Don't blame the Washington Nationals, who did their fair share for the N.L. and then some, going 10-8 with a 69-57 run differential this season against the great and vaunted A.L. East: the division where supposedly every team is better than we are.

Yeah but they went 2-4 against the Orioles.

YEAH BABY!!!! WOOOO!! AMERICAN LEAGUE AMERICAN LEAGUE RAH RAH SIS BOOM BAH!!!

Don't blame the Washington Nationals, who did their fair share for the N.L. and then some, going 10-8 with a 69-57 run differential this season against the great and vaunted A.L. East: the division where supposedly every team is better than we are.


In other words, the best team in the NL is a .500 club in the AL East, which sounds about right.

In other words, the best team in the NL is a .500 club in the AL East, which sounds about right.

Well someone obviously needs a remedial math lesson. 10 out of 18 isn't .500, it's .556. Furthermore, the pythagorean run differential was even better than that.

Also, in actuality the 10-8 really should have been 11-7, because the Nationals got blatantly screwed out of a win in the middle game against the Yankees by a horrible call at home plate. But what can you do; those are the breaks.

Er, 10-8 .556 = 90-72. That's a contender, not a .500 team.

Is that worth a Coke?

One little data point which is probably hugely significant: NL DH's typically hit pretty horridly: .234/.299/.389/.688 this year. Combine the fact that most NL teams probably don't have an elite bench hitter, and even if they do he isn't used to effectively pinch-hitting, and that's a pretty big handicap when an NL team is on the road.

john

i don't think it's offense that crimps the nl. it's pitching or lack thereof. just by memory the lesser clubs get the bejeezus knocked out of them.

10 out of 18 isn't .500, it's .556. Furthermore, the pythagorean run differential was even better than that.



Ooh, what the pythag would be 10.5 - 7.5?

One little data point which is probably hugely significant: NL DH's typically hit pretty horridly: .234/.299/.389/.688 this year. Combine the fact that most NL teams probably don't have an elite bench hitter, and even if they do he isn't used to effectively pinch-hitting, and that's a pretty big handicap when an NL team is on the road.

We had this discussion a couple weeks ago and SG ran the numbers. At that point, the NL DH + pitchers were outhitting the AL DH + pitchers.

And besides, even if every NL team had a replacement level hitter at DH, and every AL team had Edgar Martinez in his prime, we’re talking about maybe a 4-5 win advantage in the 126 games in AL parks.

When it comes to explaining the AL’s consistent winning record against the NL, the DH is a total red herring.

Also, in actuality the 10-8 really should have been 11-7, because the Nationals got blatantly screwed out of a win in the middle game against the Yankees by a horrible call at home plate

That did suck but jesus the nats have got to figure out how to score some runs at some point. I hope Zimmerman reverts to at least a useful offensive player at some point.

I hope Zimmerman reverts to at least a useful offensive player at some point.

Yep. Boy, what a shocker it is that the team has been lying about Zimmerman's health this whole time, huh? Who could have ever possibly figured that one out.

They need to just put him back on the DL until he is (hopefully) fully healed. Endlessly taking cortisone shot after cortisone shot isn't very smart. The longer he does that, the more likely it becomes that he'll never again get back to being the kind of player he was a couple of years ago.

is morse going to start hitting or is he still nursing an injury and doesn't want to be on the dl anymore?

At that point, the NL DH + pitchers were outhitting the AL DH + pitchers.

Did it take into effect the fact that DHs get many more ABs than pitchers?

At that point, the NL DH + pitchers were outhitting the AL DH + pitchers.

Did it take into account the fact that DHs get many more ABs than pitchers?

doublepost

Alfonso Soriano is available.

We had this discussion a couple weeks ago and SG ran the numbers. At that point, the NL DH + pitchers were outhitting the AL DH + pitchers.

I just ran them again through yesterday.

AL DH: .251/.328/.418, 61 linear weights batting runs
AL P: .120/.142/.128, -6 BR
55 total BR
NL DH: .238/.303/.399 (not sure why my numbers aren't the same as JDF2's), 57 BR
NLP :.190/.241/.248, 11 BR
68 total BR

This year is anomalous in that typically the AL has had a slight edge when you total them, at least from 2008-2011.

This year is anomalous in that typically the AL has had a slight edge when you total them, at least from 2008-2011.

I haven't run the numbers, but I'm guessing the AL also has a slight edge when you total the performances of shortstops, catchers or left fielders in that time frame as well. It's a pesky consequence of having better players, which is the AL's real competitive advantage over the past nine years.

Five of the top ten NL home run leaders from 2010 are now in the American League. I wonder if anything that dramatic has happened previously. Plus Ryan Howard hasn't played.

Five of the top ten NL home run leaders from 2010 are now in the American League. I wonder if anything that dramatic has happened previously. Plus Ryan Howard hasn't played.

Probably the only way that the balance is going to begin to get restored is if the National League simply starts spending more money and going after the top free agents more aggressively. The top of the MLB payroll scale is pretty much dominated by the A.L.

The top of the MLB payroll scale is pretty much dominated by the A.L.

