Five things I learned from this weekend’s Yankees-Red Sox series
Posted by Andy on April 12, 2011
Click through for 5 random observations from this weekend's Yankees-Red Sox Series.
1. The mainstream media is finally picking up on the fact that individual pitcher Wins and Losses are overrated.
It took an egregious example, but a lot of mainstream media reported on how unfair the assigned win and loss were in Friday's game. Phil Hughes (more on him later) gave up six earned runs in 2 innings and was by far the worst performer on the Yankees' staff. He got a no-decision. John Lackey also gave up 6 earned runs, allowing at least 1 run in each of the 5 innings he pitched. He also left when the score was tied but got the win. Bartolo Colon came in for emergency long relief, pitched 4.1 innings, allowed just 2 hits and 1 run while striking out 5, and got the loss.
Here's an example of the media's perception, taken from the LoHud Yankees Blog:
A shining example of how unreliable the win and loss stats are, especially given a one-game sample size: Colon took the loss this afternoon and John Lackey got the win. Their lines:
Colon: 4.1 IP, 2 H, 2 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 5 K
Lackey: 5 IP, 7 H, 6 R, 6 ER, 2 BB, 2 K
2. Phil Hughes might be toast.
It's too early to make any firm conclusions, but it's not looking good for Phil Hughes. For starters, his velocity is way down. His two starts this year had the lowest average velocity of all his major league starts. He's reporting an arm strength issue or perhaps a mechanical issue, but this is of major concern for a guy who's not yet 25.
3. Josh Beckett is not nearly as close to dead as I thought.
Beckett's first start of the season looked even worse than most of last season, and that's saying something as he was probably the worst starting pitcher who started for the whole season in 2010. But yesterday, he rebounded in a big way. For one, his velocity was back up. For another, he posted the second-best game score of his career, in a game in which he was never in trouble and could easily have stayed in to pitch the 9th inning.
4. Mark Teixeira's hot start has evaporated
Check out Tex's weekend against Boston:
14 PA, 0 hits, 2 walks, 6 strikeouts, .000 BA, .000 SLG
5. Dustin Pedroia is still the Red Sox's MVP
First there are the offensive numbers:
15 PAs, 9 hits, 2 walks, 1 strikeout, .692 BA, 1.154 SLG
Then there's his defense like this and this.
This guy's awesome.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:09 am
1. Starting pitchers are about innings and earned runs. I don't care if he wins 18 games or 21 games. There is something to be said for situational pitching-----but John Lackey did NOT 'pitch to the scoreboard' in his last 'win'. The 1-0 loss that Jon Lester took was by far a better performance. If a guy has a good WHIP and ERA, but only gives you 5.1 IP, he can't whine about 'not getting the win'. I call it passing the game through too many hands. When you mail a letter that HAS TO get there, do you give it to a guy to give to a guy to give to a guy to give to a guy--------or do you take it to the mailbox and drop it in yourself... or at least hand directly to the mail carrier? Go late in the game, allow the fewest runs possible.
For relievers, ERA is overrated. I look at WHIP and inherited runners, then ERA.
2. I hate the babying of pitchers. But because I can't control that, logic tells me to give Hughes a break until maybe May. Last year he was a 5th starter and his 'schedule' was different. I don't think he had many early April starts last year up with the big club. He may still be building up arm strength----------which just kills me, because it begs the question: 'what have you been doing to prepare for the season?' On 1 hand, they wanna build arm strength (the only way to do that is work), but on the other hand, they don't wanna burn you out. It's ridiculous. 1 month from now, I'll be concerned for Hughes. Right now, I'm, just concerned how some of these teams prepare for Opening Day. Most of the Red Sox look like they were firehosed out of their bunks at the Frat House to play ball at 2am. They look ill prepared. So does Hughes.
3. I can tell immediately if Beckett is going to be trouble or not. It's in his curve. If he is throwing it sharply, he can murder anyone-------especially if his FB is up around 94, 95+... but sometimes his curve looks like nothing more than a little humpback change. That's BP for everybody. It looked like October 2003 or 2007 on Sunday vs the Yankees. If he is going to throw the curve like THAT? He's back. If not, he's Matsuzaka's taller twin.
