- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Regarding the perceived increase in the number of men left on base in Omaha
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:30 am
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:30 am
It was right on par with what LSU had done all year.
68 games / 583 LOB = 8.6 per game
2 games / 19 LOB = 9.5 per game
So only one more per game
LINK
68 games / 583 LOB = 8.6 per game
2 games / 19 LOB = 9.5 per game
So only one more per game
LINK
This post was edited on 6/19/13 at 1:33 am
8
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:32 am to 9Fiddy
You can also skew that stat and say we get at least 9 men on base for every game.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:33 am to 9Fiddy
I agree......and it seemed like too many. Is there a stat that measures efficiency of getting runners in and how did we stack up?
It seems like too many were left on all year, and that was a weakness that was made up for by our great pitching staff. Now I guess when you're winning 57 games those little things get passed over, but when the season gets compressed into small tournaments against above average to great teams they become more glaring.
It seems like too many were left on all year, and that was a weakness that was made up for by our great pitching staff. Now I guess when you're winning 57 games those little things get passed over, but when the season gets compressed into small tournaments against above average to great teams they become more glaring.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:39 am to Harry Caray
quote:
You can also skew that stat and say we get at least 9 men on base for every game
Doesn't matter how many guys you're getting on base if you leave them there
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:42 am to 9Fiddy
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/19/13 at 1:43 am
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:47 am to 9Fiddy
The UNC game was much worse.
LSU struggled mightily against UCLA. They couldn't piece anything together.
LSU hit the ball well and drew walks against UNC. They loaded the bases twice and had runners on 1st and 3rd with no outs once.
LSU's lack of clutch hitting all season finally hurt them at the worst time. The classic 2013 example was runners on 1st and 3rd and LSU scores a run by grounding into a double play.
All season LSU scored runs by getting outs when the bases were loaded.. not by getting hits.
LSU struggled mightily against UCLA. They couldn't piece anything together.
LSU hit the ball well and drew walks against UNC. They loaded the bases twice and had runners on 1st and 3rd with no outs once.
LSU's lack of clutch hitting all season finally hurt them at the worst time. The classic 2013 example was runners on 1st and 3rd and LSU scores a run by grounding into a double play.
All season LSU scored runs by getting outs when the bases were loaded.. not by getting hits.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 1:48 am to Cap Crunch
quote:
Doesn't matter how many guys you're getting on base if you leave them there
6.5 runs/game
ETA: another stat is we had the 5th highest winning margin/game, at +3.6
This post was edited on 6/19/13 at 1:52 am
Posted on 6/19/13 at 2:37 am to 9Fiddy
quote:
It was right on par with what LSU had done all year.
68 games / 583 LOB = 8.6 per game
2 games / 19 LOB = 9.5 per game
So only one more per game
This stat actually means our batting order was horrible. Especially having Ibarra follow Katz.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 2:38 am to Harry Caray
quote:
6.5 runs/game
Imagine how many it would have been if the order would have been tweaked a little.
Oh well its the off season and we going to win it all next year!
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:30 am to LaBornNRaised
quote:
Especially having Ibarra follow Katz.
I've wondered what the major drawback would be of going 8. Stevenson (if necessary I'd really like to have seen Foster as a fixture here) 9. Laird and then move Ibarra to 2.
I suppose that hurts your speed at the top tremendously....but coming to the second time around the order it basically gives you two leadoff hitters at the top in Laird and McMullen.
Of course I'm not the coach and I'm sure if Maineri could go back now he would change some things.
This post was edited on 6/19/13 at 7:32 am
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:34 am to 9Fiddy
The fact that we scored 3 runs in those two games is worth mentioning.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:38 am to LaBornNRaised
quote:
Especially having Ibarra follow Katz
Are you serious? Ibarra hit the ball the hardest and most consistent the entire weekend, just right at people. And it's Rhymes (who's approach was horrible) that followed Katz, not Ibarra.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:39 am to LSU316
quote:
I've wondered what the major drawback would be of going 8. Stevenson (if necessary I'd really like to have seen Foster as a fixture here) 9. Laird and then move Ibarra to 2.
I suppose that hurts your speed at the top tremendously....but coming to the second time around the order it basically gives you two leadoff hitters at the top in Laird and McMullen.
Ohhh, dont start shifting the lineup around. People on here will have a shite-fit. I suggested this exact same thing about a week ago.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:42 am to dnm3305
quote:
Ohhh, dont start shifting the lineup around. People on here will have a shite-fit. I suggested this exact same thing about a week ago.
To their credit it is a helluva lot easier to speculate when we don't have a dog in the fight.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:42 am to TIGRLEE
Raph gona Raph...how many double plays did he hit into in key moments, all year? He ended almost every odd inning yesterday....LSU had a batting order issue IMO, and was as unclutch as I've ever seen them through the years, while also having a great year...smh..Oh well, on to next year...
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:47 am to dnm3305
Right but Ibarra was 0 for his last 16 going into the elimination game. The way he hits is terrible for that ball park. Water under the bridge now anyway. We got ut next year.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:49 am to Harry Caray
quote:
You can also skew that stat and say we get at least 9 men on base for every game.
In the Saturday night game against South Carolina, we had 14 hits. Which looks really impressive against a team of that caliber...until you realize we only scored 2 runs and lost.
Posted on 6/19/13 at 7:51 am to Godfather1
quote:
In the Saturday night game against South Carolina, we had 14 hits. Which looks really impressive against a team of that caliber...until you realize we only scored 2 runs and lost.
Someone that never followed LSU this year would probably think you were lying about the run production in that game
Posted on 6/19/13 at 8:12 am to 9Fiddy
It's not a "perceived" increase, its an increase. Also, I'd be curious to see how many of the previous runners LOB were the end to multiple run innings, unlike the CWS. Cause when you start scoring alot of runs like we did all year, there are going to be guys on most likely when you end the inning.
This post was edited on 6/19/13 at 8:13 am
Posted on 6/19/13 at 8:55 am to 9Fiddy
You can leave 8.6 on base per game when you're scoring 8 runs.
When you score 3 runs in 19 innings, you can't leave 19 runners on base.
Its all relative.
We scored 6.4 runs per game over 68 games.
We scored 1.5 runs per game in CWS.
There's your difference.
When you score 3 runs in 19 innings, you can't leave 19 runners on base.
Its all relative.
We scored 6.4 runs per game over 68 games.
We scored 1.5 runs per game in CWS.
There's your difference.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News