Padres bloggin' since 2007

The Top 10 Padres of ’10: No. 10

October 19th, 2010 by

Ray’s note: Over the next 10 (or so) days, I will be counting down the 10 best Padres of the past year. To compile this list, I used a very complex equation that I can’t really get into now but rest assured that this is in no way completely arbitrary.

10. Tim Stauffer, RP/SP

Tell me if you’ve heard this one before:

A down and out athlete, whose sport is of no real consequence, finds that he’s got one more shot at glory. Maybe he used to be someone people believed in — but after years of questionable returns, his goodwill has dried up and now it’s on him to make others believe. So he battles back, puts one foot in front of the other, and begins on the path to redemption. He fights and claws until one day he makes it. Then his manager tells the world, Tim Stauffer is too valuable to start.”

It’s easy to forget now that there are better things to talk about, but Stauffer missed the entire 2008 season. Looking at his numbers, it’s easy to assume it was due to shame. In 2007, he spent the full year in Portland and only managed a 4.34 ERA, which was actually a step up from his 2006 5.53 ERA. He was a 25-year-old former first round pick, fourth overall, and he was floundering in Triple-A. So he sat out 2008, either from embarrassment or his alleged shoulder injury, and came back to take it easy in 2009. That year, he only played in 16 minor league games, starting four, but he did better, amassing a 2.14 ERA between Portland and San Antonio before getting the call. He packed up his 6.37 career ERA (to that point) and came down to San Diego, where he made 14 starts for the same team that gave ample opportunities to Chad Gaudin and Josh Geer. It seemed to be something of an audition and Stauffer delivered, contributing a 3.58 ERA, a 4.67 FIP, and a 4.72 xFIP. Not exactly Cy Young stuff but for a team that gave 36 starts to Gaudin and Geer, it would be enough to earn Stauffer a look-see for 2010.

The writing was on the wall in Arizona this spring, as Stauffer got into six games but only started one. At the beginning of the season, there was no room in the rotation. When Chris Young went down following his first start, it was Wade LeBlanc who took his spot. During the first week of the season, Stauffer came into two games: taking over for a struggling Jon Garland on April 5th and helping the Padres win an extra inning contest on the 10th, his biggest game of year according to WPA. He pitched well, striking out five and surrendering zero runs in five combined innings of work, and this must of stuck with the team.

Contrary to popular belief, it was Corey Brock — not Bud Black who said that “Stauffer might be too valuable to start,” but print the legend, right? Stauffer was too good to start, a compliment so wild that it could only make sense. At first, it kind of worked. LeBlanc had a strong April and on May 11th, Stauffer went down with appendicitis, which kept him out of San Diego for two months. When he came back, he continued to do what he do, giving the Padres good work out of the pen.

Then came the 10-game losing streak.

As the season wore on, LeBlanc’s hot start faded away. He threw a 6.47 ERA in August, a performance that’s not going to cut it in a pennant race. Making matters worse, Kevin Correia was unable to repeat his 2009 success. After suffering a personal tragedy earlier in the year, Correia’s was a story to root for, but in a pennant race, moral victories have to take a backseat. And so, on September 6th, the 136th game of the season, Stauffer started the hill against the Los Angeles Dodgers. Nine innings later, the team’s 10-game losing streak had come to an end. While Stauffer didn’t pick up the win, or even reach the fifth inning, these are just facts that any good screenwriter skips over when it comes time to put pen to paper. Stauffer kept going. Other than a rough go in St. Louis, he was lights out. He was the second best pitcher on the team in September. With luck not on Mat Latos’ side, you could make the argument that he was the best.

But then, budding screenwriters, September means nothing if it doesn’t give way to October. Just as all Little Leaguer’s dream, Stauffer was in line for an important October start. Granted, it was still a regular season game, but the Padres were down two to the Giants with two left to play. The Giants. In San Francisco. Stauffer, like the legend he’s become, came through when his team needed him the most, striking out four in six and a third. He allowed only one run before giving the game to the bullpen, who shut the door and put the team one back with one to go. Obviously, that last game didn’t go so well, but it will simply be an epilogue at the end of “Stauffer: The Movie.”

Tim ended the year with a 1.85 ERA (199 ERA+), 3.02 FIP, and 3.74 xFIP. Perhaps the best thing for Stauffer to nail to his wall this winter is this:

(Jed) Hoyer wishes that he and Buddy would have put Tim Stauffer back into the rotation earlier. That’s the one thing that keeps him up at night. It could have brought them 2 or 3 more wins. They waited longer than they should have. They waited until the rosters expanded.

GM Jed Hoyer: “There’s a reason we didn’t make the playoffs. We obviously weren’t quite good enough.”

The man who was once too valuable to start saw his stifling become his general manager’s biggest regret. For a team that finished one game out from a postseason shot, those two or three wins might have been the most valuable of the year. But we’ll never know. Next year, with only Latos and Clayton Richard guaranteed spots in the rotation, there would seem to be a shot for Stauffer to finally live up to his first round potential. For his sake, our sake, and for the sake of a sequel, let’s hope we find out.

Posted in awards, players, statistics | 3 Comments »

What Jed said

October 7th, 2010 by

Jed Hoyer gave an interview to XX yesterday and thanks to the good people at Gaslamp Ball, neither of us have to listen to it. It was surprisingly (at least to me) candid, as if Jed were paying tribute to the Gunslinger. It gave us a good window into his mind. Here are some of the choice hits, as well as my valuable (you’ll see. i’ll show you) opinion.

Hoyer wishes that he and Buddy would have put Tim Stauffer back into the rotation earlier. That’s the one thing that keeps him up at night. It could have brought them 2 or 3 more wins. They waited longer than they should have. They waited until the rosters expanded.


Stauffer was the second best “starter” on this team, behind Mat Latos, but he only received seven starts. His 3.02 FIP was only .02 behind Latos and was .79 ahead of Clayton Richard, Mr. Third Place. His xFIP was also solid (3.74), putting him behind Latos and Cory Luebke and his three starts.

In his place, Wade LeBlanc and Kevin Correia combined for 51 starts, or almost a third of the season. The two also combined to give the team a total of 0.1 wins above replacement. In almost 300 less innings, Stauffer contributed 1.3 wins. I hate to have to say this, but the Padres really could’ve used an extra win there at the end of the year.

The Padres struggled all year getting on base in the 1 and 2 spot in the line up. They ranked 27 or 28th getting on base in those positions. It really hurt the run scoring. Hoyer thinks very highly of David Eckstein, he had a really good year but he won’t say if he’ll be coming back next year.

David, David, David. He actually had his best season in years (five, to be exact). Unfortunately, that had nothing to do with his hitting. He had his best defensive year ever, managing average range and letting his sure handedness do the rest. Offensively, it was the same story. A 91 wRC+, which is worse than his career 95, and a total of -5.1 runs contributed. On a team that wasn’t exactly Murderer’s Row, Eckstein had the fourth worst year with the bat. It’s just that Jerry Hairston, Jr. and Everth Cabrera, our other options at second, were worse.

It was nice of Hoyer to lie and say that Eckstein had a really good year. But if he’s looking to upgrade, we’ve found somewhere to start.

Ryan Ludwick is a really good player who struggled in the new environment. He put too much pressure on himself. He thinks that Ludwick will be moved to left field because Hoyer likes Will Venable’s glove in right field.


**Not to editorialize, but I wouldn’t be against the Padres putting Ludwick in left. With a starting trio of Ludwick-Gwynn-Venable, I’m not sure anything would fall in that outfield.

Good Ludwick the rest of the season

Getting past that, it’s good to see that Hoyer isn’t among the masses calling for Ludwick’s head. He definitely stunk while here (78 OPS+) but luck was not on his side (.257 BABIP). Both numbers are considerably down from his career averages (114 OPS+, .309 BABIP). Add in that he was still coming off of an injury and it’s likely that we didn’t see the real Ryan Ludwick these past two months. It was his evil twin, Ryan Ughwick.

Jon Garland had a great year. They’ll talk about exercising his option over the next two weeks. He felt that he performed exactly as they hoped.

A great year might be something of an overstatement, but Garland was who we thought he is (4.41 FIP, 106 ERA+, 200 IP). His option is for $6.75 million and that might be a bit steep, but Garland is a dependable pitcher and the rotation would still only be around $8 million with him.

Gwynn had a good season defensively. The team missed him in the outfield when he was injured. He struggled offensively. He’s a reason for the success of the pitching staff.

AJ was amazing this year, posting the highest UZR/150 of all players with at least 700 innings (33.6). Even being four-to-five hundred innings behind the rest of his competition, he still ended the year second in UZR (12.9) behind only Michael Bourn. This guy can play him some centerfield and seemed to be unaffected by the grand expanse of Petco Park (6.4 home RngR). He had a down year with the bat but like Ludwick, luck was not on his side (.236 BABIP, .050 BABIP-LD%). It’d be a big risk for the team to go into 2011 with AJ installed in center but his defense makes him a valuable player (1.7 WAR in 2010).

