Sanity check...

[Frobby]

I don't believe I ignored any point you've made. I think I have repeatedly addressed each one in various posts. Just because I didn't do it in a direct response to you, that doesn't mean anything. It's not like you respond to each point I make in my posts either.

I apologize, I hadn't realized you addressed this elsewhere. I have to confess that I often only skim some of your longer posts, because they are so.....long. Either you are too long-winded, or my attention span is too short, or both.

There is one thing I wanted to point out -- our starting pitching has been 100% healthy for a full 1/3 season. That is very, very fortunate. The overall team ERA is almost exactly where I projected it to be. So, overall I still lay 75%+ of our disappointing record on the offense, and a lot of that disappoinment has nothing to do with injuries.

[eddie83]

Like I said in my other post (quoted by you but ignored), you had to expect some injuries. The baseline isn't zero.

Reimold isn't hurt, he just stunk. Is it partially due to his achilles? Personally, I don't think so, but if it is -- that was foreseeable.

Pie's injury should have been easy to absorb. We spent half the winter worrying about how we were going to keep all of our OF's happy with their playing time because we had such a big surplus. If the other OFs were hitting at all, nobody would be losing sleep because Pie was injured.

Koji is another guy whose injury was somewhat foreseeable. Sure, we hoped he'd be back and able to remain healthy in a relief role. But we knew how last season ended, and we had no solid information that he was healthy going into spring training.

The bullpen injuries have hurt, no doubt, but the bullpen has not really cost us that many games. The offense is what has really killed us, from Day One, and despite the injuries it shouldn't be nearly as bad as it is. The average team scores 4.5 runs/game -- 5 runs is a game you should win. This team has scored 5+ runs in only 19 games all year. That is why they are losing. By contrast, the Os have allowed 4 runs or less in 27 of 52 games -- those are game you should win. The O's are only 12-15 in those games, including a shocking 3-12 when allowing 4 runs. Just by way of comparison, last year the O's were 48-24 when allowing 4 runs or less, including 13-10 when allowing exactly 4.

I think the bullpen costs the Orioles more than the games they lost individually. This had been a team for years that reacts poorly after a difficult defeat. Since the Simon blown save we are 3-13, and right before that we had a 10-8 stretch with no blown saves.

Overall I would agree offense by a mile is the biggest problem but if there was ever a team that needs to win the games that it should it's this bunch.

[RShack]

Rshack...What do you think our record would be if Wieters, Jones, Matusz, BB, Tillman(in the rotation), DH(in the pen), Atkins, Tejada and Izzy performed up to their expected(or close to expected) levels?

To answer that, you gotta say what the expectations were. I can't speak for anybody else, but I can tell you what mine were...

Rotation: I was expecting to be happy with the 3 best guys, and overall I am happy enough with the rotation. While I expected Matusz to have smoother sailing than he has had, I also expected others to ride a roller coaster. By season's end, I expected to be happy with both Matusz and BB, but I didn't expect it to be easy for both of them. When I look at how the rotation has done overall, I don't see any big diff from what I would have expected. So, while there are lots of specific details of the ups and downs of Matusz and BB, I don't see any kind of overall team-performance diff from the rotation, really.

BP: Well, you're saying DH in the BP and Tillman in the rotation. But that's not how it's been. I expected the BP to have 3 guys who DT could count on, and they've all been out. Simon showed up, he wasn't even supposed to be on the team, and did better than I could have expected of him, but then he went down. Ohman has been pitching over his head and, while it would be great if that lasted, I don't really expect it will. I do think DH can be a stout BP guy. I think Berken can be too, and I wouldn't reserve him for the long-guy role either, simply because there's not enough payoff in doing that. Overall, I think DT has been dealing with having 1 decent BP guy (over-performers who weren't supposed to be anybody) when you need to have 3, and we were lucky to have guys over-perform to give him even that 1 decent guy. I think the BP situation has been a major disaster mainly due to who's been out there in the BP. I think DT's made a couple bad decisions, but I think that's a tiny part of it.

