Wednesday, May 05, 2004 |
Time To Get Defensive, Mike
Team | Overall Rank | Def. Eff. |
---|---|---|
OAK | 18th | .6865 |
TEX | 19th | .6865 |
SEA | 22nd | .6785 |
ANA | 29th | .6458 |
... the surprise is just how bad the Angels have become, and how much better the Rangers have become. Now, maybe some of this can be attributed to the Angels having two guys in the field who don't know their home park that well, as well as having their best centerfielder marooned at first. But as we saw with the 2002 ALDS, defense counts, and the Angels made their opportunities on the Yankees' weak infield defense. Meantime, the Rangers best friend hasn't been chemistry but improved defense (subscription required):
So why are the Rangers winning? Defense has been a huge part of the equation, especially outfield defense. The Rangers were last in the AL in Defensive Efficiency in '03, 12th in '02. They're seventh so far this year, a gain I would attribute to having a real center fielder. I've argued in the last that much of the team's perceived problems in developing pitching has been tied to their park and their poor flycatchers. With Laynce Nix and Ramon Nivar getting the bulk of playing time so far this year, the Rangers are allowing a much lower rate of doubles and triples than they did the past two years. That's the biggest reason why they're second in the AL in ERA and runs allowed.And if the Angels are losing -- or struggling making outs against weak teams like the Tigers -- the defense has a lot to do with it as well. Vlad's bobble of a routine flyball the other night, Kennedy's recent defensive miscues, and Eckstein's hide-and-seek game with the DL (not to mention his adequate-but-never-stellar play at short) all contribute to the team's problems.
The Angels led the majors in defensive efficiency in 2002; they won't return to the postseason by giving the other guys extra outs, especially not against good teams.
Newer› ‹Older
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.