Rox Talk - Tale of Two Pitchers?

Tale of Two Pitchers?

Okay so the column on the left is 2007 and the column on the right is 2008. The top line is the number of strikes thrown by the pitcher and the percentage of the total number of pitches thrown by pitcher (i.e. 63% of pitches thrown were strikes). The next three lines describe the type of strikes and the percentage of the type by total strikes (yeah don't ask me why they are greater than 100%, 43 extra pitches of some sort!). The final five rows deal with what happened to the batter or the ball (Groundball, Flyball, Line Drive, Strike Out, or Other [Walks]) with the percentage based on total batters faced. So basically the percentages are the same except a bit more flyballs and little less strikeouts in 2008.

So what about these next numbers. Again the ratios (ratios used since the 2008 pitcher didn't pitch as many innings) are pretty much the same from 2007 and 2008.

Moving on we start to see a big giant difference in the next series of numbers and that is HR allowed. 5 percent difference in Home Runs in 2008! The percentage with these is simply the percent of hits allowed (runs allowed, HR allowed, BB allowed) per batter faced.

And so we have a pitcher who pretty much had the same basic pitching stats with some more flyballs, little less strikeouts, and some more home runs which led to the following bottom lines (see final tally below). Pretty fascinating that difference between a 17 win season and a 4 win season is so small...was Jeff Francis strikeout pitch in 2007 turning into a homerun pitch in 2008? Did batter's adjust to Francis and Francis not readjust? What did the Red Sox's find during the 2007 World Series that had the rest of the NL looking for?

Rox Talk - 2008 Pitching

This is my crazy pitching blog post, stop if you hate numbers ;-)

Basically Cook and Jimenez were the work horses for the team. De la Rosa was the surprise and savior. The first four pitchers accounted for 75% (2007 had 5 pitchers to account for 75% of the IP) of the starts and overall the starting pitching accounted for 61.7% (2007, 64.1%) of the innings pitched for the entire team. If a quality start is defined as a game score of 50 then only Cook and Jimenez averaged a quality start during the season. Cook's 81 game score was the highest for the team (2007, high game score was 77). Hernandez had the distinction of having the lowest game score of 5 (beating out Fogg's game score of 4 last year)!

In addition to the the above stats, I also looked at some other wacky stuff. One question I have always had was what would be a starter's record if he won (or loss) those games because of relievers (or was bailed out by the offensive or relievers and got the no decision)? Also which pitcher actually pitches with the lead?

So in normal speak the Roxs starters were 54 - 62 with 46 no decisions (versus 55 - 47 and 61 no decisions in 2007). In my revised look the starters were 76 - 74 with 12 ties (versus 84 - 60 with 19 ties in 2007). Cook would have won 18 games. Once again Jimenez was the unluckiest as he left 16 games winning and the bullpen could hang on only 12 times. As I mentioned last year I don't think this revisionist look at pitching stats mean anything because over a pitcher's career my guess all the blown saves or offensive help probably average out. To me the bottom line is what does the team do when a certain Starter is on the mound. When Cookie step to the rubber the Rox won 19 times accounting for 25.7% of the total team wins.

If the above study looked at the underbelly of starting pitching (who has luck, no luck, or just happens to pitch that day the offensive was asleep) this next look is what does the Starter do for themselves (i.e. keeps the team in the game by keeping the lead or keeping the game tied). Of the starters, Jimenez pitched with the lead 70% of the time and Cook pitched with the lead 67% of the time. The team overall pitched 62% of the time with the lead or tied (versus 67% in 2007). Finally what did the starters throw to during the season.

Well as you guessed it Cook led the team in Groundballs and Jimenez and de la Rosa had lots of strikeouts. Interesting to see that Jimenez and Cook have very few flyballs which probably leads to their success.

Rox Talk - Big Bat Theory

Winter Meetings

Boy Howdy, Las Vegas was real exciting especially for the Roxs who picked up 38 year old relief pitcher, Alan Embree, and called it a success (?), at least that is what the email to season ticket holders said. Realistically, I didn't expect the Roxs to pick up Manny Ramirez but where is that 4th starter to shore up the rear end of the rotation (Tim Redding???...ughhh scrap heap pitchers ain't the answer)? Just a thought, but with the money drying up in the free agent market, don't you think that next year Holliday might wish he stuck around for the $85 million the Roxs offered up?

Big Bat Theory?

The Denver Post and Patrick Saunders led off Sunday's paper with an article asking "whether a team can thrive without (a top-flight slugger)"? Anytime a question is thrown out like that and then not back up by anything but baseball antidotes I have to look into the numbers. The obvious difficulty in answering a question like this is how do you classify a slugger? Is it your home run king, your RBI leader, combination of HR/RBI leader, or some other stat like OPS? In the Rox's 16 years, the HR and RBI leader was the same only 8 times (Bichette, Galarraga, Castilla, Helton (x3), and Holliday).

In my thinking and looking at 16 years of Rox's data, I will classify a slugger that hits greater than 20% of their teams HRs or hits in more than 16% of the team's RBIs. So for 2008, Holliday and Hawpe hit 25 HR which individually accounted for 16% of the team's HR (160). In 2007, Holliday's 36 accounted for 21% of the team's total (171). So Holliday was a slugger in 2007 but not so much in 2008. For RBIs, Atkins had 99 or 13.9% of the team's total (714) and in 2007 Holliday had 16.6% (137) of the team's total (823). The All-Time leader is Helton in 2000 when he accounted for 26% of the team's HR at 42 (team 161) and Castilla in 1998 when he had 18.2% of the team's RBIs (144 of 791). So back to the analysis...if you take the years the Rox had a slugger (i.e. > or equal to 20%) then there were 10 seasons and those teams had a collective record of 767 - 791 (0.492). If you move the definition to 22% then there were 5 seasons with a collective record of 361 - 391 (.480). RBI leader team collective records for greater than equal to 16% is 760 - 798 (0.488). From this analysis it would appear having one player collect all of your big hits doesn't really make for a great Rox's team. With the other 5 seasons of not having a "slugger" the Rox were a collective 422 - 550 (.434) so I guess in some manner of speaking having a big bopper might help the Roxs. Unfortunately, the Rox's history isn't probably the best example as they have had only 5 winning seasons! It is interesting to note though that for four of five of those seasons the HR and RBI leaders were the same...

OK so maybe the Rox's history isn't the best place to look. In 2007 and 2008, the MLB average was 18% and 19% respectively for HR leaders with respect to their team totals and 14.3% and 14.5% for RBIs. It is interesting to note that in 2008, only 8 of the 30 teams had different HR and RBI leaders (Marlins, Reds, Cubs, Mets, Rox, Dodgers, Blue Jays, and Mariners). In summary then for the two years noted if you look at collective team records for those that had one batter have more than 18% of the team's total HR then the record was 2431 - 2429 (.500) and evenly split with 30 teams having one batter > 18% vs 30 with no batter > 18% of total team HR. For RBIs when one batter with more than 14% of the team's RBI total then the record was 2372 - 2325 (.505) with a 29/31 split. If you increase the HR to 22% then you have a record of 987 - 957 (.508) with a 12/48 spilt and increase RBI total to 16% you have a collective win total of 1226 - 1205 (.504) with a 15/45 split. At a 22% HR and a 16% RBI slugger, than these teams would have 10 - 8 more wins above .500 respectively. Note if you modify my statement above and change a slugger definition to > 22% then the Rox had 5 seasons with a 'slugger; and the collective record was 361 - 391 (.480).

So perhaps there really isn't any true statistical basis for determining if having a slugger is worth more wins. From my perspective having a big bat accounting for alot of HR and RBIs is probably not statistically relevant but I bet mentally it has a huge factor. How many late inning rallies center around that number 3 or 4 batter? Also it is difficult to measure how a team feels if behind by one or two runs with their slugger coming up 3rd or 4th in the order versus having your 7 - 9 hitters? I tend to think of it has the reason baseball as sided with one dominant closer. I don't think it really matters who pitches the 9th but so much of baseball has become mental that not having your "closer" come in makes your team more vulnerable?

Rox Talk - Solid Pitching Starts

Short post this week as I just got back from a seven day cruise in the Caribbean! Needless to say, I didn't think much about anything except which direction the sun was facing and where the bar was.

From the Stat of the Day blog, I came across this nugget from Steve Lombardi. In short he was looking at the NY Yankees starting pitching and wondering just how bad they've been from 2004 - 2008. At first he was looking for starting pitchers who had started 90% of the time and had at least 28 starts and an ERA+ of greater than or equal to 110. He then dropped this to 100 to compare to the Red Sox over the same time period and Yanks had 7 solid seasons versus the Red Sox's 14 (obviously the Red Sox have 2 world series rings over this time period)!

And therefore the question is how many solid seasons did the Roxs have over this time span? The answer is actually 6 (I was surprised!) with Jason Jennings 2006 season leading the way with an ERA+ 130. And to think we supposedly had an awful pitching year in 2008 and yet we had 2 solid pitching seasons from Cook at an ERA+ 117 and U-Ball at an ERA+ of 116. The other three came from Jeff Francis in 2007 with an ERA+ of 114, Cook in 2007 with an ERA+ of 116, and another Cook in 2006 with and ERA+ of 116 (look at Mr. Consistent....).

Of course while we had six solid seasons and the Yanks had seven over that span, the Yanks won 476 games while the Roxs only scraped by with 375. Although the Roxs were pretty pathetic in '04 and '05 (note Kennedy's ERA+ of 134 in '05 doesn't count because he didn't start 28 games). Yanks scored 4,470 runs over that time span with the Roxs scored only 3,993 (an average of almost 95 more runs a season). Outscoring your opponent can have its advantages especially when their pitching isn't better than yours!

All in all I guess I take comfort that in 2009 we do have a starting rotation of Francis, Cook, and U-Ball which is at least a good start...now we just have to find starters for the other 66 games (assuming the big three can get 32 starts each....)

Rox Talk - It's the Weather

Hot Stove News

Not much from the Rox front. Nice to see Baylor back in the purple pinstripes. Hurdle will have two former managers ready to take over when the Rox struggle out of the gate next year. At least it will keep him honest.

It's the Weather, Stupid!

To further my cause in esoteric baseball research I decided to look at the effects on homeruns and weather at Coors Field. Weather data comes from baseball reference. Data includes 2007 and 2008 numbers (grey boxes and line) and includes Rox and opponents homers. Circles are the 2007 and 2008 data points. The rate is determined by taking the total number of homers for the point and dividing this by the number of times that point occurred (i.e., it has been 80 degrees 5 times during the last two years and a total of 9 homers have occurred so the rate is 1.80). So below is temperature and generally the trend is that has it gets warmer the rate of homers increases. The weighted mean temperature at Coors Field over the last two years has been 74 degrees. The average homers hit at Coors over the last two year has been 2.2 a game. Eighty-three degrees has had the most home runs hit (27)

The next graph shows wind speed and home run rate. Generally as the wind increases homers decrease. This graph is independent of the whether the wind is blowing in or out. The weighted average of wind is about 7.5 mph.

The final graph gives the wind direction. Generally we don't have a Wrigley effect. When the wind is blowing in (147 homers, 67 times) a rate of 2.2 and when blowing out (106 homers, 48 times) for a rate of 2.2. Also it seems when that when the wind blows out the wind speed averages about 6.5 mph while when the wind blows in it is about 8 mph. The most homers occur when the wind is blowing in from centerfield (85) although the highest rate is when the wind blows from left to right (which also has on average the higher wind speed).

Rox Talk - Pitcher Per Runs

This is an update to a post that I did back in July.  The Rox at the time had played 108 games. This post updates through 162 games with both our offensive and pitching...

A couple of weeks ago (June or July 2008) I was listening to the Rockies radio broadcast team, Jeff and Jack, and Jack Corigan made the statement that basically said that as your (i.e. the pitcher) pitch count increases in the inning the more likely a run is going to be scored. From the sound of this it made me go hmmm.  Two questions immediately popped up...1) is this true (logically you would think yes) and 2) what is on average the amount of pitches thrown in an inning that would allow a single run?

Well off to baseball reference where on their box score page they show the amount of pitches thrown in an inning along with the number of runs. By taking this data and plotting the number of pitches per inning, the runs scored for that number of pitches, and annotating in a running log how often this number of pitches occur in an inning, I was able to come up with the number of pitches thrown in 2008 by Rockies pitchers and what is the average number of pitches thrown to allow for one run in an inning (i.e., a 12 pitch inning occurred 127 times and a total of 18 runs were scored for a rate of 0.14 runs).  Conversely the Rox offensive saw 12 pitches only 90 times and scored 10 runs over the season for a rate of 0.11 runs.

Graphically all this data looks like this:

This first plot shows the number of pitches versus the total runs. The size of the circle indicates how often this number of pitches were thrown. The next plot shows the distribution which indicates that 12 and 13 pitches were thrown in an inning approximately 249 times or accounting for about 17.2% of the total innings pitched.  Conversely the Rox offensive saw 12 and 13 pitchers approximately 172 times for only about 11.9% of the total innings pitched to them.  

The final plot shows the rate at which runs are scored. So for instance 26 pitches in an inning occurred 26 times and a total of 45 runs were scored. Thus giving a rate of 1.73 runs scored when 26 pitches are thrown. If you plot this rate you get this...

A relatively nice curve that has a Rsquare of about 0.8189 (versus 0.6766 for our offensive).  If you throw out the outliers you can get a better curve fit.  After about 30 pitches in an inning the number of times a team scores runs tends to mess up the rate  (i.e. 31 pitches in an inning occurred 14 times with 34 runs scored while 32 pitches happened 6 times with only 11 runs scored).  If you take the equation and solve for 1, you get approximately 20.5 pitches for the Rox pitching and 20.6 for the Rox offensive.  Pretty consistent.

So there you have it...it does appear as you throw more pitches in an inning, the likely of runs being scored increases. 

Follow on questions would be could you establish pitcher effectiveness based on this (i.e., Cook threw 3,068 pitches this year, divided by 20.5 would indicate he should have given up 150 runs (but actually only 102)).  Actually a more representative way to look at this would be average pitches per inning that Cook threw (14.5) which would represent approximately 0.53 runs per inning or 113 runs over his 211 innings pitched.  And of course you can turn this around and say that Tulowitzki saw 1,536 pitches and if you divide by 20.6 then he should have scored about 75 runs instead of the 48 that he did.  But if you look how many pitches he saw per plate appearance (3.6) and multiplying the rate (0.10) by plate appearances then he should have scored only 41 runs.  Lowest pitches per inning average was by Buchholz at 13.4 and the most pitches seen was by Podsednik at 4.5 pitches per plate appearance.

Collecting Baseball

Okay I love baseball and when MLB sends me their Holiday (Holliday not for us anymore!) Catalog I am always interested in perusing the offerings.   Couple of thoughts...

- I have to admit people who put their own names on jerseys is kind of silly.  Although I lucked out this year and got an Aaron Cook All Star practice jersey because my wife's maiden name was Cook (and to think his number is the day my wife was born on...)  I think I scored some points for that one...

- I love ball caps but come on how many different types can companies possibly make?  I am a sucker for old school caps (by the way the greatest team store of all time is the Red Sox store)  Just to see the hat row is a thing of beauty...

- Has Alysso Milano tapped some great unknown clothes market to outfit women for their team?  Two questions for women and baseball...why is it that at a ballgame a guy always brings his date (I assume) and her friend?  Second why do women come out in bunches for opening day and are never seen again?  Come on June/July is great time for baseball, not so much in April.

-  Does someone really have a Red Sox pool table for $2,300?  

-  Okay I think baseball cards are great.  The advent of all the sets and inserts really destroyed a great concept.  I mean come on, one product for one season.  Anyway Upper Deck which probably blew the card house down, has come out with a product that is the ultimate in what I would call "mutant card sets".  Anyway the product called Upper Deck Documentary is a 4,980 card set that includes 166 cards per team and details every game.  Checklist.  That is insane! crazy (OK I confess I want the 166 Rockies cards...)

