There were a lot of encouraging signs coming off this past weekend's series win against previously ranked #16 (and now ranked #17) ECU-- strong starting pitching against a quality offensive club, solid defense (we doubled our season doubleplay total in the 3 games), some timely hitting, a couple late-inning rallies and, perhaps most important, a noticeable difference in emotion, energy and aggressiveness. We have now won back-to-back weekend series, and have improved to 3 - 4 vs. Top 25 caliber opposition. Having said that, our record is still just barely above .500 (8 - 7) as we pass the quarter turn on the season, and we have yet to play a series on the road...and we're still hitting just .249./331/.322 as a team, and averaging just 4.1 runs per game. This weekend's series win did little to raise our profile amongst the college baseball pundits. That will require playing at a consistently high level for an extended period, and demonstrating that our offense is capable of winning games when our pitching is less than at an elite level.

Consensus Top 10 ranked TCU (12-3) comes into Reckling for a mid-weeker (Tuesday @ 6:30pm CST), having just taken the weekend series from nationally ranked USC, though they did give up double-digit runs the final two games. In addition to taking 2 of 3 from Southern Cal and embarrassing us at Minute Maid, they've beaten ULaLa and Houston, and took a weekend series from a quality Gonzaga team. One item of note-- this will be their first true road game of the season (though they had to travel to Minute Maid). Here's their schedule and results over their first 15 games...
http://warrennolan.com/baseball/2016/schedule/TCU

Offensively, the Froggies have been on a tear. They're hitting .320/.413/.503 as a team, with 13 HRs, 43 doubles/triples-- that's almost 4 extrabase hits per game!, 22-25 SBs and averaging a robust 8.4 runs per game. They've score double-digit run totals in 7 of their last 12 games. They appear to be VERY patient at the plate, and tend to work the count, reflected in their high walk and strikeout totals.

On the mound we'll likely see Fr. LHP Dalton Horton (3 app, 2 starts, 2-0, 11.0 IP, 0.00 ERA, .184 BAA, 4 BBs, 5 Ks), who beaten both UT-Rio Grande Valley and UT-Arlington over the past two weeks. Not exactly great competition, but it's not as if we've been able to hit left-handed pitching. One can only hope that with our revamped lineup, and with several batters coming off strong weekend performances (Chandler, DiCaprio, Proctor, Dunlap, Myers), we can make some noise. The key, however, is going to be to try to keep the potent TCU offense in check. To minimize the damage, we simply must keep the number of free passes to an absolute minimum. I'm presuming Jackson Parthasarathy gets the start, with both Solecitto and Otto available out of the pen.

Here's their individual and team stats to date.
http://www.gofrogs.com/sports/m-basebl/s...mcume.html

Let's build on our encouraging series win over ECU, avenge our bad loss at Minute Maid, and build some much-needed momentum as we hit the road for the first time this year and open up our conference slate this weekend vs. UTSA. Go Owls!

Here's D1Baseball's, College Sports Madness' and Baseball America's preseason writeups on the Horn Frogs...
http://www.d1baseball.com/analysis/top-2...no-19-tcu/
http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/12552
http://www.baseballamerica.com/college/c...christian/

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

You're probably too use to recent Rice stats. I believe the ???? is on-base percentage which can certainly be higher than slugging percentage for a player/team with few extra base hits. If you are only getting singles, then on base will be higher than slugging. Having said that, the Owls did manage a respectable number of extra base hits this weekend.

I looked up the stats.

Owls - avg. - .249; on base % - .331; slugging % - .322....22 of 113 hits (19.5%) have been for extra bases
Opponents - avg. - .238; on base % - .329; slugging % - .333....28 of 115 hits (24.3%) have been for extra bases

Just for comparison...

Aggies - avg. - .353; on base % - .432; slugging % - .534...54 of 169 hits (32.0%) have been for extra bases

(03-14-2016 05:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

You're probably too use to recent Rice stats. I believe the ???? is on-base percentage which can certainly be lower than slugging for a player/team with lots of extra base hits. If you are only getting singles, then on base will be higher than slugging. Having said that, the Owls did manage a respectable number of extra base hits this weekend.

Correct. Rice's OBP has been higher than it's SLG for at least the past 4 - 5 years. We just don't get many extrabase hits. Having said that, our .331 OBP is pretty pathetic in itself.

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

The "slash line" is batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Slugging is almost always higher (our opponents' slash line is .238/.329/.333 for comparison). For further comparison, the overall MLB slash line for 2015 was .254/.317/.405 (and that's with pitchers batting in the NL).

The sum of on-base percentage and slugging percentage is called OPS, and is not a statistic that measures anything directly, but is regarded by many as providing a quick and dirty metric for evaluating offensive prowess. You'd like to see that over .700. Right now we are at .653 and our opponents at .662.

The difference between batting average and slugging percentage is called iso-power, and you'd like to see that at .150 or higher (right now, for us that's .073 and for our opponents it's .095). So at this point we are struggling to produce extra-base hits.

We're actually doing okay with on-base percentage, probably because NCAA pitchers tend to walk more batters than MLB pitchers.

Overall implications:
1) Our pitchers are doing a pretty good job against what have largely been quality opponents.
2) We have trouble producing runs because our lack of power often requires three hits to score a run.
3) Maybe, just maybe, we should be implementing more of Walt's small tactics.

(03-14-2016 05:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

The "slash line" is batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Slugging is almost always higher (our opponents' slash line is .238/.329/.333 for comparison). For further comparison, the overall MLB slash line for 2015 was .254/.317/.405 (and that's with pitchers batting in the NL).

The sum of on-base percentage and slugging percentage is called OPS, and is not a statistic that measures anything directly, but is regarded by many as providing a quick and dirty metric for evaluating offensive prowess. You'd like to see that over .700. Right now we are at .653 and our opponents at .662.

The difference between batting average and slugging percentage is called iso-power, and you'd like to see that at .150 or higher (right now, for us that's .073 and for our opponents it's .095). So at this point we are struggling to produce extra-base hits.

We're actually doing okay with on-base percentage, probably because NCAA pitchers tend to walk more batters than MLB pitchers.

Overall implications:
1) Our pitchers are doing a pretty good job against what have largely been quality opponents.
2) We have trouble producing runs because our lack of power often requires three hits to score a run.
3) Maybe, just maybe, we should be implementing more of Walt's small tactics.

OBP in college ball is much, much higher than at the MLB level, given the relative higher frequency of walks and hit by pitches. Our current OBP of .331 is pathetic. Even over the past several years when our offense hasn't exactly been elite level, we have posted OBPs over .375, and usually close to .400.

Our woeful run-scoring ability of late is not only due to our low frequency of extrabase hits, but also because we're one of the worst bunting and baserunning teams in college baseball...and I really don't think that's an exaggeration.

Here's the TCU game notes...

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/tcu/...314aaa.pdf

...it will, indeed, be a matchup betwee the two true Freshman, RHP Parthasarathy vs.. LHP Horton.

(03-14-2016 05:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The "slash line" is batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Slugging is almost always higher (our opponents' slash line is .238/.329/.333 for comparison). For further comparison, the overall MLB slash line for 2015 was .254/.317/.405 (and that's with pitchers batting in the NL).

Why is one called an "average" while the other two are called "percentages"?

(03-14-2016 05:59 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 05:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The "slash line" is batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Slugging is almost always higher (our opponents' slash line is .238/.329/.333 for comparison). For further comparison, the overall MLB slash line for 2015 was .254/.317/.405 (and that's with pitchers batting in the NL).

Why is one called an "average" while the other two are called "percentages"?

That's and age-old baseball question. They should all be "averages" since all are 3 decimal places.

(03-14-2016 05:59 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 05:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The "slash line" is batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Slugging is almost always higher (our opponents' slash line is .238/.329/.333 for comparison). For further comparison, the overall MLB slash line for 2015 was .254/.317/.405 (and that's with pitchers batting in the NL).

Why is one called an "average" while the other two are called "percentages"?

A true mystery.

Not to mention the fact that the two typically referred to as "percentages" are rarely (if ever) written as such. And one of the two "percentages" doesn't qualify as what is typically understood to be a percentage (a representation of a portion of a whole, with unity = 100% being the maximum), while the one typically referred to as an average would.

(03-14-2016 06:18 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 05:59 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 05:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The "slash line" is batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Slugging is almost always higher (our opponents' slash line is .238/.329/.333 for comparison). For further comparison, the overall MLB slash line for 2015 was .254/.317/.405 (and that's with pitchers batting in the NL).

Why is one called an "average" while the other two are called "percentages"?

A true mystery.
Not to mention the fact that the two typically referred to as "percentages" are rarely (if ever) written as such. And one of the two "percentages" doesn't qualify as what is typically understood to be a percentage (a representation of a portion of a whole, with unity = 100% being the maximum), while the one typically referred to as an average would.

I'm sure Bill James has an essay on this somewhere.

Kendall just included us in one of his "teams on the upswing", but clearly still has his doubts about our offense...

http://www.d1baseball.com/analysis/upswi...rofiles-2/

Quote:Rice
The Owls finally seem to be getting their bearings straight following a tumultuous start to the season. To give the Owls some credit, they started the year with a grueling schedule, while also not having all their puzzle pieces together jet yet. Rice took a step forward last weekend with a home series win over UCF, and took another climb this past weekend with a home series win over top-20 East Carolina.

Finally, there’s some light at the end of the tunnel for Wayne Graham’s club. This team couldn’t have looked much more discombobulated than it did in the Houston College Classic, so the recent strides have been impressive. Jon Duplantier and Blake Fox continue to give the Owls a quality one-two punch, while righthander Ricky Salinas was impressive in the series finale against ECU, sitting 90-93 with his fastball, along with a quality changeup. Glenn Otto continues to be a force out of the bullpen, while the only question mark is the offense, which is hitting .249 and doesn’t have the earmarks of one that will be very productive the rest of the spring. Tristan Gray needs to get healthy because he adds some athleticism to the lineup, while compact Andrew Dunlap could provide a much needed power boost. He hit a home run on Sunday against ECU that is still traveling.

(03-14-2016 05:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

You're probably too use to recent Rice stats. I believe the ???? is on-base percentage which can certainly be higher than slugging percentage for a player/team with few extra base hits. If you are only getting singles, then on base will be higher than slugging. Having said that, the Owls did manage a respectable number of extra base hits this weekend.

I looked up the stats.

Owls - avg. - .249; on base % - .331; slugging % - .322....22 of 113 hits (19.5%) have been for extra bases
Opponents - avg. - .238; on base % - .329; slugging % - .333....28 of 115 hits (24.3%) have been for extra bases

Just for comparison...

Aggies - avg. - .353; on base % - .432; slugging % - .534...54 of 169 hits (32.0%) have been for extra bases

Of course, the Aggies have played 10 of 16 games against Hofstra x 3, Yale x 3, Stephen F. Austin, Prairie View, Houston Baptist and Northwestern State. They beat up on these powderpuff teams-- all at home-- by a combined 91-21 score. Whoopee.

(03-14-2016 10:35 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 05:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

You're probably too use to recent Rice stats. I believe the ???? is on-base percentage which can certainly be higher than slugging percentage for a player/team with few extra base hits. If you are only getting singles, then on base will be higher than slugging. Having said that, the Owls did manage a respectable number of extra base hits this weekend.

I looked up the stats.

Owls - avg. - .249; on base % - .331; slugging % - .322....22 of 113 hits (19.5%) have been for extra bases
Opponents - avg. - .238; on base % - .329; slugging % - .333....28 of 115 hits (24.3%) have been for extra bases

Just for comparison...

