What is your opinion of the A.J. Pierzynski signing?
MJH on accountability
I don't particularly agree with his method, but his findings are quite interesting none the less.
Just the blind eye of watching literally every Rangers game this year tells me that when we field all our best lineup, its elite. The problem is that Hamilton missed loads of games and now Beltre too is missing loads of games. The other thing that is the other teams don't spend so many games hitting against OAK, SEA and LAA's staffs. Its actually something that bothers me about unbalanced schedules that have occurred post expansion division era.
I scoff at that. Just more anti Rangers propoganda. Not only do the rangers rank in the top 10 in almost every offensive statistical category. We're starting to get consistent pitching to back it up. i word for MLB: Dangerous!
The inter-division games should be close to being split between home games and away games though and he's comparing the difference between home and away, not between other teams. He's just showing that the Rangers struggle to produce runs away from home which I think we already knew.Something even more interesting to me is how big the difference is for Kinsler.
...oh and I forgot to add that Napoli is an absolute monster. Kudos to JD for making that trade!
Hell yeah. I work with a bunch of guys out in CA. and i got this urgent report and they said it was a "HOT" item like in bold font in the title..... anyways, i finished the report and replied "yeah this report was about as HOT as a napoli at-bat. i know that one hurt.... ha!
According to that stat, TBIA is the #1 hitters' park. Fenway is #3. Yankee Stadium is #8.
I'm not going to bother doing the math, but I'll bet if you did, you'd see comparable discrepancies in the Yankees' and Red Sox' numbers. Maybe not, I dunno. Coors Field is #2, but Colorado's numbers are 4 to 10 positions lower than ours in all the relevant categories.
You can argue that Boston and NY have better offense than we do, but I don't think anyone else does.
fenway at 3 sounds like home away from home. especially if we have to play Boston first round if we pull this out. i like our chances. it'll be a shoot out every game as opposed to a pitchers duel. but for me i can appreciate and i love a pitchers dues especially being a former pitcher. but a smash mouth in your face 10-12 tex/bos game (as many tend to go; high scoring i mean) it should be extremely enjoyable. and i'm extremely high on our offense right now and we're missing arguably our best offensive weapon in Beltre. like i said earlier we are very dangerous. and teams are starting to notice.
Just the blind eye of watching literally every Rangers game this year tells me that when we field all our best lineup, its elite. The problem is that Hamilton missed loads of games and now Beltre too is missing loads of games. The other thing that is the other teams don't spend so many games hitting against OAK, SEA and LAA's staffs.
Yep, some very tough staffs in the AL West ... you also have to account for the fact that all three teams play in what I would consider to be pitcher-friendly environs. Now, parks are accounted for in the wRC+ formula, but not quality of competition (beyond adjustments for league) as far as I'm aware.
Also, I abhor any methodology that allows you to throw HALF of the games out, look at a smaller subset of weaker performance, and then use that to support the conclusion that the Rangers' offense is "ordinary." Please.
And there's something else that I don't think was captured here:
Rangers' home wRC+: 132 (2nd in baseball)Rangers' away wRC+ 91 (T-11th in baseball)
Why would you not provide the necessary context as to how those wRC+ totals actually stack up against the competition?
@Joey: Because he's a douchecopter who has it out for the Rangers, I suppose. I dunno. He can bite me, though.
Mark Buerhle was right! It's all the flashing lights!
The following article includes a sortable table with park effects over a longer sample, 2006-2010.
Turns out that looking only at 2011 data makes RBiA look more hitter friendly than it probably is.
Hot dry Air will definitely push already hitter friendly parks to be more hitter friendly. There are a lot of nonlinear effects in ballpark effects, which make the standard ballpark adjustments that get applied so simplistic as to be fairly worthless. For instance, applying the same ballpark effect to a righty and a lefty (since some ballparks set up as righty friendly or lefty friendly) or a pull hitter vs an opp field hitter or a groundball hitter vs a flyball hitter is just kind of silly.
While I haven't seen the details of the actual park adjustment for wRC+, my suspicion is it is yet another meaningless linear adjustment that adds more distortion to data than insight. So it is completely unsurprising that a players park adjusted numbers at home are grossly different from the park adjustments away.
not much sports to cover in Seattle these days - NBA left town, Tavarius Jackson is your starting QB, Mariners still want to talk about 2001 regular season......hey at least you still have the Storm!!
Does he not realize that in the last 2 series the rangers hit 11 home runs and the mariners hit only 1? Their home wrc has more to do with the quality of pitching they have faced.
Does he realize that he put all of that effort (sorry lack of effort) int a post that has only 1 response?
I would assume he left out the fact we also have the lowest ERA(starters at least) on the road in the MLB? But, I guess that story is only suppose to look at half of the game so he can try to make a point out of cherry picked stats.... Nice reporting, sorry you are 15 GB us.
I've often said park effects underrate our pitchers and overrate our hitters.
In case anyone still cares, he wrote a rebuttal:
Someone who understands metrics better than I do could probably tell us whether he's just bitterly blowing smoke or right on. Not that it matters very much.
Andy - I think the guy is a douche with his own personal agenda. I will give him this... He did eat some crow at the end.
Ask any pitcher in the American league if they enjoy facing the Rangers lineup. I think they'll tell you they FEAR that lineup. Who cares what some clown creates on the web.
What a joke. In the first 2 games of this Angels series the Rangers have rattled off 31 hits and 15 runs in what is dubbed by this - http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor - as the 27th most hitter friendly park in the league.
I skimmed his follow-up post. I may read it again later more thoroughly.
I'm curious, though, as to why he asserts in the first post that he is "dispelling the myth that the Rangers are good on offense," and then, in the second post, says that the Rangers' offense is, upon further review, "still not elite." Being not good implies ordinary, mediocre, or average, or worse than that. Being non-elite means that you can still be good to very good, though I guess it's still his belief that the Rangers' offense isn't good either. It's weird to see him switch up the two on the fly, though.
Also, since he's now using wOBA instead of wRC+, why not make any mention of the Rangers' .318 road wOBA ranking EIGHTH in baseball this season? Yeah, that .318 is still less than the strict league average of .321 ... but it's still better than more than two-thirds of the rest of the league. That is, the Rangers' home wOBA is obviously vastly greater than the league-average home wOBA, and their road wOBA is also better than the league-average road wOBA. He failed to take that relativity into account even once in his analysis, as far as I saw.
I appreciate what he's going for here, and I don't think he's being a douchebag or petty or anything like that. I do think he's off base in calling the Rangers' offense "ordinary" and barking about how much their park helps them, and I can't help but feel as though there's some confirmation bias in his work.
The blogger's main argument seems to be the difference in splits between the Rangers' offense at home vs. away. But you will notice that the Rangers wOBA and OPS at home for this season, and for the last 5 years, is approximately the same as the Red Sox and Yankees.
Is it possible that the reason the Red Sox and Yankees home numbers are closer to their road (yet still higher than avg) because they play a plurality of road games in the AL East, while the Rangers play a plurality of road games in the AL West with pitcher friendly parks? Other than that, I see little difference between the three offenses.
@TexastRangers: To be fair, LAAofAofWhatever and Seattle are very pitcher-friendly parks, but Oakland isn't necessarily. It's listed at #10 on ESPN's park factors. However, I've also heard their park is a shithole, so take from that what you will.
On the other hand, Tampa is one of the most pitcher-friendly parks (#29), but Boston, NY, Toronto, and Baltimore are all in the top 10. Or, basically, 75% of their in-division road games are in some of the most hitter-friendly parks. So you might be on to something.
FWIW, ESPN's park factors only take one season into account at a time. Not a big fan of that method. I prefer some form of manual weighting (such as, say, the 5-4-3 method) so that you can at least take into account the last three seasons, or BR's multi-year park factors (although they're obviously far more simplistic and wrap everything into one single number).
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.