22 replies to this topic

[Eric Van]

July 21-Aug 5

Name	PA	BA	OBP	SA	OPS
Cano	73	.477	.521	.831	1.352
Posada	56	.383	.482	.766	1.248
Abreu	66	.439	.500	.719	1.219
Matsui	75	.359	.413	.750	1.163
Cabrera	76	.358	.408	.642	1.050
Damon	61	.352	.426	.537	.963
Rodriguez	76	.250	.408	.518	.926
Jeter	72	.306	.403	.403	.806
Phillips	68	.305	.344	.356	.700
Nieves	5	.667	.667	1.333	2.000
Betemit	11	.500	.545	.800	1.345
Duncan	29	.320	.414	.920	1.334
Cairo	6	.167	.167	.333	.500
Molina	12	.200	.182	.300	.482

[LondonSox]

Well all hot at once is nice and thisn't just hot it's insane but they can't all stay that hot will they all cool at once. Still the charge they're making means the wildcard is looking very possible.

[MidnightC]

Just think if they'd held on to Wil Nieves instead of trading for Molina!

So yes, everyone in the Yankees lineup is hitting the crap out of the ball, and logic suggests that it's unlikely to continue at this kind of blistering pace the rest of the year. Though in the cases of players like Abreu and Cano, this streak could be viewed as a "correction" to make up for their lousy numbers earlier in the season.

I'd still like to know how the hell Jorge Posada is having a career year at age 36.

Edited by MidnightC, 06 August 2007 - 03:44 PM.

[badger]

This is fantastic information. Where are all those people that claimed that Abreu and Matsui were cooked? what do you know - in 2+ weeks, 16 games - they are almost back to career norms.

However, some of the pitchers that pitched to them in that span:
Howell, Witasick, Stokes, Hammel, Ryu, Fossum (TB)
Braun, Elarton, Davies (KC)
Parrish, Doyne, Cabrera, Shuey (BAL)
Contreras, Floyd, Danks (CWS)

They are clearly making hay when they need to - some of the pitching that they have faced is truly, truly awful.

[Pork Fried Jim Rice]

This is one of the worst posts you've had Eric Van. In general, there's at least a lot of thought and comparison when you post. But here, you just give some stats, no commentary, no comparison to other two week periods that teams have had. What's the point? Plus don't you know more than anyway that two weeks is a small sample size?

What are the other best two weeks in RPG in baseball history? Or what's the second best RPG over two weeks this season?

[wilked]

This is one of the worst posts you've had Eric Van. In general, there's at least a lot of thought and comparison when you post. But here, you just give some stats, no commentary, no comparison to other two week periods that teams have had. What's the point? Plus don't you know more than anyway that two weeks is a small sample size?

What are the other best two weeks in RPG in baseball history? Or what's the second best RPG over two weeks this season?

I think he saved that analysis for you...

[Eric Van]

This is one of the worst posts you've had Eric Van. In general, there's at least a lot of thought and comparison when you post. But here, you just give some stats, no commentary, no comparison to other two week periods that teams have had. What's the point? Plus don't you know more than anyway that two weeks is a small sample size?

What are the other best two weeks in RPG in baseball history? Or what's the second best RPG over two weeks this season?

I was curious as to who was responsible for this offensive orgy, compiled the stats, and figured I'd share them.

I thought the interesting things were obvious: that ARod and Jeter weren't responsible, and that the teammate-baseline puts Andy Phillips in a clearer light.

[StupendousMan]

What are the other best two weeks in RPG in baseball history? Or what's the second best RPG over two weeks this season?

Well, I can tell you about the best streaks in the AL since 1961 in non-strike years (since I have that information in an appropriate form on my computer right now). Here are the top 10 "highest-scoring streaks of 16 consecutive games within a single season". The list shows the starting game and ending game of the streak, the number of runs scored, the average Runs Per Game (RPG), and the team's identity.

start	2 end  17  runs   141  RPG	8.81  1993_DET
start   24 end  39  runs   141  RPG	8.81  1999_CLE
start   36 end  51  runs   139  RPG	8.69  1999_SEA
start  105 end 120  runs   136  RPG	8.50  1996_BAL
start  104 end 119  runs   133  RPG	8.31  1999_OAK
start   66 end  81  runs   131  RPG	8.19  2006_CHA
start	8 end  23  runs   130  RPG	8.12  2000_CHA
start   38 end  53  runs   130  RPG	8.12  1996_CHA
start  118 end 133  runs   130  RPG	8.12  2000_CLE
start   53 end  68  runs   129  RPG	8.06  1996_MIL

It appears that the recent Yankees' streak is unprecedented within my restricted sample.

[YouLookAdopted]

Here are the pitchers the Yankees have won against since the ASB, with their records when they played New York:

Shields 7-5
Sonnanstine 1-4
Fossum 5-8 (in relief)
Towers 4-6
Jansen 2-2 (in relief; 1 R against Hallady in 7 IP)
Marcum 5-4
Ryu 1-2
Sheilds 8-6
Perez 5-9
Elarton 2-4
Meche 7-7
Howell 1-4
Cabrera 7-11
Contreras 5-14
Danks 6-8
Perez 6-10
Bale 0-1 (in relief)
Meche 7-9
Downs 1-2 (in relief)

80-116 .408 W%

In that stretch, they won against only four pitchers with winning records (Shields twice). The other 15 wins were all against pitchers with losing records. For the record, here are the pitchers they've lost against since the ASB:

Kazmir 6-6
McGowan 6-5
Jackson 2-9
De La Rosa 8-10
Guthrie 7-3
Burres 5-4
Logan 2-0 (in relief)

36-37 .493 W%

That's seven losses against pitchers with a collective .493 winning percentage. Overall, the pitchers that the Yankees have gotten decisions against add up to a 116-153 record, which is good for a .431 winning percentage.

[Bongorific]

This is fantastic information. Where are all those people that claimed that Abreu and Matsui were cooked? what do you know - in 2+ weeks, 16 games - they are almost back to career norms.

However, some of the pitchers that pitched to them in that span:
Howell, Witasick, Stokes, Hammel, Ryu, Fossum (TB)
Braun, Elarton, Davies (KC)
Parrish, Doyne, Cabrera, Shuey (BAL)
Contreras, Floyd, Danks (CWS)

They are clearly making hay when they need to - some of the pitching that they have faced is truly, truly awful.

So if they've only been hitting well for a few weeks out of the entire season, wouldn't that suggest they still haven't been playing at their expected level, but have instead inflated their numbers against less than stellar pitching?

[January]

So if they've only been hitting well for a few weeks out of the entire season, wouldn't that suggest they still haven't been playing at their expected level, but have instead inflated their numbers against less than stellar pitching?

Probably more like they have been playing at the expected level, against less than stellar pitching, which inflated their numbers.

[Bongorific]

Probably more like they have been playing at the expected level, against less than stellar pitching, which inflated their numbers.

If you combine my wording and yours, the point I was trying to originally make is more clear. Abreu, Matsui, and Cano had not been playing up to expectations over the first ~100 games. Recently, they have been playing well above expectations against mediocre pitching over a short span. As a result, their numbers became inflated, making their stats appear as if they have been playing at their expected levels over the course of the season. However, in reality, they have not provided the offense that was expected over the course of the season.

[TheInfallibleOne]

Ahh but heres the thing, they keep getting timely hits from unexpected people like Melky Cabrera and Andy Philips. Thay have a fight in them that wasn't there in the beginning of the year. And the boosts they expect to get from Chamberlain and Hughes and even Giambi coming back is something that should be worrying everyone in the greater New England area. Something tells me this is just enough to get them into first place. And with 6 games between us, ya have to give the Yanks the advantage, theyre scorching hotter than the Red Sox were when they got swept in the first half. Season ain't over yet, and it may be the wild card or missing October altogether in Boston.

[Eric Van]

If you combine my wording and yours, the point I was trying to originally make is more clear. Abreu, Matsui, and Cano had not been playing up to expectations over the first ~100 games. Recently, they have been playing well above expectations against mediocre pitching over a short span. As a result, their numbers became inflated, making their stats appear as if they have been playing at their expected levels over the course of the season. However, in reality, they have not provided the offense that was expected over the course of the season.

OTOH, you could say that getting real hot at some point was expected, and facing a certain amount of ctap pitching was a given. It's a coincideince that they faced so much crap pitching clustered together, and did so at the same time as they got real hot, but arguably it doesn't affect the intrerptation of their stat line so far.

OTThirdH, compiling offensive numbers in blowouts pads your stats without adding actual W/L value to the team. Here are the seasonal Inning/Score Clutch Differential, in runs, for all the Yankees. This credits each PA two ways: in terms of change in Run Expectancy (i.e., base/out situation clutch hitting is included), and in terms of changes in Win Expectancy, and then looks at the difference. So hitting a 2-out GS with a 10-0 lead gives you a big negative number.

Damon -11.9
Abreu -9.4
Posada -8.0
Matsui -6.6
Duncan -5.4
Phelps -5.2
Jeter -5.1
Cano -4.0
Rodriguez -2.1
Thompson -2.1
Betemit -0.4
Phillips -0.4
Nieves 0.1
Giambi 0.6
Mientkiewicz 0.7
Molina 1.2
Cabrera 1.5
Cairo 2.4

[LondonSox]

Ahh but heres the thing, they keep getting timely hits from unexpected people like Melky Cabrera and Andy Philips. Thay have a fight in them that wasn't there in the beginning of the year. And the boosts they expect to get from Chamberlain and Hughes and even Giambi coming back is something that should be worrying everyone in the greater New England area. Something tells me this is just enough to get them into first place. And with 6 games between us, ya have to give the Yanks the advantage, theyre scorching hotter than the Red Sox were when they got swept in the first half. Season ain't over yet, and it may be the wild card or missing October altogether in Boston.

