Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with
Dodger Home Runs Allowed, 2006
| HR# | Game | Date | Opp. | Batter | Pitcher | Inn. | Outs | Count | Runners | Score Before | Final | Harm |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 4/3 | vs. Atl. | LaRoche | Lowe | 1 | 1 | 1-2 | 2nd-3rd | Atl 1, L.A. 0 | Atl 11, L.A. 10 | 3 |
| 2 | 1 | 4/3 | vs. Atl. | A. Jones | Lowe | 5 | 1 | 0-0 | 1st-2nd | Atl. 5, L.A. 1 | Atl 11, L.A. 10 | 4 |
| 3 | 1 | 4/3 | vs. Atl. | Langerhans | Osoria | 8 | 0 | 0-0 | none | Atl. 10, L.A. 5 | Atl 11, L.A. 10 | 2 |
| 4 | 2 | 4/4 | vs. Atl. | McCann | Penny | 2 | 1 | 3-2 | none | L.A. 4, Atl 1 | L.A. 5, Atl. 4 | 2 |
| 5 | 2 | 4/4 | vs. Atl. | LaRoche | Seo | 8 | 2 | 1-0 | 2nd | L.A. 5, Atl. 2 | L.A. 5, Atl. 4 | 3 |
| 6 | 3 | 4/5 | vs. Atl. | Betemit | Perez | 3 | 2 | 1-0 | 2nd | L.A. 5, Atl. 3 | Atl. 9, L.A. 8 | 3 |
| 7 | 4 | 4/7 | at Phi. | Burrell | Tomko | 4 | 0 | 3-1 | none | L.A. 5, Phi. 0 | L.A. 5, Phi. 3 | 1 |
| 8 | 4 | 4/7 | at Phi. | Fasano | Tomko | 4 | 1 | 1-1 | 1st | L.A. 5, Phi. 1 | L.A. 5, Phi. 3 | 2 |
| 9 | 6 | 4/9 | at Phi. | Abreu | Hamulack | 9 | 2 | 3-2 | 1st-2nd | L.A. 3, Phi 3 | Phi. 6, L.A. 3 | 5 |
I haven't figured out what exactly to do with this chart yet; it's definitely a work in progress. But somehow I want to get somewhere with the final column: a rating of how important the home run allowed was, taking into account all aspects of the situation.
Right now, I'm rating the home runs subjectively on a harm scale of 1-5. For example, the game-winning home run by Bobby Abreu on Sunday gets a 5, while the bases-empty home run allowed by Brett Tomko with a five-run lead gets a 1. But you can see how quickly this gets complicated when you look at the homer allowed by Franquelis Osoria on Opening Day. At the time, it appeared meaningless, turning a five-run deficit in the eighth into six runs, but it proved to be the margin of defeat. Right now, I'm leaning toward keeping it mostly meaningless, since Osoria really had no reason not to challenge the batter. But I'm sure I'll tinker with my logic as time passes.
I hope to return to this and see if I can come up with a less subjective tool for evaluating home run damage. We also might see if there's a typical count or typical situation the Dodgers become vulnerable to the long ball. I don't know that I'll be able to keep this up for a whole month, let alone a whole season, but it's worth a shot.
Here's the chart for Dodger home runs on offense. Despite two homers Monday, it's still shorter.
