No "spark" needed.

by Nofatmike on Jul 4, 2008 8:26 PM PDT Comment 1 comment

Ever since their lead-off man, Juan Pierre, has gone on the Disabled List a few days ago, the Dodgers have since gone 4-1 over a 5-game span and now trail (as of this moment) the 1st-place D'Backs by a game in the NL West. And while Pierre has been out of the lineup in that timespan, the much-maligned Dodgers offense has suddenly hit a resurrgance despite their "self-proclaimed" spark-plug spending that entire period on the DL. This begs a question of my own; how exactly has the offense faired with and without Juan Pierre? Here's what I found (courtesy of baseball-reference.com):

Games in which Pierre started: 3.806 R/G (67 games)
Games in which Pierre did not start: 5.421 (19 games)
Games in which Pierre played: 3.726 (73 games)
Games in which Pierre did play: 6.615 (13 games)
Games in which Pierre lead-off: 3.3 (50 games)
Games in which Pierre did not lead-off: 5.361 (36 games)

While the correlation of high-scoring games during Pierre's absence does not imply that he is the main cause of the Dodgers' offensive woes, the Dodgers are surely doing a better job without their "spark-plug."

0 recs | Comment 1 comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Nice

Not sure how much statistical significance it actually does have, but it certainly can’t hurt to eliminate the worst regular in baseball from your lineup for any extended period of time.

In the beginning of the season when Furcal was playing and the outfield situation was in flux, I was keeping track of W-L for the Dodgers when Pierre received no at bats, 1 or 2 at bats, and 3 or more at bats. I stopped tallying when it became evident that Furcal was going to miss much of the season and Pierre would receive the bulk of the playing time because of his blinding speed at the top of the order.

The last time I did the tally, I remember it being 4 or 5 games over .500 when he received no at bats (the smallest sampling of games in the three categories), about .500 when he received 1 or 2 at bats, and five or six under when he received three or more.

I realize that Pierre receiving at bats is not the CAUSE of every Dodger loss, but it has thus far revealed a disturbing trend (with an expanding sample size since he’s gone down to injury). I say let it play out. If we have a great July and then go in the skids as soon as he comes back, what does it say?

by jumanjifan01 on Jul 7, 2008 12:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs