PDA

View Full Version : Sox offense by the numbers


moochpuppy
04-22-2002, 10:45 AM
Category, amount and ML ranking:

Runs: 124 (1st)
Avg: .316 (1st)
Slg: .511 (1st)
Obp: .370 (2nd)
Ops: .881 (1st)
Hits: 194 (2nd)
BB: 54 (22nd)
K's: 85 (28th) only Boston has less strikeouts
Hr: 23 (8th)
RBI: 120 (1st)
SB: 22 (1st)
TB: 314 (3rd)

Impressive.

MattSharp
04-22-2002, 10:49 AM
Yes it's impressive, but I don't think anyone every questioned their offense.

No doubt that Ray and Kenny are having better years than expected and Frank isn't living up to potential.

But Mags and Konerko are having seasons they should have....

moochpuppy
04-22-2002, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by MattSharp
Yes it's impressive, but I don't think anyone every questioned their offense.

No doubt that Ray and Kenny are having better years than expected and Frank isn't living up to potential.

But Mags and Konerko are having seasons they should have....

Their are two categories that I think really stand out and those are SB's and K's. There is no way with the power hitters in this lineup that anyone would have thought to this point the Sox would have only struck out 85 times in 614 AB's. Also the SB's has been something missing from this team for quite a while and the main reason the Sox are avering nearly 7 runs a game.

MattSharp
04-22-2002, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by moochpuppy


Their are two categories that I think really stand out and those are SB's and K's. There is no way with the power hitters in this lineup that anyone would have thought to this point the Sox would have only struck out 85 times in 614 AB's. Also the SB's has been something missing from this team for quite a while and the main reason the Sox are avering nearly 7 runs a game.

I agree. I said Ray and Lofton were surprises. I totally agree with you, but I think the Sox should have been able to score 7 runs a game anyway.

One reason the Sox K's are done is cause Ray isn't batting leadoff and I think he is seeing better pitches.

Don't get me wrong, I said the numbers were impressive, but this is the most underrated offense in baseball. I already knew they were capable of scoring 7 runs a game....

Pete Ward
04-22-2002, 11:05 AM
I guess we dont want to talk about their pitching numbers? How are we doing there? :?:

Soxboyrob
04-22-2002, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by Pete Ward
I guess we dont want to talk about their pitching numbers? How are we doing there? :?:

Actually, 6th best in the AL. Not bad.

MattSharp
04-22-2002, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Soxboyrob


Actually, 6th best in the AL. Not bad.


Yea and like 14th overall or something. The NL has some real good pitching. The Giants have like a 2.57 team ERA, phemomenal.

Oh PS....This is my 500th post :) :)

doublem23
04-22-2002, 11:34 AM
They're batting .316 AS A TEAM? Holy ****!

MattSharp
04-22-2002, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by doublem23
They're batting .316 AS A TEAM? Holy ****!

Hell yea! I mean except for Frank and Jose, who in the lineup isn't hitting? And don't say the The Choice cause anything above his weight is considered good......

Iwritecode
04-22-2002, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by moochpuppy
Category, amount and ML ranking:

Runs: 124 (1st)
Avg: .316 (1st)
Slg: .511 (1st)
Obp: .370 (2nd)
Ops: .881 (1st)
Hits: 194 (2nd)
BB: 54 (22nd)
K's: 85 (28th) only Boston has less strikeouts
Hr: 23 (8th)
RBI: 120 (1st)
SB: 22 (1st)
TB: 314 (3rd)

Impressive.

One thing that I've noticed is that the Sox are leading in almost every category except HRs. It's kinda wierd seeing a high-powered offense that doesn't rely on the long ball. It's funny that the Tribe is supposed to be the team focused on "small-ball" this year, yet the Sox seem to be doing a much better job of it.

One more thing I don't quite understand. How come the runs and rbis don't match? Isn't every run that crosses the plate batted in by someone? Unless maybe it's a passed ball or wild pitch and a guys scores from third?

ode to veeck
04-22-2002, 11:50 AM
I LIKE the fact that they're not in the HR numbers, i.e., they're focusing on getting hits and base runners. Even Royce has managed a tough walk or three. And how about smarts on the basepaths with Lofton leading by example (compared to all the blunders we we're seeing last year)--I know its early, but a tough batting, tough hitting, smart baserunning team will outperform the HR hitting squad every time, especially against better pitching--key when playoffs become part of the picture

doublem23
04-22-2002, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by ode to veeck
I LIKE the fact that they're not in the HR numbers, i.e., they're focusing on getting hits and base runners. Even Royce has managed a tough walk or three. And how about smarts on the basepaths with Lofton leading by example (compared to all the blunders we we're seeing last year)--I know its early, but a tough batting, tough hitting, smart baserunning team will outperform the HR hitting squad every time, especially against better pitching--key when playoffs become part of the picture

