User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 1.4880 seconds
40 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Thats why this season is more painful. On the surface, there seems to be no reason why the Braves shouldn't be in thick of this race.
The good news is that now we can really gear for a big run in 2010. I am pretty excited about teh farm, which I would rank in the top 3/4. What I do feel bad about is Chipper not getting another shot at the ring and MVP.
Except that it wasn't "bad luck." It was a team that was playing like crap and finding every way to lose. The problem was production, not luck
It's too bad Chipper just hit the DL, because the Braves might have been able to trade him and get a king's ransom back (if they could convince him to accept a trade). I know, that sounds criminally insane to Braves fans, but is there a reasonable expectation Chipper's still going to be a superstar by the time the Braves are ready to seriously compete for a championship again? It looks to me like it'll be a few years.
I take it this is not a joke. I am at a loss for words.
Expecting 40-year old pitchers to stay healthy was always a bad idea. Glavine wasn't likely to be very good anyway. Chipper getting hurt and missing time isn't a surprise. It is expected. They have been unlucky but they also took a lot of risky gambles.
And Diaz getting hurt was certainly a surprise. Now Hudson and McCann. Oh, yeah, Moylan. Soriano.
Unfortunately, Francoeur has avoided the injury bug. (Kidding. Mostly.)
This season has been as painful as it gets. At least 1988 was fun in a train wreck kinda way.
Elbow injury could end Hudson's season
I'm guessing it's to the Diamondbacks for a decorative cactus and a used Kleenex. That's how things have been rolling for the Braves lately.
Not trading for Manny, I assume?
I could accept that they took some risky gambles; thing is, though, you expect some of them to implode and some to pay off. In this season just about every single gamble has blown up in their face. Plus Francoeur has decided that his previous level of mediocrity was best followed up by being a bad-hitting whiny child, and now the Hudson injury is just the final insult.
I was ready for some of the risks to not pay off, but good grief, this is a case of every single thing collapsing.
It also has even more "bad pitching" or "disappearing bats" tied to it.
How many one run games can you remember from these 08 Braves that truly changed on something lucky.
I can remember many, many more where we got 3-hit in Coors Field or some crap reliever gave up a bomb late in the game.
Think about this weekends Phillies series. A one run loss and a 2 run loss both involving horrific pitching, not luck.
You score 7, I think it was, in the 5th on Hamels you have no room to blame some vauge concept like luck for your loss. We freakin' blew it.
Go back through the BravesJournal game recaps and find me some games where a bad call or lucky bounce or something out of their control happened and I guarantee you you will find 10 other one run games where someone screwed the pooch.
As I recall our horrific pen led us to a crap-tastic 1-run loss record last year too.
Really? How about Jair Jurrjens and Jorge Campillo? Those are some risks that have paid off handsomely. They have pitched 219.1 innings so far this season and have a combined ERA of 2.91. That's a ton of good luck right there. No one was expecting anything close to that from those two pitchers. The Braves haven't been that unlucky this year.
I will agree on that. I have loved those two, especially Campillo since I liked what little I saw of him when he was a Mariner.
That's a ton of good luck right there. No one was expecting anything close to that from those two pitchers. The Braves haven't been that unlucky this year.
Ay caramba, not everything is luck. Making strong personnel decisions doesn't qualify as luck. Its called being a good GM, and having great organization for getting the most out of strike-throwing pitchers.
As a general trend, I completely do not get the trend of everything an observer didn't forsee being luck. Get good pitchers, and some of them will pitch great... that isn't luck. Its baseball.
Yes, I know that. But that, by itself, is not proof of luck. Show me some games the Braves have lost this year where much of the loss was due to circumstances out of their control.
Having #### for a pen, not being able to hit in Coors field and having a back-end of the rotation that will blow the game in the 5th don't qualify as bad luck. It just means you either aren't very good, or are not playing well.
The dogmatic adherence to certain statistical generalities in the face of specific reasons for an occurrence baffles me at times.
That's just semantics. I mean that those two have produced at a level that was unexpected considering their previous performance history. Is that more acceptable? Campillo and Jurrjens are pitchers of some talent but are pitching above their true skill levels.
