The Breakdown: April 21–May 5
|
|
|
Kansas City: Won 8-7, Lost 2-0, Won 5-2
Toronto: Lost 5-1, Lost 7-1, Won 4-2
Boston: Lost 3-1, Won 9-8, Lost 6-5
@ Detroit: Won 6-5, Lost 9-7, Lost 3-1
@ Toronto: Won 9-7, Lost 10-6
THE BIG STORY: The bullpen pitched so badly, the entire season is about as close to being over as it can be after only one month. It has seemed at times that the whole team was struggling, but in truth, the lineup was going through only minor doldrums, scoring exactly 4.5 runs per game — below expectations, but certainly not bad — while the rotation stabilized nicely. Lee has returned fully to Cy Young form, while Pavano, Reyes and Laffey have each produced exactly two quality starts in their last three outings, leaving only Carmona, who has pitched decently though not exactly well. The bullpen, however, has a 7.13 ERA over the past 14 games, repeatedly pushing the Indians into the loss column in close contests.
Statistically, the typical Indians game since April 20 has featured:
- The starter going six innings, maybe a little more, while allowing about 3 runs.
- The lineup scoring about 4.5 runs.
- The bullpen allowing about 2.3 runs over three innings of work.
- The team losing by a score of about 5.3 to 4.5.
For those who buy into the wear-and-tear argument, consider that just eight days ago, five Indians relievers combined to hold the Red Sox to just one run over seven innings, giving the team an improbable 9-8 victory after Reyes started the game with a seven-run, two-inning trainwreck. Since that night, the bullpen has failed in nearly every game. Over the last eight games, the bullpen has directly and decisively handed the club four losses, while blowing leads in two other games that our hitters eventually came back to win. (That last bit is worth remembering, as we consider throwing the whole club under a bus.)
Over a 14-game stretch, it doesn't look quite so terrible — we've been outscored by 13 runs and unsurprisingly went 6–8 as a result. Fact is, with so much disastrous pitching in high-leverage situations, it's a small miracle we won six. (We managed it with a handful of gritty performances early on, plus those two extra-inning wins.) The real problem is that it follows an 0–5 start to the season. For a couple of weeks, we stayed in the periphery of the divisional race by virtue of mediocre competition, along with our own improvement to .500 ball. We were in fact only 2.5 games behind with a 6–10 record. It was inevitable, however, that one or two of our rivals eventually would start winning games, especially in a part of the schedule when two intradivisional games are being played every night. We are now 4.5+ games behind two rivals and 2.5+ games behind all four of them. Essentially, our first-week rotation blowup cost us three games, and our fourth-week bullpen blowup cost us another three — and the lineup has not done anything superlative enough to counterbalance those big faults.
It goes without saying that the season is lost if the bullpen cannot be stabilized. Beyond that, if the club's management cannot manage to produce fewer than four historically bad bullpens in six seasons, then they need to seriously consider the way they're doing things in this area — or, possibly, step aside.
After the jump: IN OTHER NEWS, WHO FED IT and WHO ATE IT.
IN OTHER NEWS: Fully one-fifth of the roster turned over, led by the crushing news that Travis Hafner would return to the DL and the big-league debut of über prospect and slugger Matt LaPorta. The extent of Hafner's setback was downplayed as being more of a "just needs a little rest" thing, but it was a sobering development and a reminder that even if his hitting skills are intact, his shoulder probably never will be. The five moves essentially boil down to:
- Hafner out, Dellucci in — In one of the season's more surprising developments, Dellucci came off the DL swinging a hot bat, and looking like a man on a mission (or possibly just a run of good BIP luck).
- Graffanino out, Valbuena in — Most roster moves are about more than just one player, and this is a textbook example. Both players demonstrated by their performances that Valbuena was the clear, best choice for this job going forward. "This job," by the way, is the one Jamey Carroll will reclaim later this month, sending Valbuena back to demolishing bathrooms in the International League.
