Friday, May 18, 2012

Defensive Soft Spots Revealed in Detroit

We knew that the defense was going to be down. Picking up Prince Fielder didn't exactly happen for his glove. Moving Miguel Cabrera to third base wasn't for his quick feet. Snagging Delmon Young wasn't for his range. Giving Boesch more and more AB's isn't so he can use his deep intuition in right.

Let's be honest... The Tigers snuck by for the first 36 games as mediocre defenders. Committing 21 errors through Tuesday would have kept them in the top ten best in baseball. However, we learned against Minnesota that they are not mediocre defenders. In fact, we learned that they are poor defenders and that errors are costly. The four errors on Wednesday led to four unearned runs and probably cost us the game as we lost by four. The two errors on Thursday led to one unearned run and probably cost us the game as we lost by one. (Not to mention that Prince Fielder's error has embarrassing for everybody. No wonder why he never gets hurt.)

Overall... Again... We didn't put this lineup together to be great at defense. We put this lineup together to score a boat load of runs. And this is the problem. 

So what that the Tigers are 21st in fielding percentage at .981? This is expected. What is unexpected is that the Tigers are 11th or 12th in just about every major hitting category.

11th
AVE (.256)
H (329)
R (167)

12th
OPS (.719)
HR (37)

By the way, Cleveland is thus far better than the Tigers in just about every major offensive category. Here is what their lineup has looked like the last three days.


The realty that this lineup is producing better that Detroit's is more embarrassing than Prince Fielder's defense. The irony is that without Jackson or Dirks, these numbers would be even more frightening. Hopefully they can keep it up while the rest of the team begins to pick it up as many have been putting in extra time at BP.

I was earlier arguing that when Victor Martinez returns, the Tigers lineup could be the best in history. I am now beginning to question if this is true.

No comments:

Post a Comment