Sure.

If they lose to the Giants today, I think their playoff hopes are dead.

Regression to the mean is a horrible thing.

I'm not sure why the Rockies are more likely to regress than the Giants. Neither team was projected that highly for this season, and the Rockies had been playing .600 baseball for a good stretch, including after their 16 of 17 run.

Tom: why do you think so? They'll still be tied; are they mentally that fragile? Their remaining 30 games after today include 19 home games and 11 road games. Giants are 15/15. Both have a remaining road series with the Dodgers; the Giants also have a road series with the Phillies.

The last series of the season could be very interesting-the Rockies better have a lead heading into it. They play at LA, the Giants play at San Diego.

I think the big thing is if you think the current Zito is the real thing or just on a hot streak.

Renck's view is also commonplace on Rockies blogs/sites, and it bugs me. Rockies fans tend to kvetch about MSM types or fans of other teams not understanding that post-humidor, Coors field is now just an extreme hitters park instead of the ridiculous hitters park it once was. But they don't even understand their own team's park factors. So they view the current team, which has an OPS+ of 99 vs. a league avg of 94 as a poor offensive team, when it is probably the 2nd or 3rd best offensive team (relative to park and league) in the team's history.

This team hits much more poorly on the road, naturally, though I don't know how it compares historically in that regard. The team is 36-32 on the road, though, and no Rockies team has finished with a .500 road record.

That said, they have picked a poor stretch to poop out. Good pitchers and all that, but you'd hope they could scratch out more than just one win (and that in a game when Lincecum's control was off). I hope they rebound today.

I think the big thing is if you think the current Zito is the real thing or just on a hot streak

That's true. He does seem to be throwing harder, and has a different pitch mix (he seemed to throw more changeups the other day). I guess as a Rockies fan, I hope it's just a hot streak, as a baseball fan, I hope he has it back. If he does, and the Giants make the playoffs, that will be an interesting rotation.

A 99 OPS+ would tie for the second best in Rockies' history, topped only by the awesome 1997 team's 100 OPS+.

This just in, in 17 seasons, the Rockies have never put an actual good-hitting team on the field.

Walt: what's your definition of "good"? How high over the league average does a team have to be? 99 vs 94 seems "good" to me. It's above-avg, anyway.

And if we're using BB-Ref stats for these OPS+ numbers, it may be that 99 is well above average. I know people were discussing a while back that NL average OPS+ usually comes in at BB-Ref as like 94. I don't remember all the particulars, but somebody else can probably comment on it.

Yeah, the OPS+ denominators exclude pitchers. So excluding pitchers, the average offense's OPS+ would be 100. Add in the non-Micah Owings-types, and you'll get something lower than that.

But then what was being discussed was that BB-Ref's figures apparently don't exclude pitchers for some reason, and 99 is a good offensive team in the NL? Is that right?

The average OPS+ in the NL has been 94 every season since 2003, when it was 95.

Ugh, I shouldn't have read the rest of Renck's article:

What: It's time to apply the old Coors Field bias to the new Yankee Stadium. This isn't a suggestion but a statistical fact. From 1995 to 2001 — the prehumidor years — there were an average of 3.5 home runs hit at Coors Field per game. Through the first 62 home games, the new Yankee Stadium is averaging ... 3.15 homers.

Yes, far more HR are hit in Yankees road games this season than in Rockies' road games over Renck's timespan.

I have slightly different numbers from Renck; I counted the home and road HR's but assumed games were split 81-81 in 1996-2001, and 72-72 in 1995...I have Coors field averaging 3.20 HR/game 1995-2001.

I get 1.94 HR/game in Rockies road games over that time span.

This season, through 64 home games and 65 road games, I have an avg of 3.11 HR in Yankees home games, and 2.65 HR in road games.

Renck is the Denver Post's beat writer for the Rockies.

