Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, October 30, 2019

The Astros Are Hitting Like The 1927 Yankees

[The Astros] feature one of the most loaded lineups in major league history, performing something like the Yankees’ Murderers’ Row of the 1920s. In fact, by some measures, the only more effective offensive club in the HISTORY of the sport is the storied 1927 New York club.

The Astros finished the regular season with the second-best mark in weighted runs created plus (wRC+), which adjusts for era and ballparks, of all time. The ’27 Yankees produced a 126 mark as a team, meaning they were 26 percent above league average run-production efficiency. The ’19 Astros finished at 125 — and that’s the top of the list. For context, erstwhile Nationals star Bryce Harper produced a 125 wRC+ for the Philadelphia Phillies this season. The Astros are a TEAM of Harpers. MLB has rarely seen anything like it. ...

Needless to say, all of this will be little consolation to the Astros if they fail to finish off the Nats, but there’s never been a lineup like this from top to bottom.

ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 30, 2019 at 09:13 AM | 62 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: astros, general

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Jack Sommers Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:44 AM (#5896299)
Legend has it that the 1927 Yankees intimidated the Pittsburgh Pirates with their batting practice display before Game 1 of the World Series en route to a series sweep. The Astros have plenty of power, ranking third this season in home runs. But the Astros offense doesn’t intimidate only through home run displays — it also features a nonstop barrage of quality at-bats. There are no breaks in the lineup. There are rarely easy outs. The Astros had the lowest strikeout rate in baseball this year and led MLB in on-base percentage (.352) — ahead of the No. 2 Nationals by 10 points. They rarely chase pitches, and that has continued in the playoffs.


This is really the key. The Yankees had a couple of guys over 200 wRC+, A few more good hitters, and several guys well below average. The Astros don't have anyone as high as Ruth and Gehrig, but they don't have any holes in the lineup either. There are no Mark Koenigs or Joe Dugan's in the Astros lineup and their bench is a little deeper

Yankees

Astros

   2. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 30, 2019 at 11:49 AM (#5896369)
The 1927 Yankees swept their World Series, then did it again in 1928.
   3. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 30, 2019 at 11:57 AM (#5896377)
I'm having a hard time seeing where this is close.

Yankees lineup out "WARed" the Astros 48.5 to 38.5 despite spotting them 8 games and a DH.
   4. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 30, 2019 at 12:11 PM (#5896394)
I'm having a hard time seeing where this is close.

Yankees lineup out "WARed" the Astros 48.5 to 38.5 despite spotting them 8 games and a DH.


Baseball-Reference calculates the averages it uses to calculate its OPS+ using only non-pitchers. Which makes sense for players - it allows you to compare players from DH and non-DH leagues. But the result is that it screws up the numbers when you try to compare TEAMS in DH and non-DH leagues - e.g., in 2019, the AL had an OPS+ of 100, but the NL had an OPS+ of 94.

Going to Fangraphs' page for the 1927 AL, a simple average of the eight teams' wRC+ is 94 - suggesting to me that they probably are doing the same thing. In which case, the Astros are getting about a 6 point boost in wRC+ relative to the 1927 Yankees from getting to use a DH.
   5. JJ1986 Posted: October 30, 2019 at 12:16 PM (#5896400)
I don't think the Astros are the '27 Yankees, but the lineup that they can throw out in the playoffs is quite a bit better than their regular season numbers. Their best 9 guys (plus a good hitting backup catcher) are all healthy. Jake Marisnick isn't batting, Tyler White is off the team and all the rest of their scrubs are off the roster.
   6. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 30, 2019 at 12:28 PM (#5896411)
Follow up to #4, I'm now 99% sure that Fangraphs is including pitcher hitting in team totals and comparing to non-pitcher averages. Neither of these are a mistake by Fangraphs: you just have to know to adjust for this when comparing across leagues. And, in fact, Fangraphs allows you to calculate team totals excluding pitchers. And, for example, the 1976 Reds had a non-pitcher wRC+ of 130 and the 1927 Yankees non-pitcher wRC+ jumps up to 135.
   7. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 30, 2019 at 12:56 PM (#5896433)
The 1927 Yankees swept their World Series, then did it again in 1928.

