Jump to content

Tim Berry is pitching for Bowie tonight.


weams

Recommended Posts

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>1-2-3 first inning for Tim Berry and he needed only 10 pitches. You can listen to the game live on 1430AM WNAV</p>— Bowie Baysox (@BowieBaysox) <a href="

">April 17, 2014</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

.

Excellent play by Schoop (Sharlon) on defense to THROW BEHIND THE RUNNER after he had hit a single to nail him after he had rounded the bag.

Somewhat reminiscent of 2 years ago when Machado picked up a slow roller down the 3rd baseline, faked the throw to first, and turned around and nailed the runner rounding 3rd base with a throw to Hardy (who was covering the bag on the play.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

Berry hurt his own cause in the 4th inning.

On an easy double play ball right back to the pitcher that would have ended the inning, he threw the ball low to second base, and they only got one.

The following batter hit an RBI-double before Berry got the next hitter on a groundout to end the inning.

It could have been worse, though. As mentioned before, an excellent defensive play by Sharlon Schoop picked a batter off of first base right after he led the inning off with a single. The RubberDucks actually got 4 hits that inning (a double and 3 singles), and netted only a single run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o

TIMOTHY BERRY O (vs. AA-Akron, 4/17)

IP:. 6

H:o 5 (1 Double, 4 Singles)

R:O 1

BB: 2

SO: 3

Pitches: 87 (55 Strikes, 32 Balls)

2014 ERA: 1.00 (AA-Bowie)

PITCHES BY INNING

*****************

10 (91 Strikes, 11 Balls)

14 (10 Strikes, 41 Balls)

20 (10 Strikes, 10 Balls)

24 (15 Strikes, 91 Balls)

71 (51 Strikes, 21 Balls)

12 (61 Strikes, 61 Balls)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o

TIMOTHY BERRY O (vs. AA-Akron, 4/17)

IP:. 6

H:o 5 (1 Double, 4 Singles)

R:O 1

BB: 2

SO: 3

Pitches: 87 (55 Strikes, 32 Balls)

2014 ERA: 1.00 (AA-Bowie)

PITCHES BY INNING

*****************

10 (91 Strikes, 11 Balls)

14 (10 Strikes, 41 Balls)

20 (10 Strikes, 10 Balls)

24 (15 Strikes, 91 Balls)

71 (51 Strikes, 21 Balls)

12 (61 Strikes, 61 Balls)

Berry is done for the night. These are his final numbers.

The Baysox just pushed 2 runs across the plate in the bottom half of the 6th, so he leaves the game on the winning end (not that he cares about that.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o

TIMOTHY BERRY O (vs. AA-Erie, 4/22)

IP:. 6

H:o 3 (1 Double, 2 Singles)

R:O 1

BB: 1

SO: 4

Pitches: 96 (60 Strikes, 36 Balls)

2014 ERA: 1.13 (AA-Bowie)

PITCHES BY INNING

*****************

14 (81 Strikes, 61 Balls)

18 (14 Strikes, 41 Balls)

13 (81 Strikes, 51 Balls)

10 (71 Strikes, 31 Balls)

30 (16 Strikes, 14 Balls)

11 (71 Strikes, 41 Balls)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Berry and Wright should at least cost controlled members of the bullpen from 2015-2021. Let that sink in. That's the floor.

I can't agree with you on that one. The floor for any pitching prospect is labrum surgery --> out of baseball. TINSTAAPP.

Moreover, even for those who dodge injury, a bullpen "floor" isn't really true. Wright and Berry are on the same age/league trajectory: Berry in 23 in AA, Wright in 24 in AAA. I don't have AAA stats for pitching prospects yet, but I can tell you that 23 year old starting pitchers in AA become successful major leaguers (ie, >200 IP and >1 WAR) about 19% of the time. About 58% make the majors for at least a cup of coffee.

I don't have breakdowns yet for the stats put up, so that 19% is for every 23-year-old starter in AA. I have every hope that Berry and Wright will both be successful, but one of the things I've learned from my prospect project is that the concept of a prospect "floor" is just flat out wrong for all except the very best of the very best position prospects only. Almost ANY prospect can get injured, lose his command, not adjust to major league pitching, or just plain suck.

One thing you are correct about is that Berry and Wright are likely destined for the bullpen. "Star" pitchers are almost never relievers (I believe there were only 2-3 relief "stars" in my dataset out of several hundred major leaguers) and 23-yo AA players almost never become stars: the rate is only 2.3%. Some "successful" players are starters, of course, but the odds are good that Berry and Wright will be relief pitchers in the majors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o

TIMOTHY BERRY O (vs. AA-Harrisburg, 4/27)

IP:. 4

H:o 9 (3 Home Runs, 1 Triple, 2 Doubles, 3 Singles)

R:O 9

BB: 1

SO: 3

Pitches: 69 (40 Strikes, 29 Balls)

2014 ERA: 3.86 (AA-Bowie)

PITCHES BY INNING

*****************

10 (81 Strikes, 21 Balls)

10 (81 Strikes, 21 Balls)

30 (17 Strikes, 13 Balls)

19 (71 Strikes, 12 Balls)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • She called Rutschman "Santander" in literally the first inning. 
    • So far, only 3 2nd rounders and 3 3rd rounders from that draft have made the majors, and only three of those have positive WAR.   But, it's still early and I'm sure that several others will make the majors eventually.   I don't follow other team's prospects closely enough to guess who from that group has a good shot at the majors.  I'd certainly say that Rhodes is a long shot, but I guess it wouldn't shock me if he developed enough to get a cup of coffee some day.  He does have some pop and pretty good plate discipline. Sorry for the digression.   Back to Povich, among pitchers with at least 5 starts, Povich leads the IL in ERA, is 3rd in WHIP, and is 3rd in K/9.  He's also 5th in innings pitched.
    • Hmm.  I'm going to just disagree and walk away from this one.  I've said enough negative things about Melanie in other threads.  I wish she was better because I think its really cool that female PBP announcers are becoming a little more common.  But they still need to be good at their job.  I hope at some point we hear a good one, but I haven't yet (the A's lady is awful too, sadly).
    • I don't really get hating on the streak.  Its something that hasn't been done to this level in a long time; the rarity of it makes it noteworthy, if nothing else.  I don't need people talking about the streak to remind of the playoff streak - not like I'm going to forget that happened.  But the regular season streak means that we haven't had a losing streak longer than - 4 games in two years.  I kind of wish the streak was spoken about in those terms - longest losing streak only 4 games - rather than in terms of being swept.  Because avoiding even a 5-6 game losing streak for two years is something worth noting, IMO, and that's basically what not being swept means. Looking back at the schedule; they lost 6 in a row from 5/13-5/18/22.  That includes the three game sweep in Detroit that is the last time they were swept, then they lost the first three games of a four game series vs. the Yankees.  Since then, their longest losing streak is just 4, three different times - 6/29-7/2/22 (which was immediately followed by a 10-game winning streak), 6/30-7/2/23, and 9/12-9/15/23. They also had three 3-game losing streaks - vs Boston 8/27-29 (4 game series),  5/6-5/8/23, and 9/20-9/22/23 (both split across two series)- ironically, that is one 4 game streak and one 3-game streak within two weeks of each other, while we were trying to clinch the division last year. So, in 2 years, that's 3 streaks of 4 games, and 3 streaks of 3 games. I'm not going to do this for every team as a comparison, but that does seem pretty good.  Longest being 4, and only 6 total in two years of 3 or 4, seems noteworthy.  At the very least, the 'streak' of sweepless series being upheld means no losing streaks of 5+ games, and that to me is why the streak does hold some meaning, despite the playoff sweep.
    • Up to this point, it’s fair to say I have not been a fan of Melanie Newman in the booth, except for some between-inning coverage where I found her passable. So far I found her somewhere between distracting and exhausting, and not particularly skilled at calling the action on the field. So I was somewhat dismayed to find that she was calling last night’s game with Ben. But to be fair, I thought she did quite a good job overall. It wasn’t perfect, but she seemed much more in control and even managed a bit of rapport with Ben over a few topics. To the point where I might prefer to hear her again over someone like Scott Garceau or maybe Geoff Arnold. That might not sound particularly impressive, low-hanging fruit and all, but considering how irritating I found her until now, I thought it was a dramatic improvement.
    • And didn't he also do something with his fingers that was unusual?   Like twiddling them constantly while awaiting the pitch instead of just gripping the bat steadily with them?
    • There literally would be no difficulty in using any other level probability per game, but the reason I've stayed with coin flips is that there are a huge number of assumptions (starting with the notion that the probability should be level) that need to be explained if I were to use a different p(individual win).  That doesn't work for a tweet or a post that I don't want to go on for a long time to explain the assumptions, but "coin flip" does, because the assumptions are commonly understood. The fact that the other teams still ahead of the Orioles did it with substantially longer average series length makes them less impressive than what the O's have done and those teams also played .650-.700 baseball over the period of the streaks which is a result of a significant difference in top-to-bottom parity in the leagues.  Both facts are too much to explain each time, but not too difficult to calculate on a coin flip basis. For example, the previous AL record holders, the 1922-24 Yankees, using the coin-flip basis had approximately a 1 in 8,819 chance chance of going unswept in their 83 consecutive series. But for folks who want to say "coin flip is not accurate", I'll produce this goalposting once for "levelized win probability" through the 103 series lengths the Orioles have played (1922-24 Yankees 83 series lengths in parenthesis): .600: 1 in 952 (1 in 90) .650: 1 in 102 (1 in 20) .700: 1 in 19 (1 in 7) 1.000: 1 in 1    
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...