Angels Refuse to Strike Out.....

[Inside Pitch]

This may have been posted already -- if so, sorry...

A good Fangraphs article outlining the shift in philosophy and hinting at hope for the future (offensively).

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-angels-refuse-to-strike-out/

[Blarg]

[T.G.]

All of these stats that point to something positive feels like some sort of consolation prize for not winning.

[zenmaster]

We hit the ball hard and never strike out. Now if only we could not be in last place. 

[Second Base]

You combine this with the Angels barrell-ball ratio and you'll see that currently, the offense is under-performing.  Their periphs suggest they should have one of the better offenses in baseball.  Hopefully once Ohtani and Upton are back, this will change. 

[AngelsFaninGA]

2 minutes ago, Second Base said:

You combine this with the Angels barrell-ball ratio and you'll see that currently, the offense is under-performing.  Their periphs suggest they should have one of the better offenses in baseball.  Hopefully once Ohtani and Upton are back, this will change. 

I feel like baseball is full of stats that are are either statistically insignificant or have little predictive value, that say a player or team "should be" better or worse, but you then don't see those discrepancies actually converging. Tons of stats that just tell you what you already see on the field but not much else. 

[greginpsca]

Pujols, Cozart, Simmons,Bour and Calhoun all pull the ball too much. They all are DP's waiting to happen. At least when we actually have a runner on base. Calhoun is at least trying to disguise it a little.

[totdprods]

Fletcher 3B, Trout CF, Upton LF, Ohtani DH, Simmons SS, Pujols/Bour 1B, Goodwin RF, Lucroy C, La Stella 2B could be a really nice line-up come July.

[totdprods]

And this article that just hit suggests the Angels pitching has some interesting trends as well. 
https://theathletic.com/938629/2019/04/23/sarris-the-search-for-todays-team-the-mlb-organization-most-on-trend-in-2019/

If you're willing to look big picture, and put weight to the farm development, the aggressive promotions, the Trout extension, the above hitting and pitching trends, our new coaching staff and minor league implementation of new tools and strategies, you can start to see why 2020 and beyond is exciting to some.

[T.G.]

4 minutes ago, totdprods said:

And this article that just hit suggests the Angels pitching has some interesting trends as well. 
https://theathletic.com/938629/2019/04/23/sarris-the-search-for-todays-team-the-mlb-organization-most-on-trend-in-2019/

If you're willing to look big picture, and put weight to the farm development, the aggressive promotions, the Trout extension, the above hitting and pitching trends, our new coaching staff and minor league implementation of new tools and strategies, you can start to see why 2020 and beyond is exciting to some.

Yes, the team will dominate the 2020 science fair.

[Inside Pitch]

 

6 hours ago, AngelsFaninGA said:

I feel like baseball is full of stats that are are either statistically insignificant or have little predictive value, that say a player or team "should be" better or worse, but you then don't see those discrepancies actually converging. Tons of stats that just tell you what you already see on the field but not much else. 

You realize that these are the sorts of stats that are predictive in nature while stuff like batting average, obp, and SLG%, aren't right?    The problem like all stats is that if people don't know how to use them they are either misunderstood or misrepresented.    Not saying you or anyone in this thread is guilty of that -- just pointing out that this stuff is the sort of data teams should be looking at when trying to predict future performance, not because they are a guarantee of anything but rather because they suggest that all things being equal they should result in better outcomes.

Basically, all anyone really should be taking from this is that the team is moving in the right direction as far as how it looks at information and tries to put it into action -- it still needs to translate into results.  Rome wasn't built in a day and these are massive changes.  Anyone expecting them to snap their fingers and make those changes happen must think baseball is a lot easier than it is.
 

4 hours ago, totdprods said:

And this article that just hit suggests the Angels pitching has some interesting trends as well. 
https://theathletic.com/938629/2019/04/23/sarris-the-search-for-todays-team-the-mlb-organization-most-on-trend-in-2019/

If you're willing to look big picture, and put weight to the farm development, the aggressive promotions, the Trout extension, the above hitting and pitching trends, our new coaching staff and minor league implementation of new tools and strategies, you can start to see why 2020 and beyond is exciting to some.

Angel fans spend years deriding MS and his dinosaur ways -- now that the team is actually doing the things they claimed they wanted them to do -- they do a 180, stomp their feet and yell -- but where are the results.

The Angels are undergoing a pretty significant reboot, and it's not just at the MLB level.   Good team, bad team....   they are changing.

 

[Blarg]

9 hours ago, Throwman91 said:

Hatcher coached the only lineup in MLB history where every starting hitter batted at least .300 at the All-Star break, we saw many other incredibly good offensive years under him then we fired him because 'reasons'.

 

9 hours ago, Throwman91 said:

I feel like low strike-outs and lots of hard hit balls is a sign of bad discipline and hit placement, there seems to be little game plan when the Angels step into the box other than 'hit the ball wherever'.

The "reasons" for Hatcher's firing is exactly what you posted above. The Angels batters were encouraged to make contact under Hatcher, the difference in results is the quality of players. 

[Inside Pitch]

36 minutes ago, Throwman91 said:

So why didn't hasn't any other team in history with more talent done the same?

C'mon dude...  it was ONE day..  

If Hatcher was such an amazing hitting coach why was it that a nearly identical team  (They lost Figgy and Vlad) failed to come close to those numbers the next season?

Naps -- .300 to .238
Abreu - .310 to .255
Izturis - .300 to .250
Aybar - .300 to .253
Rivera - .310 to .252
Hunter - .307 to .280
Morales - .303 to .290

The 2009 Angels ended the season with three .300 averages and two near misses.   Here's a list of teams that had more since 1973...  https://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14023.html If you expand it to 1901 it's almost 100.

The 2009 Angels combined to hit .285   The 2010 team -- .248 and the only losses were Vlad and Figgy.   BTW, the guy that replaced Vlad bet his 2009 OPS+ by almost 20 points in 2010, so -- you can't pretend Vlad was carrying all the weight either...

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Inside Pitch

[Stradling]

12 hours ago, Throwman91 said:

I feel like low strike-outs and lots of hard hit balls is a sign of bad discipline and hit placement, there seems to be little game plan when the Angels step into the box other than 'hit the ball wherever'.

Then you missed the article where the Angels have the lowest swing rate in the game as well.  

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, Throwman91 said:

So why didn't hasn't any other team in history with more talent done the same?

I have a couple of questions for you.  What team have we had since then that has had the same or more talent offensively?  Why hasn’t another team looked at that August scoreboard where all 9 hitters were hitting .300 and realized Hatcher was available and hired him?  

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Throwman91 said:

Bad pitch selection negates that

 

I thought Hatcher retired after he was let go? We have never had a better offensive lineup than in 2009 I believe. 

He didn’t retire.  He actually did some work in the Dodgers front office.  

[AngelsFaninGA]

5 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

 

You realize that these are the sorts of stats that are predictive in nature while stuff like batting average, obp, and SLG%, aren't right?    The problem like all stats is that if people don't know how to use them they are either misunderstood or misrepresented.    Not saying you or anyone in this thread is guilty of that -- just pointing out that this stuff is the sort of data teams should be looking at when trying to predict future performance, not because they are a guarantee of anything but rather because they suggest that all things being equal they should result in better outcomes.

Basically, all anyone really should be taking from this is that the team is moving in the right direction as far as how it looks at information and tries to put it into action -- it still needs to translate into results.  Rome wasn't built in a day and these are massive changes.  Anyone expecting them to snap their fingers and make those changes happen must think baseball is a lot easier than it is.
 

Angel fans spend years deriding MS and his dinosaur ways -- now that the team is actually doing the things they claimed they wanted them to do -- they do a 180, stomp their feet and yell -- but where are the results.

The Angels are undergoing a pretty significant reboot, and it's not just at the MLB level.   Good team, bad team....   they are changing.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't FIP one of those predictive stats? And yet I see Skaggs and Harvey, for example, consistently underperform FIP for multiple years in a row. That tells me that it should be thrown out for these two players, not that they're due for a correction. Because corrections don't take years and years to manifest themselves, at some point the player just isn't good. Same with BABIP. Not every player is going to experience a correction. And I'm worried that our front office is falling victim to these biases and signing guys under the false impression that they're undervalued and due for a correction. 

[kevinb]

This offense is really good. Once Ohtani and Upton get back watch out. 

[Inside Pitch]

1 hour ago, AngelsFaninGA said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't FIP one of those predictive stats? And yet I see Skaggs and Harvey, for example, consistently underperform FIP for multiple years in a row. That tells me that it should be thrown out for these two players, not that they're due for a correction. Because corrections don't take years and years to manifest themselves, at some point the player just isn't good. Same with BABIP. Not every player is going to experience a correction. And I'm worried that our front office is falling victim to these biases and signing guys under the false impression that they're undervalued and due for a correction. 

Egads....

Matt Harvey, career era 3.93.  Career FIP 3.66
Tyler Skaggs, career era 4.42. Career FIP 4.11

You're talking about two guys with injury riddled careers and yet the net variance is around 0.30.   

That's not the sort of difference where you're expecting a great deal of "correction", that's an example of guys pitching pretty close to what their peripherals say they will with the expectation they might yet improve given other factors and in Skaggs case, the lack of innings.

BTW, the predictive version of FIP is xFIP

Skaggs  ERA 16/17/18 - 4.17/4.55/4.02
Skaggs xFIP  16/17/18 - 4.25/4.49/3.79.    He's beaten or been right at his xFIP in two of the previous three years. 
This year he's at 4.20 .vs a 4.30 xFIP

Last time I checked Harvey's xFIP was when we signed him... it had projected him to be shitty two out of the last three years, but he was beating his too when he was healthy early in his career...  I'm not willing to put a lot of weight in the numbers while he's been struggling to work back from his TOS issues -- mostly because it's hard to argue the stuff was consistent enough to have the data be useful.  I didn't watch him play either, so...

Anyway neither of your examples support your position...  You've  essentially proven my point about stats being misunderstood or misrepresented. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Inside Pitch