Offense, not pitching is going to be the key to 2011

[maybenxtyr]

Then you blow everything up.

Well, I am not saying it is right, but where do you go when the talent in place is young, and just not good enough?

The players as individuals are decent, but as a whole they just are not. I am not trying to argue, but where does this team go if this season is around 70-75 wins?

Also, we have to assume the payroll will be close to where ot ends up when this off-season is over.

[Oriolidae85]

To be fair, the Yankees did pretty much slug their way to the playoffs last year. They score an overwhelming amount of runs, and other teams have a hard time keeping up with them.

Once you got past Sabathia and Hughes, their rotation was unimpressive. Also, Pettitte was out for a big chunk last year. The bullpen wasn't so great sans Mariano.

The difference here is that they have a HOF-caliber infield, and our offense isn't anywhere near the level of the Yankees. We stand to have a pretty dynamic offense in 2011 if all things break our way, but it will require career years from some guys and huge leaps forward from others. Even then, I think our best-case scenario leaves us 50+ runs short of NYY.

So for us mortals, pitching is still key.

I honestly believe the Orioles infield has the ability to be better than the Yankees. It starts with defense across the board (averaging the group) and the Orioles age difference/upside makes it that much more believable.

Who is going to hit better at 3b? Reynolds or Arod? It's a seven year age difference question. We know who is going to defend better...so is Arod's 135 games > Reynolds? IMO, NO!

SS? I'll take my chances with the overall Hardy/Izturis combo over Jeter's 37 season.

2B? It is not a question, Cano wins hands down

CA? No doubt Wieters balances the difference w/2B.

1B? I'd rather have Tex, but Tex has only earned his salary hitting in the new Yankee stadium. Regardless MT (or is that empty) wins...

So overall the Orioles are close to even, but much younger against the Yankees infield, IMO!

[DrungoHazewood]

Fielder has a better chance of playing a full season than Lee does.

Depth at 1B isn't as important when you have a reliable option there.

Lee has averaged 148 games played over the last four years. He's sixth in the majors in games played at first over that period. If Lee isn't reliable, then 80% of the teams in the majors don't have a reliable first baseman.

Most teams are like this. I'm not going to deny that teams spending $200 mm or $160 mm have more ability to compensate for a key injury than a team that doesn't. That should be relatively obvious.

And that's what this really comes down to. Trea equates "realiable" and "not risky" with the very, very top players at their position in the world. Maybe half a dozen or less players at each spot. Players who are either untouchable or would take an absolutely massive amount of money or prospects to acquire. Players that almost no small- or mid-market team ever acquires outside of their own deveopment system.

He's set Andy MacPhail up for failure by having standards that are essentially unattainable by a team in the Orioles' position. It is an almost unavoidable characteristic of a team like the Orioles that they'll have a higher risk profile than one with twice or three times the resources.

[Aglets]

For one month, I said one month the Pirates had a 6.62 ERA and still managed a 10-13 record while the Orioles were 2 runs better and went 5-18. It was an example that they didn't have to have stellar pitching to at least be respectable all the time which is the truth, as you don't if your offense picks you up. 10-13 would have been a respectable record for the Orioles at the end of April. They'd be 3 games under .500 instead of 13, a much easier obstacle to overcome to a winning season. And it's that start that buried the Orioles to begin with. They never came back from that until Buck arrived.

The [Orioles] offense was horrible for the entire season and was the constant in the losing.

(some stuff)

Which is why the offense is the most important factor, and will be for the Orioles in 2011. It will dictate how well the Orioles pitching has to perform to win.

Trea, I specifically called you out for making this statement before. And you didn't respond.

So either you don't read posts that respond to yours, you have difficulty understanding them, or you just.......hope people forget that you were called out? When you say things that aren't really.........true.......I'm not sure what to think.

But know this, I am not going to get tired of pointing out these falsehoods.

So here we go again. You have once more pointed out the Pirates 10-13 record in April compared to the Orioles 5-18 record, and have stated that since the pirates pitching was so awful, it was their great offense that carried them 'to respectability.'

This......is........not........true. The Orioles scored an awful 75 runs in April, the Pirates scored a thoroughly unimpressive, 82. (26th ranked O in 2010 in April.)

So which statement of yours do you believe?

Do you believe that the Orioles O was truly awful at 3.26 runs per game in April.........but the Pirates O was doing great at 3.57? Is 3.5 the standard?

Cuz if that's the case, then check this out!

The orioles had a great offense in May then! (3.57 runs per game)

And June! (3.77 runs per game)

And July! (3.78 runs per game)

And August (4 runs per game)

And Sep! (4.23 runs per game)

Man, if 3.5 is the standard set by the illustrious Pirates in April then the Orioles don't just have a great offense, it's pretty darn phenomenal by the end of the year! you should be thrilled.

But wait, there's your other bolded statement. Our O has been awful for the entire year?

Help me Jtrea, I'm having trouble understanding how both of your statements can be true. Logic and data keep getting in the way........how do you advise that I get over this problem?

[Crazysilver03]

For one month, I said one month the Pirates had a 6.62 ERA and still managed a 10-13 record while the Orioles were 2 runs better and went 5-18. It was an example that they didn't have to have stellar pitching to at least be respectable all the time which is the truth, as you don't if your offense picks you up. 10-13 would have been a respectable record for the Orioles at the end of April. They'd be 3 games under .500 instead of 13, a much easier obstacle to overcome to a winning season. And it's that start that buried the Orioles to begin with. They never came back from that until Buck arrived.

.

Man, how you forget: Pittsburgh game reveals O's losing culture

You were well aware of the fact that the Pirates lost a three game series to Milwaukee 8-0, 8-1, and 20-0, before turning around and losing 17-3 in their next match-up, while also losing one game to Houston 10-3 and one to Los Angeles 10-2. They also had a 15-6 loss to the D'Backs.

Just maybe, their win/loss record and ERA didn't correlate well because the sheer number of pure blow-outs they had inflated the numbers ridiculously. For example, the Pirates played 23 games in April, so the one 20-0 game against Milwaukee inflated their entire month's ERA by 1 whole point.

[ShaneDawg85]

Man, how you forget: Pittsburgh game reveals O's losing culture

You were well aware of the fact that the Pirates lost a three game series to Milwaukee 8-0, 8-1, and 20-0, before turning around and losing 17-3 in their next match-up, while also losing one game to Houston 10-3 and one to Los Angeles 10-2. They also had a 15-6 loss to the D'Backs.

Just maybe, their win/loss record and ERA didn't correlate well because the sheer number of pure blow-outs they had inflated the numbers ridiculously. For example, the Pirates played 23 games in April, so the one 20-0 game against Milwaukee inflated their entire month's ERA by 1 whole point.

Ugh, I'd forgotten about that one. I feel like I need to go home and take a shower after viewing that one.

[Maverick2143]

Whoever tagged this thread with "Not see forest for the Treas" is owed rep and a beer. Bloody brilliant.

[mweb]

Both are "key".

The End

Yep. These discussions are really nonsensical since everything matters.

[JTrea81]

Trea, I specifically called you out for making this statement before. And you didn't respond.

So either you don't read posts that respond to yours, you have difficulty understanding them, or you just.......hope people forget that you were called out? When you say things that aren't really.........true.......I'm not sure what to think.

But know this, I am not going to get tired of pointing out these falsehoods.

So here we go again. You have once more pointed out the Pirates 10-13 record in April compared to the Orioles 5-18 record, and have stated that since the pirates pitching was so awful, it was their great offense that carried them 'to respectability.'

This......is........not........true. The Orioles scored an awful 75 runs in April, the Pirates scored a thoroughly unimpressive, 82. (26th ranked O in 2010 in April.)

So which statement of yours do you believe?

Do you believe that the Orioles O was truly awful at 3.26 runs per game in April.........but the Pirates O was doing great at 3.57? Is 3.5 the standard?

Cuz if that's the case, then check this out!

The orioles had a great offense in May then! (3.57 runs per game)

And June! (3.77 runs per game)

And July! (3.78 runs per game)

And August (4 runs per game)

And Sep! (4.23 runs per game)

Man, if 3.5 is the standard set by the illustrious Pirates in April then the Orioles don't just have a great offense, it's pretty darn phenomenal by the end of the year! you should be thrilled.

But wait, there's your other bolded statement. Our O has been awful for the entire year?

Help me Jtrea, I'm having trouble understanding how both of your statements can be true. Logic and data keep getting in the way........how do you advise that I get over this problem?

You can't just look at runs scored per game with the Pirates.

Look at the games they won and the games they lost:

<PRE>

Rk Gm# Date Tm Opp R RA

1 1 Monday Apr 5 PIT LAD W 11 5

2 2 Wednesday Apr 7 PIT LAD W 4 3

3 3 Thursday Apr 8 PIT LAD L 2 10

4 4 Friday Apr 9 PIT ARI L 1 9

5 5 Saturday Apr 10 PIT ARI W 6 3

6 6 Sunday Apr 11 PIT ARI L 6 15

7 7 Monday Apr 12 PIT SFG L 3 9

8 8 Tuesday Apr 13 PIT SFG W 6 5

9 9 Wednesday Apr 14 PIT SFG L 0 6

10 10 Friday Apr 16 PIT CIN W 4 3

11 11 Saturday Apr 17 PIT CIN W 5 4

12 12 Sunday Apr 18 PIT CIN W 5 3

13 13 Tuesday Apr 20 PIT MIL L 1 8

14 14 Wednesday Apr 21 PIT MIL L 0 8

15 15 Thursday Apr 22 PIT MIL L 0 20

16 16 Friday Apr 23 PIT HOU L 3 4

17 17 Saturday Apr 24 PIT HOU L 2 5

18 18 Sunday Apr 25 PIT HOU L 3 10

19 19 Monday Apr 26 PIT MIL L 3 17

20 20 Tuesday Apr 27 PIT MIL W 7 3

21 21 Wednesday Apr 28 PIT MIL W 6 5

22 22 Thursday Apr 29 PIT LAD W 2 0

23 23 Friday Apr 30 PIT LAD L 2 6

</PRE>

Provided by <A href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/sharing.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool">Baseball-Reference.com</A>: <A href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PIT/2010-schedule-scores.shtml?sr&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool#team_schedule">View Original Table</A><BR>Generated 1/13/2011.

In the 10 games they won, the offense scored an average of 5.6 runs per game. The Pirates were actually a big swing team as they had a good offense in wins, and a lousy offense in losses, getting shut out in 3 games that month.

But the key is their offense was there to back up the pitching when they pitched well enough to win for the most part.

You can't say that for the Orioles.

[brotherlo38]

Trea is right, the key to success is for the offense to be there to back up the pitching when they pitch well enough for the win.

[Crazysilver03]

You can't just look at runs scored per game with the Pirates.

Look at the games they won and the games they lost:

<PRE>

Rk Gm# Date Tm Opp R RA

1 1 Monday Apr 5 PIT LAD W 11 5

2 2 Wednesday Apr 7 PIT LAD W 4 3

3 3 Thursday Apr 8 PIT LAD L 2 10

4 4 Friday Apr 9 PIT ARI L 1 9

5 5 Saturday Apr 10 PIT ARI W 6 3

6 6 Sunday Apr 11 PIT ARI L 6 15

7 7 Monday Apr 12 PIT SFG L 3 9

8 8 Tuesday Apr 13 PIT SFG W 6 5

9 9 Wednesday Apr 14 PIT SFG L 0 6

10 10 Friday Apr 16 PIT CIN W 4 3

11 11 Saturday Apr 17 PIT CIN W 5 4

12 12 Sunday Apr 18 PIT CIN W 5 3

13 13 Tuesday Apr 20 PIT MIL L 1 8

14 14 Wednesday Apr 21 PIT MIL L 0 8

15 15 Thursday Apr 22 PIT MIL L 0 20

16 16 Friday Apr 23 PIT HOU L 3 4

17 17 Saturday Apr 24 PIT HOU L 2 5

18 18 Sunday Apr 25 PIT HOU L 3 10

19 19 Monday Apr 26 PIT MIL L 3 17

20 20 Tuesday Apr 27 PIT MIL W 7 3

21 21 Wednesday Apr 28 PIT MIL W 6 5

22 22 Thursday Apr 29 PIT LAD W 2 0

23 23 Friday Apr 30 PIT LAD L 2 6

</PRE>

Provided by <A href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/sharing.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool">Baseball-Reference.com</A>: <A href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PIT/2010-schedule-scores.shtml?sr&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool#team_schedule">View Original Table</A><BR>Generated 1/13/2011.

In the 10 games they won, the offense scored an average of 5.6 runs per game. The Pirates were actually a big swing team as they had a good offense in wins, and a lousy offense in losses, getting shut out in 3 games that month.

But the key is their offense was there to back up the pitching when they pitched well enough to win for the most part.

You can't say that for the Orioles.

This is by far the dumbest argument you have ever made. What team doesn't usually have a good offense in wins?

Your argument dealt with their team ERA being two points higher then the Orioles, but remove the three blowouts to the Brewers and the ERA is almost the same.

Please stop posting such nonsense. You are the reason people diSlike stats because you skew them in anyway possible, logically or illogically. Especially considering you are citing numbers from a team worse than ours.

[ChaosLex]

[JTrea81]

This is by far the dumbest argument you have ever made. What team doesn't usually have a good offense in wins?

The Pirates never had the pitching like the Orioles did obviously, but they had the offense when it counted. They only lost 1 game where their pitching gave up 4 runs or less.

The Orioles on the other hand lost 9 games in April where they only gave up 4 runs or less.

So 1 of the 13 losses was due to the offense for the Pirates.

For the Orioles, 9 out of the 18 losses were due to the offense.

[forest leech]

Thread summary:

JTrea: Hey guys I am right, for reals

Everybody else: No, here are facts

JTrea: No you don't understand, I am right

etc for 11+ pages

[Mad Mark]

Well, I see another Treastorm has brewed up here on the Hangout. In the distance I can see Dresden burning.

Let me see if I can grind this thread to a halt with a lesson from my own, personal life experience.

This past season, the Bashers finished in second place with 14-4 record, despite being near the bottom in runs scored. How did we do that? 1: we have a good, deep crop of guys who can pitch and 2: we have a young, fast group of outfielders who can go get the ball. If you hit it in the air against us, you had better hit it out; otherwise it's getting caught.

The team that finished first at 14-3-1 (despite being swept by us) finished near the top in runs scored, but middle of the pack in runs allowed.

While we were winning games 11-4, they were winning them 23-15.

Which method is better? Depends on your personnel.

Moral: if you're winning games, who gives a crap which leg of your stool (offense, defense, pitching) is the best? One can be extremely dominant, or they can be evenly spread. The route you take is less important than the destination in this instance.

And the Pirates are still in worse shape, overall, than the Orioles.