Hitters: I never expected beans from Izzy or Atkins. I was hoping AM saw something nobody else did in Atkins, but now we know better. And if we're even discussing the hitting contributions of Izzy, well, that tells you something right there. As for Miggi, well, if you recall, when I said I thought it could be an 11- or 12-Player team, that was because I expected "Luke and/or" Miggi" to be OK. Overall, Luke has been (more or less) but, while Miggi started off OK, he's not been hitting lately. So, that alone kills the 12-Player idea and makes it an 11-Player ceiling. Which leaves us with the issue of Wieters and AJ. I think we all agree that they've been doing worse than we hoped, and I think the pressure is contributing to that for both of them, maybe in different ways, but still. I think DT is right to have moved them down in the order. Willie Mays said that one of the best things that ever happened to him was when Durocher dropped him to 7th and told him he was playing everyday no matter what. Same basic thing. How much difference would it make if they were hitting better? Hard to say, but the unexpected performance of Wiggy counterbalances some of that. Let's say Wiggy's over-hitting compensates for Wieters under-hitting. That means the net O-loss from the 2 of them comes down to AJ. How much is that? Beats me, maybe a game or two. I think the loss of BRob, Nolan, and Pie is not only the much bigger O-loss but also has created a negative pressure situation for who's left.

So, to summarize, I don't think the rotation has hurt. I don't think Izzy and Atkins hurt much, because I wasn't counting on them for much. Their performance is a worse version of bad than I expected, but I don't think it matters much. I think Wiggy's "up" has compensated for Wieters' "down", I think the BP has hurt a lot, and the loss of BRob, Nolan, and Pie, and the resulting pressure felt by AJ and Wieters counts for a whole lot. And I don't see how we can talk about Tillman in the rotation and DH in the pen when that's a new thing. If AJ and Wieters were hitting better, then I might think of it as a .~.430 team instead of a ~.400 team, but there's no way I would think of it as a ~.500 team. But I wasn't counting on Wiggy to carry the load either. If AJ, Wieters, and Wiggy all performed as expected, then the net loss from the 3 of them is what we hoped to get from AJ. The loss of Pie, Nolan, BRob, and the 3 BP guys counts for most of it.

At this point, what matters is what happens from here on. If DH, Berken, and somebody else are good in the BP, and if the rotation keeps on being OK (or even better... if Millwood and Guthrie can keep it up, and if Matusz and Bergy do reasonably well and Tillman doesn't get shellacked), that certainly helps. If that stuff happens, and if we get 2 of BRob, Pie, and Nolan back, and the 2 we get back are more-or-less OK, and if either Wieters and AJ start hitting, then I think it can be an 11-Player Team again. If Miggi gets better, or if Wiggy keeps it up, then it might be a 12-Player Team. So, it's not like I'm saying we're doomed going forward. But I am saying we've been pretty much doomed so far. There's no way the team can be expected to fix the hole it's in and get up to ~.500 overall (unless it goes on some historic charge). But if those things I enumerated do happen, then we can certainly hope to see the ~.500 team we were hoping for as it goes forward.

[RShack]

I apologize, I hadn't realized you addressed this elsewhere. I have to confess that I often only skim some of your longer posts, because they are so.....long. Either you are too long-winded, or my attention span is too short, or both.

I'm long-winded. It's a character flaw. At the same time, it's also true that sometimes you can't discuss complex things in soundbites if you wanna get it right. If we just do soundbites, we're gonna get complex things wrong.

There is one thing I wanted to point out -- our starting pitching has been 100% healthy for a full 1/3 season. That is very, very fortunate. The overall team ERA is almost exactly where I projected it to be. So, overall I still lay 75%+ of our disappointing record on the offense, and a lot of that disappoinment has nothing to do with injuries.

I agree the SP has delivered as expected. I disagree that the O-disappointment having little to do with injuries. I think the main disappointments of guys who have actually been there are Wieters and AJ, and Wiggy's over-performance compensates for Wieters' under-performance, which leaves a net loss of AJ's under-performance. I wasn't counting on Izzy and Atkins for anything. I was hoping to see "Luke and/or Miggi" do OK, and I got the "or", not the "and"...

[Sports Guy]

Rotation: I was expecting to be happy with the 3 best guys, and overall I am happy enough with the rotation. While I expected Matusz to have smoother sailing than he has had, I also expected others to ride a roller coaster. By season's end, I expected to be happy with both Matusz and BB, but I didn't expect it to be easy for both of them. When I look at how the rotation has done overall, I don't see any big diff from what I would have expected. So, while there are lots of specific details of the ups and downs of Matusz and BB, I don't see any kind of overall team-performance diff from the rotation, really.

I agree...I would have expected more out of BB and Matusz but less from Millwood and Guthrie...End of the day, the ERA is right around where I felt it would be.

BP: Well, you're saying DH in the BP and Tillman in the rotation. But that's not how it's been.

But its how it should have been if Tillman pitched to expectations.

Hitters: I never expected beans from Izzy or Atkins

I would think you should have and did expect them to put up at least another 125 points each in OPS.>That's a big difference. . .

As for Miggi, well, if you recall, when I said I thought it could be an 11- or 12-Player team, that was because I expected "Luke and/or" Miggi" to be OK. Overall, Luke has been (more or less) but, while Miggi started off OK, he's not been hitting lately. So, that alone kills the 12-Player idea and makes it an 11-Player ceiling.

But those players are here and just underperforming..no injury excuse.

think DT is right to have moved them down in the order.

Of course, it took him forever to do with Jones.Willie Mays said that one of the best things that ever happened to him was when Durocher dropped him to 7th and told him he was playing everyday no matter what. Same basic thing.

How much difference would it make if they were hitting better? Hard to say, but the unexpected performance of Wiggy counterbalances some of that. Let's say Wiggy's over-hitting compensates for Wieters under-hitting. That means the net O-loss from the 2 of them comes down to AJ. How much is that? Beats me, maybe a game or two

.Sorry but this is bs...Wiggy takes over the loss of BRob, not those other 2.

I really can't disagree with you more...You want to put the blame on all the outside factors. You don't want to admit that AM screwed up the offseason...That DT has made a ton of poor moves, that Crow is getting nothing from the young hitters and that the team is greatly underperforming.

You just want to apply everything to your theory of 15 players and run with it.

Well, its bs...You are just wrong here.

The fact of the matter is this team is underachieving for several reasons..and your boys DT and AM are part of that reason...So are the players...So are the injuries and so is the schedule.

You are asking for a sanity check in this thread...I think you need to check yourself first.

[RShack]

Sorry but this is bs...Wiggy takes over the loss of BRob, not those other 2.

I said Wieters, I didn't say the other two. He's cooled off some lately, but his OPS was recently something like .950 with 13 dingers, which was like a 40-HR pace. So far, he's hit more than was expected of Wieters, let alone BRob...

[RShack]

You are asking for a sanity check in this thread...I think you need to check yourself first.

SG, that's not helpful. I'm talking substance here, and you're just going back to insults.

What do you think of the part below? You didn't say anything about that. Do you agree or disagree with it?

At this point, what matters is what happens from here on. If DH, Berken, and somebody else are good in the BP, and if the rotation keeps on being OK (or even better... if Millwood and Guthrie can keep it up, and if Matusz and Bergy do reasonably well and Tillman doesn't get shellacked), that certainly helps. If that stuff happens, and if we get 2 of BRob, Pie, and Nolan back, and the 2 we get back are more-or-less OK, and if either Wieters and AJ start hitting, then I think it can be an 11-Player Team again. If Miggi gets better, or if Wiggy keeps it up, then it might be a 12-Player Team. So, it's not like I'm saying we're doomed going forward. But I am saying we've been pretty much doomed so far. There's no way the team can be expected to fix the hole it's in and get up to ~.500 overall (unless it goes on some historic charge). But if those things I enumerated do happen, then we can certainly hope to see the ~.500 team we were hoping for as it goes forward.

[Frobby]

The fact of the matter is this team is underachieving for several reasons..and your boys DT and AM are part of that reason...So are the players...So are the injuries and so is the schedule.

Hard to disagree with this. Look, if we were on pace for another 64-win season, I'd be very disappointed. WE'RE ON PACE FOR A 47-WIN SEASON! We are playing like one of the epic worst teams of my lifetime, just behind the '62 Mets and the '03 Tigers. That cannot be explained solely (or even primarily) by injuries, that's just an epic failure on every level.

Let's start with AM. He is the one who envisioned a lineup with Izturis and Atkins as everyday players. Those two guys are awful offensive players, and that puts pressure on the other 7 guys to be healthy and above average. There simply was no margin for error there, and the injuries to Roberts and Pie are hugely magnified by what AM chose to do there.

As to DT, I've never been as big a critic of his game management as many around here, but he has made his share of bizarre bullpen decisions this year, and as Drungo proved rather clearly, he is way out of the mainstream in terms of going to relievers for 1-2 outs and matching up even when the matchups aren't that good. And, after watching him for three years, I've also decided that there is something intangible that goes on with him when the team hits a really rough patch, and he just seems incapable of stopping a losing bandwagon from rolling down the hill and gaining momentum. He seems tense and it translates over to the team.

Then there's Crowley. Again, I've never been one to blame him for having an offense of players who aren't that talented. But now we have a bunch of guys who are talented, and who don't seem to be developing as they should. Is he the reason? I don't know, but I'm ready to change horses and find out.

[Sports Guy]

I said Wieters, I didn't say the other two. He's cooled off some lately, but his OPS was recently something like .950 with 13 dingers, which was like a 40-HR pace. So far, he's hit more than was expected of Wieters, let alone BRob...

Doesn't matter...He is replacing BRob. He doesn't cancel out Wieters.

[Sports Guy]

SG, that's not helpful. I'm talking substance here, and you're just going back to insults.

What do you think of the part below? You didn't say anything about that. Do you agree or disagree with it?

All we have is what the young guys do for the rest of the season....The season is shot due to several different things.

At this point, its trade a bunch of vets, perhaps go after a good young bat if its there and hope for your youth to start producing.

[Sports Guy]

Hard to disagree with this. Look, if we were on pace for another 64-win season, I'd be very disappointed. WE'RE ON PACE FOR A 47-WIN SEASON! We are playing like one of the epic worst teams of my lifetime, just behind the '62 Mets and the '03 Tigers. That cannot be explained solely (or even primarily) by injuries, that's just an epic failure on every level.

Let's start with AM. He is the one who envisioned a lineup with Izturis and Atkins as everyday players. Those two guys are awful offensive players, and that puts pressure on the other 7 guys to be healthy and above average. There simply was no margin for error there, and the injuries to Roberts and Pie are hugely magnified by what AM chose to do there.

As to DT, I've never been as big a critic of his game management as many around here, but he has made his share of bizarre bullpen decisions this year, and as Drungo proved rather clearly, he is way out of the mainstream in terms of going to relievers for 1-2 outs and matching up even when the matchups aren't that good. And, after watching him for three years, I've also decided that there is something intangible that goes on with him when the team hits a really rough patch, and he just seems incapable of stopping a losing bandwagon from rolling down the hill and gaining momentum. He seems tense and it translates over to the team.

Then there's Crowley. Again, I've never been one to blame him for having an offense of players who aren't that talented. But now we have a bunch of guys who are talented, and who don't seem to be developing as they should. Is he the reason? I don't know, but I'm ready to change horses and find out.

This is a great post.

I agree on AM. He took the chance on Atkins. Now that the decision has failed spectacularly, that gaping hole at 1B is on him.

I agree on DT. I like him, but never loved his BP mgmt at its best and I feel it has gotten significantly more illogical this season as the losses have mounted. I also agree on the intangible thing re: losing streaks. There is something there, but I can't put my finger on it.

Finally, I agree on Crowley. I'm not against him, but this level of failure by virtually every hitter is just unacceptable. I'm fine with starting with a new voice at this point.

To go along with what you are saying here...What bothers me is that after we have had these blown saves this year, the team looks awful after.

Not good..That falls on DT IMO.

[SteveA]

I think the bullpen costs the Orioles more than the games they lost individually. This had been a team for years that reacts poorly after a difficult defeat. Since the Simon blown save we are 3-13, and right before that we had a 10-8 stretch with no blown saves.

Overall I would agree offense by a mile is the biggest problem but if there was ever a team that needs to win the games that it should it's this bunch.

Is it possible that a team that "reacts poorly after a difficult defeat" is lacking in leadership (either from players or from the manager)? Should we just accept that this is a trait that our team possesses rather than try to do something about it?

EDIT: I was reading the thread sequentially so I hadn't gotten to the post where SG made this exact same point. Apologies.

[eddie83]

Is it possible that a team that "reacts poorly after a difficult defeat" is lacking in leadership (either from players or from the manager)? Should we just accept that this is a trait that our team possesses rather than try to do something about it?

EDIT: I was reading the thread sequentially so I hadn't gotten to the post where SG made this exact same point. Apologies.

I think leadership is lacking big time. I think the team played the same way under Sam as well though. I have said this before. Dave inherited this issue he didn't create it. I sure as heck don't think we should accept it to me that is worse than the losing itself.

I think the new manager will have a different personality but Andy has to shake up the makeup of the clubhouse as well. It is about getting better talent but hopefully that talent has an attitude of hating losing and not accepting this quality of play.

[SteveA]

Hard to disagree with this. Look, if we were on pace for another 64-win season, I'd be very disappointed. WE'RE ON PACE FOR A 47-WIN SEASON! We are playing like one of the epic worst teams of my lifetime, just behind the '62 Mets and the '03 Tigers. That cannot be explained solely (or even primarily) by injuries, that's just an epic failure on every level.

Let's start with AM. He is the one who envisioned a lineup with Izturis and Atkins as everyday players. Those two guys are awful offensive players, and that puts pressure on the other 7 guys to be healthy and above average. There simply was no margin for error there, and the injuries to Roberts and Pie are hugely magnified by what AM chose to do there.

As to DT, I've never been as big a critic of his game management as many around here, but he has made his share of bizarre bullpen decisions this year, and as Drungo proved rather clearly, he is way out of the mainstream in terms of going to relievers for 1-2 outs and matching up even when the matchups aren't that good. And, after watching him for three years, I've also decided that there is something intangible that goes on with him when the team hits a really rough patch, and he just seems incapable of stopping a losing bandwagon from rolling down the hill and gaining momentum. He seems tense and it translates over to the team.

Then there's Crowley. Again, I've never been one to blame him for having an offense of players who aren't that talented. But now we have a bunch of guys who are talented, and who don't seem to be developing as they should. Is he the reason? I don't know, but I'm ready to change horses and find out.

Great post, and I agree 100%. I do have to point out, however, that my recent research into teams that have gotten off to this type of start in the past 25 years, kind of reveals the fallacy if bringing up that a team is "on pace" for something, even as we are now about 1/3 through the season.

[http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2157633#post2157633]

I found 13 teams in the past 25 years, prior to this year's Orioles) that were .300 or less after 50 games (i.e. "on pace" to win 49 or fewer games).

Only one of those teams actually wound up in the 40s in wins, the Tiger team you mention. And 6 of the 13 won 62 or more games. The AVERAGE of what the teams finished at was 60-102. And the Oroiles, at 15-35, were actually at the high end of that range. 10 of the 13 teams had FEWER than 15 wins after 50 games.

I'm not trying to weaken your point, and believe me I am as frustrated and angry as you are about this season. But despite the start, and despite what we are "on pace" for, the odds are still fairly low that we would actually finish in the range of those historically bad teams you mention.

I agree with all the points you make, I just wanted to point out that history and logic still shows we aren't going to be quite as epically bad as our current win% would project to.

Of course someone probably made that same point on Tigers Hangout in 2003.

[The Rick]

Great post, and I agree 100%. I do have to point out, however, that my recent research into teams that have gotten off to this type of start in the past 25 years, kind of reveals the fallacy if bringing up that a team is "on pace" for something, even as we are now about 1/3 through the season.

[http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2157633#post2157633]

I found 13 teams in the past 25 years, prior to this year's Orioles) that were .300 or less after 50 games (i.e. "on pace" to win 49 or fewer games).

Only one of those teams actually wound up in the 40s in wins, the Tiger team you mention. And 6 of the 13 won 62 or more games. The AVERAGE of what the teams finished at was 60-102. And the Oroiles, at 15-35, were actually at the high end of that range. 10 of the 13 teams had FEWER than 15 wins after 50 games.

I'm not trying to weaken your point, and believe me I am as frustrated and angry as you are about this season. But despite the start, and despite what we are "on pace" for, the odds are still fairly low that we would actually finish in the range of those historically bad teams you mention.

I agree with all the points you make, I just wanted to point out that history and logic still shows we aren't going to be quite as epically bad as our current win% would project to.

Of course someone probably made that same point on Tigers Hangout in 2003.

This is what I keep waiting for, the page to be turned and for the team to get on some kind of hot streak. But the young players continue to flounder and are playing awfully.

The one good thing about the '03 Tigers--with that year's draft pick (2004 Draft), they picked Justin Verlander.