SO record; Big, hairy butts

[nyy26wc]

1) Yesterday's scores--

AL
Orioles 7, Devil Rays 4
BlueJays 10, Royals 9
Whitesox 3, Twins 1
Mariners 4, Tigers 3
Rangers 10, Yankees 7
A's 4, Indians 3
Redsox 6, Angels 4 (14)

NL
Diamondbacks 6, Mets 1 (1st)
Diamondbacks 7, Mets 3 (2nd)
Astros 6, Expos 3
Braves 7, Brewers 1
Phillies 1, Giants 0
Reds 7, Padres 5
Dodgers 6, Pirates 2
Rockies 6, Cubs 3
Cardinals 7, Marlins 6 (20)

2) Standings--

AL EAST         WON  LOST  PCT  GB      HOME   ROAD   EAST  CENT  WEST STREAK
Yankees          20    5  .800   -      7-2   13-3   09-03 07-00 04-02 LOST 1
Redsox           16    9  .640   4      7-2    9-7   13-06 00-00 03-03 WON  1
Orioles          12   12  .500   7 1/2  7-6    5-6   07-08 05-04 00-00 WON  1
Devil Rays       10   15  .400  10      8-8    2-7   10-15 00-00 00-00 LOST 1
BlueJays         10   16  .385  10 1/2  4-8    6-8   05-12 05-04 00-00 WON  1

AL CENTRAL      WON  LOST  PCT  GB      HOME   ROAD   EAST  CENT  WEST STREAK
Royals           17    5  .773   -     10-0    7-5   01-02 16-03 00-00 LOST 1
Whitesox         14   11  .560   4 1/2  9-4    5-7   01-02 13-09 00-00 WON  2
Twins            10   14  .417   8      3-7    7-7   03-10 07-04 00-00 LOST 2
Indians           7   18  .280  11 1/2  3-7    4-11  03-03 04-09 00-06 LOST 6
Tigers            3   20  .130  14 1/2  1-7    2-13  00-00 01-16 02-04 LOST 1

AL WEST         WON  LOST  PCT  GB      HOME   ROAD   EAST  CENT  WEST STREAK
Mariners         16    9  .640   -     11-5    5-4   00-00 05-01 11-08 WON  1
A's              15   10  .600   1     12-3    3-7   00-00 05-01 10-09 WON  4
Angels           11   14  .440   5      8-7    3-7   02-04 00-00 09-10 LOST 1
Rangers          11   14  .440   5      8-8    3-6   03-03 00-00 08-11 WON  1

NL EAST         WON  LOST  PCT  GB      HOME   ROAD   EAST  CENT  WEST STREAK
Braves           15   10  .600   -     10-6    5-4   10-09 05-01 00-00 WON  2
Expos            15   10  .600   -     10-6    5-4   08-05 05-04 02-01 LOST 1
Phillies         15   10  .600   -     10-6    5-4   07-06 03-03 05-01 WON  2
Marlins          13   13  .500   2 1/2  9-6    4-7   09-11 04-02 00-00 LOST 1
Mets             11   14  .440   4      8-7    3-7   05-08 05-04 01-02 LOST 2

NL CENTRAL      WON  LOST  PCT  GB      HOME   ROAD   EAST  CENT  WEST STREAK
Cubs             14   11  .560   -      8-5    6-6   04-02 08-05 02-04 LOST 2
Cardinals        11   12  .478   2      4-4    7-8   02-04 07-04 02-04 WON  1
Astros           11   13  .458   2 1/2  5-4    6-9   02-04 06-06 03-03 WON  1
Pirates          10   14  .417   3 1/2  4-11   6-3   03-03 06-06 01-05 LOST 5
Reds             10   15  .400   4      7-8    3-7   02-04 04-09 04-02 WON  2
Brewers           9   16  .360   5      4-6    5-10  01-05 06-07 02-04 LOST 2

NL WEST         WON  LOST  PCT  GB      HOME   ROAD   EAST  CENT  WEST STREAK
Giants           18    6  .750   -      7-2   11-4   01-02 07-02 10-02 LOST 2
Rockies          14   11  .560   4 1/2 10-2    4-9   00-03 05-04 09-04 WON  2
Dodgers          12   13  .480   6 1/2  5-4    7-9   00-00 04-02 08-11 WON  3
Diamondbacks     10   15  .400   8 1/2  4-6    6-9   03-03 03-03 04-09 WON  2
Padres           10   15  .400   8 1/2  5-5    5-10  00-00 03-03 07-12 LOST 2

3) Today's schedule--

Marlins (somebody) at Diamondbacks (Elmer Dessens), 9:35
Phillies (Brett Myers) at Dodgers (Darren Dreifort), 10:10

4) Yesterday's HRs--

Jeff Bagwell--#10
Carlos Delgado--#7
Raul Mondesi--#7
Rondell White--#7
Ryan Klesko--#5 & #6
Jose Valentin--#6
Mike Lowell--#6
Joe Randa--#5
Mike Sweeney--#5
Manny Ramirez--#4
Jeff Kent--#4
Javier Lopez--#4
Richard Hidalgo--#4
Tony Clark--#4
Jason Varitek--#3
Scott Spiezio--#3
Charles Johnson--#3
Ricky Ledee--#3
Dmitri Young--#2
Bobby Higginson--#2
Michael Barrett--#2
Matt Williams--#2
David Ortiz--#1
Jeff DaVanon--#1
Carlos Beltran--#1
Ramon Vazquez--#1
Eric Karros--#1
Ramon Castro--#1
Luis Castillo--#1
Mark Grace--#1
Mike Kinkade--#1

5) HR leaders--

AL
1) Alfonso Soriano--9
2) Alex Rodriguez--8
T3) Rafael Palmeiro--7
T3) Carlos Delgado--7*
T3) Carl Everett--7
T3) Jorge Posada--7
T3) Raul Mondesi--7*
T8) Juan Gonzalez--6
T8) Bernie Williams--6
T8) Tim Salmon--6
T8) Carlos Lee--6
T8) Jose Valentin--6*

NL
1) Jeff Bagwell--10*
2) Austin Kearns--9
T3) Richie Sexson--8
T3) Adam Dunn--8
T5) Luis Gonzalez--7
T5) Jose Cruz Jr.--7
T5) Rondell White--7*
T8) Barry Bonds--6
T8) Gary Sheffield--6
T8) Craig Biggio--6
T8) Todd Helton--6
T8) Ryan Klesko--6**
T8) Mike Lowell--6*

**--hit 2 yesterday
*--hit 1 yesterday

6) Jeff Bagwell passed Johnny Bench and tied Graig Nettles for 38th place on the all time HR list, with 390.

7) Matt Williams tied Carlton Fisk for 51st place on the all time HR list, with 376.

[nyy26wc]

1) The Diamondbacks set a major league record when their pitchers struck out 27 batters in a 18 inning doubleheader. In the opener, Brandon Webb struck out 10 and Mike Myers had 2. In the nightcap, Randy Johnson struck out 12, Mike Koplove 2 and Matt Mantei had 1.

The old record was 26, achieved 3 times, with the Mets being victims of it in back to back years (1970-71).

Johnson ranks 2nd all time in SO above the league average--

STRIKEOUTS                      DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE   
1    Nolan Ryan                 2536     5714     3178   
2    Randy Johnson              1677     3777     2100   
3    Roger Clemens              1240     3940     2700   
4    Walter Johnson             1191     3509     2318   
5    Rube Waddell               1116     2316     1200   
6    Dazzy Vance                1086     2045      959   
7    Steve Carlton               981     4136     3155   
8    Bob Feller                  963     2581     1618   
9    Sandy Koufax                958     2396     1438   
10   Pedro Martinez              874     2258     1384   

2) The Marlins-Cardinals 20 inning game set a Marlins record for the longest game. It was tied for the 2nd longest in Cardinals history, behind a 25 inning game against the Mets, on September 11, 1974. The Cardinals also played a 20 inning against the Cubs, on August 28, 1930.

3) The Diamondbacks sent P Brandon Webb to the minors, to make room when they activated Randy Johnson from the DL.

4) A's 3B Eric Chavez and CF Chris Singleton were given routine days off yesterday.

After 28 RCAA/.878 OPS and 21 RCAA/.860 OPS seasons, Chavez is off to a .472 SLG, .363 OBA, .835 OPS, 2 RCAA start in his first 23 games. He has a .843 career OPS, compared to his league average of .773, and 63 RCAA in 611 games.

After -6 RCAA/.762 OPS and -7 RCAA/.706 OPS seasons, Singleton is off to a .397 SLG, .315 OBA, .712 OPS, -1 RCAA start in his first 21 games. He has a .740 career OPS, compared to his league average of .776, and -37 RCAA in 577 games.

5) Cubs P Shawn Estes has a lower back strain and could be headed for the DL after he sees a doctor tomorrow.

Estes's 5.10 ERA/-20 RSAA with the Mets and Reds in 2002 was his 3rd career double digit negative RSAA. He's off to a 7.43 ERA/-10 RSAA start in his first 5 starts and has a 4.43 career ERA, compared to his league average of 4.35, and -46 RSAA in 194 games.

6) The Rangers designated P Doug Davis for assignment and called up P Erasmo Ramirez.

Ramirez isn't expected to remain in the majors for long. The team will add another starter on Saturday. Todd Van Poppel could off the DL and return to the rotation, while R.A. Dickey, Victor Santos and Joaquin Benoit are also considered candidates to make the start.

7) Phillies P Kevin Millwood started against the Giants yesterday. The most impressive and important thing about his start was he didn't give up any runs. In the interesting, but unimportant category, he didn't give up any hits. In the maybe as impressive as the last one category, he held Barry Bonds off the bases in 4 plate appearances.

To recycle a couple of paragraphs I wrote a year ago today, after Derrek Lowe's no hitter (see Redsox fans, I told you that my comments have nothing to do with a bias against your team)--

No single game accomplishment is more overhyped than a no hitter. It's an interesting, and a noteworthy, statistical fluke for a pitcher to not give up any hits. A no hitter is a fun thing to watch. However, it is also an item whose hype value far exceeds its actual value.

But, avoiding hits isn't a pitcher's job. His job is avoid giving up runs. I'll say it again--Preventing hits and base runners are merely a means towards the end, but the end is all that matters. So, a perfect game or no hitter's hype value is far greater than it's actual value, when compared in both regards to a typical shutout.

I will now add that, considering the importance of preventing baserunners, I am more impressed with a perfect game than a typical shutout. But, I'm also more impressed with 2 hit/0 walk and 1 hit/1 walk shutouts than a 0 hit/3 walk shutout like Millwood's.

Millwood's performance also shows the ridiculousness of the "wins" stat, aka "the pitcher in the game when his team scored a particular run", aka "pitcher in the game when a really stupid, discredited and abandoned hitting stat was accomplished by his offense."

When we look at the rulebook for how to determine the "winning pitcher", here's the procedure--locate when the game winning RBI (which was a really stupid, discredited and abandoned hitting stat) and then assign credit to the pitcher in the game at that moment (except for when that pitcher is a starter who doesn't last 5 innings and an exception for an ineffective relief pitcher that is actually invoked maybe once in a decade). So, why was Millwood was the "winning pitcher"? It was merely because he was the pitcher at the time Ricky Ledee hit a HR that would be the GWRBI.

I do have a good solution on how to get rid of the W stat. It needs to be renamed BOB, short for the pitcher who was in the game with his Big Hairy Butt On the Bench at the time of the GWRBI.

It is important to associate the stat with pitcher's butts. It is a fact that males dominate the sports writing profession and given the choice between discussing a stat associated with male butts and abandoning it, it will be abandoned in a moment. The only male I've met who enjoys public discussions of big hairy butts was one of my law school roommates. And actually, BOB was going to just be short for Butt On Bench before I decided to add the big hairy part in order to completely cite him.

8) Another item in the completely unimportant, overrated, but a tiny bit interesting category--The Phillies loaded up the bases in Chase Utley's major league debut, something he had as much to do with as Hal Chase, who decayed in his grave over a half century ago, and who deserves as much credit for that as Chase does, prior to Chase hitting a homer. The only other players whose teammates were either so successful (successful in loading up the bases) or unsuccessful (none of the previous hitters being able to knock in any of the others) to load the bases before a player making his major league debut homered were Bill Duggleby and Bobby Bonds.

9) A high ranking BlueJays official is denying a rumor that the team will officially change their name to Jays for the 2004 season. The team is still planning on changing the uniform to just say "Jays," but the official says that's the same thing as the Devil Rays putting just "Rays" on their uniform and retaining the full name.

10) The Devil Rays placed P Bobby Seay on the 15 day DL. They will replace him by activating 1B Travis Lee from the DL tomorrow.

Seay has tendinitis in his shoulder. After starting his career with a 6.23 ERA/-3 RSAA in 12 games in 2001, Seay has a 4.05 ERA/1 RSAA in 9 games this year.

After 4 consecutive years with a negative RCAA, Lee is off to a .510 SLG, .396 OBA, .906 OPS, 3 RCAA start in his first 12 games. He has a .745 career OPS, compared to his league average of .778, and -29 RCAA in 716 games.

11) Twins 1B Doug Mientkiewicz was given a day off yesterday.

After 23 RCAA/,851 OPS and 5 RCAA/.756 OPS seasons, Mientkiewicz is off to a .370 SLG, .284 OBA, .654 OPS, -7 RCAA start in his first 22 games. He has a .761 career OPS, compared to his league average of .767, and -5 RCAA in 445 games.

12) Yankees minor league QB Drew Henson was drafted by the Texans in the 6th round of the NFL draft.

13) The Marlins will place P A.J. Burnett on the 15 day DL today and call up P Justin Wayne.

Meanwhile, with Carl Pavano, who was scheduled to start today, having to pitch 2 innings yesterday, it's uncertain who will start tonight. It could be Wayne.

Wayne had a 5.32 ERA/-4 RSAA in his first 5 major league starts, in 2002.

[Skip]

I will now add that, considering the importance of preventing baserunners, I am more impressed with a perfect game than a typical shutout. But, I'm also more impressed with 2 hit/0 walk and 1 hit/1 walk shutouts than a 0 hit/3 walk shutout like Millwood's.

While I think's some of Lee's diatribes go over the top, I totally agree with his statement here. That's why comments such as the following, from ESPN's 'Out of the Box' column really toast my tushie:

Article Title: Perfection!

... And if you didn't see, Sunday's line was perfection: 9 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 3 W, 10 K

Italics added by me. Gee, I thought we had a different definition for perfection as it applied to baseball pitchers.

Chill out, guys....while it's true that a shotout is just as, or more valueable than a no-hitter (since you can give up runs w/o giving up hits,) there is such a thing as intangible value. Sometimes I feel like this board analyzes things so much that it takes the joy out of just watching the sport. Regardless of what's said in this thread, pitching a no-hitter is one of, if not the greatest, thrills in a major-league pitcher's career. And it's great to watch, too.

[Craig S.]

Originally posted by janderson
Chill out, guys....while it's true that a shotout is just as, or more valueable than a no-hitter (since you can give up runs w/o giving up hits,) there is such a thing as intangible value. Sometimes I feel like this board analyzes things so much that it takes the joy out of just watching the sport. Regardless of what's said in this thread, pitching a no-hitter is one of, if not the greatest, thrills in a major-league pitcher's career. And it's great to watch, too.

Overanalysis on this board? No, really?

