I had a new game: it was called figure out which R. Ortiz is pitching for the Los Angeles Dodgers of Los Angeles. How it was played was I would go on my blackberry and check out the Dodgers box scores. When checking out the box scores, the blackberry wouldn't have their full name (both pitchers were labeled R. Ortiz), thus giving the suspense. Since Joe Torre seemingly loves using the same relief pitchers every game, there would be at least one R. Ortiz (maybe both) pitching. I had to guess which R. Ortiz played. It was fun. Sadly, that game is now over. The Dodgers designated Russ Ortiz for assignment.
The Mustached GM never fails to amaze me. He signed Russ Ortiz and Ramon Ortiz. What does The Mustached GM* like about these guys?
Russ Ortiz got the game ball during a World Series (despite the Giants losing the game in the end). He also won 21 games in a year and playing in an All-Star game. And he turns 36 years old this season.
Ramon Ortiz has a less impressive resume. He did actually win a World Series ring. In fact, Ramon's Angels played Russ's Giants in 2002. He won 15 and 16 games in back to back years in 2002 and 2003. He turns 37 years old this season.
Anyone who actually went to baseball-reference would predict that these were horrible signings. Russ Ortiz has a career 1.39 so/bb line, and he hasn't been adequate since his overrated 2003 season, in which he finished 4th in Cy Young balloting despite 4.3 bb/9 and meh 6/3 so/9 lines. Ramon Ortiz hadn't pitched since the 2007 season. He has a career 1.82 so/bb line, and he hasn't been adequate since 2002--his only okay season. Even in that year, he served up a league high 40 home runs to average 1.7 hr/9.
Of course it's not surprising that these two pitchers have struggled so far. Take a glance at Russ Ortiz's box score and Ramon Ortiz's box score. I was hoping that this game would last until at least the All-Star break, but even the Dodgers figured out that Russ Ortiz was horrible. When will they figure out that Ramon Ortiz is horrible?
*The Mustached GM also signed Garret Anderson
What does The Mustached GM like about Garret Anderson?
Anderson was a three time All-Star, won a home run derby, won a World Series with Ramon Ortiz in 2002 and he turns 38 years old this season.
Of course he is a guy who has never been a great on base guy. On top of that, he has little power these days. He hasn't been a good hitter since 2003. Any guess how this one will turn out?
Showing posts with label Russ Ortiz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russ Ortiz. Show all posts
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Max Scherzer goes for win number two tonight
Tonight Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Max Scherzer aims to get his second win in his big league career. It took Scherzer 14 starts and 23 games dating back to last year to notch his first victory last week against the Atlanta Braves in a 12-0 victory. He pitched six shut out innings, but he could have pitched a mediocre six innings of four-run ball. For a pitcher who boasts an impressive 147 ERA+ for his career along with good career rate stats of 9.5 strikeouts per 9 innings and 1.27 WHIP, the fact that it took him 93.2 career innings to notch his first victory shows the flaws in the win-loss stat.
Livan Hernandez was 13-11 last year with the Minnesota Twins and Colorado Rockies. Not bad. Certainly better than Scherzer's career record of 1-7. Look a little deeper and Hernandez had an ERA+ of 69, a WHIP of 1.667 and struck out 3.4 batters per 9 innings.
Looking at Scherzer's game logs this year, you can see why it took him so long to get the first victory. On May 5 against the Los Angeles Dodgers, he pitched six innings and gave up 3 runs (2 earned) in a 3-1 loss. On April 30, he pitched six innings of shut out ball against the Milwaukee Brewers, but the Diamondbacks lost 4-1. On April 19 against the San Francisco Giants, he gave up 1 run in five innings in a 2-0 loss--a game where Randy Johnson gave up one hit in seven innings.
While I know and you know that Scherzer is a pretty good pitcher despite his 1-7 record, Cy Young voters still use the win-loss record as a criteria. While a great pitcher will most likely have a nice win-loss record, sometimes the lack of wins kills a pitcher's chance. Two recent examples come to mind when Chris Carpenter won in 2005 against Roger Clemens and in 2004 when Roger Clemens won against Randy Johnson. In 2005, Clemens had his best ERA+ of 226, a microscopic 1.008 WHIP and struck out 7.9 batters per 9 innings. Carpenter had a great season, but you know the voters gave him the Cy Young because his 21-5 record looked nicer than Clemens' 13-8 record. Perhaps it's justice because while Clemens had a great 2004 year, Randy Johnson was better. Johnson had a 16-14 record which is no indication of how dominating he was that year. He posted a league best .900 WHIP. Nobody was getting on base against him.
While a poor win-loss record may hurt a pitcher's candidacy, a great win-loss record will improve a pitcher's candidacy. Makes sense, right? Russ Ortiz won 21 games with the Atlanta Braves in 2003 to finish fourth in Cy Young voting. Impressive. Of course his ERA+ was 112. While he was above average, he was merely 12% above the average pitcher in earned run average. His league leading 102 walks did not help his cause. What happens when your ERA is only 7% above the average major league pitcher and you post a 1.532 WHIP? You finish 5th in Cy Young Voting. Aaron Sele threw up those horrendous numbers with the Texas Rangers in 1999 along with his impressive 18-9 record. To his credit, he did strike out 8.2 batters per 9 innings. Of course Arlington Stadium is a hitter's ballpark, but ERA+ is league adjusted.
