No, these numbers aren't some mystical numbers from the confines of my mind. They're representative of the sorry pitching state of the Baltimore Orioles. I'll get into the exact meanings in a second, but I'd like to give 2 more sets of examples:
The 2008 Oakland Athletics - 646/690
The 2008 Los Angeles Angels of Anahaim - 765/697
Now, what do these numbers represent? Well, the first is the sum total of all the runs scored (hitting) by the team for the entire regular season. The second number represents the sum total of all the runs allowed (pitching) by the team for the entire regular season. What do the sets above say about the respective teams? Well, they say the following:
Okay, so far the Orioles are looking pretty good. After all, the Angels went on to a blazing record of 100-62, whilst the Athletics only mustered a 75-86 record. As for the Baltimore Orioles? They went 68-93. With all the fire power the Orioles had this season [mostly contributed to the reemergence of Aubrey Huff, Melvin Mora and some steady assistance from Luke Scott], the Orioles had a worse record than the Athletics. Surely something is amiss. And it's something the Orioles have lacked for quite some time. What IS IT? PITCHING!
Ah, yes, pitching. Since 1997 (the last year the Orioles had a winning season), the Orioles score/allow stats have looked like the following:
What a sorry state of affairs for Orioles pitching. Now, unless you're a sabermatrician or at least knowledgeable of some sabermetric terms, you may be wondering what the value of this ratio is. On the obvious level, it quite simply says that if you allow more runs than you score, you're most likely doomed for failure. Yes, there is a certain amount of luck that goes either way that might allow a team like the Angels to scoot by with a 100-62 record instead of, say, 88-74 (not an arbitrary number, btw). But it's pretty self explanatory from the very obvious level. On a not so obvious level, there is a terminology by the name of Pythagorean W-L. This stands for the Pythagorean winning percentage. From baseball-reference.com (they can define it more elegantly than I can):
Pythagorean winning percentage is an estimate of a team's winning percentage given their runs scored and runs allowed. Developed by Bill James, it can tell you when teams were a bit lucky or unlucky. It is calculated by :
(Runs Scored)^1.83
---------------------------------------------------------
(Runs Scored)^1.83 + (Runs Allowed)^1.83
The traditional formula uses an exponent of two, but this has proven to be a little more accurate.
Let's go back to our first examples of the Athletics and the Angels. The Athletics had a better pitching staff (on the surface) which can be indicated by the number of runs allowed (690 vs. 697), whilst the Angels hit better (765 vs. 646). As can be seen, a 119 run differential in the scoring department is kind of hard to overcome in the luck department. However, the Angels record was certainly a bit lucky (by definition) when compared to their Pythagorean W-L, which is 88-74, or about 12 wins less. This is a lot closer to the Athletics record of 75-86 (their Pythagorean W-L was nearly spot on at 76-85). So, if we wanted to rely on just the numbers and this formula, the Angels should have only been 12 wins better than the Athletics being that the Athletics had a better pitching staff, but a pretty anemic lineup. This is all good and fine, but it comes back to the obvious: if a team can only hit, they're doomed, if a team can only pitch, they're doomed. There either needs to be a balance or they have to be ridiculously good in one department and so-so in the other (more on that later).
So, what was the Orioles excuse? Afterall, they scored more runs than the Angels. Well, here you go:
Bingo. Well, how about the Orioles compared to, say, the other teams in the AL East?
What do these stats say, ultimately, in regards to the Orioles (we could argue how unlucky the Blue Jays were later)?
The 2008 Baltimore Orioles allowed 175 more runs than the Rays, 198 more runs than the Red Sox, 142 more runs than the Yankees, and a whopping 259 more runs than the Blue Jays. Now, on the hitting side of things:
The 2008 Baltimore Orioles scored 63 less runs than the Rays, 8 more runs than the Red Sox, 7 less runs than the Yankees, and 68 more runs than the Blue Jays. The Orioles were clearly competitive in the hitting department.
Now, let's liken the future Baltimore Orioles to the 2008 Tampa Bay Rays. What needs to be done in order to turn this franchise around? Well, let's look at the Tampa Bay Rays over the last few years:
Do the 2008 Tampa Bay Rays look like anyone? Well, yes, they do. The 2008 Angels. The Angels went 765-697 for a difference of +68. So the Tampa Bay Rays were actually better in both areas, 9 more runs scored, and 26 less runs allowed. That's a recipe for success. Why can't the Orioles follow this type of success? Well, it would involve a monumental turn-around from the pitching staff. For 2008, here are the pitchers and the number of runs they've allowed (not earned) as well as their ERA+:
Daniel Cabrera - 109, 85
Jeremy Guthrie - 82, 122
Garrett Olson - 100, 67
Brian Burres - 90, 74
Radhames Liz - 67, 66
Chris Waters - 38, 89
Steve Trachsel - 41, 53
George Sherrill - 28, 94
Jamie Walker - 31, 65
Jim Johnson - 18, 199
Dennis Sarfate - 47, 94
Chad Bradford - 17, 181
Lance Cormier - 36, 111
Matt Albers - 21, 127
Randor Bierd - 21, 91
Fernando Cabrera - 18, 82
Alberto Castillo - 11, 117
Adam Loewen - 19, 55
Brian Bass - 13, 94
Rocky Cherry - 15, 70
Alfredo Simon - 10, 71
Greg Aquino - 13, 35
Jim Miller - 3, 378
Kameron Mickolio - 5, 76
Bob McCrory - 12, 28
Ryan Bukvich - 4, 66
Let's use an ERA+ of 100 or more as the cutoff for effective pitchers. The 2008 Baltimore Orioles had the following pitchers with an ERA+ of at least 100:
Jeremy Guthrie
Jim Johnson
Chad Bradford
Lance Cormier
Matt Albers
Alberto Castillo
Jim Miller
7 pitchers. Only 1 of which was a full time starter. This alone says a lot about the sorry state of starting pitching for the Orioles. Now, the pitchers above only allowed 188 runs. That's about 21.6% of the runs. Let's compare to the Tampa Bay Rays. They had the following pitchers with an ERA+ of at least 100:
James Shields - 122
Andy Sonnanstine - 100
Edwin Jackson - 99 (close enough)
Matt Garza - 118
Scott Kazmir - 125
Dan Wheeler - 140
Trever Miller - 105
JP Howell - 197
Grant Balfour - 282
Al Reyes - 100
Jeff Niemann - 307
David Price - 226
Kurt Birkins - 484
13 pitchers. Almost double the Orioles. And the real impressive thing? All 5 starters are in there. All 5. Let's count the runs of the pitchers above. 539 runs. Or a whopping 80.3% of the runs. Their effective starters who are at or above league average let 80% of the runs. This is a recipe for success.
This may have been an obvious blog, but it should certainly tell the story of the Baltimore Orioles: mediocre hitting (or above mediocre hitting) and terrible pitching. The plus side to all of this? The Orioles have quite a bit of prospects coming up through the system in Tillman, Matusz, Arrieta, Hernandez, Spoone, Erbe, etc. The problem, of course, is that the current crop of prospects in the Orioles rotation haven't showed much the last 2 years. Those pitchers in question are Liz and Olson. Liz may be destined for the bullpen, and Olson needs to find the control that he had in the minors. Daniel Cabrera, I fear, is a lost cause. He's still walking a ton of hitters, striking out a ton less, throwing wild pitch after wild pitch, hitting a lot of batters, allowing too many hits and too many home runs. His WHIP has went up, his velocity has went down, and he is one year older. The only consistent starter the Orioles have had over the last 2 years has been Jeremy Guthrie.
The position player outlook doesn't look so great, either. Aside from Nick Markakis and Adam Jones, the only future coming out of the Orioles in the foreseeable future are Matt Wieters, Nolan Reimold, and maybe Brandon Snyder. Billy Rowell turned 20 fairly recently. Brian Roberts is only here for 1 more year. Melvin Mora has 1 year left on an albatross of a contract and is only getting older. Huff had a tremendous 2008, but can he repeat? Luke Scott provides ample power and good defense at a reduced cost, but he may be better suited at the DH spot.
If the Orioles stood pat at this point in time, the following positions will be vacant come the end of 2009:
2B - Brian Roberts
1B - Aubrey Huff
3B - Melvin Mora
SS - Anyone
C - Ramon Hernandez
Ideally, the Orioles could fill out the roster as such:
LF - Reimold
DH - Scott
1B - Snyder/trade for someone
SS - Trade for someone
2B - Trade for someone
C - Wieters
3B - Rowell/trade for someone
Of course, ideally doesn't always pan out. The Orioles are in a sad state of affairs, as of the moment. They need to get creative and fill in the holes immediately. This means trading a Brian Roberts, a Ramon Hernandez, and an Aubrey Huff. This means utilizing talent that we have in the minors as temporary fills (or possible futures) in players like Montanez and Salazar. After all, they're cheap and effective, unlike players like Kevin Millar and Jay Payton. The Orioles must take a page out of the Tampa Bay Bible. Pitching, pitching, pitching. But the Rays have a solid, young core at the positions as well. The Rays were creative in who they traded over the offseason. The Orioles need to follow the same. It's not going to be a quick turnaround (although it could), so patience is a virtue. However, action needs to be taken immediately. Here's looking at you, MacPhail. And here's looking at you, Angelos. Keep your meddling hands out of baseball hands. You don't know anything about baseball, leave it to the guys that do. Rant off.
No comments for this blog, yet! Be the first!
just one second, seeing if everything was inputted correctly.
