Tigers vs. mariners Game Thread September 17

[Thumb]

Offensive consistency and not repeating last years lack luster offensive post season preformance still remains a HUGE concern

Indeed, but still have some faith.

You know last year 6 AL teams finished with better records than us? NYY, OAK, BAL, TEX, TBR, and LAA.

And we still went to the big dance.

 

[Thumb]

5-3 Indiots.

Oh well, just really want LAA to win.

 

[tigermud]

Indeed, but still have some faith.

You know last year 6 AL teams finished with better records than us? NYY, OAK, BAL, TEX, TBR, and LAA.

And we still went to the big dance.

Yes thank you justin verlander...this year the offense will be required to show up to make this happen.. Can it? Sure..will it, I sure as hell hope so cuz it's now or never!

 

[Thumb]

On today's date last year we were 77-69.

And 3 games back of the White Sox.

 

[Thumb]

More random information, on today's date in 2011 we were 88-64, and were the only team to clinch the playoffs in the AL. at that point.

 

[kalinecountry]

http://wapc.mlb.com/det/play/search/?game_pk=349000&tagName=More From This Game
Tigers Webvideo Highlights from tonights Win.

 

[Mitchrapp]

We had a thread about wins for the Tigers. I'm curious to see those predictions again. I think I went 92 or 93 win total..Could be close..

 

[Mitchrapp]

Btw, I see that Iggy made an error. How bad was it?

 

[Rebbiv]

Tigers still have the best record in the AL since the AS Break

DET 36-21 .632
BOS 34-21 .618
KCR 36-23 .610

OAK 33-23 .589
CLE 31-25 .553

The last time DET was not in 1st place alone was June 30th. They were tied with CLE. Since June 30th:

DET 45-26 .634
BOS 42-26 .618
OAK 41-27 .603

TBR 39-29 .574
KCR 41-31 .569
CLE 38-31 .551

2nd Best Record in the AL since July 31st

BOS 27-16 .628
DET 27-18 .600
OAK 25-18 .581


The same 3 teams are at the top. DET, BOS and OAK. Anything can happen in the playoffs, but health will be the key to all teams.

 

[tomdalton22]

Btw, I see that Iggy made an error. How bad was it?

The timing of the error was terrible. Coke on the mound in the top of the 8th just after the Tigers took a 3-2 lead. One out with a man on 1st and Jose booted a double play ball. Now men on 1st and 2nd with one out and Phil Coke on the mound. Coke walked the bases loaded with one out. Alaverez releived Coke and got the DP ball.

 

[Mitchrapp]

So Coke is still terrible, shocker!

 

[Rebbiv]

So Coke is still terrible, shocker!

Runs did not score so the ERA was 0.00. Even if runs had scored, they would have been unearned, so ERA would still have been 0.00.

 

[tomdalton22]

Runs did not score so the ERA was 0.00. Even if runs had scored, they would have been unearned, so ERA would still have been 0.00.

I think we all know that ERA and WHIP are not good stats for single game circumstances. They are BOTH good long term stats.

 

[Rebbiv]

I think we all know that ERA and WHIP are not good stats for single game circumstances. They are BOTH good long term stats.

I do not agree with this statement.

 

[tomdalton22]

I do not agree with this statement.

which part of the statement?

 

[Mitchrapp]

Runs did not score so the ERA was 0.00. Even if runs had scored, they would have been unearned, so ERA would still have been 0.00.

What does that got to do with anything? Yep, WHIP is king - king of stats. Yeah, Reb.

 

[Rebbiv]

which part of the statement?

ERA is not a good stat or a good comparative stat, even over long term. WHIP isn't perfect and has biases, but it is better.

ERA's offensive equivalent is BAVG.

If I say so and so is a .275 Hitter. What does that mean? If I say Player A is a .275 hitter and Player B is a .250 hitter, who is better?

ERA is meaningless unless you add another stat to add context. Same with BAVG.

Randal Simon had a .300 BAVG, so he must be a good hitter.

I will also add, that in 1984 the Average AL ERA was 3.99, but the WHIP was 1.37. In 2012, Average AL ERA was 4.08 and the WHIP was 1.31. There isn't much difference in ERA, but .06 difference in WHIP is huge.

 

[Rebbiv]

What does that got to do with anything? Yep, WHIP is king - king of stats. Yeah, Reb.

Where did I ever say WHIP was king? Please Mitch, find that post.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Where did I ever say WHIP was king? Please Mitch, find that post.

WHIP, by itself is not an indicator that someone is good or bad. Basically the same you say about ERA. ERA alone, sucks. I don't argue that but WHIP along, also sucks.

 

[johnny2x2x]

WHIP in general is a better stat than ERA, but not in every case. For some pitchers, it's no accident that they strand base runners more than other pitchers, or they force a lot of double plays.

It's also no accident that some pitchers have a knack for getting wins regardless of WHIP or ERA. Give CC Sabathia a 5-4 lead in the 5th inning and more times than not he'll shut the other team out for the next 3 innings, give another pitcher the same 5-4 lead in the 5th inning and he's likely to give up 2 or 3 more runs, is this an accident or just chance?

Furthermore, some pitchers cannot pitch well in a 1-0 game. Stats will never be able to tell the whole story, there's always going to be an eye test. I think QS% is one of the most important stats for a pitcher, a quality start doesn't tell you shit for 1 game, but over a season it tells you a lot.