Indians drub White Sox to cut AL Central deficit to five games

5 Comments

Indians starter Ubaldo Jimenez turned in a solid effort while the offense provided more than enough support to cut their deficit in the AL Central to five games. Meanwhile, the Tigers lost 1-0 to the Royals.

The offense put up a five-spot in the fourth on a two-run home run by Asdrubal Cabrera and a three-run home run by Lonnie Chisenhall, taking advantage of White Sox starter Andre Rienzo. The Indians tacked on two more in the sixth on Carlos Santana’s two-run single to center, which was initially deflected by shortstop Alexei Ramirez. One more run was added in the ninth on Ryan Raburn’s sacrifice fly.

The way Ubaldo Jimenez was pitching, though, the Indians didn’t need that many runs. The right-hander went eight and one-third innings, allowing just one run on eight hits and a walk while striking out eight. He allowed two consecutive singles with one out in the ninth before giving way to reliever C.C. Lee, who promptly allowed a single to load the bases. After surrendering a sacrifice fly to Josh Phegley, he retired Marcus Semien to end the contest.

With the 8-1 win, the Indians improve to 80-68, just five games behind the Tigers for first place in the AL Central. They also move one game behind the Rays for the second AL Wild Card.

Red Sox owner: “spending money helps”

Getty Images
5 Comments

The other day Rob Manfred said, as he and other owners have said often in the past, that there is no correlation between payroll and winning. He said that defensively, in response to criticism of the slow free agent market of the past two offseasons.

As we have noted in the past, Manfred is not being honest about that. While, yes, in any given year there can be wild variation between payroll and win total — the Giants stunk last year, the A’s won 97 games — common sense dictates otherwise. What’s more, a recent study has shown that there is a pretty strong correlation between winning and payroll over time. Yes, you can fluke into a big season with a low payroll — Deadspin compared it to a cold snap occurring during a time of climate change — but if you want that “sustained success” teams claim they want, the best way to ensure it is to spend more money over time.

If you know anything about baseball labor history, though, you know well that the Commissioner and the owners will continue to mischaracterize the dynamics of the business as it suits them. Mostly because — present lefty sportswriters notwithstanding — very few people push back on their narratives. Fans tend to parrot ownership’s line on this stuff and, more often than not, baseball media acts as stenographer for ownership as opposed to critic. That gives owners a far greater ability to shape the narrative about all of this than most institutions.

Which makes this all the more awkward. From David Schoenfield of ESPN:

In apparent contradiction to his own commissioner, Boston Red Sox owner John Henry said Monday that, while there is not a perfect correlation between a bigger payroll and winning, “spending more money helps.”

Which is right. The correlation is not perfect — teams can spend a lot of money on a bad team if given the chance and a low payroll team like the Rays can bullpen their way to 90 wins — but you’re way more likely to win year-in, year-out if you’re spending than if you go cheap all the time and hope for a miracle season.

Which is not to say that Henry is some labor activist owner. He and his fellow front office officials have a long history of backing the league office on just about everything that matters and will no doubt do so with labor matters in the runup to the next CBA negotiation. The owners tend not to have a solidarity problem.

But Henry does seem to draw the line at peddling baloney, which is a shockingly necessary thing when the league and the union’s relationship turns acrimonious.