Great first post. Somthing tells you.... I have to give the advantage to the Yanks as they're only 6 games back? Right ok... Yes the Yanks are playing well and yes the Red Sox are probably annoyed that the division is still available for discussion and 2004 shows teams can get real hot for long periods. Hwoever this is an utterly utterly retarded comment.

Just to repeat it the Yanks have the advantage because they're 6 (5) games back.... Yes clearly. Who would want to be 6 games up, being six games back is clearly the driving seat. Go away. I guess the Sox should be jealous of every other division leader who is only a game or two up, that's clearly a much stronger position to be in.

I'll also stress the timely hits from unexpected people, this is a reason to expect this to continue? Or in fact a reason that a retracement is likely? The boosts they EXPECT to get from Hughes and Chamberlain. Yes they're excellent but they're rookies. Hughes got roughed up by the Royals at home while Chamberlain has sub 100 innings of pro career (ie rushed). They COULD help. They're PROBABLY better than what they had. EXPECTATIONS however on rookies are a bit dangerous.

[justin32099]

All this gloom and doom aside, the Yanks slicing this lead has been more a credit to their great play over the past month (even against below-average competition) rather than a negative statement about the Red Sox play. They've played really well. If they come back and win the division, they will have absolutely earned it. And unless the Red Sox really collapse down the stretch, they'll be there in October. I'm not sure any of Cleveland/Detroit/Seattle will have more than 90 wins, so the Sox would have to REALLY collapse (they would have to go 22-27 the rest of the way to win 90).

[jcb8642]

I'm not sure any of Cleveland/Detroit/Seattle will have more than 90 wins, so the Sox would have to REALLY collapse (they would have to go 22-27 the rest of the way to win 90).

This is an absurdly dangerous assumption. The Red Sox will almost certainly have to win more than 90 games in order to make the playoffs. Since 2001, no team has won the AL Wild Card without winning at least 95 games: this is why the nickname "magic number" has been given to 95 or 96 wins. In order to reach 95, the Sox need to win 27 more games - meaning the inverse of the record you indicated, 27-22.

Saying that neither Cleveland, Detroit, NOR Seattle will win more than 90 games is equally unsustainable. While it is unlikely that they will all win over 90 games, it is even more unlikely that none of them will win over 90 games. Currently, Cleveland is on pace to win 91.7 games; Detroit, to win 91.2 games; and Seattle, to win 89.9 games. Employing the infamous "If The Season Ended Today" method of projection, the Sox would need to win 92 games in order to win the Wild Card outright over the Tigers, giving the Central to the Indians and making the Sox the weakest Wild Card winner since the 2000 Seattle Mariners went 91-71. Of course, it is very, very possible that 2 of those teams could get "hot" (playing only slightly better ball down the stretch than they have up until this point) and win MORE than 92 games. This does not make me feel safe. In order to win 92 games, the Sox need to go 24-25 the rest of the way, which is ~.500 ball. If you have been watching the same team I have since June, you might start to worry too.

So forget 90 wins, or even 92. If the Sox want to make the playoffs, they need 95 wins. Sure 22-27 is a collapse, and it's one that would, if the season ended today, leave the Sox out of the playoffs. 24-25 is not as much of a collapse, but it too might see the Sox playing golf in October.


I'm not panicking - just saying "let's be careful not to set the bar too low." Silver linings: the Tigers and Indians have 8 games left head-to-head; the Sox schedule is pretty fluffy after this last game in LA.

[LondonSox]

Saying that neither Cleveland, Detroit, NOR Seattle will win more than 90 games is equally unsustainable. While it is unlikely that they will all win over 90 games, it is even more unlikely that none of them will win over 90 games. Currently, Cleveland is on pace to win 91.7 games; Detroit, to win 91.2 games; and Seattle, to win 89.9 games. Employing the infamous "If The Season Ended Today" method of projection, the Sox would need to win 92 games in order to win the Wild Card outright over the Tigers, giving the Central to the Indians and making the Sox the weakest Wild Card winner since the 2000 Seattle Mariners went 91-71. Of course, it is very, very possible that 2 of those teams could get "hot" (playing only slightly better ball down the stretch than they have up until this point) and win MORE than 92 games. This does not make me feel safe. In order to win 92 games, the Sox need to go 24-25 the rest of the way, which is ~.500 ball. If you have been watching the same team I have since June, you might start to worry too.

