2012 MLB Regular Season Running Thread

The A's lost so many elimination games in a row because of dumb luck and not because they couldn't throw the ball around the bases properly and nor could they run those bases properly. I know. I misunderstand everything.

I also misunderstand September being different from April and fourth-quarter quarterbacking being different from first-quarter quarterbacking.

 

The best reason for any team with any combination of players and skill sets succeeding or not succeeding in the playoffs is that the playoffs provide a very, very small sample size in which anything can happen.

The A's lost four consecutive playoff series. The Twins have lost six in a row.

 

Glad we're on the same page.

If I could get Michael Lewis to write a *really* compelling narrative around these facts, could I get you on board?

 

The Cubs have lost 8 consecutive playoff games by multiple runs, and they've lost six consecutive potentially pennant-clinching games.

Man, fuck baseball.

 

Looks like it's five. And they were thoroughly outclassed in all five, losing 15 of 17 games. I wouldn't call that luck as much as clearly being inferior. EDIT: I see it's six including that LCS. So they lost 19 of 22 games.

The A's of that era lost nine games in a row that would have clinched a series.

 

I just like to laugh at Darwin Barney's name.

If he heard me and bothered to care about it, he would simply laugh at my paycheck.

 

Yes, but those trends are still only nine- and 22-game trends. In the context of a regular season, they would mean nothing. We make big deals out of them because they're in the postseason and matter more, but the sample sizes are too small to be statistically relevant.

 

Some fun notes:

1) The A's are 3rd in MLB in Defensive Efficiency (percentage of balls in play turned into outs, the ultimate in team defensive measurement).

2) For their playoff years of 2000-2003, the Moneyball A's finished 21st, 3rd, 7th and 2nd in defensive efficiency.

3) The teams they lost to in those playoff rounds finished 10th, 25th, 11th and 25th in defensive efficiency.

So not only were they a good defensive team three of the four years, they also lost their playoff series to a worse defensive team three of those years.

 

That's if you believe those defensive stats in the first place and believe that they haven't been and won't be retroactively altered.

I don't believe either of those things. Defensive metrics are just not what people want them to be.

 

What could possibly be retroactively altered about Outs divided by Balls in Play?

 

I'd play the Tin Man in the field if he could win a Triple Crown for me.

 

This is measurable.

http://blogs.thescore.com/mlb/2012/09/27/flip-flop-fly-ball-is-playoff-success-affected-by-when-a-team-clinches/

In the wild-card era through 2011, exactly 60.4% of teams (82/136) have clinched a postseason spot with 6 or fewer games remaining in the season. That includes Game 163 tiebreakers, of which there have been six.

33.1% of teams (45/136) have clinched with 7-13 games remaining in the season.

And 6.6% of teams (9/136) have clinched with more than 14 games remaining in the season, led by the 1998 Yankees, who clinched a postseason spot with 26 games left.

***

(If you include this year's teams, the Reds clinched with 13 games left, the Nats with 12, the Giants with 11, the Braves with 9, the Yanks/O's/Rangers with 3 games left, the Tigers/A's with 2 games left and the Cardinals or Dodgers will clinch with 1 or 0 games left. So that changes the percentages slightly to 60.3%, 33.6% and 6.2%.)