Two months in the books, a third of the season. Let's check in on the Blue Jays rotation.
As is my custom, I will Game Scores to help Organize the Material; so let me cut and paste a little bit here so we all know just what Game Scores are.
When Bill James devised the Game Score back in the late 1980s, it was his hope that the "average" start would score at about 50. It didn't quite work out that way, as even in 1988 the average Game Score proved to be a little bit lower than 50, but it was certainly close enough for government work. Offense has increased over the past two decades, and the average Game Score has declined accordingly - but 50 is still reasonably close to the middle. Last year, Blue Jays' starters averaged Game Scores of 49.8 per game - the starters had a 4.20 ERA, which was 6th in the AL and 14 in the majors. This year, the starters' Game Scores are down to 46.8 - their ERA of 4.98 ranks 8th in the AL and 21st in the majors.
Anyway, you calculate a Game Score this way:
The good news is that these games have almost become automatic victories in 2006 - the Jays have lost just once when they received a 60+ game from a starter. This was most definitely not the case with the 2005 team, and I think there are two reasons for this: Troy Glaus (well, not just Glaus, but the improved offense for which he may stand as a symbol) and B.J. Ryan. If a starter pitches well enough to post a Game Score of 60 or better, the game is much more likely to bypass this year's somewhat shaky middle relief crew, and proceed straight to the closer. Ryan has obviously been a huge upgrade at the end of the game, and it's leading to Real Wins.
Last year's team lost 14 games despite this type of performance by the starter, and in exactly half of those games, it was the bullpen that took the loss (three times in relief of Josh Towers.) The hard-luck starters who actually lost games despite these outstanding performances? Halladay, Chacin, and Lilly were each victimized once, and Dave Bush four (!) times. So far this year, the only comparable Tough Loss is Lilly's game against the Angels, the one and only time the Blue Jays have been shut out in 2006.
It seems logical to conclude that the increased run production is the major reason the team is winning more often when the starter's performance is in the 40-49 range. This is a very good thing - that's the type of start they've been getting most of the time this year. I'm not inclined to give a whole lot of credit to the middle relievers, at any rate. Gustavo Chacin has 3 of these Cheap Wins already (Game Score below 50). Last year, none of the starters had more than two Cheap Wins - Roy Halladay didn't have any, and Dave Bush had just one.
Here, for your Pondering Pleasure, is the complete list of Game Scores through the end of May. I shall most likely do another progress report in a couple of months, at the end of July...
As is my custom, I will Game Scores to help Organize the Material; so let me cut and paste a little bit here so we all know just what Game Scores are.
When Bill James devised the Game Score back in the late 1980s, it was his hope that the "average" start would score at about 50. It didn't quite work out that way, as even in 1988 the average Game Score proved to be a little bit lower than 50, but it was certainly close enough for government work. Offense has increased over the past two decades, and the average Game Score has declined accordingly - but 50 is still reasonably close to the middle. Last year, Blue Jays' starters averaged Game Scores of 49.8 per game - the starters had a 4.20 ERA, which was 6th in the AL and 14 in the majors. This year, the starters' Game Scores are down to 46.8 - their ERA of 4.98 ranks 8th in the AL and 21st in the majors.
Anyway, you calculate a Game Score this way:
Start with 50 points.
Add 1 point for each out recorded.
Add 2 points for each inning completed after the 4th.
Add 1 point for each strikeout.
Subtract 2 points for each hit allowed.
Subtract 4 points for each earned run allowed.
Subtract 2 points for each unearned run allowed.
Subtract 1 point for each walk.
GS Games Pitcher's Team PitchersWhat I want to do next is compare this to last year: what percentage of starts have been in a given range, and what relation does it have to the team's winning percentage been.
Record Record
90+ 0 - -
80-89 2 2-0 2-0 Halladay (1), Janssen (1)
70-79 4 4-0 4-0 Halladay (2), Janssen (1), Lilly (1)
60-69 4 3-1 3-1 Lilly (2), Halladay (1), Towers (1)
50-59 12 7-2 10-2 Halladay (4), Chacin (4), Lilly (2), Janssen (2)
40-49 14 4-8 5-9 Lilly (3), Towers (2), Chacin (2), Burnett (2), Janssen (2),
Downs (1), Halladay (1), Taubenheim (1)
30-39 7 1-4 3-4 Lilly (2), Towers (2), Halladay (1), Chacin (1), Janssen (1)
20-29 7 0-4 2-5 Towers (3), Lilly (1), Chacin (1), Downs (1), Taubenheim (1)
0-19 2 0-2 0-2 Towers (2)
GS Games % of Games Winning Pct. Games % of Games Winning Pct.The difference is extremely easy to spot, is it not? Move roughly two-thirds of the 60-69 games (which should almost always be a win) and drop them into the 40-49 range. Last year, almost one start in three scored at 60 or better (50 of 162); this year, it's been more like one in five. The starters most likely to provide this level of performance last year were Roy Halladay and Dave Bush - Doc delivered this type of outing in two-thirds of his 2005 starts. He's been pretty good this year, as well - just not quite as good as last year.
90+ 0 0.0 --- 1 0.6 1.000
80-89 2 3.8 1.000 2 1.2 1.000
70-79 4 7.7 1.000 16 9.9 .938
60-69 4 7.7 .750 31 19.1 .581
50-59 12 23.1 .833 35 21.6 .629
40-49 14 33.3 .357 30 18.5 .300
30-39 7 13.5 .429 27 16.7 .333
20-29 7 13.5 .286 14 8.6 .286
0-19 2 3.8 .000 6 3.7 .000
The good news is that these games have almost become automatic victories in 2006 - the Jays have lost just once when they received a 60+ game from a starter. This was most definitely not the case with the 2005 team, and I think there are two reasons for this: Troy Glaus (well, not just Glaus, but the improved offense for which he may stand as a symbol) and B.J. Ryan. If a starter pitches well enough to post a Game Score of 60 or better, the game is much more likely to bypass this year's somewhat shaky middle relief crew, and proceed straight to the closer. Ryan has obviously been a huge upgrade at the end of the game, and it's leading to Real Wins.
Last year's team lost 14 games despite this type of performance by the starter, and in exactly half of those games, it was the bullpen that took the loss (three times in relief of Josh Towers.) The hard-luck starters who actually lost games despite these outstanding performances? Halladay, Chacin, and Lilly were each victimized once, and Dave Bush four (!) times. So far this year, the only comparable Tough Loss is Lilly's game against the Angels, the one and only time the Blue Jays have been shut out in 2006.
It seems logical to conclude that the increased run production is the major reason the team is winning more often when the starter's performance is in the 40-49 range. This is a very good thing - that's the type of start they've been getting most of the time this year. I'm not inclined to give a whole lot of credit to the middle relievers, at any rate. Gustavo Chacin has 3 of these Cheap Wins already (Game Score below 50). Last year, none of the starters had more than two Cheap Wins - Roy Halladay didn't have any, and Dave Bush had just one.
Here, for your Pondering Pleasure, is the complete list of Game Scores through the end of May. I shall most likely do another progress report in a couple of months, at the end of July...
DATE OPP RESULT IP H R ER HR BB SO GB FB PIT BF GSc DEC
Janssen May 17 @LAA W 3-0 8 2 0 0 0 0 3 9 10 88 26 81 W (2-3)
Halladay May 8 LAA W 5-1 9 4 1 1 0 1 6 18 3 98 32 80 W (4-1)
Halladay May 13 @TB W 8-1 9 3 1 1 1 1 3 17 6 90 28 79 W (5-1)
Janssen May 7 LAA W 3-1 7.1 1 0 0 0 1 3 16 4 86 26 78 W (1-2)
Halladay May 23 TB W 4-1 8.2 7 1 1 0 0 7 16 2 110 30 73 W (6-1)
Lilly Apr. 13 @BOS W 8-6 7 6 1 1 0 0 10 8 7 100 28 71 W (1-0)
Towers May 14 @TB W 8-3 8 5 3 2 1 0 2 11 9 76 28 64 W (1-7)
Halladay Apr. 4 MIN W 6-3 7.2 5 3 2 0 2 4 16 3 88 29 63 W (1-0)
Lilly May 6 LAA L 0-3 7 5 2 2 1 3 6 6 9 106 28 62 L (3-2)
Lilly May 1 @BAL W 9-7 7.2 5 3 2 1 2 4 12 9 116 31 61 W (3-1)
Lilly May 26 CWS W 8-2 6.1 5 2 2 2 4 7 7 9 110 28 58 W (5-4)
Chacin Apr. 25 BAL W 7-3 7 6 3 3 2 1 4 10 9 91 26 56 W (4-0)
Halladay Apr. 28 @NYY W 7-2 5.1 7 0 0 0 1 3 13 3 99 22 56 W (3-1)
Chacin Apr. 30 @NYY L 1-4 6 6 2 2 1 3 6 5 9 110 26 55 L (4-1)
Chacin Apr. 6 MIN W 6-3 6.2 6 3 3 0 1 4 10 7 88 26 53 W (1-0)
Lilly May 11 OAK W 8-3 7.2 6 3 3 2 4 2 12 9 119 31 53 W (4-2)
Halladay May 29 BOS W 7-6 7 7 3 3 2 0 2 6 11 97 28 53
Halladay Apr. 22 BOS W 8-1 5 6 1 1 0 1 2 9 5 90 21 52 W (2-1)
Janssen May 27 CWS W 3-2 5.1 7 1 1 0 2 3 13 3 102 25 51
Chacin May 5 LAA W 13-3 5.1 6 2 2 0 1 3 5 7 91 23 50 W (5-1)
Janssen May 12 @TB L 1-4 7 7 4 4 0 1 4 11 5 107 26 50 L (1-3)
Halladay May 18 @LAA W 8-4 7 8 4 4 1 2 7 10 6 93 31 50
Janssen May 22 TB W 6-4 6.2 6 4 4 2 0 3 13 6 103 26 49 W (3-3)
Lilly Apr. 26 BAL W 8-2 5 6 2 2 1 2 3 4 6 92 21 48 W (2-1)
Chacin May 30 BOS W 8-5 5 4 2 2 0 4 1 8 6 88 23 48 W (6-1)
Downs Apr. 7 TB L 8-9 5 6 3 3 1 0 4 11 0 71 20 47
Burnett Apr. 15 @CWS L 2-4 6 7 4 4 2 1 5 12 8 95 27 46 L (0-1)
Lilly Apr. 19 NYY L 1-3 5 7 2 2 1 5 5 7 4 101 26 45 L (1-1)
Taubenheim May 20 @COL L 1-5 5 5 3 3 1 3 3 7 6 86 25 45 L (0-1)
Halladay Apr. 9 TB L 2-5 7.1 8 5 5 1 2 4 12 5 94 31 44 L (1-1)
Chacin Apr. 12 @BOS W 8-4 5 5 3 3 2 4 3 3 9 90 24 44 W (2-0)
Burnett Apr. 21 BOS W 7-6 4 5 3 3 2 1 5 6 3 78 18 44
Janssen Apr. 27 BAL L 5-7 4 3 3 2 0 3 0 7 4 95 20 43 L (0-1)
Towers May 9 OAK L 5-6 4 5 3 3 2 1 4 5 5 61 18 43 L (0-7)
Lilly May 16 @LAA L 3-8 4.1 5 3 3 1 3 4 6 6 83 21 42 L (4-3)
Towers Apr. 11 @BOS L 3-5 6 8 4 4 0 3 4 9 7 102 28 41 L (0-2)
Janssen May 2 @BAL L 2-9 6 8 5 5 1 0 3 11 6 81 25 39 L (0-2)
Towers Apr. 23 BOS L 3-6 5.2 7 4 4 1 3 1 10 7 95 29 37 L (0-4)
Chacin Apr. 18 NYY W 10-5 6 7 5 5 2 3 1 10 8 104 26 36 W (3-0)
Halladay May 3 @BOS W 7-6 6 9 5 5 0 2 2 11 9 105 28 34
Towers May 19 @COL L 3-8 5 8 5 5 2 1 2 9 6 75 24 32 L (1-8)
Lilly Apr. 8 TB W 8-4 2.1 4 4 3 0 6 2 3 2 67 17 31
Lilly May 31 BOS L 6-8 4 5 5 5 2 4 2 5 6 79 19 31 L (5-5)
Towers Apr. 5 MIN L 4-13 4.2 10 5 4 1 0 3 7 4 70 23 29 L (0-1)
Downs Apr. 14 @CWS W 13-7 2 4 5 5 1 4 3 3 0 59 28 27
Chacin May 10 OAK W 9-7 3 6 5 5 3 3 2 2 8 72 18 26
Towers May 24 TB L 8-10 1.2 6 4 4 1 1 0 2 5 43 12 26
Lilly May 21 @COL L 3-5 1.2 6 5 4 0 2 1 2 4 68 14 24 L (4-4)
Taubenheim May 28 CWS L 5-7 2.1 6 5 4 0 4 1 4 1 61 16 24 L (0-2)
Towers Apr. 16 @CWS L 4-6 2 7 5 5 2 2 2 6 2 59 15 22 L (0-3)
Towers May 4 @BOS L 4-7 5.2 11 7 7 1 2 2 5 14 89 29 19 L (0-6)
Towers Apr. 29 @NYY L 6-17 2.1 6 7 7 2 1 2 4 6 61 15 18 L (0-5)
