The Texas-Sized Gap May Have Already Been Closed, Several Times!
So ESPN wants to know if the Angels have closed the supposed Texas-sized gap? Well, I have the answer for you: They already did, in 2011. Several times.
The Angels were 6 games back on June 10th, and then were tied for first with the Rangers by July 3rd. The Halos were 7 games back on August 17th, and were one and a half back by September 10th. The team then went into a long overdue slump, after adding 9 games to their record from August 18th and September 21, and lost 6 of their final 7 games, which eliminated them from the playoffs at game #160. The Rangers, after being inconsistent all season and never pulling away, finally got hot the final 3 weeks; at the right time.
The Cardinals were 8 and a half games back of the Wildcard on September 5th. Had the season ended then, ESPN might be talking about Pujols, Berkman, and Holliday being on the decline, and how Wainwright was the missing ingredient. The Cardinals are your 2011 World Champions.
Where a team finishes is not always about how good or bad they are. Many teams have been hot at the right time, and won it all, even when those teams should never have made the playoffs (1988 Dodgers).
That just confirms that baseball is not won on paper; however, with a 53-34 run the Angels had from mid-June through mid-September, and the many chances they had to take over first place, one must wonder how many additions the team really needed. One might also wonder how many wins were added by trading Mathis and letting Pineiro and Rodney walk.
The Rangers always have great offense, but their current lineup is overrated; the Angels have outscored Texas on the road the last 3 years because the Rangers offense is skewed by their home ballpark. According to Baseball-Reference.com, the Angels and Rangers offensive WAR were only off by 2.0, with Texas in the lead. Baseball-Reference.com also listed a 6.7 difference in pitching WAR, with Texas in the lead.
Believe it or not, it was pitching that needed to close the gap more than offense. The Angels just took away the Rangers #1 starter, who had a WAR of 5.0. Subtract that from the Rangers, and add it to the Angels, and we're already talking a close match.
Then, there's the Angels adding the WAR attached to Pujols, Ianetta, and Hawkins. There's also the potential WAR that Pujols can bring. And don't forget that Wells had a WAR of -0.3, and just an average year out of him would make a big difference too. Several Rangers players had what may be their peak years. The Angels have several good young players who have yet to even reach their prime.
All the Rangers have added so far this offseason is Joe Nathan, who doesn't do much to improve things for the Rangers, and Feliz has never started a major league game, same with Darvish.
However, with all this being said about WAR, the fact still remains that the Rangers won the AL West by 10 games because they got red hot in the final three weeks of the season, while the Angels slumped at the wrong time. I'll take the larger sample size and say the actual gap is more like 2 or 3 games.When factoring that in with the major additions the Angels made, and the little moves the Rangers have made, it looks more and more, in my opinion, like the Texas-sized gap may have already been surpassed this offseason.
We'll know for sure in 2012.
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
58 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Texas sucks.
that is all you need to know.
by Balls and Strikes on Jan 8, 2012 5:16 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
No Worries
I figured I wasn’t the first, and probably won’t be the last. I was hoping there were bits and pieces that weren’t mentioned before. Probably one of the most common subjects.
Texas is for bitches
The neighbor is a cranky irish expat. He if wanted no snakes, he shoulda stayed in Ireland.
-Moondoggy
by DAD OF VLAD on Jan 9, 2012 8:55 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
No matter how hard I might try, I just can't hate on Texas.
All my hate, and I mean ALL of it is reserved for Boston.
FUCK Boston!
That is all.
I woke up in a great mood; I don't know what the hell happened.
From the ALDS Game 1 of 2009
found on this thread: LINK

"I have something 95 percent of all those All-Stars only wish they had: a World Series ring. If I had to choose between that and being an All-Star, it would be no contest. I’d grab the gold ring and never look back." -Tim Salmon
yep
texas is for bitches, but boston is for retarded alchoholic racist shitheads
"id take 5th Dimention Wormhole Rivera over Wells any day of the week"
-clover_black
by the king of CERA on Jan 9, 2012 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
That could very easily be reversed
"I have something 95 percent of all those All-Stars only wish they had: a World Series ring. If I had to choose between that and being an All-Star, it would be no contest. I’d grab the gold ring and never look back." -Tim Salmon
by BruinHalo on Jan 9, 2012 3:38 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
As a dude living in Boston, I gladly root for Texas over Boston or New York.....
