When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo..

On Oct 7, 12:19 pm, tmbowma....RemoveThis@yahoo.com wrote:

> I cant figure out how they did it. i was actually thinking about it in
> the shower this morning. They dont have anybody who's numbers really
> make you go WOW with the exception of maybe Balfour, and some key
> players actually had down years.  My best guess is that they simply
> dont have any below-average players at any spot. No real holes in the
> lineup or staff. Theres no way that team should have finished ahead of
> the red Sox.
>
>  Actually, the whole TB situation pisses me off. How did they go from
> pereniall chumps to champs overnight? Troy percival? Why them but not
> the reds?

I'll agree that the Sox are the better team on paper, but the Rays'
success isn't really a mystery. They had the league's third best run
differential and were second best in runs allowed despite playing 18
games against the Red Sox offense. Their worst regular starting
pitcher, Edwin Jackson, had an ERA of 4.42 and 14 wins. That's better
than Arroyo, the Reds' second best starter, which means the Rays
didn't have to waste half a season on a guy like Josh Fogg to fill the
rotation.

I just added up the numbers: Belisle, Fogg, Bailey and Thomson were a
combined 3-19 on the season. Add in Harang, and those two spots went
9-36. The Rays bottom two were 27-20. You just can't have too much
depth with your starting pitching.

At any rate, despite the lack of any incredible seasons, the Rays'
talent is for real. They didn't luck into a good season, they've made
good deals and (finally) taken advantage of a decade of excellent
draft position. I'd take Longoria and Upton over any two position
players in the entire Cincinnati organization.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

On Oct 7, 10:46 am, tom dunne <dunn... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 7, 12:19 pm, tmbowma... DeleteThis @yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > I cant figure out how they did it. i was actually thinking about it in
> > the shower this morning. They dont have anybody who's numbers really
> > make you go WOW with the exception of maybe Balfour, and some key
> > players actually had down years.  My best guess is that they simply
> > dont have any below-average players at any spot. No real holes in the
> > lineup or staff. Theres no way that team should have finished ahead of
> > the red Sox.
>
> >  Actually, the whole TB situation pisses me off. How did they go from
> > pereniall chumps to champs overnight? Troy percival? Why them but not
> > the reds?
>
> I'll agree that the Sox are the better team on paper, but the Rays'
> success isn't really a mystery.  They had the league's third best run
> differential and were second best in runs allowed despite playing 18
> games against the Red Sox offense.  Their worst regular starting
> pitcher, Edwin Jackson, had an ERA of 4.42 and 14 wins.  That's better
> than Arroyo, the Reds' second best starter, which means the Rays
> didn't have to waste half a season on a guy like Josh Fogg to fill the
> rotation.
>
> I just added up the numbers: Belisle, Fogg, Bailey and Thomson were a
> combined 3-19 on the season.  Add in Harang, and those two spots went
> 9-36.  The Rays bottom two were 27-20.  You just can't have too much
> depth with your starting pitching.

The Reds 5th starters looked like this:

Fogg 2-7 7.58
Bailey 0-6 7.93
Belisle 1-4 7.28
Thompson 0-2 6.91

with some relief appearances thrown in.

Why so many guys at 7+? I never would have predicted Fogg to post a
7.58 era. I wouldnt have expected such attrociousness from Belisle or
Bailey either. 5+ yes, but not these cartoonish seasons.

I dont know what to make of this. Are the Reds this bad at judging
talent or did these 3 guys just happen to be trending downward
everytime they took the mound for the big club. I was of a mind early
in the season that they yanked Fogg from the rotation too early and
then spent the remainder of the season moving him from one role to
another.

It just cant be this bad next year.

>
> At any rate, despite the lack of any incredible seasons, the Rays'
> talent is for real.  They didn't luck into a good season, they've made
> good deals and (finally) taken advantage of a decade of excellent
> draft position.  I'd take Longoria and Upton over any two position
> players in the entire Cincinnati organization.

Theres no doubt that the Rays have some very talented players, but
they have had talented young players most of thier existence,
especially in the outfield. How did Jackson and Sonnanstine and
Balfour etc suddenly turn it around so drastically? Thats the key.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

<tmbowman25 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ee0609b4-ec1f-4b98-9e6a-0a72b8b125dc@a19g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 7, 6:56 am, David Short <David.no.Sh... DeleteThis @Spam.Wright.Please.edu>

>Actually, the whole TB situation pisses me off. How did they go from
>pereniall chumps to champs overnight? Troy percival? Why them but not
>the reds?

The Rays are well managed and play them game correctly.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

Bob Braun wrote:
> <tmbowman25 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ee0609b4-ec1f-4b98-9e6a-0a72b8b125dc@a19g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 7, 6:56 am, David Short <David.no.Sh... DeleteThis @Spam.Wright.Please.edu>
>
>> Actually, the whole TB situation pisses me off. How did they go from
>> pereniall chumps to champs overnight? Troy percival? Why them but not
>> the reds?
>
> The Rays are well managed and play them game correctly.

Awww dude.

That hurts.

All those bullet points and that's the only thing you've got to comment on?

Talk about a down year for the home team.

dfs
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

On Oct 7, 4:28 pm, tmbowma....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Oct 7, 10:46 am, tom dunne <dunn....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 7, 12:19 pm, tmbowma....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > > I cant figure out how they did it. i was actually thinking about it in
> > > the shower this morning. They dont have anybody who's numbers really
> > > make you go WOW with the exception of maybe Balfour, and some key
> > > players actually had down years.  My best guess is that they simply
> > > dont have any below-average players at any spot. No real holes in the
> > > lineup or staff. Theres no way that team should have finished ahead of
> > > the red Sox.
>
> > >  Actually, the whole TB situation pisses me off. How did they go from
> > > pereniall chumps to champs overnight? Troy percival? Why them but not
> > > the reds?
>
> > I'll agree that the Sox are the better team on paper, but the Rays'
> > success isn't really a mystery.  They had the league's third best run
> > differential and were second best in runs allowed despite playing 18
> > games against the Red Sox offense.  Their worst regular starting
> > pitcher, Edwin Jackson, had an ERA of 4.42 and 14 wins.  That's better
> > than Arroyo, the Reds' second best starter, which means the Rays
> > didn't have to waste half a season on a guy like Josh Fogg to fill the
> > rotation.
>
> > I just added up the numbers: Belisle, Fogg, Bailey and Thomson were a
> > combined 3-19 on the season.  Add in Harang, and those two spots went
> > 9-36.  The Rays bottom two were 27-20.  You just can't have too much
> > depth with your starting pitching.
>
> The Reds 5th starters looked like this:
>
> Fogg            2-7   7.58
> Bailey          0-6   7.93
> Belisle         1-4   7.28
> Thompson    0-2   6.91
>
> with some relief appearances thrown in.
>
>  Why so many guys at 7+? I never would have predicted Fogg to post a
> 7.58 era. I wouldnt have expected such attrociousness from Belisle or
> Bailey either. 5+ yes, but not these cartoonish seasons.
>
>  I dont know what to make of this. Are the Reds this bad at judging
> talent or did these 3 guys just happen to be trending downward
> everytime they took the mound for the big club. I was of a mind early
> in the season that they yanked Fogg from the rotation too early and
> then spent the remainder of the season moving him from one role to
> another.
>
>  It just cant be this bad next year.

Almost certainly not, though we're definitely seeing a trend of
mediocre pitchers having career worst seasons for the Reds (Fogg,
Milton, Dempster, probably others.) I don't know why that is.

> > At any rate, despite the lack of any incredible seasons, the Rays'
> > talent is for real.  They didn't luck into a good season, they've made
> > good deals and (finally) taken advantage of a decade of excellent
> > draft position.  I'd take Longoria and Upton over any two position
> > players in the entire Cincinnati organization.
>
> Theres no doubt that the Rays have some very talented players, but
> they have had talented young players most of thier existence,
> especially in the outfield. How did Jackson and Sonnanstine and
> Balfour etc suddenly turn it around so drastically? Thats the key.

