Revised Quality Starts Part 2
by vivaelpujols on Mar 20, 2009 9:35 PM EDT
Email
PrintLast post I looked at quality starts through the eyes of FIP. However that left a lot to be desired. The one main concern was that a "quality start" is simply when someone pitches at least 6 innings with a better than league average FIP. Doing that, however, doesn't tell the complete story of how good a pitcher is. At bgh's suggestion, I am going to try classify a pitchers starts.
I went to the Fangraphs' starting pitcher leaderboard. I selected all of the pitchers who pitched at least 100 innings last year and I sorted them by FIP. Overall there were 143 pitchers who hit that cutoff. I label pitchers by what spots they would have been in a rotation.
Spot FIP Number of Pitchers
#1 2.50-3.50 17
#2 3.51-3.90 28
#3 3.91-4.40 31
#4 4.41-4.70 22
#5 >4.70 43
Note that these rankings are arbitrary on my part, I don't know exactly what makes a #1 or a #2, but I think that these numbers are pretty close. Dealing with innings pitched is another matter, putting a qualifier on how many innings you need to have to be ace or a two leads to a thousand variables. So for the moment I am not going to include innings until I can think of a better way to use them.
So translating those rankings to FIP by starts we can see how WW pitched in each of his starts:
IP HR SO BB IBB Game FIP Rank
8 1 4 1 0 4.34 3
7 0 6 0 0 1.49 1
7.2 0 6 2 0 2.34 1
7 0 6 4 1 3.63 2
9 3 6 2 0 7.91 5
6.1 0 5 1 0 2.20 1
7 0 3 2 0 3.20 1
6 3 3 1 0 8.34 5
5.2 0 2 1 0 3.06 1
7 0 5 2 0 2.63 1
8 1 8 1 0 3.20 1
8 1 4 2 0 4.77 5
5 1 4 1 0 4.34 3
6 1 4 1 0 4.34 3
6 0 2 0 0 2.63 1
5.1 0 7 2 0 2.06 1
8 1 6 1 0 3.77 2
4 0 3 2 0 3.20 1
5 0 5 3 0 3.06 1
6 0 2 5 0 4.77 5
So Wainwright pitched like an ace 11 times, he pitched like a #2 two times, a #3 three times and #5 four times. That really is outstanding production as over half of the time he pitched like an ace. He only had 5 starts in which he pitched worse than league average, and one of them was a complete game win. I am growing more confident that Waino can be an ace next year.
Now lets look at Kyle Lohse:
IP HR SO BB IBB Game FIP Rank
5 0 3 3 0 3.63 2
7 0 2 1 0 3.06 1
5.1 0 2 1 0 3.06 1
7 0 3 0 0 2.34 1
4 0 1 2 0 3.77 2
6 0 3 1 0 2.77 1
6 1 0 2 0 5.91 5
4 0 4 5 0 4.20 3
7 1 4 1 0 4.34 3
6 0 5 0 0 1.77 1
6 0 5 0 0 1.77 1
6 1 0 1 0 5.49 5
5 0 2 0 0 2.63 1
6 1 3 2 0 5.06 5
8 1 3 2 0 5.06 5
6 1 4 2 0 4.77 5
4 1 2 1 0 4.91 5
7 0 4 2 0 2.91 1
7 1 6 2 0 4.20 3
7 0 3 1 0 2.77 1
7 1 4 2 0 4.77 5
8 0 7 0 0 1.20 1
5 3 2 1 0 8.63 5
5.1 1 6 3 0 4.63 4
7 1 5 1 0 4.06 3
4.1 1 5 0 0 3.63 2
6 0 2 3 1 4.34 3
6 0 3 2 0 3.20 1
8 1 6 1 0 3.77 2
6 0 7 2 0 2.06 1
5 0 5 2 1 3.06 1
6.2 0 5 2 0 2.63 1
6 2 3 1 1 6.91 5
So Lohse pitched like an ace 14 times!!, he pitched like a #2 four times, a #3 five times, a #4 once and a #5 nine times. So it turns out, that Lohse was actually very streaky. He led the team with 14 ace starts, but he also pitched like Carlos Silva 9 times. However, over 2/3 of the time he was better than league average, so I won't complain.
Now lets look at Wellemeyer:
IP HR SO BB IBB Game FIP Rank
5 1 6 3 0 4.63 4
7 2 7 1 0 5.34 5
6 2 7 3 0 6.2 5
7 0 6 2 0 2.34 1
6 1 5 1 0 4.06 3
6 0 5 2 0 2.63 1
5 0 4 4 0 3.77 2
6 0 2 0 0 2.63 1
7 0 5 3 0 3.06 1
6 0 2 3 0 3.91 2
6 1 4 0 0 3.91 2
7 1 4 2 0 4.77 5
6 0 5 1 0 2.2 1
3.1 3 3 3 0 9.2 5
5 0 3 0 0 2.34 1
5 0 2 2 1 3.91 3
5 0 3 0 0 2.34 2
6.1 2 2 1 0 6.77 5
6.1 1 2 3 0 5.77 5
5 0 2 5 0 4.77 5
6 0 5 1 0 2.2 1
6 1 3 1 0 4.63 4
6.2 2 5 1 0 5.91 5
7.2 0 3 4 0 4.06 3
5 1 5 2 0 4.49 4
6 1 5 2 0 4.49 4
7 0 4 0 0 2.06 1
8 2 7 1 0 5.34 5
5 0 2 4 0 4.34 3
6 3 6 2 0 7.91 5
6 1 7 4 0 4.77 5
6.1 0 3 1 0 2.77 1
Wellemeyer by his cumulative FIP was a #4 starter. Going game by game we can see that he pitched like an ace 9 times, a #2 four times, a #3 three times, a #4 five times and #5 eleven times. Any time that you have nearly as many below average starts (15) than above average ones (16) it means that you aren't a very good starter.
Conclusions: This isn't a very good method because 1) It doesn't include innings pitched and 2) it doesn't differentiate between FIP's in each group. The next step is figuring out the expected winning percentage of each particular game. However, for right now, this is a decent map of how effective a pitcher was game by game.
Here is Carps 2005 season by game FIP and #rank just for some reference on a true ace season:
IP HR SO BB IBB Game FIP Rank
7 0 2 0 0 2.63 1
3.1 1 2 2 0 5.34 5
6.2 0 5 3 0 3.06 1
9 0 6 1 0 1.91 1
7.2 1 12 0 0 1.63 1
6 2 8 1 0 5.06 5
7 0 5 5 0 3.91 2
7 1 8 3 0 4.06 2
6 1 7 4 0 4.77 5
7 0 6 3 0 2.77 1
7 0 8 0 0 0.91 1
8 0 6 2 0 2.34 1
6 1 8 2 0 3.63 2
9 0 10 1 0 0.77 1
8 1 8 2 0 3.63 2
9 0 11 0 0 0.06 1
7.2 0 9 2 0 1.49 1
8 1 7 2 0 3.91 2
9 0 9 0 0 0.63 1
9 0 3 2 0 3.2 1
7 0 5 1 0 2.2 1
9 0 6 1 0 1.91 1
8 2 10 2 0 4.91 5
9 1 8 0 0 2.77 1
8 2 5 0 0 5.49 5
8 0 4 2 0 2.91 1
7.2 0 5 1 0 2.2 1
9 1 8 2 0 3.63 2
7 0 7 1 0 1.63 1
6.1 1 3 1 0 4.63 4
4 0 2 1 0 3.06 1
5.1 0 4 3 0 3.34 1
6 2 6 1 0 5.63 5
Carp pitched like an ace 20 times out of thirty starts. That is a 60 percent "ace" start rate, and that is not even considering how many innings he pitched in each of them (he averaged 7.5 innings per "ace" start and pitched 7!! complete games). That would be an above average percentage for quality starts, much less "ace" ones. All in all, he only had 6 games in which he pitched like a below average starter.
Okay. At bgh's suggestion I have added another ace to compare Carp's 05 to. Here is Roy Halladay in 08:
IP HR SO BB IBB Game FIP Rank
7 1 3 2 1 5.49 5
8 3 6 1 0 7.49 5
9 0 6 1 0 1.91 1
9 0 6 1 0 1.91 1
8 0 4 1 0 2.49 1
8.2 0 6 1 0 1.91 1
7.1 0 7 0 0 1.20 1
6 0 9 3 1 2.34 1
6.2 1 8 0 0 2.77 1
2.1 0 2 0 0 2.63 1
9 0 5 0 0 1.77 1
8 0 9 1 0 1.06 1
6 0 3 1 0 2.77 1
7.2 2 7 0 0 4.91 5
5 1 5 1 0 4.06 3
7 0 7 2 1 2.49 1
6.2 1 7 4 0 4.77 5
9 0 6 0 0 1.49 1
7 1 7 1 0 3.49 1
9 0 8 1 0 1.34 1
6 1 6 3 0 4.63 4
7 0 6 1 0 1.91 1
8 1 8 3 0 4.06 3
8 1 8 1 0 3.20 1
6.2 0 6 2 0 2.34 1
9 1 4 1 0 4.34 3
7 1 9 2 0 3.34 1
6 0 7 0 0 1.20 1
7 2 3 0 0 6.06 5
7 0 7 0 0 1.20 1
6 0 8 1 0 1.34 1
7 0 5 0 0 1.77 1
6 1 3 3 0 5.49 5
9 0 5 1 0 2.20 1
He is a very similar pitcher to Carp (great control, a lot of GBs, innings eater), so I thought that it was a good comparison. Anyway, Halladay in 34 starts had 24 ace starts, three #3 starts and one #4 start. He also had 6 #5 starts. Halladay was more dominant than Carp with more "ace" starts and fewer #2 ones. However they were similarily consistant with only 5 and 6 terrible starts.
When I have time, I will plot some of these pitchers on a graph as to include innings pitched into the equation. Also, using a type of WAR variation, we can see the exact winning percentage a pitcher will have when facing a .500 offense, and a .500 pitcher. I will include that in the next post. Also I will try to define "ace", #2, #3, etc. a little better, probably by using winning percentage.
43 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Very helpful, and encouraging.
Looking at Wainwright’s starts, only one of them went really bad. His other (few) #5 starts were right on the edge of the next category, indicating a probably-still-winnable game. Very impressive.
With Lohse, he let the game get out of hand (greater than 5.0 FIP) 6 times. In those 6 games, he completed fewer than 6 innings only once, meaning that at least he wasn’t both losing the game and killing the bullpen.
Welly, well, Welly, how about a bit better consistency, eh?
Counting the days 'till the first pitch.
by IL and StL Fan on Mar 20, 2009 10:51 PM EDT reply actions
Also
one of Wainwrights #5 starts was when he pitched a complete game win. He allowed three solo homeruns which really raised his FIP. Timeliness of homers isn’t a skill, so he got lucky, but it was still an impressive start none the less.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 20, 2009 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
"timeliness of homers"...
… might not be a skill, but might also be indicative of strategy. if the bullpen is spent, and AW knows he needs to eat innings, and he gets a big lead, then he may be more willing to sacrifice a solo HR or two in exchange for some fast outs.
"Timeliness of homers isn’t a skill"
I’d like to see the research that went into determining this. It seems counterintuitive.
- So, to ease his pain, you're supposed to take him to a ball game?
- Yes.
It may be somewhat controllable
as kindred said above “he needs to eat innings, and he gets a big lead, then he may be more willing to sacrifice a solo HR or two in exchange for some fast outs.” However, I would argue that most of the time pitchers try to limit homeruns all together.
The start I was referring to, Waino won 4-3. So I doubt that he intentionally made him self susceptible to solo homers just to “get some fast outs”, I would argue that he was just lucky.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 22, 2009 4:15 AM EDT up reply actions
So would you also argue
that Waino pitches to Berkman the same way with runners on base as he does with the bases empty?
