2022 Rear View Mirror: Offense and Defense

[RobertS975]

As the Red Sox plod towards their 5th AL East last place finish since 2012, the following basic statistic surprises me: Runs scored vs. Runs allowed. Only three teams in the AL have scored more runs: NY, Toronto and Houston and the Sox are virtually tied with Houston. But only two teams allowed more runs, Oakland and KC.

There has been a lot of teeth gnashing on SOSH about the Red Sox offensive decline: the overall decline in HRs, the SO rate, the subpar year of JD and indeed Devers as well, the lack of Renfro and Schwarber production, the ineptitude of JBJ and Dalbec, the prolonged absent stretches of Story and Arroyo etc. Yet the Red Sox essentially managed to be tied with Houston for the third most runs scored in the league. But whole it is said that statistics don't lie, it still seems that the Six were offensively challenged this year. They sucked at coming back from behind and they sucked at extra inning games.

Maybe those observations were manifestation of the dumpster fire that was our bullpen. While the team had its share of blown saves with no effective closer for much of the year, the larger problem was disastrous late inning relief that put many games out of reach which is why they never had much success after trailing.

The larger point is that had the team's run prevention been more effective, their run production despite the optics would have carried them into the playoffs.

 

[TapeAndPosts]

But whole it is said that statistics don't lie, it still seems that the Six were offensively challenged this year.

Someone must have come up with a nice stat to quantify how efficiently a team distributes its runs. In September we beat the Orioles 17-4 and the Royals 13-3, but we also got swept in a four-game series by the Yankees losing by 1 run twice and 2 runs twice, so it's feeling like we're not just allowing too many runs, but we're distributing our runs badly. But I haven't actually verified that's more than a feeling brought on by recent events.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

Someone must have come up with a nice stat to quantify how efficiently a team distributes its runs. In September we beat the Orioles 17-4 and the Royals 13-3, but we also got swept in a four-game series by the Yankees losing by 1 run twice and 2 runs twice, so it's feeling like we're not just allowing too many runs, but we're distributing our runs badly. But I haven't actually verified that's more than a feeling brought on by recent events.

I always think about the famous Pirates v Yankees 1961(?) World Series. Pirates won in 7 despite being immensely outscored. Distribution of runs is important!!!! My personal suspicion is that the Three True Outcome offense doesn't work as well as it is supposed to (or once did) for just any team. And when that approach isn't working (say... how do the Sox "players left in scoring position with less than two outs" compare to other teams????), how about figure out how to just score runs in any fucking way possible!!!
I suspect that with the shift ban next season though, teams will adjust to higher BA types with some speed (Duran?), on base skills and low power having some relevance to generating runs.

 

[Tony Pena's Gas Cloud]

As the Red Sox plod towards their 5th AL East last place finish since 2012, the following basic statistic surprises me: Runs scored vs. Runs allowed. Only three teams in the AL have scored more runs: NY, Toronto and Houston and the Sox are virtually tied with Houston. But only two teams allowed more runs, Oakland and KC.

There has been a lot of teeth gnashing on SOSH about the Red Sox offensive decline: the overall decline in HRs, the SO rate, the subpar year of JD and indeed Devers as well, the lack of Renfro and Schwarber production, the ineptitude of JBJ and Dalbec, the prolonged absent stretches of Story and Arroyo etc. Yet the Red Sox essentially managed to be tied with Houston for the third most runs scored in the league. But whole it is said that statistics don't lie, it still seems that the Six were offensively challenged this year. They sucked at coming back from behind and they sucked at extra inning games.

Maybe those observations were manifestation of the dumpster fire that was our bullpen. While the team had its share of blown saves with no effective closer for much of the year, the larger problem was disastrous late inning relief that put many games out of reach which is why they never had much success after trailing.

The larger point is that had the team's run prevention been more effective, their run production despite the optics would have carried them into the playoffs.

I'm not sure what could have been done about the bullpen though. Whitlock, Houck, Strahm, Barnes, and Taylor all missed significant time, and in Taylor's case the entire season. Combine that with Robles falling off a cliff out of nowhere, Diekman being traded (a good trade, albeit), the team decision to baby starters in April, and Cora's sometimes questionable usage of his relievers. It was a perfect shitstorm of injury, overuse, underperformance, and mismanagement.

 

[Papo The Snow Tiger]

I always think about the famous Pirates v Yankees 1961(?) World Series. Pirates won in 7 despite being immensely outscored. Distribution of runs is important!!!! My personal suspicion is that the Three True Outcome offense doesn't work as well as it is supposed to (or once did) for just any team. And when that approach isn't working (say... how do the Sox "players left in scoring position with less than two outs" compare to other teams????), how about figure out how to just score runs in any fucking way possible!!!
I suspect that with the shift ban next season though, teams will adjust to higher BA types with some speed (Duran?), on base skills and low power having some relevance to generating runs.

The huge lack of situational hitting is my second biggest source of frustration with the year's Red Sox (general bullpen suckitude being the biggest). How many times have we seen a leadoff double with the runner never advancing to third base, are a runner on third with less than two outs not scoring. I'm a firm believer that a Three True Outcomes philosophy is a recipe for disaster. Put the ball in play enough times and good things will happen.

 

[RobertS975]

I always think about the famous Pirates v Yankees 1961(?) World Series. Pirates won in 7 despite being immensely outscored. Distribution of runs is important!!!! My personal suspicion is that the Three True Outcome offense doesn't work as well as it is supposed to (or once did) for just any team. And when that approach isn't working (say... how do the Sox "players left in scoring position with less than two outs" compare to other teams????), how about figure out how to just score runs in any fucking way possible!!!
I suspect that with the shift ban next season though, teams will adjust to higher BA types with some speed (Duran?), on base skills and low power having some relevance to generating runs.

First World Series that I can remember... it was the 1960 series. The Yankees won their three games 16-3, 10-0 and 12-0, but lost 4 close games includinggame 7 which ended with a walk off HR from Bill Mazeroski. Game 7 was the first ever World Series to end in a walk off homer. And that game 7 has another distinction...it is the only postseason game in MLB history where there wasn't a single strikeout by either team.