Fun With Small Sample Sizes

After 10 games, the 2012 Cubs are what we thought they were, a poor offensive team with moments of intriguing starting pitching. Here are some rather meaningless numbers I stumbled across...

Cubs 2012 P/PA - 3.71 (Team Leader: I Stewart 4.19)

Cubs 2011 P/PA - 3.74 (C. Pena 4.13)

Cubs 2012 BB/PA - 0.79 (J. Baker 1.76)

Cubs 2011 BB/PA - 0.71 (C. Pena 1.67)

Cubs 2012 SB/CS - 8/11 for 72.7% success rate (pace of 129/178)

Cubs 2011 SB/CS - 69/92 for 75% success rate

Cubs 2012 Offense - 4 Runs Per Game, 10th in NL

Cubs 2011 Offense - 4.04 R/G, 8th in NL

 


 

The Good: Clevenger (1.500 OPS), LaHair (1.119), Castro (.831)

The Okay: DeJesus (.799), Johnson (.779), Stewart (.749)

The Not Okay: Barney (.669), Soriano (.655)

The Awful: Soto (.538), Baker (.448), Mather (.282), Byrd (.212), DeWitt (.191)

 


 

Aramis Ramirez: 114/179/171 0 HR, 5 RBI, 5 R

Ian Stewart: 242/342/424 1 HR, 5 RBI, 4 R

Tyler Colvin: 350/381/600 1 HR, 5 RBI, 3 R

 


Soriano 2012: .313/.343/.313 5.7 BB%, 22.9 K%, .400 BABIP, 43.2 O-Swing% (swings at pitches outside zone), 54.3 O-Contact% (contact on pitches outside of zone when swinging)

 

Soriano 2011: .244/.289/.469 5.3 BB%, 22.2 K%, .266 BABIP, 43.9 O-Swing%, 60.4 O-Contact%

 


 

Cubs 2012 Pitchers: 2.63 K/BB ratio, 1.22 WHIP, 8.08 K/9, 1.022 HR/9

Cubs 2011 Pitchers: 2.11 K/BB, 1.41 WHIP, 7.68 K/9, 1.017 HR/9

Cubs 2012 Run Prevention: 4.80 R/G, 14th in NL

Cubs 2011 Run Prevention: 4.67 R/G, 14th in NL

Cubs 2012 Starters: 4.23 ERA, 9th in NL, 3.73 K/BB, .225 BAA

Cubs 2011 Starters: 4.79 ERA, 16th in NL, 2.12 K/BB, .276 BAA

Cubs 2012 Relievers: 5.47 ERA, 16th in NL, 1.53 K/BB, .250 BAA

Cubs 2011 Relievers: 3.51 ERA, 8th in NL, 2.09 K/BB, .233 BAA

 


 

The Good: Russell (0.00 ERA, 4/1 K/BB), Garza (1.23, 14/3), Dolis (1.80, 1/3), Dempster (1.88, 15/6), Samardzija (3.95 13/1)

The Okay: Lopez (4.50, 1/2), Volstad (4.95, 10/2)

The Not Okay:

The Awful: Camp (6.50, 4/0), Castillo (7.36, 5/2), Marmol (8.10, 4/4), Wood (11.57, 4/3), Maholm (13.50, 4/3)

 


Comments

roids work.

Rights fees paid by cable television channels are behind the growth in team values. Aggregate cable television revenue for baseball’s 30 teams has increased to $923 million from $328 million over the past 10 years. And thanks to new television deals inked by teams like the Houston Astros, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and the Texas Rangers that have yet to kick in, as well as the pending deal for the San Diego Padres and a likely new, rich deal that will begin in 2014 for the Los Angeles Dodgers, local television revenue could exceed $1.5 billion in 2015.

~snip~

Both the Chicago Cubs, who rose 14% in value, to $879 million and the Philadelphia Phillies, who increased 19% in value, to $723 million, are expected to enjoy huge increases in local television revenue when their current deals expire. The Cubs contract with WGN, which televises about half the team’s games, ends following the 2014 season and its deal with Comcast SportsNet Chicago expires after 2019.

your 2015 World Champion Cubs!!!!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2012/...

Cubs rank 4th in total valuation (don't ask me how they get these numbers), but have the 2nd worse debt/value ratio behind Mets and are 3rd in revenue brought in and operating income.

live sports TV is becoming a gold mine thanks to Tivo and other passive-watching tools.

people like to watch sports live, it's one area where Tivo isn't totally trampling programming.

delivery of a live-action 3 hour+ block of programming that people will watch for all 3 hours rather than watching the next day and skipping through commercials.

I understand that's how most people do it, but I actually prefer TiVo for sports for the opposite reason. I can watch a Bears game in 70 minutes, and if I time it right, I'm usually catching up to real-time right around when Cutler's throwing the game-ending pick.

LeMahieu enjoying Colorado Springs; 326/373/435 with a HR
Marshall: 3.1 IP, 1 SV, 2.70 ERA, 4 K, 2 BB, 1.8 WHIP
Cashner: 6.2 IP, 2.70 ERA, 6 K, 7 BB, 1.5 WHIP
Flaherty: 0/3 with 3 K's and 1 R
M. Gonzalez: 250/280/333 in 25 PA, 2 K, 1 BB
Colvin's #'s are in the post.

Byrd dives for a ball, looked a bit unnecessary, but regardless, a nice play. If he was on his feet, it's a double play.

Recent comments

The first 600 characters of the last 16 comments, click "View" to see rest of comment.
  • Maybe it's just Werth & Ross I'm noticing. Weird.

  • CRAIG: Jose Albertos is not chunky like Fernando. He's built more like Dylan Cease. Exact same body type. And his delivery is free & easy. He's definitely not a "max effort" guy.   

  • Hendricks after 50 MLB starts: 17-11, 3.45 ERA, 1.12 WHIP. Not bad for a #5 starter. He may be a 6-inning max guy, but, if he can keep those stats up, I will gladly take it.

    Speaking of WHIP -- last year, he was tied for 11th in the NL. Tied with Hammel.
    Last year's NL rank in WHIP: Arrietta 2nd, Lester 9th, Haren 10th, Hammel T11th, Hendricks T11th. Wow.

  • I went to a Nats game in DC two years ago while looking at colleges with my son -- it's a fun park, worth a visit if you are in the area.

    I also saw the "slowness" thing -- particularly Werth, who would mosey out of RF about 5 seconds before the inning started.

    Weird.

  • It's Dusty's fault. It'll be the end of them.

  • Speaking of how teams "look", my take on the Nats- It's really weird, but the pace of the entire team seems slow. Slow walking to the plate, slow on the mound, even on some routine groundouts, it looked as if there wasn't a ton of hustle. Don't get me wrong, when the ball is hit to their outfielders, they get after the ball, I'm really referring to non-critical action- they mosey around. It's kind of odd. Maybe that "calm power" is part of the Nats ethos, idk.

  • My favorite moment of Hendricks' performance last night was the last strikeout he rung up- the cajones it took to throw a high, 86MPH fastball to Zimmerman on a 0-2 count. And he swung the bat like it was a 96MPH heater. I literally laughed out loud.

  • In listening to Maddon's post-game, he is interested in how these other teams "look" to him. He is assessing for today...and tomorrow. I love this guy.

    One observation from last night: Joe Ross is incredibly slow. 20-30 seconds between pitches at times. Hendrix had a nice, peppy rhythm which is great to see.

    I know there are plenty of purists here which I applaud, but the game just will not sustain itself unless change of pace rules come into play. Pitch clock, improve the shit-ass reviews, mound visits (there is a clock for this), batter time outs, etc.

  • Thanks, Phil. Albertos at 17, and having gotten a good signing bonus ($1.5, even though as Mexican prospect I think his team gets half of that?), throwing in the 90's and showing some command of a curveball sounds pretty interesting, even if that control is only for a dozen-pitch sample.

    What kind of a frame does he have? Is he on the stocky and short-ish side (I'm recalling Fernando Valenzuela!), or somewhat taller? A lot of 17-year olds have projection, "when he fills out" projection. Would that apply at all for Albertos?

  • A-Team

  • Ha

  • I definitely hang around here looking to reply to your comments as noticed by my nearly year long absence.

    there's a fine line between posting something relevant, useful or at least humorous versus posting something irrelevant, useless or unfunny...actually it's rather quite a thick line and easy to see for most people not named crunch.

  • I certainly am digging the RISP machine Zobrist version.

  • Cubs are taking advantage of bad D by their opponents -- did it a few times in PIT and the Nats botched 2-out rundown leads to 3 Cub runs in the 8th. Which were nice to have.

    I hope Kyle had fun at the dance party -- he was terrific.

  • i hope he's getting more consideration for the 2-slot vs lefties, too.