ORIOLES

How tired can the Orioles starters be? They're onto the second string at this point. And Hammel will be returning after a nice rest. I'd say it's the Nats who should be worrying about tired arms.

Baseball players these days are such pussies. Back in my day, they had four man rotations and the pitchers routinely threw 250+ innings. Now you have pitchers (Troy Patton, i'm looking at you) going on the DL for falling down in a fucking parking garage.

James wrote:
How tired can the Orioles starters be? They're onto the second string at this point.

It was even worse that when I was laying out the starting rotations, I couldn't name but 2 of Baltimore's current starters off the top of my head - and I watch a lot of baseball.  Again, not a good sign down the stretch.

This brings up interesting questions about teams down the stretch.  Looking for workload stats by starting rotation (pitch count, innings pitched) but can't find anything.

chaz wrote:
This brings up interesting questions about teams down the stretch.  Looking for workload stats by starting rotation (pitch count, innings pitched) but can't find anything.

I use baseball-reference.com and total them up myself. 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/

Then the team, then the year.  Click on the individual's name to get a history of what they've done previously.


For example:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/LAA/2012-pitching.shtml

vansmack wrote:
… the Orioles - they're the only team in baseball with a +.500 record and a negative run differential, and it's not even close at -43.  That stuff catches up to you eventually.

Run differential a flawed statistic

The Red Sox were +41 going into last night's game. 

Shemp wrote:

vansmack wrote:
… the Orioles - they're the only team in baseball with a +.500 record and a negative run differential, and it's not even close at -43.  That stuff catches up to you eventually.

Run differential a flawed statistic

The Red Sox were +41 going into last night's game. 

An interesting article and right here we have two really arguments against it.  Are the O's really 11th best team in the AL and the Nats the best in baseball (before last nights game)?  Probably not.  However, every year, by the end of the year it's a stat that usually shakes out as an accurate predictor of playoff teams.  Granted not perfect, but I'm certainly in the camp that looks at run differential instead of wins and losses up until the final few weeks of the season. 

In the end, I think the O's will be a victim of their division like always; even in an off year the competition is just too good in the division and with the whole AL plodding along with the exception of the Yanks and Rangers, the Jays and Sox are clearly looking at that extra wild card this year and will up their game.  I think the Rays/Jays/Sox/O's all play each other pretty hard here on out and none of them make it.

Shemp wrote:
Run differential a flawed statistic

I wish people would stop stealing sh!t off our board. 

But look, the guy gives one example in the last 5 years and says it's flawd (which is the correct spelling on this board).  I will admit that it's not perfect, nothing ever is, but in the last 20 years it's held up pretty well.

I think the '05 Padres (who won their division with an 82-80 record) and the '97 Giants are the other exceptions to make the playoffs with a negative run differential since the Wild Card was added. 

So 3 out of the 68 teams to make the playoffs since the Wild Card was introduced have had a negative RD (or less than 5%).  All were from the NL where pitching rules over offense to a greater degree (even more interesting is that they were all from the NL West - I'll have to think about what that means), and 2 were swept in the NLDS, 1 was swept in the NLCS.

I don't think I'm going out on a limb here by saying that it doesn't look good for the O's given their pitching staff and that they're in the AL.

I say never say never.

The stats are against the Orioles.  negative run differential, 12 left fielders this season, the worst defense record in baseball.

But they're still winning games. 

vansmack wrote:
but I think Lincecum will save the Giants

Melky just got banned 50 games.  I'd like to revise this…

Good commentary about stats and the Orioles

http://www.npr.org/2012/08/15/158749428/feeling-just-wild-about-wild-cards

Finally, a useful stat:

Following last night's loss to the Orioles, the Red Sox are 0-13 on Ben Affleck's birthday since the release of Good Will Hunting in 1997.

How about them apples?

Last 3 road series:

@ Yankees - took 2 out of 3
@ Rays - took 2 out of 3
@ Tigers - took 2 out of 3

How many will they take from Texas?

Shemp wrote:
Last 3 road series:

@ Yankees - took 2 out of 3
@ Rays - took 2 out of 3
@ Tigers - took 2 out of 3

Here's hoping for a sweep!

Do the Angels have enough left in the tank to hold off the Mariners? After all, the Mariners have a respectable run differential of only -2.

James wrote:
How many will they take from Texas?

We better get 2 - could not have hoped for a better draw against their starting rotation.  Of course, they're probably saying the same thing about us.

K8teebug wrote:
Here's hoping for a sweep!

Now you're getting greedy!  ;D

Haha.