Comments on: Worst World Series Game 1 game scores This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: steven Sat, 30 Oct 2010 03:29:20 +0000 Interesting post. Anybody else notice how most of us bear a strong resemblance to Honus Wagner?

By: Kahuna Tuna Fri, 29 Oct 2010 19:42:06 +0000 John (#17) — I'm not going to "indict" Cliff Lee for the Game 1 shellacking because it certainly was not a typical performance for him. Still, Lee got that start because he's the staff ace, and he got ripped.

I agree that Washington has let the first two games get out of hand by going to his back-of-the-bullpen guys way too early. Guys like Lowe and Kirkman have no business pitching in the World Series unless the manager plans to concede the game, as Joe Torre was doing when he brought in Jay Witasick for the Yankees early in 2001 Game 6.

Washington appears to have four relievers whom he trusts: Oliver, O'Day (only against right-handed hitters), Ogando, and Feliz. So make that three and a half relievers. With this arrangement, he can't play lefty-righty matchups too carefully or he'll run out of good relief pitching. He probably had quite a bit more flexibility when Francisco was available.

By: Johnny Twisto Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:53:41 +0000 I'm not sure how it's "flawed," unless you assume it means something it doesn't. It is what it is. It doesn't hold all the answers. It's a number that is supposed to be easily calculated by looking at a pitcher's line in the boxscore.

It's a misuse of DIPS to assume Lee was "unlucky" because so many batted balls landed safely. From what I saw, many of those were hit hard. If he makes good pitches and balls happen to squeeze between fielders, that might be bad luck for Lee. If he makes bad pitches and gives up line drives, it's poor pitching.

But if you want a more DIPS-oriented game score, you could try one of these:
Then others will say how flawed that system is because it identifies a 7 K, 1 BB, 0 HR performance as one of the better Game 1 starts ever.

By: Bill Reynolds Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:26:09 +0000 I suppose I should have been more clear. The game score statistic is simply flawed. Andy didn't misuse it, it is just not that telling about how well someone pitched. Bill James developed game score long before the DIPS revolution -- it focuses too much on hits and runs allowed (especially earned runs) and makes no distinction between home runs and other hits.

Not sure how I misused DIPS in my comment.

By: Johnny Twisto Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:45:23 +0000 And that's a misuse of DIPS, so you're even.

By: Bill Reynolds Fri, 29 Oct 2010 15:29:25 +0000 I think this is a misuse of the very flawed game score statistic. The man struck out 7 batters, walked only 1 (and hit one with a pitch), and allowed 0 home runs in 4 and 1/3 innings. That is good pitching. He was simply unlucky on balls in play -- by my count, of 15 batters who put balls put into play against him, nine reached base (one by error). I bet he comes back strong in game 5 (if there is one).

By: Larry R. Fri, 29 Oct 2010 15:26:31 +0000 @16

Unlike the '60 Yanks, the Giants won both games. Getting 20 runs by 11 & 9 is much better than 4 & 16.

By: John Autin Fri, 29 Oct 2010 15:04:15 +0000 @16, Kahuna -- It's certainly an "indictment" of their performance. But how can you indict a staff that ranked 2nd in the AL in ERA+ ? Is Cliff Lee to be indicted for having a rare bad game? Or C.J. Wilson for a fine start that the bullpen butchered?

The only thing I see worthy of indictment is Ron Washington's bullpen calls. It's incomprehensible that Mark Lowe came into both games before they were blowouts: he began the 8th of Game 1 with an 8-4 deficit and quickly gave up 3 runs, then was asked to douse the flames in Game 2 with the score 3-0 and 2 out, and instead he blew it up. Lowe, who has had a pedestrian career, joined Texas late in the year and pitched all of 3 innings for them (and 13 IP on the year), with lousy results. If not for the injury to Frankie Francisco, I doubt he'd even be on the roster. So what is he doing pitching important innings?

Washington's first fatal error last night was lifting O'Day after the 2-out single, with the lefty Schierholtz coming up. O'Day had fanned the first 2 batters. The move could only make sense if it gained a significant platoon advantage. But O'Day was quite effective against lefties this year (.229 BA, no HRs, .561 OPS) -- and worse, Schierholtz has a pronounced reverse split in his career line; he's hit just .249 with a .668 OPS against RHPs, but .354 / .890 vs. LHPs. Of course, these facts were mooted by Holland's wildness. The point, though, is -- why take out a reliever who's going well and not overworked, when there's no matchup advantage? I hope it wasn't because Schierholtz had a bloop hit to the opposite field in his only prior faceoff with O'Day, in June 2009.

Nothing personal against Schierholtz, but a batter of his level should never be the reason for a pitching change.

By: Kahuna Tuna Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:41:00 +0000 The 2010 Giants have tied the 1960 Yankees for the most runs scored (20) in the first two games of a World Series. That's a pretty strong indictment of the Texas pitching staff.

By: John Autin Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:05:33 +0000 This is about Game 2, but for lack of a better place to post this....

Derek Holland has tied a World Series record by walking the only 3 men he faced.

It was done just once before, by Colorado's Ryan Speier in a 13-1 loss in Game 1 of the 2007 series.

(I don't know if this was noted by Fox broadcasters. I'm one of those NY-area folks caught up in the Fox/Cablevision contract dispute, so I haven't been able to watch the games.)

The record for most walks without retiring a batter is 4, by Art Reinhart of the 1926 Cardinals.

P.S. The Rangers now trail, 9-0, after the Giants scored 7 runs with 2 out off Holland, Mark Lowe and Michael Kirkman. But hey, at least Washington still has Neftali Feliz available if they can get the lead....