Coming in fourth or fifth in Cy Young voting is nice, but it's not like they won the award. Bartolo Colon won the award in 2005 with the Los Angeles Anaheim California Angels. He had a very nice season. He threw 222.2 innings with two complete games and put up a 122 ERA+, a 1.159 WHIP and struck out 6.3 batters per 9 innings. He had a very good season, but we all know he won the award because of the 21-8 record. Mariano Rivera finished second despite striking out 9.2 batters per 9 innings and putting up a .868 WHIP. He had his usual dominating season. That said, the real travesty was Johan Santana not winning the award. Santana threw 231.2 innings with three complete games and two shutouts along with a 1.55 ERA+, a .971 WHIP and struck out 9.2 batters per 9 innings. He dominated Colon in every category. Of course the 16-7 record for Santana was totally his fault.
Edit:
After I wrote this, I went to espn.com and noticed this little gem from Rob Neyer. He writes about the great Johan Santana, but this is the paragraph that emphasizes my point:
"But while Santana was not robbed of the award in 2008, he most certainly was in 2005 when -- finishing 16-7, just like last year -- he led the AL in strikeouts and finished second (by a hair) in ERA but finished third in the Cy Young balloting because voters are obsessed with wins and losses."
My post was about Max Scherzer finally getting that coveted first win, but I had a deeper theme about how good he is despite his poor win-loss record. Then I used some historical examples to prove my point. I will say that as a young kid, I was impressed with wins and losses. It was Neyer who showed me how meaningless records are in the big picture years ago.
Livan Hernandez was 13-11 last year with the Minnesota Twins and Colorado Rockies. Not bad. Certainly better than Scherzer's career record of 1-7. Look a little deeper and Hernandez had an ERA+ of 69, a WHIP of 1.667 and struck out 3.4 batters per 9 innings.
Looking at Scherzer's game logs this year, you can see why it took him so long to get the first victory. On May 5 against the Los Angeles Dodgers, he pitched six innings and gave up 3 runs (2 earned) in a 3-1 loss. On April 30, he pitched six innings of shut out ball against the Milwaukee Brewers, but the Diamondbacks lost 4-1. On April 19 against the San Francisco Giants, he gave up 1 run in five innings in a 2-0 loss--a game where Randy Johnson gave up one hit in seven innings.
While I know and you know that Scherzer is a pretty good pitcher despite his 1-7 record, Cy Young voters still use the win-loss record as a criteria. While a great pitcher will most likely have a nice win-loss record, sometimes the lack of wins kills a pitcher's chance. Two recent examples come to mind when Chris Carpenter won in 2005 against Roger Clemens and in 2004 when Roger Clemens won against Randy Johnson. In 2005, Clemens had his best ERA+ of 226, a microscopic 1.008 WHIP and struck out 7.9 batters per 9 innings. Carpenter had a great season, but you know the voters gave him the Cy Young because his 21-5 record looked nicer than Clemens' 13-8 record. Perhaps it's justice because while Clemens had a great 2004 year, Randy Johnson was better. Johnson had a 16-14 record which is no indication of how dominating he was that year. He posted a league best .900 WHIP. Nobody was getting on base against him.
While a poor win-loss record may hurt a pitcher's candidacy, a great win-loss record will improve a pitcher's candidacy. Makes sense, right? Russ Ortiz won 21 games with the Atlanta Braves in 2003 to finish fourth in Cy Young voting. Impressive. Of course his ERA+ was 112. While he was above average, he was merely 12% above the average pitcher in earned run average. His league leading 102 walks did not help his cause. What happens when your ERA is only 7% above the average major league pitcher and you post a 1.532 WHIP? You finish 5th in Cy Young Voting. Aaron Sele threw up those horrendous numbers with the Texas Rangers in 1999 along with his impressive 18-9 record. To his credit, he did strike out 8.2 batters per 9 innings. Of course Arlington Stadium is a hitter's ballpark, but ERA+ is league adjusted.
Coming in fourth or fifth in Cy Young voting is nice, but it's not like they won the award. Bartolo Colon won the award in 2005 with the Los Angeles Anaheim California Angels. He had a very nice season. He threw 222.2 innings with two complete games and put up a 122 ERA+, a 1.159 WHIP and struck out 6.3 batters per 9 innings. He had a very good season, but we all know he won the award because of the 21-8 record. Mariano Rivera finished second despite striking out 9.2 batters per 9 innings and putting up a .868 WHIP. He had his usual dominating season. That said, the real travesty was Johan Santana not winning the award. Santana threw 231.2 innings with three complete games and two shutouts along with a 1.55 ERA+, a .971 WHIP and struck out 9.2 batters per 9 innings. He dominated Colon in every category. Of course the 16-7 record for Santana was totally his fault.
Edit:
After I wrote this, I went to espn.com and noticed this little gem from Rob Neyer. He writes about the great Johan Santana, but this is the paragraph that emphasizes my point:
"But while Santana was not robbed of the award in 2008, he most certainly was in 2005 when -- finishing 16-7, just like last year -- he led the AL in strikeouts and finished second (by a hair) in ERA but finished third in the Cy Young balloting because voters are obsessed with wins and losses."
My post was about Max Scherzer finally getting that coveted first win, but I had a deeper theme about how good he is despite his poor win-loss record. Then I used some historical examples to prove my point. I will say that as a young kid, I was impressed with wins and losses. It was Neyer who showed me how meaningless records are in the big picture years ago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)