Yeah, that was the downfall of the team last year... They'd all swing for the fences, and when someone did actually connect, there'd be no one on base and they'd only be losing by 4 or 5 runs...

doublem23
04-22-2002, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by Pete Ward
I guess we dont want to talk about their pitching numbers? How are we doing there? :?:

AL Team Pitching Stats (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/statistics?stat=teampit&league=al&season=2)

as of Sunday, April 21st...

ERA: 4.48 (5th best in AL)
H: 150 (2nd)
R: 87 (5th)
ER: 79 (3rd)
BB: 69 (10th :angry: )
K: 88 (13th)
2B: 35 (T-7th)
3B: 3 (T-3rd)
HR: 14 (T-2nd :D: )
WHIP: 1.380 (5th)
SB: 8 (3rd)
BA: .256 (3rd)
OBP: .334 (7th)
SLG: .397 (4th)
OPS: .731 (5th)

They're not as bad as I thought. :)

moochpuppy
04-22-2002, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode



One more thing I don't quite understand. How come the runs and rbis don't match? Isn't every run that crosses the plate batted in by someone? Unless maybe it's a passed ball or wild pitch and a guys scores from third?

That and runs scored on fielding errors I don't believe count as rbi's.

doublem23
04-22-2002, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by moochpuppy


That and runs scored on fielding errors I don't believe count as rbi's.

Right... Ray only got 2 rbis yesterday because they ruled one run scored on Higgy's E... and other things... I think...

Paulwny
04-22-2002, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode

One more thing I don't quite understand. How come the runs and rbis don't match? Isn't every run that crosses the plate batted in by someone? Unless maybe it's a passed ball or wild pitch and a guys scores from third?


There is no rbi if a batter hits into a dp even if a run scores.

Paulwny
04-22-2002, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by moochpuppy


That and runs scored on fielding errors I don't believe count as rbi's.

If a runner is on3rd with less then 2 out the batter is credited with a rbi even if there's an error. They assume the run would have scored anyway. If 2 out then no rbi since the error would have been the 3rd out.
Ray was credited with 2rbi's because the runner would have stopped at 3rd. Ray was credited with a single and 2rbi's.

MattSharp
04-22-2002, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by doublem23


AL Team Pitching Stats (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/statistics?stat=teampit&league=al&season=2)

....

They're not as bad as I thought. :)

Yea so they are like in the Top 5 in the AL. But I mean think about it.....

The Yankees and Oakland are ahead of them, no surprise there. Boston is a bit of a surprise but they still ahve Pedro and then theres Seattle who we also expcted to ahve better pitching. Other than that the Sox are right where they should be. Minnesota is the only team in the AL, IMO, that would even have ashot at being ahread of the Sox.

I think we are where we should be, but nothing spectacular. YEa it could be worse but its nothing to get too excited about.....

hold2dibber
04-22-2002, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by MattSharp


Yea so they are like in the Top 5 in the AL. But I mean think about it.....

The Yankees and Oakland are ahead of them, no surprise there. Boston is a bit of a surprise but they still ahve Pedro and then theres Seattle who we also expcted to ahve better pitching. Other than that the Sox are right where they should be. Minnesota is the only team in the AL, IMO, that would even have ashot at being ahread of the Sox.

I think we are where we should be, but nothing spectacular. YEa it could be worse but its nothing to get too excited about.....

I disagree. They've pitched better than my expectations. If they end up with about the same comparative pitching numbers, with three very young and green guys in the rotation and a mess of guys coming off of arm surgery, we'll be in great shape. After a disasterous first week, the bullpen has been pretty darn good, especially Foulke, Glover, Porzio and Marte of late. Even Howry seems to have more life on his pitches lately. Garland, Wright and Rauch have been up and down - we need some consistency from them. And Buehrle and Ritchie have been lights out.

But there are other teams that appear to me to have pitching staffs that will fare better than they have so far, including Anaheim, Cleveland, and Toronto. Then again, if Parque, Biddle and Wunsch can contribute this year, and two of the three young starters in the rotation are at least decent, we'll be living large.

Zednem700
04-22-2002, 01:56 PM
Its nice to see the team hitting so well, but the team can't hit over .300 all season long, and that makes the poor showing in terms of walks a bit unsettling. Frank, Kenny, and Ray are responsible for 30 of the team's 54 walks. the other players need to start taking some more walks, because eventually the hits won't all manage to drop in. Walks are extremely important to a team's offense, and if the Sox don't start improving in that area the offense will drop.

hold2dibber
04-22-2002, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by Zednem700
Its nice to see the team hitting so well, but the team can't hit over .300 all season long, and that makes the poor showing in terms of walks a bit unsettling. Frank, Kenny, and Ray are responsible for 30 of the team's 54 walks. the other players need to start taking some more walks, because eventually the hits won't all manage to drop in. Walks are extremely important to a team's offense, and if the Sox don't start improving in that area the offense will drop.

I agree, but I think there is reason to believe they'll improve. In particular, I believe that Maggs, Konerko and M. Johnson all have, historically, been much better at taking walks than they've showed thus far. So we should get better in that department.

On the other hand, what do you think of the idea that this team will draw less walks simply because there are too many good bats in the lineup -- in other words, pitchers can't really work around anybody in the lineup, because of all the RBI machines lined up to drive home stray baserunners?

Zednem700
04-22-2002, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber



On the other hand, what do you think of the idea that this team will draw less walks simply because there are too many good bats in the lineup -- in other words, pitchers can't really work around anybody in the lineup, because of all the RBI machines lined up to drive home stray baserunners?

I don't buy that, the teams that score the most runs consistently walk the most as well. Look at Seatle these last few years, everyone likes to talk about how Oakland pushes walks, but Seatle walks a ton as well and winds up scoring tons of runs. If you look back at the great offensive teams of the last few years, Seatle, Oakland, the Yankees, Cleveland, all of them walked a lot. those mid nineties Cleveland teams had some of the scariest lineups ever, and they got a ton of walks. No matter how good a lineup is its wise to walk batters in it as infrequemtly as possible, realize the vast majority of batted balls result in outs. If the Sox don't start walking more, pitchers will throw nothing in the zone, and the team's avg and runs will drop a ton.

One really scary point for me is that the only AL teams with fewer walks than the Sox are Detroit, KC, Anaheim and Tampa Bay. None of those teams are within 46 runs of the Sox for the season. I doubt the Sox offense could ever get that bad, but really it could drop quite a bit if guys don't start taking their walks.

hold2dibber
04-22-2002, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by Zednem700


I don't buy that, the teams that score the most runs consistently walk the most as well. Look at Seatle these last few years, everyone likes to talk about how Oakland pushes walks, but Seatle walks a ton as well and winds up scoring tons of runs. If you look back at the great offensive teams of the last few years, Seatle, Oakland, the Yankees, Cleveland, all of them walked a lot. those mid nineties Cleveland teams had some of the scariest lineups ever, and they got a ton of walks. No matter how good a lineup is its wise to walk batters in it as infrequemtly as possible, realize the vast majority of batted balls result in outs. If the Sox don't start walking more, pitchers will throw nothing in the zone, and the team's avg and runs will drop a ton.

One really scary point for me is that the only AL teams with fewer walks than the Sox are Detroit, KC, Anaheim and Tampa Bay. None of those teams are within 46 runs of the Sox for the season. I doubt the Sox offense could ever get that bad, but really it could drop quite a bit if guys don't start taking their walks.

All right, now you're freaking me out. But isn't it true that Maggs and PK usually draw a fare number of walks, but haven't done so thus far? I don't think Clayton, Lee or Valentin walk much, but everyone else in the lineup at least does a decent or better job of taking walks (except Alomar, but Johnson is pretty good at it, thereby making the C platoon average in terms of plate discipline).

Zednem700
04-22-2002, 07:12 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber


All right, now you're freaking me out. But isn't it true that Maggs and PK usually draw a fare number of walks, but haven't done so thus far? I don't think Clayton, Lee or Valentin walk much, but everyone else in the lineup at least does a decent or better job of taking walks (except Alomar, but Johnson is pretty good at it, thereby making the C platoon average in terms of plate discipline).

Maggs has become a player who walks at a decent rate, and last season Konerko walked less than 1 out of every ten times to the plate which is both slightly less than the minimum I want to see from a player, and right in line with his career averages. Most players on the team saw their walk rates drop last year which is hopefully a one year blip due to losing Thomas's presence and the early season struggles. Of course they should bounce back this season, but if they keep going without walking much, trouble might not be too far away. Of course even with the drop last year the Sox finished 5th in the AL in total walks, so hopefully they'll recover this season and be right ther with the leaders by the end of the season.