Looking National League Stats

[Balsa]

IIRC DLee has always had a high BABIP.

[CubColtPacer]

10 days later here are the updated totals-this continues to be a strange team

 

Offense

Cubs are 6th in runs/game

Cubs are 4th in OBP

Cubs are 6th in SLG

Cubs are 6th in OPS

Cubs are 9th in HR

Cubs are 13th in BB/game

2nd in BA

 

The offense needs to improve in home runs and walks. The team has slowly been catching up to the pack in walks/game-they are getting very close to passing 3 to 4 teams to get into the middle of the pack in that category, which would be acceptable to me with what should be a high SLG/high BA team. The Cubs current walk pace would be the highest total since the 2002 team.

The HR's they should be top 5 in-they can move up a couple spots, but getting into top 5 means that they are going to have to start hitting them on a much more consistent basis. Right now they are on pace for 144 home runs-which is very low for the lineup they have.

 

Pitching

5th in ERA

3rd in BAA

8th in walks/game allowed

2nd in strikeouts/game

2nd in OBP against

4th in SLG against

4th in OPS against

10th in least HR allowed

2nd in WHIP

5th in starter ERA

6th in reliever ERA

 

The high number of HR's is the most glaring stat, espeically since that isn't even a rate stat and the Cubs have played less games than most teams in the NL. The walk rate is the next most glaring stat, but it also is much improved from previous years and it is in the top half of the league.

[Soul]

I think we need to take out some of the blowout games we have and then see how our stats look. Because right now, our record is not going to match up with the stats because we lose 2 or 3 games by 1 run and our offense does crap, then we win by 9 like last night and it puffs our stats up.

 

In short, I don't think the overall stats are going to tell the real story of this ballclub. At least not unless we either start winning some close games, or stop blowing teams out every 4th game or so.

[SouthSideRyan]

I think we need to take out some of the blowout games we have and then see how our stats look. Because right now, our record is not going to match up with the stats because we lose 2 or 3 games by 1 run and our offense does crap, then we win by 9 like last night and it puffs our stats up.

 

.

 

Then you need to take out the blowout games of every team.

[Sarcastic]

I think we need to take out some of the blowout games we have and then see how our stats look. Because right now, our record is not going to match up with the stats because we lose 2 or 3 games by 1 run and our offense does crap, then we win by 9 like last night and it puffs our stats up.

 

In short, I don't think the overall stats are going to tell the real story of this ballclub. At least not unless we either start winning some close games, or stop blowing teams out every 4th game or so.

 

It isn't logical to pick and choose which games "count" towards team totals. The blowouts are as much a part of the team's performance as the one run losses. If the data showed that, over the long term, a team that tends to lose lots of one run games while outscoring opponents over will continue to lose, you'd have an argument. But while it is possible that the Cubs' poor play in one run games could continue, you haven't proven that those games are any more predictive of their future performance than their overall efforts. If you can show statistical evidence that those losses were more predictive, and not mostly up to chance, I'd like to see it.

[Soul]

I think we need to take out some of the blowout games we have and then see how our stats look. Because right now, our record is not going to match up with the stats because we lose 2 or 3 games by 1 run and our offense does crap, then we win by 9 like last night and it puffs our stats up.

 

In short, I don't think the overall stats are going to tell the real story of this ballclub. At least not unless we either start winning some close games, or stop blowing teams out every 4th game or so.

 

It isn't logical to pick and choose which games "count" towards team totals. The blowouts are as much a part of the team's performance as the one run losses. If the data showed that, over the long term, a team that tends to lose lots of one run games while outscoring opponents over will continue to lose, you'd have an argument. But while it is possible that the Cubs' poor play in one run games could continue, you haven't proven that those games are any more predictive of their future performance than their overall efforts. If you can show statistical evidence that those losses were more predictive, and not mostly up to chance, I'd like to see it.

 

I know, but the Cubs have not been winning according to what the overall stats say they should. Do you really think with this BP we're going to start winning close games late? I'm certainly not seeing it, although I'd love for it to start happening.

 

I can show you the lack of holds from the BP. We don't have anyone near the league leaders in that category. If the BP can't hold teams, why would they suddenly start winning one-run close games? I'm sure you acknowledge the BP has been weak this year, correct?

