I think the conventional wisdom at the beginning of the year was that the Rangers would win with a great offense and decent pitching and the Angels would win with great pitching and a decent offense. A little over halfway through the season, it looks like the opposite may be true.

Rangers wRC+ 107 (3rd), Angels 105 (4th)

So overall, both offenses have been v. good. But they're clearly headed in different directions.

Rangers
June wRC+ 106 (10th)
July wRC+ 53 (30th)

Angels
June wRC+ 128 (1st)
July wRC+ 121 (6th)

Meanwhile, the Rangers pitching has been better. The 2 teams have almost identical ERAs. But that masks the fact that the Angels have a better defense and play in a pitchers park. SIERA is defense independent and is park adjusted.

Rangers SIERA 3.75 (7th)
Angels SIERA 4.08 (24th), over the past 30 days it's 4.31 (29th)

This could all change. But at this point in the season, the Rangers are a good pitching team with an ok offense. The Angels are a great offensive team with a great defense and terrible pitching.

That's pretty weird if you ask me!

Damn Coolbaugh

Or all hail, Mike Maddux.

Why do you like snapshots so much, Rfan?

Most of the stats I listed are full season stats. I broke out the June/July offenseive #s b/c for the Angels at least, there's a good argument that those #s better reflect who they actually are. Trout didn't play in the early part of the season and Pujols had a bumpy transition, which he's obviously gotten past. I think they'll cool off some, but they've got a good offense.

I know that you think the Rangers offensive struggles are a fluke and they'll end up with a wRC+ at season's end of 110+. I'm optimistic about that as well. Though I do think that too many key guys are having bad seasons for it to be easily dismissed as random bad luck.

That said, the point of the post is that the Angels may wind up having the better offense and Texas having better pitching. That's not a result that I think most would've predicted.

On 11-11-11 I posted the mother of over-the-top threads about Ranger pitching. I made radical declarations. I sang praises. I indulged in playful grandiloquence...

Certainly, RFan it lacked your sophisticated analytical breakdowns...

Needless to say...I'm a HUGE believer in Ranger pitching. It's very, very, very good. And completely under-appreciated.

Link:
http://forum.newbergreport.com/showthread.php?13749-The-Mother-of-All-Threads-about-Texas-Ranger-Pitching

I really never thought the Angels were as bad they started the season and the Rangers are as bad as they are right now (offensively). That being said, I still believe the Rangers have a better Offense/Pitching than the Angels with the Angels having a slightly better defense (and a better to much better defensive outfield depending on who is out there).

Nothing wrong with snapshots, I just don't think it's representative of the 'whole picture'.

the rangers are better on paper but they've been absolutely terrible over the last 2 months. their production isn't helped by slumping hitters being sandwiched between players that are actually hitting.

I'm optimistic that our offense will figure it out. But there's no denying that Trout/Trumbo/Pujols are putting on a show right now. Fortunately, we have a 5 game lead and the better pitching staff.

I think the Angels are going to be looking to upgrade their pitching. They didn't sign Pujols and Wilson to with an eye toward missing out on October. I don't know much about their farm. But as I understand it, they don't have much. I imagine that whatever they do have, they're ready to give it up and then some.