4. Teixeira is a slow starter. Yankee Stadium is a whiffle ball park with a jet stream for guys who can elevate the ball into right field. The contrast between his splits there VS on the road is stark since they built the new Stadium. I think he was just helped by hitting there, but he'll be productive, again.
5. If Pedroia is healthy, he's quite a ballplayer. No fluke. Last year, he was 'on pace' (I know...) for something like 24 HR and 100+ RBI.... he's a tough player, a good competitor and is developing into a leader. He also has his share or gems in the field.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:12 am
Last I checked the purpose of playing the game was to win. Your under valuing the W and this has taken hold currently in media which is good for SABR people but I dont agree. Sure it was a cheap win, but that happens just like inflated stats in 13 -5 game or when September call ups are playing at times.
Give me a Jack Morris any day, if there was a guy on second and his team was up 2-1, that guy wasnt scoring if his team needed to win. He wouldnt by happy because he left a 2-2 game after 8 innings. The only number he cared about was wins. This is a lost art in the game and it is the main problem with your post.
It does matter when a guy gives up a run in top of 8th and the game gets tied 2-2, his stats may be great but he failed to keep the other team down. Great stat line but his team lost . . .
April 12th, 2011 at 9:31 am
Go troll somewhere else, #2
April 12th, 2011 at 9:38 am
if there was a guy on second and his team was up 2-1, that guy wasnt scoring if his team needed to win
Evidence?
The only number he cared about was wins. This is a lost art in the game
No, I'm pretty sure teams still win about 50% of all games played.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:58 am
Twisto that was EPIC!
April 12th, 2011 at 10:12 am
"Last I checked the purpose of playing the game was to win."
For teams. Pitchers do what they can to help their teams win. They can't control offense or fielding.
"Give me a Jack Morris any day, if there was a guy on second and his team was up 2-1, that guy wasnt scoring if his team needed to win."
Jack Morris was 17-109 with a 3.98 ERA, 1.331 WHIP, 1.74 K/BB when receiving less than 3 runs of support. So yeah, he always came through, except like 90% of the time when he didn't. Not that these numbers are particularly bad, they're right in line with his career averages which were a little above league average.
By comparison, Bert Blyleven, who of course, hated winning, was 39-162 with a 3.34 ERA, 1.202 WHIP, and 2.73 K/BB when receiving less than 3 runs of support. But all he cared about was his numbers. If he went 8 and lost 2-0, he would actually pop the champagne in the clubhouse and go crazy celebrating his personal accomplishment.
I'm having a little trouble manipulating the play index to detail this EXACT situation, but he actually had a 4.47 ERA, .707 OPS-against, and 1.68 K/9
in the eighth inning. So if a team got a guy into scoring position in the eighth, he shut them down for sure...ok, well about half the time.
"The only number he cared about was wins. "
He did an amazing job at inspiring Alan Trammell, Kirk Gibson, Lou Whitaker, Kirby Puckett, Roberto Alomar, and John Olerud to be such tremendous ballplayers!
April 12th, 2011 at 11:36 am
Tom @2, your notions about Jack Morris "pitching to the score" have been disproven in more than one study.
I loved Jack Morris for his attitude, durability and general success. But not for some mythical "ability to win."
April 12th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Too early to draw conclusions about Teixeira this season. But his downward trend since donning pinstripes -- especially away from Yankee Stadium -- has to be troubling to the team that owes him another $112 million for 2012-16.
April 12th, 2011 at 12:13 pm
Re: Point 1
While they may have learned about the unreliability of W/Ls, they have NOT learned about the unreliability of tiny sample sizes :-p
April 12th, 2011 at 1:04 pm
Hughes is another great example of the pointlessness of a pitcher's W/L record.
He finished 18-8 in 2010 but most of that record was based on the point that Hughes received 6.8 runs per game in support. He finished 1rst out of 63 qualifying pitchers in run support per game. Other than Wins, Hughes did not finish in the top 10 in any other important pitching category. I don't even think he finished in the top 15 in any important pitching category.
Hughes WAR last year was 2.7, good but it ranked 32nd in the AL last year.
The worst thing was that Girardi decided to start Hughes in game 2, 6 of the ALCS over Andy Petitte. Hughes pitched to a 11.42 ERA and the Yankees lost both games. It hard to imagine Girardi would have started Hughes over Petitte had he not had a 18 wins during the regular season.
April 12th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Just to clarify my post, the "they" I was referring to was the person quoted, not Andy.
April 12th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
The worst thing was that Girardi decided to start Hughes in game 2, 6 of the ALCS over Andy Petitte.
I have forgotten the details already but I believe Pettitte was hurt and not ready to pitch game 2 of the ALCS (he did pitch game 2 of the ALDS). I think it was said later that he would not have been able to go in game 7 of the ALCS if it were played.
April 12th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Dustin Pedrioa is not just the Sox MVP, but will be in the league MVP running for the next few years. When he gets hot, its like a super nova, you can't get him out. He's just a baseball player, personified...I said it 2 years ago, and mark my words...he'll be a HOFer.
April 12th, 2011 at 4:23 pm
After reading BSlash's comment, I was prepared to offered a nuance counter-argument, that started with the disclaimer that I am both a Sox fan and a Pedroia fan, went on to discuss how I think his scrappiness (whiteness) coupled with a legitimate elite skill set made him a bit of a media wet dream, and concluded an acknowledgement that Pedroia has the makings of HoFer, but to declare him one now, let alone two years ago, is beyond premature.
I then saw on his player page that his nickname is apparently Laser Show (something I was entirely ignorant of until this moment). I now think that BSlash is being too modest...
April 12th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Re #14, see http://www.nesn.com/2010/07/laser-show-leads-list-of-top-10-dustin-pedroia-quotes.html
LASER SHOW
April 12th, 2011 at 4:34 pm
"1. The mainstream media is finally picking up on the fact that individual pitcher Wins and Losses are overrated."
King Felix, in my opinion, proved that the MSM realized this by winning the 2010 Cy Young Award.
April 12th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
it's a prediction. Of course you can't put him in the hall today. But he's certainly playing at a hall of fame level. If he doesn't fall off his pace, he'll be a borderliner already by the time he's got 10 years in.
But then, Nomar looked even better at this stage in his career -- who knew he'd only have 2 more really good years and a few average ones left back in 2001?
April 12th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
@12 Twisto,
I stand corrected, good post.
I could see Hughes having about the same WAR this year (around 2.5) but having his runs per game return to a more average level and thus lowering his win total. And as a result I could see people start wondering what happened to Phil Hughes when in reality he was just a recipient of unbelievable run support in 2010.
April 12th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
2. Phil Hughes might be toast.
Would you say he's as toast as the Phillies circa August 2010? (can't let that die, it's too funny)
1. The mainstream media is finally picking up on the fact that individual pitcher Wins and Losses are overrated.
Perhaps, but I'm still waiting for everyone to figure out that just because a game includes the Red Sox or the Yankees doesn't mean it's must-see-tv. 2 weeks into the season and we already had a Sox-Yanks Fox Saturday game followed by a Sox-Yanks ESPN Sunday night game followed by the Sox on ESPN Monday night. There's probably no way to check this, but I have to imagine the 2-7 Red Sox vs. the 1-8 Rays was the worst combined record on an ESPN game of the night for any night. Granted those schedules are made in advance and those records won't hold over a 162 game season, but still, that was a sad game.
April 12th, 2011 at 8:36 pm
Djibouti
Amen about the Yankees-Red Sox domination of national media!!!!
April 12th, 2011 at 9:02 pm
BSK says:
After reading BSlash's comment, I was prepared to offered a nuance counter-argument, that started with the disclaimer that I am both a Sox fan and a Pedroia fan, went on to discuss how I think his scrappiness (whiteness) coupled with a legitimate elite skill set made him a bit of a media wet dream, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why is scrappiness a plug-in term for whiteness?
April 12th, 2011 at 9:07 pm
Regarding Red Sox/ Yankees coverage.... if it's on TV, it's there for a reason that's connected to advertising $$. Those 2 teams have been among the---if not THE biggest road draws, suggesting that they have perhaps a larger national following than other clubs.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:39 pm
Josh Beckett bounced. The question remains whether he is or is not a dead cat.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:43 pm
@21, "Why is scrappiness a plug-in term for whiteness?"