Balfour is the only real shock here, and sometimes things like that
just happen. Do you remember Kent Mercker in 2003, the year he was
traded from Cincy to Atlanta for Matt Belisle? He had a 1.95 ERA that
season, after two seasons over 6.00. No idea why he suddenly turned
it around, he just had a crazy good year. Balfour fits that
description, I guess.

Sonnanstine and Jackson didn't do anything that special - they both
posted almost exactly league average seasons. Considering they're
both still young, the improvement makes sense - Jackson is even
younger than Edinson Volquez, who had a much more dramatic
turnaround. The important thing is that league average starters were
the 'worst' the Rays had in the rotation this year. For the Reds,
every 5th game is almost a guaranteed loss, while Tampa Bay had a
reasonable shot at winning on any given day.

Another thing I noticed is that the Rays led the league in Defensive
Efficiency (one of those fancy Bill James stats.) They were really
good in the field at turning balls in play into outs. That'll make
your pitching staff look better than it is. Meanwhile, the Reds
were... wait for it.... waaait for it..... Yep, they were dead last
in the National League.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

"David Short" <David.no.Short.DeleteThis@Spam.Wright.Please.edu> wrote in message
news:gcfq1h$crv$1@posting.glorb.com...
> Compared to the way the reds run their roster?
>
> Coco Crisp would be starting for the reds.
> Mark Kotsay would be starting in center for the reds and the Red Sox are
> using him at first base.
>
> How come the reds can't try and use young guys like the red sox are using
> Papelbon. He may end up a starter, but they are getting effective innings.
>
> I know I come across as a moneyball/walks type guy, but I was rooting for
> the Angels. That's a fun team to watch. They lived and died with batting
> average and pitching.

I think they relied too much on small ball. They call it that for a reason.
It's good for small results here and there, but you shouldn't constantly be
in situations where you have to use it. The squeeze play with only 1 out
was silly to me.

> Once you were past Konerko, Dye and Pierzynski, the White Sox just didn't
> have anything. Both Junior and Thome looked OLD and slow.

Jr says he's not retiring. My question is, who wants his numbers in their
lineup?
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

tom dunne <dunnetg DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in
news:f614fd4d-b824-493a-af70-41afc212ce63@a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com:

>
> Another thing I noticed is that the Rays led the league in Defensive
> Efficiency (one of those fancy Bill James stats.) They were really
> good in the field at turning balls in play into outs. That'll make
> your pitching staff look better than it is. Meanwhile, the Reds
> were... wait for it.... waaait for it..... Yep, they were dead last
> in the National League.
>
>

That's why Jason Bartlett, the shortstop for the Rays this year, was voted
the team MVP by the Baseball Writers Association of America. His batting
average of .286 was certainly respectable, but when you're on a team with
Carlos Pena and Evan Longoria you're probably not going to put up the best
offensive numbers on your team. Instead, Bartlett was a defensive upgrade
at SS for them and resulted in far fewer runs against the Rays than they'd
had in the past...or so I read.

And hey, the Reds might've been last in the National League, but they
weren't dead last *overall*! At least we can say we're better than the
Texas Rangers in that category. I guess that counts for...something.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

On Oct 8, 10:06 am, t... DeleteThis @nomail.please (JustTom) wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 10:46:03 -0700 (PDT), tom dunne <dunn... DeleteThis @gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >I'll agree that the Sox are the better team on paper, but the Rays'
> >success isn't really a mystery.  They had the league's third best run
> >differential and were second best in runs allowed despite playing 18
> >games against the Red Sox offense.  Their worst regular starting
> >pitcher, Edwin Jackson, had an ERA of 4.42 and 14 wins.  That's better
> >than Arroyo, the Reds' second best starter, which means the Rays
> >didn't have to waste half a season on a guy like Josh Fogg to fill the
> >rotation.
>
> They also went from having one of the worst bullpens to one of the
> better ones.
>
> They flashed it on the screen during one of the games.  Last year's
> bullpen era was 6.16, one of the worst ever.  This year?  3.55
>
> They resigned Wheeler, got Percival and Miller, converted a pedestrian
> starter in Howell to an effective reliever and hit the big time
> jackpot with Balfour.   They picked up that submariner dude from
> Baltimore at the break to add even more quality depth.
>
> I really like how they're bullpen is composed of different guys with
> different looks and strengths.   It's a really flexible group.
>
> Here's an article from St Pete that  speculates on the Devil Rays
> success...http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseball/rays/article834436.ece