Personally, I’d like to see Venable get first crack at centerfield. He showed a lot of promise when Black finally gave him the shot and with his bat, the Padres wouldn’t have to make sacrifices or choose one facet of the game over the other. But given that Black sent Chris Denorfia out for 360 innings (we’ve been over this) I would gladly take another year of Tony Gwynn, Jr.

Posted in media, statistics | 8 Comments »

The road so far

October 1st, 2010 by

(Cue “Carry On My Wayward Son” by Kansas)

The Padres and Giants have followed two very different paths coming into this weekend’s final series. On September 1st, the Padres were 76-56 with a three game lead over the Giants. Now, twelve wins and fifteen loses later, the roles have been reversed and the Padres find themselves down three on October 1st. To show you what kind of month we just finished, I’ve made another graph, this one including how the Giants did:

Padres/Giants postseason odds

Where the lines diverge is where the Padres began a streak in which they lost four of their last five and the Giants won four of their last five, completing the flip-flop. San Francisco is only one win from clinching the division. But how did we get here?

How did we get here, Ray?

For the season, neither team has bad a strong offense, with the Giants and Padres posting similar wOBA of .318 and .304 respectively (note: don’t forget about park factors). And in September, not much changed. Both teams stumbled but stumbled equally, with the Giants falling to .303 and the Padres to .280. Honestly before I looked this up, this is where I figured the difference came. But that’s why we crunch the numbers.

If you’re dead set on blaming the offense and are upset with the last paragraph, there is hope. Despite their team’s general struggles, the heart of San Francisco’s lineup has been doing their part. Pat Burrell (.373 wOBA), Aubrey Huff (.370), and Buster Posey (.367) have stayed hot, hitting 17 home runs between the three of them this month. As for their San Diego counterparts, Adrian Gonzalez’s September has been solid, if not to his usual standards. His .346 wOBA is second to everyone with regular at-bats, behind only the playing-out-of-his-mind Will Venable (.363). Miguel Tejada’s also doing his part (.327) but his fellow deadline darling is another story. Ryan Ludwick’s time here in San Diego has been something of a disaster–and his September wOBA of .289 is hard to swallow. Jed Hoyer recently committed to bringing Ludwick back and while I’m glad he has (Ludwick’s really battled bad luck here), I understand if you aren’t. I also understand if you’re less than pleased with Chase Headley as well. His .223 wOBA (with a .305 BABIP) is awful– it’s been a horrible end to what was an otherwise excellent season for Chase.

Pitching-wise, the Padres have the edge in FIP (3.66 to 3.74) and the Giants take the edge in ERA (3.37 to 3.41) but over the past month, the Giants’ pitchers have been unhittable (2.75 FIP and 1.78 ERA). This is due in large part to their five starters, who had a combined 2.90 FIP and 2.04 ERA. Our guys didn’t fare as well, ending up with a 3.85 FIP and 4.15 ERA. If there’s a silver lining here, it’s that we’ll avoid the Giants’ two hottest pitchers,Madison Bumgarner (1.96 FIP) and Tim Lincecum (2.18) but really, it’s more of a bronze lining at best.

The season’s not over, but it’ll take a miracle for the season to continue into next week. Against such a formidable opponent, we can only hope that our team’s October goes a bit better than their September.

Posted in statistics | 3 Comments »

The Giant Dipper

September 26th, 2010 by

With one week left, this has already been an exhausting September.

On August 26th, the Padres’ postseason odds were at their peak, scoring a 96.7 from Baseball Prospectus and a 97.2 from coolstandings. Since then, the Padres have made it interesting, losing 10 in a row, flirting with an all-time collapse, and winning five of their last seven.

I’m sure I don’t need to tell you how up-and-down this past month has been, but here’s a visual reference for you just in case.

Padres postseaso odds

That looks like one fun roller coaster. Here’s hoping they let us off at the top.

Posted in statistics | 3 Comments »

Is Mat Latos better than Jake Peavy?

September 8th, 2010 by

What a stupid question. Jake has more than twelve hundred innings on Latos. We’re not even close to being able to make such calls. But let’s try anyway.

Last night, Latos set a major league record by pitching in his fifteenth straight game of five innings or more while allowing two runs or less. The last time he gave up three runs was on June 4th, which was also the last time he allowed three runs in a game since April 26th. Since May 1st, his ERA has been 1.64. He may be young, but Latos has muscled his way into Great talk.

I don’t know about you, fellow Padres fans, but my barometer for great Padre pitching is Jake Peavy. The break up may have been less than amicable but he’s still the greatest Padre I’ve ever seen toe the rubber in the first inning. So how does new hotness measure up?

Here’s a sampling of what the tattooed one has done this season, at age 22:

FIP 2.96
xFIP 3.25
ERA+ 163
K/9 9.41
BB/9 2.38
WPA 4.4
WAR 3.7

Not bad. For starters, let’s look at how Jake did at age 22.

FIP 4.99
xFIP 4.35
ERA+ 96
K/9 7.21
BB/9 3.79
WPA 0.32
WAR 0.3

I think it’s safe to say that Latos found his feet a little earlier. Now, Jake’s Cy Young season.

FIP 2.54
xFIP 2.84
ERA+ 158
K/9 9.67
BB/9 2.74
WPA 3.50
WAR 6.1

Latos actually holds his own. Jake’s got him at FIP and xFIP, the big kahunas of the moment, strike outs, and WAR (it should be noted here that WAR is a cumulative stat on Latos is on pace for less than 200 innings this year) but Latos takes ERA+, walks, and WPA so far. His K/BB also bests Jake’s, 3.95 to 3.53. It’s highly doubtful that Latos will get the award this year, Johnson and Halladay have just been too dominant, but that takes nothing away from what he’s accomplished this year.

In case you were wondering, Latos has set career highs in every category this year. How do they compare to Jake’s career highs, you ask? Let’s find out.

FIP 2.84 2007
xFIP 2.99 2009
ERA+ 171 2004
K/9 9.74 2009
BB/9 2.22 2005
WPA 3.59 2005
WAR 6.1 2007

With the exception of WPA, Latos still has a ways to go before he reaches Jake but he’s off to a fast-start. It should be interesting to see how much ground he gains next year, don’t you agree Tom Verducci?

Posted in players, statistics | 5 Comments »

Good Ludwick the rest of the season

July 31st, 2010 by

Remember how nonplussed I was with the Tejada trade? I couldn’t even be bothered to come up with a witty title. Now look at the title for this post. So witty. So plussed.

Earlier today, the Padres pulled the trigger on a trade for Ryan Ludwick, getting him away from the Cardinals in a three-way deal that also sent Jake Westbrook from Cleveland to St. Louis.

After flirting with Jayson Werth earlier in the week, the Padres may have made a better deal. While Ludwick doesn’t have Werth’s mighty beard (Werth doesn’t have it anymore either), he’s got the type of numbers that should make you excited.

Ludwick’s in the middle of another solid season, posting a 123 wRC+ with an 8.8 UZR. From 2007 (his breakout season) through 2009, he had a line of .280/.350/.512 while playing in the new Busch Stadium, which is not hitter-friendly. It’s no Petco* but there’s no reason to fear that Ludwick will collapse once he gets to San Diego.

Defensively, Ludwick is a great right fielder who will likely bump Will Venable over to left field. Since 2007, his defense’s been worth +15.7 runs (that’s with a little left and center sprinkled in. At right alone, he’s been worth +12 runs). While he doesn’t have the best range, which should be interesting moving to Petco’s humongous right field**, he’s got the kind of arm you want from the most storied position in Padres history.

While I would have loved for the Padres to acquire Jayson Werth, he would be a two month rental as Werth is a free agent at the end of the year. Ludwick isn’t. Ludwick is a player that we can pencil into the four hole for the next year and a half and watch as he offers Adrian the type of lineup protection that he’s never received in his career. If Adrian wanted the team to show him they’re serious about winning, then he got his wish.

But wait, it gets better! For everything I just spelled out, the Padres gave up nothing. Were you worried about having to part with Simon Castro or Corey Luebke to improve them team? Then you’ll be glad to hear that the Padres received Ludwick in exchange for Corey Kluber*** and Nick Greenwood. If you’re asking who those guys are, my point exactly. And we’ll tell you, just not right now****. Along with Kluber and Greenwood, the team also sent some money St. Louis’ way. That’s right, us broke-ass busters sent another team money. And Ludwick’s arbitration eligible and likely to become the highest paid player on the team next year. Anyone questioning whether or not Moorad’s going to open up his pocketbook can stop asking.

If you wanted proof that the new regime is serious, here it is.

*Keep in mind that Petco makes hitters look bad, but it doesn’t make them actually bad. The Padres offense is currently ranked fourth in the NL when you take park factors into consideration, and I’d bet that you don’t believe me when I tell you that.

**Not to editorialize, but I wouldn’t be against the Padres putting Ludwick in left. With a starting trio of Ludwick-Gwynn-Venable, I’m not sure anything would fall in that outfield.

***With Luebke and Kluber, and the once rumored Corey Hart, this year’s been the Deadline of the Coreys for us.

****Coming soon!

Posted in hot stove, statistics | 2 Comments »

Open range

July 30th, 2010 by

In Tim Sullivan’s article on the Miguel Tejada acquisition, Adrian Gonzalez was quoted as saying:

“We position ourselves in the right place and then the ball’s hit nearby most of the time. We haven’t made a lot of spectacular plays out there this year. We’ve just always been in the right place. And that’s because the pitchers can execute their pitches. … There’s not a lot of range needed.”

According to UZR, the Padres as a team are second in the league in range runs at +31.6 and they’re tenth in out of zone (OOZ) plays with 286. In the infield alone (excluding first base), the Padres have +10.8 range runs and 109 OOZ. In both categories, the team ranks near the top of the league, ahead of the great defenses in San Francisco, Cincinnati, and Arizona.

Adrian’s had a better view of the infield than I have this season, but I can’t help but feel like he’s selling his guys a little short.

Posted in statistics | Comments Off

Padres acquire Miguel Tejada

July 30th, 2010 by

Let’s get this out of the way: Miguel Tejada is no longer the player you remember. In fact, he is no longer a good player.

This season, Tejada has been worth 0.1 wins, making him a slight upgrade over current awful Padres Everth Cabrera and Matt Stairs (-0.1 wins) and Oscar Salazar (-0.3), and assuming that he takes Everth’s shortstop job, Tejada will become the worst hitter on the team and it won’t be close (-10 runs). The next lowest position player is Salazar at -3.6. While all current Padres have Petco Park pulling their numbers down, Tejada has Camden Yards lifting his up. Yet he’s still only managed a wRC+ of 81. On the road, that number drops to 60.

But wait, it gets worse. Tejada will likely become our everyday shortstop, a position where he couldn’t find a job last offseason. In the 16,000+ innings he’s logged at short in his career, Tejada has been worth -30.2 runs on defense (-3.6 UZR/150) and from 2007-09, the last three seasons (almost 3,800 innings) he played at the position, he was worth -6.3 runs (-5.3 UZR/150). We don’t have enough information to draw any conclusions, but early returns on Tejada’s play at the hot corner have not been inspiring (-7.3 UZR/150 in 808 innings).

Sounds awful, right? Why would Hoyer make this trade? For starters, it didn’t cost a whole lot. While Wynn Pelzer, our contribution to this trade, was ranked seventh in our system by Baseball America before the season, his lack of control and modest projections make him a small loss. And despite his apparently fading abilities, Tejada has maintained his reputation as a great teammate, earning high praise from none other than Mark Loretta:

Loretta said Tejada was one of the best teammates he ever had.

“He’s just a fun guy to be around,” Loretta said. “He really pulled for his teammates, kind of one of those guys that people are drawn to. Funny, plays every day, plays hurt. He’s a gamer.”

I don’t think I need to tell you that no one, save for Bryan Cranston, has benefited from chemistry like these 2010 San Diego Padres and it sounds like it just got better.

Ultimately, this is an uninspiring-but-inoffensive trade. The team didn’t add the missing piece, but they didn’t just trade Wilson Ramos for Matt Capps either. Tejada hasn’t been a good player so far this season and while it’s possible that a jump into the fire could do him good, he’s still replacing a player worse than him even if it doesn’t.

If nothing else, Tejada makes this team that much easier to build on MVP 2005, so let’s call it a win.

Posted in hot stove, statistics | 5 Comments »

Sample size, randomness, baseball, and you

June 22nd, 2010 by

Special note: this post doesn’t have a lot of jokes. In exchange for your forgiveness, please accept this photo of Padres prospect Blake Tekotte. Thank you.

Blake Tekotte

When looking at statistics, there are two major pieces of information to learn.

  • How much has a player contributed to his team in the past?
  • How much will a player contribute to his team in the future?

Often times, the ability of a player to contribute to his team in the future is called “true talent level”. This is a player’s raw ability, with other factors such as luck and the ballpark environment in which he plays stripped from the conversation. This is where the concept of sample size is most important. Without using an adequate sample size in measurement, all the stuff that doesn’t affect a player’s future performance might mess up our opinions. Sample size, among other things, is what gets us there.

While fun and interesting, when talking about things a particular baseball squadron should or should not do, a player’s contributions in the past generally aren’t relevant. Sure there are exceptions–when a lifelong Padre player is negotiating his final contract–for instance. But those are rare.

My stupid example: flipping a coin

Suppose you ask me to call heads or tails as you flip a quarter in the air. I choose heads, and wouldn’t you know it, the quarter lands heads up! Does this mean I will know the result of all future coin flips when asked? In other words, do I have a perfect “true talent level” of calling coin flips? Of course not, and we all understand why. Because of luck.

Along these lines, each measurement (or statistic) has its own requirements for sample size. If you flipped a second coin, and I guess correctly a second time, that still doesn’t prove my coin guessing. We simply haven’t reached the number of coin flips necessary to filter out the luck. As you approach 50 coin flips and calls, my successful calling rate will likely be pretty close to my true talent level of 50%.

Back to baseball: wOBA and UZR

The same applies for baseball measurements. Different stats require different amounts of trial before they eliminate noise. I’m not a stat expert, so I can’t expressly say exactly how many tries one should use for each stat. For me, 3-5 years of wOBA (my favorite hitting stat) is what I want to see when looking at a player. 500 plate appearances at minimum.

When measuring defense with UZR, however, things are different. 3 years of UZR data is worth about 1 year of hitting data. That means when determining a defender’s true talent level, as I understand it, you really ought to look at 9 years of data. I’m completely serial. 3 years of UZR at minimum.

So please, everyone from message board posters to SDUT staff writers, be careful when making judgement about a player’s future potential using statistics. Especially UZR.

Your pal,


Posted in statistics | 7 Comments »

To be the best

June 4th, 2010 by

After tonight’s game, the Padres will be a third of the way through the season and they could potentially have the best record in the NL, so it’s only fitting that tonight’s game wil be against the two-time defending NL champion Philadelphia Phillies, with superace Roy Halladay on the mound. But how have the Padres done against the other good teams in the league? Good question, Ray! Let’s take a look:


This list is made up of all the teams at or above .500 at the end of play on June 2nd.

W L %
Atlanta 1 2 .333
Cincinnati 2 1 .667
Colorado 2 4 .333
Florida 2 1 .667
Los Angeles 1 4 .200
New York 2 1 .667
St. Louis 2 1 .667
San Francisco 7 1 .875
Total 19 15 .559
Pythagorean 19 15 .569

The team’s .559 winning percentage isn’t too far off of their .604 overall mark, which means that they’re doing the fair thing and treating all team’s equally. Less sarcastically, it means that the team isn’t just beating up on the bad teams, but that they are more than stepping up when necessary. In fact, the Padres have played more than twice as many games against the better teams in the league, making their run even more impressive.


To assess the team’s hitting, I looked at how they matched up against the top teams in the league by OPS.

Atlanta .836
Cincinnati .782
Colorado .602
Florida .584
Los Angeles .641
New York .924
St. Louis .551
San Francisco .655
.500+ .681
Overall .692

As should have been predicted, the team has not hit very well against the better team in the league, but then the team doesn’t hit well against any teams. There are exceptions but none are memorable. Overall, against teams over .500, the Padres have hit below their season average but not by too much, so that can be the silver lining. But really, this should not be a surprise.


To assess the team’s pitching, I looked at how they matched up against the top teams in the league by ERA.

Atlanta 4.33
Cincinnati 3.12
Colorado 4.20
Florida 5.19
Los Angeles 3.68
New York 3.41
St. Louis 2.61
San Francisco 2.79
.500+ 3.36
Overall 3.01

In a funny way, these numbers are almost disappointing. There’s nothing wrong with them, as they’re still pretty good. A team ERA of 3.36 would still be good for third in the NL and fourth in the entire league, it’s just 35 points higher than the overall mark and this team’s kind of spoiled me. Though it’s encouraging to see the team do well against the teams that have seen them the most (save for Colorado and Coors Field).

With two-thirds of the season left, this really means nothing and it’s very possible that the ground will start coming up on the Padres. But as far as Halladay and the Phillies are concerned, they are about to start a series with a team that has shown that, so far, it can hang with the big boys.

Posted in statistics | 2 Comments »

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Search Posts

The Sacrifice Bunt on Facebook The Sacrifice Bunt on Twitter


Sacrifice Bunt Shop

Sacrifice Bunt Shop