An April Win is Like Any Other Except Maybe the Orioles' April 2016 Wins

"April is the cruelest month, breeding lilacs out of the dead land,

mixing memory and desire, stirring dull roots with spring rain."

T.S. Eliot, the Wasteland

Spring is full of hope.  That is certainly true with baseball where projections and predictions can be forgotten and a vision of success can intoxicate the mind.  Wins can be exaggerated in importance and losses can be overlooked.  The mind can be protected by a shield of acknowledged small sample sizes or the sword of actual successful outcomes.  As they come, April is one of the cruelest for a baseball fan as it plays most with their ability to fully comprehend the talent of their chosen club.

A few weeks back, the site discussed the importance of a successful April slate of games.  The basic conclusion was that if a team wins a lot in April then they will have a great shot at participating in the playoffs.  This was a simple conclusion.  We should expect good teams to win whether in April or May or whenever.  On any given day, the teams that win are likely to be good teams because good teams win.

With that dip into frigid February waters, I wanted to take a different look at the importance of games played by month. I wanted to compare the importance of winning games in April vs. any other month.    We know that good teams win, but does a particular month highlight which team is good?

Replacing the analysis I did on Monday, which I think was impacted by toddler brain rot, I went at it a couple different ways with best fit models using league data over the last three seasons.  One, comparing the month record to the total record.  Two, comparing the cumulative month to total record.  Three, comparing the cumulative month to cumulative total of games for the rest of the season.

	Month	Cumulative	Post
April	0.26	0.26	0.07
May	0.32	0.50	0.15
June	0.39	0.71	0.23
July	0.20	0.80	0.24
August	0.56	0.93	0.18
September	0.42	1	NA

With the monthly data, April has the second least correlation to the final season winning percentage.  Cumulatively, we see what we would expect with certainty increasing as games played increases.  Pre vs Post data suggests that much of the certainty we have is simply put in that games have counted as opposed to gleaning much information into what will happen.

Let's shake it another way.  How does winning percentage in April compare to the season end total?

Season	Average	SD	Max	Min
>550	.587	.086	.773	.476
450-550	.500	.104	.714	.292
<450 font="">	.423	.108	.583	.217

I used a winning percentage of .550 to represent a likely wild card club or better.  That is roughly 90 wins.  What we see is that all three batches produced at least one team that looked interesting in April.  However, over the past three seasons there has been no terrible April performers who wound up with 90 wins or more.

If we look only at clubs with a .476 winning percentage or greater in April, we cover those 19 high quality clubs, but also 39 more lesser teams.  What this means is that historically, an April winning percentage of .476 or more has meant that you have a 33% chance at 90 wins.  On the flip side, no team below .476 had 90 wins.

Another angle to look at would be in division games.  One might expect that a certain number of teams may actually be impacted with team matchups.  We should think that not all games are created equally.  While overall record is what decides who gets into the playoffs, that is largely impacted by the leap frogging within the division.  We might well expect that a division win or loss is more impactful than a win or loss outside of the division. 

For the 2016 Baltimore Orioles, they will be facing in division competition 20 out of 23 games this April.  This compares unevenly with last year's 12 out of 23 games.  In fact, the Orioles' crunching of division rivals is not really all that common amongst teams.  This not common occurrence may well be spread rather evenly amongst teams and would be obscured in the exercise above.

Therefore, I wanted to compare in division vs out of division records against what really matters: games back.  In this analysis, I did not look at MLB records in 2016.  Instead, my data set contained all AL East teams from 2012 until last season.  What I found out was that a divisional game was about 29% more important than a non division game.

Anyway, chew on that for awhile.

Can we assume Wieters will hit better next time in the playoffs?

Jon Shepherd contributed to this article.

There has been some data that suggests that catchers peak later offensively in their careers than the average player. The narrative often attached to that late boost in offensive prowess is that a catcher has to deal with the mental hardships that come with taking care of a MLB staff and that exhausts a catcher from developing quickly from an offensive standpoint.  A second competing narrative is that a catcher's appearance in the majors is not a product of his offensive game, but of his defensive game.  As such, catchers with under developed offensive skills are more likely to be promoted and learn at the major league level than catchers with under developed defensive skills. 

The former idea of mental adaptation comes up a lot though in a variety of ways.  In a playoffs-related chat at Baseball Prospectus last week, Dan Evans suggested that the first time a catcher goes to the post-season his offensive production can suffer because he's focusing so much on his pitching staff. To put it another way, he is thinking so much about his pitchers that his mind is dulled for handling his own offense. This came up in reference to Matt Wieters, who ended up batting a dismal .125/.197/.167 in the playoffs. Jon was nice enough to provide me with a non-exhaustive list of catchers who had multiple post-season appearances over the last couple decades, so I could preliminary look at how they did their first time there versus their second (counting "first time" as the first year in which they had at least 10 plate appearances in the playoffs.)  The was not intended to be an exhaustive study on the subject, but a quick pilot study to see if there was any indication as to whether this truly is a topic to invest more time.

The list: Javy Lopez, Sandy Alomar Jr., Jason Varitek, Jorge Posada, Dan Wilson, Chris Hoiles, AJ Pierzynski, Yadier Molina, and Carlos Ruiz.

The first time this group of players were exposed to handling pitchers in the playoffs, they had an average OPS of .692. In the season preceding that post-season, they had an average OPS of .784. So, while acknowledged that the playoffs do only provide a small sample size, the catchers fared worse in the playoffs than they did in the regular season by an average of about 91 points or a reduction of 12%. This decrease would be in line with general conventional wisdom about offensive performance decreasing in the playoffs for all players in that pitchers in the playoffs tend to be better as a function of the best teams being in the playoffs. Worse teams with likely worse pitchers are not present for hitters to beat up on. 


The second time the catchers went to the playoffs, they had an average OPS of .674 - so that is a little bit worse than the first time. That isn't that bad though, when you account for their average OPS during the regular season on .742. So their OPS fell by only 69 points, on average, or a 9% decrease in performance.

This is only nine players, of course, likely with different levels of responsibility when it comes to handling their respective pitching staffs and the quality of pitching each of them faced while hitting may not be the typical quality of post-season pitchers. Again, this is a pilot study. A difference between a 12% decrease and a 9% decrease in relation to their regular season stats does not appear to be incredibly significant.  At least, it does not seem to be an interesting enough result to look more deeply into the numbers.  The idea is interesting and likely merits greater study, but nothing immediately emerges from this pilot study to indicate there is something really meaty here. A major problem for many statistical-minded folks is to be at arms with established lines of thought.  Where this has made sense in order for this approach to gain a strong foothold in every front office, it can sometimes overlook great ideas and concepts that statistical analysis has difficulty in assessing.  Perhaps there is truth to the mental hardship being placed on a playoff newbie catcher or maybe there is a general narrative that is being forced on catchers who happen to do poorly in a handful of plate appearances.

The work done here is largely inconclusive.  Maybe someone else can find much more merit to the idea than we did.  Our personal opinion is that Matt Wieters' line during the playoffs this year will not mean much to what he will do the next time he gets into the post season, fingers crossed, in 2013.

The full data (with an extra year for some catchers who were fortunate enough to see October over and over):

Javy Lopez:

1995 - .315/.344/.498, .842  OPS
1995P - .300/.302/.525, .827 OPS, 43 PA

1996 - .282/.322/.466, .788  OPS
1996P - .365/.426/.625, 1.061 OPS, 61 PA

1997 - .295/.361/.534, .895  OPS
1997P - .125/.207/.250, .457 OPS, 29 PA

Sandy Alomar:

1995 - .300/.322/.478, .810  OPS
1995P - .220/.233/.366, .598 OPS, 43 PA

1996 - .263/.299/.397, .696  OPS
1996P - .125/.125/.125, .250 OPS, 16 PA

1997 - .324/.354/.545, .900  OPS
1997P - .274/.303/.507, .809 OPS, 76 PA

Jason Varitek:

1999 - .269/.330/.482, .813  OPS
1999P - .220/.227/.512, .739 OPS, 44 PA

2003 - .273/.351/.512, .863  OPS
2003P - .294/.351/.706, 1.057 OPS, 37 PA

2004 - .296/.390/.482, .872  OPS
2004P - .245/.295/.472, .767 OPS, 61 PA

Jorge Posada :

1998 - .268/.350/.475, .824 OPS
1998P - .227/.414/.500, .914 OPS, 29 PA

1999 - .245/.341/.401, .752 OPS
1999P - .182/.217/.409, .626 OPS, 23 PA

2000 - .287/.417/.527, .943 OPS  
2000P - .204/.353/.278, .631 OPS, 68 PA
 
Dan Wilson:

1995 - .285/.330/.3444, .774 OPS
1995P - .061/.114/.061, .175 OPS, 35 PA

1997 - .270/.326/.423, .749 OPS
1997P - .000/.000/.000, .000 OPS, 13 PA

Chris Hoiles :

1996 - .258/.356/.474, .830 OPS
1996P - .158/.292/.316, .607 OPS, 24 PA

1997 - .259/.375/3419, .794 OPS  
1997P - .143/.280/.286, .566 OPS, 25 PA

AJ Pierzynski:

2002 - .300/.334/.439, .773 OPS
2002P - .344/.371/.500, .871 OPS, 35 PA

2003 - .312/.360/.464, .824 OPS
2003P - .231/.333/.462, .795 OPS, 15 PA

2005 - .257/.308/.420, .728 OPS  
2005P - .262/.313/.571, .884 OPS, 48 PA
 
Yadier Molina:

2005 - .252/.295/.358, .654 OPS
2005P - .286/.286/.371, .657 OPS, 35 PA

2006 - .216/.274/.321, .595 OPS
2006P - .358/.424/.547, .971 OPS, 59 PA

Carlos Ruiz :

2007 - .259/.340/.396, .735 OPS
2007P - .333/.400/.444, .844 OPS, 10 PA

2008 - .219/.320/.300, .620 OPS
2008P - .261/.346/.391, .737 OPS, 52 PA

2009 - .255/.355/.425, .780 OPS
2009P - .341/.474/.591, .1.065 OPS, 57 PA

The Orioles Could Be in the Playoffs Right Now

A potential problem that baseball has during its long season is that there are a great many games that mean next to nothing for the majority of fan bases.  About twelve of thirty teams had some hope to make the playoffs on September 1st.  By now the group has narrow down to five interesting teams: Red Sox, Rays, Angels, Braves, and Cardinals.  Everyone else is too far from each other or has basically sealed up their divisions.  Maybe it is a unique season in that there is so little intrigue and maybe a Baltimore-centric bias exists here, but this seems like a fairly common occurrence.  Fans of the game may be thrilled, but fans of a team (and I think there are more of them) are not and tune out.

Football, basketball, and hockey recognized similar issues in their respective histories and tried to make the games more broadly interesting by adding the number of playoff teams.  It works in football.  A single game is actually a good indication of who the better team might be and home field advantage significantly impacts those games.  In basketball, I don't think it works as the post-season drags on forever.  Basketball seems to require more games to show who is a better team, but it may also simply be a TV money grab.  Hockey?  I guess it is similar.  I do not follow pro basketball or hockey much.

Baseball, on the other hand, cannot do this.  Anything can happen in a seven game series as Billy Beane can attest...the Cardinals, too.  The best team does not always win in a sport that needs about all 162 games to figure out which teams are the best.  Baseball needs a lot of events to say much of anything.  Think of it like this...if a running back pulls in 1500 yards in sixteen games, it means a lot.  You expect him to be a pretty good running back.  If a baseball player hits .350 with power over sixteen games, you are not going to put much stock in it.  Even if you look at it as 300 carries, a batter with 300 at bats will fool you.  In 2010, Wilson Betemit had 315 plate appearances and a 989 OPS (.385 wOBA).  Baseball simply requires a greater sample size, so increasing the number of teams in traditional playoff series will likely not result in satisfying the need to crown a team at the end of the year.

So how do you:
1) Keep the interest of as many teams as possible,
2) Keep the regular season in length,
3) Keep the post-season in length,
4) Give significant advantages to teams that did well during the season, and
5) Respect divisions with greater levels of competition?

Here is my response: Use a weighted system to have the playoffs expanded to twenty teams.  This seems absurd and it probably is, but let us use the current September 24, 2011 standings for the AL.

The way this system will work is in this way:
Seed 1: Divisional winner with best outside the division record
Seed 2: Divisional winner with second best outside the division record
Seed 3: Divisional winner with the third best outside the division record
Seed 4-10: Remaining teams in order of best outside the division record.


Playoff Schedule

September 29

Two doubleheaders with seeds 5-10.  The doubleheaders will take place in the home stadium of the 5th and 6th seeds.  The afternoon game will be played between 7th and 10th or 8th and 9th seeds.  The evening game will take place against the home teams (5th or 6th seeds).

This would provide for a pretty exciting day of baseball with the lowest ranking teams having to compete in a difficult situation to advance onward.  The afternoon game should be fairly even with the teams both as road teams, but the evening game will be grueling.  The afternoon winners will have to deal with fatigue, spent arms in the bullpen, a team with a better record on a balanced schedule, and the disadvantage of being on the road (between an equally matched pair of teams, the home team wins about 53% of the time in baseball).

In the current framework, really only the 5th and 6th place teams here would likely be in a hunt for a wildcard or a weak division championship.  This is likely to keep competition fierce as a few more wins could lead to a 4th place rank and outside of this crazy one day setup and a few more losses puts you on the road and in need of sweeping a difficult doubleheader.  Likewise, teams at the lower stretch of the bracket are fighting for home field advantage or just the simple chance of getting into the playoffs.  I think it would be a great win for baseball to have such a wild and inclusive day of meaningful games as well as the intrigue that would manifest in the weeks before.

September 30 - October 5

The winners of the play in round must then fly off to begin playing the next round as a road team.  The play in winners, of course, as allowed to change their rosters as needed.  I imagine the play in game would include a great number of relievers.  The second round will be a best of five series at the home of the 3rd and 4th seeds.  The entire series will be played at these locations.  This gives a great advantage for the 3rd and 4th seeds with an extra day off to get their pitchers on the right rest and to give them home field for the entire time.  It also gives the 3rd and 4th seeds home dates because in the next round, they will have them.

October 6 - October 11

The winners of the second round will fly off to the home stadiums of the 1st and 2nd seeded teams.  This too will be a five game series with the top seeds having the luxury of the entire series at home.  This gives advantages to being the 1st or 2nd seeded team as they get an entire week off to get their pitchers in order and heal minor injuries.  They also retain home field advantage throughout this series and maintain the gate they would have seen in the current format.

October 12 - October 20

The League Champion Series would work the same way as it does now.

October 22 - October 31

The World Series would work the same way as it does now.

The current standings using this format:
1: New York Yankees (.625 outside of division; 45-27 outside of division)
2: Texas Rangers (.540; 47-40)
3: Detroit Tigers (.522; 36-33)
4: Boston Red Sox (.583; 42-30)
5: Toronto Blue Jays (.565; 39-30)
6: Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (.529; 46-41)
7: Tampa Bay Rays (.514; 37-35)
8: Chicago White Sox (.493; 34-35)
9: Baltimore Orioles (.478; 33-36)
10: Kansas City Royals (.472; 34-38)


There only a couple out of division games left as the current schedule is designed to make the most of largely non-existent divisional races.  For instance, there are no bubble teams at the edge of the playoffs, but this certainly was not the case a week ago.  Now, the Orioles are in the playoffs in this scenario because the next two teams outside of the top ten are the Oakland Athletics (.460; 40-47) and the Cleveland Indians (.458; 33-39) who no longer have any outside of the division games remaining.  The worst the Orioles can do is .465 if their next two games with Detroit go poorly.  The Royals also no longer have outside the division games left.  The the Orioles won their next two, they would tie White Sox for the 8th seed.

AL East Division Winner Race

This is actually an interesting race.  At the moment, the Yankees and Rays are tied with divisional records of 37-29 with Boston at 36-30.  This would be an amazing end of the season.  You can see above what it means if the Yankees win.  Boston gets a bye and home field advantage in the second round with the Rays being on the road in the difficult first round.  If Boston wins the division, then the Yankees get only the first round bye and home field in the second round with the Rays in the same predicament.  However, if the Rays win they leap frog several seeds to the third seed with Texas and Detroit moving to the first two seeds.  Yankees get the fourth seed and Boston is left with a home field advantage only in the first round.  To say this would be exciting would be an understatement.

Conclusion

The first problem here is that I have absolutely no control over this process and I figure none of my readers do as well.  That might be the only problem.  I do think though that this set up would make baseball far more interesting to most fan bases and provide a fair structure that rewards teams for good play within their divisions and abroad.  This may make it easier for free agents who worry about the playoffs to take more of a chance with teams in difficult divisions.

Although when I began this endeavor I never expected the Orioles to be in a position to actually be included in this setup.  However, they did surprisingly well (from my perspective) outside of the AL East.  I think that I have been relatively without bias here.