Wel no not really as it's got to be either Seattle or both of the other two to win that many games, if one of those teams wins 100 games and it's Detroit or Cleveland they'll win the divison and not the WC. That's the whole point the Sox have to be passed by the Yanks, and Seattle or the Yanks and both of Cleveland and Detroit. So the point is at least two teams have to play a lot better than the Sox and possibly three. That's why they're 99% for the playoffs

Edit typoed Seattle pretty badly

Edited by LondonSox, 09 August 2007 - 03:44 AM.

[January]

Saying that neither Cleveland, Detroit, NOR Seattle will win more than 90 games is equally unsustainable. While it is unlikely that they will all win over 90 games, it is even more unlikely that none of them will win over 90 games. Currently, Cleveland is on pace to win 91.7 games; Detroit, to win 91.2 games; and Seattle, to win 89.9 games. Employing the infamous "If The Season Ended Today" method of projection, the Sox would need to win 92 games in order to win the Wild Card outright over the Tigers, giving the Central to the Indians and making the Sox the weakest Wild Card winner since the 2000 Seattle Mariners went 91-71. Of course, it is very, very possible that 2 of those teams could get "hot" (playing only slightly better ball down the stretch than they have up until this point) and win MORE than 92 games. This does not make me feel safe. In order to win 92 games, the Sox need to go 24-25 the rest of the way, which is ~.500 ball. If you have been watching the same team I have since June, you might start to worry too.

So forget 90 wins, or even 92. If the Sox want to make the playoffs, they need 95 wins. Sure 22-27 is a collapse, and it's one that would, if the season ended today, leave the Sox out of the playoffs. 24-25 is not as much of a collapse, but it too might see the Sox playing golf in October.
I'm not panicking - just saying "let's be careful not to set the bar too low." Silver linings: the Tigers and Indians have 8 games left head-to-head; the Sox schedule is pretty fluffy after this last game in LA.

There is very little chance the Sox don't make the post-season(modulo the usual 'devastating injury bug attack'). Even if they Sox collapse enough that they play .500, their previous record gives them a good wild card shot. Really, the Wild Card is there for the Yanks to take.

It's gonna come down to the Head to Head games vs the MFY. If we hit them good in those, we can knock them out of the WC race, a split would result in the Sox winning the division by a few and the MFY winning both series would be bad.

I worry how the team would do in the post-season, but getting there is about as sure as it can be, short of clinching.

[justin32099]

This is an absurdly dangerous assumption. The Red Sox will almost certainly have to win more than 90 games in order to make the playoffs.

Well, I didn't make it as an assumption, I meant it as the most likely scenario. The Sox, who currently have the best record in baseball, would have to get passed by three teams--New York and either Cleveland AND Detroit or LAA AND Seattle. For what it's worth, by PECOTA-adjusted BP playoff odds, the average AL WC winner has 91.8 wins.

I think the issue is that because everyone else in the AL East blew so hard at the beginning of the season, we built a huge lead by playing pretty well (we started out hot, but we haven't been on a 100-win pace for a month or so, I believe). Now that we're still only playing pretty well and the Yankees are playing incredibly well, it makes us look like we're struggling.

I'm certainly not suggesting we all have a party to celebrate a playoff berth and start mapping out the rotation. The Sox have a lot of work to do. But they're still way more in control of their playoff destiny than any other team in the majors at this point. (BP playoff odds = 98.7%, next best team is the Mets at 88.6%. The Mets are almost nine times as likely to miss the playoffs as we are.)

[jcb8642]

Wel no not really as it's got to be either Setale or both of the other two to win that many games, if one of those teams wins 100 games and it's Detroit or Cleveland they'll win the divison and not the WC. That's the whole point the Sox have to be passed by the Yanks, and Seattle or the Yanks and both of Cleveland and Detroit. So the point is at least two teams have to play a lot better than the Sox and possibly three. That's why they're 99% for the playoffs

Right. That was essentially my point, I just didn't spell it out, ie. there is no combination of 2 of those 3 teams getting "hot" that would enable us to make the playoffs still, if we were to win 90 or 92 games (by the way, of course this is assuming the Yanks pass us - that has been implicit throughout). The issue is there is no reason to rest assured at the prospect of being able to "slump" (22-27) and still win the WC. Because it won't happen. Although this really is just for argument's sake, since it is unlikely the Sox will play that badly against this schedule; I'm really not too worried, just not complacent.

Edit: this is also all assuming LAA wins the West.

Edited by jcb8642, 08 August 2007 - 04:35 PM.

[January]

To be fair, there is the chance the Sox get hot also. They were actually doing pretty well, except for these last two games. I'm hoping these two don't kill the momentum, but we'll see.

[TheInfallibleOne]

Kinda has to hurt to know I was devastatingly right. Especially by the end of the week when they are 1/2 game ahead of the Sox.