47-73, Game Thought
Yesterday's game - at least the good parts of it - belonged to Adam Moore. And today's game belonged almost exclusively to Luke French and Matt Tuiasosopo. It was French who turned in 7.2 innings of shutout baseball, and it was Tuiasosopo who drove in all four of the Mariners' runs. That's good work from two guys who weren't expected to get a lot of 2010 playing time at the start, and in its short life, this series has seen some different players step up from the norm.
Tuiasosopo in particular shined tonight, as the guy who didn't know he'd be starting until 20 minutes before first pitch went 2-4 with the game-winning double and a ninth inning insurance home run. I won't say it was a statement game, since I'm not much for believing in statement games, but it was an eye-opening performance from a player that so many M's fans seem ready and willing to write off. Not only did the late dinger give Brandon League all kinds of breathing room - it also gave Tui his first big league home run of 2010 that actually left the park on the fly.
With that said - and I swear I'm not trying to be a wet blanket, as I rather enjoyed this game for the duration - I think this series, and this game, help to shed some light on something that doesn't get nearly the attention it deserves. And that's the matter of quality of opponent.
Quality of opponent, like home-field advantage, is one of those things that's very easy to understand. But quality of opponent, like home-field advantage, is one of those things that tends to get glossed over. Maybe because it's just always present. In any given game, one of the two teams will have the home-field advantage. In any given game, there will be matchups of higher and lower quality. It never goes away. People know, for example, that it's easier to beat the Indians than it is to beat the Yankees, but they don't necessarily take it to the next step. If it's easier to beat the Indians than it is to beat the Yankees, then it's easier to get good performances against the Indians than it is to get good performances against the Yankees.
Now, understand I'm not saying that the Mariners are any good. They're not. I'm not trying to say that the M's are superior to the Orioles, because that may not be true. But the Orioles are bad. And that's something that we absolutely have to keep in mind when we talk about how players did when they faced them.
Look at Luke French. French went 7.2 innings, with three hits, three walks, and three strikeouts. That's pretty all right. He also faced a lineup with a .317 OBP. He faced a lineup whose two best hitters are left-handed. French wasn't facing a spectacular challenge, and we have to remember that when we discuss his performance. He's had four moderately effective starts in a row, but three of those starts came against Baltimore, Kansas City, and Oakland. That has an impact on his stat line.
And look at Matt Tuiasosopo. I'm happy for Tui. I think he gets flipped too much shit in these circles, although I acknowledge my role in bringing that about. Tui had a big game, a game that can do wonders for his confidence. But Tui also hit his double off a version of Kevin Millwood that's hardly at its best, and his home run came against some guy named Armando Gabino. Gabino's a 26 year old non-prospect reliever who's been good but hardly dominant out of a AAA bullpen, and who has all of seven innings of miserable Major League experience. Sure, the homer was the third of Tui's big league career, but should it really count like that? The only thing that made it a big league homer was the fact that it happened in a big league game. I wouldn't say it came against a big league opponent.
The Mariners - a bad team - have had some players take advantage these last two days of facing another bad team with players all its own. It's wonderful to see guys like Moore, French, and Tuiasosopo have some success at this level. It really is. Hopefully, they'll be able to get into a groove and continue on forward with wind beneath their wings. But it is absolutely vital that, when we look at their numbers, we don't just take them at face value. We have to remember the opponents against whom the successes and failures took place. Though it's nice to see guys succeed against the Orioles, that isn't enough to convince me of anything. It isn't home runs against the Armando Gabinos of the world that get me excited about Matt Tuiasosopo. It's home runs against the Andrew Baileys, the Carl Pavanos and the Jon Lesters.
With luck, those will come. With luck, the success will sustain. For the time being, I suppose I'll take what I can get.
69 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
re:Tui
personally, I’d been plenty high on Tui until you and Dave started ripping him constantly. And I mean yeah, I respect the opinions of you two a lot because they’re usually supported by fact. But I’ll still contend that you have to give the guy a chance, a “larger sample size” if you will, against the Lesters, the Carl Pavanos and the Andrew Baileys before you write him off.
I'll talk more about Tui soon if I get the chance
but the short of it is that his bat isn’t exactly the problem. It’s the fact that he hasn’t proven he can play defense anywhere.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 17, 2010 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions
I think that's why most people dislike Tui, really.
He can hit some, but not enough to really be that valuable at any defensive position he can reasonably play.
I see him as maybe a 4th outfielder sort of guy. I’m not sure where to look for minor league splits, is he potentially useful as part of a platoon?
Somewhat
It’s all about how he develops, both offensively and defensively. I don’t think he’s much now. I think he could be something, someday, somewhere. He’s not the hopeless mess he’s made out to be.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 17, 2010 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Was it you that said he was Mike Morse Part II?
Because I still like that comparison.
You're dead to me.
I don't know if I said it first, but that's where I'm at
They look very similar as hitters.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 17, 2010 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Could he develop into a decent solution at third base, maybe?
At least to give us another option along with Liddi/Triunfel/others I’m likely forgetting?
I think he *could* but I am not as comfortable with analyzing defensive skillsets as I am with pitching skillsets
More realistically, I think Tui’s best bet may be to hope for an offensive breakout so he can stand as a passable first baseman. But I’d love it for someone to correct me on, say, his footwork or his instincts.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 17, 2010 11:57 PM PDT up reply actions
I think that'd have to be a heck of an offensive breakout, which I guess could happen.
I think his upside is probably a solid bench bat who can play corner infield or outfield without totally embarrassing himself if you need him to.
Something like a less-shiny Langerhans.
Ryan Langerhans is criminally underrated and has a completely dissimilar skillset
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 18, 2010 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions
To be a little less snarky
I see them providing value to teams in similar ways: decent-to-good backup at multiple positions, and a non-embarrassing option to start for a while if you have to.
I love Langerhans and he probably is good enough to be a starter somewhere, but I was speaking more about the niches that they fit into than the actual players.
Late to the party, but...
… while I haven’t seen as much Tui at third as I’d like, what I’ve seen has left hesitant to call him a third baseman. I think if he played there regularly, he could be…. OK… but more in the “well, he’s not hurting us TOO badly” sort of way.
If you want a rough comparison, he’s somewhat like Matt Mangini there, only not quite as good. While I rate Mangini higher at third than most, even I’m not certain he can stick there.
One thing I've never heard mentioned in regards to Tui is DH
Now I’ve never followed his minor league numbers, but when we’re talking about a guy with potential at the plate, but no defensive skills then designated hitter comes to my mind. Does his bat project to be good enough to be an above replacement DH?
What's the deal with corn nuts?
by BaronVonBullshit on Aug 18, 2010 2:26 AM PDT up reply actions
He'd have to develop quite a bit to be a league average DH
Which is what we should be shooting for, not above replacement.
A “above replacement DH” isn’t particularly valuable.
I'm aware, but Griffey/Bradley/Branyan/Sweeney have posted a whopping .9 WAR this year
And some of that value is coming from Bradley and Branyan’s gloves, so I’d be ok with just “above replacement” at this point.
What I’m asking is does he have a high enough ceiling with his bat that he can become a useful DH? Cause I haven’t followed his development in the minors.
What's the deal with corn nuts?
by BaronVonBullshit on Aug 18, 2010 2:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Just because we're terrible at a position doesn't mean we should shoot to be slightly less terrible next year
do you want to replace Tony Pena, Jr. at SS with Yuniesky Betancourt?
by seattlebruin on Aug 18, 2010 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Seems like every question I've ever asked here turns into an argument about the semantics of my question
Rather than just answering the question. Maybe it’s my fault, maybe I’m not being clear enough about what I want to know. Let’s try this again shall we?
Does Matt Tuiasosopo have the talent required to become an option as the Designated Hitter for the Major League Baseball team the Seattle Mariners?
You have my sincerest apologies for being so confusing by using the phrase “above replacement”.
What's the deal with corn nuts?
by BaronVonBullshit on Aug 18, 2010 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Well. .9 WAR is above replacement.
No need to get all butthurt, dude. He asnwered your question; no, probably not. He might develop into an above-replacement DH, but that’s not sufficient.
by Aaron Campeau on Aug 18, 2010 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions
I didn't answer the question, I responded to his assertion that we should move Matthew Tuiasosopo to DH
because he would be ever so slightly less shitty than the shitty guys we ran out there this year
by seattlebruin on Aug 18, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Most of us at LL genuinely enjoy debating semantics
And don’t intend any disrespect by it, but I definitely understand the frustration.
I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
Hm, well let's see
And some of that value is coming from Bradley and Branyan’s gloves, so I’d be ok with just "above replacement" at this point.
That came from this comment earlier in the thread
Seems like a reasonable response to me.
by seattlebruin on Aug 18, 2010 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions
He could do it, yes
He is unlikely to ever develop enough of a bat to be an impact guy anywhere, though.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 18, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Thank you! :)
What's the deal with corn nuts?
by BaronVonBullshit on Aug 18, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Who do you think is the better hitter between Mangini and Tui?
by Edgar for Pres on Aug 18, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Right now?
That’s really hard to say. Mangini’s swing is FINALLY looking good, and he’s finally putting up good numbers to prove it. This is the first time he’s had a lot of success at the plate, though, and even last year was only passably decent. Hard to say how much of this year is legit and how much is a fluke.
Tui’s swing has gotten messier this year, but he’s hit well in AAA pretty much since he got called up there. Obviously, though, he hadn’t been able to hit his way out of a paper bag in the majors until last night.
If I had to choose one, I might lean towards Mangini. He’s more of a solid-contact, line drive hitter, and I like his approach at the plate a bit more. He’s also got more power potential, and from the left side of the plate, so there’s that.
I wouldn’t mind at all seeing Mangini get a September callup, just so we can get an idea of what he might be able to do in the Majors. The standard Jeremy Reed caveat would apply, however.
Not nearly as bad as it's billed to be
His only glaring problem is his arm strength. He’s a little stiff at times, but he’s dropped my jaw on how far he’s gone to get balls on several occasions. I’d say on a whole he’s probably a bit below average there, but not the butcher that most people say he is.
Well, Morse is doing OK this year
in a 4th outfielder, emergency firstbase sort of role with the Nationals.
.277-.322-..496
Well, yes and no.
You can also have a team like Baltimore go in and swwep the Yankees in a 4-game series. Good players/teams have bad days, bad players/teams have good days. Good players and teams prove it over the long haul, not one game or AB. So I don’t think you really temper Tui or French in this game because it’s Baltiomre. Way too small a sample size to get any meaning.
You can say they had a good game against a typically poor team. You can’t really say they had a good game because it was a poor team.
We might be able to say they had good games
but we can’t really say they performed very well, because it’s so hard to isolate one side from the other. The safest bet is to assume that any good performance against a bad player is in some way influenced by the bad player.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 17, 2010 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe this is simple. I feel like I should know this
If the M’s have a winning percentage of 0.400 and they play a team with a winning percentage of 0.600, what is the chance that we win this game?
If a hitter has 0.300 wOBA and he faces a pitcher that allows 0.400 wOBA then what do we expect his wOBA to be?
Is there an easy formula to determine our expectation for matchups?
by Edgar for Pres on Aug 17, 2010 10:35 PM PDT reply actions
Why yes!
I just don’t remember what it is. Tango knows.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 17, 2010 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
log5 gives 31% too
Apparently log5 = odds ratio when the mean is 50% (team records the mean is always 50%)
by Edgar for Pres on Aug 17, 2010 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Just to put it out there in case anybody is wondering what I was talking about...
This is a mathimatical expression for matchups I stole from this thread at Tango’s blog.
P=(S*F-S*F*A)/(S*F+A-S*A-F*A)
or
P=S*F*(1-A)/(A+S*F-S*A-F*A)
P[robablity] = probability of outcome for player or team vs opponent
S[uccess]= probability of outcome for player or team
F[ailure]= probability of opponent allowing that outcome
A[verage]= average probability of outcome.
(I think these equations are a little simpler to understand)
This equation basically comes from just working through the probability table of outcomes (I haven’t worked through the derivation but it looks like it works). When A ~ 0.5 it simplifies to P ~ S*F/A.
Like Matthew said, the odds of a .400 team beating a .600 team is 30.7% and using the shortcut you get 32% which is pretty close.
by Edgar for Pres on Aug 17, 2010 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Thanks
I had wondered this last year when I was playing the Beat The Streak thing on mlb.com and wondered whether it was more likely that a .300 BA hitter would get a hit off a .270 BAA pitcher or a .280 BA hitter would get a hit off a .290 BAA pitcher.
I understand my contradiction....
…but this goes back a long way. I don’t necessarily like Tui, but I would really love for him to succeed.
I seem to remember getting a lot of flack for talking about how Strasburg's first few opponents were bad and suggesting it influenced his numbers. Hmmm.
I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
This is an annoying comment
Strasburg’s numbers were great, but they weren’t what made him so impressive. Did you watch him pitch?
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 18, 2010 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions
I did. That shit was baller.
He was like Chone White on crack.
I did. I also thought right when I clicked "post" that this would be regarded as annoying, so, I apologize.
I’ve just always been a member of the “quality of opponent matters” group.
I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
As far as Strasburg is concerned
yeah, the results were amazing, but more amazing were things like this:

His stuff was obvious, regardless of opponent.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 18, 2010 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions
He is obviously amazing no matter who he is facing.
This was more in reference to me specifically being told “quality of opponent doesn’t matter at all,” which I snorted at.
That said, Strasburg makes everyone look like Junior circa 2010.
I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
Further, I'm taking this too far off topic and don't want to get reamed
So I’ll keep my stupid comments in my pocket.

I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
I'm really sad that I think I know where that screen shot comes from...
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 18, 2010 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions
1 free spooning session with Loafie to anyone who knows where it comes from!
I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
The Pirates are still Major League hitters
the difference between good Major League hitters and bad ones is not 14 strikeouts and zero walks in seven innings.
by seattlebruin on Aug 18, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree the difference is not 14 strikeouts and zero walks.
However, the point of the article above seems to indicate that the quality of opponent should at least be considered.
Pirates wOBA: .296
Red Sox wOBA: .350
It’s only logical that Strasburg would have a slightly easier time mowing down the Pirates than a team that hits better than the Pirates.
I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
But Strasburg wasn't good against those opponents. He was other-worldly. Even if you adjust for league average or above average offenses he would have still been at the top of the game.
by Kenneth Arthur on Aug 18, 2010 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions
What about decent players that play poorly against a bad opponent?
If a weak player has a better performance against a bad opponent, you say “temper your enthusiasm”.
Following that logic, does an especially-poor performance (like Guti’s Ks) against a bad opponent mean “increase your concern”?
Either way, this topic seems to focus on performances in single games or in a single series; a pretty small sample-size for drawing any conclusions in any direction. The connections made in the article pass the smell-test; but it seems doubtful that any meaningful data or conclusions can be extracted from these situations.
No, there's no meaningful data or conclusions to be derived
All I ask is for opponent to be something you keep in mind when you talk about how someone did, because it’s relevant information. There’s no mathematical adjustment for Tui’s home run. It’s just, you remember that he hit it off a nobody.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 18, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions

by 















