Cheer for Regression

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 6:30 PM EDT

Okay, we're 5-8 and in last place. Everything that could go wrong has thus far. Evan Longoria and B.J. Upton have missed multiple games apiece, Dioner Navarro and Pat Burrell have been ineffective offensively, the rotation has four members with FIPs over 5 and three with tRAs over 6, and the bullpen has some issues as well. We're not going to play like a 62-win team all season, it's just not going to happen.

Nothing about this team's layout from two weeks ago has changed. Nothing. The only change has been B.J. in, Matthew Joyce out. Otherwise, the roles and names are the same - now whether you think they should be is an entirely different issue. The point is, this is the same team that we all had warm, fuzzy feelings about less than two weeks ago.

I know some of you don't buy into regression to the mean and all that, but if you have, just imagine there being some grand regression fairy. We don't know when it's going to strike, or where, but it's going to strike eventually. This is team is nowhere near as bad as they're playing, and whether or not you believe they were ever going to win 95+ games, they aren't going to lose that many unless a series of small asteroids find their way into the Rays clubhouse.

Also, it would be dandy if the regression fairy hits us during the off-day. We're heading to a pair of parks where homeruns aren't so trendy and where flyballs go to die. Something's gotta give.

Tweet Comment 38 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I believe in regression to the mean

when it applies to things like off/def BABIP and HR/Fly rates, etc. We are being victimized by some poor luck in those categories. But I don’t agree with regression when it comes to out-and-out poor performances. If batters are swinging and missing, there is nothing which convinces me they are the victim of bad luck. Or if pitchers are missing the strike zone and walking opponents around the bases, that they will regress to a more positive performance.

I stick to baseline skills as best as we can presently evaluate them statistically. Things like contact rate for batters (basically non-strikeout rate), K/9 and K/BB ratios for pitchers, and so forth. Right now we are not looking great in those categories. It may just be a small sample size and ultimately unrepresentative. But I don’t think it has to do with random variation outside of the norm.

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 6:47 PM EDT reply actions

Did you miss the part a few days ago about how the Rays are hitting nearly 50% flyballs?

Because if so, look into team flyball rates over the last few years. Few teams top 40% for an entire season, not along 50%. When you’re putting that many balls into the air, odds are you’re going to have some issues stringing together runs via anything but homeruns. Also, I honestly doubt we’re going to continue to run into an out on the basepaths once every other game. So that’ll help offensively.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions

You're right RJ

I wasn’t referring to any game in specific, just what I’ve seen over 2 weeks. I did note that I felt we’ve been unlucky with regard to HR/Fly%. What bothers me is the swinging and missing, especially with runners in scoring position and 0 or 1 outs. (Not that I believe in clutch factors)

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions

I want to look at some numbers this evening

Then maybe have more to say on the issue. Also want to do a post on the Zorilla, who I think is more valuable than we are giving him credit for

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions

I still can't buy into his power.

His HR/FB% is around Prince Fielder/Carlos Delgado HR/FB% level. That’s not something I see Zobrist being able to sustain. Yeah, okay, he switched his approach, and if it were that easy then 17-20% HR/FB wouldn’t be that impressive, would it?

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah I don't buy it either

But I do buy him being a real HR threat. He has a sweet power swing. Combine that with a good batting eye, and he could be a nice OPS guy.

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions

And again, I don't see RISP as our problem.

We’re hitting 0.310/.385/.513 with RISP and .268/.379/.482 RISP and 2 outs.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions

Did the Yankees regress from '98-'00?

by Raymondo on Apr 19, 2009 6:49 PM EDT reply actions

I'm having trouble understanding what this has to do with our situation.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Just that it doesn't have to happen

in all cases

I like the FB% stat, but why is that happening?

And i know you hate the word, but’chemistry’ isn’t there

by Raymondo on Apr 19, 2009 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions

What exactly doesn't have to happen?

I’m not talking about a team going 1-9 then turning around and righting that by going 9-0 or whatever. I’m talking about a team going 5-8, then playing at 60% ball the rest of the way, like we would expect.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions

I hope so, but pen

ad hitting scares me

by Raymondo on Apr 19, 2009 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions

The Marlins sure do have chemistry this year, though, huh?

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Apr 20, 2009 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions

The Yankees were loaded with talent

Due to solid farm system production under Stick Michael and an unlimited wallet to keep existing talent and pay for any needy area. There was nothing to regress to, they were just damn good. Although it took some amount of good fortune, and a helluva 8th-9th inning pitching combo, to win 4 world series rings. Plenty of strong teams play bad for 3 or 4 games at exactly the wrong moment. (Cubs in the last NLDS for instance) So Yankee fans should feel fortunate to have capitalized as completely as they did in that era.

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 6:58 PM EDT reply actions

We just need to get a high calibur starter or something to make the team excited to play again

Like I said, Kaz + Crawford for Halladay

by Sylar on Apr 19, 2009 7:02 PM EDT reply actions

If only we had someone like Scott Kazmir or James Shields.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Who the hell are they?

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Apr 19, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions

I think what Sylar is saying

is that we have 3 really good pitchers, but not 1 great one. Personally I don’t think that much matters. You can send 5 solid pitchers out there over the course of a season and win a lot of championships

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions

That didn't hurt them last year

Excited to play again? They were three wins from a World Championship. How much more excited do you need to be? Why would you trade Kaz and CC for Halladay, when Price is a few weeks a way?? I will take my chances with Price, rather than trading the core of this team. They are in a slump…whether they make the playoffs this year is another story. Don’t start tearing the team apart due to a mid-April record. Give them a chance.

by Lithia Rays on Apr 19, 2009 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Halladay's best days

may be behind him soon. I wouldn’t do this particular trade. But I would definitely trade Caz and Crawford for a stud #1 if the opportunity were there.

I believe Price will be that stud within 2 years. Would not shock me to see Garza become that stud this year either.

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions

Kazmir is that number one stud.

His first two games were ridiculously good. He got squeezed last night.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions

You have more faith than I RJ

I admit I didn’t see last night’s game…listened to the radio call as I was driving through the Carolinas. I like Kaz, and I’ve seen a lot of past wildness. Am worried he is losing the strike zone again, but I’ll take your word for last night

by RayFanNY on Apr 19, 2009 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions

By the same reasoning he got “anti-squeezed” in his first start when he repeatedly got called strikes on pitches half a foot off the outside corner. I think as fans we all have a tendency to think our pitchers get squeezed when in fact this goes both ways of course.

I just don’t see how anything in Kazmir’s career points to him improving. Sure, he is a great strike out pitcher and he is young, two very good qualities. However he has never been able to go deep into games and he as always had BB problems. Over his career he has averaged a fair bit less than 6 innings pitched per start, and puts too many guys on base. He is a very good pitcher, but not a number one stud.

by Buzzy on Apr 19, 2009 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Nobody said he was improving.

If he pitches like he did in 06/07 he’s a number one.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Hmm

but even with those 350 innings factored in he still has struggled over his career to go deep in games and keep baserunners off base. He is also significantly better in Tampa than on the road. Would you trust your life to a Kazmir start to save your team in the playoffs? If you want to call him a number one, that’s fine. It is partly semantic and I wont argue, I just don’t agree.

by Buzzy on Apr 19, 2009 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm not going to trust my life to any baseball game.

I’m not arguing that Kazmir has zero issues, nor am I arguing that he’s suddenly the best of his career. I’m saying he’s closer to 06/07 form than 08. Most players are better at home than on the road, so that’s not really something i would factor in as overly useful. It’s not like the Trop has some ridiculous dimensions or anything of that sort either.

by R.J. Anderson on Apr 19, 2009 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m not going to trust my life to any baseball game

of course not. Just to say that Kazmir is pretty inconsistent and wild. Why do you say he is closer to 06/07 than 08? Based on what? Also he has given up 50% more hrs on the road over his career. Not the case for Halliday, Santana, Beckett, Sabathia, Lackey…that is not quite a Jake Peavey plit, but whatever.

by Buzzy on Apr 19, 2009 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions