Game 153: Braves 2, Phillies 1
September 23, 2012 at 4:18 pm by David Lee under Atlanta Braves
Source: FanGraphs
Game MVP: Tim Hudson, 75 game score
Least Valuable Brave: Jeff Baker, -.102
Most Valuable Phillie: Cliff Lee, 69 game score
Least Valuable Phillie: Juan Pierre, -.149
Big plays:
2nd – (ATL) David Ross solo homer for a 1-0 Braves lead, .121
Two good pitching matchups with the difference being a sac fly RBI off the bat of Dan Uggla in the third inning. Cliff Lee allowed just one earned run, but the go-ahead run became unearned due to his own error. It’s the story of Lee’s season, allowing a home run, recording a lot of strikeouts (11) and managing to lose with no offense.
Tim Hudson didn’t get much more support, but he held the Phillies to the one run thanks to nine ground balls. He threw 59 strikes out of 85 pitches, so his control was on, but his in-zone command remained just a touch off, resulting in a few line drives. He benefited from a .100 BABIP.
The Braves’ magic number is down to two with an off day Monday before their final homestand of the regular season.
Loading ...
Just a thought, how long till the green line showing perc chance of winning starts at like 98% when Medlen is starting. Just start it at 98 and watch it bounce back and forth 97 99 97 98 till it hits 100. Hopefully good sign today with Huddy, will need a couple of those in the playoffs.
Our other magic number is 15…
Now we have to win out. Milwaukee needs to win tonight and then Washington can go 5-4 against a tough remaining schedule to fall into a tie with us.
While we go 9-0? Even against the dregs of the NL East and the rapidly-combusting Pirates, that’s a tall order.
It is, and we shouldn’t be expecting to win the division. Focusing on the one-game playoff-like the team is already doing-is the smart route, clearly.
[...] The Atlanta Braves are pushing for the NL East Division title, while further cementing their position atop the Wild Card Race. [Capitol Avenue Club] [...]
One earned run per game isn’t going to get it done. The bats better get going soon.
2 runs off of Cliff Lee isn’t exactly chump change.
The bats cranked up saturday night. Cliff Lee is still one of the tougher match ups for us and one of the better pitchers in the NL east. Plus if Uggla’s sac fly went 5 more feet it was a grand slam. I think there are a lot of positive signs from the offense actually, and I think once we clinch a playoff berth we will start to relax a bit and crush some teams. I’m just happy that we are able to keep winning, no matter how.
What would be worse? Finishing tied with the Nats, which would lead to possibly 2 1-game playoffs, or them winning the division outright and us hosting the 1-game playoff?
I was actually thinking about this yesterday. But the answer turns out to be pretty obvious. If you finish tied, you have two 50% (or so) shots at making the divisional round. If you finish back, you have only one. I think doubling your chances of advancing has got to outweigh any effects from team fatigue or burning the ace.
Two 50% chances of success in a row does not mean you have a better chance. It actually means you now have a 25% chance of success. Or, were you saying that having only one shot is better?
Wrong. It means you have a 25% chance of failure, therefore a 75% chance of success……
Statistically speaking its still only 50% (assuming all factors even). Its like saying ” I flip a coin I have a 50% chance of getting heads, I flip a coin 2 times I still only have a 50% of getting heads each flip”
But you don’t have to win both games, only one….Compare it to the lottery, would you rather have one ticket (one game) or two tickets (two games). Obviously, two gives you a better chance to win.
Matt: No. If your objective is to get only ONE heads (win), then increasing the number of trials unambiguously helps you achieve that objective.
Thats true about having a better chance at getting into the playoffs with 2 opportunities if you tie for the division, but in my opinion this is the biggest flaw with the new system. For example, if the Braves and Nats end the season tied, they could potentially also be tied for the best record in the NL. It’s true that you’re given 2 opportunities to play for the playoffs, but the loser would be penalized in a way for potentially burning their best starter for that game. Then, they could hypothetically play the team with the worst record in the wild card game, who would be going with their best starter. So say they win that game. Now the team with the second best record in the league goes into the playoffs without their number one and number two starters. I understand and actually agree to some point with handicapping the wild card team, but it simultaneously punishes a team if they tie for their division, which is basically punishing them for succeeding.
Well, what’s the alternative? Head-to-head record? It doesn’t seem quite fair to consign one team to the wild card coin flip on the basis of losing the season series while coming out with the same record.
Well, I’m not commissioner / shill for the baseball ownership (Bud Selig), so I don’t really have to come up with a viable alternative. What I CAN do though is critique the new system which they obviously didn’t seem to think the new wild card plan completely through, even though baseball is.. you know.. a multi-billion dollar industry which holds the interests of millions of people.
yes, I think head to head record is absolutely the right way to determine it (even though this would hurt the Braves this year, who are 8-10 against Washington). When we’re talking about a tie for the division, we’re talking about 2 teams that have already faced each other 18 times this year… that should be more than enough to determine who wins the division. I don’t think a 162 game season should ever come down to one game (which is why I’m totally against the one game wild card playoff as well). I get that the one here has implications on the other, which i think sucks, but I don’t think the wild card game should be used as a reason for ignoring the previous 18 games. I mean, imagine a situation where Atlanta and Philly tied for the NL East this year… There’s no way the Braves should have to play them one more time for the East when they’re 12-6 against them on the season.
They should do away with divisions altogether, play a balanced schedule. The top 3 records make the Division Series while seeds 4 and 5 play the play-in game.
Don’t know if this was in response to my last, but if so: what do you do when there’s a tie for the third seed?
I’m all for anything that balances the schedule. I think I’d prefer just taking the top 4 teams from each league and having the team with the best record play the team with the 4th best record while the teams with the 2nd and 3rd best records play each other though. Like I said though, I’ll take pretty much anything that leads to a balanced schedule.
I would assume you would have a play-in game for that as well. Same as if the Braves and Nats tie for the division.
Here’s to MLB actually scheduling some double-headers, in future years, throughout the season so that the number of days baseball is played (ST+Regular Season+playoffs) remains the same, but that the season actually ends 5 days earlier and the 2 wild card teams can have a best of 3 series.
I think that is the obvious solution, though I think baseball is the one sport where having multiple days off can actually be more of a detriment to a team.
Has anybody heard anything more about Bourn’s thumb? I read on Sunday that he was going to see a doctor yesterday as a precaution, but nothing since.
“Atlanta’s Michael Bourn, the NL leader with 39 steals, may return after sitting out Sunday with a sore thumb.”
- via espn preview for todays game
That reads a lot like uninformed speculation.
Bourn should sit for the next 3-4 games.
I think they’re serious about this run for the East, is the thing. I don’t know that it’s wise, but I expect Fredi to be stepping on the gas until the Braves are officially out of division contention.