Jump to content

Our starters have failed to go five innings 23 times


Frobby

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Frobby said:

I mean, that is just pathetic.   

Less than one inning - 1.

Less than two innings - 4.

Less than three innings - 10.

Less than four innings - 14.

Less than five innings - 23.   

I am beyond frustrated.

In Miley's better starts he was burning the pen, that guy is scared of contact. It's got to be awful being in the field behind him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

And between two and three first round draft picks added to the farm.

Of course under the new system you can't really divert a large sum to international signings.

Ilso don't think you can sign top tier starting pitchers in Baltimore.

Agree, signing FA pitchers is a stretch and I'm actually completely against long term contracts for star players

The only path is the Tampa Bay model, develop a large group of starting pitching acquired from the draft and key trades of soon to be expensive (FA) players on your roster.

If we would have traded Jim Johnson in 2013 and Chris Davis and Darren O'day in 2015 I think we could have had a dynamite team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only 4 teams have fewer quality starts than the O's, but we do have as many as Houston. 

Only one team has a BAA over .274, that's us, at .281. Houston is at .232. We are one of 6 teams with fewer than 605 strike outs. We are one of 7 teams without a CG. We are one of two teams to give up over 400 earned runs. We are one of 3 teams with over 310 walks.

Houston has 852 Ks to 261 BBs

Baltimore has 602 Ks to 312 BBs

Not long ago we were looking down at those Astros. Their strength is their bats, their arms also embarrass ours. They've somehow turned Brad Peacock into a strike out machine. We turned Gausman into a pitching machine. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

We play in so many games that are just non competitive. We're down 3-0, 4-1, early every game. If the SP wasn't so bad I think the bats would scrap back some more and grind some runs out. Can't grind when you're down 10. 

To your point, in the 24 games where the starters failed to last 5 innings, they have a record of 0-13.   Miraculously, the offense bailed the starters out of a decision in 11 of those games, but that still put us in a ridiculous hole.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Frobby said:

To your point, in the 23 games where the starters failed to last 5 innings, they have a record of 0-13.   Miraculously, the offense bailed the starters out of a decision in 10 of those games, but that still put us in a ridiculous hole.  

I'm surprised it's that good.  It had to be 0 and something, I probably would have guessed 16 or 17.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, SteveA said:

I'm surprised it's that good.  It had to be 0 and something, I probably would have guessed 16 or 17.

Here are the details of the games the starter didn't lose:

4/7 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.1, but we won 6-5.

4/8 - Gausman yanked after allowing 4 runs in 4.1, but we won 5-4.

4/12 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.2, but we won 12-5.

4/24 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 3 in 3.1, but we won 6-3.

5/5 - Miley yanked after pitching 0.2 scoreless (he was hit twice in a row by liners and was pulled), but we won 4-2.

5/13 - Tillman yanked after allowing 3 runs in 4.1, but Asher took the loss in a 4-3 game.

5/14 - Gausman yanked after allowing 5 runs in 3.1 innings, but Bleier took the loss in a 9-8 game.  

5/22 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 6 runs in 4.0, but Wilson took the loss in a 14-7 game.   

6/7 - Miley yanked after allowing 4 runs in 2.2 innings, but we won 9-6.

6/20 - Tillman yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.0, but we won 6-5.

6/25 - Tillman yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.1, but we won 8-5.

That's 11 games the starter didn't lose despite not lasting 5 innings, and we actually won 8 of those.

By the way, I miscounted in the OP and thread title.    It's actually 24 times that the starter hasn't lasted 5 innings, not 23.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 

 

Here are the details of the games the starter didn't lose:

 

4/7 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.1, but we won 6-5.

4/8 - Gausman yanked after allowing 4 runs in 4.1, but we won 5-4.

4/12 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.2, but we won 12-5.

4/24 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 3 in 3.1, but we won 6-3.

5/5 - Miley yanked after pitching 0.2 scoreless (he was hit twice in a row by liners and was pulled), but we won 4-2.

5/13 - Tillman yanked after allowing 3 runs in 4.1, but Asher took the loss in a 4-3 game.

5/14 - Gausman yanked after allowing 5 runs in 3.1 innings, but Bleier took the loss in a 9-8 game.  

5/22 - Ubaldo yanked after allowing 6 runs in 4.0, but Wilson took the loss in a 14-7 game.   

6/7 - Miley yanked after allowing 4 runs in 2.2 innings, but we won 9-6.

6/20 - Tillman yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.0, but we won 6-5.

6/25 - Tillman yanked after allowing 5 runs in 4.1, but we won 8-5.

 

That's 11 games the starter didn't lose despite not lasting 5 innings, and we actually won 8 of those 11.

 

By the way, I miscounted in the OP and thread title. It's actually 24 times that the starter hasn't lasted 5 innings, not 23.

 

 

o

 

You can change the thread title by hitting "edit" for your Opening Post, and then going to the upper-left corner of the screen, which is where the thread title is.

 

o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

You can change the thread title by hitting "edit" for your Opening Post, and then going to the upper-left corner of the screen, which is where the thread title is.

 

o

Thanks.    The OP gave a breakdown of the "23" games according to how many innings the starter pitched, and I don't have the energy to figure out what game I missed right now, so I'm just going to leave it for the time being.    I'm pretty confident the total's not going to stay at 24 anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

You can change the thread title by hitting "edit" for your Opening Post, and then going to the upper-left corner of the screen, which is where the thread title is.

 

o

I didn't know you could do that! Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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



  • Posts

    • Cowser had a 4.0 fWAR in 2024. You ready to lock him up for 7-8 years or longer?
    • I think he already had and it was Bradish.  Midling prospect who turns out to have #1 level stuff.  Injuries are a bitch.
    • Cell service restored, power back on, not a single shingle missing from the roof. 
    • They need players who are better than some they have
    • Probably neither - it may be more a function of lining up with players.  The Astros extensions aren’t really comparable. The first Altuve extension was ridiculously team friendly. Altuve had less than $1MM in career earnings ($15K signing bonus as amateur). He had a good 2012, making the all-star team. However, he struggled in the first half of 2013 with an OPS in the six hundreds.  He fired Boras in May, presumably because he wanted to sign an extension that Boras would have been vehemently opposed to.  The deal announced in July bought out his four remaining years of team control for $12.5MM and gave the Astros control over what would have been his first two FA years via club options that totaled $25MM. The second Altuve extension occurred after he rehired Boras and was basically about buying out his grossly undervalued club option years.  It was needed to reverse the mistake of the first extension. The Bregman extension was reached in ARB-3 negotiations. Neither of these situations are at all comparable to a potential Gunnar extension this offseason. First of all, Boras had NEVER extended a pre-arb player with seven figures in career earnings (Carlos Gonzalez was below that threshold).  He is philosophically opposed to it. Second, there are two potential comps that would starting points for a deal: Tatis Jr and Witt Jr.  Boras would reject either of those deals; he would want to do better given his distaste for pre-arb extensions, his strong preference for “record-breaking” deals, and the fact the Gunnar has more career WAR (at least fWAR) than either of those players when they signed their extensions.  When teams are successful in getting a lot of early extensions done, it’s often a case of having a lot of players amenable to an extension. That generally covers attributes such as not signing a large draft or IFA bonus (i.e., relatively “poor” players), players with geographic ties to the team (big part of Atlanta’s success), not having Boras as their agent, and being more risk-adverse from a financial perspective.  The team’s risk tolerance also plays a role as you can get burned if they turn into Grady Sizemore.
    • I think the main reason they’re not big contributors for the Tigers right now is that they were all jettisoned from the team right around the time the Tigers got good. Canha was traded to SFG at the deadline, Urshela was DFA’d on August 15, and Baez shuffled off to season-ending hip surgery on August 22. They were 62-66 when Baez was shut down — they’re 28-11 since.
    • Their rebuild has not been better but their players don't melt under pressure.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...