Rating the Defenses: AL Central
The Royals can play defense and the Indians can’t? Find out who can handle the leather in the AL Central.
Introduction
This is the second in a series of 6 articles. I’ll be looking at
team defense, grouping the teams by division. The foundation of these
articles is FRA (Fielding Run Average), a measure I developed last
year to look at how successful a given team’s fielders were in terms
of preventing runs.
For a detailed explanation of how it works, please read my article
Measuring
Team Defense.
To evaluate team defense, I used each teams’ raw FRA, adjusted for
park (note that the park factor I use is not a general one, but a park
factor for the FRA stat itself) and averaged together 2000 and
2001. Keep in mind that there is evidence that particular pitchers can
influence FRA, so it can’t be considered a pure measure of fielding
prowess. However, I am confident that a large majority of a team’s FRA
can be safely attributed to the fielders.
A typical FRA is in the neighborhood of a run better than ERA. In
2001 the AL average was 3.596; in 2000 it was 3.754.
Kansas City Royals
2000/2001 FRA data (AL rank)
| | FRA | Park | FRA+ |
| 2000 | 3.457 (3) | 1.053 | 3.283 (3) |
| 2001 | 3.100 (3) | 1.024 | 3.027 (4) |
2000/2001 ranking: 2nd in the AL
Surprise, surprise, the Royals are good at something. That 2nd
place finish in adjusted FRA over the last 2 years was not far behind
the Anaheim Angels for best in the league. Kauffman Stadium is a great
place for hitters when the ball doesn’t leave the yard - The Royals’
park had the second highest FRA PF in the AL over the 2000-2001
period. The Royals featured an outfield of Beltran, Dye and Damon in
2000 and only Beltran remains. They also replaced a great defensive
shortstop (Rey Sanchez) with a good one (Neifi Perez - at least that’s
his rep) mid-season last year.
I think the Royals’ defense is due for a decline in 2002,
which might inhibit the development of the young pitchers a little
bit. With Beltran out there, it’s still a good defense, but Chuck
Knoblauch is certainly no Johnny Damon.
I don’t predict great things for the Royals this year:
whatever they gain on offense they’ll likely give back on
defense. Even so, an above average defense should be a help to the
Royals’ young pitchers (who don’t strike out a lot of batters).
Minnesota Twins
2000/2001 FRA data (AL rank)
| | FRA | Park | FRA+ |
| 2000 | 4.105 (12) | 1.146 | 3.581 (5) |
| 2001 | 3.366 (4) | 1.113 | 3.025 (3) |
2000/2001 ranking: 4th in the AL
The Metrodome has had the highest FRA PF in recent years (edging
KC) in the AL. You can usually count on the Twins to put together a
fast outfield. In 2000, the raw ranking had Minnesota at 12th, but
after park adjustments, they rose all the way to 5th. 
Doug Mientkiewicz and Luis Rivas were the big additions in 2001; Torii
Hunter established himself as one of the premier defensive CFs in the
league. The Twins sure needed his glove: their pitchers led the league
in lowest GO/AO (Ground Outs/Air Outs) ratio, meaning of course that
they were predominantly flyball pitchers. Joe Mays put up great
numbers last year and he should definitely thank his defense for
that. Eric Milton is one of the more extreme flyball pitchers in the
league. The Twins should be looking for more offense - I’ll be rooting
for Bobby Kielty to win a spot in the outfield in 2002.
The defense should be just as good, which means the Twins should
be in the running for a playoff spot, especially if they can get some
lumber in return for Rick Reed when they eventually trade him.
Chicago White Sox
2000/2001 FRA data (AL rank)
| | FRA | Park | FRA+ |
| 2000 | 3.580 (5) | 1.026 | 3.488 (4) |
| 2001 | 3.441 (5) | .978 | 3.520 (5) |
2000/2001 ranking: 5th in the AL
I sure hope Frank Thomas doesn’t play too many games at 1B (he’s
only played 33 at the position over the last 2 years). I have a
feeling that the pitchers are going to miss Chris Singleton in CF. The
key infielders, Valentin, Clayton and Durham, seem to be a solid
group.
The outfield D might be a bit of a problem this year: I’m not
convinced that an aging Lofton can cover as much ground as the
departed Chris Singleton. If I’m right, the logical thing to expect
would be for the Sox’ flyball pitchers to be less successful in
2002. Let’s see who the flyball pitchers on the staff are:
White Sox 2001 pitchers, 50 + innings
| | GO/AO | ratio |
| Keith Foulke | 66/100 | 0.75 |
| Bob Howry | 76/90 | 0.89 |
| Gary Glover | 114/114 | 1.05 |
| Rocky Biddle | 149/144 | 1.08 |
| Mark Buerhle | 268/258 | 1.13 |
| Todd Ritchie (PIT) | 275/215 | 1.36 |
| Jon Garland | 158/124 | 1.44 |
| Danny Wright | 91/67 | 1.48 |
Not returning:
| | GO/AO | ratio |
| James Baldwin | 110/131 | 0.91 |
| David Wells | 117/116 | 1.07 |
| Sean Lowe | 173/133 | 1.40 |
| Kip Wells | 173/123 | 1.54 |
Note: data from mlb.com. The listed ratio is not based
directly on the GO/AO totals provided.
Like Safeco, Comiskey helps the defense get outs (mostly
because of the large foul territory area).
The White Sox had the 8th highest GO/AO ratio in the league as a
team, but none of their returning starters are flyball pitchers. That
doesn’t figure to change much, since Ritchie had a fairly high GO/AO
ratio last year and the 4 men who have departed were a mixed bag of
flyballers and groundballers.
Detroit Tigers
2000/2001 FRA data (AL rank)
| | FRA | Park | FRA+ |
| 2000 | 3.937 (10) | 1.024 | 3.845 (9) |
| 2001 | 3.893 (10) | 1.038 | 3.751 (8) |
2000/2001 ranking: 9th in the AL
The Tigers were the busiest fielders in the AL in both 2000 and
2001. Not striking out many batters puts a lot of strain on your
fielders and if you’re going to take that approach, you’d better have
some ballhawks out there. The Tigers haven’t done well on that score,
as their #9 ranking indicates. No team in the AL needs to address
their defensive weaknesses more than Detroit. Have they done that?
The answer is a resounding NO on that count. Out goes Juan
Encarnacion, their centerfielder, in comes Dmitri Young - someone
Tigers fans hope doesn’t see the outfield too often. Deivi Cruz and
Roger Cedeno have also gone, but they were hardly what you’d call
great glove men last year.
The Tigers had the 4th highest GO/AO ratio, so the priority would
seem to be to find a very good defensive shortstop. Rey Sanchez was
available, but will now be manning the second sack for Boston.
I don’t see good things ahead for the Tigers: In addition to their
offensive problems, they might have one of the worst defenses in the
league in 2002.
Cleveland Indians
2000/2001 FRA data (AL rank)
| | FRA | Park | FRA+ |
| 2000 | 3.920 (9) | .973 | 4.028 (11) |
| 2001 | 4.514 (14) | .989 | 4.564 (14) |
2000/2001 ranking: 13th in the AL
There’s little doubt that the Indians were one of the worst
defensive teams in 2000 and 2001, but they may not have been quite as
bad as these numbers suggest. Power pitchers, and the Indians
certainly have a lot of those, likely have a tendency to post worse
FRAs that control type pitchers (who usually are good at getting the
GIDP and holding runners on).
The defensive reps of the up the middle defenders have not been
reflected in the FRA department. It’s hard to escape the conclusion
that the defensive skills of Vizquel, Alomar and Lofton are in serious
decline. When we add Russ Branyan and Jim Thome into the mix?
Matt Lawton should be an improvement in LF and Milton Bradley, the
likely CF has speed to burn, but it remains to be seen if he has the
polish of a quality centerfielder.
“Progression” to the mean is likely applicable here: the Indians
may still have one of the worst defenses in the league, but they
shouldn’t be as bad as 2001. The news is not all bad: the Indians were
2nd in 2001 and 1st in 2000 in lowest BIP PCT (Percentage of batters
putting the ball in play against). With Sabathia, Finley and Colon in
the rotation, they are likely to remain among teams with the lightest
workload for their fielders.
Throwing out base-runners
What I like to do is compare a catcher’s throwing performance to
the other catchers on the team. This is not a perfect approach, since
in some cases particular catchers are in the lineup when particular
pitchers are on the mound. As well, the backups themselves differ in
their ability to throw out baserunners so we can’t really make firm
conclusions looking at this data. All the same, it is interesting to
look at. The data given is for both 2000 and 2001.
Stability was noticeably absent in this division over the last 2
years at the catching position: only 1 of the 5 teams in this division
(Cleveland) has had the same regular catcher in 2000 and 2001.
note: I couldn’t find pitchers only CS for 2001 so I lumped
all CS together instead of segregating them into “normal” and the
1-3-6 kind.
Kansas City:
| |
Starts |
Attempts |
CS |
SB% |
| Gregg Zaun |
96 |
100 |
21 |
79.0 |
| Others |
228 |
206 |
62 |
69.9 |
Zaun is no longer with the team. - the Royals appear to have
settled on Brent Mayne as their #1 catcher. Kansas City led the majors
by having 6 catchers start 35 or more games over the last 2
years. Opponents stole at a .723 clip against Mayne during his time
with the Royals last year.
Minnesota:
| |
Starts |
Attempts |
CS |
SB% |
| A.J. Pierzynski |
129 |
81 |
27 |
66.7 |
| Others |
195 |
132 |
49 |
62.9 |
Will Lecroy win the backup catching job? In limited trials, he’s
had some success cutting off the running game (33 attempts, 48 starts,
10 caught). Tom Prince (.571 pct against) was Minnesota’s top throwing
catcher over the last 2 years.
Chicago:
| |
Starts |
Attempts |
CS |
SB% |
| Mark Johnson |
125 |
115 |
45 |
60.9 |
| Others |
199 |
169 |
53 |
68.6 |
Ramon Castro of Florida might be most deserving catcher of a #1 job
of those who don’t have one, but Mark Johnson might be next. Sandy
Alomar swooped in and seems to have parlayed his “proven veteran”
status into a #1 job. Johnson has cut down baserunners at an
impressive rate, and his bat isn’t bad either.
Detroit:
| |
Starts |
Attempts |
CS |
SB% |
| Brad Ausmus |
140 |
80 |
38 |
52.5 |
| Others |
184 |
171 |
54 |
68.4 |
The departed Ausmus was replaced by prot?g? Inge. If
Inge (.545 stolen base pct against) could hit like Ausmus, he’d be an
easy choice as the number 1, but he’s a long way away from
that. Meluskey will likely take over #1 duties this year with Inge the
backup.
Cleveland:
| |
Starts |
Attempts |
CS |
SB% |
| Einar Diaz |
195 |
188 |
70 |
62.8 |
| Others |
129 |
151 |
32 |
78.8 |
Is Einar the best all-around catcher in the division? It looks like
it to me. His caught stealing pct is pretty good,, especially
considering the Tribe’s collection of power pitchers (though Colon is
good at holding runners on).
Robert Dudek
Posted: March 11, 2002 at 06:00 AM |
8 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Related News:
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Charles Saeger Posted: March 11, 2002 at 01:25 AM (#604947)Valentin is a third baseman now so he is not directly comparable to Vizquel (who is now the most overrated defensive player in baseball).
The Sox hated Valentin at third so much that they've given him the starting job for this year.
News flash: teams do not always make correct decisions about where to deploy their players.
Most teams are obsessed by errors, to the point where they'll take someone with limited range who makes all the plays that he is supposed to make over someone who gets to more balls but also throws more of them away.
In 2000, Jose Valentin made 36 errors at shortstop. Omar Vizquel made 3. But Valentin was superior in turning balls in the SS vicinity into outs.
Ground balls hit to SS ("6" zones):
Valentin 198 BIP/179 PM, .904
Vizquel 160 BIP/144 PM, .900
Ground balls hit in SS hole ("56" zones):
Valentin 147 BIP/75 PM, .510
Vizquel 160 BIP/74 PM, .463
Ground balls hit up the middle ("M" zones):
Valentin 277 BIP/139 PM, .502
Vizquel 298 BIP/141 PM, .463
Vizquel makes all of the routine plays; at this stage of his career he doesn't make many more than those. Valentin doesn't make all of the routine plays, but he makes quite a few plays on balls that Vizquel doesn't touch.
-- MWE
Valentin: 179 (6 zone), 75 (56 zone), 139 (M zone): 393 total PM
Vizquel: 178 (6), 68 (56), 128(M): 374 PM
So Valentin makes 19 more plays but 33 more errors.
I believe that errors are counted as balls in play and are treated the same as base-hits. That means that Valentin's errors are already accounted for by Mike's numbers.
Actually, my numbers include 28 of Valentin's 36 errors; he made six throwing errors after force plays, dropped one foul popup, and dropped a throw on a steal attempt. All three of Vizquel's errors were on ground balls.
-- MWE
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main