Game 25: Tigers 3, Indians 1
by Ryan on May 3, 2009 5:10 PM EDT
in Game Recaps
Email
PrintIf a pitcher with great stuff is on his game, often there isn't a lot you can do. Justin Verlander, who had all kinds of trouble against the Indians last season, was virtually unhittable today, judging by the at-bats the Indians had against him. But for most of the game, Cliff Lee kept the Indians in the game, and by the time Verlander's pitch count started to mount, the Indians and Tigers were still tied at one. But to use an overused but in this case appropriate phrase, the Indians found a way to lose this game.
The seventh inning determined the game. In the top of the frame, Shin-Soo Choo walked, then scampered to third on Mark DeRosa's double, only the second hit of the game to that point. David Dellucci was then intentionally walked, loading the bases with nobody out. With Choo at third and the infield drawn in, any reasonably-deep fly ball or hard-hit ground ball would give the Indians the lead. Even a slow-hit grounder would probably get the job done. Instead, Kelly Shoppach hit a shallow pop fly to right, and Choo had no chance of scoring. Next up was Matt LaPorta, hitting for the third time against Verlander in his major-league debut. He fouled a couple of high-90s fastballs off, but was eventually frozen by a curve on in the inside corner. Luis Valbuena, in his Indians debut, grounded to the shortstop to end the rally, and any chance of a win.
Cliff Lee also had problems in the seventh, but he couldn't get out of it. Backup catcher Dane Sardinha doubled to begin the seventh, but unlike the Indians, the Tigers had their best hitters up with runners in scoring position. Curtis Granderson broke the tie with a double, and he scored two batters later on Magglio Ordonez's single. The Indians managed another scoring opportunity in the eighth, but Mark DeRosa's line drive was hit right at shortstop Adam Everett.
It's getting late early, folks.
Next Up: Carmona vs. Tallet*, 7:05 PM
*Let's Go (Former) Tribe
| Highest WPA | Lowest WPA | ||
| Mark DeRosa | .058 | Matt LaPorta | -.196 |
| Asdrubal Cabrera | .051 | Grady Sizemore | -.148 |
| Shin-Soo Choo | .042 | Kelly Shoppach | -.110 |
118 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Attempts at optimism become less and less wholehearted.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
Can I both flag and rec this at the same time?
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on May 3, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Hoynes says there’s a weariness to Wedge.
Maybe it is possible for him to get the ax. Again the bases loaded thing. The pitcher is supposed to be at a disadvantage, but with the Tribe, it’s the hitter who is in the hole with the bases loaded and nobody out. Terrible hitting the past two days with RISP (especially taking away Asdrubal’s gift double yesterday).
I would actually anticipate him resigning if Shap wants him out. I think Shapiro respects him enough to ask him which he’d prefer to do-resign or be fired, and I think Wedge would choose resign.
Fangraphs is telling me that Grady is first in hte league in combined negative WPA. That can’t be good right?
Is there anyone outside of Victor, and possibly Asdrubal, that you feel a sense of confidence watching? I think that’s my complete list.
I still have confidence in Choo, even though the stats don’t bear it out. He just doesn’t look as defeated as some of the other chumps do.
by supermarioelia on May 3, 2009 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I actually don’t have any confidence in Martinez in RISP situations. Seems like he hasn’t really done much with runners on base.
If that’s true, it’s very recent. Guy was an RBI machine for the first 2-3 weeks.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
For the season, 6/23 with RISP, 1 XBH, 6 BB, 2 K (.387/.304/.691)
Weirdly, he is 18/40 with Runners On, which means he’s 12/17 with a man on first, right?
Meanwhile, he’s 19/54 with the bases empty. (.417/.593/1.009)
Would it be rude for me to point out that the whole discussion is retarded?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Based on SSS? No, it wouldn’t be rude. But here’s my issue. The sample sizes are significant enough that the Tribe has made several costly roster decisions based on them. (As always, it’s granted that the Indians FO is working with better data than the Yahoo stuff I used above.)
The SSS argument only works until it doesn’t, right? Are Victor’s RISP stats thus far 50% too small? 75%? How much above his career average would he have to perform to balance them out?
The Tribe has played bad enough that they’re 5 games out after only 25 games and they’re currently tied for worst in the AL with the Orioles. As was mentioned elsewhere, Stark mentioned this (and yeah, I’m citing Stark unironically) in a blog post on Friday.
OK, let’s look back even further. The Rays (9-14) and Indians (8-14) won’t enjoy learning that only 10 of the 160 playoff teams since 1982 finished April more than three games under .500. And just one team since 1935 — the 1979 Pirates — was more than three games under after April and won the World Series.
So, just to be clear, it’s true that we’re dealing with small sample sizes. But it’s also true that only one team has been three games under .500 at the end of April (we’re 7 games under) and won the World Series. So, at some point, it stops being SSS and starts being another lost season.
PS, if the whole discussion is pointless for another reason, please disregard the above.
The SSS argument only works until it doesn’t, right? Are Victor’s RISP stats thus far 50% too small? 75%? How much above his career average would he have to perform to balance them out?
RISP don’t become statistically significant for many years, and what you find is that at that point, more or less every player in major league history flattens out to the point where you can’t see any clutch or non-clutch at all. By the time you have a good sample size, you realize you’ve been studying something that simply does not differentiate players the way you hoped.
The sample sizes are significant enough that the Tribe has made several costly roster decisions based on them
I have no reason to think the Indians have made any roster decisions based on RISP stats.
Most teams that finish April with a bad record are bad teams, so it’s no surprise that few make the playoffs. Nothing is going to make us happy about this situation, but the question we face now is not whether the hole we’re in is too big — clearly and definitively, it is not too big — but whether the team is capable of starting to play well.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 6:02 AM EDT up reply actions
I think that it’s not just us that don’t have any confidence. I don’t think most of the players are confident. They don’t think they will get the big hit late or will be able to hold off the opposition late.
Pluto had this stat which just absolutely floored me. In April, the Indians were 11-95 (.116) with runners in scoring position and two out. I knew they were bad, but it’s rather unbelieveable that a major league team could be that bad over an entire month. I think they got a few of these hits this weekend, but still, that’s ridiculous. It is the type of stat that you would think would turn around in a big way, but this team seems prone to these types of slumps over the past few years.
It’s also sad that in Lee’s and Carmona’s last five starts, they’re 0-5, and that’s with games where they got decent to excellent starts.
Anyway, I’m back to my 2006 DVR-style watching of this team. On the few days where I can actually sit down and watch the game live, I stop watching after 6 innings if it’s close. I check in every so often to get a status, and then speed through it later.
“over an entire month”
Regardless of the span of time or the number of players involved, it’s still just 95 AB.
I agree that the whole offense seems to go into a freeze with this team, but we tend to blame the whole club (and the manager) when in reality, only 2-3 players are really at fault. There are about 20 Cleveland indians who have had nothing to do with our giving up 25 runs in the 8th inning.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 6:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes, it’s still just 95 AB, and as I indicated, it’s a stat that should change significantly. But THAT bad???
Actually, it’s 35 runs given up in the 8th inning. My dad and I had a conversation yesterday in which we both agreed that regardless of the starting pitching or offense, if the bullpen continues to be this bad they are going nowhere. It’s up to Raffy-L and Lewis to get going.
Only two or three? Sizemore and Peralta, I guess. Hafner, Francisco, DeRosa, Shoppach?
Victor is bad with RISP and two outs.
We all know about the Twins last season with a ridiculous team BA with RISP. An unsustainable figure. The Indians aren’t likely to reach .300 based on the lame performance in the first 95. It will balance out, but it probably ain’t going to be Twins level.
It was ridiculous last year, but it is worth noting something I read somewhere. The Twins have been in the top 5 of MLB in BA with RISP in three of the past five years. So I while I’ll still agree that it is fluky, I wonder if teams that are more willing to put the ball in play are slightly better over time?? I don’t have any data to support that theory nor the time or inclination to research.
It’s not the perfect example because their career OPS is about the same, but who would you rather face with guys in scoring position late – Mauer or Grady?
what do you mean by “more willing to put the ball in play”? like, sacrifice bunts, etc.? b/c it seems to me that not only is every player on every team in baseball “willing to put the ball in play”, but most of them are striving to do exactly that every time they stand in.
as for sacrifices, etc., if that’s your point, i believe the numbers bear out quite clearly the flaws in that strategy.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 4, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Umm..no. Not even close. Sorry, in my haste maybe I didn’t explain it more thoroughly.
Many of the Twins hitters will try to use the entire field and strive just to make contact moreso than other teams. It’s an organizational philosophy. I’m not endorsing that philosophy and I do think they take it to far, because I think Mauer is a 25 HR-plus guy who is too willing to just slap it the other way. But sometimes it pays to have a few guys who are willing to do that.
I’m basically wondering if the success the Twins have had over the past 5 years with RISP is entirely luck. Also, I think Grady could use a “90%” swing. It’s not very often that you see him stick his bat out and flip the ball over the shortstop to drive in a run. I love Grady but there are times where I’m yelling at him to just shorten up some and try to hit a line drive somewhere.
I think there is something to this. Derek Jeter is very good at flipping the ball in play using all fields
Yes, but sacrificing all the time protects BA(risp), so a team that relies heavily on the sac-bunt will end up with an 0-for-0 where they otherwise have had a 2-for-10.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Partially true. If the Twins Sac Bunt as much as they do, it is true they will have fewer PAs for BA/RISP. But they still have to get those runners across the plate.
Assumption, man on 1st, no out. SH occurs, now man on 2nd, one out. Twins score on a base hit. 1-1, RBI.
Next assumption, man on 1st and 2nd, no out. SH, now 2nd and third, one out. A SF scores one, guy on 3rd, two out. another base hit. 1-1, 2 RBI.
Now taking the Indians approach … man on 1st, no out. PO/FO/K, man on 1st one out. Groundout to P, man on 2nd, 2 out. Let’s assume the next guy actually gets a H to score a run, nad the last guy gets out. 1-3, 1 RBI.
Even though the Twins may sacrifice alot, they still need to get a base hit to score the guy they moved up.
on the grady shortening up the swing thing, i certainly can’t argue.
but is “put the ball in play w/ RISP” really an organizational philosophy? that just seems like good baseball.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 4, 2009 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Victor is bad with RISP and two outs.
Wow, what’s your sample size there, 5-10 PA?
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
Nine plate appearances. I would say his one hit in these nine PAs has contributed to the “whole offense freeze” referred to above. In other words, even though Victor is killing the ball, he has not necessarily done so at every opportune moment.
Saying he’s “bad at” it means that it’s a skill, something you can be good or bad at. Whether any significant number of players are actually “good at it” or “bad at it” is a supposition very much in doubt. Whether Victor is bad at it is completely in doubt.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Our schedule thus far is the 4th hardest in the MLB and the hardest in the AL (Cubs, Pads, Astros).
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
We lead the league in silver linings!
Sometimes, I just like to b****.
by emd2k3 on May 3, 2009 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Is it the hardest because we’re playing good teams or the hardest because we keep losing and making other teams look better than they are?
by woodsmeister on May 3, 2009 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, that’s why I’m not always so sold on strength-of-schedule stats. I doubt they subtract W/L that your opposition got against you — although they probably should.
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
I’m now thinking the Biggest Breakout Poll needed to have a “none of the above.”
Sometimes, I just like to b****.
How about replacing it with a “how many weeks does wedge have left” poll?
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
You are not actually “thinking” that.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 6:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Let’s just say you’re having more of a feeling than a thought.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions
The three worst teams in the majors right now are Washington, Baltimore & Cleveland. That is not good company to be in after a month of baseball. Are we really this bad? When do you know that you are bad rather than just damn unlucky?
It really is a nice that none of the other AL Central teams have run away from us with the division so far, cause it could have happened and we would have been out of it already. No we are not as bad as Washington and Baltimore (both team’s picked to finish last in their divisions by most), but a bad bullpen can kill a mediocre team (which we are).
Yeah Moe, that team sure did suck last night. They just plain sucked! Ive seen teams suck before, but they were the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked!
Apologies, but this came to mind this afternoon at the end of the 7th. Sigh.
by Seattle Tribe Fan on May 3, 2009 11:11 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
No, 2008 was the old 2006. 2009 is much newer than 2008 and perhaps even more 2006 than 2006 was.
by woodsmeister on May 4, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the new corollary is we only contend in odd numbered years where there isn’t a WBC. So we should be fine in 2011 & 2013, but obviously we’re screwed royally for 2009 and eventually 2015. All even numbered years we of course know are already a lost cause.
9-16. Kind of amusing in it’s pythagorean pathetic-ness.
I still see talent. I also see only 5 games back with 5 months to play.
Hopefully the team can remain confident, but also play like they’ve got nothing to lose
Not to mention with tons of games left against probable cellar dwellers (cellar mates?) Baltimore and Oakland and teams in our Division. This isn’t like 2005, when Chicago ran away with it. If we can turn it around soon, we still have a chance.
Hopefully it isn’t like 2006 and 2008, where we don’t turn it around in time.
If we can turn it around soon, we still have a chance.
That is so sad to read.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
Of course the Indians are behind every single team in the division by at least three, and we’re now at a place where we need to win at a 92-win full-season clip just to get to 87 wins.
If we can’t play at a 92 win pace for a portion of the season, then there really isn’t any hope or point in getting invested in this team as it stands right now
Oh, also, it’s not a 92-win pace for a portion of the season, it’s a 92-win pace for the remainder of the season.
I don’t want to debate semantics, but with a month played, the remaining games could be considered a portion of the season
Baseball is maddening. The differential from a bad to good or good to great team is so minute that it can be measured in a handful of missed opportunities over the course of a month.
It’s the difference between Cleveland and Detroit in 2007. It’s the difference between the Twins and the Indians last year. It’s the difference between Seattle and (whomever) for this first month of the year. Seattle, a team that doesn’t bowl you over with their stats, but somehow seems to win games through other tangibles they possess.
No one inning squandered and no one game given away breaks a season for a team. But a handful of these a month are the mere difference between the three classes of teams.
Are we a bad team? No. But our record will reflect that we are a bad team if we keep failing to capitalize at key moments in sporadic games.
Emo Gootz compels you to obey!
His OPS is .730, which is good enough to be third highest among their hitters. They are 15-10.
by Toxicadam on May 4, 2009 1:25 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Which will happen first:
- The Indians get 15 wins.
- Wedge gets fired.
Better yet. Which deserves to happen first?
I just want to believe.
That’s easy. Look at the clues:
1. Ancient.
2. Glittering eye.
3. Long beard.
It was Casey Blake.
by InfiniteMonkeyTypists on May 4, 2009 7:59 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
See, I would’ve gone with Gutz since he’s the Mariner now…
I just want to believe.
by mjmarble on May 4, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Chuck?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Saw this last night when I was watching the game. Laughed my butt off. Good to see someone screen capped it.
Good to see someone screen capped it.
not you, apparently.
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
by westbrook on May 4, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not much of a commenter on the game discussions, but I notice that when a new thread starts around the 7th inning, things start to go downhill… Can I put in a motion to avoid all new threads after the fifth inning?
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
Yeah, one with equal bins of numbers.
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
This got rec’ed?
The recs I’ve gotten feel worthless now.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ll admit giving it one that I otherwise may not have because it was at 2. Possibly the first time I’ve done that, so don’t feel too bad.
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
You can un-rec it.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 4, 2009 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Citi Field All-Star game has finally been made official for 2013
- Brett Lawrie receives four-game suspension, fined for ‘aggressive actions’ toward umpire
- PNC Park security guard loses finger in struggle with fan during Pirates game
- Create-a-Caption: Partying like it’s 1988
- The Ron Washington puppet is watching you while you sleep — and has possibly jinxed the Rangers
