1 run games

1 run games

Postby Disco Stu » Tue May 29, 2007 7:40 pm

Worst:

Cubs: 2-12
Yankees: 2-9
Phils: 3-9
Baltimore: 6-11

Best:

Arizona: 14-6
Dodgers: 11-4
Boston: 8-3
Mets: 7-3
Check The Good Phight, you might learn something.
User avatar
Disco Stu
Dropped Anchor
Dropped Anchor
 
Posts: 9600
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: Land of the banned

Postby BigEd76 » Tue May 29, 2007 7:41 pm

Pitching is good
User avatar
BigEd76
You've Got to Be Kidding Me!
You've Got to Be Kidding Me!
 
Posts: 93878
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:13 pm
Location: 40.155/-74.829

Postby td11 » Tue May 29, 2007 7:43 pm

BigEd76 wrote:Pitching is good


as is luck
User avatar
td11
Plays the Game the Right Way
Plays the Game the Right Way
 
Posts: 35204
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:04 am
Location: berry my dick

Postby SideshowBob » Tue May 29, 2007 7:46 pm

Good sign for the Phillies.
User avatar
SideshowBob
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 3000
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:00 pm

Postby dajafi » Tue May 29, 2007 7:47 pm

Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.
User avatar
dajafi
Moderator / BSG MVP
Moderator / BSG MVP
 
Posts: 24567
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:03 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Postby EndlessSummer » Tue May 29, 2007 8:07 pm

dajafi wrote:Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.


Haven't dug up his Cleveland teams, but the 2005 team was 21-23 and the 2006 team was 22-23 last year, figures I thought would be worse. This year has been brutal.
User avatar
EndlessSummer
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 6013
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:16 pm

Postby Laexile » Tue May 29, 2007 8:23 pm

EndlessSummer wrote:
dajafi wrote:Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.


Haven't dug up his Cleveland teams, but the 2005 team was 21-23 and the 2006 team was 22-23 last year, figures I thought would be worse. This year has been brutal.

Keep in mind that a one run game can be a game like last night. It wasn't really close until the Dobbs homer and only became a one run game at the end. Often, one run games are decided in the early innings.
Laexile
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: LA

Postby phdave » Tue May 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Laexile wrote:
EndlessSummer wrote:
dajafi wrote:Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.


Haven't dug up his Cleveland teams, but the 2005 team was 21-23 and the 2006 team was 22-23 last year, figures I thought would be worse. This year has been brutal.

Keep in mind that a one run game can be a game like last night. It wasn't really close until the Dobbs homer and only became a one run game at the end. Often, one run games are decided in the early innings.


What? How can a one run game be decided in the early innings? By definition, in a one run game, the final batter was the tying run.

And last night, it was only a 2 run game going into the 9th.
User avatar
phdave
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 11433
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: Ylvania

Postby Laexile » Tue May 29, 2007 9:03 pm

phdave wrote:
Laexile wrote:
EndlessSummer wrote:
dajafi wrote:Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.


Haven't dug up his Cleveland teams, but the 2005 team was 21-23 and the 2006 team was 22-23 last year, figures I thought would be worse. This year has been brutal.

Keep in mind that a one run game can be a game like last night. It wasn't really close until the Dobbs homer and only became a one run game at the end. Often, one run games are decided in the early innings.


What? How can a one run game be decided in the early innings? By definition, in a one run game, the final batter was the tying run.

And last night, it was only a 2 run game going into the 9th.

He was mentioning Charlie's late game tactics and use of a bullpen, implying that moves made throughout late innings were one run tactics. The game wasn't a tight game until the game was almost over. When thinking of managers impacting one run games people usually think of the game being tied or the two teams one run apart for the last several innings.

Sometimes a bullpen pitches well in a one run game and sometimes poorly. Sometimes a manager's late game tactics work well, sometimes poorly. Last night Manuel made a few late game decisions. Putting Madson in wasn't a poor tactic since he is one of Charlie's better relievers. He made several moves in the bottom of the 9th. Pinch hitting Dobbs for Werth was unexpected and ended up brilliant. Pinch hitting Burrell worked well. Having only Barajas left didn't work, although he did give the ball a ride. He could have saved Bourn for that, but he's not known as a big hitter.

Overall, I think Charlie's late game tactics worked and the three runs they gave up early ended up sinking the team.
Laexile
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: LA

Postby dajafi » Tue May 29, 2007 9:10 pm

Yes, you're right of course. I see now that one half-inning of moves that worked out well clearly outweighs the balance of evidence over two and a third seasons.
User avatar
dajafi
Moderator / BSG MVP
Moderator / BSG MVP
 
Posts: 24567
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:03 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Postby philliesphhan » Tue May 29, 2007 9:15 pm

phdave wrote:
Laexile wrote:
EndlessSummer wrote:
dajafi wrote:Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.


Haven't dug up his Cleveland teams, but the 2005 team was 21-23 and the 2006 team was 22-23 last year, figures I thought would be worse. This year has been brutal.

Keep in mind that a one run game can be a game like last night. It wasn't really close until the Dobbs homer and only became a one run game at the end. Often, one run games are decided in the early innings.


What? How can a one run game be decided in the early innings? By definition, in a one run game, the final batter was the tying run.

And last night, it was only a 2 run game going into the 9th.


that cant be true because Dobbs HR was a 3 run shot
dont remember if they scored before that but I think they were down by 4
philliesphhan
Plays the Game the Right Way
Plays the Game the Right Way
 
Posts: 33660
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:37 pm
Location: the corner of 1st and 1st

Postby phdave » Tue May 29, 2007 9:21 pm

I'm having a hard time understanding how giving up 3 runs early sunk them when they ended up scoring 4 runs.

One run games mean that small things along the way could have changed the outcome. Managerial decisions often do not impact the outcome of the game. When a team loses by one run, the decisions of a manager are likely to have a greater impact on the outcome of the game. If a manager forgets to double switch and his team is losing or winning by 15 runs, it doesn't matter very much, even if it cost his team a few runs. If a manager's team loses by one run and he made some mistake that contributed to the team not scoring an additional run, it has a greater effect on the outcome of the game.
User avatar
phdave
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 11433
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: Ylvania

Postby phdave » Tue May 29, 2007 9:23 pm

philliesphhan wrote:
phdave wrote:
Laexile wrote:
EndlessSummer wrote:
dajafi wrote:Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.


Haven't dug up his Cleveland teams, but the 2005 team was 21-23 and the 2006 team was 22-23 last year, figures I thought would be worse. This year has been brutal.

Keep in mind that a one run game can be a game like last night. It wasn't really close until the Dobbs homer and only became a one run game at the end. Often, one run games are decided in the early innings.


What? How can a one run game be decided in the early innings? By definition, in a one run game, the final batter was the tying run.

And last night, it was only a 2 run game going into the 9th.


that cant be true because Dobbs HR was a 3 run shot
dont remember if they scored before that but I think they were down by 4


The score was 3-1 going into the 9th inning.
User avatar
phdave
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 11433
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: Ylvania

Postby Laexile » Tue May 29, 2007 9:46 pm

dajafi wrote:Yes, you're right of course. I see now that one half-inning of moves that worked out well clearly outweighs the balance of evidence over two and a third seasons.

I didn't say Charlie was good at late game decisions, only he was last night.

One run games mean that small things along the way could have changed the outcome.

You're definitely right on that. And there may have been a move last night that Charlie made the wrong call and that cost them the game. It might have been in the third. My point is that a one-run game isn't always reflective of late game moves or bullpen use.

A few years ago Bill James posited that a team's record in games decided by 4 or 5 or more is indicative of the team's quality. The team's record in one-run games is largely luck and that a good record in one-run games might not mean the team is good. Charlie isn't very good with late game decisions, but that wasn't been reflected int he team's one-run recor in 2005 and 2006.
Laexile
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: LA

Postby philliesphhan » Tue May 29, 2007 9:55 pm

phdave wrote:
philliesphhan wrote:
phdave wrote:
Laexile wrote:
EndlessSummer wrote:
dajafi wrote:Is there any way of seeing what Manuel's teams have done in 1-run games throughout his managerial career? I would guess that his winning percentage in 1-runs is considerably lower than his overall. The guy is simply not a good late-game tactician, and he can't run a bullpen.


Haven't dug up his Cleveland teams, but the 2005 team was 21-23 and the 2006 team was 22-23 last year, figures I thought would be worse. This year has been brutal.

Keep in mind that a one run game can be a game like last night. It wasn't really close until the Dobbs homer and only became a one run game at the end. Often, one run games are decided in the early innings.


What? How can a one run game be decided in the early innings? By definition, in a one run game, the final batter was the tying run.

And last night, it was only a 2 run game going into the 9th.


that cant be true because Dobbs HR was a 3 run shot
dont remember if they scored before that but I think they were down by 4


The score was 3-1 going into the 9th inning.


oh i thought they scored earlier
philliesphhan
Plays the Game the Right Way
Plays the Game the Right Way
 
Posts: 33660
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:37 pm
Location: the corner of 1st and 1st

Postby swishnicholson » Wed May 30, 2007 12:13 am

dajafi wrote:Yes, you're right of course. I see now that one half-inning of moves that worked out well clearly outweighs the balance of evidence over two and a third seasons.


But I thought the stats cited above were that the Phillies were just about even in one run games over the last two years, which is about what I'd expect just from random fortune. What am I missing in terms of Manuel's decisions (or other factors) affecting one run games beyond luck based on this "balance of evidence"?
Flanders feeds me people food.
User avatar
swishnicholson
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 28393
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:56 pm
Location: First I was like....And then I was like...

Postby TenuredVulture » Wed May 30, 2007 12:35 am

I wonder what Steve Smith's record is in one run games.
If someone asks you to keep a secret, that secret is a lie.
User avatar
TenuredVulture
Plays the Game the Right Way
Plays the Game the Right Way
 
Posts: 48602
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:16 am
Location: Magnolia, AR

Postby Laexile » Wed May 30, 2007 1:17 am

Baseball Analysts - 2005 Season
In the Team Efficiency Summary, James notes that the Indians "should have won their division by a whopping 13 games." The White Sox just so happened to be the "most efficient team" in baseball, while the Indians were the "least efficient" in the league. Cleveland was 22-36 in one-run games and 34-14 in games that ended with a margin of victory or defeat of five runs or more. The Tribe, in fact, was one of five teams with winning records in five-plus run differentials and losing records in one-run games. The other four? The Toronto Blue Jays in the AL, and the Philadelphia Phillies, Mets, and Cardinals in the NL. Does it make a little bit more sense why TOR, PHI, and the NYM are being so aggressive this winter?

Were the Indians, Blue Jays, Phillies, Cardinals, and Mets unlucky? Or were they poorly managed? Tough to say without looking at it game by game, but the Cardinals and Mets both went to the playoffs a year later. The Mets were 21-24 in one-run games and 62-55 in games decided by two or more runs. The Phillies were 21-23 and 67-51.

The Mets had an excellent record in 2006, turning it around. The Mets were 31-16 in one-run games and 66-49 in games decided by two or more runs. The Phillies were 22-23 and 63-54. The one-run games were most of the difference. Atlanta went from 23-20 in first place to 19-33 and third place.
2006 Season Clearly the Phillies scoring 24 more runs close and late didn't result in that many wins. The Phillies may have had a lot more of those games or the bullpen might have blown them.

But I thought the stats cited above were that the Phillies were just about even in one run games over the last two years, which is about what I'd expect just from random fortune. What am I missing in terms of Manuel's decisions (or other factors) affecting one run games beyond luck based on this "balance of evidence"?

There is a lot of randomness on one-run games, but that doesn't mean Manuel's decisions didn't factor in. The Phillies won 8-7 last Wednesday. That doesn't mean that Manuel's decisions didn't cost the Phillies a run or two. Or that they did.

One-run game records aren't always indicative of overall records. The Yankees, Orioles, Tigers, White Sox, Angels, Giants, Nationals, and Astros all had similar one-run game records and their overall records were all over the place. So were their bullpens. Detroit was 4th and Baltimore was 29th. The others were sprinkled in between. The Red Sox had a very good record in one-run, but not a good bullpen.

I think you have to look at the decisions on a game by game basis and see how well they worked to judge Manuel. It's not in the stats.
Laexile
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: LA

Postby philliesphhan » Wed May 30, 2007 2:11 am

Laexile wrote:Tough to say without looking at it game by game, but the Cardinals and Mets both went to the playoffs a year later.


The Cardinals were 17 games worse in 2006.
philliesphhan
Plays the Game the Right Way
Plays the Game the Right Way
 
Posts: 33660
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:37 pm
Location: the corner of 1st and 1st

Postby Disco Stu » Wed May 30, 2007 7:52 am

swishnicholson wrote:
dajafi wrote:Yes, you're right of course. I see now that one half-inning of moves that worked out well clearly outweighs the balance of evidence over two and a third seasons.


But I thought the stats cited above were that the Phillies were just about even in one run games over the last two years, which is about what I'd expect just from random fortune. What am I missing in terms of Manuel's decisions (or other factors) affecting one run games beyond luck based on this "balance of evidence"?


While true, the Phillies are a highly suspect case in point team since their overall record was around .500. You'd have to look at more extreme teams and see where they fell.
Check The Good Phight, you might learn something.
User avatar
Disco Stu
Dropped Anchor
Dropped Anchor
 
Posts: 9600
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: Land of the banned

Next

Return to Back She Goes!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests