Rickey Henderson, who was recently named MVP of the Atlantic League's All-Star Game, is back in MLB after signing with the Dodgers.
Rickey's back!
Rickey's back!
I'm glad to hear it.
I'm 32 years old, and I don't have a memory of what MLB was like WITHOUT Rickey. I think I was sufferring from withdrawl symptoms while he was gone.
I'm 32 years old, and I don't have a memory of what MLB was like WITHOUT Rickey. I think I was sufferring from withdrawl symptoms while he was gone.
Well, with Burnitz and Henderson it doesn't look like the Dodgers are in the Stewart market anymore (if they ever were).
In a move of much, much greater significance, former Texas GM Doug Melvin has signed former Texas 11-game-winner Doug Davis to a contract with the high-powered Milwaukee Brewers.
If I'm not mistaken, Davis has a chance -- with unheartfelt apologies to Matt Kinney -- to step in as the Brewers' #2 starter behind Ben Sheets.
How do y'all feel about that Blue Jay pitching staff now.
If I'm not mistaken, Davis has a chance -- with unheartfelt apologies to Matt Kinney -- to step in as the Brewers' #2 starter behind Ben Sheets.
How do y'all feel about that Blue Jay pitching staff now.
In a move of much, much greater significance, former Texas GM Doug Melvin has signed former Texas 11-game-winner Doug Davis to a contract with the high-powered Milwaukee Brewers.
It's the next stage of the Death Spiral(tm). First it's Milwaukee, then Tampa Bay, then Detroit, then unemployment. Estimated ETA: spring training 2005.
Glad to hear that Rickey's back. I'm always glad to see someone older than me in the major leagues (there aren't many left).
It's the next stage of the Death Spiral(tm). First it's Milwaukee, then Tampa Bay, then Detroit, then unemployment. Estimated ETA: spring training 2005.
Glad to hear that Rickey's back. I'm always glad to see someone older than me in the major leagues (there aren't many left).
Dave,
Not to be too picky, but I don't think Doug Davis is going to Detroit on that death spiral. Detroit has five starters who have been adequate so far (Cornejo, Knotts, Bonderman, Maroth, and Roney), and Ledezma has pitched well in his first two starts. Detroit's team ERA is 4.56, whereas Toronto's is 4.98.
Of course, park factors need to be accounted for in this kind of comparison. I'm ashamed to admit that I don't actually know how to use them.
Apropos nothing, here's an interesting Tippett snippet from Rob Neyer's latest column on ESPN.com:
At the SABR convention, Tom Tippett -- the genius behind Diamond Mind Baseball and an occasional ESPN.com contributor -- presented the best study yet of the notion that the pitcher has close to zero impact on whether a batted ball in play (i.e. not including home runs) becomes a hit, or an out.
I'd love to report Tom's findings here, but instead I'm going to leave that to him, and with luck, ESPN.com will be running that piece sometime soon. But trust me when I say that Tippett's conclusions are going to shake up some people.
John
Not to be too picky, but I don't think Doug Davis is going to Detroit on that death spiral. Detroit has five starters who have been adequate so far (Cornejo, Knotts, Bonderman, Maroth, and Roney), and Ledezma has pitched well in his first two starts. Detroit's team ERA is 4.56, whereas Toronto's is 4.98.
Of course, park factors need to be accounted for in this kind of comparison. I'm ashamed to admit that I don't actually know how to use them.
Apropos nothing, here's an interesting Tippett snippet from Rob Neyer's latest column on ESPN.com:
At the SABR convention, Tom Tippett -- the genius behind Diamond Mind Baseball and an occasional ESPN.com contributor -- presented the best study yet of the notion that the pitcher has close to zero impact on whether a batted ball in play (i.e. not including home runs) becomes a hit, or an out.
I'd love to report Tom's findings here, but instead I'm going to leave that to him, and with luck, ESPN.com will be running that piece sometime soon. But trust me when I say that Tippett's conclusions are going to shake up some people.
John
Picking up Rickey isn't a bad move for the Dodgers, I just wonder why it took them so long.
Not to be too picky, but I don't think Doug Davis is going to Detroit on that death spiral. Detroit's team ERA is 4.56, whereas Toronto's is 4.98.
Good point - mind you, maybe they'll sign him to DH. :-)
Good point - mind you, maybe they'll sign him to DH. :-)
I don't see the case for keeping Sturtze over Davis. Davis has been a better pitcher (not quite league average but still better than the usual replacement level), and seems likely to have a few useful years left at a low price. I don't understand the criticism Davis has taken in this forum.
I was at the Tippett talk at SABR. Basically he found what Bill James found a few days after the initial publication of McCracken's results; that pitchers do have some control over hits allowed on balls in play (this is why my glossary entry for DIPS has always referred to it as a "not quite true" theory). The correlation for hits on balls in play from year-to-year obviously is a lot less than for strikeouts. But since balls in play are a large percentage of events (70-80%), small advantages in this skill can be as important as larger advantages in the ability to strike out batters. For forecasting this skill, it may be better to look at larger samples (e.g. career data) than just the previous season. Tippett did not look at isolating extra-base hits (doubles and triples), calling that the next thing to look at.
I was at the Tippett talk at SABR. Basically he found what Bill James found a few days after the initial publication of McCracken's results; that pitchers do have some control over hits allowed on balls in play (this is why my glossary entry for DIPS has always referred to it as a "not quite true" theory). The correlation for hits on balls in play from year-to-year obviously is a lot less than for strikeouts. But since balls in play are a large percentage of events (70-80%), small advantages in this skill can be as important as larger advantages in the ability to strike out batters. For forecasting this skill, it may be better to look at larger samples (e.g. career data) than just the previous season. Tippett did not look at isolating extra-base hits (doubles and triples), calling that the next thing to look at.
Stephen,
As one of the Davis-bashers, I'd like to respond to your post.
I don't think Sturtze is a better pitcher than Davis. I've been harping about Davis rather than Sturtze simply because Davis has been starting every fifth game while Sturtze has been pitching mostly low-leverage relief innings. If the Jays had decided to move Davis to the pen and bump Sturtze, I wouldn't have had a problem with that.
But I disagree with you on just how effective Davis has been.
Sturtze is walking fewer men per inning than Davis and striking out more, leading to fewer hits allowed. Davis has the edge in home runs. On the whole, I'd say it's a wash so far this year. The difference in ERA, in my opinion, is attributable entirely to luck. I've never seen a pitcher strand so many runners as Doug Davis, and I don't think he does it because of any special ability in the clutch.
I agree that Davis has had a better career than Sturtze, particularly after adjusting for park factors. Now that you make me think about it, I'll concede your point: I would probably have kept Davis, but it's not a decision that I'd be hung up on, as I don't expect either one to be anything more than the 11th man out of the pen.
I'd be interested to hear your rebuttal to any of the above.
Cheers,
John
As one of the Davis-bashers, I'd like to respond to your post.
I don't think Sturtze is a better pitcher than Davis. I've been harping about Davis rather than Sturtze simply because Davis has been starting every fifth game while Sturtze has been pitching mostly low-leverage relief innings. If the Jays had decided to move Davis to the pen and bump Sturtze, I wouldn't have had a problem with that.
But I disagree with you on just how effective Davis has been.
Pitcher IP H BB K HR $H $BB $K $HR ERA
Doug Davis, 2002 57 74 30 27 8 .352 .109 .098 .029 5.00
Tanyon Sturtze, 2003 66 80 27 37 12 .349 .088 .121 .039 5.86
Sturtze is walking fewer men per inning than Davis and striking out more, leading to fewer hits allowed. Davis has the edge in home runs. On the whole, I'd say it's a wash so far this year. The difference in ERA, in my opinion, is attributable entirely to luck. I've never seen a pitcher strand so many runners as Doug Davis, and I don't think he does it because of any special ability in the clutch.
I agree that Davis has had a better career than Sturtze, particularly after adjusting for park factors. Now that you make me think about it, I'll concede your point: I would probably have kept Davis, but it's not a decision that I'd be hung up on, as I don't expect either one to be anything more than the 11th man out of the pen.
I'd be interested to hear your rebuttal to any of the above.
Cheers,
John
I don't see the case for keeping Sturtze over Davis.
I don't see the case for keeping either of them! :-) Basically, choosing between Sturtze and Davis is like being asked to choose between arsenic and rat poison, or between hanging and the firing squad. In either case, I'd prefer (c), none of the above.
I don't see the case for keeping either of them! :-) Basically, choosing between Sturtze and Davis is like being asked to choose between arsenic and rat poison, or between hanging and the firing squad. In either case, I'd prefer (c), none of the above.
Davis' major league and minor league career numbers suggest he's probably close to an average pitcher. His performance with the Jays doesn't contradict that hypothesis (the hits allowed was high but it's not a big sample, and anyway it didn't show up in his runs allowed ratio for whatever reason).
I like Davis' chances to be a useful pitcher for the next year or two better than for Sturtze, Service, and possibly some others.
I like Davis' chances to be a useful pitcher for the next year or two better than for Sturtze, Service, and possibly some others.