Aggies - avg. - .353; on base % - .432; slugging % - .534...54 of 169 hits (32.0%) have been for extra bases

Of course, the Aggies have played 10 of 16 games against Hofstra x 3, Yale x 3, Stephen F. Austin, Prairie View, Houston Baptist and Northwestern State. They beat up on these powderpuff teams-- all at home-- by a combined 91-21 score. Whoopee.

Walt, I didn't say anything about the quality of the Ags schedule. Just using their data to illustrate my point about slugging percentage.

Do you really believe if the Owls had played the same schedule, the Owls' numbers would be anything close to the Ags' numbers?

(03-14-2016 10:53 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 10:35 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 05:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ... we're still hitting just .249.331/.322 as a team ...

I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

You're probably too use to recent Rice stats. I believe the ???? is on-base percentage which can certainly be higher than slugging percentage for a player/team with few extra base hits. If you are only getting singles, then on base will be higher than slugging. Having said that, the Owls did manage a respectable number of extra base hits this weekend.

I looked up the stats.

Owls - avg. - .249; on base % - .331; slugging % - .322....22 of 113 hits (19.5%) have been for extra bases
Opponents - avg. - .238; on base % - .329; slugging % - .333....28 of 115 hits (24.3%) have been for extra bases

Just for comparison...

Aggies - avg. - .353; on base % - .432; slugging % - .534...54 of 169 hits (32.0%) have been for extra bases

Of course, the Aggies have played 10 of 16 games against Hofstra x 3, Yale x 3, Stephen F. Austin, Prairie View, Houston Baptist and Northwestern State. They beat up on these powderpuff teams-- all at home-- by a combined 91-21 score. Whoopee.

Walt, I didn't say anything about the quality of the Ags schedule. Just using their data to illustrate my point about slugging percentage.

Do you really believe if the Owls had played the same schedule, the Owls' numbers would be anything close to the Ags' numbers?

No, but they'd be a heck of a lot better than ours are today. Level of competition matters...and the Ags always push the envelop of OOC competitiveness. Not only do they play weak teams, but they play weak Northern teams (Hofstra, Yale), who have had minimal, if any, practice time.

(03-14-2016 11:47 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 10:53 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 10:35 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 05:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 04:58 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  I'm not absolutely sure, but I don't think I've ever seen the third figure in this stats lineup for a team (batting percentage/slugging percentage/ ??? percentage) being lower than the second. How unusual is this? And what are its implications?

You're probably too use to recent Rice stats. I believe the ???? is on-base percentage which can certainly be higher than slugging percentage for a player/team with few extra base hits. If you are only getting singles, then on base will be higher than slugging. Having said that, the Owls did manage a respectable number of extra base hits this weekend.

I looked up the stats.

Owls - avg. - .249; on base % - .331; slugging % - .322....22 of 113 hits (19.5%) have been for extra bases
Opponents - avg. - .238; on base % - .329; slugging % - .333....28 of 115 hits (24.3%) have been for extra bases

Just for comparison...

Aggies - avg. - .353; on base % - .432; slugging % - .534...54 of 169 hits (32.0%) have been for extra bases

Of course, the Aggies have played 10 of 16 games against Hofstra x 3, Yale x 3, Stephen F. Austin, Prairie View, Houston Baptist and Northwestern State. They beat up on these powderpuff teams-- all at home-- by a combined 91-21 score. Whoopee.

Walt, I didn't say anything about the quality of the Ags schedule. Just using their data to illustrate my point about slugging percentage.

Do you really believe if the Owls had played the same schedule, the Owls' numbers would be anything close to the Ags' numbers?

No, but they'd be a heck of a lot better than ours are today. Level of competition matters...and the Ags always push the envelop of OOC competitiveness. Not only do they play weak teams, but they play weak Northern teams (Hofstra, Yale), who have had minimal, if any, practice time.

I always make fun of their OOC schedule to the Aggies I know but this year their SEC schedule is brutal. They get Florida Vandy and SC out of the east. They also have midweek games against us, UH and UT (today). We'll know more about them soon enough.