TT: This is who the Orioles are right now (23-27 in last 50 games)

[bpilktree67]

1 hour ago, HowAboutThat said:

Define “around .500”? In the last 50 games, the Os are four games under .500. If that is “around,” then fine. But “around” isn’t going to be enough. If the Yankees lose today, we’re tied, but if they win, we’re still a game behind.

We are actually 24-26 in last 50 now.  Win tomorrow and we are 25-25.  Actually win any of the next 4 games and we are back at .500 for the 50 game span.  

[glenn__davis]

6 minutes ago, bpilktree67 said:

We are 28-28 if you go to last 56 games or the day Bradish got hurt.  If you go to last 45 we are 23-22.   Which are both .500 or better it just depends when you want to start looking at it.  

Right.  Tony set the bar at 50 games which was fine and reasonable.  It's a nice round number.  At the time of the post that included a 5 game losing streak at the start.  If you remove that that streak, we're 24-22.  Huzzah!  Trending up!

[Moose Milligan]

11 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

The team we were in May and early June is long gone and it's times to face facts that this is not a slump, but what this team is at this point. When your 23-27 and your last 50 games, that's who you are currently.

So the question is why is this team not very good and is there anything that can be done about it?

Injuries
This team has been decimated by injuries but according to Fangraphs they've only lost 4.7 fWAR to injuries this year which is 20th worse. Now I don't know how accurate that is but it does go to show that this team hasn't been bit by injuries more than most other contending teams. 

 

I laughed when I saw that the other day and I don't believe it at all.

There's no way anyone can convince me that losing Bradish and Means by themselves add up to less than 4.7 WAR.  Now, if they're saying that the players that have replaced Bradish and Means (and others) have offset the loss of WAR and you're left with a delta of 4.7, I can maybe...MAYBE buy that.

I do think injuries will be the downfall of this team when we look back on everything, too many key guys gone for too many stretches of time.  Mateo struggles to hit often but he brings a dimension to this team, IMO, that is sorely missed.  Westburg has proven to be a great glue guy in his second season, he's missed as well.  Also, not having Bautista (which we knew headed into this season, but still) makes this bullpen different with his presence alone.  Bautista without Kimbrel and the addition of Seranthony...I like that back end of that bullpen, much more than what we have now.

I'm rambling...but yeah, I think injuries are the biggest culprit.  After a couple seasons of getting lucky in that department, we haven't been able to dodge that bullet.

I agree with @Sports Guy and others...I'm not so worried about how they are right now or how they've been over the last 50 games...it's what they'll be in six weeks from now that I'm most interested in.  Who's back, who's healthy, etc...a healthy Coulombe who's performing well...Westy, G-Rod...If they're healthy and performing well headed into October, I'm good with it.  

As others have mentioned, the Rangers limped in and caught fire at the right time.  And this year, they're back to being average...or below average, really...they're 11 games under .500.

As disappointing as this recent stretch has been, I'm just hoping they catch fire at the end of October like we know they can with some of the key guys back in the fold.  Unlike the Rangers last year who pushed all their chips to the middle and were hoping on veteran performances from Scherzer and DeGrom and Seager and Semien, we're thankfully not in that situation.  We're set up to compete for the foreseeable future and if they don't get it done this year, there still are chances ahead.

[Moose Milligan]

45 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The Twins are a very dangerous team…all of those ALC teams are.

In fact, if I had to bet money right now, I would bet on a team in the ALC representing the AL in the WS.

Just curious, why?

I can see Cleveland because of their bullpen...and their staff overall, really.  

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

Just curious, why?

I can see Cleveland because of their bullpen...and their staff overall, really.  

Cleveland is my favorite. Their pen is great. They are #1 in DRS and #11 in OAA, so they can field. They put the ball in play and don’t strike out much at all.

They have a few legit stars guys and a guy who is the most underrated super star in the sport in Ramirez.

 

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Cleveland is my favorite. Their pen is great. They are #1 in DRS and #11 in OAA, so they can field. They put the ball in play and don’t strike out much at all.

They have a few legit stars guys and a guy who is the most underrated super star in the sport in Ramirez.

 

Agreed on all points.  They're probably a matchup nightmare for just about anyone.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Agreed on all points.  They're probably a matchup nightmare for just about anyone.

I get 2014 Kansas City Royals vibes from Cleveland. Nothing worse than going into the sixth inning trailing a team with a shutdown bullpen during the playoffs. I have to think teams know it in the back of their minds that they need to get the lead early and hold it. That can lead to an offense that gets too aggressive and starts pressing at the plate swinging at pitches outside of the zone.

I don't fear any team in the AL, but my preference is Cleveland gets eliminated before facing Baltimore. I was rooting for the Angels in 2014 to beat the Royals while knowing they would probably lose. A team with a great bullpen, speed and good defense is built for postseason baseball.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Agreed on all points.  They're probably a matchup nightmare for just about anyone.

They are 11th in runs and 12th in homers but they are outside the top 20 in OBP.

They can have a mediocre offense and if they lose, my guess is that’s why..they struggle to score runs.

Still, they can score and the offense isnt that bad.

But don’t overlook Minnesota. One of the best pricing teams in the league. Also 7th in runs scored, 8th in homers, 9th in OBP and 6th in slugging.  They are 6th in OAA although only 21st in DRS.

I think they are quietly the most dangerous team in the league.

And KC can field and they are top 10 in ERA and in runs scored.

All are dangerous teams…I trust any of them as much or more than us, Houston, Seattle or NY.

[oriolediehard]

It doesn't matter when we score early or later in the game, as long as it is enough to win. There would be less pressure if we can score in the early innings and hold the lead.

[Moose Milligan]

19 minutes ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I get 2014 Kansas City Royals vibes from Cleveland. Nothing worse than going into the sixth inning trailing a team with a shutdown bullpen during the playoffs. I have to think teams know it in the back of their minds that they need to get the lead early and hold it. That can lead to an offense that gets too aggressive and starts pressing at the plate swinging at pitches outside of the zone.

I don't fear any team in the AL, but my preference is Cleveland gets eliminated before facing Baltimore. I was rooting for the Angels in 2014 to beat the Royals while knowing they would probably lose. A team with a great bullpen, speed and good defense is built for postseason baseball.

Agreed.  Which makes this past offseason so frustrating...Kimbrel wasn't enough.  I like the Seranthony pickup but it feels like it's too little and almost too late.

21 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

They are 11th in runs and 12th in homers but they are outside the top 20 in OBP.

They can have a mediocre offense and if they lose, my guess is that’s why..they struggle to score runs.

Still, they can score and the offense isnt that bad.

But don’t overlook Minnesota. One of the best pricing teams in the league. Also 7th in runs scored, 8th in homers, 9th in OBP and 6th in slugging.  They are 6th in OAA although only 21st in DRS.

I think they are quietly the most dangerous team in the league.

And KC can field and they are top 10 in ERA and in runs scored.

All are dangerous teams…I trust any of them as much or more than us, Houston, Seattle or NY.

You are right about Minnesota and KC.  I think a lot of people sleep on the AL Central, overall.

[SteveA]

1 hour ago, HowAboutThat said:

 

It is clear the Os are declining. They aren’t as good as they were. And there’s no indication that they will suddenly improve.
That is just undeniable. They may improve but there’s no indication that they will.

Well first of all, the 50+ game stretch everyone is so obsessed with actually started out 8-13, including two five game losing streaks.

Since then we are 16-14, and have not lost more than two in a row in that stretch.

So if recency is more important, and you are concerned about the "trend", then I would say the TREND is that we had a really bad stretch in early July, and have rebounded to be slightly over .500 for over a month now.   Still not where we should be, but given the injury situation, a month of slightly over .500 ball isn't the end of the world.

[Sports Guy]

11 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Agreed.  Which makes this past offseason so frustrating...Kimbrel wasn't enough.  I like the Seranthony pickup but it feels like it's too little and almost too late.

You are right about Minnesota and KC.  I think a lot of people sleep on the AL Central, overall.

They have been garbage in the past and the Yankees own Minnesota, so they get looked over but they have real teams right now And Minnesota’s park isn’t easy to hit in, so teams like the Os, that rely on the homer, could struggle to win there.

[e16bball]

I wouldn’t agree about KC.

They remind me a little of us last season — yeah, they’re scoring runs, but they’re not actually that good offensively. They’re below-average by wRC+, which I think is a better measure of their offensive talent than runs scored. They’re so dependent on Witt, who is incredible of course, but it’s much easier in the postseason format to pitch around one guy or throw everything at him to neutralize him. Plus, such a young kid, who’s been driving them all year…that’s a lot to maintain throughout multiple playoff series as well.

Cleveland isn’t that good offensively either, of course, but with Kwan/Ramirez/Naylor, they’ve got 3 legit high-end hitters. And you can squint a see a little more with Fry, Noel, Gimenez, etc. than you can probably imagine KC getting from their lesser guys.

KC also has a genuinely bad bullpen, even with Erceg added to the mix. The starters are good enough, but it’s tough to make it work with a weak offense and a weak bullpen. By comparison again to CLE, I can envision Bibee and Williams stringing together enough good innings to let that bullpen eat up the ends of games — but I’m not sure I see KC being able to score enough (consistently) to keep the pressure off that bullpen.

I do think MIN has as good a shot as anybody. And I think the same is probably true of CLE, given that the rest of the league is just not that great. 

[HowAboutThat]

2 hours ago, glenn__davis said:

Frankly I think there are so many incorrect things in this post that it's hard to know where to start, but I can see we're not going to get anywhere with this.

They need to start playing better.  We can agree on that.

Not incorrect. The record is correct, the pace to win I quoted is correct, the decline comment is correct, recent performance is more important.

You’re welcome to disagree, and that’s fine.

[Three Run Homer]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

I laughed when I saw that the other day and I don't believe it at all.

There's no way anyone can convince me that losing Bradish and Means by themselves add up to less than 4.7 WAR.  Now, if they're saying that the players that have replaced Bradish and Means (and others) have offset the loss of WAR and you're left with a delta of 4.7, I can maybe...MAYBE buy that.

 

Does the Fangraphs number count the loss of Bautista, even though the injury happened last year?   Felix Bautista had 3 WAR last year and Kimbrel currently has -0.1 WAR.  So that's 3.1 WAR right there.   Bradish had 4.9 WAR last year and 1.1 WAR this year.  Bradish's injury forced us to give a bunch of starts to Povich, who even after last night's excellent start has -0.6 WAR for the season (all numbers from BB-Ref).  So that's another 4.4 WAR (4.9 - 1.1 + 0.6).   

So I don't know how Fangraphs gets only 4.7 WAR total unless they aren't counting Bautista or their measure of WAR is very different from BB-Ref.