Blogads

Google Ads


« Double Trouble: Jays/Sox and Royals/Yanks Gamer | Main | Moonshot »

Monday, August 18, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

My word, Paul, what an amazing study. Thank you.

I was right!!

Great work, Paul. As usual.

Good analysis, lots of interesting stuff, even if I have some small issues with some of the moving parts in the machine, so to speak. I think the conclusions you reach are generally good ones though.

Off the top of my head (that is to say without delving deep into the numbers), two things I would note are:

1. A caveat: The Sox obviously play half their games in Fenway, a very good hitters' park. So pitching a "gem" there is a lot more difficult than pitching one in say, Minnesota or Yankee stadium. Texas is an even better hitters' park though (and it shows in the study - those top pitchers post a 4.50 ERA vs. TEX), so I would say that the 3.21 ERA posted by the pitchers in your analysis is even more impressive given that a number of those we in Fenway.

2. A conclusion (guess, really): I think the rest of the discrepancy between the Sox and the Yanks performance against opposing pitcher "gems" comes down to bullpen. Statistically, it's pretty well established that an effective and balanced bullpen will turn a disproportionate number of close games in a team's favor (Lower scoring games tend to be much closer, and a game is much more likely to be low scoring if one of the SP's throws a gem).

Starters that pitched a gem against the Yanks actually have a losing record, which if I were to guess is a testament to the Yankee bullpen being very effective in high-leverage situations, which it has been for the majority of the year. The Sox have experienced much more trouble in that area.

-Mark

Great work, Paul. Over on Baseball Musings, Dave Pinto has an interesting interpretation of this data that I think bears some interest for our Yankees. He suggests that the Sox's problem against good pitching is that their offense is more walk dependant than the average team, and that good pitchers don't walk a lot of batters.

It' worth noting that the Yankee offense, over the last few years, has also been highly walk dependent, and this might explain some of the problems they've faced in the playoffs in recent seaasons. In recent seasons, a great offensive machine during the season was slowed by the top pitching staffs faced in the postseason. Not exactly a revelation, but interesting. It's also worth noting that this evens the field a bit with a free-swinging playoff team (ie the Angels).

Yes, that's another excellent point, YF. Also explains the A's postseason struggles a few years back.

-Mark

YF: Pinto's observation is interesting, but how do you rectify it with 2004 and 2007 playoffs, particularly as you ask about the Yankees' countering performances? In '04 the Sox were first in the AL in walks, and in '07 they were second (trailing just the Yankees). Certainly they did just fine in the playoffs.

SF: Haven't checked the 2007 playoff numbers, but the '04 Red Sox still managed to walk a whole lot in those games - they averaged 7.67 BB/game in the DS vs. ANA, and about 6 BB/game vs. NYY in the LCS. Didn't bother looking up the numbers for the STL series, since it was such a blowout.

I'm not really sure what you're asking, SF. I think the overall point is that the more you depend on walks, the more you CAN suffer against quality pitching. But it's relative and within context. Obviously, the 90s Yankee dynasty was predicated on high obp, as were the 2 championship Sox teams.

"But those aren't the pitchers they would face in the playoffs -- assuming they even make it -- and it seems that's another cause for concern as we head into the stretch."

I dunno. If I were a Sox fan, I might be more than little psyched to face the Rays and James Shields in a short series. It seems, based on these numbers, that Boston owns him.

Great work, Paul. In general, I tend to be somewhat of a lazy nihilist when it comes to studies like these. I always have a sneaky suspicion that sample size is a culprit. In this case, I think there's the strong possibility that over a greater sample, the Sox would compare favorably to other offense against better pitchers. That's not to take away from the hard work you've done.

As SF pointed out, the example of the Sox seems to counter Pinto's speculation. In general, I think the best team wins more than other teams in the post-season. But I do think there's a lot of truth to Billy Beane's famous Moneyball line about it being a crapshoot. It might be a tautalogical argument, but I think the Yanks' "failures" of the past 7 years have a lot to do with not always being the best team, bad luck, and bad timing.

Also, walks/OBP wasn't meant to be the end-all, just that it was undervalued/underpriced. I don't know how efficient free agency is, but it probably worked itself out a little bit..

i haven't really seen any updates on hughes around here of late. i guess he got lit up last nite (3.2 in, 5 er, 91 pitches). many are starting to get concerned about his drop in velocity, 5-8 mph. it's not all bad though as carl p threw a decent game in class A trenton (3.2 in, 0 er, 1 h).

I agree with Dave Pinto, but good productive pitchers without power stuff have less margin for error – they need to hit their spots and not be squeezed – to shut down a patient lineup. Ervin Santana and John Lackey are the only two likely postseason bound pitchers I would put in that category.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Search YFSF




Sports Gambling

twitter

schedule & standings