Apparently the shoulder has been bothering Martin since the spring.
He had a breakthrough for a spell but his hitting has been heading the wrong again with only 1 hit in the last 4 games.

After that fiasco with Lebron, I'm ready to see the hometown heroes beat Cleveland into a pulp.  Although I always feel that about Cleveland, with that damn mascot. 

Goins' 439 foot homer was the longest of his career. All 3 of his homers this year have been over 400 feet.

Listening on the radio and the call "Morales is getting waved home" was pretty terrifying.  Wilner's talking this up as a team victory - Leiper shouted for Smoak to run once Rivera waved home Morales.  Anybody watching with a take on the play?

Oh. My. God. Pillar. Wow.

Goins seems to have decent pop. It's the OBP that really sucks. I mean, a career OBP of .269 is terribad.
Almost 4 strike out for every walk.

That Pillar catch was not a catchable ball.

Maybe the Jays got their September '16 month out of their system early this year.

Without any look at exit velocity numbers, I've never got the sense Goins has trouble making hard contact in his career. He hits the ball hard and often has nothing to show for it.

Did Goins do something to you personally, scottt?  Does he haunt your dreams?  I’ve seldom seen anyone here more obsessively trash a player than you do Goins. (How many runs does he save with his defense?)    Give the kid a break. 

Yes, that Pillar catch was stupendous.

apparently the catch was 57% likely a hit. How does that work in the new statscast 5 star ratings?

I did look. Goins exit velocity is 88.85, about 1 mph above mlb average. His launch angle is almost exactly average. Can't access last years though to see if anything changed.

It's almost mid-May, and Goins is outhitting (and outslugging) Bautista.

How many runs does Goins saves with his defense.

That's a fair question. Baseball-reference gives him -0.2 dWAR. That's a bit puzzling.
Anyone has insight on this?

If the Jays regulars could finally get (and stay) healthy, the team could have an interesting season.

FG has him as a negative as well, both this year and last after plus numbers the previous 3 seasons. Issue seems to be he doesn't have the range he used to.

Some odd DRS numbers so far. Stroman leads the team with 4 runs saved and next is Barney with 3.Tied with 2 each are Martin and ..wait for it.. Kendrys Morales?!?!... each with 2 defensive runs saved.

Defensive stats suck in general.  I've been asking questions about some of these negative valuations for a while now - on Goins, Smoak and Pillar - nobody seems to have a theory.  I just think these stats appear to be too volatile.  All those guys look good to me, have high defensive reputations among the industry and most of the fan base, and better defensive numbers in general throughout their careers than they are showing this year. 

Lexomatic, wheres that 57% likely a hit number from?  Sounds to me like some good evidence of what I'm saying. 

i think the issue with goins is that while he's a very stylish defender his range isn't great and he makes too many misplays.

and i'm not sure the pillar catch actually needed a dive. he seemed to slow up a bit.

Smoak is not a good defender and has never been. The defensive metrics aren't wrong on him. He does one thing well - scooping balls in the dirt. In every other respect he is a below average (not terrible) fielder. I keep noting that Seattle gave up on him defensively before they gave up on his bat.

Derek Jeter's Gold Gloves are a perfect example of how poor fans and industry are at judging defensive value. On the other hand single defensive metrics are also not overly accurate, especially in small samples.

smoak has a good glove. but he's a statue.

Smoak has good hands and good reach, but his range is obviously poor.
I would venture that nobody keeps anyone who doesn't catch balls at first for long, so, compared to other first basemen he's just okay.

Are there aging curves that focus on defense anywhere? It looks like hitting typically peaks around 25-26 and starts declining from there. Looking at Boston and New York, even Baltimore, it certainly looks plausible.  In Toronto, we've seen a constant parade of late bloomers.

As I was saying earlier, Goins' slugging numbers are fine. It's the OBP that's the problem. That might have been fixable with a better 2 strike approach, but maybe he just doesn't have the pitch recognition skills to go deeper in at-bats. At 29, unless he goes to Korea or Japan for a year, it seems a little late to hope for improvement. As Smoak said about Tellez's bat, it is what it is.

By the way, one theory about why players improve in Korea and Japan is that nobody there wants to be beaten by the foreigner, so they pitch around them. Every time. So they learn to focus at the plate. Clubber that first pitch strike because that's all you'll get. Incidentally, I think Goins had a great line at Buffalo last year.

Pillar seems to be taking longer to break for a catch. The metrics don't like those late starts. 
There's no bonus for dives.

Pillar seems to be taking longer to break for a catch. The metrics don't like those late starts.

I too noticed that he broke a little later than usual, but I'm not worried that it's a trend - this ball was hit right at him, and those are the hardest to judge. I worry that soon he won't be able to catch those without injuring himself on the landing.

After the botched rundown, I was convinced that Edwin would wind up hitting a game-tying home run. So perhaps the baseball gods are not planning on being cruel to the Jays anymore.

"....i'm not sure the pillar catch actually needed a dive...."

Totally disagree.  He was running full-tilt, while trying to track the ball over his left shoulder.  It was impressive that he came anywhere near the ball, let alone caught it.  The only way for him to catch the ball was to leave his feet, which he did.

"....the botched rundown...."

Looking at the replays, I think Gibbons was right:  that was an unfair interference call.  The contact (if any) was initiated by Lindor, who reached out and tried to swipe Travis when they were close.  The umpire, who has a history of dubious decisions with the Jays, later told Gibbons that he made the call because Travis "obstructed" Lindor's movement.  But you can clearly see that Travis was obliged to run straight at Lindor because he was trying to tag him, before he finally tossed the ball to Goins and ducked out of the way.  If you're running full-tilt towards a base-runner to try to tag him, and then at the last minute you throw to second base while the runner reverses direction, of course you can't get completely off the base path in that micro-second available to you.  All you can do is duck away from the runner, which Travis did.  Lindor deserves an Academy Award for his exaggerated imitation of an obstructed runner.  And it was clear from the beginning of the rundown that Lindor was trying to set up an obstruction call, because that was the only way he could be called safe.  Reaching out and trying to swipe Travis was a completely unnecessary movement by Lindor, there was nothing natural in that swipe, and that alone should have negated the obstruction call.

wheres that 57% likely a hit number from? Sounds to me like some good evidence of what I'm saying.

It means that balls hit to that spot, at that launch angle and exit velocity, fall for a hit 57% of the time. When calculating that, I'm sure there's some wiggle room -- for instance, if the exit velocity was 95 mph, perhaps they consider 93-97 mph when calculating hit percentage.

When I watched the replay of the rundown, at first I thought that Travis just botched it. But on second thought (and after reading China fan's post), I think that the Jays had an insolvable problem - what do you do when the runner caught in a rundown is faster than any of the fielders trying to tag him?

The orthodox solution is to chase the runner down and gradually narrow the gap. But if you throw too soon, the second fielder now has the same problem - Lindor can just reverse direction and outrun the other guy. And if you leave the throw too late, Lindor can just deliberately collide with the fielder in his path and get the obstruction call that way.

So Travis did the only thing that he could do - close the gap as much as possible, and then throw the ball to the other fielder to keep that fielder from being charged with obstruction. He just wasn't able to move out of the way fast enough after making the throw. Credit to Lindor for having enough baseball smarts to try this move - most runners in his position would eventually just give up and get tagged.

+1 to China fan's description of the rundown. Carapazza is a terrible umpire, and continued to prove it last night. Wednesday's game is probably going to be another "Brooks-Baseball-spectacular".

Thanks for the explanation James W ... 57% of those balls are hits still feels low to my eye.

although going from some of the thoughtful posts here and elsewhere, it appears the consensus is that Pillar looks a bit better than he needs to because of the spectacular plays - Robbie Alomar syndrome?

Goins has been a fine hitter so far this year, despite the mundane slash line.  He's hit the ball hard, hasn't popped up at all,  and had pretty good control of the strike zone.  What is killing him in 2017 is his .200 BABIP.  If it were even .250, he'd have a fine slash line for a middle infielder. When Goins got hot in the 2nd half of 2015, there was a modest power spike (but nothing like what we have seen so far in 2017 both in volume and in distance) and his BABIP was .343. I like this power surge more in terms of its sustainability for a few years.  

As for Goins' defence, UZR and DRS tell different stories. Fangraphs relies on UZR for its dWAR.  UZR's inventor, Mitchel Lichtman, speaks of the importance of 2-3 years (full-time) worth of fielding opportunities to make an assessment.  That is basically Goins' career to date.  UZR in total has Goins as a +8/150 second baseman and a +4/150 shortstop.  DRS has him as a +20/150 second baseman and a +15/150 shortstop.  Both systems do suggest that he has been less capable in 2016 and 2017 than he was previously, but the sample size is very small.  I'd be inclined to take an average, and then a deduction for modest decline (perhaps something like- second base average +14/150 less 4 for age-related decline or +10/150 and shortstop +9.5/150 -4.5 or +5/150).  That's about what I would expect from him the rest of the season. 

Barney has been good also, although the .370 BABIP plays an important part. He has been more consistent in the last few years as a defensive player both statistically and by observation.  I like both of them.

In other numerical trivia, the Blue Jays now have a positive SRS (Simple Rating System) according to BBRef.  How is this possible with a 12-20 record?  The Rating System looks at run differential and strength of schedule.  All of the AL East teams are positive, and all of the other AL teams are negative.  The AL has outscored the NL 162-148 and owns a 23-15 record in inter-league play.  In a word, the AL East has killed it.  So, the Blue Jays record of 12-20 has four factors playing a role: a bucketload of important injuries, the terrific performance of their AL East rivals who they have played 2/3 of the time so far, underperformance by particularly Bautista and Travis, and inefficient run use/close game performance.  The first two factors appear to me to be the key ones. 

it appears the consensus is that Pillar looks a bit better than he needs to

To my eyes, he does seem to instinctively break in on all balls hit his way. That tendency, and his athleticism, result in many seemingly uncatchable balls being caught. But the downside is that he sometimes gets burned with balls over his head, though sometimes those are catchable via a course correction, like last night's.

None of this is intended to disparage the man's defense. He is probably not the first center fielder to gamble as he does.

The AL East is already collectively 16 games over .500 with a run differential of about +65.

2yr RP (2016-2017)

RH Osuna (22): 84gms, 86.0ip, 28.9k%/4.5b%, 67era-, 70fip-, 81xfip-, 1.8war/65ip
RH Barnes (27): 19gms, 23.2ip, 22.9k%/8.3b%, 72era-, 52fip-, 99xfip-, 1.4war/65ip
RH Biagini (27): 74gms, 86.1ip, 21.6k%/6.0b%, 74era-, 67fip-, 84xfip-, 1.1war/65ip
RH Smith (33): 71gms, 68.0ip, 22.5k%/8.2b%, 79era-, 103fip-, 90xfip-, 0.6war/65ip
LH Loup (29): 33gms, 27.0ip, 23.1k%/9.9b%, 71era-, 88fip-, 98xfip-, 0.6war/65ip
RH Tepera (29): 32gms, 35.2ip, 22.4k%/10.9b%, 92era-, 85fip-, 105xfip-, 0.5war/65ip
LH Howell (34): 70gms, 53.1ip, 19.2k%/7.7b%, 111era-, 95fip-, 92xfip-, -0.1war/65ip
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RH Grilli (40): 79gms, 68.2ip, 31.0k%/13.7b%, 116era-, 118fip-, 102xfip-, -0.3war/65ip
RH Leone (25): 37gms, 40.1ip, 20.4k%/8.9b%, 136era-, 130fip-, 115xfip-, -0.7war/65ip



It'll be interesting to see what they do if/when the pitching staff gets healthy. For me it's starting to be pretty obvious that Grilli would have to be dropped, but we'll see.


The more overarching point here being that that pen kinda sorta looks pretty good.

"So, the Blue Jays record of 12-20 has four factors playing a role: a bucketload of important injuries, the terrific performance of their AL East rivals who they have played 2/3 of the time so far, underperformance by particularly Bautista and Travis, and inefficient run use/close game performance. The first two factors appear to me to be the key ones."

Nice summary.

"it seems pillar looks a bit better than he needs to"

Well he does but Pillar has still been an elite of elite defender the past couple years, theatrics or not. One of the top 2 or 3 defensive players in baseball. That's a bit different than a guy like Goins, imo, who does actually look much better than he actually is out there.

The metrics don't like those late starts.   

“The metrics” must be right then, I guess.  We seem to have arrived at a place where numbers invariably take precedence over what we see with our eyes.  But numbers are just as contingent as optics.   That’s life.  People who insist that numbers are incontestably superior trouble me.  They’re essentially playing video/math games, not watching a ball game on a ball field.

We don’t know anything; so we need as many aids as we can muster.  Like Mike, I respect the stats and my eyes.

*

As for Pillar’s dive: there’s no other way he catches the ball.  Did you actually see it?  And must we now disparage ‘style’ or flair?  Isn’t that in large part what we go to the ballpark to see?  (Please note “in large part”.)  “Theatrics” is disparaging, ugly.  Theatrics is what Reyes was guilty of all too often when he was here.  Was Tony Fernandez 'theatrical'?

BTW the second double-play that bailed out Stroman was good Goins.  Receiving a high throw from Stro and still keeping his foot on the bag, then very deliberately nailing the runner at first.  (I.e., with dekiberation).   Nice.

Interesting discussion.

Well, O.K. deliberation, not dekiberation (a shortage of doggie treats).

I don't mean theatrics as an insult. Jim Edmonds was much the same. I love the theatrics to be honest....but I try my best to look past them when it comes to judging how good a guy is defensively. It's really hard to evaluate defense, and I think it's a good habit to get into to not let the highlight reel plays sway you too much. To be honest highlight-reel capability might be the single biggest reason why defense gets misanalyzed.

But again, Pillar is awesome, regardless of his style out there. I do think he's been a bit off this year, though. But then again all that means is I think he's had a handful of misplays which he usually makes, which speaks to Mike's point about the tinyness of the sample size of defensive metrics.

not dekiberation (a shortage of doggie treats)

Nice one.  We do need a word for that often-desperate situation.

I agree. Thank you to all for an interesting discussion. This is what I come to this site for.

On the defence related discussion, I would only add two small points. I think defence (notwithstanding what Buck and Pat have to say) does go into slumps. I think both Pillar and Travis have been in one for much of the year. I think both will pull out of it and I think Pillar may have already. I've thought that he's looked better in the field the last week or so. Secondly, I think the confusing thing with Goins is that he is less consistent than most "good" fielders (which I think he is). He makes the occasional bone headed play.

I agree with Mike's synopsis for the season so far. I would add two other lesser factors - Grilli's and Osuna's early season struggles have led to some high leverage bullpen issues (that seem to be sorting themselves out as Osuna has righted the ship and Smith has been excellent) and some plain old bad luck.

Coke to uglyone on Pillar.

The bad record in close games is a bad luck factor according to our well discussed conclusions.

The many extra innings played by the Jays this year so far has affected the performance of the pen. For the next game or 2 the relievers are forced to deal with that issue.

2 extra inning games in a row would be terrible. A reliever would have to pitch "at not his best". This could cause his good/excellent pitching line and complex metrics to become bad.

This happened to F Rios in AA due to that horrible 8 ER inning.

In our discussion of Bolsinger and the 40-man roster yesterday, I forgot that the Jays will also need to remove someone from the 25-man roster to make room for Bolsinger.

I'm going to guess that Leone gets optioned down to make room on the 25-man roster, and Ceciliani gets DFA'd to make room on the 40-man roster.

