Didn’t we all get a litter slower, post pandemic?It is odd. He was 70-84 percentile his first three years and then 52 last year and 40 this year. Quite a precipitous drop.
Didn’t we all get a litter slower, post pandemic?It is odd. He was 70-84 percentile his first three years and then 52 last year and 40 this year. Quite a precipitous drop.
As you should. It's like @DennyDoyle'sBoil's post in the Psssst thread noting the time to break up a no hitter after it gets posted on SoSH. My FB memories in October have a few days where the Sox were playing and getting no hit for like 3 or 4 innings and my posts are "Hey, did anyone notice that <insert pitcher> has a no hitter going?" I have a 100% success rate in causing the breakup of no hitters.I blame myself for drawing all this attention to him.
I need to try that!
You are the worst. Way to go.I blame myself for drawing all this attention to him.
Hey! How about those Tampa Rays!
Goes 1-17, average drops from 402 to 378… then boom 11-14 back to 400 even.How about 5-5 twice in three days? I need the stat on the last time that happened and who it was.
I might actually need to watch a Marlins game. I usually reserve those viewings for when they’re wearing their teal hat throwbacks, but I may make an exception.
He’s already at .800 without ANY walks or XBHHe has a .940 OPS, good for 6th in MLB, and he's hit two homers all year. Everyone else in close to him has at least 10.
I check Shohei every day. I am fascinated by him.I love this. Aside from checking if Judge homered the night before during last season, when was the last time there was an interesting reason to check on an individual player every day? The analytical look at this is laugh out loud funny. Is it too early? Is he getting cheapy hits? Do I care? Someone is hitting .400!
At least last night he crushed four of his hits, and the fifth was no cheapy. Baseball savant data.Is it too early? Is he getting cheapy hits? Do I care? Someone is hitting .400!
Well, you weren’t wrong. He doesn’t have much power and doesn’t have much speed but those contact skills are the best we’ve seen in a long time. That trade for Minnesota…woof.I was surprised last night when, while rocking a 5 for 5 game, he was lifted for a pinch hitter in the 8th vs a Jays position player pitching. Seems like an obvious time to let him go for the 6th hit? The guy is a menace. I admit I wrote him off "no power" "not much speed" but wow this is fun to watch.
Not for nothing, but Lopez also has about a 1 run difference between his FIP and his ERA (3.49 v. 4.40). His xERA is 3.23. I think it's much more likely that Lopez turns back into a solid pitcher than Arraez finishes the season hitting .400.It seemed like the Marlins were universally panned for that trade, but Pablo Lopez is giving up a lot of big innings because he can't retire anyone out of the stretch. The Twins also received Jose Salas, a highly regarded infield prospect, in the deal. MLB.com had him ranked as Minnesota's #9 prospect, but he's putting up a .499 OPS in Hi-A ball.
Arraez has a career OPS+ of 125 and is just entering his prime so Lopez had better get closer to his peripherals or that’s not a great trade. Definitely time for it to be a relative wash though.Not for nothing, but Lopez also has about a 1 run difference between his FIP and his ERA (3.49 v. 4.40). His xERA is 3.23. I think it's much more likely that Lopez turns back into a solid pitcher than Arraez finishes the season hitting .400.
Yep, like the now deceased LeMahieu.As a Sox fan, I’m just glad he’s not setting the table for an AL team. He’s exactly the kind of hitter the Yankees need in front of Judge, for instance.
I'm no expert on FIP or xERA, but as I said, Lopez is struggling with a known issue of pitching out of the stretch. I suspect a pitcher who's allowing an inordinate number of his baserunners to score is probably going to look better in theoretical statistics than those that measure actual results. It doesn't make sense to throw our hands up and say it must be bad luck or random statistical variance when we already know there's a mechanical or mental issue that accounts for why the models don't match reality. That doesn't mean he won't make adjustments or completely change what he's doing and get better results, but he has a legitimate problem to solve that isn't simply luck.Not for nothing, but Lopez also has about a 1 run difference between his FIP and his ERA (3.49 v. 4.40). His xERA is 3.23. I think it's much more likely that Lopez turns back into a solid pitcher than Arraez finishes the season hitting .400.
To be fair, this is at least in part because two of their young-ish starters (Joe Ryan and Bailey Ober) took major steps forward, arguably beyond reasonable expectations.Even if Lopez bounces back, it looks like poor roster construction for the Twins. Their rotation is the team's biggest strength with 3 starters ahead of him pitching at an All-Star level. The reason they're a sub-.500 team is because they have no consistent offense (and no one in their pen to bridge the gap from their starters to their closer).
Yup. Twins are hitting .230 for the season (25th) and have the most strikeouts. Two areas where Arraez would obviously greatly help.I'm no expert on FIP or xERA, but as I said, Lopez is struggling with a known issue of pitching out of the stretch. I suspect a pitcher who's allowing an inordinate number of his baserunners to score is probably going to look better in theoretical statistics than those that measure actual results. It doesn't make sense to throw our hands up and say it must be bad luck or random statistical variance when we already know there's a mechanical or mental issue that accounts for why the models don't match reality. That doesn't mean he won't make adjustments or completely change what he's doing and get better results, but he has a legitimate problem to solve that isn't simply luck.
I'm also pretty sure Arraez doesn't need to hit .400 to be worth a "solid pitcher".
Even if Lopez bounces back, it looks like poor roster construction for the Twins. Their rotation is the team's biggest strength with 3 starters ahead of him pitching at an All-Star level. The reason they're a sub-.500 team is because they have no consistent offense (and no one in their pen to bridge the gap from their starters to their closer).
Teddy did face a shift starting in 1946, 5 years after he hit .406.Interesting the .400 chase is happening in the first year after banning the shift. But then, Ted didn’t face the shift either. So not like it’s a .400*. If anything, would probably be celebrated as a return to *true* baseball, if it happened.
Interesting. Sounds like Ted was the impetus for the shift In generalTeddy did face a shift starting in 1946, 5 years after he hit .406.
https://sabr.org/gamesproj/game/july-14-1946-lou-boudreau-debuts-his-shift-against-red-sox-slugger-ted-williams/
For those who have been closest, you don't have to miss by much:Arraez has at least one hit in every game since June 16th, except for the one Bello held him hitless... and his average is down to .388.
It absolutely blows my mind that anyone was ever able to hit .400.
Not quite the same thing, but Wade Boggs had a stretch of 162 games from 6/9/1985 to 6/6/1986 where he batted .401. He had 257 hits in 641 at-bats (in 81 home games and 81 away games). Along with 12 HR, 92 RBI, 125 R, 109 Walks, .489 OBP, .541 SLG. He was insanely good. Tony Gwynn sort of did the same thing, he hit .402 in 162 games from 7/27/1993 to 5/13/1995 (but over a longer time period due to the strike).Arraez has at least one hit in every game since June 16th, except for the one Bello held him hitless... and his average is down to .388.
It absolutely blows my mind that anyone was ever able to hit .400.
I think it was another Williams, Cy Williams.Interesting. Sounds like Ted was the impetus for the shift In general
You are correct. The Williams Shift is often misattributed to Ted.I think it was another Williams, Cy Williams.
Rogers Hornsby probably had the longest streak of batting .400+ as he averaged .402 from 1921 through 1925, and it was actually a bit longer than that as he ended the 1920 season with 43 hits in 97 at bats.Not quite the same thing, but Wade Boggs had a stretch of 162 games from 6/9/1985 to 6/6/1986 where he batted .401. He had 257 hits in 641 at-bats (in 81 home games and 81 away games). Along with 12 HR, 92 RBI, 125 R, 109 Walks, .489 OBP, .541 SLG. He was insanely good. Tony Gwynn sort of did the same thing, he hit .402 in 162 games from 7/27/1993 to 5/13/1995 (but over a longer time period due to the strike).