Dodger Home Runs, 2006
| HR# | Game | Date | Opp. | Batter | Pitcher | Inn. | Outs | Count | Runners | Score Before | Final | Harm |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 4/4 | vs. Atl. | Drew | Smoltz | 1 | 1 | 2-1 | 1st | L.A. 2, Atl. 0 | L.A. 5, Atl. 4 | 3 |
| 2 | 6 | 4/9 | at Phi. | Navarro | Madson | 2 | 0 | 3-2 | none | L.A. 2., Phi. 0 | Phi. 6, L.A. 3 | 3 |
| 3 | 7 | 4/10 | at Pit. | Repko | Duke | 1 | 0 | 0-2 | 1st | L.A. 0, Pit 0. | L.A. 7, Pit. 3 | 3 |
| 4 | 7 | 4/10 | at Pit. | Saenz | Duke | 5 | 1 | 0-0 | 1st | L.A. 5, Pit. 0 | L.A. 7, Pit. 3 | 2 |
For the Aybar Marching & Chowder Society:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Apr-10-Mon-2006/sports/6789443.html
For the Aybar Marching & Chowder Society:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Apr-10-Mon-2006/sports/6789443.html
Are you trying to get at how bad the homers were in the sense of 'gee, why didn't he pitch more carefully in THAT situaton' (ie as more of a measure of pitcher decision making) or in the sense of 'wow, that really sunk the team' like the walk off homer in Philly.
I guess I ask because what if you came in with the bases loaded and a tie game and the count 1-0 on the batter. And it was the bottom of the ninth. You have to throw strikes, since in that situation the walk is as bad as a grand slam--but would a homer there be a 5 on the harm scale? The pitcher did what he could, but of course the homer ended the game. Just curious.
In response to your second paragraph, I would give a 5. Ultimately, though a walk is as bad as a homer there, the pitcher still has to get the out. It's probably true I'd rather see a pitcher give up a grand slam in that situation, though sometimes you get the out by throwing a pitch that, if not swung at, might be a ball.
Anyway, you can see it can get complicated. But basically, I'm just trying to look at how harmful the Dodger home runs have been this year. If they end up allowing 162 homers this year, how much will they have mattered?
Is BP doing that stat during the season? I didn't see it on the site.
In other words, it seems reasonable to hypothesize that the number of runs you will give up on average will probably be higher when you give up a HR to a bad hitter than when you give up a HR to a good hitter.
http://www.tangotiger.net/welist.html
It's just too bad we've hit less than half as many as we've given up...
If Osoria had allowed his HR in the eighth inning of a 10-10 tie, I might up it to a subjective rating of 3. Then again, it's only one run with two innings to go for the Dodgers - it's still not a huge deal.
Arroyo: 2-2, 2 HRs, BB
Pena: 1-3, 2B, 2 Ks
An interesting observation during the first week is that the Dodgers are among the leaders in combined doubles and triples (no one comes close to the 4 triples so far). Historically (and may be in part to Dodger Stadium), the Dodgers hit the fewest doubles and triples in the league. They compensated that by being among the leaders in home runs.
And I've never known the Dodgers to be amongst the leaders in homeruns. Maybe relative to their standings in doubles and triples...
Is leading the league in triples a good thing...?
http://tinyurl.com/esmcg
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/story/2006/4/10/234142/556
I would like to do the same for the Angels and Dodgers and automate the whole thing, as I have for the Minor League Scorebook posts. One of these days.
Last night's game was against the Angels' triple-a franchise, from Salt Lake City. They were considerably tougher, as Kevin Gregg opened the game, and seemed to overpower the 51s for four innings. Meanwhile, the 51s' pitcher, Eric Stults, generally kept the SLC team off-balance. Never overpowering them, but hitting his spots and making the pitches he needed to make. It all fell apart when the 51s brought pitcher Harold Eckert into the game, who proceeded to give up six runs in 2/3 of an inning (including three MASSIVE home runs). Evidently, the 51s came back to win the game, but I'd left before the ninth. I was, after all, in Vegas.
http://tinyurl.com/kawm8
And yeah, a hell of a game. Should be a great series.
Fresno doesn't have much in the way of talent from what I remember.
26 What's great is that Fresno is the Giants AAA affiliate, so it's all the sweeter. Their farm system is fairly weak at this point, with one of their top pitching prospects already in the majors (Cain) and only a few other players anywhere near ready.
27 You mean Vegas... and who? Not Fresno - they can't be all that talent-stacked...
I wonder if Jered W will turn out to be more consistent than his brother...
I do miss the Dodgers having a Cal League affiliate. The last one was San Berdoo, but I understand that you don't really need 2 high A teams.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.