Stats. Giggity!

[PC]

I believe we've entered another losing streak, our 3rd of the season, ending our previous winning streak (our 2nd of the season) after the first game of the Braves series.  We finished 13-6 in that streak, averaging 5.0 rps and allowing 3.05 rpg.  That run differential is almost as big as the diff from our previous winning streak which was a little over 2 runs per game scored than allowed.  The runs allowed were much better for this second winning streak, 3.05 compared to 4.3 in the other streak.  That other winning streak, we just bashed scoring more the 6 runs per game.

This 3rd losing streak is still young so it's all very small sample size but the offense...is offensive.  So far, we're 3-5 but have scored 2.5 runs per game.  Take into account that we score 9 runs in one of those 8 games.  Without those nine runs, in the remaining seven games, the offense is average 1.57 runs per game.  Sadly, we're allowing just 2.75 runs per game in those 8 games and that's still too much for this offense to overcome.

[HalfSmokes]

(from the Effectively Wild podcast)

If you're wondering how fast a great rotation can turn to crap, the phillies are currently on pace to put up the worst second ERA- in the expansion era, the 2011 Phillies had the third best behind the 97 and 98 braves, so in four years, they've gone from historically great to historically awful (and it could get worse if Hammels is traded away)

[houston-nat]

This week at Banknotes Industries (the exile blog for FanGraphs' laid-off humor writers), I will be publishing the stupidest baseball analysis idea I've ever had:

All-Time Leaderboards for Players Named Lip, Tripp, Bip, Skip, Flip, Tip, Chip, Kip, Rip, and Zip

[Natsinpwc]

This week at Banknotes Industries (the exile blog for FanGraphs' laid-off humor writers), I will be publishing the stupidest baseball analysis idea I've ever had:

All-Time Leaderboards for Players Named Lip, Tripp, Bip, Skip, Flip, Tip, Chip, Kip, Rip, and Zip

No Nip?   I know there was a Nap (Lajoie)

[JCA-CrystalCity]

No Nip?   I know there was a Nap (Lajoie)

Al  Nipper doesn't make it?

[houston-nat]

Al  Nipper doesn't make it?

only first names. And if I had included variants, Chipper Jones woulda made it, so I skipped them.

I think there might have been a Nip in there. Will check mañana.

[Optics]

Anyone know our median or mode runs scored? I bet our averages/totals are still pretty good because of the few outbursts we have but I'm confident our median/mode runs scored is in the ~2 range.

[imref]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sabermetrics-is-killing-bad-dugout-decisions/

[JCA-CrystalCity]

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-02-29/what-buffett-saw-in-baseball-s-greatest-hitter?

[JCA-CrystalCity]

From Alex Speier's email blast (Extra bases from Boston.com).. Something to think about when discussing Scherzer (too late) and Strasburg, as well as JZ and even Gio (whether to re-sign him after this contract).

RADAR GUN RISK: Former Red Sox trainer Mike Reinold offered a thoughtful – and, in many ways, frightening – look at the injury risks presented by current velocity-obsessed throwing programs.

In essence, baseball looks like a sport that is cultivating velocity at the cost of longevity. The inventory of dominant late-innings relief arms has never been greater, but one wonders whether it’s coming at the expense of longevity.

As dramatic as the known risks of 30-something pitchers have been, based on the sort of analysis being provided by Reinold, it will be fascinating to see whether pitching primes begin to shift – and whether the most pronounced dropoffs for pitchers begin to start earlier.

Just a few years ago, it wasn’t uncommon to see a wealth of pitchers sustaining excellence into their thirties. In 2000, for instance, the average age of the 20 most valuable pitchers (as measured by Baseball-Reference.com’s WAR) was 31.0 years old; 10 pitchers age 32 or older were worth 4.0 WAR or more. Ten years ago, in 2006, the top-20 pitchers by WAR were, on average, 28.9 years old.





Average age of Top 20 pitchers

Rated by wins above replacement



Year

Average age  / Number of
Top 20 bWAR/ 4+ WAR, age 32+

2015 27.9         1
2014 27.6          1
2013 28.1         5
2012 28           4
2011 27.8        2
2010 27.7         5
2009 27.4         6
2008 27.1         3
2007 27.4          1
2006 28.9         4
2005 30.3          8
2004 29.5         5
2003 28.9          8
2002 29.1          7
2001 29.1          8
2000 31             10


SOURCE: Sources


By contrast, in 2015, the average age of the top-20 pitchers was fully a year younger – 27.9 – than it had been in 2006, and only one pitcher – 36-year-old John Lackey – posted a WAR of 4.0 or better at age 32 or older.

[imref]

Incredible:

[Nats Diamond]

Yowza! 

[aspenbubba]

Unbelievable.

[houston-nat]

FanGraphs has rolled out a pitcher usage page where you can easily see how often a reliever has been used in the past 7 days.

For instance

http://www.fangraphs.com/teams/nationals/pitcher-usage

Here you see a little calendar showing Blake Treinen has had two outings, both an inning, one 17 and one 20 pitches, and that he's thrown 37 pitches in the last three days.

Should be good for those who are suspicious of Dusty.

[NJ Ave]

FanGraphs has rolled out a pitcher usage page where you can easily see how often a reliever has been used in the past 7 days.

For instance

http://www.fangraphs.com/teams/nationals/pitcher-usage

Here you see a little calendar showing Blake Treinen has had two outings, both an inning, one 17 and one 20 pitches, and that he's thrown 37 pitches in the last three days.

Should be good for those who are suspicious of Dusty.

When I'm watching RPs - I know this is blasphemous coming from me - stats mean almost nothing to me.

The only stats that matter are butthole puckers and sighs of relief. A butthole pucker is when I'm sure a RP is going to blow the game, and a sigh of relief is when I'm sure a RP is going to lock it down. There is no in-between.

Last night Blake Treinen had a butthole pucker of a game.

[houston-nat]

Anthony Rendon's wRC+ today: 860

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Anyone think this was Dusty's way of showing that the bullpen is better but not "fixed"? Not much time before the non-waiver trade deadline. That was absolutely the wrong situation for Enny, and Dusty knows that, and everybody had a day off yesterday so they should all be available. Maybe that was a message?

something I don't get is not going with your best reliever in the bottom of the 9th in a tie when you are on the road.  By definition, one run kills you.  There are no higher leverage situations.  Maybe it was season managing and not game managing.  Got to see if Enny can get out of the xBH high pressure spot to know what I have.  If Doolittle was due, then it was at the start of the inning. 

[mitlen]

something I don't get is not going with your best reliever in the bottom of the 9th in a tie when you are on the road.  By definition, one run kills you.  There are no higher leverage situations.  Maybe it was season managing and not game managing.  Got to see if Enny can get out of the xBH high pressure spot to know what I have.  If Doolittle was due, then it was at the start of the inning. 

That's what I was trying to say.   

[mimontero88]

something I don't get is not going with your best reliever in the bottom of the 9th in a tie when you are on the road.  By definition, one run kills you.  There are no higher leverage situations.  Maybe it was season managing and not game managing.  Got to see if Enny can get out of the xBH high pressure spot to know what I have.  If Doolittle was due, then it was at the start of the inning. 

It's how you have to manage the situation.  The Nationals could only win that game in two ways (really one but the difference matters) - scoring >3 runs in an inning or scoring 1-3 runs in an inning.  The scenario where they score 1-3 runs is much, much more likely so that is going to require a save.  If you pitch Doolittle in the 9th then you have to put either Romero or Perez in the even higher leverage situation that a save situation presents.

[varoadking]

It's how you have to manage the situation.  The Nationals could only win that game in two ways (really one but the difference matters) - scoring >3 runs in an inning or scoring 1-3 runs in an inning.  The scenario where they score 1-3 runs is much, much more likely so that is going to require a save.  If you pitch Doolittle in the 9th then you have to put either Romero or Perez in the even higher leverage situation that a save situation presents.

Tied in the bottom of the ninth is less pressure than up one or more runs in the bottom of the tenth?

No...

[mitlen]

It's how you have to manage the situation.  The Nationals could only win that game in two ways (really one but the difference matters) - scoring >3 runs in an inning or scoring 1-3 runs in an inning.  The scenario where they score 1-3 runs is much, much more likely so that is going to require a save.  If you pitch Doolittle in the 9th then you have to put either Romero or Perez in the even higher leverage situation that a save situation presents.

I keep coming back to "Dusty ain't that deep."

[Truconfidence]

No bullpen has 7 stellar relievers.  When you have to use 5 in 9 innings while saving your closer, you're down to the bottom of the barrel as far as game situation is concerned.  You see this a lot in extra inning games (which was essentially the situation in the 9th yesterday since we were playing for extra innings) where managers are just kinda stuck with who is left that doesn't have to be saved for a save situation.  Dusty had exactly two options available to him at that point - Enny or Perez - neither of which were great options because they were both pitching out of the roles you'd rather have them pitch in.  It's just the reality of an extra inning type of situation where your starter didn't go deep, causing you to fire a lot of your bullets earlier than you would have liked.

EDIT:  For the record, I'm not saying that the bullpen is totally fixed.  I'd like to see us add another arm at the back end.  No question.  I'm only saying that I don't think this game is a great example of that.  This game is more indicative of how important it is for a starter to go deeper into close games.

This 

[mimontero88]

Tied in the bottom of the ninth is less pressure than up one or more runs in the bottom of the tenth?

No...

Over the course of a long season, it's a higher leverage situation yes.  It comes down to win probability.  You're far more likely to win a game you've gotten to a save situation than you are to win a tie game in extra innings.  So you save your closer for the situation in which your win probability is much better instead of the situation where it is essentially 50/50.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

It's how you have to manage the situation.  The Nationals could only win that game in two ways (really one but the difference matters) - scoring >3 runs in an inning or scoring 1-3 runs in an inning.  The scenario where they score 1-3 runs is much, much more likely so that is going to require a save.  If you pitch Doolittle in the 9th then you have to put either Romero or Perez in the even higher leverage situation that a save situation presents.

I'd like to see leverage charts that say a situation where the next run = loss, as in the tie in the 9th on the road, is higher leverage than a "save" situation in extra innings.  I don't believe it, but I could be wrong.  Sure, it may be more deflating to let a game get closer, tied or lost when you have grabbed a lead in extras, but in terms of runs damaging your hope of victory, giving up a run when that loses the game is a definite killer, while giving up 1 when you have a 1 run lead just means more overtime.

Of course, Dusty agrees more with you than me, Janes says:

So Baker, who was going to use Sean Doolittle in the ninth if the Nationals had a lead, but Romero if they didn’t, chose Romero. When the lefty tried to elevate a fastball to Pollock, it stayed down the middle, then flew out to left center. A few intentional walks and one out later, Drury singled through the right side to end the game

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/bullpen-falls-apart-again-for-nationals-in-6-5-loss/2017/07/22/5b2b88bc-6e9b-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html

[JCA-CrystalCity]

When you have a save situation in extras, your win probability is less than 100%.  1 run drops to 50% (maybe a touch more if the run scoring event is anything other than a homer).  When you have a tie, that one run drops you from 50% to 0%.  Like I said, I'd really like to see the leverage charts to understand how this works.