It is time for those Pagan-deniers (and there are still some) to admit the truth. Angel Pagan has an over-sized effect on the performance of the Giants offense. An almost immediate, demonstrable, statistically verifiable effect.
In small samples and large samples. Period. End of story.
from sfgiants.com:
Pagan, Morse likely out vs. Dodgers | sfgiants.com:
It has been the tale of two very distinct seasons for the Giants -- with and without Pagan in the lineup -- and that pattern held fast as San Francisco's hopes of winning the National League West continued to fade with a 6-2 loss.
The Giants are 56-34 (.672) with Pagan in the lineup and 26-34 (.433) without him. And so, here we are with 12 games left to play.
"He makes a big difference, the numbers show that," Bochy said. "If you look at the evidence, we miss him when he's not in the lineup. We're a different club. He's our leadoff hitter. He's our catalyst. He's the guy who kind of makes things go. When he's not in there, we've had a tough time, tougher than you would think, actually. But for some reason, the numbers are a lot different when he's not in our lineup."'via Blog this'
Here's a sample from the last ten days or so, culminating in that ghastly offensive display versus the Padres. Almost as soon as Pagan leaves, the Giants offense seizes up like an engine without oil. It may run OK for a little while, but eventually the engine comes to a stop.
from Yahoo Sports:
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/7717/
| Last 10 Games | Season To Date | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date | Opp. | Score | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | K | SB | CS | AVG | OBP | SLG | OPS |
| Sep 19 | @SD | L 0-5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | .300 | .342 | .389 | .731 |
| Sep 15 | @ARI | L 2-6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .302 | .342 | .391 | .733 |
| Sep 14 | LAD | L 2-4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | .302 | .342 | .391 | .733 |
| Sep 13 | LAD | L 0-17 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .305 | .346 | .395 | .741 |
| Sep 12 | LAD | W 9-0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | .304 | .345 | .392 | .737 |
| Sep 11 | ARI | W 6-2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .307 | .347 | .396 | .743 |
| Sep 10 | ARI | W 5-0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | .305 | .344 | .392 | .736 |
| Sep 9 | ARI | W 5-1 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | .305 | .344 | .393 | .737 |
| Sep 7 | @DET | L 1-6 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .298 | .339 | .387 | .726 |
| Sep 6 | @DET | W 5-4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | .299 | .340 | .390 | .730 |
We saw last week how dominant Clayton Kershaw is and the effect he has on the team's overall winning percentage. But does that automatically make him the presumptive NL MVP candidate? And if he is that strong a candidate (and he is) due to W-L effect, then shouldn't Angel Pagan get some consideration as well?
Kershaw has to overcome the BBWAA bias against giving a pitcher both the Cy Young Award and the Most Valuable Player Award. That task alone presents a considerable hurdle. We see annually how the baseball writers cling to their biases like an anti-Obama voter.
Having accomplished that, the two main criteria it seems that most voters use to determine the winner is either some monstrously dominant, almost off the charts statistical year or a players perceived impact on a team's Won-Loss record ( the Kirk Gibson effect ). It's here where I think Pagan gets a foot in the door, the Kirk Gibson effect.
We did the math last week and noted that Kershaw was 19-3, now 20-3 with 3 no decisions and the Dodgers are now 89-67 overall. Since I was too lazy to find out what the Dodgers record in the 3 no-decision were, I give Kershaw two out of three. If he was knocked out my initial thought was maybe 1-2 or 0-3 but what the heck, if they were 3-0 then my bad.
That leaves the Dodgers 22-4 in Kershaw's 26 starts, a gaudy 0.846 winning percent.
They are 89-67 overall with a 0.5705 winning percentage, leaving them 67-63 minus Kershaw, a 0.515 winning percentage.
0.846 with Kershaw ( 22- 4 record )
0.515 without Kershaw ( 67 - 63 record )
---------
0.331 Kershaw effect in 26 games out of 156 games total
Here's where the sportswriter bias maybe comes in, let's do the math:
( 0.331 Kershaw effect ) times ( 26 games Kershaw applies the effect / 156 games total )
= 0.055 overall Kersahw effect on Dodgers winning percentage.
Apply same to Pagan / Giants:
0.672 with Pagan ( 56 - 34 record )
0.433 without Pagan ( 26 - 34 record )
--------
0.239 Pagan effect in 90 games out of 150 games total
( 0.239 Pagan effect ) times ( 90 games Pagan applies the effect / 150 games total
= 0.143 overall Pagan effect on Giants winning percentage.
Note: I didn't realize Giants were this bad with A.P., I would have guessed about .500 same as Dodgers minus Kershaw.
So, Pagan's effect would appear to be almost three times greater than that of Kershaw.
But I may be biased.
Clearly, on the games he pitches, Kershaw has a greater effect on winning, but that effect is only applied 26-28 times this season. Pagan, even though he has only played 100 and has a lesser per game effect, obviously is able to exert his presence more often.
I'm not sure I see the writer giving the MVP to a guy who played less than 100 games, in fairness Kirk Gibson played 150 games in his 1988 MVP season. He also had the benefit of Orel Hershiser as a teammate dominating in a similar fashion to Kershaw today.
I feel better making the case for Pagan rather than Pence ( shown below) especially the way that Hunter has been swinging the bat lately. (sorry Hunter)
No comments:
Post a Comment