[biittner77]

If the BP can't hold teams, why would they suddenly start winning one-run close games? I'm sure you acknowledge the BP has been weak this year, correct?

 

Maybe the Cubs offense could get to the other teams BP first. The Cubs BP has done pretty well it what has seemed like a lot of extra innings games only to lose after holding the opposition down for 3-4 innings.

[SouthSideRyan]

Games the Bullpen has lost

 

4 IP, 1 R

2.2 IP, 7 R

8 IP, 2 R

1 IP, 1 R

6.2 IP, 3 R

5.1 IP, 5 R

2 IP, 3 R

9 IP, 1 R

3 IP, 2 R

2 IP, 3 R

 

That's 6 games at most they deserve the loss for, which seems pretty average to me.

[Sarcastic]

I think we need to take out some of the blowout games we have and then see how our stats look. Because right now, our record is not going to match up with the stats because we lose 2 or 3 games by 1 run and our offense does crap, then we win by 9 like last night and it puffs our stats up.

 

In short, I don't think the overall stats are going to tell the real story of this ballclub. At least not unless we either start winning some close games, or stop blowing teams out every 4th game or so.

 

It isn't logical to pick and choose which games "count" towards team totals. The blowouts are as much a part of the team's performance as the one run losses. If the data showed that, over the long term, a team that tends to lose lots of one run games while outscoring opponents over will continue to lose, you'd have an argument. But while it is possible that the Cubs' poor play in one run games could continue, you haven't proven that those games are any more predictive of their future performance than their overall efforts. If you can show statistical evidence that those losses were more predictive, and not mostly up to chance, I'd like to see it.

 

I know, but the Cubs have not been winning according to what the overall stats say they should. Do you really think with this BP we're going to start winning close games late? I'm certainly not seeing it, although I'd love for it to start happening.

 

I can show you the lack of holds from the BP. We don't have anyone near the league leaders in that category. If the BP can't hold teams, why would they suddenly start winning one-run close games? I'm sure you acknowledge the BP has been weak this year, correct?

 

According to ESPN.com, the Cubs bullpen ERA is 3.58, 6th in the NL. That isn't the best measure of a bullpen, but I prefer it to holds or saves. In the early going, the team has consistently put the bullpen in positions demanding perfection. The end result is that the bullpen gives up just enough and they get the blame, even though the offense failed to score the tack on run, or the starter let the opposing team back in the game. The bullpen hasn't been spectacular, but it gets more than a fair share of the blame. As the season goes on, it is probable that the luck of one run games will even out. It won't necessarily. We could have a bad season in one run games. But hopefully the rest of the team picks the bullpen up and puts them in fewer crucial situations, and maybe a few breaks will go the Cubs way in the close ones. Either way, what the batters and starters do will be much more important to the team's success than the bullpen.

[jjgman21]

Games the Bullpen has lost

 

4 IP, 1 R

2.2 IP, 7 R

8 IP, 2 R

1 IP, 1 R

6.2 IP, 3 R

5.1 IP, 5 R

2 IP, 3 R

9 IP, 1 R

3 IP, 2 R

2 IP, 3 R

 

That's 6 games at most they deserve the loss for, which seems pretty average to me.

 

I don't know how you determine "deserve" but at first glance I assume you are putting Monday nights game into a "didn't deserve" catagory, which is insane. you probably also include the 8 IP 2 R performance in this catagory. shouldn't this be considered a 2 IP 1 R performance since the Cubs would have won the game had Dempster not given up the lead in the ninth? same thing goes for Eyre and the 6.2 IP 3 ER affair. even the 9 IP 1 R affair is diminished by the fact that the defense played out of their minds to keep the pen from giving up runs that game, including Pie gunning a guy at the plate in the 10th.

 

simalarly, in Z's second game against Cincy, not all the blame can go to the pen, but walking two batters with the bases loaded certainly didn't help. there's also been a few games where the Cubs were within striking distance only to have the pen put it completely out of reach.

 

there are too many variables in scoring that are hidden in this analysis. there are inherited runners that count against the starters, and there is the fact that the starter gets the loss if the team never gets the lead (so if the game is 0-1 when the starter leaves, and the offense scores five but never regains the lead, and the team losses 5-6, the pen doesn't take the loss).

 

 

presuming you are right in defining "deserve," 10 NL teams don't have 6 pen losses, so how on earth can 6 be average? the Cubs pen is 2-10. no other team has more losses, and presumably several of the teams that are close also had games that the pen didn't "deserve" the loss. so presumably 6 games, which is actually 9 games, is far worse that "average."

 

those teams that are close to losing as many games have also won more than two. of course part of that is offense, but part of that is the pen keeping the team in close games.

 

53% save percentage. enough said. all you have to do is watch the games, and you will know that the pen is a huge problem.

[jjgman21]

 

According to ESPN.com, the Cubs bullpen ERA is 3.58, 6th in the NL. That isn't the best measure of a bullpen, but I prefer it to holds or saves. In the early going, the team has consistently put the bullpen in positions demanding perfection. The end result is that the bullpen gives up just enough and they get the blame, even though the offense failed to score the tack on run, or the starter let the opposing team back in the game. The bullpen hasn't been spectacular, but it gets more than a fair share of the blame. As the season goes on, it is probable that the luck of one run games will even out. It won't necessarily. We could have a bad season in one run games. But hopefully the rest of the team picks the bullpen up and puts them in fewer crucial situations, and maybe a few breaks will go the Cubs way in the close ones. Either way, what the batters and starters do will be much more important to the team's success than the bullpen.

 

regarding the bold, the pen has to come through sometime in this situation. I think the pen has held exactly one 1-run lead the entire year.

[sunnydoo]

Our 27 yr old SS with great range has moved up to 8th non qualified in BA and 7th in OBP in the NL after a stinko start for NL SS. Considering his last full year was in 2004 (when he was 24) was .288/.340, I would say he needs some loving with the glove he carries.

 

Now hitting .284 after a single in his first AB, and .395 for the month of May.

 

But yet everyone hates him on this board.

[VVMattVV]

But yet everyone hates him on this board.

 

His OPS is hovering around the .700 mark, his OBP is still mediocre, and he hasn't been that great in the field so far this year. I will continue to hate him.

Edited May 17, 2007 by VVMattVV

[CubColtPacer]

Our 27 yr old SS with great range has moved up to 8th non qualified in BA and 7th in OBP in the NL after a stinko start for NL SS. Considering his last full year was in 2004 (when he was 24) was .288/.340, I would say he needs some loving with the glove he carries.

 

Now hitting .284 after a single in his first AB, and .395 for the month of May.

 

But yet everyone hates him on this board.

 

It's very confusing-it's almost like the player who played for the Cubs in April got replaced. Around the start of May, both his offense and his defense started to get a lot better. You're right, overall so far he has been a middle of the road NL shortstop. I just have no idea if June's version is going to be closer to the April version or the May version, as I could easily see both happening.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Our 27 yr old SS with great range has moved up to 8th non qualified in BA and 7th in OBP in the NL after a stinko start for NL SS. Considering his last full year was in 2004 (when he was 24) was .288/.340, I would say he needs some loving with the glove he carries.

 

Now hitting .284 after a single in his first AB, and .395 for the month of May.

 

But yet everyone hates him on this board.

 

Maybe people dislike him for how he's performed as a whole throughout his career, not just during the stretches that fit your argument.

[Guest]

Just to clarify for anyone looking, that 11th in walks allowed that he posted actually means that the Cubs have been the 6th best team at preventing walks from their pitchers. Even people who have watched the games this year I think would not believe that, but it's true.

 

Here are some other stats:

 

Starters ERA: 3.78 (6th in league)

Bullpen ERA: 3.14 (5th in league)

 

 

8th in HR's (I bet the team will be top 3 or 4 before all is said and done)

The only bad stat they have is that they are 13th in walks-but they are still on pace to walk over 100 times more than last year.

 

That .334 OBP number keeps slowly rising-I expect it to level off pretty soon here. If the team can have between a .335-.340 OBP on the season, I will be very happy. That would be a top 5 OBP in the NL each of the last 2 years, and combined with their slugging would make the team one of the best scoring teams in the league.

 

Plus, this offense has been on a roll now for a little while. In their last 16 games, they are averaging 5.625 runs per game. In their last 11, it's been 5.9. In their last 7, it's been 6.43 runs per game.

 

if number of games aren't equal, shouldn't we compare rate stats like walks per IP?

[CubColtPacer]

Just to clarify for anyone looking, that 11th in walks allowed that he posted actually means that the Cubs have been the 6th best team at preventing walks from their pitchers. Even people who have watched the games this year I think would not believe that, but it's true.

 

Here are some other stats:

 

Starters ERA: 3.78 (6th in league)

Bullpen ERA: 3.14 (5th in league)

 

 

8th in HR's (I bet the team will be top 3 or 4 before all is said and done)

The only bad stat they have is that they are 13th in walks-but they are still on pace to walk over 100 times more than last year.

 

That .334 OBP number keeps slowly rising-I expect it to level off pretty soon here. If the team can have between a .335-.340 OBP on the season, I will be very happy. That would be a top 5 OBP in the NL each of the last 2 years, and combined with their slugging would make the team one of the best scoring teams in the league.

 

Plus, this offense has been on a roll now for a little while. In their last 16 games, they are averaging 5.625 runs per game. In their last 11, it's been 5.9. In their last 7, it's been 6.43 runs per game.

 

if number of games aren't equal, shouldn't we compare rate stats like walks per IP?

 

You quoted the post I made a couple weeks ago-in my most recent one on the last page, I made it walks per game for both the batters and the pichters to try to compensate for the difference in games played.

[Guest]

yea, sorry - tired. and annoyed at being one hit by Jorge Sosa.

[RegulusBlue]

I wonder why these stats are not turning into runs for us?

 

BP is still convinced that we're a decent team, but I just don't see it. I think too many of our hitters are extremely flawed, especially when they decide that a HR is the only way to get runs late (JONES, BARRETT).

 

The numbers look pretty, but the problem is that our OBP is lining up with the players that do all the hitting. Sure Lee is an OBP monster, but he's not hitting HRs this year, and we're certainly not driving him in often. Aramis gets on often as well, but Jones does very little other than hit into DPs and Murton, Floyd, DeRosa, Izturis are not gonna hit for the power to score those guys without stringing three singles together to satisfy our station to station base running habits.

 

There is hope on the horizon, however. If we tinker with the lineup a little, I think we can generate some more runs by putting some OBP threats ahead of the guys who can drive them in, rather than batting them 1, 3, and 4.

 

If Soriano were moved to the fifth spot, he could drive in Aram and Lee with doubles and HRs, and Lou can still waste outs and try to play super manager when he gets on ahead of people who can bunt.

 

Bat Murton and Theriot in either order at the top of the lineup, probably putting Murton first so he won't get Theriot doubled off due to his high grounder rate. That puts two nice OBP guys ahead of our RBI core.

 

If you did those two things, our run production would more accurately match our stats, which is what we all want. Then the bullpen wouldn't have to be amazing to keep us in a game.

[soccer10k]

Our 27 yr old SS with great range has moved up to 8th non qualified in BA and 7th in OBP in the NL after a stinko start for NL SS. Considering his last full year was in 2004 (when he was 24) was .288/.340, I would say he needs some loving with the glove he carries.

 

Now hitting .284 after a single in his first AB, and .395 for the month of May.

 

But yet everyone hates him on this board.

 

Ronny Cedeno had a pretty good April 2006, but that doesn't mean we should forget the other 5 months that he sucked.

 

If Izturis continues to hit well and plays good defense, people will start to like him more. But until he shows he can play well day in and day out, there will always be a lot of skepticism around him.

[sunnydoo]

Maybe people dislike him for how he's performed as a whole throughout his career, not just during the stretches that fit your argument.

 

Wow, snippy much? So dont take my word for it. While none of these guys may be of the caliber of the new breed of SS, all of them had pretty solid careers and some pretty good years.

 

Similar Batters through Age 26

 

Bill Russell (964)

Royce Clayton (964)

Marty Marion (961)

Rafael Ramirez (960)

Terry Turner (960)

Steve Yerkes (960)

Jose Oquendo (958)

Jackie Hayes (958)

Bucky Dent (957)

Jerry Remy (957)

 

Now lets see you come back from TJ surgery and play SS mister. Usually takes right at 2 years to get back into the full swing of things. His OPs may never be really high b/c of his slugging %, but i think once he adjusts to the IF at Wrigley, he can make up for it with the glove. :wink: