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

Um.... http://www.talksox.com/forum/threads/16696-Sizing-up-the-ALCS-starting-pitching

Well, I *want* them to bunt on Cabrera - even if he gets them, it'll make a hobbling player do things he doesn't want to do, and that could aggravate his injury. Moreover, I want them constantly running. Detroit's starters aren't good at holding runners, and Avila's terrible at throwing them out. That combined with the fact that the Sox already steal at the highest success rate in MLB....well, it's not a stretch to suggest that the running game could be huge here.

The Tigers and Red Sox both possess outstanding offenses. Boston ranked #1 in all of baseball in the most important statistical category of all: runs scored - and Detroit was #2. The gap between them was very large, however. Boston scored 853 runs, while Detroit plated 796 - a difference of 57 runs. The gap between #1 (Bos) and #2 (Det) was bigger than the gap between #2 (Det) and #6 (Cle). That shows you just how good the Red Sox' offense was. Here are some relevant categories and where each team ranked: Runs - Bos: #1 (853) - Det: #2 (796) Avg - Bos: #2 (.277) - Det: #1 (.283) OBP - Bos: #1 (.349) - Det: #2 (.346) SLG - Bos: #1 (.446) - Det: #2 (.434) OPS - Bos: #1 (.795) - Det: #2 (.780) Total Bases - Bos: #1 (2521) - Det: #2 (2491) So the Red Sox and the Tigers are the top two offenses in all of baseball, with the Sox' offense being better in nearly every way. The difference is more pronounced when you factor in baserunning. The Red Sox were 4th in baseball with 123 stolen bases, while Detroit finished dead last with just 35. Moreover, the Sox were successful an MLB-leading 87% of the time, while Detroit was 28th at just 64%. Beyond just stolen bases, the Red Sox took 173 extra bases this year, at a rate of 39%, while Detroit took 166 extra bases, at a rate of 33%. The bottom line is that the Red Sox were far more productive on the basepaths than the Tigers were this year. That's an extra weapon at Boston's disposal. One area that the Red Sox excel in, which might be a big advantage in this series, is the number of pitches they see. As a team, the Red Sox see an average of 4.01 pitches per plate appearance, while Detroit sees 3.76. If we assume 100 as a rough number of pitches to get a starting pitcher out of a game, the Red Sox need just 25 plate appearances to get there, while Detroit needs nearly 27. Those two numbers may not seem like a big difference, but that could be 2/3 of an inning that the Detroit bullpen needs to get each game more than Boston needs out of theirs. Each team's lineups look pretty similar, in that each of them has a roster of quality hitters through and through. If Peralta plays SS, then here's a likely Detroit lineup: CF Jackson - 103 ops+ RF Hunter - 114 ops+ 3b Cabrera - 187 ops+ 1b Fielder - 120 ops+ DH Martinez - 111 ops+ SS Peralta - 119 ops+ C Avila - 87 ops+ 2b Infante - 113 ops+ LF Dirks - 86 ops+ So 7 of the 9 starters will have an ops+ of 103 or better. There's quality all up and down this lineup. And though both Dirks and Avila have sub-90 ops+ numbers, each has enough pop in his bat to surprise you with a homer. Meanwhile, here's the likely Boston lineup: CF Ellsbury - 114 ops+ RF Victorino - 119 ops+ 2b Pedroia - 116 ops+ DH Ortiz - 160 ops+ LF Nava - 128 ops+ 1b Napoli - 129 ops+ C Saltalamacchia - 118 ops+ SS Drew - 111 ops+ 3b Middlebrooks - 88 ops+ So 8 of the 9 Red Sox' hitters have an ops+ number of 111 or better, and Middlebrooks, the low man in the lineup, managed to hit 17 homers in just 348 at-bats, so he is dangerous. Off the bench, the Tigers do not nearly have the depth the Red Sox have. They only have one reserve with an ops+ over 95, and that's Tuiasosopo, at 106. Meanwhile, the Red Sox can come at you in waves. They can play lefty-righty matchups, and bring Carp (140 ops+), Gomes (111 ops+), Bogaerts (terrific power, drew two huge walks in game 4 of the ALDS), and even Quinten Berry, who doesn't really hit but who is tremendous on the basepaths. One area that the Sox will have a big advantage in is that Detroit has nothing but right-handed starters. As a team, the Sox had a .795 ops total, but against righties, that number jumps up to .818, a full 30 points better than the #2 team (Det). This will be an intriguing series, because we have the two best offenses in baseball, going up against two of the best rotations in baseball, with bullpens that have significant holes should the rotations falter. The offensive advantage, for numerous reasons here, goes to Boston. EDGE: BOSTON

No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm definitely not going to do the position-by-position deal, because that's completely irrelevant. But it *is* relevant to talk about the different areas: starting pitching, bullpen, offense, defense. It doesn't matter where the offense comes from (i.e., whether you get 20 homers from your 1b or LF), but it does matter how good your offense is.

As good as the Tigers' rotation is, their bullpen leaves a lot to be desired. They posted the 7th worst bullpen era in all of baseball this year, at 4.01. They don't have a lot of guys that scare you. Their closer is Joaquin Benoit, who is pretty good. 2.01 era, 24 sv, 1.03 whip, 9.8 k/9. After that, they have power arms with strikeout ability, but their real-life production just wasn't that great. Here are their main bullpen arms: Smyly: 2.37 era, 1.04 whip, 9.6 k/9 Alburquerque: 4.59 era, 1.49 whip, 12.9 k/9 Coke: 5.40 era, 1.67 whip, 7.0 k/9 Putkonen: 3.03 era, 1.32 whip, 8.5 k/9 Alvarez: 5.82 era, 1.50 whip, 7.2 k/9 Smyly, Coke, and Alvarez are lefties, and Coke has had some success against the Red Sox before. But on the whole, if you can get past their starters, you have a chance to do some real damage against this group. The difficulty, of course, is getting past their outstanding starters. Just as the Red Sox' rotation is very good but a slight tick below Detroit's, their bullpen isn't great but a slight tick better than Detroit's. The Sox' bullpen posted the 10th worst era in baseball, at 3.70. They are led by one of the most dominating closers in recent years in Koji Uehara. All he did this year was put up a ridiculous line of 1.09 era, 0.56 whip, and 12.2 k/9. He had a string of 12 straight perfect innings, in the midst of an incredible run of 30.1 innings without giving up a single run. Simply put, when the ball has been in Koji's hands, the other team not only doesn't score, they almost never get guys on base. That's an awesome weapon to have at the end of games. Setting him up are two guys that have had terrific seasons: Junichi Tazawa and Craig Breslow. Tazawa faded a little late in the season, but had a fine year, putting up a line of 3.16 era, 1.20 whip, and 9.5 k/9. Breslow was fantastic, with a 1.81 era and 1.12 whip. And he may have saved his best for the end of the year. His performance in game 4 of the ALDS was phenomenal against Tampa. Over his last 28 regular season games, covering 25.2 ip, he allowed just 12 hits and just one run. So late in the game, the Red Sox seem to be in good shape. They're in less good shape getting there, if the starters can't go at least six innings. The group consisting of Workman, Morales, Thornton, Dempster, and Doubront does not inspire a lot of confidence, so, just like with the Tigers, if teams can get the Sox' starter out relatively early, they can make hay against this weak part of the Red Sox' bullpen. Fortunately for Boston, it's not that easy getting to the starters. In the final analysis, the Red Sox have the advantage in the bullpen, not just because they have the best closer in the league, but because their back 1-2-3 is better than Detroit's. EDGE: BOSTON

The Tigers had the majors' fourth-best era among starters for 2013. They boast four terrific starting pitchers, and their fifth, Rick Porcello, will be coming out of the bullpen. Their best starter this year was Max Scherzer, the likely AL Cy Young award winner. He was 21-3 with a 2.90 era, 0.97 whip, and 10.1 k/9. In other words, he's tremendous. Their second best starter this year was Anibal Sanchez, who was only the league's era champion, at 2.57, and he also struck out 10.0 batters per 9 innings. Their third best starter was Justin Verlander, who is only a 2-time Cy Young award winner. He had a "down" year, but still put up an impressive line of 3.46 era and 8.9 k/9. And last night he reminded us all what kind of weapon he is, dominating the A's with 8 innings of 2-hit, 10-k, shutout baseball in the deciding game 5. And to round out their rotation is Doug Fister, who will only see one start in the series, but who still had a terrific season, posting a 14-9 record with a 3.67 era. This is a very tough group that brings experience and a wealth of talent to the table. The Red Sox, meanwhile, also have a very solid starting rotation. Jon Lester rebounded from a disappointing 2012 season to post a 15-8, 3.75 line. He pitched very well in game 1 of the ALDS against Tampa, and he also out-dueled Scherzer 2-1 during the regular season. Lester comes into the game with a sterling lifetime postseason pitching line of a 2.54 era, 1.07 whip, and 8.3 k/9. Over his last 11 games (including the ALDS), he put up a line of 77.2 ip, 63 h, 19 er, 23 bb, 59 k, 2.20 era, 1.11 whip, and 6.8 k/9. After Lester on the depth chart is Clay Buchholz, who dealt with injuries this year but who put up incredible numbers: 12-1, 1.74 era, 1.03 whip, and 8.0 k/9. If he had stayed healthy he would very much have been in the mix for the Cy Young award. After him come two veterans with postseason experience: John Lackey (3.52 era) and Jake Peavy (4.04 era with Boston). Lackey has won an AL era title and was the winning pitcher for the Angels in game 7 of the 2002 World Series, so he is not afraid to take the ball in a big spot. The Red Sox' rotation is outstanding, one of the best 1-4 groups in all of baseball. Unfortunately, the group they're matched up against is THE best 1-4 in baseball. The advantage here goes to Detroit, though it wouldn't surprise me at all if Boston's starters did very well. SLIGHT EDGE: DETROIT

