dc.

It's absurd that you can black out a game in its local region for a 'national game' on another network.

loss on blown save ... again. why the game wasn't on?? i dunno. but gamecast just showed me jason johnson let a man reach on a wild pitch third strike... then let him advance on a wild pitch... then intentional walk... then game winning single. tadaaaaaaaa.

I disagree about the pitchers. If anything, they are the strongest part of the team right now and McPhail is a master of them... Millwood, despite his spring, has given the team two solid outings. His second was superb until late in the game when he seemed to run down. Matusz is perhaps the best pitcher under 25 not named Price in the majors right now. And he's showing it. He will be this team's ace one day. Guthrie is having an alright time of it, especially compared to his spring and last year. Not fantastic, but better than expected. Hernandez has been pretty fine too. Sure, a 4 or 5 everywhere else... he's our 5. Bergesen is the only confusing one ... and I think he'll turn around. But we also have plenty in the tank in Tillman, Arrietta, Erbe, Britton, etc... Meanwhile... short of Gonzalez, the relief efforts haven't been awful. Albers even had a great few games until the last couple appearances. Our pitching has, with one exception, put us in the position to win every game. And MacPhail built that - despite all the doubters.

Of course. It's not exactly a fulfilling argument to make. But I think 3-5 baserunning errors are the least of this team's worries. Meanwhile, it still is an interesting question. And I think you're right - if the need arises, Trembley will be gone midseason. But I don't know what the turning point is. When do we cross the threshold from "early season slump" to "historically bad?" 7 games on the west coast before a day off. You've obviously gotta win some of them to avoid anything other than 'slump.' Then 12 straight against the Yankees and Sox? Yikes. Say we go 3-4 on the west coast (4-12). Going into that stretch against NY and BOS... expectations can't be high. But you can't accept sweep after sweep. What's the expectation?

I am sure that thoughts of firings have to be out there... they certainly are among fans. If there is a firing, I think you're right - it should be a clean house. Unfortunately, you can't clean house midseason. It's just not possible. So that would have to wait. Which makes me wonder how likely a firing can be? And, of course, it's only been 9 games. But on top of this... we have to look at what's really wrong here, which is really complicated. In the middle of a losing streak, especially one like this, every last little mistake is magnified. The baserunning blunders look obscene, but obviously look even worse in the midst of an awful streak. So, what is really wrong and whose fault is it? Starting pitching has actually been pretty impressive. In fact, short of Bergesen's two starts, we've gotten 7 pretty good starts that have put us in good positions. Minus two Mike Gonzalez blown saves, you're talking about a 3-6 team. Minus Kevin Millwood and Brian Matusz's meltdowns, you're talking a 5-4 team. Of course, had the bullpen not been so pathetic in past games, Millwood and Matusz perhaps wouldn't have been left out to get outs they were straining to get... so there's a few problems that play off each other. The bats have been a serious problem. Roberts' rough spring and now injury certainly hasn't helped. And the seasonal slow start from Markakis hasn't helped either. But what do you do with either of those problems? Bench Markakis? Is that even an option? Somewhere, somehow, the bats need to start producing. 8 runs in 3 games this series against the Rays. Only 12 ABs with RISP. Only 1 hit in those situations. Bad baserunning mistakes. Bad at bats. Bad double plays. That's just silly. But how much of that is on Trembley? The fact is we have a lot of 'good' bats but none that are great (yet). Markakis will be beyond good in June, but April slumps. Pie, Jones, Wieters, Reimold... all still coming up and good, but not special. Wigginton, Tejada, Atkins, Scott? They're all at points where they have established themselves as just 'good.' But just 'good' won't save you ... especially when they're all slumping. No excuses here. But a realistic look - what mistakes, what issues had Trembley really had control over? Even the baserunning issues were hardly game-changers. The Scott-Wigginton issue came with 2 outs... what are the legit odds that the O's score there anyway? Slim to none given their play.

Millwood! AHH! The last few years we've had a guy pitch like Millwood did today into the 8th and 9th... he had 69 pitches through 7 innings. Was about to have 80 through 8 when Miggy muffed the grounder. Anyway, last few years... Dave/whoever has pulled the starter and - ouch - closers blow it. Playing it "safe." We leave Millwood out there and - ouch - he turns into a gopher ball boy. Just brutal. Got a killer sun burn in LF again though. If you were watching, probably saw me on both HRs in the 8th. They landed 5 rows behind me and 10 feet to my right. Meanwhile... totally agree. TY SWING BAT!

Wish I got HBO to see David Simon's new show 'Treme' about New Orleans... which is getting unbelievable reviews (much like The Wire)

The OPACY gun was clocking him around 92-93 yesterday... but it's also notoriously 'fast' (adds up to 5mph).

Except that, as Schmuck points out today, scouts from across the league were in O's camp and consistently convinced he had to be pitching hurt. Millwood looked like crap - and there were good, believable reasons to write that off as standard. Gonzalez was a question mark to everyone.

Luke might be, yes. Meanwhile, had to laugh on my way out of the ballpark as there were still a few guys selling programs and souvenirs... "Get your Mike Gonzalez collectible program hereeeeee!" with a wry grin. He wasn't lying... Gonzalez and Atkins on the cover. Sure he wasn't selling any though.

The signing didn't bother me. In fact, I applauded the signing. And I can't deny that. But what I didn't really like was that in the first week of camp, Trembley announced Gonzalez was closing - no competition, nothing. Now, I don't know that anyone pitched well enough this Spring to take the job from Gonzalez - who also pitched like shit all spring. But I do know that Gonzalez looked awful this spring and many reported was not only missing the plate (a standard problem for him) but that his velocity was down 5-10MPH. How the hell can a guy lose 5-10MPH and have NO ONE concerned? That's unbelievable to me. 4/4 in 1 run games.

Pretty much any ball you hit that stays in the field of play is a "Ball in Play." But just like regular batting average, your BABIP would not go up if you reach on an error. The formula is... (Hits - HRs) / (AB - HR - Strikeouts + Sac Flies) So, at bats generally includes every time you come to the plate ... except Sac Flies and Walks. Because a Sac Fly is 'putting a ball in play' we need to re-add that. Because striking out and hitting home runs do not 'put the ball in play' we remove those at bats. So then you've got the total number of times a ball is 'in play' by a batter. And then we just want to see how many times they actually get on base once the ball is in play. Why is 300 an average number? It just is. As people have calculated this stat, almost all players are close to 300. Again, the number is so consistent largely because neither a batter or a pitcher has much control over where a ball is hit (is there a fielder there or not?). Of course, some players have been able to consistently establish themselves as better/worse BABIP (Ryan Howard's BABIP is almost always over 320, Tom Glavine's was almost always under 290). But once a player establishes their average BABIP over a few seasons, you know what to expect. I should point out one more time... there are things you can do to affect your BA that BABIP can't handle - strike out less? Avg goes up. Hit more Home runs? Average goes up. But both would impact your BABIP very little. In Melvin's 2004 campaign, he hit more HRs than before - but his strike outs were right on par with his career numbers. So it's not like he was simply 'getting more contact' ... he was probably getting the same contact, and just getting lucky as to where the balls landed.

His numbers, historcally, kind of scare me. ERA has been consistently solid. So has K/9 innings. But WHIP, Walks, Hits... all much higher than you'd like. And despite consistently posting an ERA under 3 - he's never had a stable closing job. He went 24/24 one year for Pitt. But before that in Pit and after it in Atlanta, no one used him as a closer. Last year he was just 10/17 in save opps - despite a low ERA and WHIP. Add it all up??? He's the type that lets guys get hits and get on base - even in the NL. His blown saves last year (7 of them in 17 chances) hardly hurt his ERA (2.42) because he was letting someone else's runners score. But that's still his save blown. He's going to be a George Sherrill. Living on the edge. He'll strike out 10 per 9 innings (avg)... he'll also walk 5 per 9 innings (avg). Not closer material.

No, it does not include reaching on an error. But it's pretty much how many times you reach base (minus home runs) vs every ball you put in play (minus homeruns). For both batters and pitchers, an average BABIP is 300. So, let's say Brian Roberts is hitting 280. For Roberts, that's pretty normal. But let's say he's hitting 280, but his BABIP is only 250. That's 50 points below average - and its not something hitters or pitchers can really control. Once a ball is hit, it's hit. That tells you that Roberts 280 average is likely a little bit lower than it should be. Because as his BABIP naturally rises to the 300 level that everyone else gets... his regular average should rise as well. Meanwhile, you can see the reverse as well. If Roberts is hitting 280, but his BABIP is something crazy like 400, then there's some inflation there. As his BABIP gradually regresses to its "natural" level, his overall average is bound to fall as well. Now, of course, your average and the impact BABIP will have on your average is in large part relying simply on how often you put a ball in play (aka - how often you DON'T strike out) and how many HRs you hit. Guys that hit lots of HRs can have a lower BABIP but a higher average. Anyway - bottom line is that it tells you simply how "lucky" a players is getting (both pitchers and hitters). If every time a guy hits a ball, it gets caught... your ERA is likely to be lower. But what control does a pitcher really have over whether a ball is hit to a fielder? Aside from either (a) striking a guy out or (b) giving up a home run... he has no control. Same for a batter. Very little control over whether someone is standing where you hit the ball. Miguel Tejada's liner to LF the other night is a perfect example. Crushed - right to Crawford.