Nice, a whole article discussing everything in this thread :p

I have come to believe that building a bullpen is just as much pure
dumb luck as anything else. The only really obvious move they made
was resigning Wheeler, and even that was a bit of a gamble after his
'07 season. Signing Percival was a roll of the dice, Balfour was
completely unexpected, and Howell's success is the kind of things
clubs always try but can't really expect will succeed.

The up-and-down nature of relievers' seasons makes a guy like Mariano
Rivera worth the money - you actually know what you're going to get
from him every year. Not too many relievers like that, though.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 10:46:03 -0700 (PDT), tom dunne <dunnetg DeleteThis @gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>I'll agree that the Sox are the better team on paper, but the Rays'
>success isn't really a mystery. They had the league's third best run
>differential and were second best in runs allowed despite playing 18
>games against the Red Sox offense. Their worst regular starting
>pitcher, Edwin Jackson, had an ERA of 4.42 and 14 wins. That's better
>than Arroyo, the Reds' second best starter, which means the Rays
>didn't have to waste half a season on a guy like Josh Fogg to fill the
>rotation.
>

They also went from having one of the worst bullpens to one of the
better ones.

They flashed it on the screen during one of the games. Last year's
bullpen era was 6.16, one of the worst ever. This year? 3.55

They resigned Wheeler, got Percival and Miller, converted a pedestrian
starter in Howell to an effective reliever and hit the big time
jackpot with Balfour. They picked up that submariner dude from
Baltimore at the break to add even more quality depth.

I really like how they're bullpen is composed of different guys with
different looks and strengths. It's a really flexible group.


Here's an article from St Pete that speculates on the Devil Rays
success...http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseball/rays/article834436.ece
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

"tom dunne" <dunnetg RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
I have come to believe that building a bullpen is just as much pure
dumb luck as anything else. The only really obvious move they made
was resigning Wheeler, and even that was a bit of a gamble after his
'07 season. Signing Percival was a roll of the dice, Balfour was
completely unexpected, and Howell's success is the kind of things
clubs always try but can't really expect will succeed.

The up-and-down nature of relievers' seasons makes a guy like Mariano
Rivera worth the money - you actually know what you're going to get
from him every year. Not too many relievers like that, though.

End of Tom's stuff...

So, is that an endorsement of Cordero?

dfsf
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 09:56:57 -0400, David Short
<David.no.Short.TakeThisOut@Spam.Wright.Please.edu> wrote:

>Compared to the way the reds run their roster?
>
>Coco Crisp would be starting for the reds.
>Mark Kotsay would be starting in center for the reds and the Red Sox are
>using him at first base.
>

I came away impressed with the flexibility that the red sox have built
into their bench even with the fact they are carrying 3 catchers.

But as much as I hate to play the money card, the fact is that Boston
has incredibly deep pockets and can afford to swallow their mistakes
or use them off the bench, or pick up other team's starters and stick
them on the bench. That combined with what appears to be a pretty
deep farm gives them that incredible depth in a short series.

Julio Lugo was a huge bust, and makes over $9M a year, and yet they
can swallow that and bury him on the DL with a "tender" quad without
batting an eye.

Coco Crisp makes $5M a year. He wasn't bad for them, but he was
really another mistake. Most teams would have to unload a $5M backup
CFer. They just stuck him on the bench where he's a really solid
option.

Look at their mid season pickups.

Kotsay makes $7M a year, and the Sox have him off the bench.
Byrd makes $7.5M and is likely going to come out of the pen, if at
all.
Bay makes $6M.

Most folks couldn't do that, even if shedding a Manny salary.

>How come the reds can't try and use young guys like the red sox are
>using Papelbon. He may end up a starter, but they are getting effective
>innings.

I've thought that we should be doing that for a long time. I think
it's a huge mistake to simply declare most young guys are "starters"
or "relievers" and hand them the job. I like the OJT route. I
still marvel that somebody like David Wells spent 3 years in the pen,
learning how to pitch while still helping the team. I wish we'd do
that more often. We'd also know much more quickly whether or not a
guy can get ML hitters out or not.

>
>I know I come across as a moneyball/walks type guy, but I was rooting
>for the Angels. That's a fun team to watch. They lived and died with
>batting average and pitching.
>

Only because they were going against the Sox. They really are pretty
boring to watch. Although, as an east coast guy who doesn't see them
much, I'm always taken back a bit by how chubby Vlad seems to have
gotten.

>Once you were past Konerko, Dye and Pierzynski, the White Sox just
>didn't have anything. Both Junior and Thome looked OLD and slow.
>

Konerko looked old and decrepit most of the year. Sad part is that
JR at 50 is probably a better hitter than Anderson.

>
>In retrospect the devil rays didn't really pitch that well or hit that
>well, they just won.
>

I have nothing to back it up, but it seemed to me that every time the
sox scored, the the DRays would come back and answer in the next
inning.
>
>If the Angels can't win, I'll be rooting for the Phillies. There the
>next closest thing and I surely can't root for the dodgers.

It's odd, but I hold almost as much resentment for the Phils as I do
for the dodgers.

I can't explain it, but I hated everything about the phils when I was
a kid right down to those powder blue unis. I absolutely hated
those uniforms.

And I couldn't stand anyone who played for them. Luzinski, Bowa,
Maddox, Bake McBride (his name and the fro under the earless helmet),
even Trillo and Jefferies later. They've always just seemed like a
bunch of punks. I dug the Pirates outta the NL East.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 13:15:39 -0700 (PDT), tmbowman25.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com wrote:


>This doesnt explain anything. They had the same manager for the
>previous 2 seasons and won less than 40% of thier games. Were they not
>playing hard correct baseball? Same manager.


I know that chemistry and culture isn't something measurable, but I
don't think you can discount the fact that they rid themselves of what
appears to be two dickhead me-first types of players. Delmon Young
and Elijah Dukes no longer play for them this year, and I think that
was a huge improvement.

While I can't speak to Young, as someone who's cursed to have Nats on
local TV, I watched Dukes lollygag more than once. And read about
"incidents" more than once. There are always teams willing to
gamble that talent outweighs their personalities, but I think the team
creates an uncomfortable atmosphere where a lot of folks walk around
on eggshells. Everybody is kind of rubbernecking, waiting to see
what kind of trouble they get into next.

Manny's a lot like that. There is no question that he just about
singlehandedly put the dodgers in the playoffs. But does anyone doubt
that he can also take a team right out of it when he stops playing or
starts one of his tirades?
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo.. 

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 08:28:06 -0700 (PDT), tom dunne <dunnetg DeleteThis @gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>I have come to believe that building a bullpen is just as much pure
>dumb luck as anything else. The only really obvious move they made
>was resigning Wheeler, and even that was a bit of a gamble after his
>'07 season. Signing Percival was a roll of the dice, Balfour was
>completely unexpected, and Howell's success is the kind of things
>clubs always try but can't really expect will succeed.

I kind of wish they'd try it with Belisle instead of dumping him, and
I think Homer might be able to learn some things out of the pen.

The more I think about it, the more I like the Rays diversity.

One of the common things about the reds pen to me, other than that it
sux, is that they are pretty much all the same. Coffey, Majewski,
Lincoln, McBeth, Salmon, etc are all pretty much the same guy.

Stick the little screwballer out there. Find a submariner or
somebody with a funky deceptive delivery to change the hitter's eye
level from time to time. Have a guy or two that can go long, not
just single inning guys.

Why doesn't anyone ever have a knuckler in the pen? Seems that it
would be a hell of a change of pace for a long reliever.

I've always thought that we should always be trying to create
knuckleballers. They eat up innings, are around forever, and could
literally pitch every day if they had to. And seems like cheap
insurance to have around on the farm for a spot start or injury
callup.
 >> Stay informed about: When you look at the teams in the post season...what do yo..