Care to compare the rosters of the 3 teams the Astros have had to play in October to the 1927 Pirates and the 1928 Cardinals?
   8. Blastin Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:13 PM (#5896440)
And, for example, the 1976 Reds had a non-pitcher wRC+ of 130 and the 1927 Yankees non-pitcher wRC+ jumps up to 135.


This tracks
   9. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:18 PM (#5896444)

Follow up to #4, I'm now 99% sure that Fangraphs is including pitcher hitting in team totals and comparing to non-pitcher averages. Neither of these are a mistake by Fangraphs: you just have to know to adjust for this when comparing across leagues. And, in fact, Fangraphs allows you to calculate team totals excluding pitchers.


Is that the proper way to go about it? You could just remove the Astros' DH and replace it with the hitting of a NL league average pitching staff.
   10. Sunday silence Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:21 PM (#5896446)
One of the reasons I am really enjoying this series is that it seems like both teams have good talent from top to bottom. And nearly every game seems filled with great plays. Great defensive plays from Robles, Rendon, Bregman etc. Great hitting and pitching. It doesnt seem like there's too many goofy defensive break downs and such.

I usually like to count how many 3 WAR players each team has as a basic measure. THe Nats have 7 which is very good. Its pitching heavy with only 3 position players at 3 WAR. The NYY have 7. The Astros have 10 (if we round up Correa at 2.9)! Which might be a record I dont recall any recent team having that many. most world champions have 6 or 7 if I recall.

ANyhow which brings me to something BIll James once said and that is that there's almost no team in history that had above average players at every position. I think he was referring to position players. He cited the 1941 BRO team as an exception and maybe the only one. Which seems really odd you'd think like the BIg Red Machine or the late 30s NYY or some team would have above average players at every position...

Even HOU it seems has one below avg player that I see (assuming 2.0 WAR over a full season is avg): Reddick in RF. WIth Marisnick in the lineup they might not have any as Marisnick's 1.2 WAR was only for about half a season. SO he might create one of these Jamesian raritiese.

OR was that all BS anyhow? Are there other teams with above avg players at every position?
   11. JJ1986 Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:35 PM (#5896453)
Are there other teams with above avg players at every position?
First team I checked, the 2001 Mariners, had 8 above-average regulars and didn't really have a regular LF. Al Martin was -0.1 WAA in 71 starts, but Stan Javier was the more regular guy by the end of the season and had a 1.7 WAA.
   12. Tom Nawrocki Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:36 PM (#5896454)
The 1975-1976 Reds' lowest-rated regular was Tony Perez in both years. He still had 3.1 and 2.6 WAR, respectively, and was, you know, a Hall of Famer.
   13. Sunday silence Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:37 PM (#5896455)
Speaking of players evaluations does Robles seem like a +24 defensive player? I havent watched the whole series but I think he's made at least 4 outstanding catches in the last several days. Assuming at least two of those would have been extra base hits (0.75 runs) and assuming an avg OF would have only made half of those catches, so 50% x 2.4 runs = 1.2 runs saved just in the few games Ive seen.

24 does not seem impossible by no means.

Looking at the last few years of stat cast it seems that +27 or 28 is probably the max value in runs saved we can expect from CF. I would concede that players like UJones and RAshburn who put numbers in excess of that probably did get more than their share of discretionary chances. BUt it also suggests the underlying methodology of Total Zone is more realistic than the stupid regressed BRIS numbers.
   14. Sunday silence Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:40 PM (#5896461)
Im gonna guess that James quote was from PLease Dont Eat the BONes as its one of the few books of his on my shelf. THe other is the Historical Baseball Almanac. I dont think its Whatever Happpened to the Hall of Fame?
   15. Sunday silence Posted: October 30, 2019 at 01:44 PM (#5896465)
the 1976 Reds have 10 players at 2.9 WAR or better. A worthy comparable to 2019 HOU.

C Geronimo w/ +25 def runs in CF in '75.
   16. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 30, 2019 at 02:43 PM (#5896536)
the 1976 Reds have 10 players at 2.9 WAR or better. A worthy comparable to 2019 HOU.

True, but then there's this:

2019 Astros ERA+: 127
1976 Reds ERA+: 100
   17. Blastin Posted: October 30, 2019 at 02:49 PM (#5896544)
You really want the Astros to be seen as the best team ever, I guess.

They have, perhaps, the best relative statistics, depending on how they are parsed, of any regular season team. I would say they are absolutely one of the most talented teams of all time.

I would have put them in the pantheon if they hadn't... wheezed 2-4 (so far) through all these clinching games.

Last year's Red Sox had more holes, let's say. And they got some fluky nonsense performances. But they sacked up and demolished three 100 win teams. It's a small sample, so the stats don't matter. But you play the regular season so it can help you for the postseason. The latter really does matter. I am not going to say any nonsense about clutch/grit/ice veins/etc. But you have to really outplay the October teams to reach the top.

Of the WC era, I would have the Astros as top 3 if they win tonight.
   18. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 30, 2019 at 03:01 PM (#5896558)
I would have put them in the pantheon if they hadn't... wheezed 2-4 (so far) through all these clinching games.

Yeah, the "best team ever" doesn't play games where they can be eliminated.
   19. Blastin Posted: October 30, 2019 at 03:04 PM (#5896560)
And they also don't get outscored (or only outscore by 1 or whatever) in any series. You just don't do that.

This is the unfair (but great!) part about not being basketball or football (though the rare times when Brady loses is probably even more fun). The most talented team doesn't always win, and to be "greatest" you have to do both.

Pains me to say it, but I would take both 04 and 18 Sox (do not Regular Season stats me, I know), particularly the latter.
   20. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 30, 2019 at 03:08 PM (#5896564)
Pains me to say it, but I would take both 04 and 18 Sox (do not Regular Season stats me, I know), particularly the latter.

Well, if you want to discount the old timers, you start with the 1998 Yankees.
   21. cookiedabookie Posted: October 30, 2019 at 03:12 PM (#5896567)
This may be the most boring seven game world series I can remember. Winners are at +31 runs, averaging 5+ runs per game more than the losers. I wonder how this compares to others World Series, especially those through six games.
   22. Blastin Posted: October 30, 2019 at 03:15 PM (#5896570)
I'm only discounting them because of his "but the playoffs were different" stuff.



So, of these 25 years then...


I'd call it 98 Yankees, 18 Sox, 95 Braves as of now.

I'd put 19 Astros (if they win), 17 Astros, 99 and 09 Yankees, 04 Sox in next tier.

And now I'm going to school so people can argue if they want.
   23. Blastin Posted: October 30, 2019 at 03:16 PM (#5896571)
This may be the most boring seven game world series I can remember.


Yes Fangraphs wrote about this before yesterday, when we finally had another lead change! But the drama is always over before the final two innings.
   24. Jose Is Absurdly Chatty Posted: October 30, 2019 at 03:31 PM (#5896585)
But the drama is always over before the final two innings.


Which is kind of funny because neither of these teams is known for a lockdown bullpen.
   25. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 30, 2019 at 04:41 PM (#5896628)
This may be the most boring seven game world series I can remember. Winners are at +31 runs, averaging 5+ runs per game more than the losers. I wonder how this compares to others World Series, especially those through six games.


Just adding up the numbers, the winners of the first six games of the 1960 World Series were +41. But that was a little misleading. The Pirates won Games 1, 4, and 5 by 2, 1, and 3 runs, respectively, while the Yankees won Games 2, 3, and 6 by 13, 10, and 12. Including Game 7, the Yankees outscored the Pirates 55-27 (which is still a record for largest run differential in a World Series) but lost Game 7 (by one run, naturally) and the Series. My vote for the weirdest World Series ever.
   26. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 30, 2019 at 04:49 PM (#5896634)
Just adding up the numbers, the winners of the first six games of the 1960 World Series were +41. But that was a little misleading. The Pirates won Games 1, 4, and 5 by 2, 1, and 3 runs, respectively, while the Yankees won Games 2, 3, and 6 by 13, 10, and 12. Including Game 7, the Yankees outscored the Pirates 55-27 (which is still a record for largest run differential in a World Series) but lost Game 7 (by one run, naturally) and the Series. My vote for the weirdest World Series ever.

Yes, you also had Whitey Ford throwing two SHOs in the midst of his record setting streak, but they were in games the Yankees scored 12 and 10 runs.

Stengel starts Ford in Game 1, and series probably ends pretty quickly.
   27. TJ Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:02 PM (#5896639)
Watching the Astros hit in the postseason, there have been plenty of games where they hit like the '27 Yankees- and all those guys are dead.
   28. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:14 PM (#5896642)
You really want the Astros to be seen as the best team ever, I guess.

Not really, since I'm a Yankees fan, and up to now the '98 Yankees hold the title.

They have, perhaps, the best relative statistics, depending on how they are parsed, of any regular season team. I would say they are absolutely one of the most talented teams of all time.

I would have put them in the pantheon if they hadn't... wheezed 2-4 (so far) through all these clinching games.


I'd consider the opposition they've faced before paying too much attention to that: A 96 win Rays team with a team ERA+ of 122; a 103 win Yankees team with a lineup almost as fierce as theirs; and a Nats team with two CYA level starters that from the last week in May to now has had the best record in baseball.

I'd call it 98 Yankees, 18 Sox, 95 Braves as of now.

No argument with those first two. Great offensive/defensive balance, and your point about the '18 Red Sox postseason opposition is well taken.

But the '95 Braves? Great pitching rotation, but a mediocre (91 OPS+) offense with only one real standout and no depth at all.

If the Astros win tonight, I'd put them in the first group, with the top elite talent but little other than that to differentiate them from the other two.

Of the pre-WC era teams, I'd put the '27 Yanks at the top, even though I doubt they actually could've beaten many of the better post-WW2 teams. Impossible to really say one way or the other.

   29. Walt Davis Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:16 PM (#5896643)
Not individual players but from the b-r league WAA tables ... then oWAR to get defense out of it

1975 Reds
C +2.5
1B +1.4
2B +8.7
3B +1.5
SS +1.7
LF +2.3
CF +2.8
RF +1.2
PH +0.3 (#1)

A lot of that is defense though, especially at C, SS and CF. The pitching staff overall had -2 WAA.

Meanwhile the 1975 Braves

C -2.9 (last)
1B -4.1 (last)
2B -1.8
3B +0.8
SS -4.7 (last)
LF -1.3 (last)
CF -2.2 (last)
RF -0.1
PH -2.4 (how is this possible? last obviously)

I do have doubts about that PH number -- team splits say they hit 248/327/374 which seems just fine in context. That's a bit above league average for PH and overall.
   30. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:18 PM (#5896645)
Stengel starts Ford in Game 1, and series probably ends pretty quickly.

I'm not convinced that the 1960 Yankees were really better a better team overall than the Pirates, given the relative league strength that year, but you're absolutely right that if Stengel hadn't had a brain fart and had started Ford in game 1, it could've well been even a sweep, since the Pirates hung on to win game 4 by the skin of their teeth.
   31. Walt Davis Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:26 PM (#5896647)
Also, I know it's old-fashioned but the non-P OPS+ of the Astros is 119; the 27 Yanks were 136. That's a rather large difference. The Yanks' team OPS+ is dragged down to 127 by their pitchers.

But of course the Astros didn't have a team as bad as the 51-103 Red Sox to beat up on ... oh wait ...

The 27 Yanks went 21-1 against the Browns; the Astros went 18-1 against the Ms. The 66-87 Indians managed to hold the 27 Yanks in reasonable check, going 10-12 against them.

Per my earlier post, I meant to add the 2016 Cubs

C +0.0 WAA
1B 3.8
2B 1.9
3B 3.4
SS 2.5
LF 1.8
CF 2.5
RF 0.1
PH 0.2

Cubs' LF was a total mash-up -- 190 PAs Soler, about the same for Bryant, half that for Contreras, Coghlan, Szczur, some Zobrist.
   32. Itchy Row Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:34 PM (#5896651)
I do have doubts about that PH number -- team splits say they hit 248/327/374 which seems just fine in context. That's a bit above league average for PH and overall.
Reds PH were 238/357/317 that year, so there must be something weird about it. Based on the explanation below the table, I think the WAA figure just means the Reds had better players who pinch hit sometimes. They weren't really better as pinch hitters.
   33. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:38 PM (#5896652)
. . . if Stengel hadn't had a brain fart and had started Ford in game 1, it could've well been even a sweep, since the Pirates hung on to win game 4 by the skin of their teeth
While Ford was the better choice, particularly in hindsight, Ditmar did have more Wins, a higher Winning %, lower ERA & better ERA+ that year. Stengel’s decision wasn’t that aberrant.
   34. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:47 PM (#5896655)
While Ford was the better choice, particularly in hindsight, Ditmar did have more Wins, a higher Winning %, lower ERA & better ERA+ that year. Stengel’s decision wasn’t that aberrant.

His players sure thought it was, they basically forced his firing because of it.

Through the 1960 regular season Ford had a career record of 133-59, 2.70 ERA, Ditmar 70-67, 3.82 ERA. They were tied in ERA in 1960, but everyone on the planet knew Ford was the better pitcher. The decision was hugely aberrant.
   35. Moeball Posted: October 30, 2019 at 05:55 PM (#5896657)
1927 Yankees owe part of their legend to sheer dominance and career year type seasons. Yes there were some weak spots in the lineup, but Ruth and Gehrig had historically eye popping numbers, with Combs, Lazzeri and Meusel having excellent seasons as well. A big part of their success was that their 4 best players overall (the Core 4 I guess) hardly missed any games, so you could count on them being in the lineup every game. And they dominated the League Leader categories like no team I've ever heard of. Top 3 players in the league in HRs, runs scored, top 2 or 3 in several other categories. Top 3 pitchers in ERA and so on. Truly dominant.

1984 Tigers and 1998 Yankees, on the other hand, didn't strike me as teams with a bunch of players having historically great seasons, but they did seem to be teams without any real weaknesses and were above average pretty much across the board, with excellent depth as well.
   36. Sunday silence Posted: October 30, 2019 at 07:27 PM (#5896681)
The '37 Yankees have merely 7 guys at 3 WAR. Pretty stacked though w/ Gomez at 9, DiMaggio 8, Gehrig almost 8 and Dickey 7. Wow 4 guys > 3 MikeTrouts.

THey have at least 3 position guys below average. Crosetti (who was good both before and after this season), Myril Hoag barely above replacement and Jake Powell below replacement (and below for his career). That's pretty odd for such a great team.
   37. Jack Sommers Posted: October 30, 2019 at 07:30 PM (#5896683)
Was just looking to see what other teams had two players achieve 180 OPS+ or higher in the same season.

I couldn't find any other duos than Ruth and Gehrig

They did it 5 times

1927,28, 30,31,32.

Did I miss any ? Report Link

   38. Itchy Row Posted: October 30, 2019 at 07:38 PM (#5896685)
Did I miss any ? Report Link
This report shows the number of players by team. You're right that the five times Ruth and Gehrig did it in six years are the only times teammates have had 180+ OPS+es in a season since 1901.

There are seven teams that have had two guys at 175+ since 1901. Ruth and Gehrig have six of them (1927-28 and 1930-33). Anybody want to guess the other one? It wasn't a Yankee team.
   39. JJ1986 Posted: October 30, 2019 at 08:45 PM (#5896732)
2000 Giants? 2004 Cardinals?
   40. Itchy Row Posted: October 30, 2019 at 08:58 PM (#5896743)
Not the ‘00 Giants or ‘04 Cardinals.

The team is recent enough that both guys are alive, but they’ve both been retired for a while. Both fell off the Hall of Fame ballot the first year.
   41. Walt Davis Posted: October 30, 2019 at 09:24 PM (#5896786)
Palmeiro and Juan Gone?

EDIT: I would have thought "season of 175 OPS+ and off the HoF ballot in first year" was already a pretty short list ... two on one team?
EDIT2: I'm wrong as I suspected but doubly so as Palmeiro actually lasted 4 years on the ballot and Juan 2.
   42. Itchy Row Posted: October 30, 2019 at 09:52 PM (#5896823)
The team in question did make the World Series, but lost.

One of the two players won a ring as a member of a team that sometimes gets mentioned in “greatest team” discussions like this, but I don’t think it’s been mentioned in this one. The other guy had a better career but never won a Series.
   43. Walt Davis Posted: October 30, 2019 at 09:53 PM (#5896824)
What an annoying question! :-) Every time I think of somebody who might have scraped a 175 OPS+ but fell off fast -- Jimmy Wynn, Rico Carty, Brady Anderson -- they didn't get to the 175 (Wynn 166, Carty 171) but even before I checked that, I had no idea who the 2nd player could be. I thought it might be a trick clue and one might be Dick Allen (199, 181, 174) but no teammate anyway. It's not Norm Cash (Rocky Calavito gave it a solid effort at 157 OPS+ but he lasted 2 years anyway).
   44. Itchy Row Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:00 PM (#5896838)
I never would have guessed the team or the players. I stumbled on to it checking to see how closely Ruth and Gehrig came to six-peating or if anybody else had come close.
   45. JJ1986 Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:01 PM (#5896840)
I looked it up and one of the guys makes perfect sense (and he did it twice!), but the other player should have been on the ballot longer.
   46. Itchy Row Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:03 PM (#5896843)
Yeah, I was surprised he was a one and done.
   47. Posada Posse Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:18 PM (#5896875)
Will Clark and Kevin Mitchell, 1989 Giants? The clues sound a lot like them.
   48. DCA Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:22 PM (#5896880)
47 - that's right. My first guess as well.
   49. Itchy Row Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:23 PM (#5896882)
That’s the duo. I thought Clark hung around the ballot at something like 40% for a while, but he didn’t hit 5%.
   50. Howie Menckel Posted: October 30, 2019 at 10:35 PM (#5896933)
the 1927 Yankees used a total of 25 players all season - 15 hitters and 10 pitchers.

pitcher Walter Beall threw 1 IP on May 30, when the Yankees played a doubleheader. he threw 107 IP in the minors that year, so it looks like the Yankees had a 24-man roster that year and just stuck with it - but he got a one-day callup.
   51. Walt Davis Posted: October 31, 2019 at 03:02 AM (#5897244)
Bugger, I did think of Kevin Mitchell at some point but I always think of him as a Met although he barely played for them.
   52. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 31, 2019 at 03:11 AM (#5897245)
Needless to say, all of this will be little consolation to the Astros if they fail to finish off the Nats . . .
Heh.
   53. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 31, 2019 at 09:02 AM (#5897270)
Good pitching can stop even great hitting, and bad bullpens can kill you. And in this case, bad bullpen management didn't help the Astros, starting but not ending with the decision to pull Greinke after only 80 pitches.
   54. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 31, 2019 at 10:46 AM (#5897331)
Good pitching can stop even great hitting,

Not if you're the greatest lineup ever.
   55. Jack Sommers Posted: October 31, 2019 at 11:28 AM (#5897375)
Thanks Itchy !

The Giants managed an NL Best 104 OPS+ that year, Edging out the Mets who had a 103 OPS+. (HoJo 169 !)
   56. Itchy Row Posted: October 31, 2019 at 11:38 AM (#5897384)
The Giants managed an NL Best 104 OPS+ that year, Edging out the Mets who had a 103 OPS+. (HoJo 169 !)
It seems strange that the best team would only be at 104, but the Giants and Mets were the only teams in the NL over 96. The league average was 94. I think I've heard that pitchers' hitting is removed, but I don't know how that works.

The AL average was 100, like you'd expect. The Red Sox and Blue Jays led at 107. The 1988 and 1990 OPS+ figures for the two leagues are similar- 93 and 94 for the NL and 100 both years for the AL.
   57. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 31, 2019 at 11:44 AM (#5897387)
It seems strange that the best team would only be at 104, but the Giants and Mets were the only teams in the NL over 96. The league average was 94. I think I've heard that pitchers' hitting is removed, but I don't know how that works.

The AL average was 100, like you'd expect. The Red Sox and Blue Jays led at 107. The 1988 and 1990 OPS+ figures for the two leagues are similar- 93 and 94 for the NL and 100 both years for the AL.


The denominator for OPS+ is league-average for non-pitchers, so when you do team OPS+ in the NL, it will usually end up below 100, b/c pitchers can't hit.
   58. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 31, 2019 at 12:00 PM (#5897406)
It seems strange that the best team would only be at 104, but the Giants and Mets were the only teams in the NL over 96. The league average was 94. I think I've heard that pitchers' hitting is removed, but I don't know how that works.

The AL average was 100, like you'd expect. The Red Sox and Blue Jays led at 107. The 1988 and 1990 OPS+ figures for the two leagues are similar- 93 and 94 for the NL and 100 both years for the AL.


See comment #4 of this thread.
   59. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 31, 2019 at 12:11 PM (#5897419)
Good pitching can stop even great hitting,

Not if you're the greatest lineup ever.


So is this the greatest lineup ever?
   60. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 31, 2019 at 12:15 PM (#5897426)
So is this the greatest lineup ever?

Congratulations! You've just won the cherry-picking Olympics.
   61. Jack Sommers Posted: October 31, 2019 at 12:23 PM (#5897433)
A short series is the ultimate in Cherry Picked Games, regardless of outcome. Pirates had a good staff of course, but it wasn't a great staff.

How odd the 1927 National League Pitching Table looks. The team with the best ERA+ won only 65 games.

The disparity between best and worst is also so large.

Tm      RA/G   W   L W-L%  ERA ERA+  FIP
BRO     4.06  65  88 .425 3.36  118 3.76
PIT     4.22  94  60 .610 3.66  114 3.90
STL     4.35  92  61 .601 3.57  113 3.97
CIN     4.27  75  78 .490 3.54  109 3.51
CHC     4.32  85  68 .556 3.65  108 4.02
LgAvg   4.58  77  77 .500 3.91  101 3.95
NYG     4.65  92  62 .597 3.97   98 4.15
BSN     4.97  60  94 .390 4.22   88 3.92
PHI     5.83  51 103 .331 5.36   73 4.38
        4.58 614 614 .500 3.91  101 3.95 


Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 10/31/2019.
   62. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 31, 2019 at 12:28 PM (#5897438)
A short series is the ultimate in Cherry Picked Games, regardless of outcome.

No, they're the most important games of the season, between two of the best teams.

If someone says Babe Ruth had a 1.200 OPS and 15 HRs in the World Series, no one says "Oh, you're just cherry-picking those games to make him look good".

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
BFFB
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogSource: Astros focus on Dusty Baker to be new manager
(2 - 3:59am, Jan 29)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogRyan Zimmerman on electronic sign stealing: ‘It’s the greatest sin that you can do’
(1 - 3:40am, Jan 29)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogDustin Pedroia and the Pricey Guarantees of MLB Contracts
(32 - 2:15am, Jan 29)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogWhere a Mookie Betts, Nolan Arenado or Francisco Lindor trade would rank among winter blockbusters
(29 - 12:57am, Jan 29)
Last: John Northey

NewsblogOrange Coast College baseball coach John Altobelli died in Kobe helicopter crash
(10 - 12:55am, Jan 29)
Last: QLE

NewsblogClass action lawsuit filed against MLB, Astros, Red Sox on behalf of DraftKings players
(14 - 12:30am, Jan 29)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network)

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread 2020
(841 - 11:58pm, Jan 28)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogStarling Marte, D-backs trade | MLB.com
(46 - 11:54pm, Jan 28)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogOT - Soccer Thread - January, 2020
(310 - 10:41pm, Jan 28)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogPosnanski: Baseball 100 Rules
(465 - 9:58pm, Jan 28)
Last: Sweatpants

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (January 2020)
(233 - 9:26pm, Jan 28)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogESPN is reportedly removing Jessica Mendoza from Sunday Night Baseball
(39 - 8:50pm, Jan 28)
Last: Greg Pope

NewsblogRed Sox, Padres have reportedly discussed Mookie Betts trade that includes a surprising name
(62 - 7:27pm, Jan 28)
Last: Jose Is Absurdly Chatty

NewsblogNicholas Castellanos deal with Reds | MLB.com
(49 - 6:23pm, Jan 28)
Last: bfan

NewsblogCubs expressing interest in free agent second baseman Scooter Gennett
(6 - 5:11pm, Jan 28)
Last: Jeremy Renner App is Dead and I killed it

Page rendered in 0.5699 seconds
46 querie(s) executed