- Crowe out, Barfield in — This move made apparently in the recognition that your Designated Runner doesn't actually have to start any games, at any position.
- Jackson out, Sipp in — Jackson was not really a lefty specialist, and with the rotation stabilizing, the Indians need a guy who can neutralize lefties a whole lot more than a long man. This move reminiscent of when The Tonight Show switched from Doc Severinson to Branford Marsalis, or when the Batman movie franchise switched from Joel Schumaker to Christopher Nolan.
- Smith out, LaPorta in — The bullpen shrinks back to its regular complement of seven, while the bench gets someone who can actually hit, or at least might plausibly hit. Smith more than likely will return after a rehab assignment shakes out whatever is ailing him, recalling that he had a compressed spring training due to an early bout with the flu.
WHO FED IT: Victor Martinez continued his torrid run, producing almost exactly the same OPS over his last 14 games (1081) as in his first 13 (1077). He has produced an OPS of 929 or better in all nine series played so far, averaging 4.7 hits, 7.4 total bases and 1.8 walks per series. I have often commented that there is nothing truly "consistent" in baseball as we perceive it, but Victor's opening month is the most consistently excellent I can ever remember seeing, and he's started every single game, playing catcher 56% of the time. He's among the league leaders in most batting categories, and his 67 total bases leads all AL catchers by more than 20.
Cliff Lee has averaged more than seven innings and 1.5 runs allowed over his last four starts — outside of the second inning of the season, when he was struck on his pitching arm by a comebacker and gave up four runs, Lee has a 3.08 ERA, and over his last four starts, it's 1.86. Tony Sipp dominated in his first five big league appearances, striking out 8 of the first 17 batters he faced while allowing just one lonely single, two walks and no runs. Even after allowing back-to-back home runs last night, Sipp still has the staff's lowest ERA (3.60), although he may come with a limited-use warranty. Pavano doesn't really deserve a mention here, but after his first-start disaster, he has averaged 6+ innings per start with a 4.44 ERA, delivering two quality starts and one near-miss in four tries — if he keeps this up, we're definitely getting our money's worth.
Chulk has too few strikeouts and too many walks, but geez, the guy really has been vaguely unhittable, allowing just four hits, all of them singles, over his last 32 batters faced. Beyond Victor, there were no real offensive standouts over the whole stretch, although Dellucci came in with a vengeance, batting .538 in his first four games back. Barfield accidentally got two at-bats and just as accidentally got two singles. Absolute Best: Lee, who has an 0-2 record (per the idiot stats) to show for it. Relative Best: Victor.
WHO ATE IT: A long list of hitters and relievers. Grady's hot start crashed with a 640 OPS, owing to a diminished walk rate and a horrible .230 BABIP (which didn't seem entirely due to bad luck). Hafner had a 601 OPS over eight games prior to going on the DL, and Trevor Crowe was 1-for-11 with no walks and no extra-base hits before being sent down. Our Little Giraffe reached new depths by making nine outs in only seven trips to the plate (and one pinch-running appearance) — but we don't have to worry about those guys anymore. Shoppach had a .345 OBP over these 14 games, but it was propped up by three HBP in his last two games. He had only one walk and one extra-base hit over 29 PA, and he batted .174. Garko did his usual mediocre schtick, batting .294 with a decent .359 OBP — but his total lack of power production means that he's still a first baseman with a 683 OPS. LaPorta looked borderline-overmatched over a handful of games, though his two-run bomb certainly was memorable.
Several Tribe hitters seemed to collapse utterly after the Tribe's 22-4 drubbing of the Yankees, but none moreso than Peralta, who hit just .082 (4-for-49) in his next 12 games (prior to last night's 3-for-5 performance). He's struck out an astounding 19 times in his last 10 games, including a trio of three-strikeout performances. It's really bad, and none of his three hits last night — essentially two bloops and a well-placed hard grounder — really demonstrated that he's done with his dry spell.
Let's just admit it: Kerry Wood has been terrible. He had a 9.45 ERA over the past two weeks, and getting down to results-oriented boobery, he's outright lost two games and nearly a third. The K/9 looks phenomenal, but the walks and home runs do not — and when you're blowing games and allowing more than two baserunners per inning, nobody really cares about the K rate. He'll get a long rope to hang himself, but it hasn't been the 9th inning we signed up for, that's or sure.
Perez's last two weeks actually have been no worse than his previous two weeks, raising the question of why he's still in the majors at all. Somebody with the Indians mumbled something about "respecting what he's done here" — as if anybody should give a crap about respecting the achievements of a third-year reliever with an ERA north of 15. Let's not mince words here, this isn't about the lack of a viable reliever in Columbus — there is nobody pitching in Columbus who isn't likely to do better than a 15.19 ERA. Just what are we saving this guy's third option year for? Are we waiting for him to have a really serious problem getting guys out while the season hangs in the balance? Hello? Absolute Worst: Peralta. Relative Worst: Perez.
8 recs |
79 comments
|
Comments
Replace as many of the players who are “eating it” with ones who blend in. If that fails, we start over.
if the club’s management cannot manage to produce fewer than four historically bad bullpens in six seasons, then they need to seriously consider the way they’re doing things in this area — or, possibly, step aside.
I’m happy to see a mod write this. I’ve thought it, but been to scared to post it.
Do we really know whether or not Shap can build a bullpen?
Why were you scared to post it?
I’m not not sure if it is randomness or that Shapiro and Wedge have trouble putting a bull pen together. Maybe it’s just bad luck. I’m helpful, huh?
Shap Daddy is deified around here (“our best players wear suits,” etc.). I thought I’d be crucified if I wrote something so incendiary.
by JulioBernazard on May 6, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point. I just don’t like getting flamed.
by JulioBernazard on May 6, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
our best players wear suits
I for one have never written that.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s your blessing and your curse.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on May 6, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, that’s what this is … jealousy.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not trying to say that. I’m just not comfortable being at the center of this particular controversy; it’s being taken pretty far out of context-the idea of a faux gamethread.
Whatever. This is a dumb thing to be panty bunching over.
I didn’t even realize you were the first to post that phrase, so that was not in any way directed at you. I just know that several people have posted it, posted about getting the Antonetti-2 jersey, etc. While obviously I have much praised this front office, I just don’t have that mentality.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, it’s an interesting distinction, as I was just writing below.
I don’t know, in some ways I think there is a decent argument for attaching yourself to Shapiro instead of to a player. If you align with the organizational commitment to stability then I think a Shapiro jersey makes more sense than a Victor one simply because Shapiro is the symbol of that stability, both within the organization (he creates the stability) and as an outward figure (he is stable in that he has been her longer than nearly any Indian and will almost certainly outlast them).
This has happened in some organizations before, I think. I guess there’s an argument that this is how Yankees’ fans viewed Steinbrenner for years; Mike Sciosa jumps to mind as more symbolic of an era of success for the Angels than nearly any other player.
Yeah, that’s just not how I think of it. Ultimately, nothing happens without the players actually doing it. Wins are the bottom line, and players win ballgames.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I mentioned that phrase earlier, and I want you to know that I’m not trying to shoot the messenger. I happen to think you can turn a phrase, and it’s a damn good phrase. It’s just not true. One interesting thing about it: it’s really not just a comment. You really encapsulated the opinion of the time with those words. But here’s the truth: no number massaging, er “facts,” are ever as interesting as a bat hitting ball or ball hitting glove. No drama is bigger than the comeback story of Lee, total hardass, standing on the mound. Shap and Co are not why we love the Indians. It’s the players – ironically, Shap can and should stay for many years longer than most of the players ever will – but its the players who keep us coming back every year.
