Are the Angels for Real?

As I write this, the Anaheim née California née Los Angeles Angels are a half game behind the defending AL West champion Seattle Mariners and could tie them for first with a Mariner loss tonight. If not, they are still the forerunner for the wildcard spot. A year ago today, the Angels with largely the same team as this year were one game above .500, in third place and 21 games behind the Mariners. They faltered the rest of the way to end up 75-87 (that's 24-37 from July 25 on), 41 games behind the Mariners. They started 2002 with a 6-14 record but since have been 54- 26 (.675). The vast improvement from last year is enough for people to ask if they're for real and can they contend the rest of the way. I mean, this is a franchise that has only finished first three times in 41 years. They choked in the 7th game of the AL Championship Series to the ultimate choke artists, the 1986 Red Sox. How could they be for real? Let's see...

First, let's check their Pythagorean winning percentage. This is a stat devised by Bill James to measure if a team's record reflects its runs for and against. (The formula I used is RF^1.83/(RF^1.83 + RA^1.83. James originally used the values to the 2nd power, but the 1.83 power has become standard.)

          Actual                   Pythagorean
         W-L    PCT  GB    RF-RA    W-L    PCT
Seattle 61-40  .604   -   514-407  61-40  .605
Anaheim 60-40  .600  0.5  533-426  60-40  .601
Oakland 59-43  .578  2.5  472-436  55-47  .536
Texas   42-58  .420  18.5 484-527  46-54  .461

They have basically a record that reflects their runs for and against as does Seattle. Oakland is playing 4 games better than expected and Texas 4 game worse, but they're out of it either way.

OK, so yet far their record matches what one would expect it to be. What about the players, are they playing way above their ability? Are they far exceeding what they did last year and that's why they have improved? Are they exceeding their established career levels?

Below is a table of the Angels batters and their OPS (On-Base Plus Slugging) for the last two years who have had a significant amount of playing time. Note that Fullmer's 2001 OPS is not listed because he was not with the team. Joyner and Wooten played for the Angels in 2001 but not this year (Wooten's been injured). The table compares this year's OPS with last year's and with the player's career OPS:

 NAME           OPS 2001 OPS Change Career OPS Change
G. Anderson   .860   .792   .068    .792     .068
D. Eckstein   .757   .712   .045    .729     .028
Darin Erstad  .721   .691   .030    .786    -.065
J. Fabregas   .487   .553  -.066    .605    -.118
Brad Fullmer  .821     -            .811     .010
Benji Gil     .732   .807  -.075    .650     .082
Troy Glaus    .779   .898  -.119    .855    -.076
Adam Kennedy  .756   .690   .066    .708     .048
Jose Nieves   .612   .751  -.139    .627    -.015
O. Palmeiro   .738   .641   .097    .710     .028
Tim Salmon    .882   .748   .134    .901    -.019
Scott Spiezio .793   .764   .029    .747     .046
Bengie Molina .621   .660  -.039    .681    -.060
Shawn Wooten    -    .798     -  
Wally Joyner    -    .656     -  
Angels        .764   .732   .032            -.043
Opponents     .734   .742  -.008  

Note that the Angels team OPS has gone up 32 points from last year and their opponent has gone down slightly (8 points). The greatest increase since last year is Tim Salmon (134 points), but he's still below his career OPS. So one can safely assume that last year was an aberration. The same can be said for Erstad. The 33-year-old role player, Orlando Palmeiro, is far above last year but only a slight increase over his career (28 points). Garret Anderson, however, may be due for a comeuppance-He is 68 points higher than his OPS last year and for his career and is on a pace for 28 homers and 58 doubles (his pervious high is 41). He's 30 years old and is either having a career year or is due for a very bad streak. We'll have to see. Eckstein and Kennedy are having much better years than last and are better than their career average, but that might just be the maturation process. Spiezio has improved slightly (more doubles but fewer HRs) and is far above his career totals but is still not up to snuff compared to the average first baseman. The greatest improvement was replacing a DH by committee (no more than 30 as DH games for any player) with Brad Fullmer. Last year the Angels' DHs had a .285 slugging and a .277 on-base percent, which combine for a .562 OPS. Fullmer is 259 points better than that this year. Or another way to look at is that he replaced role players like the now-retired Wally Joyner (165 point OPS difference) and recently activated Shawn Wooten (23 points). This is merely filling a hole with a good role player. Troy Glaus is playing tremendously below last year and his established career levels. He may have have a good deal of room for improvement down the stretch. Besides that the aggregate total difference for the team this year compared to their career is 43 points. There may be room for improvemet in the offense in general on the team.

