Sizing up the ALCS - Defense and Intangibles

[Orange Juiced]

The last components I want to look at are the defense and intangibles, which, to be honest, are the hardest things to measure in baseball. Intangibles, by the definition of the term, are "not tangible" and thus can't be measured, but I'll take a crack at them anyway.

 

First, defense. We need to begin with the fact that the Tigers are perceived to be one of the worst defensive teams in all of baseball. A quick look at the fielding percentage stats reveals something surprising, however. Detroit is ranked #7 at .987. Guess where Boston is? #9 at .987 (slightly behind as we are seeing the rounded numbers).

 

When I think of fielding, I think of turning live balls into outs, and/or allowing the other team to take extra bases. In other words, a ball hit to an outfielder that is misplayed might not end up being an error, but it nonetheless turns into a hit. A runner stealing second successfully may not count as an error against the defense, but it shows up in the SB% against the catcher.

 

Raw Fielding Data

Total Chances

- Det: 5972

- Bos: 5958

 

Total Assists + Putouts

- Det: 5896

- Bos: 5878

 

Total Errors

- Det: 76

- Bos: 80

 

Fielding Percentage

- Det: .987

- Bos: .987

 

Here's another way to look at it, though. Baseball-reference's dWAR factors in fielding percentage and zone rating and range factor, everything. It's not a perfect stat because judging whether a ball that drops in is a hit or an error is not a science. But it's what we have to work with. Here are the likely starters and their dWAR numbers:

 

Detroit

C - Avila: 0.4

1b - Fielder: -2.2

2b - Infante: -0.1

3b - Cabrera: -1.4

SS - Peralta: 0.7 (Iglesias: 0.3)

LF - Dirks: 0.5

CF - Jackson: 0.8

RF - Hunter: -1.5

TOTAL: -2.8

 

Boston

C - Saltalamacchia: 0.3

1b - Napoli: 0.4

2b - Pedroia: 2.3

3b - Middlebrooks: -0.4

SS - Drew: 0.6

LF - Nava: -1.2

CF - Ellsbury: 1.9

RF - Victorino: 2.2

TOTAL: 6.1

 

This represents a HUGE advantage for Boston. The only spots where Detroit really has a fielding edge are at catcher and left field. However, let's talk about those two spots for a moment.

 

At catcher, here are the numbers:

Fielding percentage:

- Avila: .993

- Salty: .994

 

Passed balls:

- Avila: 9

- Salty: 7

 

Caught stealing:

- Avila: 17%

- Salty: 21%

 

So while Avila may simply be better at handling pitches, or whatever, Salty is very comparable.

 

And now, at left field, Dirks has a decided dWAR advantage over Nava (or Gomes, when he plays....Gomes' dWAR is -0.3). However, that may be mitigated by the uniqueness of Fenway. We've seen many times over the years players in left have difficulty with the wall - a ball isn't played properly and it scrapes the bottom of the wall for a hit, or it ricochets off the wall and bounces over the fielder's head and extra bases are taken. Nava plays the wall pretty well. It remains to be seen how someone like Dirks - or, goodness, Peralta, should he be put out there - does handling the Monster.

 

Long story short, defensively the Red Sox have a major advantage over Detroit. This doesn't mean that in a 7-game series Detroit couldn't outplay Boston defensively, but I wouldn't count on that if I was a Tigers' fan. They should allow Boston a few more bases over the course of the series, due to a worse defense. The question will be whether Boston can take advantage of it. If I was Boston, I'd bunt towards Cabrera a lot with Victorino and Ellsbury. And I'd run on Avila as much as possible. Put pressure on Detroit's fielders all series long. They'll make mistakes.

 

FIELDING EDGE: BOSTON

 

 

Now, to the intangibles. I don't see any advantage in terms of which team has momentum, etc. The beards and "togetherness" of this Boston team is exciting and makes for a great story, especially coming off last year's disaster. But Detroit has a good clubhouse too, and they seem to play very well as a team. They have just as much momentum, riding Verlander's arm to a game 5 victory over Oakland. They know they belong here.

 

One issue to keep in mind is the managing. Jim Leyland has been there, done that, and is one of the most respected managers in the game. John Farrell...well, this is his first time as a manager on this stage. He's been there as a coach, but not a manager. I think, because we see Farrell's in-game decision-making every day, that we worry about the moves he'll make. Well every manager does things that makes their fan base scratch their collective heads. We just don't see it every day. Both managers are very smart. Both will make very good moves, and at least one move that make us go, "Huh?" If I had to give an edge, I'd give it to Leyland, based on his experience and reputation. But I'm comfortable with Farrell.

