Yes, it's time for the Indians to panic

The author's headline, not mine.

"So before burying the Indians with more than 95 percent of their season to play, allow us to present a few facts: Over the past 25 full seasons, 45 teams in Major League Baseball have begun their seasons 1-6 or worse. Of those 45, eight have finished the year with a better-than-average record. And of those eight, only one – the 2007 Philadelphia Phillies – made the postseason. In which they were promptly swept."

almost 3 years ago millionairesrow 25 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Which would you rather be:

1-6, 3 games out of first in your division, with the White Sox, Twins, Tigers and Royals ahead of you. Or,
2-5, 3.5 games out of first in your division, with the Orioles, Bluejays, Rays and Yankees ahead of you.

by APV on Apr 14, 2009 4:28 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

The one without Carl Pavano.

I refuse to ever root for a team that routinely does the MVP chant for opposing players.

by TheVanillaGorilla on Apr 14, 2009 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs

Really? Wouldn’t it be better to have Carl Pavano really stink for a few starts and get the boot than have someone like Jon Lester stink marginally less but keep taking the mound every fifth day (11 IP, 11 ER so far). If you’re going to suck, do so magnificently.

by FredOx on Apr 14, 2009 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions

The one with the 2007 ERA+ of 144 over 200 innings.

Carmona for Cy Young 2009

by danvail on Apr 14, 2009 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions

2008

Carmona for Cy Young 2009

by danvail on Apr 14, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Hello, rec, nice to see you.

Eric Wedge. The Adam LaRoche of managers.

by emd2k3 on Apr 14, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah here’s the thing. These things hardly ever seem relevant. Especially this part:

And of those eight, only one – the 2007 Philadelphia Phillies – made the postseason. In which they were promptly swept

Let’s say the Indians were to make the playoffs. Odds of us getting swept in the first round? Odds of anyone even mentioning, “You know, remember when we started 1-6? Well the last team…”? Odds of us getting swept actually having anything to do whatsoever with the Phillies getting swept?

And odds that this same author, were we to get swept in the first round of the playoffs, proclaiming us World Series favorites for 2010? Because you know only one other team in history went 1-6, made the playoffs, and got swept in the first round, and you know what happened to them?

SCIENCE.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Apr 14, 2009 4:47 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs

These things are all dumb anyways. The Indians will right the ship and then win it too.

by mjschaefer on Apr 14, 2009 5:23 PM EDT reply actions

It’s not completely dumb. There is some merit behind an article that cites actual statistics. We aren’t very good right now, why should we suddenly become world-beatingly better?

I never learned to read.

by Brad D on Apr 14, 2009 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Well, the question isn’t whether the article cites statistics, it’s whether those statistics have any predictive value (as opposed to being correlations). I don’t know, it hardly reads like something you’d read in a SABR journal.

"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter

by Denver Tribe Fan on Apr 14, 2009 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs

For sure. Even if they are just correlations, they don’t bode well.

I never learned to read.

by Brad D on Apr 14, 2009 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions

If anything the Indians’ 1-6 record looks worse in context, considering who they’ve played. If they played, for instance, the Red Sox and Rays over their first seven games, you might chalk it up to a tough schedule.

But I’m not going to start drawing conclusions until at least the end of April.

by Ryan on Apr 14, 2009 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions

I am curious if the rest of those 45 teams made it much past .500 or if they remained crappy. I don’t think you cam point the finger at this one stat.

LGT's resident Beer Advocate.

by LGT Patrick on Apr 14, 2009 6:37 PM EDT reply actions

lies, d*** lies and statistics

by lenred on Apr 14, 2009 6:42 PM EDT reply actions

That article and headline are both pretty silly. I can’t really see a reason why the first 7 games are any more significant than any other 7 game stretch. (Some might say it’s less important because its early in the season, others seem to believe that wins in April count double.)

There are also a lot of factors not discussed, such as the advantages of divisional play and the wild card, that make the article less than enlightening, but oh well, they gotta ~~sell papers~~ get hits.

Obviously the team has started poorly and that’s not good, but I don’t even know what “panic” means – fire everybody? stop watching? stop caring? Whatever. Go Tribe.

Lead singer and driver of the Winnebago.

by Fredward on Apr 14, 2009 7:55 PM EDT reply actions

I think a lot of bad teams (e.g., the 2009 Nationals) start bad and remain bad. I don’t think the Indians are a bad team (though I’m not as certain of this as I was a week ago), which would suggest this seven-game mess is just conspicuously timed.

by odradek on Apr 15, 2009 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions

eight game mess.

by afh4 on Apr 15, 2009 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Yes, and it probably isn’t going to end anytime soon. I don’t see them going to New York and winning two out of three. They’re going to look like the North Ridgeville JV team when they’re playing in NY.

by odradek on Apr 15, 2009 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions