18 Atlanta Braves (McCarthy) @ Philadelphia Phillies (Velasquez)

LoneStarPhan 2018-04-29 21:14:59 UTC #101

So the home stand that started so great and was looking pretty good after the win on Friday, looks a lot less glamorous after two dismal losses to the Braves to end the ten game stand. I cannot complain about a 6-4 home stand but I really wanted one more win this weekend.

Phillies fall to 16-11 and the Braves move up to the same record. I am at a loss as to why the Phillies have struggled so much against Atlanta, although I see they are a much improved team right now. Take away the head to head meetings between the two clubs and the Phillis are 13-5 while the Braves are 10-8. Not sure that proves anything. All the games count the same.

Looking over the box score, the only bright spot that jumps out at me is Altherr going 3 for 4 today with a double.

Upcoming a week on the road with 3 in Miami and 3 in DC. I hope for at least 4 wins in the 6 games.

EastFallowfield 2018-04-29 21:29:00 UTC #102

When they said the Phils were off to their best start since a stadium or two ago you figured a regression was coming.

el-pietro 2018-04-29 22:09:40 UTC #103

Ugly series. Good thing we don't have to wait too long for the next one!

LoneStarPhan 2018-04-29 22:45:56 UTC #104

Interesting observation.

Austinfan 2018-04-29 23:11:11 UTC #105

Thoughts:

Atlanta has some really good young players, so do we, but some of ours are struggling right now.

Velasquez didn't have his good fastball, and couldn't locate his changeup, good example why FB velocity is overrated, 93-94 but he couldn't locate it and it got pounded, so did the curves he got up.

Altherr seems to be on track, while Williams may be on the fast track to AAA if Quinn keeps hitting.

Garcia pitching the 8th was interesting, Game was out of reach.
Thompson pitched very well until his 4th inning and 50+ pitches. Sometimes a box score can be misleading.

schillingfan 2018-04-30 00:41:49 UTC #106

You always argue a straw man when it comes to importance of velocity. I don't think anyone is saying velocity (as defined by the standards of the time) is a sufficient ingredient to make a successful pitcher. What they are saying is that velocity is a necessary ingredient to make a successful pitcher (with a few exceptions).

Your argument would have made more logical sense if you had excluded the snarky portion. I think we all agree that a 93-94 fastball (let alone a 97-98 fastball) isn't enough to be successful unless the pitcher can locate it and he has secondary pitches. That's what you just wrote about VV without the snark.

Show me a sufficient sample of successful pitchers, within the past five years or so who don't have fastballs averaging at least 92-93 and then we can talk about velocity being overrated as you do.
Caveat: I don't know what kind off data is out there but one could think someone must be running regression analyses that correlate data such as fastball speed with success.