Frayed Knot

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Last night reminded me that while Mets pitching has been quite good this year, they seem to issue an extraordinary amount of runs after 2 outs, nobody on, at least as a percentage of their total runs allowed. Who can figure this one out? My guess would be they are the worst in the league at this. That stuff is findable - at least sort of. BB-Ref under the Mets 2010 page, then under 'Pitching', and then under 'Splits' (scroll down to see 'Number of Outs per Inning' -- http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/split.cgi?t=p&team=NYM&year=2010 And indeed the Mets are giving up more 2-out runs than in 1-run or no-run situations. 0 outs = 91 RA; 1 outs = 177 RA; 2 outs = 197 Problem is you'd then have to look up the same with every other team (or at least the league as a whole) to see whether that's unusual or not. I suspect more runs in general are given up with 1 or 2 outs than with none just based on the idea that runs are scored more often as inning moves further along. I remember looking this up a few years back (2008 maybe) and the Mets that year were MUCH worse at coughing up 2-out runs.

... otherwise known as, answering my own question. In the 'Stats I'd Like to See' thread I wondered about not only the percentage of games that were saved but also about that fan-comforting feel of the 'perfect save', that 1-2-3, no-mess/no-fuss inning that most fans are convinced happens against them regularly but only rarely for them. So, not being able to find the actual stats I wanted, I did the next best thing: I made them up. Well, not quite. I actually took a dive into the land of box scores (via the net Timmy K., not my scrap book) and came up with a representative sample size that should at least approximate what I was looking for. Here's the criteria: - I took a month of MLB games all from after this year's AS break. That's the games from Thursday July 15 up to and including yesterday, or around 400+ games in total. Maybe not enough to be a definitive answer on the topic but certainly a sizable sample. - I looked for all cases of what we might call 'Standard Issue Saves' in this closer's era. IOW, saves where a reliever comes in at the beginning of the 9th inning (or occasionally in extras) with no outs and the bases empty trying to close out a 1, 2, or 3 run lead. So no partial inning saves, no multi-inning saves, no inherited runners. - I didn't distinguish WHO was saving the game (as in whether or not that pitcher normally has the title 'Closer' tattooed on his ass) only that a team used someone in the above situation - and I tracked two things: Did that pitcher save the game?, and was that save a perfect 1-2-3 inning? Results: - Of the 400-some games, about half (203 to be exact) had a save situation that fit the mold. Actually it was probably a bit fewer than half the games seeing as how some games had more than one save situation (ex: visiting closer blows lead in top 9 giving the home closer a shot to either save or blow the game in the bottom half) - of those 203, 41.3% were 1-run leads, 29.6% were 2-run leads, 29.1% were 3-run. I don't think this says anything really except that close games are more common in MLB than not. - of all the save opps, 166 - or 818% - got saved. That's about where I thought it would be and maybe even a bit higher (I might have guessed it would be in the 75-80% range). What I probably should have done but didn't was track what pct of the 1-run, 2-run & 3-run saves were converted rather than just taking them as a whole. Maybe next time for that. - and just under 1/3 of the total save opps (66, or 32.5%) were 'Perfect' saves. Or, looked at another way, of games that are saved, just under 40% are perfect. I'm betting that a majority of fans would guess that number to be much higher - like well over half.

Rockin' Doc wrote: Not only was I at that game (at least I'm assuming Lolich and Torre only pulled that stunt once) but I was up front and along that LF line somewhere. It was the annual 'Photo Day' promotion where early arrivers could crowd the front rows and click their 'instamatics' as the players walked - or, in the case of those guys, 'hogged' - the gauntlet around the warning track. I don't see myself in the photo and suspect I was a little further down the line.

A Roman Polanski film where a non-political and otherwise under-the-radar type writer is the surprise pick to finish ghosting the memoirs of a former British PM following the death [suicide?/accidental?/other?] of the previous ghost writer Complications and intrigue ensue, mostly triggered by a scandal that breaks just days into the new guy's job.

Now all we have to do is find a 2Bman who's, y'know, ... better. Maybe the one we're trying now will be some day but he's not yet.

The phucking Phils haven't hit a ball hard yet. Every hit has been soft or a 'tweener' and the rest of them the NYM phielders are phucking up. Misch deserves better.

Number 6 wrote: Shenanigans on that quote. Love it anyway. Yeah, but while we certainly don't want to discourage sarcasm around here, putting a made-up quote in a quote box with an accompanying link implying that's where it came from is something I think we'd be better off not doing.

1. Jose Reyes, SS 2. Angel Pagan, RF 3. David Wright, 3B 4. Carlos Beltran, CF 5. Ike Davis, 1B 6. Fernando Martinez, LF 7. Josh Thole, C 8. Ruben Tejada, 2B 9. Pat Misch, P PHILLIES 1. Jimmy Rollins, SS 2. Placido Polanco, 3B 3. Raul Ibanez, LF 4. Mike Sweeney, 1B 5. Jayson Werth, RF 6. Shane Victorino, 7. Carlos Ruiz, C 8. Wilson Valdez, 2B 9. Roy Halladay, P

What the umps see when they go to the 'replay room' comes from MLB headquarters in NYC and they DO have access to all available angles whether from home or road team feeds. As far as what happens when a fan interferes with the ball: - the part about umpire's discretion as to where to place the batter comes from the idea that the interference can come at various points in the play and therefore they use their judgement as to what would have happened had it not occurred. It's different from a 'ground rule' where a batted or thrown ball goes directly out of play and the remedy is automatic. - ejecting the fan is an individual stadium decision and not a rule from baseball as a whole. The problem with NOT punishing it is that it would lead to even more occurrences than what you have now. If the ball's in play then leave it alone!!

Ashie62 wrote: Ken Berry, all appeared on F-Troop. There ya go. I actually thought this was too east for the pop-cultures vultures in this crew and was going to be scooped up almost immediately. Troopers Dobbs & Duffy were characters on F-Troop and Ken Berry was the name of the actor who played Captain Parmenter You can now come up with one of your own if you want ... or you can just ignore this and send the thread into a well-deserved early death.

dgwphotography wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: (Holy shit... do these guys think this league is some sort of tenure-based fraternity?) As long as Omar is around, yeah... Considering that Castillo currently is sitting in favor of a guy who's hitting .183 for the season and is 4 for his last 53, if there is a tenure system no one seems to have told the guy making out the lineup cards.

Ump quotes: �The feeds that we had from the replay, the fan reaches over the fence, hits his hand and knocks the ball down,� [crew chief Tom] Hallion said. �And in our judgment, would not have gotten out of the ballpark.� [Hallion insisted that] �it�s so hard because the angle is looking from home plate out.� ... �We did our best,� ... �Of course an umpire wants to get a call right.� Asked why Hessman was awarded third � instead of the more conventional decision to give him a double � Hallion said, �There was fan interference. It�s our judgment of where he would have been if there was no fan interference.� NY Post: In left field, fan Dave Fisher said security kicked the interfering fan out [although] a security guard in the section said he could not talk about it when asked if the fan was booted. Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/upon_further_and_further_review_DR27cScxK3KdvC4UtSYB0M#ixzz0wa7xrgZT

ESPN seems to think the issue was if the fan touched it or not. I didn't think that was the issue. I thought it was where would the ball have landed if it was not deflected by the bonehead. It is what would have happened had the dope not touched it -- and unless that ball is somehow coming straight down I can't see how it lands below the top of the marked fence if untouched. Just another example, btw, of how replay rules work much better in theory than they do in practice, especially when the rule is installed in-season with no consideration given to whether or not camera angles are even going to be definitive for what they're supposed to be watching. Maybe, just maybe, a good idea would have been to install cameras which shoot along the fence line before you decide to use them to determine what went on along that line.

Willets Point wrote: Dobbs, Duffy, & Berry all have a double consonant in their names. True, but not what I'm looking for.

You gotta let this 'jinx' thing go man. And the O'Connor line is kinda funny.

seawolf17 wrote: LaValliere. All three were known as "Spanky." AFAIK, neither Dobbs or Dyer were known as 'Spanky' (but maybe I just don't know enough about their private lives)

Maybe my instructions weren't clear enough. The first two have a common bond as does one of the three choices. You have to choose which one of the choices is a mate with the first two and say why.

1) Philly PHer Greg Dobbs 2) Former NYM catcher Duffy Dyer is #3 in the set - 1975 Boston WS hero Bernie Carbo ? or - 1967 White Sox All-Star OFer Ken Berry ? or - 1980s fat Pirate catcher Mike LaValliere ?

Shouldas: - Hessman shoulda had a HR - Somebody shoulda beaten that fan to a bloody pulp - Pagan shoulda gone on contact on Wright's bouncer in the first inning - Beltran shoulda been had a triple on his double. I think both he and Wright thought he had a HR - Davis shoulda been at 1B for defense in the last inning - and SOMEBODY shoulda gotten Hessman in from 3B Other than that it was a great game.

I don't understand that ruling at all.

Not to panic but ... signing deadline for 2010 draft picks is Monday. Mets have actually already signed all of their first 20 picks except for 1st pick (7th overall) Matt Harvey & 6th rounder Greg Peavey (also signed 13 of the following 15 choices) That Harvey hasn't signed and that we haven't heard a whole lot about it isn't that unusual. He's expected to sign "over slot" and when that happens the clubs keep that info a secret until the very end lest all of the top picks use the amount the other guys signed for as leverage in their negotiations. If all these deals get announced just before (or even after) the deadline then no one gets an advantage and MLB keeps pretending that its precious 'slotting' system works. Have no idea what the story is with Peavey. If one of the back-round guys hasn't signed yet he probably won't at this point so it looks like John Franco Jr. isn't in our immediate future -- http://www.baseballamerica.com/draftdb/2010xteam.php?team=1013

Good enough recently to make BA's 'Hot List' at #9 Team: high Class A St. Lucie (Florida State) Age: 20 Why He's Here: 1-0, 0.66, 13 2/3, 11 H, 1 R, 1 HBP, 2 BB, 18 SO The Scoop: Where has this been all year? Familia is one of the hardest throwers in the minor leagues, but when he pitches, balls have been been flying out faster than they've been coming in most of the year. Not so in his last two outings, his best two of the season. Familia still needs to develop a reliable breaking ball, and with nearly six walks per nine innings, his control has also gotten him in trouble this year. With his stuff and the effort in his delivery, the bullpen might be in Familia's future, but his most recent starts might be encouraging signs of progress.

Santana - 5.8 Beltran - 1.6 Reyes - 1.0 Pagan - 0.6 Davis - 0.6 Martinez - 0.2 Thole - 0.2

Niese - 4.9 Parnell - 0.2 Pagan - 2.0 Reyes - 0.4