Welllll . . . it's a bit of a semantic issue here. I think the Braves made a great trade for Jurjjens, who was a fine prospect with excellent stuff and numbers. So yes, that's solid baseball acument. Credit to them. But they ALSO got lucky in that he performed as well as he has as quickly as he has -- I think even Frank Wren would admit that with young pitchers, your reasonable expectations are that they need some adjustment time at the major league level and you take some lumps while they learn what they need to do to win. The Braves were both good to acquire him, and lucky that he came along as fast as he did to contribute as much as he has in 2008.
But the evidence strongly hints the one-run W/L record revolves mostly around chance (for lack of a better word). The Braves' one-run record this year is 6-23.
It's statistical nuttiness of the highest order.
Jair Jurrjens has a sinking mid 90s fastball and an outstanding changeup. He's been a highly rated prospect since he was signed. He has enormous talent. You have no idea what his true skill level is.
Its not entirely about "luck" like that. The reason 1 run games are supposed to be lucky is that it shows that the teams were evenly matched, and one team had a more timely hit or a grounder go through a hole with runners on. Conversely the team that lost might have had a grounder hit straight to a fielder for a DP or give up a seeing eye rbi single. Thats what is meant by 1 run games "should" even out.
But attributing it all to luck removes any credit management deserves for picking the right players to go after and the credit management deserves for going after good players in general. The better the talent you bring in is, the more likely some guy is going to break out and dominate for you.
Bringing in Campillo was a great move. Hes a guy who, IIRC, was a one-time Braves farmhand who went back to Mexico and became the "Mexican Greg Maddux" by putting up super numbers in a hitters paradise of a league despite not being overpowering. The Mariners picked him up and he showed he could be an MLB pitcher... and then he blew him arm out and missed a year or two.
The Braves didn't forget about him, knew he was capable of a being a good MLB starter and they gave him a chance.
Your definition of "luck" would remove human credit for almost any great performance or acquisition.
Drafting Pujols... luck.
Getting 2 great years of Renteria for the low, low price of Andy Marte... luck
Jose Guillen breaking out at age 28 (or whenever)... luck.
Soriano hitting great in Washington.. luck
I am pretty confident he is not really a 137 ERA+ pitcher.
The Braves didn't forget about him, knew he was capable of a being a good MLB starter and they gave him a chance.
All I am arguing is that Campillo isn't a 2.80 era pitcher. That's all I am saying.
Sure, Smoltz and Glavine going down was bad, so were the injuries to Moylan and Soriano. But the Braves tided over that.
What is killing them is their craptastic outfield. Francouer/Diaz have been horrible. Blanco has done a good job, but he is a 4th outfielder. Infante has done a good job but he has been injured. Its been the OF of Doom, and worse, the opposing pitchers know it. The number of rallies that have ended with Francoeur batting 6th, because the pitchers haven't been afraid to challenge him is ridiculous.
The offence of this team has been top-heavy, and that has killed them.
Yes. I know what is "meant" but not a whole lot of one-run Braves losses this year were for reasons like that.
That is my point. When you can't hold a lead to save your life, that is going to happen.
When your 3,4,5 hitters can start a rally and then your 6 hitter swings at something in his face to end the rally.. it isn't luck.
When your starting pitcher starts sucking in the 5th with the lead.. not luck.
When your crap pen blows another one.. not luck.
And that, to my knowledge, is most of our 1-run games have been lost.
Luck is not merely 'circumstances out of control.'
That IS the definition of luck. That is what luck is. I don't know how to state it any stronger. That is like me telling you a triple is when the batter reaches second base on a hit. That simply isn't so.
But the evidence strongly hints the one-run W/L record revolves mostly around chance (for lack of a better word). The Braves' one-run record this year is 6-23.
Generally speaking, this is infact so. But that does not mean it is ALWAYS the case. And in the case of this year, I think we can see a team that simply isn't very good. I think we can see a team that has shown it knows how to blow a game in everyway possible. The only luck I can see is a team that was lucky to be that close that often.
It's statistical nuttiness of the highest order.
Statistical nuttiness of the highest order is to cling to what one knows generally happens, or what generally causes a certain happening, when there is evidence pointing a to a completely different explanation.
But crappy teams throughout baseball history have had OK one-run W/L records. They aren't tied to crappy play. Or great play, for that matter. That's what studies have typically shown (it's not all luck, but luck is clearly a big component.)
I seem to remember you saying roughly the same thing about McCann.
Well, not exactly the same thing, but y'know...
You are redefining luck and making it a fill-in for anything that doesn't usually happen, no matter the cause..
That isn't what luck is, and it takes the most basic, dogmatic adherence to certain general trends to continue to insist it is.
I don't see what is productive about taking something some research has shown is usually the case and assuming this explains every outlier that pops up.
It implies that once someone has explained something to some extent, no further study is needed anything outside of the rules we've established is simply lucky and can be explained as such even when there is evidence to the contrary.
It simply isn't a productive mindset, no matter what you are observing.
I've watched a zillion Brave games this year, I don't see anything that makes me believe the one-run W/L record isn't bad luck.
I partially agree with you about skill being part of the current 1 run record for the Braves. But historically teams that have awful 1 run records are really really bad teams. Thats what is striking about this situation. That a team which has a decent record and such a good core has that record.
If I give you a C hitting at 145 ops+ clip, a 3B at 170 ops+, 1B at 140 ops+, SS at 100 ops+ with good defence, and 2B similarly with average defence. Add in 3 starters with 130 era+.
What would you expect?
True dat. All they needed was a few ordinary OFers. They wouldn't have won with this pitching, though...Russlan and Sam are right, as much as I love Jair he has pitched better than could have been expected for a 22 y/o. Campillo is probably a fluke. Reyes. Morton. Those guys are finally imploding. The bullpen is toast. Once Smoltz went down it was turn out the lights time anyway, competent OF or not.
There is little evidence pointing to a completely different explanation.
A shitty pen, a back-end of the rotation that sucks and can't go deep in games (see problem #1) and an offense that dies after hitter #5.
You are COMPLETELY oblivious if you think these things can't affect a teams chances of winning a close game. Particularly the bullpen problem.
If you're Bobby Cox, who do you call in tomorrow to finish off a tight win for you?
Ohman has been great but hes more of a LOOGY (more Gs than IP and RHBs hit him .150 points of OPS better the last 3 years)
Gonzalez is good but he only came back from a dead-arm this month.
Soriano, Acosta (a game-blowing machine in his own right) and Moylan, a guy whose success I believe would be dismissed as lucky based on the new definitions that have been established, are hurt. Ring sucks. Tavarez should maybe look into the porn career he once considered (no joke). Bennett is a useful end-of-pen guy in my book, but hes still an end-of-the-pen guy. Boyer has a live arm but hes coming off an injury last year and has not pitched well all year.
There isn't anyone there. Buddy Carlyle might be the best bet?
And things are helped by the fact that you're relying on some young starters (Reyes, Morton.. James earlier in the year) who can't go deep and often, despite their nice potential, can't pitch well at all. Jurrjens has been great but hes still young so you don't want him to eat innings at the expense of his health.
There are simply lots of holes on this year. Blowing a game is "bad luck" thing
What games have you been watching?
Find me more than one 1-run loss where "luck" has been at fault more than the performance of the mediocre team on the field.
What would you expect?
It's baffling until you look at
the OF - all way below avg.
the bench - appalling
the bullpen - with Sori and Gonzo injured for most of the yr, Ohman was the only reliable arm
also, the offense has been atrocious in high leverage spots. That explains the bad "luck" in one run games.
If I give you a C hitting at 145 ops+ clip, a 3B at 170 ops+, 1B at 140 ops+, SS at 100 ops+ with good defence, and 2B similarly with average defence. Add in 3 starters with 130 era+.
What would you expect?
Oh. I agree. You are right.
The problem is, if I told your team is the Richmond Braves but you can pick a handful of real MLB ballplayers to fill out your team you're probably going to suck unless you choose Brandon Webb, Hanley Ramirez, Pujols, Sabathia, Oswalt and.. ect.
How is the pen 'shitty?' They're 5th in the league in ERA. I mean, you wouldn't say they're great, but they've been relatively solid.
I think that is the problem, again, in taking one stat and trying to make it mean something in the face of other evidence.
The Braves have, at times, gotten good pitching from certain members of their pen. But those members that have pitched well have not been on the active roster for much of the year, but for the couple of weeks they have pitched guys like Moylan (260 ERA+), Soriano (260), and Gonzalez (153) were super. Campillo was also super in the pen but must now start. Getting Tavarez and Nunez to give up just 4 ER in 10 IP makes your pen numbers look better, but doesn't mean they don't suck. But when the good guys were not pitching, which was most of the year, your only reliable reliever was a guy with a drastic platoon split.
Acosta was consistently horrible in any close game, Boyer has been up-and-down, Bennett medioce and then some suck-ass guys in there too. THAT has been the reality of the year.
Its about as good as a NL bench can be. Infante has been good. Prado, Gotay and Norton have been decent pinch hitters. The problem is that Infante and Blanco are supposed to be on that bench, but are playing full time.
You are right. The bullpen has a good era and peripherals, but they have been abominable in high leverage situations. And another problem the Braves have is that they have no lefty killer since Diaz went down. That has been a big issue too.
I think the Braves should trade Escobar for an OFer.
How do you figure that?
Norton has at least gone 8-24 as a PH but hes wiped out all that goodness by sucking when he starts.. and by generally being the fringe MLBer he is at this point.
Gotay sucks, which was to be expected.
Who would play short then?
I like Infante and Prado both but not enough to trade Yuny and, despite the prospect hype some (questionably) heaped on Lilli last winter, he still hasn't shown he can hit at higher levels. Hes a little guy who tries to hack like a big dude.
His versatility, speed and the occasional offensive contributions he can make will give him a career but, again, I wouldn't want to part with Yuny for that.
I wouldn't trade Escobar as a very good SS is difficult to replace.
First, the Braves are being led by a new, unproven GM, not John Schuerholz. The Braves will soon be led by a new, unknown manager, not Bobby Cox. For those two reasons alone, there is very little reason to have confidence that the Braves have the smarts in the key positions they will need to make the right decisions to stay competitive.
Second, if they try to go with a Kiddie Corps rotation, they will have some hits and some misses and it will take them a while to actually build a contending-caliber rotation. Not that they apparently have much choice, since it's hard to imagine Smoltz ever being a rotation anchor again, Hampton is a goner, and Hudson is now a question mark. But do you really think they can keep pace with the Mets and Phillies if they go almost entirely with a rotation built of sub-25 year olds? I mean, I think you can build a contender down the road that way, but I don't think it'll be ready before 2010 at the very earliest, and more realistically 2011.
Third, the core of their offense is also on the way out, whether it be via free agency or trade(Teixeira), or aging (Chipper). Other than McCann, and to some extent Escobar (who at least is a plus offensively for his position, if not really an impact bat), they really have to rebuild essentially their whole offense before the next Braves' championship contender will emerge. Chipper Jones, after all, is more likely to DH for an AL team in a WS than he is to ever bat for the Braves in one again. Which at some level ought to make me sad . . . but doesn't.
Top five defensive shortstops so far this year by plus/minus:
1. Yunel Escobar +21
2. J.J. Hardy +15
3. Omar Vizquel +10
4. Mike Aviles +8 (this one surprised me)
5. Erick Aybar +7
He has no power, but a guy that hits .281 with walks (OBP .355) and plays defense that well is a hidden star. That's one guy the Braves should hold onto.
Heyward, Freeman, Lillibridge, Escobar, KJ, Schafer, Gorkys, and McCann (among others) should make for a really interesting young offensive core. If the Braves can get a few more good prospects in deals the next 48 hours, or in the offseason...well, dang it, I'll just hope for a repeat of 1991 in 2011.
On the pitching - there's nothing wrong with young pitching if they're good. Look at the Marlins arms this year. And if Hudson and/or Smoltz can come back to stabilize, that's a very good rotation.
Again, I'm not saying that the Braves should be favorites next year. But good young talent can change a franchise's fortunes in a hurry. The Mets should know...
Good summation, by the way. Can't really argue with most of what you said. They have a lot of work to do rebuilding the offense. I'm comforted by the fact that the farm is in terrific shape from a hitting standpoint.
1. Yunel Escobar +21
2. J.J. Hardy +15
3. Omar Vizquel +10
[whistles] The Mets would be interested if Escobar were available...
OK, let's. The Fish are 14th in the NL in ERA, and 12th in the NL in road ERA (4.81), this year. They've given up the third most walks in the league (you KNOW how I love pitchers who don't throw strikes . . .). This is not a path I would think the Braves would with to follow, to be honest. Granted, it hasn't helped that they've given up about 753 unearned runs because of that defense, but their pitching has NOT been very good. Young, talented arms are nice, and you might eventually build a staff around them. But you're going to have hits, misses, and growing pains.
I was going to quote their WARP figures, but... BPro's, shall we be charitable and say idiosyncratic FRAR/FRAA system rates Young as a better shortstop than Escobar. Which is... absurd.
What does all of this mean? Aim for 2010 and beyond. Figure out if its realistic at all to move Chipper to 1st. Whether Chipper moves or not, targeting Brandon Wood makes a bunch of sense. Nice caddy for Chipper and he makes Lillibridge or Escobar expendable to get a corner OF or 1B.
This Hudson injury further complicates the situation because they may as well pack it in for 2009 if he undergoes Tommy John. With him, a bunch of money, and some relatively easy holes to fill its possible they might contend.
I'd prefer they just do everything possible to pry a Jarrod Parker-type talent away in a Tex deal. Not major league-ready, but very high-upside.
I just got the strongest sense of deja vu. Have you typed that paragraph before? I think at least the last two sentences are a re-do.
As for the Braves and luck, luck has certainly played a part but the thing that irritates me and, I think, others, is for someone to attribute all the "bad" events to luck while giving the organization credit for "good" events. If the GM gets credit for Jair, he should be docked for Glavine, etc. On the whole, I have no idea why the Braves were seen as a real threat. Yes, if they got lucky and caught a bunch of breaks, they could be contenders. But that is true of 80% of the teams out there. A "real" contender, to me, is one that can break even on gambles, and still be in the race. A strong contender is one that can do less than break even on gambles and still be in the race. The Braves weren't taht. You simply can't go around expecting everything to work out well, which is what the Braves, most of their fans, and the press seemed to do with them.
I don't see Jurrjens as a risk that paid off. He is probably performing above his head, but he's a young pitcher with good stuff, albeit one who doesn't often go deep into games.
Campillo I will acknowledge as good luck. He's been amazing.
Now compare the other risks they took: Smoltz (old) - out for season/career; Glavine (old) - out for most of season; chipper - injury prone again; Kotsay - hitting okay (an empty .290), but injured a lot; Soriano - injury prone again; Hampton - missed first 3.5 months. And, since you consider young pitchers to be risks: Reyes - crappy; Morton - crappy; James - previously decent, now crappy.
And that's before you get to the guys that weren't supposed to be risks. Hudson - out, maybe for this year and next; Moylan - out for the year; francoeur - not good to begin with, but plumbing new depths of crap; Escobar - injuries; Diaz - injuries and crappy.
I don't have it handy, but I looked at the free agent list, and the pickings seem slim. They're best option for spending that money will be unburdening other teams of contracts they no longer want. I'm with you, 2010 seems liek the target now, especially if Hudson has to get the Tommy John surgery.
With Saito on the shelf the Dodgers need another late-inning reliever, right? Doesn't seem realistic, but don't the Dodgers hate Kemp?
I am not sure if that is the right attitude though. Lillibridge will hit. He was starting to come around towards the end of his stint in the majors, and he is continuing that at Richmond. And he looked spectacular defensively.
Braves have 2 serviceable SS, who are probably going to have similar production going forward. Yunel might do better, but his stock is higher too, and will fetch a much better return.
Sign me up.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main