Comments on: Reevaluating the Rangers Offense

By: Thundercat32

Thundercat32 — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 08:24:52 +0000

Damn good point Dbuff and a HUGE oversite from the author of this article. For the author was the objective of this article to be objective or was it to present a slant against the Rangers?

FYI, the Cowboys offense if you look at it from weeks 7-9 of last season sucked too. Romo is missing the Cowboys offense is downgraded and you compare it to the rest of the NFL they don’t look like they are living up to their vaunted reputation. Granted when Romo did return (probably never at 100%) the offense still struggled, but it was better. And weeks 7-9 were definitely the low point.

This is the Rangers low point of the season. If you want to be fair and compare their low point to the rest of the league. Lets do so by taking their best hitter out of the lineup and then factor a league average that way. Or better yet lets take a look at the Rangers offense in August, September, and October (assuming there are no more injuries) and lets see how they rate against the rest of the league in those months.

By: dbuff

dbuff — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:57:40 +0000

Matthew How many runs would the Rangers offense have scored at home last year had they had the pleasure of hitting against the Rangers pitching staff?

By: dbuff

dbuff — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:16:47 +0000

Of course the Rangers production is down since the middle of May. Kinsler is a career .286 hitter who hit .243 in May and now .184 in June. Young is a career .300 hitter hitting .245 this month. Hamilton is out and played hurt a good part of the time before he went on the DL. Few people forecast that Davis would hit .208. The jury is out on Davis but past performance says that the production from Kinsler, Young and Hamilton will improve significantly. The Rangers led the majors in runs scored at home last year. They also led the majors in runs scored on the road last year. By what definition is that average?

By: R M

R M — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:04:36 +0000

Their park is so hitter friendly that you can’t just look at how many runs they’ve scored….that’s the whole point of the article. If you compare how the Rangers are hitting at Arlington and then compare how their opponents are hitting at arlington, the Rangers wouldn’t be above average at all, judging by the numbers in this article.

By: Fresh Hops

Fresh Hops — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 05:16:06 +0000

I don’t even know why the rangers offense is a point right now. Their run production is fine, in the top third in baseball and about where you’d expect.

Their pitchers are so over their heads it’s not even funny. Millwood has an ERA under 3, but so is his K/BB ratio. He’s the tip of the Texas pitching iceberg whose underside shall eventually surface.

By: t ball

t ball — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 04:42:54 +0000

By the way, I think those numbers are from 2005-2007, not sure if 2008 followed that line.

By: t ball

t ball — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 04:41:39 +0000

Thank you for that. Many Ranger fans are tired of national media (and even some local writers who should know better) reflexively reporting that the mighty Ranger bats are going to have to carry the pitching, or some such nonsense.

Do Gassko’s ballpark figures break out into splits? We’ve had a few discussion about this over at Lone Star Ball and someone posted these numbers from the Bill James Handbook:
LHB – avg : 100
LHB – hr : 124
RHB – avg : 103
RHB -hr : 99

These numbers match the eyeball test of watching 15 years of ballgames there — the park loves lefties, righties not so much. Perhaps it’s a bit too simple to call the park a hitters’ heaven? Do the lefty numbers skew the total with that friendly right field porch?