Bobby's Troubles

by Andronicus on Apr 29, 2008 10:57 AM CDT

How worried should we be about Bobby Jenks' in 2008? Although much has been discussed about his decrease in velocity, I'm more alarmed by the following numbers:

2005: K/IP = 1.27, BB/IP = 0.38

2006: K/IP = 1.15, BB/IP = 0.44

2007: K/IP = 0.86, BB/IP = 0.20

2008: K/IP = 0.51, BB/IP = 0.43

While his walks are on par with his carrer numbers (2007 seems like an outlier), the strikeout rate is plunging dramatically.

With 2 blown saves already this season, at what point might Ozzie actually have to consider a closer-by-commitee as in 2005??

0 recs | Comment 46 comments | Add your comment

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

I don't have to look at stats for this one...

He hasn’t thrown 99 MPH for awhile. Hell, he isn’t even throwing 95 MPH these days.

by SSH2005 on Apr 29, 2008 11:25 AM CDT reply reply 0 recs

two poor outings against the orioles and the guy is cooked

alex, i’m gonna with what is sometime after april 29th.

free jason bourgeois

by larry on Apr 29, 2008 11:38 AM CDT reply reply 0 recs

I'm betting around april 15

oh crap, it’s the 29th, can I take that back?

So Jenks is crap against the O’s in his career, BFD. Have some freaking patience, larry. What’s with your suddenly reactionary stance regarding demoting Jenks, Konerko and Thome ;)

Sure, I don’t like that Ozzie pulled Javy to put Jenks in yesterday, I would hope that Ozzie will check the stats next time and make a better decision, but I understand wanting to give your closer another shot at a team that kicked his butt earlier in the season and what it means to a guy when his role is defined and you are consistent in how you handle him. Also, to give you some perspective, Trevor Hoffman has 2 blown saves this year as well. Blowing saves is bound to happen to all good closers at some point.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on Apr 29, 2008 3:02 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Hoffman's near the end of his rope.

I don’t know if that’s all that comforting a comparison.

by chrome on Apr 29, 2008 9:12 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

then insert the name of x closer

instead. remember when mariano rivera was pronounced done in 2005 after getting lit up in two straight games by the bosox to open his season. thank god the yankees dumped that guy while they still could.

4/29/08: the ginger ninja strikes again

by larry on Apr 30, 2008 9:05 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Let's wait and see

I think Bobby’s style has changed quite a bit over the years which could explain the decrease in the K/IP category. Let’s wait and see.

by LT_sox_fan on May 2, 2008 9:56 AM CDT reply reply 0 recs

It is clear...

that Jenks was on the juice in ‘05. He was throwing 101, which is in the top 3 of mph ever pitched in the majors ( i believe zumaya hit 103 and 102) and all of a sudden he drops to 93-95 mph very quickly once all the steroid talks started to heat up.

trying to look at it objectively, what else explains it?

by The Scoper on May 2, 2008 10:52 AM CDT reply reply 0 recs

yeah, because there's never, ever been a pitcher in the history of the game of baseball

whose velocity on their fastball dropped as they got older and learned how to pitch. christ.

4/29/08: the ginger ninja strikes again

by larry on May 2, 2008 1:11 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

there's also

never been a pitcher who has a screw in his elbow who thinks, shit, maybe if i want to last long enough to get a real contract i’d better stop trying to throw every pitch through the catcher’s chest and learn to pitch.

Repeat after me: reading comprehension, even a little bit of thought before posting, and basic research are not signs of weakness.

by Toonderstrook on May 2, 2008 1:22 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

yup

count how many guys you know/heard scouting reports on who threw “100 MPH” when they were in their early twenties. now count how many of them who are still doing it in their early thirties. the first guys aren’t the genetic freaks. the latter guys are. or it’s “clear” are on steroids, of course.

4/29/08: the ginger ninja strikes again

by larry on May 2, 2008 1:30 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Please - a guy with a previous alcohol problems

HAS to have “cheated” – alcohol is the great gateway drug. Alcohol, HGH, heroin. I hear it all the time.

I took the "under".

by winningugly on May 2, 2008 2:58 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Well, that's how I got where I am today ;)

Hello Folsom State Prison!

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on May 2, 2008 3:08 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

if you were a real tough guy, you'd be headed to san quentin.

Repeat after me: reading comprehension, even a little bit of thought before posting, and basic research are not signs of weakness.

by Toonderstrook on May 2, 2008 3:11 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Would San Quentin make me "Gay Area" tough?

and how does that rate on the Chicago toughness scale?

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on May 2, 2008 4:29 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

i think san quentin qualifies as any area tought.

that reminds me, i’m going on a tour of sq soon if anybody’s got messages to get to folks on the inside.

Repeat after me: reading comprehension, even a little bit of thought before posting, and basic research are not signs of weakness.

by Toonderstrook on May 2, 2008 4:33 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Watch out for the "skull fuck"

and pissing in your eye sockets.

From my experience.

I took the "under".

by winningugly on May 2, 2008 6:16 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

not at all

by The Scoper on May 2, 2008 3:40 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

1-2 years older and he drops this much?

i’m just raising the possibility. do you think that is is not a consideration at all?

i dont know for sure that he was or not. but it definitely is a probability that is not too far fetched which doesnt warrant a smart ass comment just because you dont want to believe a player you root for may or may not have taken performance enhancing drugs.

your response reminds me of those cub fans back in the day who stood by their grave that sosa never took any performance enhancing drugs or never cheated when in fact they just let their fandom get in the way of their objective reasoning.

by The Scoper on May 2, 2008 3:33 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

perhaps a misunderstanding?

scoper… “trying to look at it objectively, what else [other than steroids] explains [Jenks’s loss of velocity],” implies that you attempted to think about it objectively and couldn’t come up with anything. the responses were very obvious objective possibilities…not necessarily probabilities or truths, but possibilities that have been discussed over and over in relation to jenks’s loss of velocity, albeit it non-steroids related discussions.

Repeat after me: reading comprehension, even a little bit of thought before posting, and basic research are not signs of weakness.

by Toonderstrook on May 2, 2008 3:51 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

With perhaps a bit of 'tude,

but I imagine you’ve noticed this ain’t church or group therapy – more like Oz. Don’t personalize – everyone gets called out if statements are made as “truth” without a full vetting of the issue. Especially when the observation falls into a category of cliche (everything wrong with someone’s performance is because they used to juice).

Just my opinion. You don’t mention what you think of larry’s postulation/numbers. How does that square with being objective if you fire back without acknowledging why you think someone else’s deduction isn’t applicable?

I took the "under".

by winningugly on May 2, 2008 3:59 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

i understand that

the responses were very obvious, objective possibilities but the manner in which they came across was in a manner that the possibility of steroid use was 100% out of the question. that i would be out of my mind to even consider it.

i ackowledge that learning how to pitch and maybe more wear on his elbow contribute to it. but the use of performance enhancing drugs is not something that is totally unfathomable to warrant a shit response

by The Scoper on May 2, 2008 4:06 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

you wrote...

“It is clear that Jenks was on the juice in ‘05.” Now you’re trying to say you were only bringing up the possibility? You’re the one who put other possibilities 100% out of the question by saying the answer was clear. You asked for objective possibilities after you said there were none (because it was CLEAR he was on the juice), and you got them.

Repeat after me: reading comprehension, even a little bit of thought before posting, and basic research are not signs of weakness.

by Toonderstrook on May 2, 2008 4:10 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

save your time for concerts and hiking

talking to walls doesn’t get you home any faster

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on May 2, 2008 4:33 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

best advice i've gotten in a long time. i'll try...most likely to no avail.

Repeat after me: reading comprehension, even a little bit of thought before posting, and basic research are not signs of weakness.

by Toonderstrook on May 2, 2008 4:34 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

very clever

by The Scoper on May 2, 2008 4:35 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Correct me if I'm wrong

but didn’t you recently move to SF for school or something?

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on May 2, 2008 4:58 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

career move

why you ask?

by The Scoper on May 2, 2008 6:21 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Possible SSS pow-wow

May not actually happen, but I thought a preliminary head count was in order.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on May 5, 2008 12:53 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Have you ignored the posts above?

Do you want to be named an accessory?

Say hello to my lil’ friend!!!!!

I took the "under".

by winningugly on May 5, 2008 2:57 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Yes I have

My question to you, WU, is which one of them is more likely to go postal?

We have what we think is a known entity in Toonder, but those dead heads can always pull a fast one on you. And then we have a total wild card in the scooper.

Give ‘em a pair of gloves and let them “work it out” in the ring.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on May 5, 2008 3:57 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

"Scoper" just might be refering to a rifle with

a “scope” on it. Toonder, well, I imagine him to be a big, lumbering Swede who’s bark is worse than his bite.

Scoper by a .22 shell. (And you, sir, I imagine are next if you refer to him as “scooper” again.)

AIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

I took the "under".

by winningugly on May 5, 2008 7:55 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Interesting perspective

I think Toonder is really Aaron Rowand wanting to reconnect with the White Sox fan base, but not wanting to blow his cover. The recently moved to the bay area thing is what made me realize this.

Scooper is really Barry Bonds trying to be as popular as Rowand, and using this site to deflect steroid talk / focus from himself. He says he recently moved to the bay area for a job, but I think that’s just reverse psychology to make us think it’s not Bonds.

The simplest explanation is always the best, and here you have the best explanation of who the posters are.

And don’t think I don’t know that you’re really Lou Pinella, WU.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on May 6, 2008 2:22 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

exactly

you get what you ask for on this site. at least from me. i get tired of the “his performance went up/down; ergo, he is/was on the juice.” it’s silly. are such players using PEDs? maybe. i wouldn’t eliminate the possibility. but i also know that players had career years or terrible years or experienced declines in velocity long before PEDs became widespread. it seems to me that if we’re going to say something is “clear” it should be that jenks is experiencing exactly what a multitude of other pitchers have experienced instead of reaching a conclusion that requires much more explanation.

this article by nate silver pretty much summarizes what i (and i imagine many others) feel about the topic.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7421

and, one other thing: if you want to suspect bobby of use of a PED, i don’t think steroids is the one i’d go for. we’re going pretty far down the “if” path but if bobby was using steroids enough to affect his velocity that much for that long, it’s unlikely bobby would have been as pudgy as he was.

4/29/08: the ginger ninja strikes again

by larry on May 2, 2008 6:24 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

many different steroids retain water in the muscle

creating a puffy look. when off steroids, muscle turns to fat very easily creating a bulky, pudgy look if not taken care of

you dont know if his drop in velocity is attributable to age, learning how to pitch or screw in his elbow as much as i claim that its attributable to being off the juice

spare me the bullshit larry

by The Scoper on May 2, 2008 6:36 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

That's the first you've acknowledged that it might be other factors

so we can stop the pissing contest now, right?

I took the "under".

by winningugly on May 2, 2008 6:38 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

yeah

when off steroids. your point is that he was on steroids. it’s certainly not impossible that bobby would still be a bit pudgy even if he were on an aggressive steroid cycling – bodies can react differently. but you’re getting pretty far down the unlikely path with that one.

and no shit “i don’t know.” neither do you. that was the very point of my original post mocking your ridiculous assertion that you did know. spare me your backpedaling bullshit.

4/29/08: the ginger ninja strikes again

by larry on May 2, 2008 6:54 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs