ashbury

Do only batters have hitches, or can a pitcher?

The second most important thing then is not being one of the teams that other teams absolutely should beat.

On May 9, 2013, the Twins came back from a 2-0 deficit to beat Boston 5-3, to run their season record to 16-15. We don't know yet whether the 2015 edition is hopeless or not, either.

B-r.com has "Batting Against" as a choice under the pitching menu on the main league page. http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL/2015-batting-pitching.shtml There is also an equivalent display for a given team, under the pitching menu but titled "Detailed Stats". Maybe I should talk to Sean about that inconsistency. It shows our Gibby with 10 doubles and 2 homers. Probably more meaningful is the .248/.331/.365 slash line. Compared to the league, his BA is right at average, the OBP is a little high, the SLG a little low. I think that's what you were driving at, right? His BABIP is .258. That's low. But guys like Kershaw do it (well, .278). Why not our guy?

Our batters have an above average Babip in aggregate, while our pitchers have one that is below. FIP is also well above ERA. I'm enjoying it while it lasts, A LOT, but we'll need further infusions from the prospect pipeline to make this a sustainable level of performance.

Send them down to AA to fatten up their numbers.

It's hard to say what "this forum" says about any player, particularly Hicks. You can find opinion all over the map. Indeed, you are on this forum, and seem to be implying you lean toward the failed prospect camp. I don't get this comparative assessment at all, as to who is a bona fide prospect. Compare their age 20-22 seasons (different calendar years of course), as a measure of their stature as prospects. They both were in single-A at 20, and had nearly equal OPS. At 21, Rosario had a better year split between high-A and AA than Hicks did at high-A. At age 22 the reverse happened at AA for both, with Hicks having the much better OPS. I don't know how their defenses were viewed at these steps in their progression, but as prospects, they seem to me actually pretty closely matched, all in all. I don't see why you would laud one and flush the other. Their paths diverged at age 23, of course, with Hicks being rushed to major league duty and floundering horribly, while Rosario at age 23 in AAA hasn't done so hot himself (OPS in the .600s) but was out of the glare of the spotlight and apparently is getting a pass on that. Eddie got an outstanding introduction to major league pitching of course, the other night. But right now I believe he's at 2-for-7 overall, nearly the ultimate in Small Sample Size; he's one Ofer from the Mendoza line, one multi-hit night from Hurricane Hazle. Hicks meanwhile is putting up highly acceptable numbers in AAA. We know Hicks did not make good use of his age-24 season. That's not a mark in his favor. But his good performance so far this year isn't suddenly out of character with the first part of his progression through the minors. We may well look back and decide 2013-14 were the aberration. And I say that as someone who was thoroughly disgusted with Hicks's performance this Spring (particularly on defense) and wanted to see him spend time in Rochester. There's a chance both Hicks and Rosario will have significant major league careers.

I have a TV too.

An English Lit degree with a minor in statistics would also suffice.

Ricky Nolasco collects the win. I knew the guy was a winner as soon as we signed him. Forget the stats, He Just Knows How To Win.

Don't know. Try this:

Winnah!

Grrr, even for the mlb.tv free game of the day, I am offered only the audio.

Well, I've arrived just in time to see Perk get a chance to finish the ninth. Hope you all have brought luck.

Tahoe Forecast this morning: scattered reading with first-graders mid-morning, followed by a period of intense dental checkup. I'll catch up with you all later, if I survive this maelstrom.

Nick Gordon isn't ready.

There is significant computational science behind a true magic number this far out. It's usually smaller than you think, because if you win most of the games, the other teams will fight among each other and help you toward your goal. Here is a web site that's been doing the calculations for a few years now. http://lyle.smu.edu/~olinick/riot/american_league.html You'll see that the Twins need to win 131 to clinch the division, 120 merely to clinch the postseason berth. (Data as of this morning, it says.) They also compute a perverse version, the minimum number of wins necessary if every other team tanks. At the moment they have 27 for the Twins - as long as they win this many, all hope is not lost, unless any of the other teams in the division win some games needlessly. Cool but geeky. Geeky but cool. Stupid. Your call.

Close, but it was the other Gibson that holds that honor. "Bob Gibson is the luckiest pitcher in baseball. He is always pitching when the other team doesn't score any runs." - Tim McCarver.

Yeah, I've noticed that a lot here.

You wish you knew how to quit us, you're saying. http://www.sss007.com/uploads/allimg/141023/2-141023093356.jpg

Just an unamusing one-character typo that I was going to hang him mercilessly for anyway, for reasons I used to remember before I drank a beer of my own.

DrunkDialing - FatFingering ----------------------------------- = 0 as t -> infinity t where t = how much you have to pay me to care about the difference between the two

FTFY.

Your first post, with the typo, had me wondering.

He upped mine. Tell him up yours. / then report back on what happens. If you still have your account.