After the 2003 regular season ended, the time before the divisional series was filled by “experts” forecasting the outcome of the four divisional series. This phenomenon will be repeated before the League Championship Series, and again before the World Series. These same pundits will look back after each series to pat themselves on the back, make excuses or explain how they went wrong. They believe, or at least pretend, that postseason results can be accurately predicted. Others believe that the postseason is essentially a crapshoot, that any club can win a succession of short series among eight clubs which all finished within 10-15 games of one another during the regular season. This group includes Billy Beane, quoted in Moneyball as saying: “My s*** doesn’t work in the playoffs. My job is to get us to the playoffs. What happens after that is f****** luck.” Those in the first group have criticized Beane’s Oakland A’s and Bobby Cox’s Atlanta Braves as teams that “can’t win the big ones”; those in the second think “clutch postseason performance” is as real as “clutch hitting,” or the Easter Bunny. Who’s right? Let’s look at the past century of postseason play. Since 1903, there have been exactly 200 postseason championship series of best-of-five or longer. This includes 94 best-of-seven World Series, four best-of-nine World Series (1903, 1919-21), 34 best-of-seven League Championship Series (LCS), 32 best-of-five LCS, 32 best-of-five divisional series, and four best-of-five divisional playoff series following the 1981 strike-induced split season. That’s a sizable data set.
Joe Sheehan offers up his picks for NL and AL MVP, Cy Young, Rookie of the Year, and Manager of the Year and sounds the call to vote in the Internet Baseball Awards (coming soon). Delve into the Monday edition of Prospectus Today for more.
I’m not a big fan of evaluating the character of individuals through their work, particularly when it comes to sports. I think we, as a culture, extrapolate far too much about people from the outcome of a bounce of a ball. That said, the Astros can’t feel too good about themselves this morning; when you’re tied with three games to play at home against one of the worst teams in the league, you’d like to think you could at least avoid getting eliminated in the quickest fashion possible. The Astros were blown out Friday night—down 9-1 after an inning and a half—and scored just two runs in yesterday’s defeat. It was a disappointing performance by a team that had led the division for most of the second half, and which was set up to control its own destiny when the weekend began. However, if you want to judge the Astros, what’s clear is that their collapse, and the Cubs’ taking advantage of it, changes the Division Series. With Friday’s rainout leading to Saturday’s doubleheader, and the possibility of playing meaningful games Sunday and even Monday, the Cubs were looking at having to open the Division Series with Shawn Estes and not having their top two starters available until Game 3 at the earliest. Against the best-hitting team in the league, one loaded with right-handed power, that was a recipe for disaster. Having clinched, the Cubs can set Kerry Wood aside for Game One on Tuesday. With no playoff to play Monday, Carlos Zambrano is available to start Game Two, and Mark Prior can start Game Three Friday on four days’ rest.
Hello Gary! In your chat session, you stated that you thought Keith Woolner’s research into replacement level was the most important work in sabermetrics. Why is it so important? I think that your work on PAP is much more important. It can change the way teams handle their pitchers. The pitchers will be healthier, and the teams will be better because of it. Why is replacement level more important than that? –R. J., Baton Rouge, LA
First off, let me clarify something. Pitcher Abuse Points was a system developed by Keith Woolner and Rany Jazayerli, not me. And if you review it, you’ll find a curve fit that you’ll be lucky to find again in your whole life.
The answer’s pretty straightforward: replacement level is essential to know because it’s the only way you can accurately assess marginal value. Let’s say you can sign Joe Slugger, who’s likely to play a pretty good corner outfield spot and post .280/.360/.550 each year, for $6,000,000 annually. Is that a good deal? There is absolutely no way to tell unless you know what your options are–you need to know the marginal value of that player’s production, and for that, you have to know what your replacement options are. Or, put another way, you have to know replacement level.
Q: When are 93- and 90-win seasons not success?
A: When you’re the Seattle Mariners.
By the standards of most teams in the baseball, and by the standards of their own history, the Mariners’ last two years have been excellent ones. They’ve won 183 games, been in two pennant races, drawn three million people in both years, and made a good amount of money. The problem is that in neither season did the team make the playoffs, despite spending four months of each year in first place and having a pretty good lead over their rivals as late as August.
Let’s focus just on this year. Where did things go wrong? On August 6, the Mariners were 69-43, and had a three-game lead on the A’s in the AL West and over the Red Sox for the AL wild-card slot. From that day until today, the Mariners went 21-26, losing 10 games in the standings to the A’s and seven to the Sox, being eliminated from any potential playoff spot last night. The Mariners had actually been treading water since June, when they peaked at 48-22 on June 18 with a win over the Angels.
Livan takes home the WTF?! for the Expos. Jeffrey Hammonds has been a great deal for the Giants. Carlos Delgado can hit a little. Year-end reviews and looks ahead for Toronto, San Francisco, and Montreal in Friday’s Triple Play.
Everyone has his own standards when it comes to MVP voting, ranging from Player Rated Highest by Win Shares (PRHWS) to My Favorite Yankee (MFY). Most debates about the MVP turn out to be pointless because they devolve into reiterating those standards over and over, rather than actually applying them. And people aren\’t likely to change their standards in the heat of an argument. So instead, I\’ve become something of an existentialist when it comes to MVP voting: Pick whatever standards you like, just make sure you apply them consistently. If you don\’t think starting pitchers deserve consideration for the top spot on your ballot…don\’t vote for one of them for second. Same goes if you only want to consider players on contending teams. We can debate semantics all day, but the fact is that the voting standards outlined on the official ballot are sufficiently vague so as to permit multiple interpretations. And that\’s OK. As an analyst and would-be cultural critic, though, I am interested in looking at looking at the nature of people\’s biases–what are they, and how do they arise?
A lost season for the Angels has folks in Anaheim scratching their heads. John Smoltz’s injury buries Bobby Thigpen’s name for another year. The Royals’ run evokes memories of George Brett and company. Sandy Alomar…you can probably guess what Chris will write about Sandy Alomar. Witticisms, Kahrlisms and roster schmisms in this edition of Transaction Analysis.
The Marlins have done just fine without Mike Lowell–in no small part aided by the acquisition of Jeff Conine–but the Fish will certainly be happy to have their start third baseman back in the lineup. It’s possible that he’ll get a couple regular season at-bats to test his thumb if he’s cleared. He was targeting Saturday, but due to the medical staff’s concerns, and an adjustment of game time, Lowell is more likely to be back on Sunday. A final determination will be made when he’s seen by the doctor on Friday. (On Conine and others, has this been the weirdest year in recent memory for moves working out that looked horrible on paper?)
With the clinch, the Twins get to rest their players and reset their rotation for the Division Series. Ron Gardenhire started the 2003 Rochester Red Wings on Wednesday, affording some rest for guys like Doug Mientkiewicz. Minky will sit out the remaining games to try and get his wrist some much needed rest. As well, the Twins will work the rotation to get Johan Santana–a guy they were reluctant to have in the rotation not too long ago–as their Game One starter. How Ron Gardenhire sets his bench and rotation will be very interesting, with guys like Chris Gomez, who has missed the better part of September with back problems, and Eric Milton, looking for roles.
How does Francisco Rodriguez stack up with other AL rookies in 2003? If anyone’s seen the real Shawn Estes lately, the Cubs would certainly like to know of his whereabouts. And the Detroit Tigers suck. All this and much more news from Anaheim, Chicago, and Detroit in your Thursday edition of Prospectus Triple Play.
See? THIS is why I don’t go to more games:
Have you seen anything more fun (on a baseball field) than Billy Wagner vs. Barry Bonds today? –Jim Cole
Well, Jim, I wouldn’t know, because I didn’t see that epic matchup. While the Astros were clinging for dear life to their division hopes in yesterday’s 2-1 win over the Giants, I was in Anaheim, watching the Dodgers…excuse me, the Mariners…go down like Peter McNeely against John Lackey and the Angels. I’m not complaining–I got to talk baseball for two hours with SABR’s Stephen Roney and saw some very good pitching–but Jim’s e-mail illustrates the opportunity cost of going to games in the satellite era.
I promised an analysis of the Mariners’ fade for today; that’s not coming until Friday. (Life Lesson No. 12: Never believe promises made after 2 a.m. Those of you 22 and over probably know this one already.) Today, it’s all about the Marlins.
The O’s have something to look forward to in little Mike Fontenot. Colorado is more or less stuck for the time being. And Jose Reyes has been showing some nice development over the past few months for the Mets. All this and much more news from Baltimore, Colorado, and New York in your Wednesday edition of Prospectus Triple Play.
Among serious contenders this season, Boston’s Theo Epstein is the only freshman GM. And since the Red Sox have roughly a 97.6% chance of winning the Wild Card, perhaps it’s time to divvy up the plaudits. Boston’s erstwhile GM, Dan Duquette, put together the bulk of this team. While that’s fairly ipso facto for an exec only 18 months or so removed from the job, it’s worth asking to what degree Duquette’s fingerprints are on this year’s model. One obvious way to do that is to take a cumulative, all-encompassing metric and see what percentage the Epstein-era acquisitions are contributing. Let’s first take a look at the offense using Value Over Replacement Player (VORP). Players traded for or signed by Epstein are indicated by an asterisk (*) following their names:
This probably happens to everyone. After I filed my column for Tuesday, I started to think I’d missed something, that there was one more thing I’d forgotten to look at. The next day, I had the same feeling, so when the column went up, I went back again and there it was, staring me in the face. I started this follow-up immediately, and considering the amount of e-mail I normally get I was stunned that I was able to dive into it a couple hours before a reader sent feedback that nailed the problem exactly: I found your latest Breaking Balls (“Cheaters”, in case it takes a week for you to get to this e-mail) quite interesting. But I also find your conclusion a little odd, especially considering the Red Sox splits at home with RISP. The reason for the drop-off is right in your article: “Some teams have supposedly gone to always using more complicated signs usually reserved for runner-on-second situations when facing the Sox.” Since RISP usually means a runner on second, teams will switch to the more complex signs. Anyone stealing signs would be more likely to screw up and relay the wrong pitch, or be unable to relay any information at all, either way one would expect a decrease in the hitter’s effectiveness. In fact, one could argue that Boston’s poor performance in those situations is evidence that they rely heavily on stealing signs. Not that I blame them, it’s not cheating after all.
With the White Sox eliminated, they’ll try to keep something positive working by giving Esteban Loaiza a couple shots at winning 20 games by pitching him twice this week on short rest. Word from the south side has the Sox with a quick hook, positive or negative, in his first start and letting him control his destiny for the last. Loaiza has been handled very well this season–another positive reflection on Don Cooper’s work.
I’m just stunned at the comeback of Jose Guillen. With a broken hamate, his swing looks unaltered and effective. He’s obviously subject to pain tolerance and immediate relapse, but the A’s have to like having a guy who can play under such circumstances. They’re also smart enough to let another team overpay for him. Is Jose Guillen this year’s Jeffrey Hammonds? Maybe.
The Padres are beginning to figure out how the pieces go together for 2004. As expected, Ryan Klesko will move to the outfield with Phil Nevin being a bit protected from diving injuries (we hope) at first base. With Brian Giles normally a left-fielder, the immediate thought is that Klesko would move to right, but with the new park showing some odd dimensions, the Pads will have an open mind when it comes to positioning their outfield.
One of the weird things about this gig is that people who aren’t familiar with BP or my work assume that I go to a lot of baseball games. I don’t, actually. While I love live baseball, I also love my Extra Innings package and the 10-15 games a night it brings into my home. Given a choice between attending one and watching 15, I often choose the lazier of two paths.
If anything, I’ve gotten worse about it with each passing season. I’ll have to make a greater effort next season, maybe set a goal of N games or to catch one game of each series.
Last night, however, I dragged my sorry ass down to Anaheim to catch the Angels/Mariners game with BP’s Jason Grady. I’d been wanting to see the Mariners, anyway (and will do so again today), because their repeat of 2002’s second-half fade is an interesting story that I’d like to cover. More on that tomorrow.