Anything to keep the imperialists from winning
When I flip a coin I dont say heads or tails, I say Halos or Spurs
by ItCouldHappen on Jan 9, 2012 3:17 PM PST up reply actions
Mr Krol...
You forgot something….
Mathis was traded to Toronto, and Lyle Spencer estimates his WAR @ +10, so we are screwed.
Peanuts...Get your Overpriced Peanuts!
Dunno. They call me Mr Tibbs.
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read" ~Groucho Marx
by George Kaplan on Jan 10, 2012 12:56 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Fired Up
As an Angel fan who expected a 77 win season in 2011 I’m pretty excited about this team.
1. One of the 2 best rotations in baseball (along with the Rays).
2. A solid defensive club: the only potential defensive liabilities will be an elder Torii in RF and “Too Blessed to be Stressed” in LF (as long as Callaspo is at 3B).
3. Addition of a catcher who actually can hit the ball and take a walk.
4. Addition of Pujols and what looks to be a healthy DH in Kendrys Morales.
5. Excellent depth with Izturis in the IF, Trumbo as a 1B/corner OF guy, MIKE TROUT! to go along with normal AAA depth (Moore, Cantu, Jimenez, etc.).
6. Decent bullpen, with minor league talent to trade for another arm if needed in July.
Seriously, if Kendrys is healthy and mashing in ST this is the best team in baseball entering 2012.
by YouthofToday on Jan 10, 2012 12:00 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Im not entirely sure
Morales even appears healthy in the slightest. I’m looking forward to an Abreu/Trumbo platoon.
"DOV all the way
Just compare the signature lines. Phi’s is terrible, just like his skidmark…errr…"mohawk". "
by PhiSlamma on Jan 10, 2012 4:55 AM PST via Android app up reply actions
i'm really interested to see the Iannetta/Mathis comparison play out
2011 road stats:
Catcher A – .197/.250/.307
Catcher B – .172/.321/.266
Not that noticeable of a difference.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
Agree to disagree
getting on base 7.1% more of the time makes a difference over a season
Willits? Check. Reagins? Check. Mathis? Check
I would much rather have a catcher who could get on base
than slug guys home…. but thats just me
When I flip a coin I dont say heads or tails, I say Halos or Spurs
by ItCouldHappen on Jan 12, 2012 10:39 AM PST up reply actions
Huh?
I think I’d rather have a catcher who could slug any day!
If he could do that, the rest would just be a bonus, IMO
Peanuts...Get your Overpriced Peanuts!
by Angel Hawker on Jan 13, 2012 3:27 PM PST up reply actions
Ianetta's OBP even away from Coors is a major upgrade
He’ll probably hit 8th, which means don’t expect huge numbers, which is why he’s a #8 hitter in the first place.
.321 is just fine for a #8 hitter. If it were .400, he’d be hitting behind Pujols. But we have enough right handed power in the middle, and need a lefty.
So in my opinion, Ianetta is fine where he is, and will boost the production from the bottom of the order, and will provide more RBI opportunities for the #9 and leadoff hitters as well.
The question is, though, how much was Ianetta's OBB inflated by batting in front of a pitcher?
I.e. intentional walk to get to the pitcher?
If the Halos don't care about the way they play, then why should I?
It's not as great as you might think.
Batting in the 8 spot, his walk rate is around 15%. In any other spot in the lineup, it’s 12.8%.
Winning doesn't matter. -Lyle
In the inverse of this arguement is that Mathis is better or just as good.
Which….makes you sound dumb.
"The Transplant" (So. Cal boy stuck in NYC)
by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Jan 18, 2012 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
How cool that 6 LSBers responded to the poll
by LanaBanana on Jan 10, 2012 9:49 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
they can read?
Nothing says Sundays like the thump of an Andy Lee punt followed by the frantic backpedaling of a return man.
- jveezy
by DAD OF VLAD on Jan 10, 2012 12:05 PM PST up reply actions
However, with all this being said about WAR, the fact still remains that the Rangers won the AL West by 10 games because they got red hot in the final three weeks of the season, while the Angels slumped at the wrong time.