I think that if you take a count of how often terms like "scrappy" and "intelligent" are applied to white players and to non-whites (in all sports), you'll see why some people have come to view such terms with suspicion, if not as outright code words.
April 12th, 2011 at 10:28 pm
Although I like Pedroia as an all-around player, I was also drafting a counterargument to BSlash's HOF prediction, since I think his offense is a bit overrated because of Fenway. His career OPS+ is 114, which is good for a 2B but not eye-popping. (For context, Chase Utley was at 126 at the same point in his career.)
But then I checked the WAR in their first 5 seasons for HOF second basemen. And Pedey looks right at home in that analysis.
(1) In his first 5 years, Pedroia has 4 seasons with WAR of 3 or higher.
Of the HOF second basemen, only Joe Gordon had 5 in his first 5 years. Robinson, Alomar and Lazzeri had 4; Morgan and LaJoie had 3.
(2) Pedroia has 17.8 total WAR over his first 5 years. Only 9 HOF second basemen had more (including Paul Molitor, who had already been moved off 2B by his 4th year). Pedroia's 5-year WAR is just about the median for HOFers at the position.
So one can make the case that Pedroia is on a HOF path.
Still, 9 other second basemen had at least 17 WAR in their first 5 years but failed to make the Hall; anybody remember Chuck Knoblauch? Chase Utley had over 20 WAR in his first 5 years and 34.5 in his first 7 years, but his HOF progress is on hold.
The median career games for a HOF 2B is around 2,100. Pedroia has 566 games, barely 1/4 of that total. He's making progress, but he has a long way to go.
April 12th, 2011 at 10:32 pm
Sean @21 and JA @24
Don't want to go there.
Observation: this discussion took a decidedly negative tone after post #2. I think we missed the original intent of Andy's blog.
There are fairly large issues with both the Red Sox and Yankees rotations. Phil Hughes must still prove he can handle Big Apple pressure.
My theory is that players underperform when coming from outlying markets to New York or Boston. Nothing prepares you for the media spotlight.
Future evidence, the performances of Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford and Mark Teixeira over the rest of this year.
April 12th, 2011 at 11:31 pm
JA-
As I said, I fully admit Pedroia has the makings of a potential HoFer. But, as your analysis shows, he has got a long way to go. It is also worth noting that he had a relatively late debut (24 years old), which means he likely avoided developmental years in the show AND might accumulate fewer seasons. Of course, it's possible he didn't develop into the player he is if he comes up earlier. But the point is that it is not an apples-to-apples comparison if you are comparing him to more precocious players.
As to the scrappiness-equaling-whiteness question, it is pretty well-documented that this term (among others, like gritty and gamer) are used almost exclusively in regards to white players. Others, like athletic, raw, and toolsy, are often reserved for black (and sometimes Hispanic) players. Ultimately, such stereotyped, coded, and limiting language harm all groups, as players who do not fit the mold prescribed to them often suffer in their evaluations. Keith Law has touched on this at times based on his experiences as a scout and in front offices, though he has, to this point, not taken on the issue head on.
April 13th, 2011 at 7:30 am
@6 "Jack Morris was 17-109 with a 3.98 ERA"
Maybe he wasn't as lucky as I thought
April 13th, 2011 at 8:09 am
I think the term 'scrappy' in baseball is consistently applied to middle infielders and perhaps 2nd Basemen in particular.
If people want to see race-------they'll see it. And some people see it all the time. What a burden.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
And some people never see "it." Some people think that "it" is no longer a huge factor in American society. Some people only see what they want to see.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
BSK -- I agree that Pedroia debuted later than many HOF 2Bs, but he was not actually 24, as you said. He was 5 years past his 23rd birthday when he debuted on Aug. 22, 2006; his seasonal age was 22.
In a WAR comparison through seasonal age 26, Pedroia does not compare quite as well to the HOF 2Bs as he does in the "first-5-years" comparison. But he's still ahead of 4 of them (Gehringer, Fox, Schoendienst and Mazeroski), and less than 1 WAR behind Carew.
April 13th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
I presume JA meant to say "days" not "years" in #31...
April 13th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
Juan Pierre is called a scrappy.
Jeter is called a gamer.