-  Finally because we haven't tapped every market there is a market to dress your dog in your team's colors!  I think my Greyhound would bite me if I decided he needed dressing up in a Taveras Jersey...

Only 135 days to Opening Day

Rox Talk - Pitching HOKE

This week the pitching HOKE are in.  See below...note pitching is a bit more complicated in the formula:

Total Bases (1B, 2B, 3B, HR) + RBI (minus HR) * RBI base factor (see last week's post) + Hit By Pitch + Walk + Balk + Stolen Base + Wild Pitch - Pick Off - Caught Stealing - Double Plays - Offensive HOKE = HOKE

Note: that I take the pitcher's offensive HOKE and subtract it from their pitching HOKE because a pitcher's goal is to have fewer bases allowed and since they bat and can add bases to their count (granted very few) this gets subtracted.  So for instance Cook had 474 HOKE and faced 886 batter's (he also batted 78 times himself) and so had 3,232 possible HOKE which gave him a percentage of 14.7% or 101 HOKE+ (note the MLB average was 14.9%) . See the chart below for this year's pitching prowess (compared to last year's). HOKE, followed by HOKE (or base) per plate appearance, HOKE divided 4 for runs, HOKE+ (based on MLB average), RC or Runs Created, WPA, and WS or Win Shares (a win is worth 3 win shares).

Obviously the team did a bit better in 2007.  Interesting to note that while Cook's HOKE+ wasn't that much greater in 2008 then 2007 he had a much better season in the eyes of many fans. Hopefully Corpas can come back to form and Buchholz continue his bullpen prowess.  If Street in facts stays in the mix that makes us have a pretty good pen for next year.  Also if Francis can gain back his form from 2007 that makes a pretty potent 1-2-3 (assuming Jimenez continues to improve).  De la Rosa is a decent 4th man which leads us to find a fifth between Hirsh, Reynolds, Morales, and Smith.

Now that I have the HOKE complete for both offense and pitching, I have to wonder if it really means anything?  Does Holliday's 135 versus Buchholz's 129 mean much?  Holliday had 23 win shares to Buchholz's 9 (7.5 wins to 3 wins).  Buchholz's average of bases per plate appearance was 11.5% versus Hollidays 20.1% (MLB average 14.9%) but Buchholz only played in 59 games versus Holliday's 139.  So although it is interesting that bases are the one thing that can be compared to pitcher's and batters the final number probably still doesn't allow you to compare a player's real value to his team (and versus his teammates).  Perhaps next week I will take a look at the MLB in general and find what the top player's HOKE are...

Box Score Haiku - The Book

I have a sister site called box score haiku in which I wrote a haiku for every 2008 Colorado Rockies game. For posterity, I compiled a version of the box score haiku into a paperback book. The cover is below...

You can buy it here....

Rox Talk - Holliday and Offensive HOKE

Holliday Gone...

In a trade with the Oakland A's, the Roxs finally part ways with Holliday and in return get 23 year old outfielder Carlos Gonzalez, 24 year old left hand pitcher Greg Smith, and 25 right hand reliever Huston Street. After last week, it became apparent that Holliday had no desire to re-sign with the Roxs and due to the fighting words between management and Holliday any sort of leverage the Roxs might have kind of faded away. I think this was a better trade for what the Cardinals were offering but youth is always tricky and you have to think why Mr Moneyball gave away these players. The key to this trade had to be Street has a back up to Corpas and set up man. Smith becomes another log jam pitcher for the 4th and 5th spot in the rotation. Gonzalez is a young star that is probably iffy. I for one am not disappointed by Holliday's departure...see post here.

I think Holliday is one of those players simply out for the contract. And that is ok. I can't begrudge a person with the ability to hit a little ball who wants to go for the gusto. That is part of baseball but in this case I would say be careful what you wish for because you aren't always guaranteed the limelight...you might get traded to a team with no more upside then the team you are leaving. With the Angels in the AL West, I just don't see Holliday going to anymore playoffs then hanging out with the Roxs. The interesting question is what did Mr Moneyball see in this deal? Certainly he doesn't have the long-term cash...but perhaps he see Holliday as a 2009 trade deadline bonaza to a team like the Yankees who want to win now and will give up the moon and stars to get another bat (?). Have fun in Oakland Matt and thanks for the "Slide"...you will always be a Rox Star in Denver.

2008 Offensive Hoke

In last week's post on the Rox, I went through a study to find the total bases that a player got when counting their RBIs. In earlier studies, I simply picked a number which I estimated to be around 2. In determining my "Hoke" I established the formula of:

Total Bases (1B, 2B, 3B, HR) + RBI (minus HR) * RBI base factor (see last week's post) + Hit By Pitch + Walk + Stolen Base - Caught Stealing - Double Plays - Field Errors = HOKE

Note: One thing the above formula doesn't take into account is bases that a player moves up but doesn't account for an RBI. Also although we add total bases for an RBI we are not taking bases away if the player doesn't get a hit when a runner is in scoring position.

An additional step was that I took the MLB Hoke and divided this number of possible HOKE (Total Plate Appearances x 4 bases). This percentage (15.1%) became 100 and then I scored each of the players to get a HOKE+ number which makes 100 average. So for instance Holliday had 501 HOKE and 623 plate appearances (or 2,492 possible HOKE) which gave him a percentage of 20.1% or 135 HOKE+. See the chart below for this year's offensive prowness (compared to last year's). HOKE, followed by HOKE (or base) per plate appearance, HOKE+, RC or Runs Created, WPA, and WS or Win Shares (a win is worth 3 win shares).

