Jump to content

Seattle Mike

MotownSports Fan
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Seattle Mike

  • Rank
    MotownSports Fan
  1. Matt Latos would also have been a great depth addition to the starting rotation. Even last year, when he kept getting traded, he had 100 Ks and only 32 BBs in 116 innings. Yes, his ERA was 4.95 but he had a 3.53 FIP. I also understand he had some injuries, but nothing catastrophic I believe. Oh well, he's only 28 and has been a consistent 3-4 type starter his whole career. I'll bet the White Sox get a nice return on the 3 million they spent on him.
  2. double agree with this. In 30 starts last year Pelfry allowed 3 runs or fewer in 19 of them (total runs, not just earned). He didn't always last deep into the game, but when he did leave he gave his team, the offense and bullpen, a chance to win in almost 2/3 of his starts. That is pretty solid for a number 5 starter.
  3. I'll still take Babe Ruth over Barry Bonds in the greatest ever discussion (maybe you would too and the above is just for effect). Anyway, just to use a couple of stats, context neutral: OPS+ Bonds: 182 Ruth: 202 WAR Bonds: 162 Ruth: 163, plus an extra 20 as a pitcher. Ruth is still, for my money, the greatest athlete of the modern era, mostly for how he dominated his sport and redefined it in the process. I also agree Bonds should be in the Hall. So should Clemens and McGwire.
  4. In 19 of his 30 starts Pelfry allowed 3 runs (total not earned) or fewer (Simon in 31 starts did this only 14 times). Pelfry allowed 2 runs or fewer 15 times (Simon did this in 11 starts). Pelfry allowed 5 runs or more only 5 times (Simon did this 11 starts). Simon, however, pitched into the 6th inning 22 times; Pelfry only 17. Belfry should be a solid upgrade over our #4 and 5 starters from last year. Good, cost effective move.
  5. After reading a few scouting reports on Jones I suspect he could end up providing something the Tigers haven't had in a long while: a utility guy who hits for power. Too bad he doesn't hit left-handed, but the prospect of having a guy on the bench who can play multiple positions and actually hit..with..power is intriguing.
  6. I believe that is exactly what Ausmus said about analytics. It's more valuable for putting together the team and less for putting the team on the field on any given day. Anyway in this article he sure seemed a strong advocate of analytics.
  7. One home run in a four game series. No wonder they only scored 9 runs. Anyway the Rangers are on a Twins like run right now. Optimal hit sequencing (they are 7th in AL in OPS yet 4th in runs scored) and 13th in runs allowed per game. How in the heck is team like this in a position to make the playoffs?
  8. I don't know what to think of the Royals. To date the Tigers have had 88 more baserunners than the Royals. They have hit more home runs, more doubles, more triples, have collected 32 more hits and walked 82 more times. The Royals lead the league in HBP, besting the Tigers by 32 in this category. Despite putting considerably more men on base the Tigers have scored only a fraction more runs than KC (Det 4.36;KC 4.34). The double plays and stupid baserunning no doubt account for some this discrepancy. But the runs scored differential should still be much greater just based on the extra 88 base runners the Tigers have had. On the flip side, the Tigers have allowed 140 more baserunners than the Royals. Big difference, yes. The kicker here is that the KC staff has a higher BB/9 and lower K/9 than the Tigers staff. Hard to believe. Besides KC's great defense the difference maker here is that the Tigers have allowed 33 more HRs, the most in the AL. When you add it all up though the difference between the Tigers and Royals just doesn't seem like 14.5 games. The net difference between baserunners is only 52, meaning about a half a baserunner edge per game for the Royals. And most of this difference has occurred since the All-Star Break and the trade deadline. At the break the net difference was almost zero and yet the Tigers trailed by 9.5 games. So the Royals have been living right all year. Maybe those 33 extra HRs the Tigers staff has allowed explains most of the difference in the standings. One could argue the difference between the two teams comes down to Sanchez, who's allowed 29 HRs, and Edison Volquez, who has allowed only 10. This all probably an oversimplification. Certainly right how, post trade deadline, the Royals are clearly a superior team. But for the first three months the Tigers and Royals should have only been separated by a game or two, not almost 10.
  9. Do you think hitters can really foul off pitches as part of an overall strategy to drive up pitch counts? I have no idea if that's possible. It sounds pretty darn difficult though.
  10. Hey Fox added OPS to the TV stat line. That's a start, albeit a small one
  11. It may be fair in terms of competitive balance but it's unfair to the free agent, who through no fault of his own must market himself encumbered by a loss of draft pick. That's ******** and has to cost him some money on the open market
  12. My thinking exactly. I wouldn't be surprised if some of these guys get dealt during the offseason as well. As for free agent signings, other than Sanchez, an in-house option, what other starting pitchers has DD signed as a free agent? He never pursues the really big fish, which is probably wise. I can think of Kenny Rogers and a few other marginal guys. Probably someone I'm missing. But I would expect a Leake or Latos type. I'd really like Kazmir or Zimmerman (although he's one of the few guys who would require a draft pick). That whole draft pick thing really screws some of these guys. MLB needs to fix that.
  13. What's funny is the Tigers are only a game back of the Blue Jays in the loss column. Of course they are only 6 games out of first. But they traded a ton of pitching for quite a few 2-month rentals.
  14. Thanks for the clarification. Got that from A fangraphs article where writer was quoting an unnamed scout.
  • Create New...