Series Preview: [Location] Angels @ Seattle Mariners
Seattle: 4-6
California: 6-4
GAMES
Game 1: Felix Hernandez vs Jered Weaver
Game 2: Carlos Silva vs Jon Garland
Game 3: Erik Bedard* vs Joe Saunders*
Not quite how we imagined the top of our rotation to slot up, but hey, we'll take it. Let's be perfectly blunt here, the Mariners own a clear advantage in each of these matchups with only the first one potentially not a significant difference.
We've documented extensively the issues with Jered Weaver's past results, though to his credit, his start to 2008 is closer to legit. He has so far generated far more swinging strikes than usual for him, making his 11 Ks in 13.3 innings mark on according to the regression analysis I did before. This might be due to an increase use of a cut-fastball as it's certainly not the case of Weaver's stuff improving since his average velocity is actually down from previous years. The walks on the other hand are lower than expected. Of course, this is all based on way too small a sample to draw anything meaningful.
Garland is simply not a good pitcher at all. He doesn't strike people out and he doesn't get groundballs. He does keep walks down, but not enough to offset the pitiful strikeout rate. Garland misses fewer bats than Jarrod Washburn even, a feat I thought impossible.
While Saunders is adequate, he's not the best pitcher in the AL and is thus inferior to Bedard. Saunders is almost exclusively a fastball-changeup pitcher and neither pitch is extraordinary with his fastball barely topping 90 and his changeup above 80 meaning there's a little under 10 mph difference between the two. Adequate, but that's all.
Likely Starters:
C Mike Napoli
1 Casey Kotchman*
2 Maicer Izturis^
3 Chone Figgins^
S Erick Aybar^
L Garret Anderson*
C Torii Hunter
R Gary Matthews Jr.^
D Vladimir Guerrero
Rightfield and DH seem to be interchangeable thus far for the Angels and 2B could end up back in the hands of Howie Kendrick at some point during this series. Izturis and Aybar are not formidable bats up the middle, though they are fine glovesman along with Kotchman.
It's not often you see four switch-hitters in the same lineup and I'm fairly confident that you've never seen an entire infield that could be hitting from the left side. The first two games of this series with Felix and Silva hurling might see the Angels featuring six batters hitting from the SafeCo friendly left side. Thank god Wilkerson should be starting both of those games and on the plus side, it should help keep balls away from Ibanez in left.
Overall through 11 games the Angels offense profiles as analogous to last year's Mariner squad. There is some decent power throughout the lineup, but very little in the way of patience, neither in drawing walks (22, close to last in the AL) nor in taking pitches (3.44, last in the AL).
CONTEXT
The Tampa series ended on a pretty down note with the first shutout of the season, but lets not have the end overshadow the first two contests and even in that final game in which the offense looked anemic, the Mariner hitters had their fair share of well-struck balls and did draw four walks. Starting Batista in the 7th was insane, but we have to expect that to happen with our organization. In the end, it's a series win, making it 2 out of 3 for the year. If we're 3-of-4 after this weekend, we'll all be pretty pleased.
The Angels are hurting right now with not just Kelvim Escobar and John Lackey out but Francisco Rodriguez dinged up and Howie Kendrick suffering his becoming-routine hand problems. The Mariners have their three best starters facing off against arguably the Angels three worst. This is way too early for the series to mean much on the long-term consequences of the season, but the emotion is obviously jacked up for this series. We would all prefer to be in first place before Lackey returns.
The key to getting there is going to be continuing to stay patient at the plate and help drive up the pitch counts of the starters and getting to the bullpen. Normally a staple of strength for the Angels, they've been hit with the aforementioned injuries and general ineffectiveness. That isn't to say the Mariner bats should aspire to just hold serve against Weaver/Garland/Saunders -- no, that trio is ripe for teeing-off on -- but more a recognition that the patient approach is going to pay nice dividends for the offense should they continue to execute it.
The Mariner defense also needs to right itself. The entire team looked sloppy in Baltimore and though they looked significantly better in every aspect in Tampa, the defense is still a little wonky beyond just the normal hamster-wheel range of super nice guy Raul Ibanez. Beltre and Yuni have made their share of great plays and also had an avoidable gaffe or two so far. Not to go Morgan on y'all, but some defensive consistency would help.
THIS SERIES BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
African Amber
Mac and Jack's Brewing. Redmond, WA
What's there to say? You should all have had this beer by now if you're a beer drinker of legal age near Seattle. Amber and cloudy with a nutty/yeasty aroma with subtle hints of melon behind it. Caramel and hops become present in the taste which stays strong throughout the finish. With apologies to Derek, this is probably the Seattle beer.
0 recs |
84 comments
Comments
Angels switch hitters
they piss me off. I have conducted extensive analysis and have determined that they all need to be Felix Pie'd.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Apr 10, 2008 7:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Being under 21 sucks...
especially when I serve mac & jack's at my work. Only 2 years to go. Who agrees/disagrees with the 21 law?
by Fin on Apr 10, 2008 8:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Disagree with the 21 law
I'm 19 >:(
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Apr 10, 2008 8:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One and the same.
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Apr 10, 2008 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just out of curiousity, why do you ask?
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Apr 10, 2008 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its absurd and I'm 23
I do my best to be an enabler.
by hcoguy on Apr 11, 2008 12:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Come on down to Missouri where they really don't care.
Hell, 17 is the age of consent...
15 if she's kin to you.
by hcoguy on Apr 11, 2008 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everything should be legal at 18
I know the connection has been made plenty of times before, but It's absurd that we can go to war and vote but not buy a beer and play a hand of poker.
by cwel87 on Apr 11, 2008 6:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can play poker all you want
There are a hell of a lot of Indian casinos is this great nation, and in some states, like the one the Mariners play in, it's not illegal
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I realize this
Being a summer resident in New Jersey, I have access to Atlantic City, where I make most of my rounds. When I was younger, I used to regularly visit Mohegan Sun and Turning Stone - and albeit high quality casino/hotels, it was at minimum a 6 hour one-way drive. Alas, you can typically find one within shouting distance.
But it's still utterly ridiculous that the primary gambling hubs (Vegas and AC) are 21+.
by cwel87 on Apr 11, 2008 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
But I can go buy all the powerball and scratcher tickets I want.
At least poker has an amount of skill involved.
by hcoguy on Apr 11, 2008 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Poker is as much a game of skill as baseball is
they're actually eerily similar in the fact that skill is what gives you the opportunity but the rest is just luck
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I absolutely agree with the second part
And, I guess, the first part is pretty well-stated as well, considering one requires a physical expertise, while the other is strictly mental. Although, baseball players need to have at least a basic understanding to be successful, while poker champions need no physical honing whatsoever.
But, the general idea *is*, indeed, truthful.
by cwel87 on Apr 11, 2008 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I think the idea really is
yeah, baseball obviously requires a lot more preparation as well and both physical and mental skill.
The thing is that in both, you can be successful without being good, but it won't last, and likewise, you can be very good and do very poorly.
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Vegas isn't a gambling hub so much as it's a debauchery hub
and dear God do I love LV
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amen brother!
I'm pretty sure I'm not retarded.
by Thingray on Apr 11, 2008 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Strongly disagree with it
18 should be good enough. Voting, killing for your country, driving, etc. can be done at 18, why not drinking?
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 11, 2008 8:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can kill for your country
at 17 here. Only 'modernized' nation to allow its children to be soldiers, and the only one to not sign the ban on child soldiers.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Apr 11, 2008 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think if you can be drafted and vote, then you should be allowed to have a beer.
I'm pretty sure I'm not retarded.
by Thingray on Apr 11, 2008 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree with law
I'm 36 and have kids.
by chinn on Apr 11, 2008 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ditto.
Except I've only got one kid so far.
Ill Ligitamus Non Carberendum
by PositivePaul on Apr 11, 2008 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Glad everyone agrees with me
I utterly think it is a stupid law. I mean god forbid it inhibits my brain development and I get a bunch of DUIs (the only reason I think people are for the law). I feel like a kid not being allowed in places, such as bars, certain concerts and pool halls. And not even get to drink Mac and Jack's, delicacy here in Seattle. I agree people under 21 can be irresponsible with alcohol, but that's just because it is illegal. If it was legal there wouldn't be such a cool thing to chug 50 beers and pass out at a frat party. Just look at europe, everyone there is pretty responsible with it.
by Fin on Apr 11, 2008 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know plenty of people in their 30's and 40's that are irresponsible with alcohol. It's not just people under 21.
I'm pretty sure I'm not retarded.
by Thingray on Apr 11, 2008 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
but it's people under 21 who are restricted from drinking. I really think there should be like an intelligence test to see if you can or not rather than just an age thing. Some high school drop out living on welfare who is over 21 can get all the booze they can afford, but someone under 21 who works and goes to college at the same time can't?
by Fin on Apr 11, 2008 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
These games always seem unpredictable.
Not just in a "that's why they play the games" kind of way but Weaver vs. Hernandez almost never results in a pitchers duel.
by ThundaPC on Apr 10, 2008 8:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Remember the Felix v Weaver matchup last year
when Broussard ran into Felix? I almost shit my pants.
by borgy on Apr 10, 2008 9:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I was at that game
I thought Felix died the way he lied there and didn't move.
I fucking hate you Mariners
by kentroyals5 on Apr 10, 2008 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was one of the scariest moments I've ever had at a game.
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Apr 10, 2008 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that was even worse
than when Felix went down with the elbow injury in his third start.
by BrianL on Apr 10, 2008 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mac n Jacks
is the sweet sweet nectar of the gods. At more than one M's game I have walked down multiple flights of stairs and over dozens of seating sections, passing all manner of perfectly quaffable brews, just to have a pint.
by Eazy E on Apr 10, 2008 10:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
From the opposite side of the fence,
I'd like to point out that the M's offense has been having significant trouble with pitchers much worse than 2 of the 3 the Angels will be throwing out during this series (Exhibit A: Edwin Jackson). The Halos have a marked advantage in both batting average and slugging percentage in the young season, as well as a slight edge in OBP. If that wasn't enough, Vlad Guerrero has hit .393 .451 .659 in 153 PA's at Safeco, making it his favorite AL park outside of Arlington. They also have the advantage in baserunning.
On the defensive side, the M's lead the league in errors and are near last in DP's turned. The M's also have bullpen troubles of their own, not to mention the fact that Mike Scioscia tends toward the competent side of the managerial spectrum and McLaren, well, doesn't. >_>
From here it looks more or less like a toss up. Anyway, this should be a fun series. ^_^
*Visiting Angels fan* Never give up, never surrender!
by TheOptimist on Apr 10, 2008 10:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That game was more the exception then the rule
We've played shitty teams thus far, I grant this, but in every game we've at least led for a fleeting moment. That, and we won our series versus the Rangers.
Oh no he didn't!
by cwel87 on Apr 10, 2008 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All pretty much spot on.
It just all goes without saying because we're all familiar with it.
by Matthew on Apr 10, 2008 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Vlad's BA in Safeco
has more to do with our pitching the last few years than the park itself.
Its too early to say anything about defense at this point, but ours is a safe bet to be awful.
I'd take Edwin Jackson over Garland.
To sum it up, we have the pitching advantage no matter how you cut it, but the Angels are a better team in pretty much every other aspect of the game, as we've been saying here between fanboygasms all winter.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Apr 11, 2008 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's generally thought that the Angels are better
But that we may be able to capitalize if injuries struck our opposition while keeping us fairly healthy.
Here the Angels are, out a ton of starting pitcing and their closer, while we're out our closer.
It should be a good series...or, at least, better than it was last year.
by cwel87 on Apr 11, 2008 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mac and Jacks Hefeweizen
Was made by god
Coach Owens = Scruffy's spell check
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 11, 2008 8:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
There's a question that's been running around
in the back of my mind for a while- Matthews, you did an analysis back in March of why Howie Kendrick would not continue put up ungodly offensive numbers the way he did in the minors, because he played in hitters parks while he was there. If you applied those same modifiers to Jered Weaver's minor league numbers (he played in the same parks, during the same years as Howie) would you guys accept that as a "real" indication of Weaver's potential? Or Joe Saunders, for that matter?
Or is it a catch 22 situation where the modifiers only apply to forecasting hitters?
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 11, 2008 8:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Weaver's minor league numbers are more or less irrelevent at this point
He's had 2.5 years in the bigs, and projections are only worthwhile going 3 years back.
But yes, park factors matter for Angel pitching just as much as for hitting.
by Graham on Apr 11, 2008 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
minor league numbers for pitchers
are also far far far less meaningful for two reasons. Pitchers have tons of variability in them and there's also no definite aging curve like there is for hitters.
Minor league pitchers should be much more heavily rated based on scouting and that's always been our main beef with Weaver.
Not to mention that Weaver's only tossed 160 odd innings in the minors. One season across multiple levels isn't going to be much of a sample.
by Matthew on Apr 11, 2008 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see. While we're on the subject,
How did the League hitting factors for the various minor leagues get calculated? Park Factor with in the league is pretty easy, but I am curious how the league factors would have been figured.
Also I notice that THT dismissed the type of park factor you used in the Kendrick analysis as finicky and unreliable, leading to the creation of the new park factor, which tRA now uses.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 11, 2008 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just so I understand
is the THT change you mentioned the Greg Rybarczyk (sp?) hit-tracker based approach? Or something else?
From my perspective, which quite obviously means less than Graham/Matthew, yes, Angels pitching 'spects get 'bonus points' for playing in bandboxes like Salt Lake. This is part of the reason why Nick Adenhart got so much attention despite so-so stats above the MWL. It's why it hasn't been all that surprising that guys like Saunders have been able to contribute at the MLB level.
But Jered never seemed like a guy who was helped/hurt by his home parks. Part of this is because he never stayed in one place long enough - no full seasons in any stop in the minors, and part of it was because the batted ball results were always secondary to his insane K/BB ratio. That was the key in the minors, and it's simply not as important anymore. If he could replicate the 9:1 ratio or 12k/9 with 1.9 BB/9 ratios he had in the minors, that's one thing. But the issues with Weaver in the majors are things like strand rate (2006) or HR per fly ball (2007). If there's a reason you think he can continue to keep these numbers from regressing, cool, let's hear it. But even in the minors, he didn't appear to have a noticeable 'skill' with regards to them. You couldn't really tell, of course, given that he was striking everyone out.
I can see a case that, say, HR/Fly is less important because he'll start striking more people out, or that his BB/9 will improve and make a regression in strand rate less important. But even with a K/9 rate around 8, he's still got to worry about HR/FB.
standard disclaimer: I'm not arguing that Jered Weaver sucks. I think Howie Kendrick is an amazing pure hitter. Thank you for your time.
by marc w on Apr 11, 2008 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should really link this stuff the first time.
Sorry about that. Yes, I'm referring to Greg Rybarczyk's article on park factor, where he talks about the numerous problems with current park factor, specifically the way homeruns are dealt with. Much of what he says can be applied to all the stats in a given park factor. The new park factor does well for homeruns, but because other types of hits aren't one of the "true outcomes" they are harder to accurately adjust for, even with three-year park factors.
After that, you have the league values Matthew used- which as far as I can determine were created by Baseball America in 2004, and based entirely on the 2003 season. We apparently don't know what data they used to compute this stat, or even what statistic it's supposed to be applied to. Based on that data, he claims Kendrick was really a .320 hitter in the minors. It seems pretty spurious to me, so I wondered about Weaver and Saunders, and whether you could apply the same logic to them.