Not really. Historically NY was the huge outlier and then everybody else was roughly the same. Also, historically the NL's 15th and 16th team usually were extremely cheap but this year with the Marlins in their new stadium that floor has vanished. For quite some time the AL's and NL's 2 through 14th were comparable and I believe the NL teams were spending more between those teams.

This year 5 NL teams are in the top ten and 5 AL teams are in the top ten. There are 5 NL teams in the bottom ten and 5 AL teams in the bottom ten as well. Which means of course that there are 6 NL teams in the middle and 4 AL teams in the middle.

Now the one caveat to this is that it doesn't include payments to other teams. For instance the list has the Cubs at 88 million because it isn't including the cost of sending Zambrano to Miami. While the Marlins' payroll includes Zambrano's full salary.

NLP :.190/.241/.248, 11 BR

Is it just me or do those numbers look significantly better than NL pitchers usually hit over the course of a season?

Also, do NL pitchers typically hit better in interleague play than they do against other NL teams?

I'm thinking this is the real anomaly this season.

Because THIS TIME IT COUNTZ!!

Any word yet on a scheduling format for 2013? Will it be

A. 84 intradivision games (21 x 4), 60 intraleague games (6 x 10) and 18 interleague games (6 vs. rival team in mirror division, 3 vs. each of the other four teams in the mirror division or 3 vs. four of the five teams in another division), or

B. 72 intradivision games (18 x 4), 60 intraleague games (6 x 10) and 30 interleague games (18 vs. mirror division, including six games vs. rival team; 12 vs. one of the other two divisions)

I personally prefer "A," as teams should play a majority of their schedule within their division. Whichever, set up some intraleague uniformity. It's absurd that the Nationals play five games vs. Pittsburgh and San Diego and eight vs. some other NL teams. or that Baltimore plays seven of its nine games against the Angels in Anaheim (the other two are in Camden Yards Tuesday and Wednesday).

P.S. Since some teams don't have natural "mirror" rivals, they would rotate, e.g. Philadelphia and Atlanta vs. Boston and Toronto; Texas and Houston vs. Colorado and Arizona.

Is it just me or do those numbers look significantly better than NL pitchers usually hit over the course of a season?

Also, do NL pitchers typically hit better in interleague play than they do against other NL teams?

I'm thinking this is the real anomaly this season

It helps to have a small sample and have Strasburg hit a home and Dempster hit a triple.

Last year the pitchers hit .107/.136/.150.

This year pitchers got a hit 37 times and got 2 hits 6 times. Last year pitchers got a hit 24 times and got 2 hits just once.

Any word yet on a scheduling format for 2013?

Here you go. 20 interleague games per team - everyone plays an entire division once, plus a 4-game rivalry series, probably split home-and-home. No word on how the other 142 games will be split up; if you want to do it evenly, 72 games within the division (18 each) and 70 outside (7 each) would work, but MLB has shown a distinct lack of interest in being even with the schedule.

20 interleague games per team - everyone plays an entire division once, plus a 4-game rivalry series, probably split home-and-home.

Isn't that 19 games or am I really bad at math?

I guess one of the divisional IL series will go 4 games as well.

Isn't that 19 games or am I really bad at math?

I guess one of the divisional IL series will go 4 games as well.

Yeah, there'll have to be an extra 4-gamer in there - you need an even number of interleague games, I guess. Of course, you could easily do 18 instead of 20, but then you only get rivalry home games once every two years, and we couldn't have that.

Don't blame the Washington Nationals, who did their fair share for the N.L. and then some, going 10-8 with a 69-57 run differential this season against the great and vaunted A.L. East: the division where supposedly every team is better than we are.

It's like your memory doesn't even extend back to the weekend before this past one. Not that the Nats aren't still a hell of an impressive team that has a damn good shot of making the World Series.

When we have years where AL East plays NL East, AL Central plays NL Central and AL West plays NL West, I'm guessing the 20 games will all be 4-game series (2h/2a).

The Cardinals became the last team in baseball to lose over 100 interleague games since it's inception. That's the advantage of the silly disproportionate teams. Cardinals have something like the 11th best record in interleague play, but because their division plays fewer interleague games a year, they became the last team to lose 100 games.

The Rockies were 2-13, and the Cubs were 5-10.

How do the records look if you take out the worst two teams in the NL and matchup the best 14 teams in the NL with the 14 AL teams ?

Does the fact that the NL has two more teams "dilute the talent in the league" ?

The Rockies were 2-13, and the Cubs were 5-10.

How do the records look if you take out the worst two teams in the NL and matchup the best 14 teams in the NL with the 14 AL teams ?

I'm sure it looks better. It would probably help the AL's case if you wiped out the Twins* and Mariners' IL performances, but I'm not sure why you would. The NL doesn't have two extra crappy teams. It has two extra teams, with no specific quality level assigned to them.

And even with that atrocious interleague play, the Rockies are still two games better than the Pads.

Does the fact that the NL has two more teams "dilute the talent in the league" ?

Unless each league's participants must build their roster from a separate (but equal) supply of talent, there's no reason to believe it should.

* Turns out the AL's two worst went 17-19 in IL play, which is pulling the league down a little, but not a whole lot.