In regards to Matt's trade and Atkins impending trade it is going to be tough to lose 931 bases (or 36 win shares...that is 12 wins!).

Postscript: In googling Travis Hoke, I came across this article. Written by the man himself he does have an interesting thing to say about his counting of bases, "I had realized by then that it was not accurate to credit a hitter with one unit for each base, because all bases are not equally important. It is more than twice as valuable to the team, for instance, to hit a double than a single, because a man on second is in position to score on a following single. It is more valuable to hit safely with a man on second that with one on first, and there should be recognition of the difference, in the figures. So I had revised the system to fit. If a man singled with the bases empty he was credited with one—from home to first counted one base—but from first to second counted two bases, so that if he doubled he received credit for three, not two bases. A triple got him six bases, and so on. A home run with the bases empty meant ten out of a possible ten bases." So it would appear that Hoke had his doubts about the simplicity of the system. I think a base is a base. People with more bases tend to be better players so I'm sticking with it. As Hoke says this game is called baseball and thus the base in its singularity is the ultimate essence of what it means to play this game...the offensive tries to get them and the pitcher tries to prevent them! Doesn't it make sense to have a stat that compares apples to apples...not week I will throw up the Pitching HOKE....

Rox Talk - Total Hokes (?)

Back in June I was playing around with a stat I called Total Base Plus. See the below link for my early definition of such a stat.

http://purpleroxsquad.blogspot.com/2008/06/stat-of-week_11.html

Since then I read Alan Schwarz - The Numbers Game and realized my little exercise on total bases was put to use in 1915 by Travis Hoke, who rated players by counting the number of bases their hits accounted for, not just for themselves but the advancement of any base runner! So perhaps instead of calling it Total Base Plus perhaps I should call it Total Hoke's or TH. Either way in my efforts to determine total bases I realized there was no good way to determine advancement of a runner. Easiest stat to try and determine an estimate of this would be the RBI. Although RBI doesn't account for a batter getting a single and moving a batter into scoring position thus allowing the following batter the ability to hit a single and get this RBI. So with my early estimate I used a value of 2 bases per RBI. For 2008 I decided to calculate in actual

number for the Rockies this year. I used the following table. Obviously a runner on third and with an RBI obtained then the batter gets one base. Bases loaded home run would give the batter 6 total bases (note the HR gives an RBI to the batter but is already counted in the HR total so the four bases are not counted in the RBI).

So what does the 2008 Roxs look like:

So on average a RBI is worth 1.75 total bases. So Atkins who had 99 RBIs (78 actual ones) got a total of 146 total bases or an average of 1.87 bases per RBI. Not for sure what the rate really means. If you look on the low end it is mostly pitchers and single hitters. Anyway that is that. In addition to this you can also rate the pitchers the same way. One thing I don't do is give bases to pitchers who left a man on then was relieved for another pitcher. My way of thinking is that pitcher gave up the hit which allowed the RBI so the bases would go to the reliever.

Note that the RBI total should be 788 and sacrifice flies should be 47.  I am not going to go through 162 games to find the missing RBIs...I figure above is a decent estimate and I will catch up on it for 2009 (database, database!!!).  It is interesting to note that the base per RBI is about the same...

Rox Talk - World Series

World Series Update

Still playing Game 5. What a mess...rain, rain, everywhere. Whoever wins this series certainly won't have the umpires to thank. I can think of a couple of instances, the miscall at 1B between Moyer and Howard, Rollins getting hit in the jersey and not being given first base, the goofy strike out call and then the Ray batter getting ball 4, and Rollins getting tagged at third and being called safe. I think Joe Morgan said last night on the radio that the calls have been split 3-3 but still alot of mistake calls that did ultimately lead to runs scored.

Update:  Boy is Selig the unluckiest man in the world.  Everytime baseball tries it takes 8 steps backwards.  I mean first it was the all-star blunder now this...man they say baseball and American history go hand in hand and let's hope next week goes smoother than this!

Rox Update

Well the word is out that Holliday is officially on the trading block. A bit surprising as it seems that for the right price Atkins is also available. Pitching is king but losing 196 runs when the teamed underachieved this year could be a bit much. Granted Stewart appears ready but you are counting on Fowler moving up (see Nix last year) and Helton coming back stronger than ever (highly unlikely at 36?). Appears Vizcaino had some alcohol issues and he still has one year left on his deal.

Management has made some talk that last year's team came unglued during spring training when they couldn't get Holliday signed for a home town discount. Think they want to go through that again? Personally I would keep him and Atkins and try for the division. If at the All Star break there no improvement then unload (granted you won't get as good of prospects but at least your not entering a new year with loads of untested youth). Another thing to note is the economy and professional sports. My guess is that contracts might be hard to find next year. If I was a betting man, I will say attendance will plummet next year. Small market teams will certainly be a bit more cautious in trying to sign anyone long term. I think the Roxs would do well to get rid of someone who is all about the money. The money Holliday would command would certainly not hand tie the Roxs long term (see Helton think we should give Holliday a 6 year deal?). Lets face it, the Roxs spend like a small market so we shouldn't be surprised but they better do better with pitching or the boo birds will come out whining that we are simply player development for the big boys.

