OnlyBucs

The Pirates are 4-24 in their last 28 games.  The best they can do in 30 is 6 wins.  I mucked around on Baseball-Reference, and it looks like these clubs had stretches where they couldn't manage 7 wins in a 30 game stretch:



1890: 1-29 (this was the year of the Players League. The players remaining in the NL went 23-113)

1952: 4-26 (42-112)

1884: 4-25 (American Association, one tie, 30-78)

1985: 5-25 (57-104)

2009: 5-25 (62-99)

1998: 5-25 (74-88)

1950: 5-24 (tie, 61-92)

2019: 6-24 (?)

2010: 6-24 (57-105)

2001: 6-24 (62-100)



These clubs often had overlapping stretches, such as losing 25 of thirty from May 1 through May 31, and doing the same from May 2 through June 1.  The 1890 club had at least a couple completely separate stretches where they were this bad.



So they're already in the "top" ten in this category.  Two more losses will put them in very rarified air, with only a Rickey dink team to match them in the modern era.



I have bad memories of the end-of-season 1998 collapse, because it seems like the one that made "the streak" inevitable.  They brought in Mike Benjamin, Ed Sprague, Brant Brown, Pete Schourek, and Pat Meares in the following offseason, and from that point forward proven veterans were the preferred way to fill holes.



The 1965 club lost 23 of thirty early in the season, sat at 9-24, but turned things around and finished third at 90-72.

I went thru the boxscores of the 4-24 streak and found 9 losses when the Pirates were tied or ahead until the BP allowed more runs in the 7th thru 9th innings and Vazquez never appeared in any of them. Actually, that includes 1 game when the Pirates trailed 5-3 in the 8th and ended up with 7 runs but still lost 9-7 because of the additional runs the BP allowed in the 8th and 9th.



During these 28 games Vazquez has appeared only 7 times for a total of 7 IP, 1 hit, 0 runs, 1 BB, 12 Ks. In other words he's been unhittable at the same time the Pirates are losing because the BP is consistently ineffective but Hurdle refuses to use Vazquez. These are his 7 appearances during this stretch:



7/14: He hadn't pitched in a week so he did a 9th inning mop up just to get some work in an 8-3 loss.



7/16: He got a save in a 5-4 win.



7/20: Pitched a scoreless 9th in a 5-1 win (not a save situation).



7/21: Pitched a scoreless 10th in a game the Pirates lost 2-1 in 11.



7/25: Pitched a scoreless 9th to get some work in a 6-3 loss.



8/2: Pitched a scoreless 9th in an 8-4 win (not a save situation) to get some work after not pitching for a week.



8/7: Pitched a scoreless 9th to get some work in an 8-3 loss.



So that's 1 save, 2 appearances in non-save wins, 1 appearance in extra innings and 3 mop up appearances in losses just to get some work because of how seldom he's been used. Meanwhile, 9 games were lost in the late innings during this stretch where it would have been advantageous to use him in at least a few of them but he was held out of all of them. This incredibly poor handling of the BP has Vazquez pitching at meaningless times just to get some work because he's never used in meaningful situations. The absurdity is astounding.

2 innings pitched in close games. They might as well use him as an opener.

596A7677747C4A776C706B6C7D7176180 wrote: The Pirates are 4-24 in their last 28 games.  The best they can do in 30 is 6 wins.  I mucked around on Baseball-Reference, and it looks like these clubs had stretches where they couldn't manage 7 wins in a 30 game stretch:



1890: 1-29 (this was the year of the Players League. The players remaining in the NL went 23-113)

1952: 4-26 (42-112)

1884: 4-25 (American Association, one tie, 30-78)

1985: 5-25 (57-104)

2009: 5-25 (62-99)

1998: 5-25 (74-88)

1950: 5-24 (tie, 61-92)

2019: 6-24 (?)

2010: 6-24 (57-105)

2001: 6-24 (62-100)



These clubs often had overlapping stretches, such as losing 25 of thirty from May 1 through May 31, and doing the same from May 2 through June 1.  The 1890 club had at least a couple completely separate stretches where they were this bad.



So they're already in the "top" ten in this category.  Two more losses will put them in very rarified air, with only a Rickey dink team to match them in the modern era.



I have bad memories of the end-of-season 1998 collapse, because it seems like the one that made "the streak" inevitable.  They brought in Mike Benjamin, Ed Sprague, Brant Brown, Pete Schourek, and Pat Meares in the following offseason, and from that point forward proven veterans were the preferred way to fill holes.



The 1965 club lost 23 of thirty early in the season, sat at 9-24, but turned things around and finished third at 90-72.




You have 129 years of history in that 10 year list.   The most telling thing is that 50% of the list has occurred since 1998 (21 years).      30% of that list has occurred under our current GM.  Imagine, that  in 129 seasons you're in the GM seat for 3 of the worst 30 game streaks.     



I hope they don't win another game all year.  Not a single game.   

The pain of being a Pirate fan.



Also, Vasquez should be a Dodger and the Bucs should have May and Ruiz.



Going a step further, Marte, Liriano, and Vasquez should be Dodgers, and the Bucs should have May, Ruiz, Pederson and Urias playing in Pittsburgh.

So they held steady at 6-24. Still in the top ten.

Trying to choose which thread is the best one for this:



https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-pirates ... very-eyes/

Is this the exclamation mark on the worst 30 days ?



https://www.mlb.com/news/jameson-taillo ... hn-surgery

4160757C447D66756071140 wrote: Is this the exclamation mark on the worst 30 days ?



https://www.mlb.com/news/jameson-taillo ... hn-surgery

They finished 25-48 n the second half.  Only six Pirate teams were worse in their final 73 games: 1890, 1952,  1884, 1883, 1953, and 2009. The 1995 and 2008 clubs also finished 25-48, and the 1917 team went 24-47 with a couple of ties. The 1909 team had the best record: 53-19 with a tie.



Frustrating in every way, every time they got down to Rickey Dink levels of awfulness, they'd run off a little flurry of wins to avoid becoming a part of history.