As predicted by many, today’s game was the exact opposite of the previous two; as only three runs were plated in the rubber game of the series this afternoon. Unfortunately, only one of those belonged to the A’s; and it was practically an accident.
I’m not even sure you could legitimately call this game a pitchers’ duel despite the 2-1 final; the low score was more attributed to lackluster offense than stellar pitching.
For the A’s, Smith battled early and often, yet only surrendered a single run. His command was never really sharp, and after giving up a sac fly to break the scoreless tie in the fourth, Crosby had to make a nifty play to get him out of the inning without further damage. But when was all said and done, he pitched five innings of one-run ball, and being up against the soft-tossing Doug Davis, that really should have been plenty to win.
National League rules forced Smith out in the sixth, bringing on pinch-hitter Rajai Davis to start the inning. Raj smoked the ball, but it stayed up just long enough to be caught. The A’s followed with a walk by Ellis and a single by Sweeney, and then caught a break when Cust blooped a single down the line for the game-tying RBI. That’s all the A’s would get in the entire game, only managing three hits (and I can name them: a hustling double by Hannahan, and singles by Sweeney and Cust). LHP or not, that’s a pretty awful showing.
Most of the A’s bullpen did their job, as Ziegler replaced Smith and threw an unconventional three up, three down sixth, picking off the only baserunner he allowed. Ziggy started the seventh as well, but an infield single and sacrifice brought in Embree, who promptly struck out the next batter--who reached first base anyway. With runners on first and third, Embree struck out the pinch-hitting pitcher, and got the ground ball for the third out, leaving the score tied at 1 going to the eighth.
Foulke wasted no time in giving up an absolute bomb that broke the tie, and lost the game. And blame him if you want; he was the pitcher of record, looking shaky at best, but he’s not the real reason the A’s lost the game.
Thus concludes another incredibly frustrating offensive game for the A’s, and I would expect to see many more like this with an offense that only seems to hit well in blowouts. We needed a single run to have a chance to win the game; or at least tie, and the offense rolled over and did not hit. Yet again.
Thanks to the Angels’ own troubles, we are still hanging in there in the AL West, 3.5 games out, but it’s no secret that the A’s are still at least one key element away from being a competitive team; they have flashes of talent, and a couple of good, young players who will develop, but they are ETA: still too inconsistent to be a competitive team, and they are not the team you want in a close, low-scoring game. At some point, how many times can you excuse a poor offensive performance by crediting the pitching? Doug Davis threw strikes today, but the A’s offense is very clearly not good, especially against lefties, and especially when missing a real DH in the middle of the lineup.
Worth noting in the game was that the seldom-seen Bowen tossed out two runners today, and Emil Brown struck out every time he was up to bat, which is something he has done pretty much every time up to bat over the last few weeks. As more players return from the DL (please please Frank!), I would expect him to be on the expendable list.
The A’s are caught right in the middle of being a rebuilding team, and having enough go right for them to actually compete, and it will be interesting to see what happens over the next month. Almost every game is winnable for this team with the starting pitching we have seen; but they do need to figure out the missing piece(s) of the offense...and quick.
Baseball waits for no one; the A’s play again tomorrow night at home against Florida, Hendrickson vs. Harden.
Don’t forget to buy your AN Day tickets here!
0 recs | 88 comments
I hope Gallagher doesn't serve up any melons to the Rays
see what I did there? eh? eh?
Oh, the A’s offense is not so good. It’s not really terrible, though. Actually it’s really terrible against LHPs.
mikeA - June 19, 2008
Looking at B-Ref splits...
Specifically, the A’s platoon hitters have been terrible against LHPs.
At the start of the year, I figured the A’s would be platooning pretty extensively to get better matchups with LHP. But the A’s right-handed hitters, against LHP, have put up a combined .627 OPS. (Compare to the normal-ish .696 OPS the A’s left-handers have posted against LHP.) As a result, all the platoons have collapsed because the right-handed side of them isn’t doing anything at all at the plate.
PaulThomas - June 19, 2008
Yeah, Emil Brown sucks.
Wait what?
mikev - June 19, 2008
Alas, things don’t always proceed according to plan.
Two ANers, four comments, approximately 75 wildly erroneous assertions.
74mk - June 19, 2008
yeah, where's that Klown guy?
rebus - June 19, 2008
I shall list our relievers in order quality
Street
Casilla
Hmmm. I’ll stop there. If Casilla was available (and why would he not be if they activated him today?) he should have been in there in the 8th.
Of course the offense is to blame in any 2-1 game, but still…
mikeA - June 19, 2008
how many of the strikeouts tonight
were looking rather than swinging?
TamSyndrome - June 19, 2008
?????
.349 .393 .481
That’s the A’s slash line with a runner at third and less than two out.
And if I’m not mistaken the A’s were never in that situation at any point in this game.
I’m sorry, that criticism is completely groundless. I have no idea what it’s doing in this recap.
PaulThomas - June 19, 2008
Gee, I'm glad I gave up an afternoon to write a recap for you.
CLEARLY, I did not specify today’s game. They didn’t hit at all today, so no, that wasn’t a problem. But if you would like to argue that the A’s offense is doing the fundamentals right, like baserunning, scoring runners from third without a base hit, we can do that.
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
This current offense, with the real Emil Brown, and minus Frank Thomas?
Is not a very good offense. A good offense finds a way to get those runs in. The A’s beat SF and the Tigers because they aren’t very good teams. But they left runners all over the bases for both the LAA and NYY series, including a slew of runners at third with one out.
Last night they had 1st and 3rd with one out, long before the game was blown out, and got another strikeout. Granted, it was Haren pitching, but you have to make contact with the ball. This is why the A’s can do just enough to stay in the race, but up against good and great pitchers, they won’t win.
Doug. Davis.
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
I would say...
They’ve compiled quite a record of pathetic performances against bad pitchers (Byrd and Garland spring to mind and there have been plenty of others), but Davis was dealing today. Not dealing to the extent that they should have been held to one run today, but still dealing.
mikeA - June 19, 2008
Absolutely.
But he’s not Lackey or Santana. Smith gave up one run. With an average offense, that was a W in the bank.
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
But didn't we just
punch out Brandon Webb a couple days ago? He’s not a good pitcher?
I would tend to agree with you until this offense surprises me against a pitcher like Webb and other counterparts..
sf drift king - June 19, 2008
Webb
has been hittable lately… he’s going through a dead arm period and might possibly be hurt.
C-Gon - June 19, 2008
You would do well to exorcise from your mind
the fetish of scoring runs with outs. It’s not that important, for one thing, and the A’s have been fine at it for another. It is simply false to say that “doing the fundamentals right, like baserunning, scoring runners from third without a base hit” is anything more than a negligible problem, and I think it may have been a plus so far this year.
mikeA - June 19, 2008
That still doesn't make the offense good :-)
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
No argument there
mikeA - June 19, 2008
A's Offense
The A’s rank 12th in the AL in batting average and 12th in slugging percentage. They rank in the middle of the pack in on base percentage. Given the lousy batting and slugging percentages, coupled with a middle-of-the-pack OBP, it’s not surprising they leave a lot of guys on base.
Hate to say it…groan…groan…Paul Thomas…..is….right…......
richwol1 - June 19, 2008
sigh
I’m not really complaining about leaving guys on base. I’m complaining that this team is the last I’d want if I needed a single run in. They are really, really bad at that against pitchers who are throwing strikes, and it’s evident in every single ‘pitchers’ duel’.
The A’s cannot seem to score that elusive run, and that is what a) will keep them from the playoffs and b) will make them lose a lot of close playoff games.
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
The point though...
