Email
PrintComments
Normally I would say that there’s no transaction too small for us to analyze here (what, we got Rob Mackowiak?!?), but it’s hard to get too interested in a Sipp/Smith switch. Sipp has only pitched once since his recall (and again had a couple of walks). They probably just figured that Smith was a better fit for now.
This is the first bullpen transaction in a long time where we are sending down a guy who’s not horrible. So hooray for having our bullpen depth to 8!
by dgcambridge on Jun 9, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meanwhile, a guy who iS horrible and has clearly been deemed un-useable by Wedge, remains on the bench, chatting with Chuck Hernandez. I refer, of course, to Jensen Lewis. Is he out of options? If he isn’t, I’d have sent him to Columbus and kept Sipp, who at least gives us a lefty who has been effective at times (although his control issues are real).
by peter m on Jun 9, 2009 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would have made sense…. He should have an option left, since he didn’t debut until 2007, shouldn’t he? Maybe they figure why use an option when Sipp has already bounced around a few times?
Hard to know how Lewis is going to figure it out if he never gets to pitch in meaningful games though.
by Logodaedalus on Jun 9, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Wedge would rather use Lewis than Sipp right now, simple as that.
by dgcambridge on Jun 9, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i forgot all about JLew
The gamelog’s say he hasn’t pitched since June 4th.
by world dictator on Jun 9, 2009 4:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
They also says that, with the exception of his implosion against the Rays, he hasn’t been horrible over his last 10 or so appearances, although they haven’t been high leverage.
by FredOx on Jun 9, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He did get charged with a run in 5 of those ten appearances, but I guess that’s not horrible as you. The thing I noticed, and hadn’t really realized, is that lefties are batting over .400 (with an OPS over 1.3 against him) while rights are hitting under .200 (with an OPS under .6). A situational righty if there ever was one, it appears.
by peter m on Jun 9, 2009 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that should say as you “say” in the first line. I was trying to call YOU horrible!!
by peter m on Jun 9, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am horrible. I’d say that Jensen has moved from horrible to merely ugly. The scale is:
Borowskish → Horrible → Ugly → Really Bad → Bad → Mediocre → Blah → OK → Kinda Good → Good → Really Good → Awesome → Magnificent → Cliftonian
by FredOx on Jun 9, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To the left of Borowski I’d put Jimenez and that lefty (forgot his name) from a few years ago. And i mistyped again — I was NOT trying to call you horrible (my proofreading skills are).
by peter m on Jun 9, 2009 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, yeah… He also walks lefties more than 3 times as often as righties, and strikes them out less than half as often, leading to a K/BB differential of 6.7 vs. 0.9. The OPS differential is there in both OBP (.467 vs. .226) and ISO (0.442(!) vs. .155. (I’m using ISO rather than SLG here because it’s completely separate from OBP)
This is all over only 28 innings, but the magnitude of the differences, coupled with the number of separate indicators that converge on the same conclusion, suggests that it’s meaningful. I don’t have time now to go back and do similar comparisons for other relievers, or for Jensen in previous seasons, to get a sense of how extreme and stable, respectively, this is, but I’m surprised that this hasn’t been brought up before (to my knowledge).
by Logodaedalus on Jun 9, 2009 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you cruise on over to the “IR” and “IS” columns in the game log? (I haven’t, just asking if you have.)
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jun 9, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
12 inherited runners; 7 scored (if I’m reading it right, anyway).
by peter m on Jun 9, 2009 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re closer than i was. I read the first ten games (duh). It’s 7 and 2, I think. It looks as if he entered three games with a lead. Blew one, held one, and narrowed the margin from 3 to 1 run in the third.
by peter m on Jun 9, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re right. I was counting the last eleven games instead of ten. I have eleven fingers, so multiples of ten feel arbitrary to me.
From, Ben
by bentausig on Jun 9, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
I don’t think that means what you think it means.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jun 9, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I that quoting that line from that movie was verboten.
by FredOx on Jun 10, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Only quoting that line has not been done to death, or in fact hardly done at all.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jun 10, 2009 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i just assumed it would be smith up and lewis down. but what do i know … clearly, not much.
by macasson on Jun 9, 2009 4:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, you need a long-man, and if they can get Jensen through this season without burning an option, that might be cool.
by fleerdon on Jun 9, 2009 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Sweet Baboo
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