Maybe their pitching improved dramatically. Let's check. Here are all of the pitchers for the past two years in Anaheim with their 2002 stats, 2001 ERA, and career ERA:

NAME           W-L   S    IP   ERA  2001 IP 2001 ERA Change  Career  Change
Troy Percival  3-1  22   29.1  2.15   57.2    2.65   -0.50    3.03   -0.88
B. Donnelly    0-0   0   17    2.65     -      -       -
Ben Weber      4-2   5   46.1  2.72   68.1    3.42   -0.70    3.67   -0.95
Scot Shields   3-1   0   22.2  2.78   11      0.00    2.78    1.87    0.91
Dennis Cook    1-1   0   22    2.86    -       -       -      3.90   -1.04
J. Washburn   12-2   0  125.2  3.22  193.1    3.77    -0.55   3.92   -0.70
Lou Pote       0-1   0   47.1  3.23   86.2    4.15    -0.92   3.50   -0.27
Matt Wise      0-0   0    8.1  3.24   49.1    4.38    -1.14   4.74   -1.50
M. Lukasiewicz 1-0   0   10.1  3.48   22.1    6.04    -2.56   5.23   -1.75
Ramon Ortiz    9-7   0  140.1  3.85  208.2    4.36    -0.51   4.58   -0.73
John Lackey    1-1   0   29.2  3.94     -      -        -     
Al Levine      3-2   4   35    4.11   75.2    2.38     1.73   3.88    0.23
Kevin Appier   8-8   0  114    4.50     -      -        -     3.67    0.83
Aaron Sele     8-7   0  125.2  4.73     -      -        -     4.36    0.37
S. Schoeneweis 7-7   0   99    5.45  205.1    5.08     0.37   5.31    0.14
Donne Wall     0-0   0   21    6.43     -      -        -     4.20    2.23
S. Hasegawa                          55.2    4.04
Ismael Valdes                       163.2    4.45
Bart Miadich                         10      4.50  
Pat Rapp                            170      4.76   
Mike Holtz                           37      4.86 
Toby Borland                          3.1   10.80 
Totals         60-40 31 893.2  3.99          4.20     -0.21  
                                   1437.2

The Angels have had far more changes in the pitching corps than in position players as you can see. Their team ERA has dropped by 21 points in a year even as the AL average ERA has increased slightly (4.47 to 4.54). Both starters Washburn and Ortiz have improved their ERAs by 50 points. Schoeneweis has seen his ERA go up a bit, and new-comers Appier and Sele are doing about as well as Rapp and Valdes whom they replaced but are well above their career ERA, so there may be room for improvement down the stretch. In general, most of the pitchers on the staff are below their 2001 and career ERAs, but given the age of the staff it is difficult to say that this is significant.

One last thing to check, how have they done against playoff teams. Here is a chart with their record against each AL playoff contender this year. Note that the games in their 6-14 start are broken out:

The Angels have had far more changes in the pitching corps than in position players as you can see.  Their team ERA has dropped by 21 points in a year even as the AL average ERA has increased slightly (4.47 to 4.54).  Both starters Washburn and Ortiz have improved their ERAs by 50 points.  Schoeneweis has seen his ERA go up a bit, and new-comers Appier and Sele are doing about as well as Rapp and Valdes whom they replaced but are well above their career ERA, so there may be room for improvement down the stretch.  In general, most of the pitchers on the staff are below their 2001 and career ERAs, but given the age of the staff it is difficult to say that this is significant.

One last thing to check, how have they done against playoff teams.  Here is a chart with their record against each AL playoff contender this year.  Note that the games in their 6-14 start are broken out:

          Total  During 6-14  Since    Games

Team        W-L     W-L        W-L   Remaining

Seattle     4-6     0-6        4-0       9

Oakland     5-7     2-4        3-3       8

Minnesota   4-5     0-0        4-5       0

New York    0-0     0-0        0-0       7

Boston      0-0     0-0        0-0       7