Bye, Bye Any Thought of the Cy...
It's an interesting game, where it is four-three after 6, yet seems like it should be a football score. That’ll happen when your ace pitcher gives up 10 hits and a walk, the other team makes three errors and gets two runners thrown out at the plate, and your own offense leaves eleven hundred men on base.
I though I was numb to the sight of the A’s loading the bases with no one out and failing to score, but my neighbors might disagree. Honestly, this has to stop next season. I don’t care if they employ the suicide double-play as their MO, but they have to score at least one in that situation, particularly when Seattle helped the struggling Cust out by walking him twice to load the bases (one intentional, one not so much). The A’s had the leadoff man on base in almost every single inning, due in large part to the fact that Shannon Stewart led off four different innings and reached base all five times he batted (four hits and a walk).
Yay for Shannon!
And I hate to pick on the only other consistent hitter we have on our team, but Mark Ellis’ at-bat in the seventh was positively Crosby-esque. After working a bases-loaded 2-0 count from a new pitcher, Ellis swung at three pitches that I’m not sure Crosby would have. What is it about our players with the bases loaded? (And as long as I’m asking questions, what is up with the ‘rally fries’?)
But just when it looked like the A’s were going to come up empty for their bases-loaded efforts, Mike Piazza pinch hit for Dan Johnson and after going fishing for his second strike, fought off a tough pitch to dump a single into left, scoring two, and putting the A’s back on top. That lasted a whole inning.
But quite frankly, it didn’t seem to matter how many runs the A’s scored today; after the first two no-hit innings, the A's pitchers (including Haren) just seemed to get hit, blooped, and dinked to death. I kept looking at the scoreboard saying, "They’ve only scored four?" While Haren wasn’t anywhere near as bad as his line score will show; he was definitely missing the ‘ace’ quotient again. (In my opinion, he should be done for the season; we need him next year.)
But great start or not, Haren left with a good chance to get win #15, but Embree had other plans. He didn’t drag it out any; allowing a pinch-hit homerun to the first batter of the eighth, and after Putz blew away the A’s in the ninth, it was only a matter of time before the Mariners would score. To their credit, they ended things in the ninth, letting us all get some sleep.
Offensive struggles aside; the A’s defense was miles ahead of Seattle’s. Hannahan threw two runners out at the plate, Swisher made a nice catch in center, and there was no question--at least for the night--who the better Suzuki was. Our Suzuki was as good as it gets behind the plate, blocking ball after ball after ball in the dirt, just like a pro, while the seasoned veteran Ichiro dropped a routine pop fly in center.
Today’s game had a little bit of everything, including a bunt hit by an A’s player (Suzuki), and a reminder that Haren won’t be the only one left out of the Cy voting. I just can’t fathom how little Putz has been used over the last month, as the Mariners have gone nearly winless. I really do feel sorry for Seattle; unlike our green and gold, they had a real opportunity to fight for the West crown this year. At any rate, I sure wish they were representing the West instead of the annoying team in my backyard.
But such is the nature of this season. The A’s lose 6-5 in the bottom of the ninth, and for those of you into the Barton watch; he was 2 for 5 with his first stolen base.
The A’s are coming back home as the season winds down. They play the Rangers tomorrow night at 7:05, looking to salvage some of their pride after the last Texas series.
0 recs |
33
comments
Read Related
Comments
Good thoughts..
I don't necessarily agree that Danny was missing that ace quality tonight. But then again, I guess that depends on your definition of ace-like behavior. Personally, I see it as fighting through and giving your team the chance to win. Granted, this game will not be on Danny's personal highlight reel, he did leave in position of having win #15. Of course, we know Alan had other ideas tonight. I do agree though (as I said in the other tonight's game thread) that it is time to shut Danny down. We do need him next year to lead our charge and can once again chase down 15 plus wins as our staff ace. He had a great season and has (supposedly) Japan to look forward to.
by AsWin on Sep 12, 2007 11:07 PM PDT 0 recs
Nice breakdown of an awful game...
but I winced when you called Ellis' at bat Crosbyesque, but I can't disagree.
If any of the A's braintrust is actually reading this pathetic cry in the wilderness of a possible last place finish I ask you to do this: Get rid of Chavez-- replace him with Hannahan.
by Carlos1118 on Sep 12, 2007 11:41 PM PDT 0 recs
i agree about haren...
he just seems tired. i think his era has gone up 12 straight starts or something. let him rest the year and have meyer pitch or something.
by simbiant on Sep 13, 2007 12:48 AM PDT 0 recs
same thing with Gaudin and
Street should have pitched the 9th. If you're going for the sweep, you go all in.
by bringbackmiggy on
Sep 13, 2007 1:18 AM PDT
up
0 recs
on the road
you usually save the closer for a save situation in extras
by closetasfan on
Sep 13, 2007 6:18 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I would say that Haren is
tired alright. Sick and tired of a team that can't score some runs for him. The guy should of had a 20 win season easy.
by Huskerland A s Fan on Sep 13, 2007 6:00 AM PDT 0 recs
Funny you should compare Ellis to Crosby...
I said basically the same thing after the 7th -- "Who the hell was that, and why has he been watching video of Crosby's at-bats?"
Also, I slept through the 8th, so I didn't see Seattle's tying home run. I'm sorry I let my guard down.
Hannahan's run defense: Whoooo!
And I'm still over Jack Cust.
by Poppy on Sep 13, 2007 6:22 AM PDT 0 recs
ugly game
Haren must be tired. He was not leaving so many pitches up earlier in the year.
Cros- I mean Ellis' AB was pure ugly. I actually ranted about it to my wife who was innocently reading her Harry Potter (no accounting for taste) when I accosted her with a profanity-laced tirade on the AB's ugliness. That had to be the worst AB of his year, since it would be nearly impossible to have a worse AB.
Did anyone notice how few Mariners fans wear baseball caps to the game? I thought that was kind of weird: pretty much whenever they'd show the fans, no one is wearing a baseball cap (buncha A's fans at the game were, though). Maybe that's why "rally fries" instead of rally caps... hell I don't know
by Brian in 317 on Sep 13, 2007 6:58 AM PDT 0 recs
if they wear hats
you can't see their beautiful hair, and everyone in Seattle has beautiful hair
by skutch on
Sep 13, 2007 8:30 AM PDT
up
0 recs
It's not about hair
The reason you wear a baseball cap is because the bill shields your face from the sun.
In Seattle there is no sun. Hence, no interest in baseball caps.
by iglew on
Sep 13, 2007 9:27 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Ugly game because
- The A's have to find a way to score with the bases loaded and no outs. Bunt, steal home, whatever, but get that runner in. Those runners just die on the bases!
- They should have brought in Street instead of Brown. Street is a proven closer that would have kept the game tied for 1 or 2 innings, giving the A's a chance to win. Brown is a rookie pitcher and has no experience pitching in high pressure situations.
by bringbackmiggy on
Sep 13, 2007 10:25 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Our Chevy's innings heavy ...
... and his gas tank is dry.
by The Dogfather on Sep 13, 2007 8:37 AM PDT 0 recs
Keep pitchin Danny.....
you don't shut down a guy that's not hurt.
I understand your pain..being in the Angels back yard. But, I'll take them over the M's any day. I like the Angels, with one exception (Garrett!), it's their fans that I find so detestable.
by BleacherDave on Sep 13, 2007 8:50 AM PDT 0 recs
See, I hate the Angels
with one exception, Vlad. :-)
Lackey, Scioscia, and Rodriguez can take a short walk...long pier. ;-)
But YES, fans ridiculously annoying as well.
by baseballgirl on
Sep 13, 2007 9:25 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Yeah, I'm with ya...
on K-Fraud. I love my walk-off drop t-shirt.
by BleacherDave on
Sep 13, 2007 1:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
even my mom says it's ok to hate the Angels
vlad has my respect, he's an exceptional talent with class
but the rest? go away.
'specially Scioscia.
Someone on ESPN.com said before the season that the Angels would win the division easily.
I hate him too.
by 67MARQUEZ on
Sep 13, 2007 10:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I love your optimism BBG
I love your optimism BBG, but I think Dan's chances for that award went away about a month or so ago.
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 13, 2007 9:27 AM PDT 0 recs
Maybe I'm just odd
but I like it better when we get on base. Not just theoretically in a stats way, but in terms of personal satisfaction even.
If we end an inning with the bases loaded I think, "Bummer that we didn't score, but at least we got a bunch of guys on, so that's cool." Whereas if we just go 1-2-3 then I don't like that as much.
by iglew on Sep 13, 2007 9:31 AM PDT 0 recs
I'm curious as to how the team members
would see their playing goals for the rest of the season: not finishing last in the AL west? Making it to .500?
Individual goals, of course, differ: auditioning for 2008 -- with the A's or other teams (free agents or showcasing for trades); individual stats, and/or just getting into a game before the end of the season.
by OaklandSi on
Sep 13, 2007 9:44 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I think that
avoiding last place would be a huge mental victory for everyone involved. I also wonder if our recent September struggles are due to Billy's penchant to talk in vague terms about his off season plans. Surely, it can't be easy to get your job done if every other day you hear your name in the papers as being traded to some team. Remember, these people sign contracts thinking that they are going to build a life (to certain degrees) with the A's for a certain amount of time. I mean only in the A's world could someone like Blanton be considered trade bait after the solid year behind Danny he is having.
I think Billy needs to sit down Swisher, Buck, Barton, Suzuki, Street, and Haren and tell them that they aren't going anywhere. (Which should be obvious anyways). Granted, these people are professionals but a little job security is a funny thing. Blanton should also be on that list. I think it's absolutely foolish (in my opinion) if Billy is considering trading Blanton. Obviously, Danny isn't going anywhere and DiNardo/Meyer/Braden do not have a lot of trade value.
We need to keep our 1-2 punch of Danny and Joe. You only trade starting pitching if it is a luxury. We have already way to many questions concerning it. Getting rid of Joe will only weaken our staff further. Even if we were offered the magical combo of hitting prospects for Joe, Billy should take a pass. With the arrival of Buck, Suzuki, Barton, etc we have a up and coming hitting core, we need the pitching to go along with it. Trading a solid young starter for someone else's future that may not pan out just doesn't make sense. Especially with the reluctance of organizations to part with young pitching in trades.
Now if Billy is desperate to trade a starter, and he shouldn't be, trading Chad is really our only option. (Or, to a lesser extent, if Rich does amazingly well in his two starts). Our surplus in trades are in the 1b area and potential closers (Street, Embree, and to certain extents Castilla and Brown all could turn into a closer). Those are the chips we should be using. As I said before, it makes no sense to build up our offense if our starting pitching motto is Danny and pray after that for a win. It doesn't matter how many young, talented hitters we have if our staff behind Danny is giving up 10 runs a game (that is of course an exaggeration, but you get my point).
by AsWin on
Sep 13, 2007 10:22 AM PDT
up
0 recs
And so are the Rangers
So after tonight one of us will be eliminated. Is it better to get it over with or drag it out? I for one would like to keep winning because being eliminated is the last nail in the coffin. Yeah, I know it's over this season, but having a big old E next to the team name is so depressing.
What does everyone else think?
by kapers on
Sep 13, 2007 10:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Can any one of you "stat" guys
find out where the A's rank in MLB as far as bringing in runners from third with less than two outs? I have to believe if we're not the worst in the league, we have to be darn close.
Every year I think the A's have to get better -- they can't get any worse -- and then I watch them fail 7 out of 10 times to do it .... (it seems)
Any one know our success-rate percentage? I think a major-league team ought to be able to successfully bring in a runner from third with less than two outs 70% of the time. I'm fairly confident we fail 70% of the time (at least.)
Someone help me out ... thanks.
by Vacafan on Sep 13, 2007 10:08 AM PDT 0 recs
I was wondering the same thing myself
I suspect that the A's, indoctrinated into the benefits of patience/walks/OBP, aren't always able to change their approach when the situation calls for it. And not just with a runner on third with less than two outs, but with a runner at second with no outs. Guys like Cust and Swisher seem prone to taking called third strikes with runners in scoring position. This is untested, unanalyzed--it just seems that way to me.
by skutch on
Sep 13, 2007 10:19 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Not quite what you are asking
but the quickest I could find online is the number of runs batted in per at bat with runners in scoring position.
Ignoring the NL (since the DH/pitcher difference biases that comparison), the AL average is 0.40, the Tigers lead with 0.44 (613/1403), the White Sox are last at 0.36 (412/1140), and the A's are 2nd last with 0.37 (475/1299).
by green star oakland on
Sep 13, 2007 11:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Thanks
I was thinking more along the lines of "man on third with 0-1 outs" vs. overall scoring position, but I appreciate the effort.
I guess I wasn't very clear ... what I'd like to see (if possible) is what percentage of runners does Oakland bring in from third base with less than two out?
Again, I think a major-league team ought to be able to do that successfully 7 out of every 10 opportunities. Ground ball, fly ball, passed ball, whatever.
Your study above shows we're bad with runners in scoring position period. No surprise there .. just wanted to see if someone could get a little more specific.
by Vacafan on
Sep 13, 2007 11:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
No, you were clear
I was just answering a somewhat related but easier for me to answer question (and of course I should have used PA, not AB, but that requires more work gathering data from multiple ESPN stat pages).
by green star oakland on
Sep 13, 2007 11:24 AM PDT
up
0 recs
But isn't it true that
White Sox are last in hitting generally, and Oakland is 2nd last in hitting generally? If so, then these hitting with RISP numbers don't tell us anything new.
I'd like to see hitting with RISP isolated from hitting in general.
by iglew on
Sep 13, 2007 1:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Mark Ellis - 9th Inning Decision?!?!
Why didn't Ellis throw out the lead runner to record the 2nd Out in the 9th Inning. That is the 2nd time I remember seeing happening this year w/ Ellis. He definitely had time to get the lead runner.
Anyone?
by Colorado Fan on Sep 13, 2007 1:05 PM PDT 0 recs
If I'm recalling correctly
Ellis very narrowly avoided a collision on the basepaths with Guillen, who was running to third. The slight hesitation on that play that was caused by the move to not run into each other, may also have put Ellis in a better position to get the sure out at first.
by OaklandSi on
Sep 13, 2007 1:50 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Near Collision
Oh well. Hopefully next time he makes the more aggressive play.
Ellis is s stud.
by Colorado Fan on
Sep 14, 2007 7:07 AM PDT
up
0 recs



