Here's the part that *really* hurts to read:

...I don't care that Yankee Stadium is a pinball park. But let's not give their hitters any more credit than Coors Field creations received before the humidor. Remember how Dante Bichette lost the 1995 MVP trophy because of his power home- road splits, finishing second to the ridiculously inferior numbers of Barry Larkin?...don't try to sell us on how great some of these Yankees are. Won't work, not after East Coast bias diluted every accomplishment of Rockies' hitters from 1995 to 2001.

But then what was being discussed was that BB-Ref's figures apparently don't exclude pitchers for some reason, and 99 is a good offensive team in the NL? Is that right?

That's what I took away from the previous discussion, esp. when taken in with Danny's observation. To be consistent with how OPS+ appears for players, OPS+ on the league pages is also taken against a baseline of non-pitchers. So when you throw in the team's pitchers, and "average" NL offense is below 100.

But then what was being discussed was that BB-Ref's figures apparently don't exclude pitchers for some reason, and 99 is a good offensive team in the NL? Is that right?

As I understand it, individual OPS+ is calculated excluding pitchers, but if you're looking at team figures, the pitchers' plate appearances are included, thereby lowering the average OPS+ figure for NL teams to around 94-95.

Edit: Coke to Puck.

Yeah, that's it. Thanks.

So the Rockies have in fact put out some good offensive teams in their history.

puck: I'm naturally pessimistic. I don't think Jim Tracy is a genius; he seems bound and determined to have the Rockies run their way out of their offensive slump, which is only making it worse with a bunch of botched bunts and caught stealings. Brad Hawpe has come back to earth. Josh Fogg is in the starting rotation. We have Eric Young Jr. hitting in key situations. Tulo is a terrific hitter for a shortstop, not such a terrific hitter for a cleanup man.

I think they're an 85-win team. That's enough to win the Wild Card if they have a cushion, but once they lose it, well, I'm naturally pessimistic.

Why isn't Seth Smith playing CF?

Eric Young Jr. was a 2nd baseman, and all of a sudden he's a CF now?

Eric Young Jr. was a 2nd baseman, and all of a sudden he's a CF now?

Ya know, Tom makes some great points. :)
Tracy is playing Young in CF because he likes EY2's speed.

EY2 is a 2B, but due to his speed (and perhaps suspect defense at 2nd--I haven't heard anything recently, but that has been one of the knocks on him), they had him play CF in last year's AFL. He started playing there again in August so he could come up as a utility guy.

The two regular CF's have been hurt, and Tracy has been playing EY2 ahead of Spilborghs in CF. I don't think Smith can handle CF, but I'd rather see him in LF, Spilly in CF.

Tracy has, at least, decided to skip the fifth spot in the rotation and let de la Rosa come back on Tuesday, on a four-man, five-day rotation.

And they're up 4-1 in the sixth. So maybe I can be a little less pessimistic.

Tracy may like Young's speed but a playoff run in the end of August isn't the time to throw in a guy who's still trying to learn how to play CF.

I agree. He played a single into a triple yesterday.

Whew, Morales escaped a jam, 2nd and 3rd with no outs. Looks like they got a generous called 3rd strike on panda. 4-2.

Gack, how many runners has this team lost on the bases lately?

They seem ok taking the extra base, but the attempted steals are ridiculous. At least Gonzalez can be excused for thinking he has the speed to steal. Barmes and Tulo, not so much.

Remember how Dante Bichette lost the 1995 MVP trophy because of his power home- road splits, finishing second to the ridiculously inferior numbers of Barry Larkin?...

I don't know whether to laugh, cry or wince in pain. Heck I'm not even sure if you ignore park affects, and positional adjustments that Bichette is still ridiculously superior to Larkin (you know those 51-5 sb/cs ratio vs 13/9 and 6 gdp vs 16 does gain some ground)

6-5 Giants in the 7th. Edgar Renteria grand slam off Rafael Betancourt.

In a way, it'll be fun going back to just hoping they win every day, without feeling the pressure of a pennant race. That will make the losses a lot easier to take.

This will teach the national media to write nice articles about the Rockies.

WC is tied now!