Comments on: Season Salvaging Time

By: bookbook

bookbook — Mon, 05 May 2008 22:27:41 +0000

Baseball’s a phenomenally streaky sort of enterprise (especially with the travesty of home-and-home snoozer series that the current administration has saddled us with).

Last year, we wrote off the M’s several times, at which point they would go on a seven game tear.

(And then we wrote them on, and they would play down to their level of talent for a few weeks.)

This season isn’t nearly over – though the M’s might be better off if they acted as though it were.

By: badperson_ny

badperson_ny — Mon, 05 May 2008 19:31:36 +0000

I attended yesterday’s game at the stadium…painful experience.
I was confused as to why silva came back in the fourth after getting rocked in the third, the bullpen actually did a nice job the rest of the game.

I was wondering while enduring yankee ovation after ovation, if I prefer this to the power lineups of the mid-90s being destroyed by a weak bullpen…all things considered, I think this variation has a better chance of winning.

I agree with the overall thesis of today’s post, but hold out hope that the m’s can get hot, and other teams can run into trouble…although it’s clear at this point the m’s need the help of other teams (being considerate and losing)in addition to them winning.

By: Steve T

Steve T — Mon, 05 May 2008 17:00:49 +0000

You know, looking forward, there is some hope for the future. Our biggest weaknesses are the easiest holes to fill — 1B, DH, corner OF. Move Ibanez to DH where he belongs, and we’re three journeymen away from an average offense.

The sad thing is that to do this we’re relying on the team that assembled the worst 1B-DH-RF-LF I think I have ever seen.

By: msb

msb — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:47:21 +0000

Jayson Stark has just noticed that maybe the Ms weren’t constructed to win, after all.

By: cheapseats

cheapseats — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:03:33 +0000

The sad thing is they will probably crawl back up towards .500 over the rest of the season — which will be duly interpreted as some sort of hopeful sign by the FO going into next year.

Hotstove anybody?

By: argh

argh — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:52:54 +0000

That was supposed to contain a link.

By: terry

terry — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:48:46 +0000

“For a team of this quality to play .600 ball for five months is almost unheard of.”

Over the last 6 years an average ~3 teams a year played above .600 ball after May 4th (41% of which had a losing record on 5/4). Thus, teams can come back from a rough April, but most of them were pretty good to begin with (arguable much better than the current M’s roster).

I think the key is how “team of this quality” is defined. The point is how likely is it that a roster of guys who project like the Ms will be able to play .600 ball for 4/5ths of a season.

Sure teams can start slow and dig themselves out of a hole. Good teams can that is….

By: argh

argh — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:47:18 +0000

"But," says Steve Kelley, "It's not McLaren's fault."

By: Steve T

Steve T — Mon, 05 May 2008 13:19:45 +0000

Acquiring Mark Texeira is exactly the kind of bonehead move that got us into this fix in the first place.

By: Milendriel

Milendriel — Mon, 05 May 2008 13:03:22 +0000

65- Because there’s no MLB player named Mark “Texiera.”

/giggle