Are the Angels a "bad" team?

[yk9001]

“If you've been playing poker for half an hour and you still don't know who the patsy is, you're the patsy.”

― Warren Buffett

[Stradling]

3 minutes ago, mmc said:

If you’ve lost more game than you’ve won, you’re a bad team

So if the Angels were 41-39 they are a good team but since they are 39-41 they are a bad team?  In my opinion they are both average. 

[Angel Oracle]

1 hour ago, Angelsjunky said:

"Meh" means mediocre, basically. I'd say if you take out all the good players, the rest suck - so the total result is "meh" (meaning, with the good players included).

But to the original post, no, it isn't a "bad" team. It is an OK team, thus the OK record (near .500). I mean, while there's a story behind every team, in the end a team is only as good as its record. 

There aren't just good and bad teams, there is a spectrum. The Rangers are a bad team, so are the Orioles and Pirates and Diamondbacks. The Angels are better than those teams. So, roughly speaking:

Terrible: <65 wins

Bad: 65-74 wins

OK: 75-84 wins

Good: 85-94 wins

Great: 95+ wins

Or something like that. I think the Angels--with the team they have right now--are closer to being Good than Bad.

This, with a healthy Trout

[WicketMaiden]

Great line-up offensively, some good pitching but some big holes in the pitching staff too, and the part I can't quite understand, good defensive players playing bad defence. We beat bad teams, but the good teams eventually find the holes in the defence and the pitching and end up taking series after series. That makes us average, but tantalisingly close to being good. (Yes, I know we've been saying that for years now.)

As for the Yankees, last night's line-up was the worst of theirs I can remember, they've got way bigger problems than the Angels.

[Blarg]

Just now, Stradling said:

In this day and age where if you aren’t great you suck then I guess the Angels suck.  In all honesty they are about average. 

No, they really are not playing average baseball. You'd have to have blinders on to think what you see out there is league average. 

They are tied for fifth in runs scored, yay.

They are third in most in runs allowed.

That is truly crap. 

So, no, they are not average. 

 

[tdawg87]

They're gay imo

[Sully151]

Wait, a Yankee centric “news outlet” is bashing the Angels because we beat them?

Marty, it worked! Get me some plutonium, my time machine has sent me to the early 2000’s and I need to get back to the future.

[yk9001]

Jesus guys - this is the sixth straight year the Angels are under .500.  Get a clue.

[Jason]

24 minutes ago, WicketMaiden said:

Great line-up offensively

It's a good line up. When Trout comes back and if Rendon pulls his head out then it will be great. 

[Jason]

17 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

They're gay imo

Then that makes you wonder who Bundy was puking up

[tdawg87]

2 minutes ago, Jason said:

Then that makes you wonder who Bundy was puking up

Probably Cishek.

[Stradling]

58 minutes ago, Blarg said:

No, they really are not playing average baseball. You'd have to have blinders on to think what you see out there is league average. 

They are tied for fifth in runs scored, yay.

They are third in most in runs allowed.

That is truly crap. 

So, no, they are not average. 

 

39-41

[Lou]

11 minutes ago, Stradling said:

39-41

That's pretty average.

[mmc]

32 minutes ago, Stradling said:

39-41

Seattle is 42-39.  Do you believe they are an above average team?

[Lou]

Just now, mmc said:

Seattle is 42-39.  Do you believe they are an above average team?

They're pretty average.

[ScottT]

I think the Mariners are ultimately a below average team.  They may be bad.

http://claydavenport.com/stats/standings.html

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

That's pretty average.

Yes. Average isn’t bad. No one is claiming they are good. 

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, mmc said:

Seattle is 42-39.  Do you believe they are an above average team?

No.  I believe they are average. 

[tdawg87]

They are averageish.

[Lou]

1 hour ago, mmc said:

Seattle is 42-39.  Do you believe they are an above average team?

Do you believe they are a good team?

[angelsnationtalk]

Yes, they're bad.

And I can't wait to hear what AW and the front office will say to show super advanced stats on how they've improved to justify it. 

[mmc]

46 minutes ago, Lou said:

Do you believe they are a good team?

Nope, which is why I think using record alone to argue how good a team is is incredibly flawed

[Lou]

11 minutes ago, mmc said:

Nope, which is why I think using record alone to argue how good a team is is incredibly flawed

Ultimately, it's how teams are measured.

[Lou]

14 minutes ago, mmc said:

Nope, which is why I think using record alone to argue how good a team is is incredibly flawed

.

.

.

 

4 hours ago, mmc said:

If you’ve lost more game than you’ve won, you’re a bad team

 

[Jason]

1 minute ago, Lou said:

Ultimately, it's how teams are measured.

Yes but if you tell yourself that their win/loss record doesn’t define them then you feel better about the team when the players are making tee times in October.