Is that the A’s can’t score that elusive run because of that offense. Over in another topic, there was a thrash about the A’s starting pitching. But the real thing, in my opinion, that will slow this team down seems to be not regression by the pitchers but rather an inability to score runs, except on those days when they pile them on. My own hunch, based on what I’ve seen and the statistics I’ve noted, and in no way really scientific, is that even with the solid pitching, this team would do well to finish ten games over .500 at the end of the year - unless something really breaks right. Games like the Arizona blowout are enticing because they seem to show something else, but there’s this quick reversion to form almost immediately thereafter.
Emil Brown is history. He’ll disappear the moment either (a) Buck plays himself back to the Major Leagues; (b) Billy pulls off a blockbuster deal for this year’s Jermaine Dye or Johnny Damon; or ( c ) at the latest, when Frank Thomas is ready to return. I hope the answer here is (b). The A’s need to jumpstart their offense.
richwol1 - June 19, 2008
This is not what I've said...
I think the offense is going to get better, not worse. And I think the weird run distribution is basically a complete coincidence.
PaulThomas - June 19, 2008
Why...
do you think the offense is going to get better?
richwol1 - June 19, 2008
I would think you wouldn't even need to ask this question...
PaulThomas - June 19, 2008
Rookies improving, Frank coming back, and (maybe) even a deadline deal.
nevermoor - June 19, 2008
Well..
I can see it when Frank comes back, but that’s still a month and a half away, maybe longer. And a deadline deal is not a done deal, by any means.
Which means —rookies improving. Ryan Sweeney is about where he should be, and will be. CarGo may or may not improve over the course of the season. Barton seems a bit better now, but not substantially better to make a difference. Crosby is as good as Crosby is going to be; Ellis is inconsistent. The reason I ask is that I’m not sure if I’m seeing that much difference until Big Frank comes back -- or until there’s a trade.
That’s why I asked.
richwol1 - June 19, 2008
that's not surprising?
that’s been the A’s offensive stats for the last 4/5 years.
sf drift king - June 19, 2008
I edited the post.
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
Okay
That’s all I was looking for.
PaulThomas - June 19, 2008
Why did you edit your post?
It was a great recap … and absolutely no reason to edit it. Say what you want to say … your opinions regarding the A’s offense are right on the money, as far as I’m concerned.
baseballgirl, you’re one of my favorites here, because you write what you’re feeling and allow your emotions to determine a lot of your content. That’s what blogs are for. You’re a passionate A’s fan, and when they suck, it’s perfectly ok to say they suck.
Vacafan - June 19, 2008
uh, because what she wrote was in error and PT was correct
Someone’s opinion of an easily verified/falsified statistic by definition can’t be right on the money. The sentiment wasn’t changed, just the erroneous bit.
monkeyball - June 19, 2008
Actually, because I couldn't get my point across the way I needed to in the time I had
PT’s absolutely right; this offense problem for the year has not been the runner at third. I wasn’t trying to include the whole season. I think those numbers are absolutely skewed because of Emil’s unbelievable RBI total at the beginning of the year. I think the team; minus FT and with the real Emil Brown, this is going to be a big struggle (and for SURE was in the Angels’ and Yankees’ series). Cust and Chavez strike out way too many times to be effective in getting that lone run in, and it has (and will) cost us in the close games.
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
A few more facts
The A’s have 22 sac flies as a team. (Cust has 3 of those, Emil 2). The Angels, to pick a completely random other team, have 16.
The A’s also have one more sac bunt than the Angels, 13-12. (That one surprised even me).
The A’s have 35 stolen bases, which is in the lower half of the league, but also puts them on pace for more than they have had since 1998, when Rickey was here and stole 66 by himself.
On the other hand, the Angels have out-homered the A’s 61-52.
In sum, there has been more of an emphasis on trying to “manufacture” runs than at any other time in recent memory. And not only hasn’t it helped the offense in general, but the “feast of famine” phenomenon that people have complained about so much over the last few years has only gotten worse.
