Key To Yanks Success: Score More Than 4 Runs In A Game
I was just looking at the Yankees “Runs Scored Distribution” to date this season. Here it is:
Runs Games Wins Loss W-L%
+----+-----+----+----+-----+
0 5 0 5 .000
1 5 0 5 .000
2 14 4 10 .286
3 16 7 9 .438
4 27 14 13 .519
5 25 18 7 .720
6 14 11 3 .786
7 9 8 1 .889
8 13 11 2 .846
9 9 8 1 .889
10 8 8 0 1.000
11 9 8 1 .889
12 1 1 0 1.000
13 2 2 0 1.000
15 1 1 0 1.000
20 1 1 0 1.000
+----+-----+----+----+-----+
What does this mean? It means the 2009 Yankees, so far this season, are 25-42 when they score 4 runs or less in a game. On the other side, they are 77-15 when they score 5 runs or more in the game. Taking it a bit further, look at this:
W-L record when the Yankees score 2 runs or less: 4-20
W-L record when the Yankees score 3-4 runs: 21-22
W-L record when the Yankees score 5+ runs: 77-15
So, in summary, when the Yankees score 2 runs or less, they almost always lose. When they score 5 or more, they almost always win. And, when they score 3 or 4 runs in the game, it’s a coin flip on whether they win or lose.
Let’s hope the Yankees score 5+ runs a game this October.
Can this really be true? when scoring more runs, the team wins more often?
Wow! That is just amazing, considering the game of baseball is decided by which team scored more runs!
It would be far more instructive to run this type of chart relative to the rest of MLB teams or, because we’re now in October, to see this info for the other 7 playoff teams.
Simply saying that the Yanks are one game under .500 when they score four or fewer runs tells us nothing if we can’t compare it to everyone else in the game. My guess is that the Yanks are not atypical in this regard and that most, if not all teams, are under .500 when they score fewer than five runs. Perhaps not the NL teams but certainly the AL ones.
can the same type of analysis be done for the other playoff teams? I doubt you’ll find anything much different than what you found here. I don’t think it’s a surprise if you score 4 runs or less that your win probability will not be as great as if you scored 10 runs.
I’m not that concerned. You can find all types of stats that prove the Yanks aren’t any different than the Royals or any other crappy team – i.e in the first inning, on sunny days, and on days that start with the letter ‘S’ then the Yankees are performing as badly as the royals and nationals, should we be concerned?
I think I get it…. More runs = better chance to win. I’ll make a note.
Runs always seem harder to comeby in the PS. Managers will stretch their best pitchers all they can. It does point to the need to have Jorge’s stick in the line-up and, despite the earlier outcries, successfully lay down a bunt with runners at first and second and nobody out.
>It would be far more instructive to run this type of chart relative to the rest of MLB teams
You’re right, MJ. And I can’t for the life of me find the article that already performed this study.
I did, however, find this link:
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/how_can_we_predict_which_teams_will_do_well_in_the_post_season/
Read through the comments. They talk a little bit about this subject.
You guys want a comparison? Sure, no problem…So far, this season:
The Yankees are 25-42 when they score 4 runs or less in a game.
The Angels are 25-47 when they score 4 runs or less in a game.
The Tigers are 30-59 when they score 4 runs or less in a game.
The Red Sox are 22-50 when they score 4 runs or less in a game.
The Yankees are 77-15 when they score 5 runs or more in the game.
The Angels are 69-17 when they score 5 runs or more in the game.
The Tigers are 55-14 when they score 5 runs or more in the game.
The Red Sox are 69-17 when they score 5 runs or more in the game.
What does this mean? It means these four teams are probably closer in ability than most would think…
Steve Lombardi wrote:
OK, among the AL playoff teams it does appear to confirm my belief that most (in this case, all) teams would be below .500 if they scored four or fewer runs.
Considering the Yanks have eight more wins than Anaheim/Boston and 22 more wins than the Tigers when scoring five or more runs in a game, I don’t think the Yanks are “closer in ability than most would think.” I would say that this data tells us that the Yanks score more than five runs in a game more frequently than the three teams they were compared against and, predictably, won at a higher rate.
@ Janks-n-Jints:
A very interesting read. I had never thought about the Baseball Prospectus “Secret Sauce” theory but in reading that link, it does appear to poke some holes into the logic that BP came up with. Certainly, three of the past four World Series (’05, ’06, ’08) winners hurt the predictive powers of BP’s Secret Sauce…
American League teams have averaged 4.8 runs per game this year. So, it seems to follow that scoring 4 or fewer runs in a game is usually not enough to win.
The Yankees have a good record because they score more than 4 runs a lot. In fact, they’ve scored at least 5 runs in a game 92 times this year. 92! That’s a lot of games.
Every team loses most of the games in which they don’t score more than 4 runs. What matters isn’t your record with fewer than 4 runs, it’s how many games that happens in.
When the Yanks score 7 runs or better they are 55-5! There’s the plan!
On the serious side, it probably reflects that our starters and bullpen can usually stop our opponents from scoring a lot of runs, that when a starter blows up the bullpen has done it’s job, and late rallies by the bad guys fall short when we are out in front. Just about what you’d expect after watching ~ 120 games. Given our starters and the mix of middle relief guys we can spin, if we are really good in the 7th, 8th, and 9th, like we’ve been most of the season, we’ll be fine.
Steve,
Is there a way to look at our ERA in the 7th, 8th and 9th innings? Given Hughes and Mo’s years, it ought to be off the charts good compared to just about anyone else.
Steve Lombardi wrote:
Oh? Is that what it means? Small discrepancies in winning percentage in various situations are meaningful…unless they’re not, and signify very little.
Let’s examine that “closer in ability” thing, shall we?
A team that goes 25-42 is on pace to win 60 and lose 102. That’s bad.
A team that goes 25-47 is on pace to win 56 and lose 106. That’s worse.
A team that goes 30-59 is on pace to win 55 and lose 106. That’s worse, and what’s even worse than that, it shows that the Tigers offense is so pith poor, it failed to score more than 3 runs in over half their games.
A team that goes 22-50 is on pace to win 50 and lose 112, and that’s gosh awful, historically bad.
It also points out the fact that whatever advantage the other playoff contenders can be assumed to have in the rotation and the pen, it doesn’t actually win more game for them then the Yanks’ rotation and pen can haul in.
To sum this up: the Yanks have fewer games in which they score less than 4 runs than any of their AL opposing contenders, but have a better record than any of them when it does happen.
The 4 teams are close, because win totals artificially expand the gap in perceived ability, but this measure still shows the Yanks are the best of the 4, and by a perceptible margin.