Well my WS teams are still alive, though obviously I hope at least one in particular is gone by this time next week.

Yeah, I'll happily take it. It was a sweet win for sure. LOVED having a Longoria K be the last out of the series. You know, we sit here and worry about either Oakland or Detroit. But the Red Sox are a team that other teams should be worried about.

Can't tell you how thrilled I am to be wrong about that!!!!!!! What a great performance last night by so many guys. Love having Longoria be the last out on a Koji-san K.

Well, last night they got that one game. And I hope you're right that they won't win more than one there. I am very nervous about a potential game 5, even at home and with Lester going. I don't know that he can (or will) duplicate his tremendous game 1 effort. I think he'd pitch pretty well, but that might be a 7 ip, 3 r kind of game. And I think odds are good that Moore or Price would do better than that this time around. So I want it over TONIGHT. I want Peavy to go 7 ip, 5 h, 2 r, 2 bb, 7 k, and I want the Sox to light up Hellickson, Archer, and Moore (who they'll likely see). I want the Sox to put up 5 runs in the first 3 innings and win going away....no stress.

And a better #1. The Cards have some excellent pitching, but NOBODY is better than Kershaw.

They can bring in JBJ after that particular game is over, but then Ells or Victorino would have to miss the entire next series. Having JBJ on the roster allows you to replace either of those guys right then and there, and you don't lose them for the next series. Oh well, Sox win game 2, and I hope this conversation is completely moot.

Well, both Ellsbury and Victorino have been hobbled down the stretch. It's not remotely inconceivable that either of them (or both) could re-aggrivate those injuries. Then JBJ would come in real handy. Not to mention he provides excellent late-inning base-running and defense if you wanted that. We all hope Doubront doesn't see the mound, because that would mean the Sox are getting blown out.

Ok I guess. I wanted JBJ on the roster instead of Doubront. Oh well.

Well, that didn't take long for me to be wrong.....

I love this team, but I'll be the pessimist for the group. AL - Rays over Guardians - Rays over Red Sox in 5 (Price pitching the clincher) - Tigers over A's in 4 - Tigers over Rays in ALCS in 6 NL - Reds over Pirates - Cardinals over Reds in 4 - Dodgers over Braves in 4 - Cardinals over Dodgers in 7 - Cardinals over Tigers in 7 (no idea why....the Cards just seem to be able to get it done)

And you think that accounts for these differences: TOTAL MLB HR 2000: 5693 2013: 4660 DIFF: 1033 (34.4 per team) MLB OPS 2000: .782 2013: .714 DIFF: .068 Total MLB Runs Scored 2000: 24,971 2013: 20,248 DIFF: 4,723 (157.4 per team)

I'm curious as to what you guys' theory is of why home runs are down dramatically then.

I ask this question, offering the following as evidence. Look at the annual home run leader board. 1996 - # of players with 20+ hr: 83 - # of players with 30+ hr: 43 - # of players with 40+ hr: 17 - # of players with 50+ hr: 2 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4962 1997 - # of players with 20+ hr: 80 - # of players with 30+ hr: 31 - # of players with 40+ hr: 12 - # of players with 50+ hr: 2 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4640 1998 - # of players with 20+ hr: 85 - # of players with 30+ hr: 33 - # of players with 40+ hr: 13 - # of players with 50+ hr: 4 - # of players with 60+ hr: 2 (McGwire had 70) - # of HR hit in MLB: 5064 1999 - # of players with 20+ hr: 103 - # of players with 30+ hr: 46 - # of players with 40+ hr: 13 - # of players with 50+ hr: 2 - # of players with 60+ hr: 2 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5528 2000 - # of players with 20+ hr: 102 - # of players with 30+ hr: 47 - # of players with 40+ hr: 16 - # of players with 50+ hr: 1 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5693 2001 - # of players with 20+ hr: 90 - # of players with 30+ hr: 41 - # of players with 40+ hr: 12 - # of players with 50+ hr: 4 - # of players with 60+ hr: 2 (Bonds had 73) - # of HR hit in MLB: 5458 2002 - # of players with 20+ hr: 81 - # of players with 30+ hr: 28 - # of players with 40+ hr: 8 - # of players with 50+ hr: 2 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5059 2003 - # of players with 20+ hr: 86 - # of players with 30+ hr: 30 - # of players with 40+ hr: 10 - # of players with 50+ hr: 0 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5207 2004 - # of players with 20+ hr: 93 - # of players with 30+ hr: 37 - # of players with 40+ hr: 9 - # of players with 50+ hr: 0 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5451 2005 - # of players with 20+ hr: 78 - # of players with 30+ hr: 27 - # of players with 40+ hr: 9 - # of players with 50+ hr: 1 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5017 2006 - # of players with 20+ hr: 91 - # of players with 30+ hr: 34 - # of players with 40+ hr: 11 - # of players with 50+ hr: 2 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5386 2007 - # of players with 20+ hr: 86 - # of players with 30+ hr: 26 - # of players with 40+ hr: 5 - # of players with 50+ hr: 2 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4957 2008 - # of players with 20+ hr: 92 - # of players with 30+ hr: 28 - # of players with 40+ hr: 2 - # of players with 50+ hr: 0 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4878 2009 - # of players with 20+ hr: 87 - # of players with 30+ hr: 30 - # of players with 40+ hr: 5 - # of players with 50+ hr: 0 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 5042 2010 - # of players with 20+ hr: 77 - # of players with 30+ hr: 18 - # of players with 40+ hr: 2 - # of players with 50+ hr: 1 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4613 2011 - # of players with 20+ hr: 68 - # of players with 30+ hr: 24 - # of players with 40+ hr: 2 - # of players with 50+ hr: 0 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4552 2012 - # of players with 20+ hr: 79 - # of players with 30+ hr: 27 - # of players with 40+ hr: 6 - # of players with 50+ hr: 0 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4934 2013 - # of players with 20+ hr: 70 - # of players with 30+ hr: 14 - # of players with 40+ hr: 2 - # of players with 50+ hr: 1 - # of players with 60+ hr: 0 - # of HR hit in MLB: 4660 The curve downward isn't perfectly smooth, of course, but the trend is obvious. Let me just shrink this down and compare 1999 with 2013: Category: 1999 - 2013 - # of players with 20+ hr: 103 - 70 (decrease of 32.0%) - # of players with 30+ hr: 46 - 14 (decrease of 69.6%) - # of players with 40+ hr: 13 - 2 (decrease of 84.6%) - # of players with 50+ hr: 2 - 1 (decrease of 50.0%) - # of players with 60+ hr: 2 - 0 (decrease of 100.0%) - # of HR hit in MLB: 5528 - 4660 (decrease of 15.7%) So it is safe to say that the "steroid era" is officially over? (knowing that some guys will still take PEDs, no matter what)

If the Sox understand this, don't you think other teams also understand this? And if they do, why would they give the Sox a "huge haul" for a guy with such red flags?

Except that this isn't quite true. If you put the ball in play, yes, many of those will turn out to be just outs, just like strikeouts. And some will be *worse* than strikeouts - because it could be a double play that you hit into. But many outs will be better than strikeouts. Grounders that advance runners, sacrifices, sac flies, fly outs that get a runner from 2nd to 3rd, etc. On the whole, it's much better to put balls in play than it is to strike out. So it is definitely preferable to have guys make outs by putting the ball into play, because putting the ball into play can still accomplish other productive things in the process.

Right. But why trade a promising young lefty who has improved considerably from last year? He's exactly the kind of guy you want to keep. Hey, it's a nice problem to have - too many quality starting pitchers...

Middlebrooks has terrific power. Here are his career per-162 game stats (thanks, b-ref): 162 g, 588 ab, 73 r, 151 h, 31 2b, 0 3b, 31 hr, 100 rbi, .257/.298/.469/.767, 105 ops+ That's absolutely a guy that you can put at the bottom of the order, live with the low OBP because you get a lot of punch. And he costs peanuts. Not like you're spending $12 million for that guy. He's been worth 1.5 WAR over that time frame. Each WAR is worth about $5 million, so that means that, for essentially one full season of production, he's been worth about $7.5 million. He makes league minimum. That's terrific value, and it enables you to spend money elsewhere. Plus, there's always the chance he improves his OBP. If he got his OBP up to .325 or .340, he'd be worth a TON with that power.

This thread is golden.