As far as your arguments about Weaver, Graham, Matthew and I had a discussion in the Opening Day Pre-Game thread about Weaver and HR/FB rates. (It's about a third of the way down, I suggest searching for my name on the page.) At that time I mentioned one theory I had about HR/FB rates based on this study done over at THT; the theory was that the "other" category of wind in the study might be a quantified look at the semi-mythical "marine layer" which hangs over Angel Stadium during night games. I also pointed to the fact that Angels starting pitchers seem absurdly uniform in their defiance of the league-average rules of HR/FB regression. According to fangraphs.com, between Lackey, Escobar, Weaver, Saunders and Santana, the current Angel starting rotation staff has twelve full or partial seasons of HR/FB rates below the 11% league average in Angel Stadium and just one season above that mark. The sole exception belongs to Santana last year, and that was mostly due an explosion of his away HR/FB rate. (Garland isn't listed because he didn't pitch at Angel stadium last year. I should note though, that part of his regression is also based on his low HR/FB factor regressing back toward 11% and if I'm right, Angel Stadium may mitigate that somewhat.)
A summary of our discussion would be that Graham and Matthew didn't buy it, but told me they'd look into it, and later Graham mentioned to me elsewhere that he'd calculated it very minutely reduced the stadium park factor. I'm still not sure I buy that and wonder about how the distribution of day/night games at Angel stadium might affect pitchers (just for example, and with an awareness that it's a pretty small sample size- 7 HR, by both teams, in 4 night games at Angel Stadium this year; 11 HR in 2 day games at Angel Stadium this year). But at the moment I'm content to let it rest and see how it plays out. I certainly wouldn't mind hearing your thoughts on everything I've said though.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 11, 2008 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, the park effect is strong but it doesn't come close to explaining all of it HR/FLY discrepency
You might want to look at WTY's tRA card for the specifics.
by Graham on Apr 11, 2008 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I mentioned it elsewhere in repsonse
but a re-evaluation of park factors, down to the minute level as seen in Gassko's THT article had us move the Angels HR factor from 95 to 94. It's an infinitesimally small change.
You are also fantastically mis-representing what I did and my conclusions. I didn't base my numbers of Baseball America, I provided the link to illustrate the issue with league factors. The actual numbers came from hand doing all the league calculations for the years that Kendrick played there and then regressing them a bit. If anything, I was generous with only a 6% discount. The actual average percentage difference in run scoring environments between the leagues Kendrick played was around +10%.
Yes, the Angels stadium played well below normal HR/FB in 2005 and 2006, it also played well above normal in 2003 and 2004. This is why we don't use one or even two years of numbers to come up with park factors.
by Matthew on Apr 11, 2008 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
I didn't base my numbers of Baseball America, I provided the link to illustrate the issue with league factors. The actual numbers came from hand doing all the league calculations for the years that Kendrick played there and then regressing them a bit. If anything, I was generous with only a 6% discount. The actual average percentage difference in run scoring environments between the leagues Kendrick played was around +10%.
o_0 You just said you didn't do them when I asked earlier.
A. I don't know. I didn't do them.
Your disavowal was the only reason I assumed it was Baseball America's numbers. Looking back, I suppose it wasn't clear that I was referring to the Kendrick calculations when I asked about League hitting factors, so I apologize if that's where the confusion originated.
But that was what I was wondering about, so I'll ask again: how do you calculate something across leagues like that. There's no common reference point like there is in intraleague calculations- I can only think it would be something like determining league average hitters for each league and then comparing them, but I honestly have no idea how you'd do that.
but a re-evaluation of park factors, down to the minute level as seen in Gassko's THT article had us move the Angels HR factor from 95 to 94. It's an infinitesimally small change
Well, I didn't see your response, but I did see Graham's, as I noted in my post. Thank you for looking into that.
Also, even in 2004, both Lackey and Escobar managed to stay below league average.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 11, 2008 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A. I don't know. I didn't do them.
B. I have no idea what you are talking about.
by Matthew on Apr 11, 2008 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
See above.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 11, 2008 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's actually 1.5, I think (half of 2006, 2007, ?)
but the point is the same.
*Visiting Angels fan* Never give up, never surrender!
by TheOptimist on Apr 11, 2008 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no idea how I inserted an extra season in there
by Graham on Apr 11, 2008 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You've clearly gone mad with power.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 11, 2008 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Drunk with power?
After all, it is 6pm on a Friday where you are...
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 11, 2008 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's annoying.
when's this schooling nonsense over with, anyway?
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 11, 2008 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thesis is in on May 30th.
Then I have a month to do fuck all before I graduate.
by Graham on Apr 11, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Opium tea perchance?
wonderful stuff, really.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Apr 11, 2008 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That Angels lineup vs Felix...
43-146, 7 BB, 7 HR, 7 2B for a .327 OBP and .486 SLG.
Vlad in particular has owned Felix: 10-24 with 2HR and a double.
by borgy on Apr 11, 2008 11:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That won't hold up
remember one of his return starts last year were he was bled a blooped to death?
Free Barry Bonds
by JI on Apr 11, 2008 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And our M's lineup vs Weaver...
42-142, 7 2B (+2 HPB), 3 HR, 6 BB for a .338 OBP and .416 SLG.
Ibanez has been the Weaver killer: 10-19, 2 2B, 2 HR, 2 BB
by borgy on Apr 11, 2008 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Complete hyperbole?
I'm genuinely curious. I know it's a SSS. but is there any useful data to be had there?
Free Barry Bonds
by JI on Apr 11, 2008 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figured.
I always thought it was stupid when announcers would repeat that Edgar Martinez hit .800 off of Mariano Rivera. I think scouting data is useful there, but not a 16 at bat sample.
Free Barry Bonds
by JI on Apr 11, 2008 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ahhhh, Edgar
The days when our DH was the complete opposite of what we have now.
Talk about falling fast and far, eh?
by cwel87 on Apr 11, 2008 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Silva isn't until tomorrow
but I thought I'd post something pleasant. Last year Carlos held the Angels to a .578 OPS. Let's see if he can't keep it up.
The artist formerly known as Katal
by Katal LM on Apr 11, 2008 12:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Is Jeff going to do a Q & A thing with the Rev like he did last week with DRaysBay?
I think that would amuse me for quite some time.
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 1:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
No
I only do that with people I respect
by Jeff Sullivan on Apr 11, 2008 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just think of the Jon Garland questions you could ask
"You traded a Gold Glove SS with a solid bat for a guy who sucks. Explain how this is good."
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One of their pregame guesses is
"First to reach second base"
Please God let this be the day the King reigns and throws his no-hitter
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 2:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If Felix throws a no-no
against the Angels and Jered Weaver while I'm in attendence, that would pretty much obliterate any previous greatest day I've ever had in my life.
by Matthew on Apr 11, 2008 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Might be there too!
I would cream my pants if Felix gets a no-no when I am there.
by Fin on Apr 11, 2008 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bring spare pants
...or at least a jacket to wrap around your waist.
Free Barry Bonds
by JI on Apr 11, 2008 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Jarrod Washburn throws a no-no
against the Angels and Dustin Mosely while I'm in attendance, that would pretty much obliterate any previous day when something really unexpected happened to me.
by seattlebruin on Apr 11, 2008 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hate to do this...but
Mac and Jack's isn't that amazing. It's...better than average?
There's an embarrassment of riches around these parts, so it's not a big slam on the beer...
by marc w on Apr 11, 2008 2:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you. It's a very good beer, but not the end-all-be-all.
Although it might be the best beer that is available almost anywhere you go. Many of the others are only on tap in certain places, while Mac & Jacks is pretty standard tap fare.
I'm pretty sure I'm not retarded.
by Thingray on Apr 11, 2008 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mac and Jacks is delicious.
I'm glad you profiled it. It deserves as much recognition as it gets.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Apr 11, 2008 2:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 














