Re: There was nothing wrong with the 2012 Sox
posted at 10/9/2012 8:57 AM EDT
But Roy, look at the Nats. Their offense didn't didn't show up for the first two months, yet they were able to compete because their SP kept them in games
Spot on. Consistent, high-level pitching goes a real distance towards ensuring success.
It should also be noted that the Nats would've been probably had 160 starts from their rotation except for wanting to shut down Strasburg. That's virtually impossible.
It kind of fades into the memory a little, but the reason why we won in 2004 and 2007 had a lot to do with 157 and 151 starts from our rotation.
Our team did not score 0-4 runs more often than the league average, yet when we did, we lost way more than others did. That is a direct result of our pitchers being unable to grind it out and win us our fair share of pitching duels.
We were 1-18 when scoring 1 run (.053). The rest of AL was 20-186 (.097).
We were 4-18 when scoring 2 runs (.182). The rest was 69-219 (.240).
We were 6-25 when scoring 3 runs (.194). The rest was 109-200 (.353).
We were 8-9 when scoring 4 runs (.471). The rest was 173-112 (.607).
Going by the percentages of the rest of the AL, we should have won 1 more one-run game, 1 more two-run game, 5 more three-run games, and 2 more four-run games for a total of about 9-10 more losses than the norm due to lack of gutsy pitching in tight low-scoring games.
This is certainly not the whole issue with this team, but when you add in all the extra losses as compared to the AL average we got when scoring 5 or more runs, our pitching, namely the starters, were more to blame than our batting, fielding or base running combined.