I’m certainly not claiming that the A’s are a good fundamentals team – they’re about what I’d expect from a lineup where they’re running 5 or 6 players who have never played a full year in the majors out there every day. But a focus on that as the cause of our offensive woes is misplaced.
andeux - June 19, 2008
I agree the A's are making more of an effort
to create/manufacture runs, and I would just add that I don’t think this has hurt their run production or bizarre run distribution – it just hasn’t overcome it either.
Nico - June 19, 2008
Sorry monkeyball
I didn’t realize each and every stat recited was up for review. In that case, I’m glad it was changed. It is, after all, important on a baseball blog to be as completely accurate as possible. Uh, point taken.
Vacafan - June 19, 2008
no biggie
monkeyball - June 19, 2008
I love that our 1B man has a .950 OPS
We are sooooooooooooooooo good.
nevermoor - June 20, 2008
I'm not one to jump all over a player after a bad outing
But I still have to say that Foulke has disappointed me a few times as of late. And I will blame him for today’s loss, hitting be damned (and it apparently is). He’s a relief pitcher; he makes his bread by not giving up runs late in the game. He’s not a long reliever (and shouldn’t be, given that his ERA is a respectable 3.00). He should expect to be pitching in situations of moderate-to-high leverage. And if he gives up that all-important late-inning run, he hasn’t done his job.
I suppose the same could be said for the hitters and their lack of hitting. But they contribute in the defensive side of the game, too. When yer pitchin’, you gotta do that one job well. Unless, of course, you are Micah Owings.
Joey C. - June 19, 2008
We don't have a prolific offense, but when Smith, or Eveland picth a great game
it is because they pitched well, but when the A’s don’t score, the offense is terrible. Those 2 aren’t Lackey and Santana either, so how come they can have good games?
theblackpearl - June 19, 2008
I think it's because they get lucky.
Honestly, Smith wasn’t sharp today, and the D-backs have had the exact same problem as the A’s offense.
baseballgirl - June 19, 2008
Yes, but we won the series run differential
So if I understand my Pythagorous correctly, we’re World Series bound, baby!
FreeSeatUpgrade - June 19, 2008
those drops you feel on your head ...
That ain’t rain.
monkeyball - June 19, 2008
Is it World Series parade confetti?
Cause you ain’t no R. Kelly.
FreeSeatUpgrade - June 19, 2008
Smith has had shaky command for
several starts in a row now. He needs to find the outside corner – it’s right there, see? No, another inch over…Yes, there.
Nico - June 19, 2008
Uh oh
Please don’t let that be a prophetic statement. Greg Smith needs to keep overplaying his predicted performance for the A’s to stick with it.
Joey C. - June 19, 2008
As I told madmongoose in his "We're good enough" post...
“Last night they put up a ton of runs, but usually that means they’ll have a couple more where they try to avoid being shut out right after.”
I don’t like that I was right about this one, but it’s completely unsurprising.
Flashfire - June 19, 2008
We ought to skip
Greg Smith’s next start. Let the kid rest and give Gaudin a spot start in his place.
sf drift king - June 19, 2008
Take it a step further...What we COULD do
(and won’t, but I’ve had this thought for a month or so) is to have Gaudin take Smith’s spot for, say, 3 starts (Smith to the pen), then put Smith back in for Eveland (to the pen) for 3 starts, then put Eveland back for Duke (to the pen) for 3 starts – giving Gaudin 9 starts, proactively giving each of those pitchers a “break” instead of letting them likely hit a wall and pitch poorly later, and along the way having Smith/Eveland as a second lefty available in the pen or Duke for his usual bullpen brilliance. It’s not crazy.
Nico - June 19, 2008
Or is it?
It isn’t like Gaudin has looked lights out recently. Plus, I can’t imagine it’s good for pitchers to miss 2-3 weeks of starts and then be expected to come back and throw a lot of innings again.
Also, as the Braves learned with all their Smoltz drama over the years, bullpen work isn’t necessarily less stressful on the arm, so I don’t know that we’d be saving much unless we really didn’t use the resting starter.
nevermoor - June 19, 2008
Actually, I think Gaudin has looked fine recently
He pitched poorly in a blowout – that doesn’t mean much to me. Prior to that, he’s been good. And his arm is certainly fresh, his heart in the rotation.
Nico - June 19, 2008
I certainly agree that he's good
Hence my desire to trade Blanton. He certainly hasn’t pitched flawlessly enough to force his way back in. I think the better way to protect all of our fragile/unused to 200 IP arms is to go to an explicit 6-man rotation, but I’m not sure that isn’t crazy too.
nevermoor - June 20, 2008
why exclude Harden and Blanton from this rotation-rotation?
OK, so Harden we might as well throw out there every fifth day to maximize his (on-field and potential trade) value.
But Blanton’s been pitching as if he’s tiring rapidly and/or has a dead arm. He could probably benefit as much as the other three/four from extra downtime.
Heck, if we’re going to take the krazee out-LaRussa-ing-LaRussa route, we could put Harden on a four-day rotation, with the other starters cycling in and out for maximal rest.
monkeyball - June 19, 2008
I exclude Blanton just because
there’s no historic reason to think he can’t throw 180+ innings, whereas there are specific reasons with Duke, Smith, Eveland to think they will hit a wall in August-Sept if they make every start. I exclude Harden because I want to get every start I can out of him before his next alarm clock fiasco.
Nico - June 19, 2008
Maybe no "historic" reason
But with an ERA fast approaching 5—we don’t want him throwing 180+ innings.
madmongoose - June 20, 2008
If the purpose of a rotation change is to win more games this year
as opposed to showcase someone for a trade,
then Blanton should exit in favor of Gaudin, not Smith or anyone else.
madmongoose - June 20, 2008
can we PLEASE
just make Blanton somebody else’s problem?
SwampyD - June 20, 2008
Paint him pink and dress him like an Italian restaurant
That should do the trick.
PaulThomas - June 20, 2008
My prediction: Blanton stays,
starts pitching well soon, later on these sentiments look about the same as the Cust-ire in April. (Except I don’t recall any suggestions that Cust be painted pink and dressed like an Italian restaurant.)
Nico - June 20, 2008
My prediction: Zito wins Cy Young
SwampyD - June 20, 2008
Commence "I need my routine" bitching from the pitchers
Joey C. - June 19, 2008
gad, first time check in to see the results just now.
not surprised either but still, always disappointed. (goes to trunk of car for rolo bag)
ak_A - June 19, 2008
{throws body in, slams trunk, hotwires car, drives towards the ocean}
Nico - June 19, 2008
Dear Slim, I wrote you but you still ain't callin'
FreeSeatUpgrade - June 19, 2008
it was YOU... damn
ArakSOT - June 20, 2008
I have not been on the DFA Brown train.
However, I would like to buy a ticket.
Today did not help with my irrational dislike of Keith Foulke.
Kyli - June 19, 2008
I'll sell you my ticket for $20
monkeyball - June 19, 2008
I've got elevator passes
nevermoor - June 19, 2008
Not sure how irrational that is...
mikeA - June 19, 2008
Cringed when I read
Bob Geren’s quote about today’s game ending up 2-1 after alternating routs each of the two days before. And of course he didn’t specify which team would win. I blame Bob Geren!
pam5981 - June 19, 2008
DFA Geren! You heard it here first!!!!!!!!!!!!1111
nevermoor - June 19, 2008
My mom predicted 0-0 going to the 9th
I like her way slightly better.
Nico - June 19, 2008
I like Brown
He reminds me of Jose Guillen. His OBP won’t ever be much above his BA, but he gets the RBIs.
