Here’s another way to use yesterday’s NL team OPS+ and ERA+ numbers. I divided ERA+ by OPS+ to describe how heavily each team relies on its offense and defense. Numbers higher than 100 mean a team has a better defense than offense.

Tm	ERA+	OPS+	P/H
ARI	114	89	128
SDP	118	96	123
LAD	110	94	117
SFG	105	90	117
CHC	110	95	116
WSN	96	89	108
COL	106	103	103
CIN	96	96	100
PIT	92	92	100
NYM	105	108	97
HOU	93	96	97
ATL	103	110	94
STL	91	99	92
MIL	97	108	90
PHI	95	114	83
FLA	88	114	77

It still boggles my mind that Arizona is the most pitching-heavy team in the NL. If their young hitters improve like they should, the Diamonbackss will be the team to beat for long time.

San Francisco’s an extreme pitching-dependent team with some talented pitchers. And Barry Bonds. To me, that’s the biggest crime committed by Brian Sabean over the past few years — not getting Bonds any help on offense. A Molina brother is his protection, for crying out loud.

Seeing Colorado in the top half of the list makes me wonder how many seasons their strength has actually been pitching even though their hitting gets all the attention. Sounds like another blog entry to me.

When was the last time Atlanta’s strength has obviously been their hitting?

Philadelphia and Florida are making their case to join Arena League Baseball.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This


Further Reading -- Similar Posts



One Response to “Team Strengths”
  1. Frank says:

    I don’t get it. Why is “Pitching Heaviness” a sign of a good potential team (your somehow beloved D-backs)?

    Couldn’t I flip this analysis and say that when Florida’s injured riddled pitching staff comes back next year, and their young pitchers improve like they should, the Marlins will be the team to beat for a long time?

    Or do you assume that hitting is easier to improve on than pitching?
    (I guess I would tend to agree with that…)

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>