I agree that there is an intangible value that can be drawn from a game like Millwood's. My guess is that his teammates and the Philly fans feel better today about the no-hitter than they would have about a one-hit, one-walk performance. It might not be all that impressive statistically when you break it down, but it definitely had some value.

And it was fun to watch, too.

[sweaver]

Originally posted by Craig S.
Overanalysis on this board? No, really?

Guilty as charged.

But I do love a no-hitter!

[satchel]

janderson and others - I think there's a real left-brain/right-brain thing going on for many of us when we talk about this kind of thing.

It's true that many of us value a quantitative and rational approach to analyzing the game, that provides accurate measures of the value of players' and teams' achievements.

At the same time, I strongly doubt that anyone at NDF is immune to the emotional pull of the game. How likely would it be that someone who doesn't feel the emotional rush of baseball would even end up here?

Analysis doesn't take the joy out of the game; it provides a complement. They aren't mutually exclusive.

It's also important to look around and note that most of the posts about Millwood are gently making fun of Lee for his views about no-hitters. I think it's safe to say that everyone here - even Lee - appreciates the thrill and the symmetry of the "0-0" line.

[Wolf Hopper]

This will make little sense to most, because it's not based on fact - - just a personal feeling - -- but, I've always felt that when a very good to great pitcher throws a no-hitter, it's a nice extra line on his resume; and, when a not so great pitcher throws one, then it's not as big of a deal. Unfair? Sure - - but, that's baseball - - line drives get caught and squibs fall in for hits - - it's an unfair game.

Truthfully, anyone would have to admit, there have been many crappy pitchers who have thrown no hitters - - and there have been no hitters that have been ugly - - - where pitchers walk 5, 6, or more.............

Perhaps the best way to look at these is on a one-by-one basis - rather than all of them as a whole - - -

Who was the team the pitcher faced? Were they a good hitting team?
What were the conditions of the game? What was the score of the game? Was it pressure filed game, standings-wise?
How many batters did the pitcher walk?

If a pitcher threw a no-hitter this year against the Detroit Tigers, in a game where the temperature was 25 degrees, and the score was 12-0 by the 3rd inning, and he ended up walking six, would you really be that impressed?

Now, take the 10/2/78 Yankees-Redsox play-in game - - if Torrez or Guidry had thrown a no hitter in that game, walking only 1 batter, well, that would be some feat!

[nyy26wc]

I wish to clarify a few things and will be coming out with the first ever ATM reports mailbag edition.

[Skip]

Originally posted by janderson
pitching a no-hitter is one of, if not the greatest, thrills in a major-league pitcher's career. And it's great to watch, too.

I agree, especially as far as watching the game goes. With the emotion involved in an active no-no, the fans scared to cheer but not wanting to appear unappreciative, the teammates fighting superstition on the bench and the jitters on the field, etc. it's a much more broadly appealling situation than a guy who gave up two early hits, no walks and is trying to close out 'only' a shutout.

But ... I can analyze (not overanalyze) both games and recognize that the second may have been a stronger and more dominating performance than the first, even while recognizing the emotional impact of the first. Lee is bashing the hype on no-hitters much more so than the act itself, even if it can come off differently (right, Lee?)

And ... I'm not trying to get into an argument here, but columnists for as highly visible a site as ESPN using "perfect" to describe a non-perfect game do add to confusion and dilution of impact that the various terms in baseball have. It's as if the guy thought "no-hitter" didn't have enough oomph on its own.

[Craig S.]

Originally posted by Skip
And ... I'm not trying to get into an argument here, but columnists for as highly visible a site as ESPN using "perfect" to describe a non-perfect game do add to confusion and dilution of impact that the various terms in baseball have. It's as if the guy thought "no-hitter" didn't have enough oomph on its own.

I don't think there's any argument about that. I might disagree about the importance of the no-hitter, but what ESPN and other sites do with headlines like that is to misrepresent the facts. I guess "perfect" plays better than "almost perfect" in a headline.

No comment on your (over)analysis.

[GGC]

My take on no-hitters:

While they may be fun to watch, some mediocrities have been known to throw them. If your looking for a single game performance that is statistically significant for a pitcher, it would be one of those ultra-high strikeout games like Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson have thrown. Those are rarer and the pitcher is more responsible for the results in those instances.

Just my $.02

[TGwynn19]

But Gary, you can strike out the side AND give up 6 runs in the same inning.

[GGC]

Originally posted by TGwynn19
But Gary, you can strike out the side AND give up 6 runs in the same inning.

True, Trevor. But you're not going to K 18+ that way.

[nyy26wc]

I've never had a mailbag edition of the ATM reports, but today one is appropriate. And maybe this will become a regular weekly feature.

1) From Jayson Stark--

I've been at two no-hitters (Millwood's wasn't one of them). The feeling that builds in the ballpark inning-by-inning is amazing. I honestly feel that there is NOTHING that happens in a regular-season major-league game that's as cool, if not downright thrilling, to watch as a no-hitter.

Check out the emotion in the park yesterday - on the field, in the seats, in Millwood's face afterward. THAT'S what sports is all about, Lee.

My response--

What bothers me about no hitters the most is the question of why do people feel so passionate about them. It's because of conditioning. People have been conditioned to feel that way.

I want to say that looking at hits is remnant of the days when players were judged by their average. When you judge a hitter by his batting average and say hits are his job, it makes perfect sense in that environment to say that a lack of hits is the pitcher's job.

I want to say that looking at AVG is a remnant of old days. But, unfortunately, in case of too many people, it's the present condition.

I just view a no hitter is being too linked to the AVG mentality, and its continued hold on the masses, for me to not go into attack mode when it happens.

One of the goals of my writings, especially on sabermetrics, is to recondition people. If people can be conditioned to look at the game through the lenses of an AVG based mentality, then they can similarly be conditioned to break away from that mentality and move to a mentality emphasizing stats geared towards runs.

And, that in the world, we'd see no hitters for what they are: a fun event, but not something to overhype.

Reconditioning can occur. My readership list is filled with people who've been reconditioned. And those who haven't made the switch, I'm working on them.

In my case, I did it when I read my first Bill James Abstract, which was in 1983. While it may be easier to recondition an impressionable 12 year old than a set in his ways adult, it still can be done and I'm working on trying it.

2) From Satchel, at http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...&threadid=9903

It's also important to look around and note that most of the posts about Millwood are gently making fun of Lee for his views about no-hitters. I think it's safe to say that everyone here - even Lee - appreciates the thrill and the symmetry of the "0-0" line.

My response--

Guilty as charged. And, I'll also plead guilty to the charges of switching from the Yankee game to ESPN's coverage of the 9th inning.

3) From Skip, also at http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...&threadid=9903

I agree, especially as far as watching the game goes. With the emotion involved in an active no-no, the fans scared to cheer but not wanting to appear unappreciative, the teammates fighting superstition on the bench and the jitters on the field, etc. it's a much more broadly appealing situation than a guy who gave up two early hits, no walks and is trying to close out 'only' a shutout.

But ... I can analyze (not overanalyze) both games and recognize that the second may have been a stronger and more dominating performance than the first, even while recognizing the emotional impact of the first. Lee is bashing the hype on no-hitters much more so than the act itself, even if it can come off differently (right, Lee?)

My response--

That's exactly what I'm doing.

4) Moving onto my objection to "wins", from Mark Hanson--

Okay, semi-amusing tongue-in-cheek stuff aside, just who should have received the win in yesterday's game? I mean, you know -- considering that Millwood was the only Phillie to pitch that day. :-)

My response--

How about no one.

It's a bookkeeping item that's outlived its usefulness (that is, if it ever had such usefulness) and should be thrown onto the same trash heap as GWRBI was.

Counterpoint from Mark--

I certainly don't agree with that. The serious stathead crowd -- and don't take that as a slight; I'm headed there myself -- may think that wins and losses are irrelevant, but Joe Fan, who just likes baseball a lot and cheers for his team and likes to know who's doing well and who isn't, is something less than interested in RSAA and EqA and VORP and all that. For Mr. Fan, wins and losses is a perfectly useful tool for gauging how good a pitcher is or isn't.

My response--

I disagree.

The casual fan is going to accept whatever he's given. He's not going to do much thinking for himself. Whether or not "serious" fans are thinking for themselves may or may not be an issue, but I really don't think there's much doubt that the casual fans aren't thinking for themselves.

Thinking for themselves, which requires studying the issues, becoming informed and then coming to an intelligent decision on the issues--that whole process isn't undertaken by the casual baseball fan. The finiteness of our time each day, and total time on the planet, and the inability to study everything to the point where we can make intelligent judgements on everything forces us to have to prioritize things.

And one of the byproducts of that is the requirement that we accept common wisdom when it comes to things that we want to have some interest in, but don't have the interest and/or time to independently investigate the issue and come to our own conclusions.

So, if the casual fan is giving RSAA instead of W, is accustomed to seeing that, and has the conventional wisdom based on that stat, he'd adapt to that environment just as easily as he did to judging pitchers by W. In regards to a question like was Jack Morris the premier pitcher of the 1980s, he'd understand an answer of "Of course not. He ranked 13th in the majors in RSAA. He finished so far behind Dave Stieb that, even if you took Dwight Gooden, who was in the top on the list, and added Gooden's total to Morris's, he'd still trail Stieb" just easily as he'd understand an answer of "Of course he was. He was the clear leader in wins. His dominance in that category was so clear that if you took Dave Stieb, who was 2nd in the league, gave Stieb an 11th year to the decade, had Stieb have a 20 win season, Morris would still be the leader."

5) From CJW, in response to "But, avoiding hits isn't a pitcher's job. His job is avoid giving up runs. I'll say it again--Preventing hits and base runners are merely a means towards the end [...]"--

And so, by extension, striking out hitters is not a pitcher's job;
strikeouts are merely one way to keep batters off base, and thus keep
them from scoring runs. Yet, nonetheless, your lead story for this
ATM report most conspicuously did *not* read:


The Diamondbacks played a double header against the Mets
yesterday. The most impressive and important thing about these
games was that the D-backs scored more runs that they allowed in
each game, thus sweeping the Mets. In the interesting, but
unimportant category, the D-backs set a major league record by
striking out 27 batters in an 18 inning doubleheader.


If your thesis is that the only stats of significance are runs scored
and runs allowed, you spend a lot of time talking about apparently
tangential stats while choosing to openly badmouth a selected few...
I find that curious.

My response--

I mean to address this contradiction. But, I got so caught in my tirade against "wins" that by the time I was done with that, it slipped my mind.

The ATM reports do frequently contain material that, while interesting, don't have a whole lot of substantive meaning behind them. Example, the Diamondbacks 27 SO in a doubleheader, going from there to Randy Johnson's SO above average and Pedro Martinez's 6 walks in his last start and using that to get an excuse to list the Redsox career leaders in BB/9 IP above average are just a couple of recent examples.

At http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...&threadid=9882 , the discussion of the no hitter included some discussion of loving statistical anomalies, which prompted this response from me--

"Contrary to what a lot of people might think, I also love statistical anomalies.

"But, there is a difference between something being an interesting statistical anomaly and something being overhyped beyond its significance. And that is where a no hitter falls."

So, I'm interested in interesting statistical notes, even some of them that don't have a whole lot of substantive value. A no hitter would fit into that category, if it wasn't for the hype. But, once the hype variable gets added to the mix, the hype overtakes the interestingness.


Meanwhile, I also had planned on including a discussion here between absolute figures vs. the league average and rate stats. But, this mailbag edition turned out to be longer than I had originally planned. Maybe I'll turn this into a weekly feature. If so, that discussion will be in the next one. Otherwise, I'll just include it as a note in an ATM report around this time next week.