Gwynn was called a genius.
Mo Rivera is called an artist.
Sean is right. Racism is where you want to see it.
April 13th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
JA wrong? AGAIN??? GASP!
April 13th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
JA WAS right about his age though. I will quibble that I was referring to his first full year (2007) during which he turned 24. We're the same age (separated by only a few days) so I wasn't thinking of the official designation.
April 13th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
@ #30...
Yep. Real racism exists and it is despicable. But we must be careful, that in our zeal to turn sharply away from it-------we don't drive across 3 lanes of traffic, down an embankment and go flying off the idiot cliff.
When we calibrate our racism sensors to mirror Bobby Brady's Hall Monitor protocol, we will find ourselves behaving like arses-------and worst of all----------we deflect attention from REAL instances of racism by watering down the docket of things to really be concerned about.
'Scrappy' is not MLB code for 'white' to anyone who isn't thinking too darned much about skin color. JMO. Willie Randolph was scrappy. Pokie Reese was scrappy. They were middle infielders. Tony Pena was a scrappy catcher.
I'm sorry I went this far with 'race' in this forum. It's a shame it was even brought up at all. Some people.
April 14th, 2011 at 1:07 am
Sean, disagreement is one thing. But if you think that those who see subtle forms of racism in media characterizations of ballplayers are some kind of lunatic fringe, I think you are naive. The point has been asserted many times by intelligent, reasonable people of all races.
The question of whether racial stereotypes -- conscious or unconscious -- affect the media depictions and fan perceptions of pro athletes is a legitimate topic of debate.
Here's an excerpt from a review of a book written by Will Leitch, founding editor of Deadspin.com:
In another essay, Leitch takes on racism in sports, noting that white players are described as "scrappy" and "hustling," while blacks athletes are assumed to be athletically gifted and lazy. "Every fan base likes to have its white hero," Leitch says, pointing to a poll at baseball's MLB.com that asked fans to name the players they thought hustled the most. "Every single player [on the fans' list] was white."
The authors of the respected academic work Handbook of Sports and Media (which is the textbook of many college courses on the subject) cite numerous studies finding that:
-- "In contrast to Black athletes, who are frequently framed in terms of their physicality, White athletes are most often depicted as relying on intellectual means to achieve their sporting success".
-- "[W]hile Black athletes are often praised for being naturally talented, White athletes are often praised for either their hard work or perceived intellect and leadership".
http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Sports-Media-Leas-Communication/dp/0805851895,
In case this book strikes you as mere foaming at the mouth, the International Journal of Sport Communication reviewed it thusly:
"The importance of Handbook of Sports and Media cannot be overstated. It forges legitimacy and rigor in the study of media and sport, gives scholars ideas on future potential projects from key contributors, and provides vital information on the evolving relationship between two powerful entities."
I do not mean to force this discussion on anyone. But I resent being described, even indirectly, as "flying off the idiot cliff," and I will defend myself.
April 14th, 2011 at 1:18 am
Andy @32 / BSK @ 34 --
Um ... Could I use Charles Barkley's line about inflammatory remarks published his autobiography? -- "I was misquoted."
April 14th, 2011 at 8:52 am
@ # 37...
In another essay, Leitch takes on racism in sports, noting that white players are described as "scrappy" and "hustling," while blacks athletes are assumed to be athletically gifted and lazy. "Every fan base likes to have its white hero," Leitch says, pointing to a poll at baseball's MLB.com that asked fans to name the players they thought hustled the most. "Every single player [on the fans' list] was white."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And the ballplayer CAN'T be white? Because...???
'Every fanbase likes to have it's white hero' sounds kind of racially loaded to me.
What do you suppose he figures the racial demographic is of these 'fanbases who like their white hero'?
But guys like him never think it's HIM who's bunching people together because of skin color.
I've wasted enough time of everybody's with this, most of all, my own.
The darnedest people just see skin color ALL THE TIME.
April 14th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
@ Sean
I couldn't agree with you more.
Yao Ming is probably the most popular player in China, not because the Chinese detest black people and are inheriently racist. It is because they can relate or can have pride or whatever.
are African American Youths racist because they idolize Lebron and not Nash?
Your right...
The problem is not ours.