Proceeds from the ads below will be donated to the
Bob Wuesthoff scholarship fund.
Sunday, April 30, 2006 |
Our Best Reliever: White Sox 6, Angels 5
In the end, Scot Shields lost this game for the Angels, but the sad fact was that the Angels were outpitched from Friday through Sunday, and outhit collectively: in both today's game and Friday's, and in the series 24 to 18. Not only that, but
- Angels rookies barely hit; between Kotchman (2-7, 2 BB) and Mathis (0-3), they accumulated an 2-10 line — exactly Mendozian. Mathis now has a .108 average.
- Compounding the problem was a Reggie Willits stolen base attempt that ended in a laughable pitchout erasure. It wasn't even close.
- Salmon went 0-4 in today's game.
- Ervin Santana couldn't hold on to a two-run lead in the top of the sixth, giving up consecutive doubles and a sac fly.
- Figgins got on base exactly once. For a guy who lives and dies on average to make up his OBP, something is desperately, desperately wrong; he's hitting .268, way too little for a leadoff hitter who almost never walks.
- The three and four batters went 1-8 today, and 6-24 in the series. That much represents an improvement over last year's ALCS, but the results surely were the same.
- About the only bright spot in today's game was Orlando Cabrera's unexpected power surge, but he's not a guy you can rely upon. We wonder when Vlad will return, and whether GA will have a solid bat throughout the rest of the season. The early returns are looking iffy.
Comments:
"For a guy who lives and dies on average to make up his OBP, something is desperately, desperately wrong; he's hitting .268, way too little for a leadoff hitter who almost never walks."
Damn, you are a drama queen sometimes, Rob.
Figgins is leading **all** leadoff men in the Major Leagues in runs scored...it's not even close. He's been the singlemost productive leadoff man in the game so far this year. He joins Pujols, Hafner and Thome among the run-scoring elite.
And you're pulling your hair Job-style over a day he went 1-3 with a run and a sac RBI? In a three-game series where he walked FOUR times and scored FIVE of the Angels 11 runs?
I think something is "desperately, desperately wrong" with your analytical abilities today when you don't notice that Figgins leads the Angels in walks (the only player in double digits) and pitches per plate appearance.
You're clucking about Figgins average? His batting average??!
Damn, you are a drama queen sometimes, Rob.
Figgins is leading **all** leadoff men in the Major Leagues in runs scored...it's not even close. He's been the singlemost productive leadoff man in the game so far this year. He joins Pujols, Hafner and Thome among the run-scoring elite.
And you're pulling your hair Job-style over a day he went 1-3 with a run and a sac RBI? In a three-game series where he walked FOUR times and scored FIVE of the Angels 11 runs?
I think something is "desperately, desperately wrong" with your analytical abilities today when you don't notice that Figgins leads the Angels in walks (the only player in double digits) and pitches per plate appearance.
You're clucking about Figgins average? His batting average??!
# posted by 
: 5/01/2006 09:10:00 AM
: 5/01/2006 09:10:00 AM
Where were you last year? I have been complaining that Figgins is a weak choice for a leadoff man ever since they signed Cabrera and forced Figgins to leadoff. The guy may be scoring a bunch of runs now, but that bat of his is going to prevent that from continuing unless he picks it up.
"The guy may be scoring a bunch of runs now..."
And where were you last year, when Figgins scored 113 runs, and was in the top ten in the AL in that category? Where were you last year when he led the team in hits, walks, runs, 3bs and SBs? Maybe trying to fit data to a predetermined result?
This isn't a fluke or a new occurence. Figgins is very simply a top run converter.
Statistics are an integral part of my vocation, and I can tell you assuredly that they are only as good as the evaluative metrics you choose. And in this case, you've chosen the wrong ones to base your opinions of Figgins on.
When you ignore his production and focus on secondary internals that are chiefly useful in evaluating the causes of poor production, you've missed the boat.
The interesting question here is why are so many things going right since 2004 with Figgins when the secondaries say so many things should be going wrong. Focus on that question and you'll be seeing the bigger picture.
And where were you last year, when Figgins scored 113 runs, and was in the top ten in the AL in that category? Where were you last year when he led the team in hits, walks, runs, 3bs and SBs? Maybe trying to fit data to a predetermined result?
This isn't a fluke or a new occurence. Figgins is very simply a top run converter.
Statistics are an integral part of my vocation, and I can tell you assuredly that they are only as good as the evaluative metrics you choose. And in this case, you've chosen the wrong ones to base your opinions of Figgins on.
When you ignore his production and focus on secondary internals that are chiefly useful in evaluating the causes of poor production, you've missed the boat.
The interesting question here is why are so many things going right since 2004 with Figgins when the secondaries say so many things should be going wrong. Focus on that question and you'll be seeing the bigger picture.
# posted by : 5/01/2006 11:06:00 AM
: 5/01/2006 11:06:00 AM
We all saw the results when Figgins got completely and utterly shut down in the postseason last year: you can't score runs if you don't get on base, and he did so only three times in five games. That isn't cutting it. I know, small sample size and all, but it's only fair if that, you're going to taunt the opposition about "my sh-t don't work in the postseason", you recognize when the Angels' don't, either. (This is the general you, not "you", Matthew, BTW.)
It was Maxwell, not Matthew, who chimed in on the Figgins analysis. I've scattered my various opinions in comments on other posts, but have not touched this subject yet. Nor will I, for the moment, other than to opine that over the course of the season, Figgy will probably have to hit better than .268 to remain as productive as he has been thus far.
I suspect that O-Cab's "hot" start (particularly with guys on base) has enabled the team to get the most out of Figgy's on-base opportunities. Those numbers will likely decrease, meaning Figgy will probably have to reach base more to maintain the same level of output. But here, I'm just guessing without looking at any real numbers.
I suspect that O-Cab's "hot" start (particularly with guys on base) has enabled the team to get the most out of Figgy's on-base opportunities. Those numbers will likely decrease, meaning Figgy will probably have to reach base more to maintain the same level of output. But here, I'm just guessing without looking at any real numbers.
# posted by : 5/01/2006 01:02:00 PM
: 5/01/2006 01:02:00 PM
I don't know, Rob, I find that argument incrediby weak. Vlad was also shut down in the ALCS, getting one lousy single over five games. So, if your logic is consistent, Vlad is even worse than Figgins...and his true nature as a slap hitter was exposed in the post-season. Much as we should throw out Figgins' accomplishments over 162 games, we should do the same for everyone else.
Why is it that you ignore all of Figgins' seasonal run production and focus in on a two-week window in October to justify who should be hitting leadoff in May? Maybe b/c it's the only emotional lever you can pull to draw the curtain over the BIG FACT:
Figgins was one of the top 10 players in the Majors in runs scored in 2005, and remains in the MLB top 10 in runs scored in 2006.
Why is it that you ignore all of Figgins' seasonal run production and focus in on a two-week window in October to justify who should be hitting leadoff in May? Maybe b/c it's the only emotional lever you can pull to draw the curtain over the BIG FACT:
Figgins was one of the top 10 players in the Majors in runs scored in 2005, and remains in the MLB top 10 in runs scored in 2006.
# posted by : 5/01/2006 03:59:00 PM
: 5/01/2006 03:59:00 PM
Vlad isn't paid to be a leadoff man. Vlad was, in fact, worse than Figgins in the ALCS. But my point is that this kind of an offense is too easy to shut down in a short series against good pitching. And as to why a two week window in October is important, well, I would remand to you another Beane-ism: flags fly forever, baby.
Newer› ‹Older
 |
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.