I mean, clearly, it’s the players who are, at heart, the most important thing to all of us. Our team is playing poorly right now – Grady can’t hit, Wood can’t pitch, and Garko is a professional baseball player – and we’re all in Grade A Flipout Mode. But think: is our talent really that good? Are Garko, Benfran, Jensen, DeRosa, Perez, Betancourt, Laffey, freaking Reyes the guys you beat the Red Sox with?
I think Shapiro is a very good GM. I think his failings, FA signings and drafting, are currently hurting the team. There is no transitional layer of talent between the Jhonny/Victor/Grady era and the LaPorta/Santana/Rondon era. The latter need to cook another year. So in the mean time – ‘08 and ’09 – we’re pinched a little. It’ll alleviate (assuming we have a starting rotation in ’10, ’11, ’12…)
There is no transitional layer of talent between the Jhonny/Victor/Grady era and the LaPorta/Santana/Rondon era.
This is a fairly ridiculous statement.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions
First off, I don’t think he’s a particular drafter.
Second off, I think this is an interesting question. I’m not really sure that I love the Indians because of the players or that the tone of this site really lends itself to that viewpoint. All you have to do is go as far as the Sabathia Wars to realize that the bottom line here is literally the laundry and the laundry stands for an organization. Shapiro is much more representative of and tied to the organization than is any single player.
It’s ultimately a semantics argument but I think it’s an interesting one. What, exactly, do we love? We love the tribe (not proper noun but lower case) and the tribe’s leader is Mark Shapiro; the players are like paid mercenaries, or something. I can’t figure out that part.
I never though the question was about “why do we follow the Tribe?” but rather:
Where does Shapiro rank among GMs? or
What would be worse for the organization: losing Shapiro & Antonetti? or Sizemore?
I mean, sure, the answer is Sizemore, but I think people underestimate how easily WE COULD BE THE ROYALS! OR THE PIRATES! OR THE REDS!
I mean, sure, the answer is Sizemore, but I think people underestimate how easily WE COULD BE THE ROYALS! OR THE PIRATES! OR THE REDS!
More importantly, many folks have forgotten that for almost three and a half decades, we were the equivalent of today’s Royals, Pirates and Reds (60s, 70s, 80s and early 90s).
by woodsmeister on May 7, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t really buy that you can “build a bullpen”. You can buy a bullpen (like the Mets and White Sox have done) or you can throw 6 guys out there and hope for the best (which most teams do).
People always claim how the Tampa Bay Rays were inevitably going to win that division because of all the young talent they acquired through the year … but that team would have been out of the playoffs if they didn’t luck out and get good performances out of guys like Dan Wheeler, JP Howell and Grant Balfour. Look through the history of those guys, there was no indication that they could ever put together seasons like they did.
I understand why old-timers like Nolan Ryan rail against the ‘100 pitch-count era’. You spend all this time and money into developing a starting staff only to turn most ballgames over to a collection of AAAA, washed-up starters and headcases in the bullpen. There is no science to creating a good bullpen.
It’s shocking to think about when it’s laid out so starkly. The bullpen construction has been a hammartia that has been the difference between a good team and a .500 team in each one of those years. And the 2007 bullpen—was it actually a good bullpen, or just the product of two coincidentally excellent reliever years?
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on May 6, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I do not feel we had a good bullpen in 2007. We had three guys who gave us 2.5 phenomenal seasons, and they carried us through nearly all the high-leverage innings. Betancourt’s 80+ high-leverage innings were insane.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t forget that our 2007 bullpen was a mess going into May. We had Borowski who blew a couple of saves already (one memorable one in NY), Ferd Cabrera who was still Ferd Cabrera, the brief Jason Davis experiment and Oldberto Hernandez (he was our setup guy!!).
It was amazing we had a winning record that April.
I was going to link this, because I think it is the perfect example of how to gripe. Really, the FO has delivered us some great bats, great SP, great young players. Our FA signings have been across the board terrible, but that’s somewhat due to the nature of our market. But the bullpen – I mean, wtf? Maybe it’s all “randomness,” but when you’re consistently putting up the worst all-time bullpens, you have to wonder.
Beyond that, if the club’s management cannot manage to produce fewer than four historically bad bullpens in six seasons, then they need to seriously consider the way they’re doing things in this area — or, possibly, step aside.
This is the most sobering bit of the piece for me. It’s crushing to think 2005 and 2007 were mirages. Maybe this whole “moneyball” thing is bogus. Or, alternatively, we’re doin’ it wrong.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
“moneyball” as it applies to relievers? Probably not bogus at all as demonstrated by our bullpen, IMO. Look at Raffy P, Raffy B, Jensen, Wood. All recently had phenomenal years. Moneyball says that bullpens are totally variable from one year to the next, but then we’re surprised that our guys vary too – because we think that our guys actually have that great stuff, have that great talent that will eventually translate consistently. I say we need to be more ruthless and detached with our guys. If they suck the next year? Screw them. It’s variability. Move on. But MB hasn’t precluded the notion of an elite few who can be consistent – and I personally thought for a long time that we might’ve stumbled on to those elite few, the next Mariano Riveras or whatever. Clearly not the case.
I don’t think “moneyball” has egg on its face. I think the young cubs who arrogantly dismiss the opinions of the older guys based on “facts” – which are actually not facts, they are interpretation of facts – probably look a little silly right now. I think this is what mauichuck has been harping on – we shouldn’t assume we’ve found the baseball rosetta stone just yet. Or maybe that we have, but everyone else has it too, so what good is it anymore?
I think the young cubs who arrogantly dismiss the opinions of the older guys based on "facts" – which are actually not facts, they are interpretation of facts – probably look a little silly right now.
OK, but whenever we get into this kind of discussion, there is almost always a conspicuous absence of “the opinions of the older guys.” I assume this means scouts and scouting reports, and not just fans randomly remembering their favorite players. There’s no debate unless we have scouting reports that disagree with the “interpretation of facts.”
I guess I didn’t really mean it that way. I think you can use interpretation of facts to polish turds into gold – like the famous Dellichaels platoon.
But maybe all this is moot. We’re going to war with Garko, BenFran, and a fumbling Derosa in 3 of our 4 corner spots. We have a bullpen that explodes every night. We look similar to last year’s 81-81 club. Maybe our strategy isn’t really bad – we just haven’t completed The Vision yet.
I’m not really indicting “moneyball” here. I don’t even think “moneyball” is a thing. I’m just saying, it makes you think… we’ve put a lot of trust in out “Polo Shirt Mafia,” and rightfully so, it seemed. But maybe we were wrong.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
I mean, I think you can say pretty conclusively that they (CA and MS) are very good GMs (let’s just call them co-GMs, as they’ve said before). We find ourselves, right now, potentially out of a playoff race – but what about all those other teams who are perennially irrelevant? The tribe is always in it in some form. Hell, last two years we’ve produced Cy youngs. I have a friend who is an Orioles fan. Imagine his pain. That chant I’ve never repeated is the “best players wear suits” chant. This is baseball. Our best players play CF C, and their name is Victor Martinez.
Yes. I actually agree with everything you’ve said in this thread. Good stuff.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on May 6, 2009 10:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Because this bullpen just has to provide some entertainment value, here is today’s edition of Fun with Anagrams, brought to you by the Tribe Bullpen (Let Up, Nibbler):
Kerry Wood Dorky Wore
Rafael Perez A Lap Freezer
Rafael Betancourt A Notable Fracture
Jensen D. Lewis Sinned Jewels
Masa Kobayashi A Boa’s Shaky Aim
Vinnie Chulk Unveil Chink
Joe Smith Hem Joist
Tony Sipp Pony Spit
Zach Jackson A Jack Schnoz
I cheated with JLew. Gets a blown save even in a dorky word game.
by FredOx on May 6, 2009 2:47 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
I love A Notable Fracture.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on May 6, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Tony Lastoria is speculating that Sowers might have been pulled from his start because he might soon be traded for bullpen help. Kind of early in the season for other teams to be willing to trade off of their major league rosters, so I wonder if the Indians might be looking at other teams systems for help…
Kind of early in the season for other teams to be willing to trade off of their major league rosters
Unless they were looking to dump salary in the process. But I can’t see us taking on another decent- sized contract.
