Silly Sox Logic (What's New?)

Silly, silly Sox fans. When will you learn? I was catching up on posts yesterday over at Sox And Pinstripes and I came across a little blurb about Mike Mussina that made no sense whatsoever. It started out of the 2007 predictions. Sox fan Jeff went as far to predict that the Yankees wouldn't make the playoffs. No shock there. But here are the comments as to why:
"That's right, I do not think the Yankees will reach the playoffs. That dismal starting rotation is the reason why. Chien-Ming Wang has a hamstring injury, and that is an injury that lingers for months. Andy Pettitte already has an achy back. Mike Mussina is a dependable starter, but he was very hittable last season. Kei Igawa will be a decent middle reliever. And Carl Pavano is, well, Carl Pavano."
Mike Mussina was very hittable last season?? Oh really now? One of the greatest things about baseball is that it's so deep rooted in statistics. Everything can be tied to a number, and usually the numbers don't lie. Sure, you can twist the numbers, but when you use them as a basis for comparison, you can pretty much use them to settle any debate. So let's look at some stats, shall we? Mussina held opposing batters to a .241 batting average last year (43 points lower than he did in 2005). If you rank all AL starters that met the league standard for IP, Mussina was tied for 2nd in BAA (batting average against). He was tied with Ervin Santana and was behind Johan Santana. Mussina had a WHIP (Walks and Hits per innings pitched) of 1.11 (26 points lower than the year before). That was good enough to rank 3rd in the AL. He was again behind Santana, and was .01 behind Roy Halladay. Moose's ERA was 3.51 (90 points lower than in 2005). That was 4th best in the AL. He came in behind CC Sabathia and the aforementioned Santana and Halladay. I think it's pretty evident that Mussina was one of the top starting pitchers in the AL last year. I'd even argue in the top 5, maybe as high as top 3? To call Moose very hittable is one of the silliest things I've ever heard.
If he's considered very hittable, what does that say for every other starter in the AL? The numbers don't lie. Opponents hit .244 against him. Again, 3rd best in the AL. Very hittable? Please. I can't even fathom anyone with a logical mind making that statement, assuming of course that they looked up his numbers or paid attention in any game he started. But we're talking about Red Sox fans here, so I shouldn't be surprised. So of course, I presented the facts, which is what they are, and asked how that makes him very hittable. In typical Sox fan fashion, this was the response:
"J, Mussina had eight outings where he allowed four or more runs and several where he allowed 3. That isn't exactly untouchable. He was helped by the Yankees offense. He is definitely hittable, and he will be hit this season."
For starters, it was 9 games, and the Yankees went 3-6 in those games so he didn't exactly benefit from the offense that much in those outings. And what he failed to mention that Moose only had 5 starts where he gave up 4 or more earned runs. Now I think its safe to say that everyone that pays attention to baseball knows the name Johan Santana. He's highly regarded as the best starting pitcher in the game. Johan had 8 starts in 2006 in which he gave up 4 runs or more, 6 in which there were more than 4 earned runs. Again, Moose only had 5. For further comparison, Roy Halladay had 10 outings where her gave up 4 runs or more. And for fun, Curt Schilling had 11 and Josh Beckett had 14. So if Mike Mussina was very hittable last season, what does that say for the rest of the league? Again, silly Sox logic. You gotta love it. Always thinking they can justify something when they can't. Again, numbers don't lie. If Mussina is very hittable, everybody is very hittable. And if he's definitely hittable, what does that say for Schilling and Beckett?
It's so much fun to debunk Sox logic.
J-Boogie