Matches: Five Myths (And Facts) About The Texas Rangers' Offense

Comments

Myths, and not so fun facts

The Rangers lost two of their best hitters for at least three weeks at the same time. When they came back, they both hit home runs, and appeared to be hitting the ball well. Since they both hit booming home runs in Minnesota, a game that they lost, both have been in a horrific slump.

Michael Young pitcked up the slack when Cruz and Hamilton were on the DL. When they came back, he started slumping. Now that they are slumping, this is looking bad. Because much of this slump has been on the road, Kinsler’s road BA makes the road trips look really long. I just wish Hamilton, Cruz, Kinsler, and Young would start hitting a lot of line drives, because when they do that, they seem to also hit for average.

by Philar on Jun 15, 2011 10:26 AM CDT reply actions

I think the real problem is how would you improve

this offense given what is avaialble on the market. Sure we could use more offense out of a few position but who are we going to get.
This is a problem that needs to be fixed in house. Each player needs to fix their own issues and work through slumps like these.

You can only be young once but can be immature forever!

by Bigfan16 on Jun 15, 2011 11:07 AM CDT reply actions

I'm not worried about improving the offense.

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions

That first comment made my head spin.

SB Nation Dallas-Ft. Worth - Christopher Fittz is better than porn!

by philkid3 on Jun 15, 2011 11:15 AM CDT reply actions

We all have our bigsteve's to bear

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions

We have been on the road since May 30

I consider the Detroit series an extension of the road trip. We are about to embark on a 15 out of 18 (3 in Houston) home stand. If we survive the next 5 games, I think things may change in a hurry.

"Anyone that knows me, an' the game of baseball, know what Ron Washington is about."

by Atticus F on Jun 15, 2011 11:16 AM CDT reply actions

we are 8-7 in that span... the sky is falling.

by I am Neftali Feliz on Jun 15, 2011 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions

well Ogando did lose last night

he should go back to the bullpen

I know you're still struggling to find your way in LSB but you'd probably feel more comfortable in one of the other threads that talks about
weather, fashion, video games, uniform colors, etc. . - Josey Wales 5/18/11

by RangerMad on Jun 15, 2011 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions

All good points

I think the big problem is that this is one of those offenses that is just built around guys who are kind of streaky (which is the case with most hitters who don’t walk at a high clip). As a result, the team normally is relying on one or two really guys who are really hot at any given time. Occasionally, they’ll have that week or two when everyone is cold; and then they’ll have that week or two when everyone is hot.

The thing about streaky players and teams like this is that you can’t read too much into any given stretch. And while I think overall the Rangers offense has been disappointing so far (partly due to injuries to Nellie and Josh, partly because several have underwhelmed and no one has really overperformed), I don’t think this is really predictive. The team is in good shape record wise, since the rotation (with the exception of a few starts here and there) has given them a great chance to win almost every game this year and a few well timed hot streaks (e.g., Young’s tear corresponding to Josh’s injury)

So the team streaky, and while I don’t think that means they’re “due,” I do think it is just as likely they’ll be really awesome for the rest of the year as continuing to go along this path. If you think of what we’ve been seeing as the worst case scenario for a strong offense club like the Rangers, it means things can only get better from here.

(how is that for a curmudgeon, GB?)

Go Rice Owls!
Would be a Matt Harrison fan, but I only like superstars

by JBImaknee on Jun 15, 2011 11:42 AM CDT reply actions

Oooh, I'll play the curmudgeon!

Streaky/high variance basically sucks unless you’re located at a spot on the win curve where you need high-ceiling guys just to have a shot at making the playoffs.

(I suppose there’s a counterargument to be made that if you’re a team that will probably be making the playoffs every years, streaky is good since sooner or later you’ll got on a playoff tear which will help your chances of winning it all.)

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions

well, I wouldn't advocate going after streakiness either

I think that the streakiness hurt us last year when the bats turned off in the World Series…

That said, I think it is very hard to build a team that has the Rangers expected value that isn’t streaky. Frankly, there aren’t many Albert Pujols’s out there. And as we’ve seen this year, even the Pujols and Dunns of the world (both who are among the most consistent players in the league) can be streaky.

Really, I think that the flip side is that offensive slumps tend to correct themselves fairly fast, since guys go out there every day and play. Also, since there are 9 batters, it is rare for everyone to be cold at once. In contrast, if you rely too much on pitching, where single guys have a lot of leverage over the outcome of a single game; a few simultaneous cold streaks can mean a bad month. Of course, basically by definition great pitchers never slump; every great hitter does.

Go Rice Owls!
Would be a Matt Harrison fan, but I only like superstars

by JBImaknee on Jun 15, 2011 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions

Yeah, I want to say that great pitching/defense is going to be less streak-prone,

but I’m curious how much the numbers would back it up. Would great pitching/meh offense really be preferred to meh pitching/great offense? The meh offense would lower the margin of error for the pitching/defense so that even just allowing a run or two extra in a game might do you in…

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions

Run Distribution is something that has been looked at.

Studeman @ Hardball Times

One of my first FanShots here, looking at the Rangers 20 games into the 2009 season.

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions

So yep, pretty Poissony.

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions

yeah

which isn’t all that unexpected if each time has a run scoring frequency that is fairly independent of scoring other runs (I guess the fact that runs come in bunches would actually make it less Poissony…)

I guess the question is how individual teams vary around this league average.

Go Rice Owls!
Would be a Matt Harrison fan, but I only like superstars

by JBImaknee on Jun 15, 2011 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions

Depends on the sample size.

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions

what depends on the sample size?

Go Rice Owls!
Would be a Matt Harrison fan, but I only like superstars

by JBImaknee on Jun 15, 2011 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions

x

how individual teams vary around this league average.

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 6:22 PM CDT up reply actions

sample size should only affect the accuracy of your distribution

it shouldn’t actually affect variance.

Go Rice Owls!
Would be a Matt Harrison fan, but I only like superstars

by JBImaknee on Jun 15, 2011 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions

Hmm.

I think I read that statement differently than you intended it. Over a smaller sample size (say 1/3rd of a season), teams can show a different distribution from the mean distribution. Now I think you mean something different, though.

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 10:58 PM CDT up reply actions

I'd be interested in seeing evidence as to just how much more streaky the Rangers are than a normal offense.

If at all.

Outside of just having players prone to missing time.

SB Nation Dallas-Ft. Worth - Christopher Fittz is better than porn!

by philkid3 on Jun 15, 2011 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions

My hidden markov model method didn't find much super-definitive info.

It suggested streakiness existed in varying levels, but either it wasn’t sophisticated enough to really nail it down (probably the case) or it’s just a somewhat fuzzy thing. Assuming that players had varying levels of streakiness produced models that were more likely to generate the observed performances (with some big simplifications, like “all outs are the same”), but the parameters changed a fair bit even year to year. So maybe it just takes a long time to stabilize (the full-career-based models also were more likely to produce the actual sequences than the no-such-thing-as-streakiness method), or maybe the model isn’t good enough.

And because the results were fairly ambiguous for the 20-odd players I looked at I didn’t bother extending it to make it easy to apply to the whole league.

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions

The Yankees I looked at (Tex, A-Rod, Jeter) were pretty un-streaky, IIRC, though.

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions

Wait.

But I thought A-Rod only hit home runs in meaningless games.

SB Nation Dallas-Ft. Worth - Christopher Fittz is better than porn!

by philkid3 on Jun 15, 2011 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions

Well if meaningless situations are fairly evenly distributed, that could certainly still be the case. :p

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions

Than a normal offense?

probably depends how you measure it. I would wager that it isn’t particularly any streaker, just the mean around which it varies is higher.

Actually, thinking about it, if you’re using R/G, variance is going to scale at least somewhat with mean. Basically, runs scored cannot be Gaussian, since you can’t score negative runs. Just a guess, but I bet R/G probably tends to be closer to a Poisson distribution (where variance = mean); so better offensive clubs will be more variable.

Though variability is not the same as streakiness, though with increased variability you can end up seeing streaks that appear real by chance.

Go Rice Owls!
Would be a Matt Harrison fan, but I only like superstars

by JBImaknee on Jun 15, 2011 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions

Batter variance and batter streakiness would both lead to increased R/G variance,

and batter variance is something I haven’t seen looked at much even without getting into streakiness. Been a long time since I looked at my distributions, though; would a beta be a starting point for modeling something like that?

Anything that requires a multi-parameter model just blows up the complexity, though.

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions

Of course,

it’s quite hard to find consistent, patient hitters with power and upside and who also play good defense.

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions

And the limited market means someone will overpay the inconsistent ones.

I think Beltre’s inconsistency on offense makes him a huge gamble at the price the Rangers had to pay, but I don’t know that that’s the same as saying the Rangers shouldn’t have signed him.

by Closure GT on Jun 15, 2011 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions

Eh,

his defense and power help mitigate that somewhat.

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions

Michael Young has not drawn an unintentional walk since May 28.

Ugh.

Strangely, has grounded into zero double plays in that time.

My Music Blog

by FuturePants on Jun 15, 2011 12:22 PM CDT reply actions

I seem to remember being told

by some old man that his approach at the plate was FINE and that he was an exceptional hitter and he’d work his way out of it.

by vfn on Jun 15, 2011 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions

Was that old man Thomas Allen Greive?

My Music Blog

by FuturePants on Jun 15, 2011 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions

Not quite

a far bigger asshole than TAG could ever be.

by vfn on Jun 15, 2011 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions

FINEST MOMENT, VENTURA.

THIS SEASON = FINEST MOMENT.

Ever been in a boardroom, or a gang fight? Ever save a life? Ever won a court case against the odds? Ever held a dying buddy in your arms?.- jackanape on "perspective," 11/8/2010.

"do you a jet ski rental place would work here" - Mike E, 5/10/2011, in response to me saying I would rather face the Thunder than the Grizzlies in the WCF.

by Aqua on Jun 15, 2011 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions

how many strikeouts does he have in that time?

by RangerMad on Jun 15, 2011 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions

And how many strikeouts are looking?

I’ve seen some of those, which seems so contrary to MY’s usual approach. Sometimes when things are going wrong, it’s just strange.

by Philar on Jun 15, 2011 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions

they have the fewest strikeouts in the league

so they’re obviously good at making contact with the ball. however, they’re also good at making contact with pitches outside the zone and accumulating outs as a result.

by this mortal boil on Jun 15, 2011 1:34 PM CDT reply actions

We say this a lot, so I rounded up some data

I multiplied Swing% by Contact% from fangraphs to find out how often a pitch hits the bat. I do this for pitches inside the strike zone (call this STH) and outside the zone (call this BTH). The MLB average in 2011 for far is 56.9% for pitches inside the strike zone and 19.5% for pitches outside the strike zone. This means that whenever a pitch is thrown inside the strike zone, 56.9% of the time, the hitter decides to swing and is also able to make contact, and 19.5% for pitches outside the zone.

Then for each hitter on the Rangers, I find their tendencies to make contact on a pitch and represent them with BTH+ and STH+. BTH+ measure how often the hitter decides to swing and makes contact with any pitch thrown outside the strike zone, relative to league average. For example, if the BTH+ of a hitter is 1.2, it means he make 20% more contact on pitches out of the zone than league average. Basically, a higher BTH+ suggests a hitter swings at and/or makes more contact on pitches outside the zone than league average. STH+ measures the same thing for pitches inside the zone.

Here are the BTH+ and STH+ for the 2011 Rangers

Not too surprising, Borbon puts the bat on a lot of pitches, both inside and outside the zone, while Napoli likes to have just one bat for a season. Torrealba is about average for making contact for pitches inside the zone, but doesn’t like to (and probably can’t) hit things outside the zone. Overall, it doesn’t appear that Rangers hitters, as a group, swings and makes contact on a significantly larger percent of pitches.

Here are the career profiles of Rangers hitters

Again, for pitches inside the strike zone, Rangers hitters as a whole seem to come out about league average. However, most seem to hit fewer pitches outside the zone than league average.

I don’t know if this means anything else, and am too lazy to analyze at the moment. Take it as you will.

by Telegraph on Jun 15, 2011 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

interesting

thanks

by RangerMad on Jun 15, 2011 5:54 PM CDT up reply actions

This is interesting.

I’ll have to think about the relevance. Could you make this into a FanShot?

"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels

by GhettoBear04 on Jun 15, 2011 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions

Michael Young sucks

"It was like the movie Die Hard. The guy gets shot in the leg, he’s limping around and he still throws the bad guy down the elevator shaft. I was about to throw an eephus pitch."-CJ Wilson

Josey Wales is stupid

by Horns130 on Jun 15, 2011 3:09 PM CDT reply actions