Do day games really set the Cubs up for failure? To answer the question, I consulted Retrosheet game logs for each game played from 1997 to 2001 (Retrosheet doesn’t have the 2002 data ready just yet). The first series of numbers I ran looked at every team except for the Cubs, with data broken down between day and night games, as well as various permutations on what the team’s schedule had been like on the previous day (afternoon game on the road, and so forth). In the table below, I’ve provided the home team’s winning percentage based on each condition.
Chris Kahrl takes his biweekly look at even the most obscure transactions, detailing what impact they have on both player and team alike. In this issue: the Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati Reds, Montreal Expos, Pittsburgh Pirates, and Tampa Bay Devil Rays.
Thanks for all the feedback from yesterday’s story. Two topics are worthy of discussion before we get into the injuries. First, the Astros THR came out and many of you disagree with my ‘out on a limb’ red light that I dropped on Roy Oswalt. I thought I had explained my gut feel enough, but it didn’t appear to do the trick. Some of Oswalt is gut, but most of it was the analysis of his motion, and the problems the injury problems Astros pitchers have had lately.
In the end, remember that a red light simply means that someone has some indicators of injury, and that you should really consider all the facts–not just injury, but history, projections, and other knowledge about the player–when analyzing his prospects for the upcoming season. Injury analysis, at some level, is actually about economics. While I’m no Doug Pappas, bear with me for a moment. If a team pays a player like Oswalt or Pedro Martinez or Kevin Brown, that player may come up lame and not produce, leaving the team with fewer resources and lesser players to try and fill the roster spots. Sometimes the risk is worth the possible reward, but not being conscious of the risk and not hedging it will buy that team a non-refundable ticket to Lastplaceville.