On a separate note, Street has been pitching very well lately, and as someone who is deifnitely on the TRADE STREET train, I have to admit, he’s pitched better than I would have thought possible for the last month. He looks like a real closer. Makes me want to trade him more and get good value, but I will admit. He’s been better than I thought he could be.
Mike Moore Batting Cleanup - June 19, 2008
I don't know why...
seeing as how his ERA for this year is a good deal higher than his career ERA… and he’s 24…
You were expecting him to contract leprosy or something?
PaulThomas - June 19, 2008
You like Emil or UPS?
But Seriously, How can you like Brown? I backed this guy for the month of March, April and 1/2 of May, but now he just looks lost, old, confused, and out of place.
Emil Brown Since May 1st: .215/.259/.311 – 12 RBI’s (135 AB’s)
Colorado Fan - June 20, 2008
Written April 29th when Emil was still on a tear
(re platooning Emil): “That’s ultimately going to be just the right amount of playing time for Brown, who is this year’s John Mabry: A guy who can help the team win for a short time, but will help the team lose if he plays every day for very long.” Nice .570 OPS since then, SPAM-boy!
Nico - June 20, 2008
I know John Mabry
I’ve watched John Mabry.
You, sir, are no John Mabry
nevermoor - June 20, 2008
And...
We get the pleasure of getting 2 more lefties this weekend – Hendrickson & Miller. Are teams adjusting their rotations in advance of facing the A’s or does it just seem that way? I definitely think Jim Leyland and the Tigers did: Kenny Rogers / Dontrelle Willis / Nate Robertson.
Colorado Fan - June 20, 2008
Sorry
Didn’t ‘mean to jump down your throat on your very 1st post. At least that’s what it looks like?
Colorado Fan - June 20, 2008
Thanks for the writeup
I missed the game. For a baseball team they are plenty fine to watch, if not division winners. There have been some really poor teams in Oakland and this team is light years ahead on any of them.
paradox - June 19, 2008
+1
Did anyone really think the A’s would be in second place only 3.5 games back? Le’t give the boys some credit! Go A’s!
A'sfansince1970 - June 19, 2008
Competitive
I think that words needs to be tossed in with medicore in the “Words People at AN Need to Understand Better” box.
The A’s are 39-33, 3.5 games back of the AL West (and 4 of the Wild Card) and we’re more than halfway through June. That’s the very definition of competitive. They’re in the hunt at a point in the season when many figured they’d be where Seattle is right now.
I wouldn’t normally pick on one small comment, but it was in bold. And it’s just plain wrong.
Are they a dominating team? A playoff team? The best team in their division? Better than the other Wild Card contenders? They answer to all those is or might be “No,” but the fact that those are even reasonable questions to ask on June 20 is proof that they’re, at the very very least, competitive.
thejd44 - June 19, 2008
+1
nevermoor - June 20, 2008
Ha HA!
I’m with you on this one, though I suppose not on “mediocre”.
Of course they are a competitive team. They’re 6 games over .500—they have a terrific pitching staff, with the exception of one particular starter. The offense will get better with Thomas and the kids improving.
Will they be better next year or thereafter? Knock on injury wood—yes.
But are they good enough to compete this year? of course.
madmongoose - June 20, 2008
Brown has struck out in his last 8 ABs. Nice.
Flashfire - June 20, 2008
DFA, DFA, DFA
SwampyD - June 20, 2008
Emil "DFA" Brown
People around here enjoy nicknaming, and in these parts when Brown’s name comes up you hear “DFA” about as often as you hear “Emil”.
Faust - June 20, 2008
I thought his name was DFA Brown
I’d forgotten about “Emil”
EastCoastA - June 20, 2008
What is the record?
Mark Borgschulte - June 20, 2008
THE record? If I had to pick just one, it would have to be "Revolver."
Ray of Lite - June 20, 2008
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.