Skip to main content 

Owing to the width of most of the many data tables on this site, it is best viewed from a desktop computer. If you are on a mobile device (phone or tablet), you will obtain a better viewing experience by rotating your device a quarter-turn (to get the so-called “panorama” screen view).


The Owlcroft Baseball-Analysis Site




Baseball team and player performance examined realistically and accurately.
 Click here to email us. 



You are here:  Home  »  dailies  »  teams  »   this page
(Click on any image above to see it at full size.)
You are here:  Home  »  dailies  »  teams  »   this page
(Click on any image above to see it at full size.)

You are here:  Home  »  dailies  »  teams  »   this page
You are here:  Home  »  dailies  »  teams  »   this page
You can get a site directory by clicking on the “hamburger” icon () in the upper right of this page.
Or you can search this site with Google (standard Google-search rules apply).

Search term(s):



Fielding Effects


All raw data supplied courtesy of Baseball-Reference.com.
They do a wonderful job, and deserve your support.

Fielding Effects

Through games of Tuesday, 22 September 2026.
All results are from true, unadjusted data.

The Table shows two lines for each team. The first is their actual stats to date, from Games through Strikeouts; the stats FEbat and FErun—Fielding Efficiency on batters and Fielding Efficiency on runners—are explained on our page here about Team Defense. The OR stat on this line is the TPP-projected Runs the team would be expected to have yielded to date (for an explanation of the TPP, see our page here about basic Baseball Analysis). The R stat is the TOP-projected team Runs scored to date. The Δ stats are immaterial for this line.

The second Table line for each team is their calculated stats if their defense were MLB-average. The FEbat and FErun values on this line are their MLB-average values (averaged over the three recent years 2017 - 2019). The OR stat on this line is the TPP-projected Runs the team would be expected to have yielded to date based on the average-fielding stat values. And on this line, the Δ stats show the differences in Wins that having an MLB-average defense would gain or lose (the ΔW stat is for the year to date, while the ΔWyr is for a full 162-game season.

Thus, this table shows us what a given team’s defense is doing to help or hurt it. As you see, the average difference is less than 3 wins a season, and that figure is heavily weighted by a very few very bad defenses. (Without the three exceptionally worst, the average difference is just 2 wins a year, and the widest swings from assuming an MLB-average defense are 6 lost by good-fielding teams and gained by poor-fielding teams, with 2/3 of the teams within a couple of wins of average-fielding results.

(Those interested in the tiresome details of the calculations can follow that link to a full explanation.)

We cannot easily disentangle pitching from fielding, because fielding affects pitching results. But, painting with a very broad brush, we can say that at the extremes the fielding-attributable difference in runs allowed is in the range of being equivalent to perhaps a quarter to a third of a run on the team ERA, with the more normal variations amounting to about an eighth of a run. Pretty clearly, on a team level, fielding runs a poor second to pitching in significance for runs allowed, and thus a very poor third to offense. (Recall that offense and defense are each 50% of the game, and defense is part pitching and part fielding.) Since the extremes of team ERA cover about 2.75 runs (in 2020, 3.02 to 5.75) while the extremes of fielding, even including all the outliers, equate to maybe 0.60 on an ERA, their ratio is—and again, this is very, very broad-brush thinking—around 9:2, making fielding perhaps at most around 20% of defense and thus pitching about 80%, meaning that offense is 50% of the game, pitching is 40%, and fielding is at most around 10%, and so of much less importance than either offense or pitching. (Quite as we said almost 40 years ago.)

— Place your cursor over any column heading to see what it signifies. —

Team G IP BFP AB BB HBP SH SF CI H 2B 3B HR SO FEbat FErun OR R       ΔW ΔWyr
Rays,
with actual fielding		 157 1401.0 5753 5239 390 52 24 46 2 1193 228 17 193 1285 73.90% 7.68% 603 699 --- ---
Rays,
assuming average fielding		 157 1401.0 5692 5183 386 51 24 46 2 1180 226 17 191 1271 71.24% 8.14% 627 699 -3 -3
Cubs,
with actual fielding		 157 1404.0 5890 5300 483 61 20 25 1 1290 179 13 229 1226 72.72% 9.44% 675 833 --- ---
Cubs,
assuming average fielding		 157 1404.0 5828 5244 478 60 20 25 1 1276 177 13 227 1213 71.24% 8.14% 696 833 -3 -3
Yankees,
with actual fielding		 157 1405.1 5805 5220 468 55 19 36 7 1165 212 26 159 1404 72.90% 8.20% 574 683 --- ---
Yankees,
assuming average fielding		 157 1405.1 5743 5165 463 54 19 36 7 1153 210 26 157 1389 71.24% 8.14% 585 683 -1 -2
Dodgers,
with actual fielding		 157 1389.2 5747 5158 473 66 23 27 0 1128 225 15 171 1460 73.25% 7.29% 571 770 --- ---
Dodgers,
assuming average fielding		 157 1389.2 5686 5103 468 65 23 27 0 1116 223 15 169 1445 71.24% 8.14% 585 770 -2 -2
Braves,
with actual fielding		 157 1394.0 5860 5221 519 57 22 38 3 1221 200 23 176 1314 72.43% 8.05% 633 692 --- ---
Braves,
assuming average fielding		 157 1394.0 5798 5166 513 56 22 38 3 1208 198 23 174 1300 71.24% 8.14% 643 692 -1 -2
Astros,
with actual fielding		 157 1392.2 5991 5214 631 89 24 33 0 1237 210 23 201 1368 72.02% 8.62% 712 690 --- ---
Astros,
assuming average fielding		 157 1392.2 5927 5159 624 88 24 33 0 1224 208 23 199 1353 71.24% 8.14% 715 690 0 -1
Team G IP BFP AB BB HBP SH SF CI H 2B 3B HR SO FEbat FErun OR R       ΔW ΔWyr
Tigers,
with actual fielding		 158 1398.0 5862 5225 495 78 31 33 0 1211 238 20 162 1272 72.79% 8.70% 617 701 --- ---
Tigers,
assuming average fielding		 158 1398.0 5800 5170 490 77 31 33 0 1198 235 20 160 1259 71.24% 8.14% 626 701 -1 -1
Diamondbacks,
with actual fielding		 157 1399.0 5909 5301 468 65 24 47 4 1310 256 31 179 1105 72.33% 8.79% 675 686 --- ---
Diamondbacks,
assuming average fielding		 157 1399.0 5846 5245 463 64 24 47 4 1296 253 31 177 1093 71.24% 8.14% 684 686 -1 -1
Brewers,
with actual fielding		 157 1401.2 5816 5204 503 65 18 25 1 1163 214 14 166 1496 72.19% 9.03% 580 766 --- ---
Brewers,
assuming average fielding		 157 1401.2 5754 5149 498 64 18 25 1 1151 212 14 164 1480 71.24% 8.14% 580 766 0 0
Padres,
with actual fielding		 157 1391.1 5873 5226 532 63 17 31 4 1261 222 21 176 1275 71.62% 9.39% 648 683 --- ---
Padres,
assuming average fielding		 157 1391.1 5811 5171 526 62 17 31 4 1248 220 21 174 1261 71.24% 8.14% 651 683 0 0
White Sox,
with actual fielding		 157 1396.2 5989 5263 561 90 26 44 5 1277 251 22 174 1292 71.48% 8.45% 695 706 --- ---
White Sox,
assuming average fielding		 157 1396.2 5925 5207 555 89 26 44 5 1263 248 22 172 1278 71.24% 8.14% 685 706 +1 +1
Marlins,
with actual fielding		 157 1384.1 5908 5227 547 79 15 37 3 1236 230 23 167 1282 72.09% 7.63% 667 716 --- ---
Marlins,
assuming average fielding		 157 1384.1 5845 5172 541 78 15 37 3 1223 228 23 165 1268 71.24% 8.14% 665 716 0 +1
Blue Jays,
with actual fielding		 157 1393.0 5924 5224 581 43 27 45 4 1231 205 10 163 1365 71.66% 7.92% 648 633 --- ---
Blue Jays,
assuming average fielding		 157 1393.0 5861 5169 575 43 27 45 4 1218 203 10 161 1351 71.24% 8.14% 638 633 +1 +1
Team G IP BFP AB BB HBP SH SF CI H 2B 3B HR SO FEbat FErun OR R       ΔW ΔWyr
Royals,
with actual fielding		 157 1379.1 5955 5276 557 67 19 36 0 1371 284 22 200 1142 70.64% 10.14% 745 670 --- ---
Royals,
assuming average fielding		 157 1379.1 5892 5220 551 66 19 36 0 1356 281 22 198 1130 71.24% 8.14% 727 670 +2 +2
Nationals,
with actual fielding		 158 1401.0 6110 5364 587 81 23 52 3 1358 253 12 210 1245 71.18% 7.96% 779 760 --- ---
Nationals,
assuming average fielding		 158 1401.0 6045 5307 581 80 23 51 3 1298 242 12 208 1232 71.24% 8.14% 755 760 +2 +2
Red Sox,
with actual fielding		 157 1395.0 5848 5257 457 64 28 41 1 1271 246 9 150 1361 70.62% 8.78% 616 686 --- ---
Red Sox,
assuming average fielding		 157 1395.0 5786 5201 452 63 28 41 1 1258 243 9 148 1347 71.24% 8.14% 594 686 +3 +3
Reds,
with actual fielding		 157 1390.0 6162 5347 651 82 22 51 9 1362 244 30 209 1261 70.81% 6.87% 822 662 --- ---
Reds,
assuming average fielding		 157 1390.0 6097 5290 644 81 22 50 9 1348 241 30 207 1248 71.24% 8.14% 789 662 +3 +3
Guardians,
with actual fielding		 157 1394.2 5900 5246 517 73 21 43 0 1240 243 17 170 1488 70.70% 7.64% 647 658 --- ---
Guardians,
assuming average fielding		 157 1394.2 5837 5190 512 72 21 43 0 1227 240 17 168 1472 71.24% 8.14% 624 658 +2 +3
Angels,
with actual fielding		 157 1388.1 5995 5233 617 78 16 48 3 1247 221 21 160 1402 70.90% 7.62% 686 610 --- ---
Angels,
assuming average fielding		 157 1388.1 5931 5178 610 77 16 47 3 1234 219 21 158 1387 71.24% 8.14% 661 610 +3 +3
Mets,
with actual fielding		 157 1399.2 5988 5305 539 78 28 37 1 1273 253 24 179 1413 71.04% 7.55% 685 669 --- ---
Mets,
assuming average fielding		 157 1399.2 5924 5249 533 77 28 37 1 1260 250 24 177 1398 71.24% 8.14% 659 669 +3 +3
Team G IP BFP AB BB HBP SH SF CI H 2B 3B HR SO FEbat FErun OR R       ΔW ΔWyr
Mariners,
with actual fielding		 157 1384.1 5845 5290 420 69 24 40 2 1330 242 18 190 1336 70.22% 8.69% 678 647 --- ---
Mariners,
assuming average fielding		 157 1384.1 5783 5234 416 68 24 40 2 1316 239 18 188 1322 71.24% 8.14% 647 647 +4 +3
Giants,
with actual fielding		 158 1393.0 6012 5282 583 65 28 51 3 1312 228 33 154 1174 71.29% 8.85% 710 668 --- ---
Giants,
assuming average fielding		 158 1393.0 5948 5226 577 64 28 50 3 1298 226 33 152 1162 71.24% 8.14% 690 668 +2 +3
Cardinals,
with actual fielding		 157 1401.2 6023 5327 547 74 20 48 7 1350 276 15 155 1239 70.13% 9.33% 701 672 --- ---
Cardinals,
assuming average fielding		 157 1401.2 5959 5271 541 73 20 47 7 1336 273 15 153 1226 71.24% 8.14% 670 672 +4 +3
Rangers,
with actual fielding		 157 1376.1 5902 5296 480 67 18 36 5 1312 253 23 184 1301 70.82% 6.19% 691 663 --- ---
Rangers,
assuming average fielding		 157 1376.1 5839 5240 475 66 18 36 5 1298 250 23 182 1287 71.24% 8.14% 665 663 +2 +3
Twins,
with actual fielding		 158 1399.2 6091 5370 574 70 27 46 4 1338 276 19 181 1348 70.44% 6.15% 744 698 --- ---
Twins,
assuming average fielding		 158 1399.2 6026 5313 568 69 27 46 4 1324 273 19 179 1334 71.24% 8.14% 706 698 +4 +4
Pirates,
with actual fielding		 157 1401.1 6000 5289 565 85 19 38 4 1253 280 15 150 1443 70.61% 7.80% 661 748 --- ---
Pirates,
assuming average fielding		 157 1401.1 5936 5233 559 84 19 38 4 1240 277 15 148 1428 71.24% 8.14% 629 748 +4 +4
Orioles,
with actual fielding		 157 1401.1 6006 5360 525 49 17 53 2 1353 260 27 168 1269 70.32% 8.76% 710 668 --- ---
Orioles,
assuming average fielding		 157 1401.1 5942 5303 519 48 17 52 2 1339 257 27 166 1256 71.24% 8.14% 672 668 +4 +5
Team G IP BFP AB BB HBP SH SF CI H 2B 3B HR SO FEbat FErun OR R       ΔW ΔWyr
Athletics,
with actual fielding		 157 1385.0 6185 5420 614 73 16 59 3 1472 288 24 232 1307 68.66% 7.64% 883 680 --- ---
Athletics,
assuming average fielding		 157 1385.0 6119 5363 607 72 16 58 3 1456 285 24 230 1293 71.24% 8.14% 807 680 +6 +6
Phillies,
with actual fielding		 157 1393.1 5930 5332 470 69 21 37 1 1318 216 24 184 1525 69.19% 7.51% 682 680 --- ---
Phillies,
assuming average fielding		 157 1393.1 5867 5275 465 68 21 37 1 1304 214 24 182 1509 71.24% 8.14% 629 680 +6 +6
Rockies,
with actual fielding		 157 1378.2 6175 5491 521 60 26 75 2 1583 352 52 216 1075 68.22% 7.40% 931 722 --- ---
Rockies,
assuming average fielding		 157 1378.2 6110 5433 515 59 26 74 2 1566 348 51 214 1064 71.24% 8.14% 836 722 +8 +8

Return to the page top. ↑




  Advertisement:


  Advertisement:



Want detailed, careful, unhysterical analysis of the effects of “Performance-Enhancing Drugs” in baseball? Click here to visit the Steroids & Baseball web site.

All content copyright © 2002 - 2026 by The Owlcroft Company.

This web page is strictly compliant with the WHATWG (Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group) HyperText Markup Language (HTML5) Protocol versionless “Living Standard” and the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) Cascading Style Sheets (CSS3) Protocol v3  — because we care about interoperability. Click on the logos below to test us!



This page was last modified on Wednesday, 23 September 2026, at 5:31 am Pacific Time.