Marc noted).

  14. Auggeydog on July 6th, 2011 4:06 pm

    samregens you better be careful pgreyy will tell you, you are wrong. You either have to pray God will make the team better or use statistics to prove it. It has nothing to do with how a player feels, if it can’t be proven by statistics it can’t be.

    pgreyy I understand this is a sabermetrics site, but that does not mean you can totally dismiss something that can’t be proven with statistics. I find it funny it has to be stats or prayer with you. I am pretty sure you were kidding, if not I am surprised. In HS nerds and jocks could not get along for the most part, but why can’t we on here. We both look at things from a bit of a different angle, why can’t we learn from each other. Or is it because you can’t learn from a “jock”? As I learn these new stat things, I understand why something will happen more likely than not. The times it doesn’t happen could have another reason. As I open up what I am learning, maybe some of you should open up what you think.

  15. lamlor on July 6th, 2011 4:07 pm

    No, it would mean the guy has a .300-.330 on base percentage. The top of that range (.330 OBP) is roughly league average.

    I guess I see it differently since I was talking about making outs at those percentages meaning the reverse would be true for his average. I see it as if you are getting out 70% of the time, then you are not getting out 30% of the time. Not getting out would be a hit would it not? Basing it on AB’s and not PA’s so walks and sacrifices are taking out of the equation.

    Maybe it just makes sense in my head, but that is how I see it.

  16. lamlor on July 6th, 2011 4:11 pm

    A great quote today from one of the M’s scouts on why Nick Franklin was promoted despite his lower numbers (paraphrasing), “He was hitting the ball really well and making good contact”. My point. Stats would only have shown you a struggling hitter versus the eye telling you his outs were tough with strong contact. There is a reason why they pay millions each year for scouting. Numbers don’t always tell you everything even in syberland.

  17. Auggeydog on July 6th, 2011 4:16 pm

    statistically speaking I said it before Guti needs to go back on the DL and put on some weight. His bat speed is down because of loss of muscle. If he goes on the DL he will be under no pressure and concentrate on getting back to 100%.

  18. Bremerton guy on July 6th, 2011 4:18 pm

    “Clutch hitting” is just as much a “definable repeatable skill” as “plain old hitting” is.

  19. Auggeydog on July 6th, 2011 4:19 pm

    A great quote today from one of the M’s scouts on why Nick Franklin was promoted despite his lower

    numbers (paraphrasing), “He was hitting the ball really well and making good contact”. My point. Stats would only have shown you a struggling hitter versus the eye telling you his outs were tough with strong contact. There is a reason why they pay millions each year for scouting. Numbers don’t always tell you everything even in syberland.

    You know this is a statistics site don’t you, that comment is enough to get you booted. LOL OK I am done hope this washed up old broken down jock will be accepted if I have a different view from some of you.

  20. Westside guy on July 6th, 2011 4:22 pm

    I see it as if you are getting out 70% of the time, then you are not getting out 30% of the time. Not getting out would be a hit would it not? Basing it on AB’s and not PA’s so walks and sacrifices are taking out of the equation.

    So how are you then referring to the end result of a walk – he didn’t make an out, but he didn’t not make an out? 🙂

    I guess I don’t see how you can not look at total plate appearances for this.

    Edgar Martinez lifetime on-base percentage was .418, but his lifetime batting average was .312. To claim he made outs 69% of the time is horribly misleading.

  21. Auggeydog on July 6th, 2011 4:23 pm

    Bremerton “clutch hitting” is hitting under pressure. Some guys are better than others. Look at LeBron James. He is one of the best athletes in the NBA, but he withers under pressure. Some guys love to bat when the game is on the line, others not so. Again it is a mental thing.

  22. lamlor on July 6th, 2011 4:27 pm

    You know this is a statistics site don’t you, that comment is enough to get you booted. LOL OK I am done hope this washed up old broken down jock will be accepted if I have a different view from some of you.

    Very much aware, thanks. 🙂

    Stats have their place, but they are not the final story. Stats are an accumulation of numbers based on past performances. They are in no way a tool to predict the future outcome of every given situation. If stats are absolute, then why is Kennedy equal to Ichiro in hitting this year?

    I enjoy, as you seem to, play with the stat geeks. I have played and coached enough sorts in my life to know that sometimes things just happen for the good as well as the bad in certain circumstances. If not, Vegas would be right 100% of the time.

  23. Bremerton guy on July 6th, 2011 4:33 pm

    Augey,

    I agree with you. I have gone around and around with the group here for a good couple of years now on whether there is such a thing as “clutch hitting.” I don’t have enough statistical background to implement the theory, but I have suggested here in the past a methodology or a type of equation to attempt to quantify this “skill”. Let me make it clear that I believe that some players are better in the clutch than others. (Now to be met with a howl of disagreement from those who will dismiss this belief.)

  24. lamlor on July 6th, 2011 4:34 pm

    So how are you then referring to the end result of a walk – he didn’t make an out, but he didn’t not make an out? 🙂

    I guess I don’t see how you can not look at total plate appearances for this

    Again, I said it is about making good outs. Walks would just defer to the next batter. My topic was about a good out versus a bad out. We could just as easily start talking about what if he just got a hit so we don’t have to worry about outs. It wasn’t about walks, hits, spinach, or anything else. Just outs.

    Edgar Martinez lifetime on-base percentage was .418, but his lifetime batting average was .312. To claim he made outs 69% of the time is horribly misleading.

    Again, walks are not what I was talking about which goes towards his higher OBP. Talking about outs only. To me if he got a hit .312% of the time he got an AB, then conversely hit got out at a .688% of the time. A walk would go towards OBP not AVG nor would HBP or sacrifices.

  25. gwangung on July 6th, 2011 5:03 pm

    Again, walks are not what I was talking about which goes towards his higher OBP.

    Well, that might be the problem.

    I think you SHOULD talk about walks. They shouldn’t be discounted or ignored. Because they’re not making an out.

  26. gwangung on July 6th, 2011 5:05 pm

    I agree with you. I have gone around and around with the group here for a good couple of years now on whether there is such a thing as “clutch hitting.” I don’t have enough statistical background to implement the theory, but I have suggested here in the past a methodology or a type of equation to attempt to quantify this “skill”. Let me make it clear that I believe that some players are better in the clutch than others. (Now to be met with a howl of disagreement from those who will dismiss this belief.)

    Howl.

    If you can’t show that it exist, then I’m perfectly justified in believing that it doesn’t exist. And, really, folks have tried to show this in the past….

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.