|05-21-2002, 09:04 PM||#1|
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Scrappers territory
Being a pissed-off Tribe fan watching a team that hits a lot of homers, but doesn't get a lot of baserunners and grounds into a lot of DP's, I wanted to see what the relationship was, in general, between power and runs.
Start by figuring there are four main types of teams:
1) High power, high run-scoring teams (the Babe Ruth All-Stars)
2) Low power, high run-scoring teams (the Ichiro All-Stars)
3) High power, low run-scoring teams (the Rob Deer All-Stars)
4) Low power, low run-scoring teams (the Pirates).
These teams either adapt to their parks or they don't, and they either configure their lineups to best use their park, or they don't. This reflects the team from the GM on down.
I found a boneheaded way to categorize the teams by the relationship between their rank in runs scored and their rank in home runs, among all major league teams so far this young season.
The basic lists can easily be found at ESPN.com, and other sites, if you wish to check, so I won't reprint them here, but here is a summary of the teams and their runs/homers relationships:
First off, with a very few exceptions, the teams that score highest in runs, are ranked lower in homers that runs, and the teams that score the fewest runs are ranked higher in homers than runs.
Of the top-10 teams in runs scored (so far this season), 7 rank higher in runs than in homers and only 3 rank higher in homers than runs. These three are the Yanks, who are 1st in homers and 2nd in runs, the D'Backs, who are 2nd in homers and 6th in runs, and the Blue Jays, who are 4th in runs and 8th in homers. So you have the Yanks, who do everything well offensively, and two good teams in homer-friendly parks.
Among the 7 of the top ten who rank higher in runs than in homers, The ChiSox are 1,2 in runs and homers, the M's are 2nd in runs and 11th in homers, Boston is 4th in runs and 8th in homers, the Angels are 5th in runs and 25th (!) in homers, and the Twins (7th and 11th), Marlins (8th and 9th) and Astros (10th and 11th) finish out the pack. The Astros are the real surprise there -- but their team was built for the 'Dome.
Of the bottom 11 in runs (there was a tie at 20th place), 7 rank higher in homers than runs and four rank higher in runs than homers. Remembering that we're dealing with the inept offenses of the leagues, here's how they look:
My Tribe is the spread winner, ranking 22nd in runs but 7th in homers. Atlanta is a close second, ranking 23rd in runs and 10th in homers, and the Cubs are next, ranking 29th in runs and 18th in homers.
Going the other way, the Royals rank 20th in runs and 29th in homers.
The other teams in the bottom 11 in runs (Milwaukee, Detroit, San Diego, Tampa Bay amd the Dodgers) are ranked within 2 places in both categories, including, of course, the Bucs, who are dead last in both. The Brewers surprised me a little, since they not only are NOT scoring runs (expected) but aren't hitting homers either. A team full of Rob Deers in slumps.
Of the middle 9 teams, 6 rank higher in runs than in homers, all within 5 places either way except for Cincinnati, which is 15th in runs and 22nd in homers). The teams that go the other way are the Giants (6th in runs, 14th in HR), Oakland (5th and 17th), and the Orioles (15th and 18th).
What does this verbiage show, besides that it's early in the season?
I guess it shows which managers, coaches and players are taking advantage of their lineups and parks, and which aren't. You could almost use this as a gauge in measuring smart teams and dumb teams.
Seattle is smart and efficient, and so is Anaheim. The Tribe is playing dumb offensive baseball and so is Chicago. Atlanta must be banged up. The Yanks, White Sox and Red Sox have fine all-around offensive teams. Teams like KC and Cincy are really doing the best they can with what they have. Pittsburgh, San Diego, LA, Tampa Bay and Detroit just don't have the horses.
|05-21-2002, 11:13 PM||#2|
I wouldn't say the high power, low run scoring teams are Rob Deer all-stars. Rob Deer took walks. Even with a crappy BA, his OBP was around league average.
Call 'em the Dave Kingmans.
I think the best indicator of runs scored is still OBP, followed by a high secondary average. At the end your high OBP teams will be near the top of the list. Get on base, and ye shall score.
|05-22-2002, 10:33 AM||#3|
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The city of Kaline, Cobb and Greenberg
I think that you find that the high homer - low run scoring teams don't walk or hit enough to make their home runs count. It still comes down to getting base runners on base.
Last edited by WiredTiger : 05-22-2002 at 10:41 AM.
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|
|Display Modes||Rate This Thread|