October 09, 2006
ALCS Preview
The ALCS looks to be a pitching dominated series, since the hurlers are the dominant members of both teams.
2006 (AL Ranks) | Tigers | Athletics |
Runs per Game | 5.07 (5th) | 4.76 (9th) |
ERA | 3.84 (1st) | 4.21 (4th) |
Based on the full year statistics, the Tigers are clearly the better team. They're about .3 runs better scoring, and .4 runs better pitching. If you look at the in-season record, Detroit did dominate Oakland. The Tigers outscored the A's 52-39, but only won the season series 5-4. There were two big blow out wins by the Tigers in there, 10-4 and 11-4. Otherwise, the teams were even.
It's interesting to note both of those games were started by Kenny Rogers in Oakland. Rogers enjoys great success in that stadium. Leyland hasn't announced his rotation for the ALCS, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Rogers scheduled for games 2 and 6 at the Coliseum. Given the relative success of the pitchers in the LDS, I'd go with Verlander, Rogers, Bonderman, Robertson as my rotation. The A's hit lefties better than righties, especially for power, so this rotation minimizes that. Robertson was the only pitcher who didn't shutdown the Yankees in ALDS, so why give him two starts in the ALCS?
The Athletics actually took a vote on who should be their game two starter.
Ten of Oakland's top decision makers held a closed-door meeting in the manager's office Sunday and cast their votes on who should start for the Athletics in Game 2 of the AL championship series -- Rich Harden or Esteban Loaiza.
The tally: Harden 5, Loaiza 5.
Loaiza won the tiebreaker based on his health, recent results and reliability. Harden has only pitched three times since missing more than three months with an elbow injury.
I wonder who cast ballots, and if there was a split between the sabermetricians and the scouts?
Let's take a look at the offenses in more depth:
2006 (AL Ranks) | Tigers | Athletics |
Batting Average | .274 (9th) | .260 (13th) |
OBA | .329 (12th) | .340 (7th) |
Slugging Percentage | .449 (5th) | .410 (14th) |
The Detroit offense gets a big power boost away from Comerica, which is one reason they had the top road record in the majors this season. But the Coliseum doesn't boost power, so we may be looking at seven games of Detroit's offense closer to their poor showing at home. The other thing that's tough to gauge is the reality of Oakland numbers. Over the last two months of the season, they traded walks for hits, keeping their OBA the same but raising both their batting average and slugging averages about 20 points. Take two teams (or players) with the same OBA, the one with the higher batting average is going to be the more dangerous team. Hits move runners a lot farther than walks do.
Here's a more in depth look at the pitching:
2006 (AL Ranks) | Tigers | Athletics |
Batting Average Allowed | .257 (2nd) | .271 (8th) |
OBA Allowed | .321 (3rd) | .338 (9th) |
Slugging Percentage Allowed | .405 (2nd) | .422 (4th) |
Detroit beats Oakland hands down here. They do a better job keeping hits low, and keeping power low. The two teams struck out the same number of batters, gave up about the same number of home runs, but the Tigers walked many fewer batters.
There are a lot of things in favor of the Tigers as you look at the numbers. The only place the Athletics have the edge is getting their batter on base. The Twins did a good job in the first two games of the LDS stopping the Athletics offense. I suspect an even better Detroit staff will do the same. It's then up to the Oakland staff to shut down the Detroit offense, and the configuration of the two ballparks should help in that regard by cutting down on the Tigers power. I'll pick Detroit, with about a 60% chance of winning the series.
Well, I went back and looked at your division series predictions, which were: Padres, Yankees, Mets, and Twins.
Based on this, I'll take the A's! :-)
Yes, a poor job there. Sometimes I think I shouldn't even make predictions, but if you're going to go through all the trouble of evaluating the teams, you should come to some conclusion. I still don't understand why the Yankees lost the ability to take a pitch, or the Padres lost the ability to put together three hits in a row. That's the problem with predicting these series. You're dealing with small sample sizes, and luck can just overwhelm ability. I did think of picking the Athletics, just because everything I saw pointed to the Tigers.
David,
I wonder if it easy to run the same analysis but only use the data for the past three months, rather than for the full season. It is clear that the Tigers were a different team in August/September than they were in May/June, so I think their full-season numbers inflate their numbers too much.
I was about to suggest something similar to what Art just wrote...only I sort of reached a different conclusion about the Tigers' second-half slump.
The A's were a bad team in the start of the season, then came into their own in the second half. I bet their August/September numbers are far more indicative of their true ability then their overall numbers, especially in terms of their pitching staff.
As for the Tigers, I think the first half could very well have been their true team...and that maybe having a double-digit lead in their division took away the sense of urgency they really needed down the stretch. And now that that motivation is back, maybe they'll play like their old selves.
I don't know if it's fair to do it this way...but it feels like the A's numbers down the stretch are a better approximation of their ability, and that the Tigers' numbers fall somewhere in between their first and second halves. I sort of wonder what that matchup would look like.