Guess I broke out the Home Sweep Home headline one series too early. OTOH, if I hadn’t used it, the Pads wouldn’t have won the Atlanta series. See, bloggers can be superstitious too.
Oh, and is it great to have Khalil Greene back and swinging the bat well again? Now if we can somehow get Sean Burroughs and Phil Nevin into the act, the Pads will be downright scary.
Speaking of scary, here’s an interesting breakdown:
vs SD vs others
Atl/Fla/StL 1-9 68-38
Think that got anybody’s attention? Padres are now 16-3 since April 29. Thanks to David Pinto’s invaluable Day By Day Database, we can see exactly how the hitters and pitchers are doing over that period. It’s been Brian Giles, Ryan Klesko, Mark Loretta (whose injured thumb apparently isn’t too serious), and the bench and bullpen.
Pitches per Save
Eric was asking about this in yesterday’s In-Game Discussion. There are currently four pitchers in MLB averaging fewer than 20 pitches per save:
Sv Pit Pit/Sv
Trevor Hoffman 13 222 17.08
Jose Mesa 13 249 19.15
Bob Wickman 11 211 19.18
Jason Isringhausen 9 179 19.89
Last year, Hoffman was the only big leaguer under 20 pitches per save, checking in at 18.85. His past four saves of this season have involved retiring 11 straight batters on a total of 27 pitches.
Other Stuff
- Adam & Khalil Say, “No Comeback Necessary” (San Diego Spotlight). Rich was out at Wednesday’s game and gives his report.
- You can’t eff with our mojo, sucka! (Gaslamp Ball). Everyone loves the rally shillelagh.
- Prospect Retrospective: Jake Peavy (Minor League Ball). John Sickels takes a look back at last year’s ERA champ.
Finally, remember that “Prospects from 1996, Revisited” series I said would begin today? Well, it won’t begin today. I still have a few numbers to crunch, which I’ll be able to get to this weekend. Plus I’ve just been too damn busy watching the Padres win. 
Just re-reading yesterday’s game commentary. I love this site; many insight or funny posts. There were some comments on Padre “luck”; I did finally look at Baseball Prospectus adjusted averages. It shows the Padres about 3 games over their projections. The site also adjusts for the relationship between the batting line and runs (e.g. getting poor run production on good batting) and strength of schedule. The Dbacks actually drop to last; the Padres remain in first.
Link:
http://www.baseball-analysis.com/statistics/standings.php
Peter made a comment in yesterday’s game thread that I found intriguing:
“as for CG – the reason there were so many CG’s in decades past, was that hitters didn’t know they SHOULD force the action by taking walks. Furthermore, hitters didn’t hit a lot of HR so pitchers didn’t have to pitch as carefully. They didn’t keep track of pitch counts but studies have been done that showed that even back then they PROBABLY pitched roughly 100-10 pitches to get those CGs…”
I first started watching games on tv around 1980 and started thinking about them in 1982 when I read my first Baseball Abstract and I honestly don’t remember anyone ever talking about things like making the pitcher throw strikes or taking pitches to get to the bullpen. At most they would mention a leadoff hitter should take a few pitches so his teammates could get a look at what the pitcher is throwing. The only pitch count I ever heard of back then was that Don Larsen threw 96 pitches in his perfect game. I remember thinking “That’s nice. Is that a lot? What’s the average for a complete game?” It had no context.
When did the concept of taking pitches start to become accepted wisdom? Was it a result of Moneyball or has it been around longer than that?
Good to see no Padres’ pitchers on this list from today’s BP email …
Top 5 NL Hardest-Worked Starters, by Pitcher Abuse Points (PAP)
Player, Team, AVGNP, STRESS, PAP
Livan Hernandez, WAS, 111.7, 81, 82331
Carlos Zambrano, CHN, 105.1, 65, 54672
Jason Schmidt, SFN, 108.3, 52, 39438
Roy Oswalt, HOU, 103.0, 33, 30787
Roger Clemens, HOU, 105.8, 26, 22016
Anthony – it’s my understanding that the book “Moneyball” didn’t intiate anything … it merely documents Billy Beane’s approach to GM’ing. (note: this is probably simplistic, AND I’ve yet to actually read the book!!!)
I wonder if the concept of “take pitches so that the pitcher gets tired faster/sooner” wasn’t a direct thought/intent, but rather a side-effect / side-benefit realized by folks who first realized the value of OBP, and hence encouraged an emphasis on “plate discipline” (ie. taking walks) as a way to increase OBP?
And I think the rise in perceived value of OBP has coincided with the rise in Sabremetrics … so much so that it seems to be cause-and-effect.
Thanks for the adjusted standings link, Jay. I’ve been interested in this “luck” stuff lately. I put “luck” in quotes because the idea that it could include undetectable skills. I think a hot bullpen and bench is definitely a “skill” factor that partly explains the recent late-inning mojo and 3 wins above projections.
I wonder why they placed Arizona at the bottom of the list when Colorado clearly had the worst numbers.
I think Arizona is at the bottom because the final column of adjusted numbers has them with a slightly worse winning percentage. I eyeballed it rather than calculated it, but I think that is why.
Lynch, how have you not read MoneyBall, yet?
I still have to read “Men At Work” first
Geez, have you read “Ball Four”?
You all HAVE to read Moneyball. I’m re-reading again right now for about the 5th time. Now think about this, Billy Bean (a baseball god) credits Sandy Alderson (our new CEO) as being the person who taught him.
Lynch, you’re right that Moneyball didn’t intiate the movement, but it did help popularize it… But more than crediting Billy Beane with intiating the “taking pitches” approach, Alderson talked about taking pitches back when he was GM in the early-mid 90′s.
Anytime you hear some old baseball codger (if you’re here in SD – particularly if you hear the sound of Randy Jones voice) talking about today’s pitchers being babied… Roll your eyes…
What Geoff? No link to my brief but excellent
post? Where’s the love?
Ah…I was thinking only the pitches thrown in successful save appearances. Otherwise, closers who are often used in non-closer situations would be penalized, whereas Hoffman would easily lead the charts because Bochy uses him so conservatively, not necessarily because he was efficient with his pitches.
“Ball Four” is so East Coast …
What, West Coast guys don’t like juvenile cursing and greenies?