I’d be very surprised. I think they have to be projecting a multimillion loss at this point, based on the slow start’s effect on ticket sales.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s not high on the list of things I’d expect but nothing seems out of the realm of possibility right now. I see an organization that is desperate to not give up on this season and Dolan willingly deficit spending doesn’t seem totally impossible.
Of course, it all depends on how much money, who, and how long.
Personally, I see the organization closer to going into a “fire everybody, dump salary” mode than some sort of mid-season buying spree.
I mean, financially speaking, would the club really get hurt by throwing in the towel for the season? They are already averaging horrible gates with not much more promise of them getting better. Look around the league .. even the winning teams (in places where they haven’t won in years) aren’t drawing great crowds.
If you’re right, then who’s going to be bidding?
by fleerdon on May 6, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I speculated this in the other thread. I think it’s feasible.
I also think the easy and fairly logical thing to do is to swap Perez out for Rundles or Sowers directly. I’m not absolutely sure that Jensen needs to be sent down, though I probably would do it if it were up to me.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, Jensen didn’t suck enough to be eating it?
by fleerdon on May 6, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
It was complicated. He gave up that one home run, but it was on his 10th batter … his ERA was under 4 …
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions
That would surprise me. I think he and Scotty are going to be guest hosting the Tony Reyes Fifth Starter Show within a few more starts.
by fleerdon on May 6, 2009 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I just ate some edamame. I think that meas victory tonight.
by APV on May 6, 2009 3:27 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Rec
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on May 6, 2009 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions
this is increasingly looking confirmed. everyone who lives near a Trader Joe’s, go out and pick up some lightly salted frozen edamame. Easy to prepare (microwave), tasty, good for you, and good for the Tribe.
by APV on May 7, 2009 8:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Ok, so looking at the AAA stats and the (gulp) AA stats, who do we think has a realistic shot of being called up and actually being helpful? Scott Roehl & Rich Rundles are the only two guys in AAA with even decent-ish stats but who knows if either of those guys would actually be decent in the majors (though I’d tend to lean towards “probably not”). Nobody in AA is really tearing up the league to the point that I’d say “bring ’em up,” though I suppose we could screw with Rondon’s development by bringing him up to pitch in the bullpen for a while (hey, it worked for Johan Santana, right?).
My big worry is that it’s early enough in the season that nobody’s looking to unload relievers just yet, so there’s not going to be a lot of teams beating down our door to make trades to help us shore up our bullpen. Sigh.
I like that we’re thinking creatively here and on the other thread, but isn’t the most simple answer still Meloan? He’s on the 40, and has a history of talent. (if that phrase makes sense) Obviously, Rundles is likely as well, so maybe both.
And not that we should care, but imagine being Lovullo these days.
Yeah, I mean, Meloan isn’t setting the world on fire, but it’s difficult for me to imagine him doing worse. If he can keep it to a run for every five or six outs, I’d make the call.
by fleerdon on May 6, 2009 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you guys, I do appreciate the recs. These take several hours to research and write, and they don’t always generate a lot of discussion, so I need to be reminded that people actually like them.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on May 6, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed with Nick. My favorite part as well.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on May 6, 2009 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I may just go ahead and steal the whole system of eating it/fed it and mood meter for my actual life.
Waiting for Rondon.
by Gradyforpresident on May 6, 2009 10:14 PM EDT reply actions

by 






