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
Yes
With runners on base, he may be a little bit more careful, but he would still try to get him to ground out or strike him out. With bases empty he would still try to get him out. Berkman is a bad example because he walks a lot AND has excellent power AND has excellent batting average skills. A guy like Juan Pierre would be an example of someone who Waino would throw more strikes too.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 22, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess will have to disagree then
because everything I have ever learned about pitching says that it is foolish to use the same approach with a dangerous hitter irrespective of the situation. By the way, of the HRs Waino surrendered in 2008 91.7% were solos.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
His also has allowed a higher ISO with runners on in his career than with the bases empty
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 22, 2009 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know what your source is
but his b-r page would argue quite a bit differently. His ISO (SLG-BA) with men on base is .097 while it is .152 with no men on. With the bases empty he has been much more likely to give up HRs, 2B, and 3Bs, while much less likely to give up walks.
Pretty much what I would expect.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
Sorry I was looking at his 07 season
I don’t know why I did that. However, last year, pitchers as a whole gave up basically and identical ISO with runners on than with the bases empty last year.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/psplit.cgi?team=TOT&year=2008&lg=ML#situa-bases
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 26, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't doubt that at all
but there are still a lot of outstanding pitchers who have a decidedly different split in solo HRs vs. HRs with men on.
Sabathian, Santana (Johan), Lincecum, Lee, Haren, Danks, Lester, Vazquez, and Greinke all had significantly better records at keeping the ball in the park with men on base. Of Santana’s 23 dongs, 18 were solo. Of Sabathia’s 19, 15 were solo.
I am just saying that FIP is not necessarily the be all and end all when it comes to measuring a pitcher’s performance, especially in individual games. Santana’s FIP was almost a whole run higher than his ERA because of a bunch of solo HRs that were probably not particularly meaningful. fangraphs value wins has Santana as the 18th most valuable pitcher in MLB last year because their measurement is essentially FIP-based.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
I agree with you
The one main flaw of FIP is that it doesn’t consider the relationship between events. An “ace” type pitcher works with much fewer baserunners than an average starter, therefore a larger percentage of his homers are going to be solo.
I am arguing that giving up solo HRs isn’t really a skill (in some circumstances, like a 5 run deficit or lead, it may be), but really just random chance. Good pitchers just have more chances to give up solo homers than anyone else.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 27, 2009 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I wish I had the
raw data to see for myself, but I don’t know of any readily available data that would give situational views like that.
I am pretty convinced that pitchers do adjust situationally – execution is a different matter. My guess is that pitchers with superior stuff will exhibit this tendency more than control pitchers as control pitchers are far more vulnerable to getting whacked if they don’t hit their spots.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
AW seems to be an anomaly
he only gave up 1 HR with men on, 11 with bases empty. That’s extreme eve for elite pitchers.
Looking at PA/HR for all pitchers, 2008 (sac hits removed from PA)
Men on, AL: 38.9 Bases Empty: 34.7 Men on, NL: 39.4 Bases empty: 36.8
For Cy Young winners (starters) from 200-2008, only 4 of 17 seasons had more HR with men on than without. Two of those were basically “even” (1.1 and 0.8 PA/HR different). The overall mean for cy young winners was 42.4 with bases empty, 59.4 with men on.
This isn’t conclusive, but it sure looks like pitchers in general give up more home runs per PA with the bases empty, and that really good pitchers do this more than the normal pitcher does, indicating a certain level of “skill” or more likely some sort of situational effect (IE pitcher more likely to challenge a hitter with bases empty).
- So, to ease his pain, you're supposed to take him to a ball game?
- Yes.
Turn the question around a little bit....
If AW has a better strategy for limiting HR’s with runners on base, why doesn’t he use that pitching strategy all the time?
And… on the chance that it’s a “trade-off” where he gives up more BB’s or hits, is the “strategy” actually more effective at limiting runs?
This is the same reasoning that’s used against “clutch” hitting. If a hitter has a better strategy for getting big hits in the 7th-9th innings with runners on, why doesn’t he use that strategy in innings 1-6 without runners on?
I will acknowledge that the Cy Young data is pretty impressive, though I wonder if the sample size is just too small, or… if being a Cy Young winner requires a small amount of luck (giving up solo’s vs. men on HR’s) that makes your statistical line (wins, era, etc) look just a little bit better than everyone else.
In regards to the aggregate data. I think (especially in the NL) there might be some skewing do to “avoiding” hitters entirely (with IBB’s)… in both leagues there may be some separation due to reliever effects, essentially calling in specialists when men are on base… not really sure if that can make up that statistical gap though…
Finally, there may very well be a change of habit in pitchers when they get men on base, and it may be that from years of coaching/watching the game those pitchers believe that avoiding the big hit when men are on base is what matters, never realizing that their HR-avoidance strategy is actually a better technique than what they normally do, or a worse technique leading to more runs through hits/bbs.
by duncans_army on Mar 27, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions
If a pitcher who has a comfortable lead
and wants to keep his pitch count down by throwing strikes so he can go deep into the game elects to accept an elevated risk of a HR in order to force hitters to put the ball in play, it would be foolish to employ the same strategy in a close game or with men on base. The marginal value of a solo HR is just not as great when facing a 5-run deficit.
It’s not really analagous to clutch hitting at all. That argument is that certain hitters are able to focus better or remain calm under pressure.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
But the situation that I was talking about
was NOT a 5 run deficit. It was a close ballgame, a 1 run game. Wainwright allowed 3 solo homeruns in a 4-3 win, tell me that isn’t lucky.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 27, 2009 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions
So you think
he would pitch to Berkman the same regardless of the game situation?
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
He would try to get him out and not allow a home run regardless of the situation
unless it is a big lead or deficit.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 28, 2009 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions
clutch hitting point...
sorry i didn’t clarify that…
the clutch hitting argument I was referring to was the idea that certain players actually elevate their hitting abilities when the game is on the line (generally supported with small sample sizes), just like a pitcher being able to suppress HR’s with men on base.
I can understand the idea of a pitcher changing strategy… and the context it makes sense in. However, I think that context is pretty rare (how many runs is safe? how early in the game? how drained must the bullpen be? etc.) and would rely on a pretty significant change in strategy (quadrupling of HR rate?) to make any sort of statistical difference.
I looked at Carpenter’s 2005 Season:
Total HR’s: 18
In loses: 4
With Men On: 3
In Wins, at a time when the Cards lead by 4 or more: 2
Other: 9
In addition, in one of the games the pirates were down four nothing, and managed to tie the game (though the HR was when down 4-0). Only one of his 18 hr’s that season was pointless (a 9th inning HR to felipe lopez while up 6-0).
During the season Carp pitched around 35 innings while the team was up by 4 or more runs, his solo HR rates in those innings was 1 per 17.5 innings, while in losing, close, or situations with men on, his HR rate was 1 per 13.5 innings.
Of course, this is a small sample size…
by duncans_army on Mar 31, 2009 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions
don't forget it was Welley's first year as a starter
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Mar 22, 2009 4:05 AM EDT up reply actions
That's true
And a good point. Here’s to more consistency with experience, and to Dave Duncan, who was the only person on earth who thought Welly had this stuff in him.
Counting the days 'till the first pitch.
by IL and StL Fan on Mar 22, 2009 4:16 AM EDT up reply actions
very nice analysis
I remember how streaky Lohse was last year, I would have moments of disbelief when he was lights out, and then at times it seemed like he was pinata. overall, though, he was a pleasant surprise to an interesting season. here’s to Carp being the next pleasant surprise!
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Mar 22, 2009 4:06 AM EDT reply actions
Speaking of Carp
I just wanted to share with you how incredible his 2005 season was (I added it to the end of the post).
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 22, 2009 4:33 AM EDT up reply actions
that is crazy
if he can be even half that good this i will be very happy
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Mar 22, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
That was the year he won a bajillion games in a row, right?
He was simply outstanding that year.
Imagine if we could get that again this year…
world series champions
BEN MOTHERHUSHYOURMOUTH SHEETS
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
masters of the universe
BEN MOTHERHUSHYOURMOUTH SHEETS
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
benevolent emperors of everything living & dead
BEN MOTHERHUSHYOURMOUTH SHEETS
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson
Cy Young Seasons
Using your “Ace” starts, how does Carp’s 2005 compare to other recent Cy Young Award winners?
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Thanks for the suggestion
I added Roy Halladay’s 2008 year to the end of the post.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 26, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
He wasn't the Cy Young but I though he should have been
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 27, 2009 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Bravo, vivaelpuljos
I always appreciate folks looking at distributions instead of just central tendencies. Even though using the median can help with outliers, variability can give us a sense of the “streakiness”.
WW: mean =2.2, median=1, std dev=1.6
Bin Frequency
1 11
2 2
3 3
4 0
5 4
The mean is a bit faulty since the 4 #5 starts affected the average. So the median would say that WW is a #1 starter.
Lohse: mean=2.6, media=2, std dev=1.69
Bin Frequency
1 14
2 4
3 5
4 1
5 9
Even though the median says #2, the distribution shape for both Wainer and Lohse look almost identical.
Colonel: mean=3.1, median=3, std dev=1.68
Bin Frequency
1 9
2 4
3 4
4 4
5 11
Welley’s distribution looks very different from the other two. It is more bi-modal, or a bit schizo.
However the std dev for all three are around 1.6, which is not very large.
Carp 05: mean=2, median=1, std dev=1.56
Bin Frequency
1 20
2 6
3 0
4 1
5 6
Looking at his distribution, the shape looks like Wainer’s and Lohse’s. If Wainer had more starts I would say that he would have had a Carp type of season.
It seems like no matter how good a pitcher, they all suffer from those #5 or worse days.
I hope I am not reading too much into the distribution of quality starts but at the very least it provides another perspective from just looking at means.
born Dodger blue, now dyed Cardinals red
that's an interesting way of framing it -- so a mid range pitcher like lohse or wellemeyer
doesn’t have an even bell curve of appearances ( like 4 ace-type performances, 6 #2 type performances, 11 #3 performances 9 #4 performances, and 3 #5 performances) — it’s more a hyperbola with big stacks of really good and really bad games at both extremes, and not much in the middle.
it would be interesting to do the same thing with someone with a long track record, like lohse and get a bigger sample size. i’d be interested to see how much the good v. bad performances correlate with the quality of the offenses faced.
but if a larger sample size bore out that conclusion, that would be a different way of looking at mid-level pitching: it would suggest the difference between an ace and a #4 pitcher was as much a problem of consistency of performance as capacity.
Ratio
I was wondering about an “ace start” to “five start” ratio. It seems that Carp is lights out very, very regularly in 2005, with a few very poor starts sprinkled in. I wonder if this is common amongst Number Ones.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
I did Tim Lincecum
and he had like 28 “ace” starts and only a couple of #5 starts. Then again, he had a ~2.60 FIP which is pretty much as good as it gets, so I don’t think that you can compare anyone to him.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 27, 2009 1:33 AM EDT up reply actions
It's interesting
I wonder how schizophrenic Zambrano’s ratio would be. My impression, without looking, is that Big Z either goes 7+ of great baseball or goes <4 and gets shelled.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
heh
the Colonel is totally schizo
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Apr 1, 2009 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Please hold: Indians’ Joe Smith jumps the gun on relief appearance
- Local radio host honors Cubs’ Tony Campana with parody song
- Roy Halladay bobblehead with glove on wrong hand selling on MLB.com
- Will Smith shows why making your big-league debut at Yankee Stadium is less than ideal
- Steinbrenners selling the Yankees? Family denies New York Daily News report