Rox Talk - The Playoffs

Not much in the way of actual Rox talk since the end of the season. Fall out continues on the dugout changes. Really not a whole lot on the coaches but seems there is quite a lot of bad blood on the strength conditioning coach. Little odd. I think ultimately that a manager type will play second fiddle to Hurdle so if the Roxs start slow next season there will be an immediate hook and replacement of our not so favorite manager.

On to playoff talk. Now that all the preliminaries are over let's get on to the World Series. Bit surprised by the dominance of the Rays (although they got a tired White Sox team and an injured tired Red Sox team). HTis should give all the small market teams some hope even though it appears to take on average 10 years of good drafting to make a quality playoff ready team. The Rays certainly showed some resilience after a devastating Game 5 lost (see below):

The Rays were 7 outs away and were at the time 99.4% likely to win the game. So much for statistics. For the third time in a row it looked like the Sox were going to do it but no magic in Game 7 this year (although the bases were loaded in the 8th with Drew at the plate). While over in the senior circuit the Phillies dismantled the Dodgers who made mincemeat of the Cubs. Amazing how one series can be so different from the other. One thing I have to call BS on is the continued love for Manny. Everyone on the radio kept falling over themselves on how great Manny is when he is behind in the count. Well if you check out baseball reference his average is 0.194 with 0-2 (0.173 NL avg), average 0.216 with 1-2 (0.187), and average 0.265 with 2-2 (0.202). With 2 strikes he is batting 0.226 (0.185). Of course with and 3-0 count he is only batting 0.165 (0.290). So whatever...

So with the Phillies heading to Tampa for an East Coast showdown what can we expect? History has shown that Tampa hasn't been too good for Philly franchises having the Flyers and Eagles both being defeated by Bay area teams recently. Obviously this match up doesn't have alot of "must see" TV although I do think that these are representative teams that deserve to be there (the Cubs probably more so in the NL). Since both teams pounded there opponents, my guess is that we will have close games decided by monstrous home run. Teams are pretty evenly matched. Both have good starters although Tampa probably has a better 4th starter (and no Moyer). Phillies bullpen has been better in the playoffs (see Game 5 above). Offensives have both been on. Tampa has the advantage of being the home team (thanks to Hurdle) and yet Philly probably has a more passionate fan base. Tampa won the best division in baseball and yet Philly has 2 reigning NL MVPs (possibly a third...). AL has been dominant over the years yet the Rays are an extremely young team who has to come back from an emotional ALCS. Phillies had a long wait and might come out flat (i.e. like the Roxs). The Rays lose a bat when going to Philly. Manual vs Maddon? Cheesesteak vs Fishstick(?) Franchise with the most losses of any professional team vs team with its season's first winning record? Liberty Bell vs Pirate Ship?

Bottom Line: Phillies in 6

Rox Talk - Men On Base

"We just sit around talking about the old times, she says when she feels like crying she starts laughing thinking about glory days..." - Bruce Springsteen

Yup talking about the last season of Rox's baseball seems that we really just don't want to forget the 2007 season. I mean 90 wins, NL pennant, a shot at the Series...but now we have a bitter aftertaste that is the 2008 season.

So what the heck is this? Well it is a plot of 4 things; 1) dark blue line is projected wins, 2) yellow line is runs scored as a percentage of men on base, 3) light blue line is men left on base per plate appearance, and 4) pink line is runs per plate appearance. I plotted these in 2007 and then plotted again based on 2008 data. Put them together and the plot above is what you get.

Obviously these are cumulative. Projected wins settles in around Game 60. In 2008 the Roxs were projected to win about 84 wins throughout the season and only got to 90 based on their unbelievable finish. 2008 they reached a highpoint of about 76 games with 20 to play. The next graph is the yellow one or runs scored as a percentage of men on base. This value takes the runs scored divided by the amount of men that made it to a base (it doesn't subtract men who are then picked off, caught stealing, or doubled up). So in 2007, 36.9% of the men put on base crossed home plate while only 34.6% did in 2008. What was interesting was that if you look at the 2007 graph the Roxs got better through the season while in 2008 we basically plateaued.

The third graph is the light blue line and this is men left on base per plate appearance. The amazing thing about this graph is how constant 2007 and 2008 were. In 2007, 19.3% of men were left on the table and in 2008, 19.1%. It seems that 8 men left on base is the Rox's norm. Finally the pink line is the amount of runs scored per plate appearance. Again it should be noticed the upward trend for 2007 and the plateau that was 2008. 13.2% scored in 2007 while only 10.6% in 2008 (6,498 plate appearances in 2007 versus 6,312 plate appearances in 2008). What can we conclude from all this? Well 2007 saw the Roxs score 860 runs and in 2008 we eeked out 747 runs!

Did this exercise last year but here are the breakdowns by month for 2007.

AVERAGE	G	PA	AB	R	H+BB	HBP+RE	LOB
April	26	40	34	4	13	1	8
May	28	38	34	4	12	1	7
June	27	40	36	6	14	1	8
July	24	39	34	6	13	1	7
August	29	41	36	6	14	1	8
Sept	29	41	36	6	14	1	8

2008

AVERAGE	G	PA	AB	R	H+BB	HBP+RE	LOB
April	28	41	36	4	13	1	8
May	28	38	34	4	12	1	7
June	27	38	33	4	12	1	7
July	27	40	34	6	14	1	8
August	28	40	34	5	13	1	8
Sept	24	37	33	4	11	1	6

It would seem to me if the Roxs could average 6 runs a month they tend to do pretty good. Again I am somewhat amazed by the consistency between the 2007 and 2008 years at the plate especially the left on base.

Management = Clueless

So the Roxs upper management shows their displeasure with a dismal season by firing three coaches.  Whoopee the coaches they let go didn't cause the team to tank to 74 wins.  To hold onto the two coaches, Hurdle and Apodaca, that had the most to do with the Roxs miserable year is just unconscionable.  How can someone own a team and allow such poor management take place.  I mean the team that went to the World Series basically came back intact and yet they could only manager 74 wins (16 games worst then the previous year!).  Ughhh I give Hurdle until April 20th, 2009.  When the Roxs start out at 0 - 11 having lost to the D-backs, Philly's, Cub's, and Dodgers.

Rox Talk - Season Summary

Well after a 74 - 88 finish how did this all look based on some preseason predictions? Well looking back to April, Vegas O/Us for the division was the D-backs at 87.5, Dodgers at 86.5, the Padres at 84.5, and the Roxs at 83.5. Based on returning Win Shares and adding in their off season additions the D-backs were at 78, Roxs at 81, Padres at 68, LA at 83 and the Giants at 71. So what was the final tally?

So for last year based on the team's final standings

	W	L	RS	RA	Ex - W	WS Factor
Arizona	90	72	712	732	79	0.88
Colorado	90	73	860	758	90	1.00
San Diego	89	74	741	666	89	1.00
LA	82	80	735	727	82	1.00
SF	71	91	683	720	77	1.09

2008 Standings

	W	L	RS	RA	Ex - W	WS Factor
LA	84	78	700	648	87 (83)	1.04
Arizona	82	80	720	706	82 (78)	1.00
Colorado	74	88	747	822	74 (81)	1.00
SF	72	90	640	759	68 (71)	0.94
San Diego	63	99	637	764	68 (68)	1.08

Well Vegas did awful but the Win Share method did fairly well. Boy the Dodgers really helped their cause with pitching. And well the Roxs just couldn't score. Based on early projections based on Chone, ZiPs, Pecota, and Marcels the Roxs had a spread of wins from 77 to 93. The average was 84 wins. I predicted an 85 win season finishing second to the Dodgers. Looking at expectations the injury bug certainly hurt the Roxs with Helton and Tulo missing considerable games. The big hole was 2B where we had 84 runs scored last year thanks to Matsui and this year the patchwork at the 2-hole only produced 65 runs. The lowest predicted run score was 770 runs!

Looking at the pitching performance

For as much griping as there was for the pitching staff this year, I really think it was the offense that really underperformed. Had the Roxs scored 800 runs they would have won 4 - 5 more games. Oh yeah and if the Roxs weren't 3 - 15 against the D-backs we might have been a bit more respectable too.

If I Was Commissioner...

Well here is the final standings in my alternative universe. As stated way back when, the division winners and the next two best teams get the nod. Therefore Round 1 in my playoff scenario would be the Rays vs. the Yankees and the Red Sox vs. the Phillies in the Eastern League and the Angels vs. the White Sox and the Cubs vs. the Brewers in the Western League. Basically just missing the Dodgers from the real world playoffs. Have to figure out some way to simulate games to determine the winners. Stay tuned....

Rox Talk

A 3-3 week against the Giants and D-backs. The Roxs finished at 74-88. Ten games back from division leading Dodgers in third place. Finished 43-38 at home and 31-50 on the road, the Roxs were outscored by its opponents 747-822 (expected wins is 74 versus historical wins at 77).

Weekly WPA leaders (overall as well):

Good start to the final roadtrip (we swept the Giants!) but then another sweep at the hands of the D-backs in Phoenix. And that my friends is the Roxs 20087 campaign. 74 wins and only 747 runs scored. Mighty impressive when you consider last year they won 90 games and scored 860 runs! I don't think Matsui counted for 113 runs and he was the only big time non-returning starter. Disappointing is all I can say.

Last year was a fluke but I didn't think this year was worthy of a 74 win campaign. I really thought a few games over .500 was certainly feasible. You know pitching would come back to reality but the anemic offensive was really what prevented a respectable season. Of course if we hadn't gone 3 - 15 against the D-backs we probably could have had 79 wins which is a whole lot better. I mean the Dodgers only won the division with 84 wins! I don't think 2009 is going to be any easier in the division...the Giants and Padres won't be as pathetic. If we lose Holliday this winter where are we going to find that offensive spark?

Rox Talk

A 3-3 week against the Padres and D-backs. The Roxs currently stand at 71-85. Ten games back from division leading Dodger in third place. Currently 43-38 at home and 28-47 on the road, the Roxs have been outscored by its opponents 711-797 (expected wins is 70 versus historical wins at 74). On pace for 74 wins with 738 runs scored and 828 runs against.

Weekly WPA leaders (overall as well):

Well six games left. 3 in San Fran and 3 in Arizona. The D-backs are 2 back from the Dodgers. Frankly at this point I don't care how bad we've played against the D-bags but let's find our mojo and sweep them in Phoenix so we don't have to see them in the playoffs. Nothing like keeping them out of the World Series one year and the playoffs the next! Can we close it out strong, maybe...please...

Yankee Stadium No More

And the stadium goes silently into the night.  Probably deserved another World Series but no final season luck.  Visited the stadium once back on June 10, 2004 when the Roxs played the Yanks in a 3 game series.  I caught the afternoon game and watched Flaherty demolish the Roxs. The Roxs got swept in there only appearance at the stadium.  

I wasn't too impressed by the whole affair.  Got there by taking the subway.  Was able to check out the monument park which was a great tribute.  Other than that the stadium just didn't feel very intimate.  The wacky outfield dimensions was goofy.  The crowd was so New Yorkish and the $9 beers were a bit much.  I do have to admit that my opinion of Yankee Stadium was in contrast to going to Fenway the following day!  Now Fenway is a baseball park!

Anyway I am glad to have seen the House that Ruth built because it is a National Baseball Landmark.  I am sure the new stadium will be very nice but it is a shame that some stadiums have to go.

Next Year's Schedule

April 6 at Arizona

April 7 at Arizona

April 8 at Arizona

April 10 Philadelphia

April 11 Philadelphia

April 12 Philadelphia

April 13 at Chicago Cubs

April 15 at Chicago Cubs

April 17 at L.A. Dodgers

April 18 at L.A. Dodgers

April 19 at L.A. Dodgers

April 20 at Arizona

April 21 at Arizona

April 22 at Arizona

April 24 L.A. Dodgers

April 25 L.A. Dodgers

April 26 L.A. Dodgers

April 27 San Diego

April 28 San Diego

April 29 San Diego

May 1 at San Francisco

May 2 at San Francisco

May 3 at San Francisco

May 4 at San Diego

May 5 at San Diego

May 6 San Francisco

May 7 San Francisco

May 8 Florida

May 9 Florida

May 10 Florida

May 12 Houston

May 13 Houston

May 14 Houston

May 15 at Pittsburgh

May 16 at Pittsburgh

May 17 at Pittsburgh

May 18 at Atlanta

May 19 at Atlanta

May 20 at Atlanta

May 21 at Atlanta

May 22 at Detroit

May 23 at Detroit

May 24 at Detroit

May 25 L.A. Dodgers

May 26 L.A. Dodgers

May 27 L.A. Dodgers

May 29 San Diego

May 30 San Diego

May 31 San Diego

June 1 at Houston

June 2 at Houston

June 3 at Houston

June 4 at Houston

June 5 at St. Louis

June 6 at St. Louis

June 7 at St. Louis

June 8 at St. Louis

June 9 at Milwaukee

June 10 at Milwaukee

June 11 at Milwaukee

June 12 Seattle

June 13 Seattle

June 14 Seattle

June 16 Tampa Bay

June 17 Tampa Bay

June 18 Tampa Bay

June 19 Pittsburgh

June 20 Pittsburgh

June 21 Pittsburgh

June 22 at L.A. Angels

June 23 at L.A. Angels

June 24 at L.A. Angels

June 26 at Oakland

June 27 at Oakland

June 28 at Oakland

June 29 at L.A. Dodgers

June 30 at L.A. Dodgers

July 1 at L.A. Dodgers

July 3 Arizona

July 4 Arizona

July 5 Arizona

July 6 Washington

July 7 Washington

July 8 Washington

July 9 Atlanta

July 10 Atlanta

July 11 Atlanta

July 12 Atlanta

July 16 at San Diego

July 17 at San Diego

July 18 at San Diego

July 19 at San Diego

July 20 Arizona

July 21 Arizona

July 22 Arizona

July 24 San Francisco

July 25 San Francisco

July 26 San Francisco

July 27 at N.Y. Mets

July 28 at N.Y. Mets

July 29 at N.Y. Mets

July 30 at N.Y. Mets

July 31 at Cincinnati

Aug. 1 at Cincinnati

Aug. 2 at Cincinnati

Aug. 4 at Philadelphia

Aug. 5 at Philadelphia

Aug. 6 at Philadelphia

Aug. 7 Chicago Cubs

Aug. 8 Chicago Cubs

Aug. 9 Chicago Cubs

Aug. 10 Chicago Cubs

Aug. 11 Pittsburgh

Aug. 12 Pittsburgh

Aug. 13 Pittsburgh

Aug. 14 at Florida

Aug. 15 at Florida

Aug. 16 at Florida

Aug. 18 at Washington

Aug. 19 at Washington

Aug. 20 at Washington

Aug. 21 San Francisco

Aug. 22 San Francisco

Aug. 23 San Francisco

Aug. 24 San Francisco

Aug. 25 L.A. Dodgers

Aug. 26 L.A. Dodgers

Aug. 27 L.A. Dodgers

Aug. 28 at San Francisco

Aug. 29 at San Francisco

Aug. 30 at San Francisco

Sept. 1 N.Y. Mets

Sept. 2 N.Y. Mets

Sept. 3 N.Y. Mets

Sept. 4 Arizona

Sept. 5 Arizona

Sept. 6 Arizona

Sept. 7 Cincinnati

Sept. 8 Cincinnati

Sept. 9 Cincinnati

Sept. 10 Cincinnati

Sept. 11 at San Diego

Sept. 12 at San Diego

Sept. 13 at San Diego

Sept. 14 at San Francisco

Sept. 15 at San Francisco

Sept. 16 at San Francisco

Sept. 18 at Arizona

Sept. 19 at Arizona

Sept. 20 at Arizona

Sept. 22 San Diego

Sept. 23 San Diego

Sept. 24 San Diego

Sept. 25 St. Louis

Sept. 26 St. Louis

Sept. 27 St. Louis

Sept. 29 Milwaukee

Sept. 30 Milwaukee

Oct. 1 Milwaukee

Oct. 2 at L.A. Dodgers

Oct. 3 at L.A. Dodgers

Oct. 4 at L.A. Dodgers