I am consistently amazed at how the numbers just get deeper and deeper. There's certainly a level of "digging too deep" at times. But sometimes the stats are just interesting. My favorite stat is BABIP - Batting Average on Balls in Play. It works for both hitters and pitchers... pitchers especially. If a pitcher has an ERA of something wild like 2.00 or a WHIP under 1.00, you say he's damn good. But if you see that his BABIP is remarkably low (around 200), well, that's just a fluke. No one can control BABIP like that. Not even Greg Maddux or Randy Johnson. Lucky year, the hit balls are getting caught. What happens when they stop getting caught????

Streets of Baltimore is a fav of mine. I asked the O's to play it at games this year because I think it could be a great inter-inning anthem. Especially when he says "she swore the prettiest place on earth was Baltimore at night!" Gram Parsons does a great version as well. And Adam Duritz of Counting Crows has a version in Baltimore (Powerplant?) on YouTube I think.

Voice is definitely amazing and impressive. I can't help thinking, though, that on something like American Idol he would get ripped for just singing the song "karoke" style. The arrangement and note-for-note were just mimicking Whitney. Gotta see something original, something 'you' hahahahah

Yeah, I think it's just laryngitis - was clearing his throat all game.

Actually, found it really fast on MLB's site... AL East only, just for fun... In 1 Run Games: Yankees 22-16 (103 total wins) Red Sox 22-17 (95 total wins) Rays 20-25 (84 total wins) Jays 21-28 (75 total wins) Orioles 17-22 (64 total wins) So the O's were actually right on with every other team in the division in terms of 1-run contests. But like with most stats, they were significantly behind in winning percentage. And just as I scroll through... Seattle was 35-20 (55 was the most I see)... Pittsburgh played the fewest, 12-22 (34). So the O's were seemingly right in the middle/on the low end.

I'll have to check the 1 and 2 run game stats... they keep them and tout them often. Here's what I know, as was mentioned last night and tonight: the O's were something like 17-24 in 1-run games last year. That was among the worst in both leagues. And 41 games coming down to 1 run is nearly 1/4 of the games you play. I think Baseball Reference keeps those stats.

I think his point is that good teams win the last inning... if you have a lead in the 9th, you should win. Look at the numbers... teams like the Yanks, Sox, they tend to be 90-0 every year when they enter the 8th/9th with a lead. Just like good football teams hold on to leads in the 4th quarter. There are going to be plenty of 1 and 2 run games... games where we are up just a run for most of the game... there's lots of things that could change that throughout the game, but if you're winning - you're winning. And you have to hold it. Period. I hated hearing Dave Johnson saying "your starter did well... your first three relievers did well... how many times do you think you'll get lucky with a pitcher being able to hold 'em off?" Well, Dave... on a good team? It's not luck. And you proposing that we stretch Johnson or Ohman beyond an inning has it's classic flaws too. Most of these guys are 3-out pitchers and that's it. What's your solution? Because if we left Johnson in for another 2 batters and he gave up the hits, you'd be blaming him for putting Gonzalez in a bad spot. Bottom line: Yes, I expect a pitcher to get 3 outs before giving up 2 runs. Every time.

I couldn't hear him last night because I was out... but tonight I definitely was noticing it. I don't know if it's deeper or just that he's a little calmer, more settled, slower. He used to be all "Oh, yeah, Jim Hunter, when you say that I can relate!!" Tonight it sounds very "Well, that's a strike because it went over the plate."

He put out a statement apparently explaining that it was a "metaphor" for overpopulation and the impact on the environment, etc of the region. Yeah, right.

I think we certainly need that attitude... but I don't know if we need the method, per say. We're a very young team ... Trembley's gotta walk a fine line between chewing guys out and fostering growth. You're totally right that we shouldn't accept bad losses in that sense. But there's a number of ways to say you don't approve of something and to make the changes. If this were 1997, 1998... hell, even a few years ago in 2005... yeah, you rip them a new one. Teams full of veterans don't need to be coddled. But the likes of Jones, Pie, Reimold, Wieters, Matusz, etc etc... they all need a fair balance of "that was unacceptable" and "a lot went right, so keep it up"

There were plenty of mistakes. There were just as many on the Rays side and they are supposed to be a very good, very competitive team. Even picked for the series by many. Sometimes you have to win a game like that 3-2... the Rays stranded plenty. It was a team failure. It sucks. I'm not condoning it. But again, woke up this morning and put on my jersey again...