Yay for the NL WORST!

by Dex on Jun 19, 2008 6:59 AM PDT Comment 15 comments

From the Baseball Prospectus newsletter:

Bottom 5 2008 NL Offenses, by VORP
Team, EqA, VORP

Washington Nationals, .238, 21.3
San Diego Padres, .253, 49.7
Colorado Rockies, .250, 54.0
Los Angeles Dodgers, .250, 55.4
San Francisco Giants, .255, 66.1

JBox's comment in the Open Thread last night was based on a conversation we were having while he was typing it up. I go from team to team and, while I totally understand focusing on different qualities to build a team, wouldn't it be nice if even a third of our lineup was truly competitive against another lineup?

The frustrating thing about our division being represented the way it is among the bottom five offenses, is the fact that if we had even one more guy that was truly an offensive threat (Bradley, Fukudome, Headley just to beat the dead horse), we would apparently be outperforming 3 out of 4 in our division offensively while putting out a more interesting product.

That's right. I'm done drinking the Pitching Performance Kool-Aid. I want offense and I want it consistently. I want performance enhancers. I don't want to win games 2-1 anymore. I want to win them 9-1. Don't tell me a win is a win, because I enjoy blowouts more than nailbiters. In fact, I enjoy blowouts about 27% more than a nailbiter, which means that I'm 27% more likely to spend money to attend a game that I figure has a better than 50% chance of being a blowout than if it doesn't.

Next year, my mind will change. When we start losing games 11-8, I'll yearn for pitching. For now, I want me some offense.

0 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

how long?

how long until….

....we score 5 runs in a game versus an AL team?

....we are in 2nd place?

....we are .500 ?

....we play in the postseason?

by TheRevRun on Jun 19, 2008 7:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

To be fair

our offense hasn’t been the primary culprit this year. The one thing that has truly crippled us has been our inconsistent bullpen. We went from having the best bullpen in baseball to the worst in the NL. When you score 5 runs, you should win the damn game. This team is built around pitching and getting just enough offense, but when that pitching fails we get absolutely bombed, and we just don’t have the offense to make up those differences.

Our offense consistently rallied last night, but everytime they did, the bullpen turned right around and gave them back. Sure, one more stick would be nice (where are you gonna play it, though? Nobody’s gonna give up a slugging catcher, which is truly our weakest position right now), but what we really need is some more consistent pitching.

That’s why I’m starting my official Kouz for Arms campaign. Let’s trade Kouz closer to the deadline for a reliable reliever and maybe a swingman starter.

by Phantom on Jun 19, 2008 7:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Small sample size

If this team were able to rally consistently, night after night, we wouldn’t be second to last in offensive VORP.

by Dex on Jun 19, 2008 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's completely anecdotal

but if our bullpen didn’t suck so bad, we’d probably have won 5 to 7 more games this year. Of our 42 losses, 15 have been hung on the bullpen. Sure, wins and losses aren’t the best measure of a team’s ability. But that’s a hell of a lot of games for your relievers to blow.

by Phantom on Jun 19, 2008 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's what I'm saying

I don’t want to pay money to see the best bullpen in baseball. I want to pay money to see offense consistently.

I don’t want to be surprised when our outfielders are able to hit home runs. I don’t want to be surprised to see a catcher on base. I want offense.

I want a talented team, but I want a larger share of that talent to be suiting up and playing in the form of offense.

by Dex on Jun 19, 2008 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd rather watch a successful

team then a team that hits bombs on a regular basis. Obviously the two are not mutually exclusive, but in the past four years, our pitching has led us to be successful. I personally don’t find Padres baseball to be boring. I think it’s more exciting, since every pitch matters. Every play in the field is important because you know that the team won’t be able to hit five HRs to get back into it.

It’s just a matter of preference, I suppose. This team has been successful when they pitch well. If their bully was any better this year, they’d be successful this year too.

by Phantom on Jun 19, 2008 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's the terrible offense late

I don’t think the terrible record of the team is due to the bullpen, but rather the offense. The bullpen record is 12-17 (41%) and the starters record is 19-25 (43%). There is an ERA difference of 3.99 for starters and 4.43 for relief (take out Joe Thatcher, which should have been done all along, and it drops to 4.17). The only winning team in the division has a bullpen record of 7-11 (39%). The difference is that they actually win games before the end of the game.
The Padres don’t win early and cannot produce late. The offense has an OPS of .715 in innings 1-3, .708 innings 4-6, but only .662 in the last three innings. It is hard for the bullpen to pick up wins with a anemic late offense like that.

by Baron Von Metzger on Jun 19, 2008 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes but

the Padres have NEVER (outside of maybe ‘98) been a team that is going to blow opponents away on the scoreboard. This is a team that is built upon the idea of scoring enough runs. I’m not sure you’d ever be able to build a team at Petco that was going to blow a team away with offense.

You point out that the only winning team has a bully winning percentage of 39%. What I would point out is that they’re bullpen has had fewer losses hung on them then we have. Offense is not completely the problem. How many games has Maddux left with a win intact only to get a no-decision?

by Phantom on Jun 19, 2008 9:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs