Ten runs…to the Devil Rays…in the first inning?!?

The A's have fallen on hard times, especially their Big One of Three rotation. It all started when they fell from the pack during the early season mediocrity in the AL West by losing eight straight. Since starting the season 9-8, they are 8-20 with losing streaks of eight, three, and four games (current streak). During that span their starters have been 2-15 with a 5.77 ERA and have averaged under six innings a start (5.74).

I don't like to say "I told you so." Scratch that—actually, I love saying, "I told you so". And I said in the offseason that the A's strategy of dumping of both Mulder and Hudson and going with four youngsters to complement Barry Zito was ill-advised and that "history isn't really on their side." I actually did a whole series on it: "My verdict is that Beane has jumped the shark, at least that's how it looks so far."

Danny Haren, whom I criticized but who apparently (from the comments) has more than his fair share of fans, is currently 1-6 with a 5.19 ERA and 1.69 WHIP. So sayeth I regarding the flak I took on Haren, "It seems that Dan Haren won a Cy Young or two since last season."

That's the good news for the A's. The bad news is Joe Blanton, yesterday's loser, is 0-5 with a 6.55 ERA, 1.59 WHIP, and just 2.66 strikeouts per nine innings. Zito (1-5, 5.17) and Kirk Saarloos (1-3, 4.47) haven't been much better. Overall the A's starters are 6-21 with a 4.96 ERA, 25th in the mahors. If you subtract Rich Harden's excellent stats (2-3, 2.80), the rest of the starters are 4-18 with a 5.43 ERA. Ouch!

However, they might reach a new low this afternoon if Haren loses to the Devil Rays. They will have been swept by Tampa for only the second time. Even worse, they would end the day with a worse record than the lowly D-Rays (18-30 vs. 17-29), good (or rather bad) for second worst in the American League an fourth worst in baseball. The staff has a 4.71 ERA overall. Add in the fact that the A's have been out-homered 26 to 45, out-tripled (?) 5 to 10, out-hit in general (.245 to .258 in BA, .319 to .339 in OBP, .348 to .410 in SLUG, and .667 to .748 in OPS), and out-walked of all things 150 to 170, and what do you get? A pretty lousy team.

But that staff ERA is especially odd given that a good number of team ERAs are down this year. Take a look at the breakdowns for team ERA for the last 25 years:

There are four teams with ERAs under 3.50. If that holds true, this would be the first season since 1992, the year before the offense explosion we are currently living through. The way that the numbers are strafed across the different categories reminds me of 1986, a transitional year before the previous mini-explosion in 1987. Maybe 2005 will prove to be a transition back to less offensive (however you define that) times. Insert your own steroid reference here.

Reading Note: Repoz laments the loss of Yankee Stadium in the Seventies, Johnny H, punk music, the girl, the gold watch, and everything.