 

INTANGIBLES EDGE: DETROIT

[User Name]

What you call intangibles (which, as you said yourself, is immeasurable) in this case, is just a sizing up of the managers. I've caught hundreds of Tiger games and you're just going by the devil you know here. Leyland makes a lot more head-scratching decisions than Farrell, especially with bullpen management.

 

As for defense, i don't understand why you'd use dWAR over UZR, since the latter is widely regarded as the superior defensive statistic, mostly because it adds positional adjustment to fielder value and the evaluation method is better.

 

Using UZR, the numbers are as follows:

 

Red Sox: 21.6 UZR

 

Tigers: -12.9 UZR

 

Per this measurement, the Boston advantage looks even bigger, given their superiority over the central line (C, 2B, SS, CF). A word of warning regarding dWAR and UZR regarding C/2B/SS is that they are both very unreliable for C, and can be for 2B/SS.

[Bellhorn04]

So OJ, what's it all add up to?

[Orange Juiced]

So OJ, what's it all add up to?

 

Well, that's the $64,000 question, isn't it? These two teams are very evenly matched. Obviously, in a short series, it could go either way. One ball bouncing off the chalk or landing just foul can tip the series. Just think back to the ALDS game 4 - Drew's hard liner with the bases loaded is snagged by Loney; but DeJesus' liner is just over Napoli's glove. Summing up the edges:

 

Offense: Slight edge, Boston

Starting Pitching: Slight edge, Detroit

Bullpen: Edge, Boston

Defense: Edge, Boston

Intangibles: Slight edge, Detroit

 

Plus, Boston has the home-field advantage (something I should have included in the "intangibles" department). I'd say that it adds up to a Boston win in 7. However, if the series goes 7, then we're talking about a game 7 matchup of Verlander vs. Lackey. If that happens, how many of us feel comfortable about that? Not me. So it would mean that the Sox' best chance is to win in 6.

 

So I'm going to say, either Boston in 6 or Detroit in 7. And if you put a gun to my head, I'll say Boston in 6. But I am not at all confident in that prediction.

[Bellhorn04]

I'll take Red Sox in 6 as well, and I'm not super confident either. It's rare that I am confident in a sports prediction, unless it's an obvious blowout.

[User Name]

I don't see Detroit's edge in "intangibles" or manager for that matter.

[Orange Juiced]

I don't see Detroit's edge in "intangibles" or manager for that matter.

 

I lumped the manager in with the intangibles. And clearly, since neither of these are measurable, we're simply talking opinion here.

[User Name]

I lumped the manager in with the intangibles. And clearly, since neither of these are measurable, we're simply talking opinion here.

 

I think manager should have its own category. And while it's mainly opinion, there's clearly a negative bias against Farrell in most Red Sox fans' eyes. If you ask most Detroit Tigers fans, they'll tell you that Leyland is a good overall manager, but not a good handler of pitching.

[Orange Juiced]

Maybe. I'll just quote my words in the OP:

 

"One issue to keep in mind is the managing. Jim Leyland has been there, done that, and is one of the most respected managers in the game. John Farrell...well, this is his first time as a manager on this stage. He's been there as a coach, but not a manager. I think, because we see Farrell's in-game decision-making every day, that we worry about the moves he'll make. Well every manager does things that makes their fan base scratch their collective heads. We just don't see it every day. Both managers are very smart. Both will make very good moves, and at least one move that make us go, "Huh?" If I had to give an edge, I'd give it to Leyland, based on his experience and reputation. But I'm comfortable with Farrell. "

[Palodios]

I think manager should have its own category. And while it's mainly opinion, there's clearly a negative bias against Farrell in most Red Sox fans' eyes. If you ask most Detroit Tigers fans, they'll tell you that Leyland is a good overall manager, but not a good handler of pitching.

 

In all fairness, there's a negative bias towards any player on this team who isn't top 5 at their position. As someone who loathed him as a pitching coach, I believe Farrell gets a huge free pass after the turnaround. He has made a few mistakes with the bullpen and lineup, but he has also made some decisions that have worked out very well.

[User Name]

Maybe. I'll just quote my words in the OP:

 

"One issue to keep in mind is the managing. Jim Leyland has been there, done that, and is one of the most respected managers in the game. John Farrell...well, this is his first time as a manager on this stage. He's been there as a coach, but not a manager. I think, because we see Farrell's in-game decision-making every day, that we worry about the moves he'll make. Well every manager does things that makes their fan base scratch their collective heads. We just don't see it every day. Both managers are very smart. Both will make very good moves, and at least one move that make us go, "Huh?" If I had to give an edge, I'd give it to Leyland, based on his experience and reputation. But I'm comfortable with Farrell. "

 

I read the post the first time. But "comfortable with Farrell" doesn't do him justice. I also think you're very much overrating Leyland is what i'm trying to say.

[marklmw]

In all fairness, there's a negative bias towards any player on this team who isn't top 5 at their position. As someone who loathed him as a pitching coach, I believe Farrell gets a huge free pass after the turnaround. He has made a few mistakes with the bullpen and lineup, but he has also made some decisions that have worked out very well.

 

Both Drew and Ellsbury were quoted as saying: 'This is the most fun I have ever had playing baseball' or ' This is the most fun team I have ever been on' something to this effect. You can also see it with many of the other players on this team. When you get into intangibles the edge has to go to Boston for this very reason alone. These Sox players like one another and have each others back.

[marklmw]

Boston is clearly the superior defensive team no question. The team with the best defense usually come out on top in most major sports and this will be no different. Boston in 6

[Bellhorn04]

Boston is clearly the superior defensive team no question. The team with the best defense usually come out on top in most major sports and this will be no different. Boston in 6

 

But in baseball, defence = pitching + fielding, or runs allowed. The Tigers did allow fewer runs than we did this year, but we scored more and had a bigger differential.

[marklmw]

But in baseball, defence = pitching + fielding, or runs allowed. The Tigers did allow fewer runs than we did this year, but we scored more and had a bigger differential.

 

True that ... but I think that we were talking about defense sans pitching.

[marklmw]

True that ... but I think that we were talking about defense sans pitching.

 

Also, it was was thought that playing in Fenway is worth .5 to 1 extra run per game.

[User Name]

But in baseball, defence = pitching + fielding, or runs allowed. The Tigers did allow fewer runs than we did this year, but we scored more and had a bigger differential.

 

Partially helped by playing more than 50 games (almost a third of their schedule) against the putrid White Sox, KC and Minnesota offenses.

[marklmw]

Partially helped by playing more than 50 games (almost a third of their schedule) against the putrid White Sox, KC and Minnesota offenses.

True that!

[Bellhorn04]

I'll take Red Sox in 6 as well, and I'm not super confident either. It's rare that I am confident in a sports prediction, unless it's an obvious blowout.

 

Well after all that, Sox in 6 it was.

[jung]

While some of Farrell's in game, in the moment decisions are questionable, his game preparation is meticulous and one of his strong points. Also he commands respect from his players while not being the cuddly idiot that Leyland has become. The edge by a long margin goes to Farrell. Leyland has grown old in the job and would probably be gone were it not for Tigers ownership and its eccentricities.

[Beaneater]

I read somewhere that the Tigers players were giving each other "goodbye and thanks for a nice season" hugs in the dugout during the 8th inning. If that's true, well, it's just one more intangible that the Sox have. This team could be down 7-0 with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th, with an 0-2 count on John MacDonald and they'd still be thinking, "Alright, just get on base!" Down by a mere three with at least three outs to go? Shoot, that's no time for consolation hugs! That's time for planning your walk-off HR celebration!

[Youk Of The Nation]

Yeah, consoling your teammates in football with 15 seconds left on the clock is a lot different than doing it with six outs to go in baseball. If I was a Tigers fan I would have been pretty irked to see that.

[Orange Juiced]

I read the post the first time. But "comfortable with Farrell" doesn't do him justice. I also think you're very much overrating Leyland is what i'm trying to say.

 

I think both guys made big mistakes in this series, but I would guess that overall, Farrell out-managed Leyland. The single biggest impact move was inserting Bogaerts into the lineup, IMO.

[Palodios]

I read somewhere that the Tigers players were giving each other "goodbye and thanks for a nice season" hugs in the dugout during the 8th inning. If that's true, well, it's just one more intangible that the Sox have. This team could be down 7-0 with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th, with an 0-2 count on John MacDonald and they'd still be thinking, "Alright, just get on base!" Down by a mere three with at least three outs to go? Shoot, that's no time for consolation hugs! That's time for planning your walk-off HR celebration!

 

I posted that in the game thread, although it was when the Red Sox were batting, so most of the Tigers players were on the field. It was an exchange between Scherzer and Verlander if I recall. They simple gave up.