Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mike Leake to the Giants for a minor league pitcher. Eh, better than Tim Hudson and maybe Jake Peavy, but nothing to write home about. He does hit the ball pretty well, so maybe the Giants can use him to pinch hit, lol. All it cost was a minor league prospect so a low risk high reward trade. This year was pretty good at GAB, so pitching in a pitcher's heaven should only help him.
Jays trade for Mariners reliever Mark Lowe. Not a household names by any means, but he has about a 1.00 ERA this year. Playing some 45 games in Safeco Field probably bumps those numbers up a bit, but with LaTroy Hawkins (came with Tulowitski) David Price, and now Lowe, they have strengthened a very big weak area of the team. Obviously, not as good as the Yankees, Royals, even the Orioles, but they are much improved at 1:30 PM on Friday then they were at 8:30 PM on Monday.
Cubs acquire Marlins pitcher Dan Haren. Haren just started for the Marlins yesterday, so he probably wouldn't be available to the Cubs until Tuesday or Wednesday.
Hamels trade to the Rangers officially official. The players were official on Wednesday, they just had to get paperwork sent to the MLB office. Hamels may start for the Rangers tomorrow evening, and if Gallardo gets traded (he's scheduled for Saturday) I'd say Hamels fills in; if Gallardo is still a Ranger, they may keep Gallardo on schedule and bump Martin Perez (Sunday's starter) for Hamels.
Jays trade for Mariners reliever Mark Lowe. Not a household names by any means, but he has about a 1.00 ERA this year. Playing some 45 games in Safeco Field probably bumps those numbers up a bit, but with LaTroy Hawkins (came with Tulowitski) David Price, and now Lowe, they have strengthened a very big weak area of the team. Obviously, not as good as the Yankees, Royals, even the Orioles, but they are much improved at 1:30 PM on Friday then they were at 8:30 PM on Monday.
.
Not only is it not obvious that the Jays are inferior to the Yankees and Orioles, it is quite manifest that they have been better than either of those two teams.
The Jays have outscored their opposition by 103 runs, the best figure in the AL and the second best figure in MLB behind the Cardinals (106)
The Yankees are at plus 50, Baltimore at plus 47. That the Jays have had miserable luck in the distribution of their runs and their opponents runs has resulted in their inferior record to the Yankees who have been uncommonly fortunate in the distribution of their runs. If we remove luck as a factor the standings would be:
Toronto 62-41 -
New York 56-45 - 6
Baltimore 56-45 - 6
I can see where you might rate the Yankees as the better team based on their won-loss record, but Baltimore and Toronto are in a virtual tie in the standings with the Orioles having enjoyed good fortune while Toronto's luck has been sour. The Jays have been clearly superior to the Orioles.
I know that these are difficult concepts to embrace, that teams with worse won-loss records may be better than teams with superior records, but it is a valid concept. People do not seem to have trouble any longer in recognizing that a pitcher with a 10-14 record may have had a far better season than someone who went 17-7, and that the win-loss records were the product of factors beyond the control of the pitchers.
That happens on a team level as well. You cannot set out on a specific day to score exactly five runs and limit your opponent to exactly four runs, you have no control over that. But if over the course of 40 games you have scored 200 runs to your opponent's 160, that is a ratio of outscoring them 5-4. It remains possible that in 40 head to head matches, a team which scores 200 runs to its opponent's 160 runs, could lose more games than it wins. Such an event requires the 200 run team to waste runs in blowouts while losing too many close games.
If there is such a thing as an ability to win close games, no one has ever found evidence for it in the numbers.
I know that these are difficult concepts to embrace, that teams with worse won-loss records may be better than teams with superior records, but it is a valid concept. People do not seem to have trouble any longer in recognizing that a pitcher with a 10-14 record may have had a far better season than someone who went 17-7, and that the win-loss records were the product of factors beyond the control of the pitchers.
That makes sense, however, when entry to the postseason is based SOLELY on record, your argument is null and void. If the Blue Jays continue to have "bad luck" and finish with a worse record than the Yankees and Orioles, they will miss the postseason and it won't matter how "good" they were.
Not only is it not obvious that the Jays are inferior to the Yankees and Orioles, it is quite manifest that they have been better than either of those two teams.
The Jays have outscored their opposition by 103 runs, the best figure in the AL and the second best figure in MLB behind the Cardinals (106)
The Yankees are at plus 50, Baltimore at plus 47. That the Jays have had miserable luck in the distribution of their runs and their opponents runs has resulted in their inferior record to the Yankees who have been uncommonly fortunate in the distribution of their runs. If we remove luck as a factor the standings would be:
Toronto 62-41 -
New York 56-45 - 6
Baltimore 56-45 - 6
I can see where you might rate the Yankees as the better team based on their won-loss record, but Baltimore and Toronto are in a virtual tie in the standings with the Orioles having enjoyed good fortune while Toronto's luck has been sour. The Jays have been clearly superior to the Orioles.
I know that these are difficult concepts to embrace, that teams with worse won-loss records may be better than teams with superior records, but it is a valid concept. People do not seem to have trouble any longer in recognizing that a pitcher with a 10-14 record may have had a far better season than someone who went 17-7, and that the win-loss records were the product of factors beyond the control of the pitchers.
That happens on a team level as well. You cannot set out on a specific day to score exactly five runs and limit your opponent to exactly four runs, you have no control over that. But if over the course of 40 games you have scored 200 runs to your opponent's 160, that is a ratio of outscoring them 5-4. It remains possible that in 40 head to head matches, a team which scores 200 runs to its opponent's 160 runs, could lose more games than it wins. Such an event requires the 200 run team to waste runs in blowouts while losing too many close games.
If there is such a thing as an ability to win close games, no one has ever found evidence for it in the numbers.
Oakland. 55-48 if one goes by Pythagorean W-L. However, you can say that they do know how to lose close games. Lousy pen and worst defense in MLB.
Toronto is more an enigma. Pitching and defense are close to average. They do give up a lot of runs in 1st inning, but have the offense to offset that.
That makes sense, however, when entry to the postseason is based SOLELY on record, your argument is null and void. If the Blue Jays continue to have "bad luck" and finish with a worse record than the Yankees and Orioles, they will miss the postseason and it won't matter how "good" they were.
If you think the above makes my argument null and void, you apparently did not understand it.
That bad luck extends for a full season does not alter the fact that a team with a worse won loss record may have been superior to a team with a better one. Win loss records determine who gets to be in the post season, but do not necessarily identify the best teams.
Consider...in the three championships that SF has won in the last five seasons, at no time during those regular seasons did anyone suggest that the Giants were the best team in baseball. They never had the best w-l record, they never had the the best run differential, what they had was unusually good luck in the post season.
Your above assertion suggests that whoever ultimately wins had to have been the best team all along, and that is not necessarily true.
Jays trade for Phillies CF Ben Revere. This has been an excellent week for Alex Anthopolous, Blue Jays GM. They needed a starting pitcher......badly and they acquired one of the best in the game in David Price. They traded for Tulowitski, and with that trade they lost their only leadoff hitter, which they got back in Ben Revere. The bullpen wasn't as bad as the starting rotation was, but it was still leaking oil, and in the Tulowitski deal they also received a veteran reliever who has closer expierence in LaTroy Hawkins, and in a separate deal earlier today acquired Mark Lowe. With the acquisition of Price it allows Aaron Sanchez to move back into the bullpen further solidifying the bullpen which has been better since Roberto Osuna took over the closer's role from Brett Cecil. Now it still might not be enough to run down the Yankees, but I think they've put themselves in position for a Wildcard Spot.
Oakland. 55-48 if one goes by Pythagorean W-L. However, you can say that they do know how to lose close games. Lousy pen and worst defense in MLB.
.
That is clever and the sort of thing a sportswriter would be praised for crafting, but it also is not true.
Just as there is no such thing as an ability to win close games, there is no such thing as an ability to lose them. Sabermetrics has looked into this problem, searching for that golden key to the idea of a team being able to control the manner in which its runs and opponent's runs get distributed. If such a thing could be identified, it would be incredibly valuable. A team which could control the scoring and prevention of runs to that degree would seldom lose and every team would copy whatever methodology was employed to obtain this status.
No team has because no one has yet been able to distinguish run distribution patterns as being the product of anything other than luck. It has not been for lack of trying.
I know the Padres really didn't have to do anything since outside of Ian Kennedy & Justin Upton (and maybe Upton resigns) everyone else is still under control for 16, but still surprised they did nothing.
Yankees sitting on their hands doing nothing either was a big surprise. The Jays pick up Tulo & Price; Astros pick up Carlos Gomez & Scott Kazmir, Royals get Ben Zobrist & Johnny Cueto and the Yankees get......Dustin Ackley?? When CC is a complete shell of himself, & Pineda is hurt...................again you get Dustin Ackley?!?!?!?!?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
