This article in a mainstream paper?

But it really can't happen. The Padres and Dodgers are two pretty good teams, and the Diamondbacks, well, just. . . aren't. They're okay, and they're really, really on the right track, but this year, they're not as good as those other two, and it would be very unfortunate if they won it. Teams that get outscored should not be winning divisions.

Is there anything in modern baseball that doesn't offend Vaux's delicate sensibilities?

The interesting thing about this team, what makes it hard for me to project them going forward is their bullpen's play in all of this. By any account, they're one of the team's greatest strengths, but I swear they have a switch where they just decide to turn it on and off at will.

If it's a close game they'll be lights out, but if the DBacks are either leading or trailing by five or more runs, they decide that it's time to just completely implode. The number of times that this has happened is far above average, so they end up with multiple games that start out as 7-1, 6-1 affairs but become one-run, skin of the teeth victories by the end of the night.

Maybe that's a trend among all teams that outperform their pythags, but it leaves me with the feeling that if any team could continue outperforming their pythag (to a degree), it's this one. At least one thing that I have to look to is the growth and maturity of the kids. Even if they were playing over their heads for the last two months, it doesn't mean that they aren't able to raise their own level of performance for the stretch run.

And, oh heaven, does Justin Upton look sweet at the plate. Words can't describe how excited I am to able to watch him play every day for the next six years.

If it's a close game they'll be lights out, but if the DBacks are either leading or trailing by five or more runs, they decide that it's time to just completely implode. The number of times that this has happened is far above average, so they end up with multiple games that start out as 7-1, 6-1 affairs but become one-run, skin of the teeth victories by the end of the night.

Isn't that because in close games, Melvin uses Pena/Lyon/Valverde (and Cruz, and Slaten), and if there is a differential, it's hello Dustin Nippert and Edgar Gonzalez? That sounds like excellent bullpen usage.

I don't think Arizona will be able to keep it up. I am worried that the hitters are coming around, but Doug Davis? Livan Hernandez? Micah Owings? Yusmeiro Petit? Davis has a 1.58 WHIP and a 119 OPS+. Did he blow a leprechaun or something? My guess is that the pen really starts to wear down and that the starters get even worse. But maybe I'm just bitter because Arizona's pythag record is worse than the Giants' pythag record.

pleasantly surprised by this appearing in a mainstream publication!

and i thought byrnes' response was so awesome. i'm sure he knows about the pythag theorem (probably having read it himself in one of the books), so on one hand, he's probably thinking "even if part of this difference is legit, we're playing .7 above where we should be, which has to revert".

but as a public figure, and part of management - with humans involved under him - he can't say that. so instead of outright denying pythag works - which is trivial, what many mgt would do and get skewered for - he implies it works but in their case, the *people* involved bring a factor in which causes them to do better than the theorem would suggest.

wonderful response.

Isn't that because in close games, Melvin uses Pena/Lyon/Valverde (and Cruz, and Slaten), and if there is a differential, it's hello Dustin Nippert and Edgar Gonzalez? That sounds like excellent bullpen usage.

The blow ups usually start with either Nippert or EdGon but from their they spread to the rest of the bullpen (either Cruz, Pena, Lyon or Slate), until the game gets within either one run, or a tie, and then they decide to go back to being shutdown relievers. One need only look to Saturday for a prime example of this.

Of course, on their entire 5-1 road trip against the Dodgers and Padres they they only had a +2 run differential, owed entirely to their 0-11 loss to the Padres. During this most recent 13-2 run their two losses were 0-11 and 0-14. Since June 1 they are 17-14. In that time period they've only had one win by seven or more runs, but six losses of that magnitude.

The starting rotation is the undoubtedly the biggest question mark going forward, it's just a matter of whether the increased potency of the kids will be enough to make up for it.

#4

You make it sound as if Byrnes is just pulling stuff out of his ass as to why that is. His full quote:

"We're a pretty good team in close games for a lot of reasons," Byrnes said. "One, (manager) Bob (Melvin) has done a great job pushing the right buttons. Two, our bullpen is good. Three, our bench is good, so we can match up late in games. Four, we play pretty good defense. Five, we can score throughout our lineup, so wherever we are in our lineup in a game, we have a chance to score."

Obviously, the key to this team's performance is in one-run games and those are pretty damned good reasons as why to a team can do well late in games (and he still gives proper credence to the role that luck plays in all of it). Bullpen strength has long been considered a contributing factor for teams that outperform their pythags and the DBacks have that in spades.

Most significant to me is the combination of their bench and BoMel's use of it. They're 17th in the league in homeruns, but first in the majors in pinch hit homeruns (by a wide margin). Similarly, they're 26th in the majors in OPS, but once again, their pinch hitters lead the league in the same category. Some people may look at those numbers and see luck, and yes it's there to a degree, but that also says to me that this is a team with a manager that knows his player's strengths and weaknesses inside and out and knows how match them up against opposing bullpens late in games to get the maximum efficiency out his players.

This is coming from someone who spent more than his share of time screaming at the television set about one bizarre pinch hitter after another, but the thing is they work out more often than not. BoMel is a manager not content to just go by the book when it comes to in-game managing. He takes risk, makes decisions that run contrary to the instinct of us couch potato fans and I have nothing but respect for him because of it.

Speaking of "no logic"...

The Dbacks have scheduled a press conference at 1:30pm AZ time; KTAR claims that they'll announce a contract extension for Eric Byrnes. No word yet on years and dollars, but I doubt it's for less than 3 years and $30m. With CYoung in CF and JUpton in RF, this more or less would end the future of CQuentin and CGonzalez in AZ long before it ever started.

Personally, I'm pissed off. Also, I have a pretty good feeling that this extension was ordered by Moorad and Kendrick, over any objections that JByrnes may have had. You'd think Moorad and Kendrick would've learned from their acquisition of Shawn Green, but no such luck. In the end, they'll be paying for the decline of a left fielder with career OPS+ of 102.

This is a sad day for the very very very few "thinking" Dbacks fans out there...

My preferred options with Eric B.:
1. Trade him
2. Let him walk.
3. Re-sign him.
As a Dodger fan, it's nice to see other teams in the division make counter-productive moves.

I'd lean towards luck. Much of the bullpen's effectiveness is a result of guys like Pena and Lyon pitching beyond their peripherals.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/articles/0807brynes-ON-CR.html

Looks like 3/$30M. I still don't get it. If you have $30M to spend, why spend it on an OFer, if an OFer, why Eric Byrnes given the OF FAs?

Levski, I agree that this is probably an ownership thing but I'm not sure you should be pissed. Byrnes is a very popular player, right? The DBacks unapologetic way or rebuilding over the last couple of years might not be the best way to hold a fan base. Sure, primates would love it, you get to watch Chris Young, Stephen Drew and Justin Upton and see if they turn out to be stars but I think your average fan needs a face they know to root for and Byrnes is that face. Maybe ownership thinks that he basically pays for himself.

Because this is an organization that makes decisions based on sentiment.

haha, Josh Byrnes is so Saber.

#6 - you do know i was complimenting byrnes in my earlier message, right?

Agree with Levski, Dylan, dahlian and others - this is enormously disappointing: $10mm per year for a league-average outfielder (roughly - based on his career numbers through last year). Have KenKen/Moorad not learned the lesson that gambling on an out-of-favor player (E Byrnes after his brutal 2005 year) is prudent, if not brilliant, but extending that player for serious bucks over multiple years is imprudent?

Eric Byrnes has been nothing short of outstanding (given what he is being paid) over the past season and 1/2. Ignoring contractual details, he has merely been "good". But the business side of this decision is a near-no-brainer: He is not worth 3/$30mm.

If KenKen/Moorad are lucky, Byrnesie is Dante Bichette for ages 32-34, at which point they have merely overpaid AND blocked some REALLY good, REALLY inexpensive (i.e. immensely valuable) talent. If, instead, he is Jim Lemon, they have instead flushed $30mm down the crapper.

Larger concern of mine: this makes it difficult for Josh Byrnes hang around long-term (. . . if, as I suspect, KenKen/Moorad forced this past a politely but strongly disagreeing JB).

Hasn't Brian Sabean been succeeding in the NL West for years now with no logic? I think the NL West is just a random-division-title generator.

I'm not sure I'd agree that this blocks Carlos Gonzalez. If Gonzalez pans out, Byrnes can be traded.

Moving away from E. Byrnes stuff....

This is coming from someone who spent more than his share of time screaming at the television set about one bizarre pinch hitter after another, but the thing is they work out more often than not. BoMel is a manager not content to just go by the book when it comes to in-game managing. He takes risk, makes decisions that run contrary to the instinct of us couch potato fans and I have nothing but respect for him because of it.

Good point, dahlian. I would also pinpoint the not-going-by-the-book thing in both bench and lineup choices as making up for the pythagorean underperformance.

Besides the two excellent veteran performances, his four-guy young offense has not really worked out. Conor Jackson is doing what I expected. But Quentin has cratered, and Chris Young and Stephen Drew have underperformed. Melvin hasn't panicked because of it, though -- he just gave them more days off, moved them around the lineup, brought them in regularly as PH or on defense/double-switches.

Compare that to what BoMel's ex-team has done, in punting their #4 and #5 lineup slots and LF/1B offense (and putting up with terrible defense in those positions) all season long, waiting for Raul Ibañez and Richie Sexson to get hot. And the only bench player they feel comfortable using (WFB) has a .700 OPS as his upside.

I would also credit J. Byrnes for having two questionable closers in spring training (Valverde and Jorge Julio) and then choosing the right one and trading the other for some return. That was a hell of a Monty Hall decision.

If Gonzalez pans out, Byrnes can be traded.

Agreed, JC - but that is a scenario that requires both EB and CarGo to "pan out". If Byrnes merely performs in line with his pre-2007 career, he becomes difficult, if not impossible to trade. In that case, the organization eats part or all of his salary.

Greg and dahlian - you make very strong arguments for BoMel, who I have beat like a drum all year for his ADD approach to lineup construction. I tend to believe Young, Drew and Jackson underperformed early as a result of the 'random lineup generator' that brought with it a lot of uncertainty - a lot of instability.

Maybe, as Greg posits, BoMel's lineup construction has shielded the team results from the underperformance of a few key players. I'll take a step back and observe more impartially. Something is happening and I would like to better understand what is causing it. I had simply not considered that BoMel was a meaningful part of it (in a positive way, at least).

This Pythag overperformance has now bit us in the ass. We could have had two "A" draft picks for a backup outfielder! Now he's entrenched for three more years!

This is all superficial discussion as the Padres will run them down!
take it to the bank.