Need to mix up the RHers at the top of the order, Reed fits in 4/5th? I wish we had a switch hitter to plug in 2nd.
I thought with the velocity (or lack thereof) of that particular throw, had Alonso been able to stay on the bag, it would have been a bang, bang play. The way I saw it (also after looking at the replay), is if Alonso stays on the bag, Correa's foot is coming down as the ball would be hitting the glove. Again probably an out call, but close enough for a hit and an RBI at home.
Close play, but I thought the throw would've beaten his foot as is. Then, if you adjust the direction of the throw to be on target, it gets there a split second sooner...which gives the throw an even clearer "win". Just how I saw it. Separately, I wonder if Valencia's 2 errors and lack of power (2 singles and 2 walks across 13 PAs) in this series makes any difference whatsoever in their interest or negotiations. I know they're all about analytics and appropriate samples, but it's a hybrid office. And they just saw him perform relatively poorly in person. If nothing else, use it to drive the price down (assuming everyone is bargaining right now) ?
Record vs Run Difference is unorthodox Rangers -- 54-36 -- +16 Astros -- 48-41 -- +30 Mariners -- 45-44 -- +51
I was thinking about this myself. Doesn't seem like a very reliable predictor does it? Well, we all know the Rangers win a lot of 1 & 2 run games, then lose several in blowout fashion. Seattle seems the opposite with Houston in the middle somewhere. Many who read into this stat would say the law of averages would dictate the Rangers have been lucky and will regress to a mean indicative of their run differential. But it seems the Rangers beat this equation year after year. Hardly seems like luck when its an ongoing trend.
You'll typically see some of these outlier-type trends in smaller sample sizes. Usually at the end of the year, the run differential will be more in line with the record (but there are always exceptions). I'd be far more concerned if the Astros were winning games with a negative overall run differential vs. the alternative. Rangers are in the midst of some serious regression.... which is exactly what their run differential and lofty 1-run record suggested would happen. Every team has at least one slump/mediocre month-worth of baseball in them. Hopefully the Astros have already gone through there's now (as opposed to saving it till September like last season).
It is reliable, but not perfect. Teams can be that way, and the Rangers sort of are. Their recent drop off in run differential is primarily motivated by how terrible their rotation is. I agree, but that throw is more difficult than a 3B probably gets credit for. That is probably missed as often as the play Valencia made on Altuve's first bunt, but the scorer would have given Altuve a hit if Valencia didn't make it. Win is all that matters though.
The Astros road slump lasted months, which gives this squad a big advantage vs 2015. Astros are winning road series and have bullpen depth which will keep everyone fresh for the stretch run and postseason. Kuechel looks like he'll post a <3.00 post-AllStar ERA. Fires and McHugh just need to be around 4.25. Fister can regress some with the amount of bullpen depth and Astros could still roll.
Both now and in 2014, the Rangers regressed due to injuries. Its impossible to know whether this year, the team would have regressed without them or whether they would have beat the differential in 2014 without the injuries.
They were pretty awful to start last season. Basically had the same sort of April the Astros had this year. Then you combine the "luck" factor of their success in 1 run games over the last two years injuries or not. The Rangers also have benefitted from getting superb/unexpected year from Desmond, some success out of the closer position in Dyson, and quality rookie production from Mazara.
So why did you say year after year when it is impossible to know what a healthy Rangers would have done in 2014 and 2016? Dealing with injuries is a part of baseball. Injuries suck when its your team. Astros have actively tried to get healthier players by having strict signing physicals. Astros have also tried to have depth...except hey've had some bad luck with 1B/DH guys.
I am happy that, while they have guys coming off injuries and everyone is pointing at that upside, Desmond is undoubtedly going to come down from his .402 BABIP--and his power production is likely to drop a bit as well. That's a big piece of their lineup.
2014 seems like years and years ago. It wasn't, your right. I should have said month after month. But the focus of my thought was whether RD is a useable tool or not. If it is, the the Rangers should have been regressing without the deluge of injuries. As things are, sure their regressing. But is it injuries, the rubber band stretching back, or both? That is what is, for now, unknowable. But consider this. If they get all healthy again and continue to struggle then that says one thing. If they get healthy again and begin playing .650 ball then that says another as it pertains to the RD vs record topic.
I think you're confusing yourself. If they get healthy and continue to win, there's a very high probability that their run differential will improve to be more in line with their record. RD is not necessarily a predictor... Nor is it simply the after-effect metric either. It's taken in correlation with the record or how a team is doing at any given point in the season. Right now, the Rangers stormed out to a great record... But their RD has never really maxed out... And now during their struggles, the RD is going further and further down. Meanwhile, the Mariners also stormed out to a great record... But have lost a ton of close games lately that hasn't really affected their overall RD yet. In the end, if you're playing at a record at or about what your RD suggests you have (all of this stemming from Bill James' Pythagorean theorem), then it's deemed that you're neither over-achieving or under-achieiving. Can you be just achieving?
Its easy to forget this. It just seems the Rangers have been (statisically) playing above their heads (and being lucky as ****) forever at our expense. In truth, its been for a bit over one season (May 2015 - June 2016).
There will always be teams that outperform their RD. It just seems like yesterday Baltimore was the organization that had figured out how to win one-run games. Then it was the Royals. Rangers are going to have to do it for years and years, injured or not, to show they as an organization have cracked the nut on winning one-run games.