How does the timing matter, like, at all? By any measure, the Rangers played better than the Angels for the entire season. Anyone who actually watched these two teams could tell that they weren’t in the same class. The Angels were hot during the summer, but they came back down to earth in September. At the end of the day, ten games is a pretty damned decisive margin of victory.
It’s like saying that the 2009 Rangers were secretly just as good as the 2009 Angels, because the Rangers were only four games back at the end of June, but then they “just happened” to slump for an entire month. I guess we didn’t even need to play the 2010 season to know that the Rangers would take over.
by Suboptimal on Jan 10, 2012 11:24 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
The Rangers Did Not Play Better Than The Angels The Entire Season
Outside of that 12 game winning streak in July, the Rangers struggled to play much better than a .500 team.
The 2010 Rangers were similar in that an 11 game winning streak in June was the only reason they were even a 90 win team. Luckily for them, no one else in the division challenged them down the stretch.
Their offense was inconsistent, especially on the road; note the fact that the Angels scored more runs the the Rangers on the road. Kinsler, Beltre, Cruz, and even Hamilton’s OBP’s also drop off considerably on the road.
Texas probably has their most overrated of all their lineups since that ballpark opened.
The Rangers got hot at the right time, the Angels didn’t.
Correction:
Outside of that 12 game winning streak in July, the Rangers struggled to play much better than a .500 team until August.
Thats the point though, both teams played 162 games. Texas won more of them.
by Balls and Strikes on Jan 10, 2012 12:12 PM PST up reply actions
Of Course They Did
But with my original reply, I was arguing against one particular point, that the Rangers played better the entire season. I totally disagree and can back that up.
You didn't really back it up, though.
Your correction post stated that the Rangers not only had a 12-game winning streak, but also played better than .500 ball throughout August and September.
I know I’m off by a few days, but the Angels only shared or owned 1st place for about 4 days last season. The Rangers were a better team for 98% of the season.
Winning doesn't matter. -Lyle
That's because they had a 12 game winning streak in July
and because they got red hot in the final 3 weeks.
Overall wins does not always tell you how good a team really is.
The Rangers were the better team.
But how much better?
That’s where my post came in.
Are the additions enough? Are they more than enough?
Is the gap really 10 games?
what did expected pythagorean expectation say when they were tied?
without looking it up, it probably said that the Rangers were the better team, and they ended up proving that over September.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
Texas's win percentage besides the twelve-game winning streak in July
Would have been 0.560. That isn’t quite struggling to play better than a .500 team. It’s still better than how the Angels turned out, at 0.530. The same holds true in 2010. They would have still won the division by a fair amount even if they had gone 5-6 during that eleven game stretch, instead of 11-0.
You’re just passing gas, dude. Since the end of 2009, the Angels have won just four more games than a .500 team would have. Four. The Rangers have won 24. You won’t give the Rangers any credit for “getting hot,” and you definitely won’t fault the Angels for “not getting hot.” Well, good teams get hot more often than bad teams. There’s a reason why the Rangers have had two 10+ game winning streaks in the last two seasons, and the Angels have not: they have been a better baseball team.
Get over it. The Rangers blew Game 6, and we have Pujols now. What’s the point crying over last year?
by Suboptimal on Jan 10, 2012 12:36 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Through July they were barely over .500 outside of that 12 game winning streak
If you go by overall wins you can say they played better all season, but there were several times where the Rangers were just as inconsistent, if not more.
The Rangers didn’t get hot very much, and I’ve seen plenty of bad teams have long winning streaks in the 22 years I’ve been watching this game.
But whether or not the Rangers played better isn’t really the issue. The issue is how much better?
Is what Dipito added enough to close that gap, or is it more?
I’m sure there’s a math wiz out there figuring out just how many wins both teams are projected to win.
"Outside of that winning streak"
Outside of any team’s winning streaks they arent very good.
by Balls and Strikes on Jan 11, 2012 2:08 PM PST up reply actions
Injuries
The Rangers only got 120ish games from Hamilton, Cruz and Beltre. Hamilton was clearly playing hurt at the end of the season.
Outside of Kendrys — which we shouldn’t have expected anything form last year — the Angels were remarkably healthy.
by YouthofToday on Jan 11, 2012 8:13 PM PST up reply actions
you realize you can also say something as to the effect of
“Their (Angels’) pitching was inconsistent, especially on the road; note the fact that the Rangers gave up fewer runs than the Angels on the road. Santana, Haren, and even Weaver’s ERA’s also blow up considerably on the road.”
I agree with Suboptimal though…the timing of a team’s win is silly. It’s like saying that your rushing defense held the other team’s running game to only 20 yards on 20 carries if you take away those 2 80+ yard TD runs.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
The Rangers Did Not Play Better Than The Angels The Entire Season
Outside of that 12 game winning streak in July, the Rangers struggled to play much better than a .500 team.
The 2010 Rangers were similar in that an 11 game winning streak in June was the only reason they were even a 90 win team. Luckily for them, no one else in the division challenged them down the stretch.
Their offense was inconsistent, especially on the road; note the fact that the Angels scored more runs the the Rangers on the road. Kinsler, Beltre, Cruz, and even Hamilton’s OBP’s also drop off considerably on the road.
Texas probably has their most overrated of all their lineups since that ballpark opened.
The Rangers got hot at the right time, the Angels didn’t.
But flip that for a minute- the angels got hot when they did and the rangers werent hot
They still came back to win more games than the angels. It doesnt matter if they were won in April or September, they count the same.
Do the angels have the potential to beat texas- absolutely.
But the angels were not the better team last year.
Over the last few months we have upgraded catcher with iannetta, bullpen with hawkins, rotation with wilson and williams, and 1B with Pujols. We have gotten rid of frodney, mathis, wood, piniero and chatwood- all of whom were negative contributors to 2011. Each of those is significant because of what it does to other spots.
No more mathis is an instant improvement, Hawkins over frodney helps, Pujols is the best in the game and means trumbo can DH and abreu can pinch hit (with even more improvement with morales if he comes back), etc…
This team is dramatically better than it was in 2011
by Balls and Strikes on Jan 10, 2012 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
I agree, the Rangers were the better team
But my whole question is: How much better were the Rangers?
Then I go from there and ask: How much did we really need to add?
Is it enough? Is it more than we needed?
The more the better.
And I agree, this team is dramatically better.
2012 will do the talking.
by RyÅn Krol on Jan 10, 2012 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Third order winning percentage 2011
From BP third order winning percentage is designed to be luck nuetral. In 2011 Los Angles w3 was .514 83.3 wins. Texas was .642 104.0 wins. ’Nuff said.
That's A Projection Based On Mathematics
The game that is played on the field is the accurate source.
Predictions all around had the Rangers winning the AL West in 2011 with only 87-91 wins, with the Angels finishing second with about 84-87 wins.
The only 2 times the Rangers played like a 104 win team was for a 2 week period in mid-July, and the final 3 weeks of the season.
That’s 5 weeks of playing like a 104 win team, and even playing like a playoff team at all, which means nearly 5 months of playing barely better than .500 baseball.
Meanwhile, the Angels were steadily winning series after series after series, en route to a 53-34 run from June 13 – September 21. Take a look at both teams’ schedules and results and you’ll see the Halos were more consistent than the Rangers during that stretch.
It was actually going 10-20 from mid-May through Mid-June that killed the Angels’ season.
The Angels played true to their ability; the Rangers overachieved.
The question is just how much does adding Pujols, Wilson, Ianetta, Hawkins, Cantu, and whichever additional bullpen arm we get, and subtracting Pineiro, Rodney, and Mathis do to close the gap between the Angels and Rangers, and does it actually surpass that gap?
Keep in mind the Angels hot more homeruns and scored more runs than the Rangers did on the road in 2011.
Always remember the intangibles. Baseball is not won on paper.
you can't say
“the game that is played on the field is the accurate source” and then later say that a team overachieved. If the field is all that matters, then they achieved a record that was indicative of their performance.
Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball
Good point
I’ve always preferred projections based on bullshit to projections based on something so flimsy and imprecise as mathematics.
by Suboptimal on Jan 18, 2012 2:29 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
"I seen it with mah own eyes!"
"If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base." ~Dave Barry
You can't decry mathematics when it suits you, yet use WAR in your post.
Winning doesn't matter. -Lyle

by 



