Alternatively they could DFA the newly acquired Ramirez and/or Valdez, but why bother to acquire pitchers if you're going to release them before they throw a pitch?

i don't understand how john gibbons' teams experience "bad luck" in close games year in and year out seemingly regardless of talent level, or overall record.

i haven't been following the threads - what are the reasons that have been discussed?

Gone but not forgotten...Neil Ramirez...DFA today for Bolsinger.

Okay, so it's Ramirez, gone from the 25-man roster and the 40-man roster.  It solves the roster issues with one move.  What's the waiver-wire payment these days -- is it $25,000 or $50,000?   That's small potatoes, I suppose, but it's still a lot to pay for a pitcher who was never needed and never allowed to pitch.

I know it's tempting to blame Gibbons but his record in one run games seems to have stabilized since Osuna became the closer....until of course he pooped his pants to start this year, with his 3 blown saves kinda the reason we're 4-7 in one run games so far.

Ohlman makes his Jays debut tonight as the catcher for Bolsinger. I guess they know each other from Buffalo, so the familiarity might help a little.

I'm keen to see whether Ohlman can help the Jays offensively, but I'm worried about his defence. Cleveland's top base-stealer, Brantley, is currently injured, so perhaps they won't be as much of a threat to exploit Ohlman as some other lineups might be.

Ramirez could clear and accept an outright to Buffalo. Valdez starts for Bisons tomorrow. I guess they want to hold on to Ceciliani till Pompey returns.

1 run wins and losses have never been able to be shown to have any rhyme or reason year to year. A team that does extremely well one year can suck the next and vice versa. Now, it feels like Gibbons is consistently in the negatives but is he?

2017: 4-7
2016: 21-25
2015: 15-28
2014: 15-20
2013: 20-29
...
2008: 24-32 (split between Gibbons and Gaston)
2007: 29-25
2006: 20-10 - wow!
2005: 16-31 - ouch
2004: 17-22 (split between Gibbons and Tosca)

Looking at 2006 I don't see anything that fits the traditional 'this would make you do better' - only 65 SB, not a lot of bunts, great year for BJ Ryan closing but otherwise the pen was fairly blah.

Travis has a seat today so that Coghlan and Barney can start.  I wouldn't have done that.  Travis' double off the right-centerfield wall yesterday was encouraging and the rundown wasn't really a big issue.  I don't understand Gibbons' approach to Travis and Bautista.  Bautista is 36 and struggling mightily also. Nonetheless,  Travis has had 25 starts in 33 games, while Bautista has started every game except for the 2nd game of the doubleheader in St. Louis.

John, we've been through this.  I ran the numbers last year (and they would be worse this year).  Gibbons' overall career record in one run games could be explained by random chance, but the odds of it being so are very long.  If you subscribe to the lock-down theory where you bring in your best relievers with a 4 run or 5 run lead, that will lead to more wins with wide margins and ultimately to fewer with small margins. 

"....I don't understand Gibbons' approach to Travis and Bautista..."

Here's my guess. Travis was recovering from injury as recently as this spring, after missing half of the last two seasons due to injury, and he's still just 26.  It might make sense to ease him back into full-time play, especially since he has struggled so much this year.  The Jays also have Barney available as an adequate replacement for Travis.  Barney has a decent .705 OPS this season, and his defence is better than Travis, so the Jays don't suffer much when they give Travis a day off.   Bautista, on the other hand, is a veteran who just needs to get his timing back.  The only way for him to recover his hitting is to keep playing until he gets it back. And there's not much defensive benefit to be obtained if Bautista is replaced with Carrera.  (And Pearce can't play RF.)  Conclusion:  keep playing Bautista until he rediscovers his talents, but give more time off to Travis to protect his health.

"....Gibbons' overall career record in one run games could be explained by random chance, but the odds of it being so are very long...."

I don't think you've established your "long odds" theory at all.  Your numbers don't prove managerial error.  Random chance remains by far the most likely explanation.  It's true that we argued the subject into tedium last year, and I am reluctant to beat a dead horse for the remainder of this year.  But whenever the Jays have lost by a small margin, I've reflected back on the game to see if Gibbons did anything clearly wrong, and such errors are rarely discernible.  So I don't see the pattern that you're alleging.

You have to take the one-run games individually and look for explanations for each game, rather than making assumptions.  There has rarely been a one-run game where we have convincingly found that a Gibbons error was the main explanation for the loss.  The more logical explanations, in virtually every case, were the shortcomings of specific players in those games.

That's one theory.  My theory is that Bautista is his guy, one who has performed for him for many years and he is prepared to go a lot further for him than for the young Travis.  As I have said before, Travis' troubles this season have been mainly BABIP driven, despite an excellent line-drive rate and exit velocity at league average rates.  Bautista's problems are much more serious as they involve a loss of contact. 

Did I say managerial error, CF?  I don't think it is.  It's a way of managing that leads to more 5 run wins (Gibbons has an excellent record in blowouts) and fewer 1 run wins.  I wouldn't use the approach, but I'm not saying that it is an error.

What I said is that it is unlikely that random chance is the only factor, due to the large sample, the club's overall record during the period, and the tendency for one-run games to coalesce tightly around .500, Most people were persuaded by the numbers last year, and I really don't want to do a re-run of this every year. 

"You have to take the one-run games individually and look for explanations for each game, rather than making assumptions."

This seems like the very opposite of what one ought to do. If I'm running a drug trial and I look at each individual patient and try to find reasons to exclude or include their data this is not even close to sound practice.

A bettet approach would be to be to look for teams with similar Pythagorean records and to see if Gibbons' one-record record differs from that set of teams. Is it correlation and not causation? Sure, but this approach would better evidence one way or another than a set of anecodotes about individual one run games.

Basically the question becomes what causes 1 run wins or losses. I did the quick and dirty approach for that amazing record the one year and the only traditional 'helps you win tight games' bit was a closer having a super year. However, that same closer (BJ Ryan) had a good year in 2008 and in 2015 we had 4 solid relievers in Osuna/Sanchez/Hendricks/Cecil plus a nice kick at the end from Hawkins. Yet that team sucked royally in 1 run games (15-28).

Maybe if we go game by game and situation by situation we could see a pattern that led to this result but I'm inclined to the 'bad luck' given what I've seen in other teams over the years. Given many have tried to find the 'magic bullet' on what helps win 1 run games and none have found something that works year to year, team to team I say those who claim it is the fault of the manager need to prove it. If Gibbons had been sub 500 every single year in 1 run games I'd wonder but twice he was over 500, once way over. The current 5 year losing streak since he started running the team again sucks but I've flipped a coin and had one side come up 5 times in a row. It can happen.

Best record ever in 1 run games: Baltimore 2012: 29-9 In 2013 they were 20-31 in 2011 they were 22-22 all 3 years had the same manager. Did he get smart for one year in the middle? 2014: 32-23; 2015: 25-26; 2016: 21-16; 2017: 7-1; Boy Buck Showalter sure gets dumb often doesn't he? He just keeps forgetting what works in one run games after doing great in them.

For me, the sample size is now getting significant enough that I have grave difficulty seeing all of Gibbons' one-run record as just bad luck. Some of it may well be bad luck but, of the remainder, I think part of the problem is with Gibbons and part of the problem is roster construction. The part that is not his fault is that for significant chunks of his managerial time his line-up has been relatively unbalanced, leaving it susceptible to same handed high leverage relievers. I think the part that is attributable to Gibbons is some combination of the bullpen usage problem that Mike mentioned and poor tactical decision making. I will acknowledge my bias that I think Gibbons is an average manager at best. However, I think his clubhouse management skills (and I acknowledge, based on the little that a fan can discern, that he does seem to do this part of the job well) significantly exceed his in-game management skills.

gibbons' track record is long, and iirc, last year when there was a post on it, if you remove him from the equation the jays have been .500 in 1-in games historically (more or less), yet, he's about 4 games below 500 every year.

most managers with anything like his record in close games are usually not managers for so long, so...i dunno.

John, I think one (or even several) year sample sizes can be essentially random. However, if you tally up Showalter's one-run record over the entire period, I think you will see a tangible outcome that suggests he is successful in one-run games.

Let's see. On August 22 of last year, the Jays were 64/99 in one run games. The odds of flipping a coin 163 times and getting heads no more than 64 times are less than 0.0233380848091.

Could be luck, but...

Great hand-eye coordination to hit a golf ball, Tabby? It's just sitting there. I mean, I can hit a golf ball.

Bautista and Encarnacion are both on pace for 200 Ks.

Selfishly I hope Bolsinger gets another start. Tonight could have been much worse, there was a lot of hard contact that found gloves. However, I love watching pitchers try and make their way through major league lineups without any weapons. I thought Bolsinger did as well as can be hoped for.

Bolsinger seems like a ticking time bomb out there. You know the homeruns are going to come so he can't afford to be walking guys.

Bolsinger might be a time bomb, but that was a solid 6th starter outing,  Loup, though ... I don't get what's to like.  I haven't felt safe with him in a game in some time.

Odds of 5 years of losing record = 1/2 ^5 = 3.125% so it is rare but certainly possible. Same for 5 straight winning seasons. So one in 32 managers who get 5 years managing should have that happen by dumb luck.

Bolsinger wasn't just a solid #6 starter, that was an above average #3 starter pitching. Bolsinger had a game score of 58 (~50 is usually the median game score, 58 is well above average). I agree he obviously had some control problems with all the walks, and he didn't seem to be dominating, and I'd rather we had our original starting 5 all pitching, but overall he was very solid. He did what we needed him to do. But if the offense can't score, we can't win.

Maybe Ohlman can DH if Morales goes on the shelf?

With Morales' injury comes an opportunity.  The club now has 3 players ideally suited to first base/DH most of the time- Pearce, Smoak and Bautista.  I am hoping that we do not see Pearce and Bautista in the outfield together for the duration of Morales' time out of the lineup (and longer, but that is another story).

Still not really sure why Bolsinger wasn't the first choice #6sp. I mean he'll get crushed out there sometimes but what #6sp won't? He's a better bet than the rest. Bolsinger and Biagini are at least guys with legit MLB out pitches, unlike latos or lawrence at this point.

On another note, Justin Smoak is a 1B with a 98wrc+, and jays nation has been praising him this year. That means this year is going not so good.

I found Bolsinger interesting to watch. He likes to throw fastballs upstairs (shades of Pat Hentgen!) and then try to put hitters away with his curve ball. (The TV announcers pointed out that minor league hitters aren't disciplined enough to lay off that curve ball, but that major league hitters can.) My take on him is that he doesn't have an overpowering fastball, so he has to hit his spots or he'll get beaten up. He reminds me of Josh Towers, but with a better breaking pitch.

Regarding Gibbons and the Jays' record in one-run games: this year, the problem is that they haven't been scoring runs. In 2016, the problem was that Gibbons just didn't have a left-handed relief pitcher that he could trust. If you don't have that, you can't manage to gain the platoon advantage.

Great hand-eye coordination to hit a golf ball, Tabby? It's just sitting there. I mean, I can hit a golf ball.

I can't hit one - at least, not reliably. So your hand-eye coordination is better than mine. :-)

If you subscribe to the lock-down theory where you bring in your best relievers with a 4 run or 5 run lead, that will lead to more wins with wide margins and ultimately to fewer with small margins.

True enough, but I can't really blame the Jays for bringing in their best relievers whenever they happen to have a lead. They've had so few leads that they can't afford to let any of them slip away!

I mentioned the "bad Luck" factor as something to be positive about this years future. Bad luck should even out in most cases. That is the hope.

I remember participating in this discussion a few years ago. Magpie's "big honking data base". The major conclusion as accepted by most was luck. The pythag record for Wins and Losses established bad teams and good teams. Numerical evidence was produced for over performing and under performing in 1 run games.

Maybe we are due. Another 2015 run after the July trade deadline could get the job done.

Please don't mention the trades. It is not my intention to create controversy. I am just looking for hope.

"I am just looking for hope."
Well, there is always "next year"

No roster moves for tonight's game - Morales is active though I'm guessing unavailable. Perhaps they are waiting a few days to see if he can avoid a DL stint.

Bautista DHs and Carrera in RF tonight.  Net objective loss to the Blue Jays from Morales DH and Bautista RF- 0.  Net subjective gain- more than 0 (I think Bautista will hit better if he is at DH for a while.

"I think Bautista will hit better if he is at DH for a while."

Well he can't hit much worse.

Good start!

Devon, Devon, Devon...

TOOTBLAN Travis! Runs into an out and can't stay in a rundown long enough for Barney to get to second. Thanks for playing! This tweet from High Heat Stats sums up how bad the Jays' baserunning has been this year.

Outside of the Yankees, the whole AL East sucks at baserunning.

Crapapazza Ump Show returns for Season 2. Tossed Edwin, Gibby and Russ in Season 1. Walker is the first victim of Season 2. Who's next?

Maybe the Jays should try to reach base less often, so they wouldn't make so many outs on the basepaths.

That Joey homer made me silly happy.

and Liriano may just stink.

"I think Carapazza means Crapolla in Italian." Thanks for that one Chuck.

According to Richard Griffin, the last 5 Carapazza ejections have been Blue Jays players or coaches.

Addition by subtraction from the self-inflicted DH logjam. I think this Mike G guy might be on to something.

Gomes' double in the third, out of the reach of Pillar, might be an example of a catch Pillar would've tried to make two years ago, or in a close game. It was a low-leverage situation, down four runs with the bases empty, catcher running, one out, 8-9 hitters due. Why crash into something? Like hell this team's gonna score 7 off Salazar...

I only saw it once, so I might be way out to lunch on that specific play, or maybe even Pillar's mind generally, but not on this broader crackpot theory: One reason outfielders' defensive metrics often decline quickly is that they mellow out. They become entrenched in their starting roles and feel less urgency to impress people all the time. But in many cases, it seems like they can still summon their sharpest focus and top speed when they really need it. DRS and UZR do not reflect game leverage, right? It says here that as a rule, players maintain much more of the dWPA from their early seasons than the dWAR, and Pillar is still the man.

SSS and all but Barnes has been excellent. If Chris Smith can get healthy I would like him to have a similar chance. His minor league numbers in the last two years were excellent

it's really too bad about all the injuries cuz this team is battling.

intriguing theory, Mr.Obal.

for some reason it brought to mind one Adam Jones.

That is an example of part of the reason why Gibbons, in my view, has a poor record in one run games. Bunting following a lead off single in the bottom of the eighth is good practice "by the book". In certain circumstances I would agree that it's an acceptable strategy. However, following Travis were Barney and Maile. There were no good LH pinch hitting options available and Shaw is rough on RHs. In my view that isn't a situation to give Cleveland a free out. Particularly with Travis looking better in the last few games (although that in and of itself isn't my criticism of the move).

That was a good ninth inning.

well done, Mr.Goins, well done.

Smith's ability to get LHH out to date is really welcome news

that was a lot of good at bats against a very good reliever.

now we have some weaker teams coming up.

The scrubs come through big time in the ninth.

Great work by the bullpen.

Ironically, Liriano is getting quite a bit of run support and wasting half of it.
No choice but to keep throwing him out there, but he really wears the bullpen thin.

Liriano is pitching very much like he did in Pittsburgh before the trade last year. Hopefully he can turn things around again. If he doesn't, I think it makes for a greater likelihood they try to sign Estrada to an extension, because Francisco won't get one.

I doubt the FO is going to target resigning our own FA's, and they've shown no inclination to extend better players than Estrada. 

I assume they will target the best value they identify in the FA market, like the last two years, homegrown or not.   We don't need to resign our own guys or promote prospects to be competitive. 

Who's the better players than Estrada? Estrada is one of our own FA who was resigned by the FO.

Minor miracle. Toronto 205-Cleveland 202.

Not just Liriano and Grilli. Benoit is also having the same troubles he had early on last year.
Benoit blames it on his manager not giving roles to his relievers, which is usually what happens when relievers struggle, especially in the first couple of months.

An incredible performance by the bullpen last night against one of the league's most powerful teams:  7 innings, no runs, and not even a single walk.  The bullpen has been hugely improved in the past couple of weeks as Osuna returns and the roles get sorted out.

Gibbons deserves a huge amount of credit for this, but he rarely gets any recognition for it. Every year, the GM hands him a different bullpen, usually containing several pitchers who aren't nearly as good as they're supposed to be.  Over the course of the first month or two, Gibbons has to sort through the bullpen, figure out who is reliable and who is not, switch their roles around and create a strong new bullpen from a messy under-performing one.  It's actually quite difficult to make those judgments on very small sample sizes of a few innings here and there.  If a reliever has a bad couple of outings, is it small-sample variance and bad luck?  Or is it an indication that a reliever needs to be demoted or cut?  Gibbons has to make those decisions, and he usually gets it right -- quite fast -- with relatively little evidence to look at.

This year, for example, Gibbons had to endure the very damaging loss of Osuna for the first few weeks of the season (not just his injury but his slow return to form in his first games back).  He had poor performances from Howell and Grilli -- two of the pitchers who were slotted for late-inning high-leverage roles.  He had starters who were terrible, he had Stroman and Liriano departing games in the first inning or two, he had key injuries in the rotation, and he had extra-inning games, all of which put huge pressure on the bullpen.  He had to take one of his best relievers, Biagini, and put him in the rotation.  Yet from all of this, he created a bullpen that could shut down Cleveland for 7 innings last night.  That's a huge accomplishment, but a lot of people won't give credit to the manager for it.

When assessing a manager, I'd rather look at specific issues like the bullpen or lineup decisions, rather than abstract claims about "running the numbers."  There can be wild volatility in statistics for a huge range of reasons.  Let's look at specific issues instead.  Does he get the team to the playoffs?  Does he keep a clubhouse happy and productive, even when it is losing?  Does he manage the bullpen well?  Does he assume that a 4-run lead isn't necessarily a safe lead, rather than giving a 4-run lead to the worst reliever on the team?  Does he choose the right amount of playing time for an under-appreciated player like Carrera (ignoring the bizarre criticism that he "plays favorites") instead of giving all the playing time to a "proven veteran" like Steve Pearce?  Judge him on those issues, not a dubious argument about  "stats" or "one-run games" which have many conflicting factors that could explain them.

".... If I'm running a drug trial...."

A drug trial is a very poor analogy.  Drug trials are based on very carefully chosen and randomized samples, with a statistical ability to control for external factors.  You can't do that in baseball.  There can be a thousand factors, from injuries to luck to mistakes to psychology to the weather, that influence the outcome of every game.  You can't control for any of it, and you can't compare the results to a demographically similar team that has only one different factor (the manager) in the equation.

It's true that statistical analysis has greatly helped our appreciation of baseball.  But every year we see thousands of unexpected and unpredictable results that contradict what the stats would predict.  There are huge limits to what we can predict or conclude from any group of statistics.

"...What I said is that it is unlikely that random chance is the only factor..."

I didn't say that random chance is the "only" factor.  What I'm saying is that there are thousands of factors that explain any statistic, including the one-run-outcome statistic, and if we are to isolate the factors, random choice would be a bigger explaining factor than the "managerial preference for lockdown bullpen tactics" (which is apparently the biggest factor in your view).  Of all the factors that explain one-run losses, a bias in managerial tactics is probably one of the smallest factors.  Other factors, such as injuries and luck, are a far bigger factor.  This is frustrating for those of us who prefer a tidy explanation, but that's baseball and that's life.

"...Most people were persuaded by the numbers last year..."

You mean, "most fans on this site"?  I didn't read it that way.  I read it as a 50-50 divide.  But even if the divide was 60-40 among the fans, how is that relevant?  The Jays are famous for employing an entire department of statistical analysts -- and they obviously don't think that Gibbons is the reason for the one-run losses.  The Jays have just extended the Gibbons contract to 2020.  Why would any organization do that if its statistical analysts believe the manager is causing one-run losses?

I'm sure the Jays analytics team has "run the numbers" many times and done layers of statistical analysis that nobody here has done.   It would be completely stupid for Shapiro and Atkins to give a contract extension to a manager who is causing the team to suffer one-run losses.  So I think it's a pretty safe bet that a proper "running of the numbers" doesn't prove any such thing -- even if many fans think so.

Thank you CF for the explanations regarding many factors. That was a lot of effort on your part.

The decision making in bull pen use/roles helped me understand a lot. Minor injuries and tiredness is also a factor. We will never know that some reliever has a little tightness in his arm. So for example sending him in to get one guy and then pulling him after he is successful seems like a bad decision due to us not knowing the factors.

I was nervous last night when Grilli was warming up.

So other than Osuna, who else is doing well in the pen? I ask for an evaluation even though I know that last night everyone in the pen was great.

really, everyone is doing well in the pen other than grilli and howell, though howell has barely had a chance yet.

Fun with selective small sample sizes: Excluding Liriano's first start, the Jays pitching staff has the following line for Liriano's last 6 starts:
Liriano: 28 IP, 28 hits, 15 Runs (all earned), 19 walks, 29 strikeouts.
Bullpen: 24 IP, 11 hits, 1 unearned run, 2 walks, 30 strikeouts.

My tongue-in-cheek suggestion - start Liriano every game, make everyone else a reliever.

Thanks uglyone.

I don't want to start something that will create friction. But I must admit that it really bugs me when inherited runners score. I don't really care about who gets charged with the runs.

Last night Leone let all 3 score. I know he did his best. I don't blame him but at the same time it deflates me. It was a crucial factor in making the game winnable or more winnable.

I am sure teams have figured out that using the pen's 2nd best reliever is not the way to go. We still had 7 innings to mount a comeback.

On the subject of bullpens and one run games, this from ESPN on the Rockies hot start:

"We're a fifth of the way through the season, and the Rockies are 18-0 when leading after six innings, 19-0 when leading after eight innings and 9-0 in one-run games."

"Last year, the Rockies lost 14 games they were leading after six innings and lost six games they were leading after eight innings. They were 12-20 in one-run games, and the bullpen was a big reason why, with a 22-29 record and an MLB-worst 5.13 ERA."

"Now the bullpen -- at least the back end of the bullpen with Greg Holland, Adam Ottavino, Jake McGee and Mike Dunn -- is good, maybe even great. Those four have combined for 50 innings and just two home runs allowed, and Holland is 14-for-14 in save chances. "

Just want to add, great bullpens make managers seem smart. Not long ago Ned Yost was mocked for his poor on field decisions. Then he got a lock down pen with Holland, Davis, Herrera, et al. The narrative seemed to change pretty suddenly, to "Yost does know what he's doing"

Francisco Liriano's splits by catcher this year:
Russell Martin, 5 G, 26 innings, 16 W, 29 K, 2.77 ERA
others, 2G, 2.1 innings, 7 W 1K, 51.43 ERA

Over his career, Liriano has made 47 starts with Russell Martin as catcher.  His ERA with Martin is 2.92.  His career ERA is 4.09. 

In good news, Martin says that he feels much better.  If Sanchez starts on Sunday as expected, the club might want to consider skipping Liriano in the rotation (and giving Bolsinger another start) until Martin returns- maybe with some low leverage relief work to keep him sharp on the weekend (he only threw 53 pitches last night). 

Good point hypobole. Henke and Ward took care of the 7,8,9 innings very well. Of course the rest of the team was quite good also.

The Jays "rest of the team" was also pretty good when Joey MacLauglin, Brian Clarke and Roy Lee Jackson were struggling.

bpoz - agreed on inherited runners, which is one of the reasons i don't look much just at bullpen era.

as for last night - leone has been fine as one of the last men in the pen. he's probably nothing more than that. but coming into a game with the bases loaded and no outs is tough.

to go more in depth with the pen - osuna biagini Smith and Barnes have been awesome and all look like potential lock down RP. Tepera, Loup, Leone have been solid middle relievers, but not any more than that. grilli and howell have been disasters so far.

and hey we're 5-7 in 1 run games. that's just noise really.

it's our 8-14 record in the rest of the games that's more concerning.

in regards to pillar's catch and fielding in general, this guys is using statcast to find video comparables on similar ball speed angle and distance catches, and i'm not surprised by the results on this one:

https://twitter.com/mike_petriello/status/862501922737188865

If the Jays can't make a move at home against a Seattle team missing 80% of their rotation, that would be very disheartening.

Of course we're missing 44% of our starting lineup and 40% of our starting rotation. Sounds like a battle of the infirmed, or AAA fill-ins to me.

I was very impressed by scottt's math background. Scottt can have a lot of fun with baseball numbers.

For example most teams to date this year have better home records than road records. Except for Cleveland and Minnesota in the AL.

The pythag numbers are good and understandable. I will look at a couple in mid June, which is a nice marker for season evaluation.

It would really be "something" if the networks forced low market teams to play day games and one of those teams had an incredible day game record.

Interesting find uo.

Those comps bear out my thoughts on Pillar in the field, and by extension at the plate. He shouldn't be as good as he is. He doesn't have the speed to be an everyday CF, but he's made himself into one. Similarly his hitting shouldn't be as good as it is.

He's a 32nd round $1,000 signing bonus org guy who's made himself into a consistent 3-4 WAR player.

UO, Mike Petriello is looking at hang time and distance covered..  Exit velocity and launch angle gives you a good idea of hang time, but factors such as wind also play an important role. 

Last night Leone let all 3 score.

I give Guyer credit for a great at-bat here. Leone got to a 1-2 count on him, and he then proceeded to foul off a slider, a four-seam fastball, a cutter, and another four-seam fastball before finally connecting on the eighth pitch that he saw.

Leone made a mistake, but he gave it a good shot.

According to Wilner, the Jays should expect to face... Casey Lawrence, just claimed off waivers by the Mariners.

Lawrence has been assigned to AAA but given Mariners rotation problems, anything is possible.

I was thinking that facing Lawrence would be good news, because he isn't really a major-league level starter at this point.

Campos called up.

All we need now is for Estrada and Stroman to hit the DL, and we'll essentially be a replica of the 1977 Jays.

mike suggested skipping liriano's next start until martin is back. i think this is the jays agreeing with him.