PDA

View Full Version : Win/Loss splits against "bad" teams and "good" teams.



teknetic
08-05-08, 10:20 PM
Haven't seen anyone mention it, but here goes.

W/L: Team

Orioles: 5-7
Rangers*: 1-4 (they had come into Arlington without losing a ballgame in almost three years; they've now lost two in a row)
Reds: 1-2
Detroit: 1-4
Pittsburgh: 1-2
Cleveland: 3-4
Royals: 3-4

Total: 15-27

*They're actually not "bad" persay; but they aren't good either.

Combined WP% of .473.

Now against the better teams in the league;

Red Sox: 6-6
Rays: 7-5
White Sox: 2-1
Angels: 2-2
Minnesota: 5-2
Oakland: 5-1 (There was once a point in the season where they were actually doing well)

Total: 27-17

Combined WP% of .561

They show up for the big games and run with their tails between their legs in games that shouldn't all that difficult. Or at least that's the explanation I have.

NYYDragoon
08-05-08, 10:46 PM
That sounds about right. Or, they don't know how to react to rookie pitchers who they've never seen before. They swing away as opposed to taking pitches, and they end up giving the guy a break.

BroadwayBomber55
08-05-08, 10:48 PM
Haven't seen anyone mention it, but here goes.

W/L: Team

Orioles: 5-7
Rangers*: 1-4 (they had come into Arlington without losing a ballgame in almost three years; they've now lost two in a row)
Reds: 1-2
Detroit: 1-4
Pittsburgh: 1-2
Cleveland: 3-4
Royals: 3-4

Total: 15-27

*They're actually not "bad" persay; but they aren't good either.

Combined WP% of .473.

Now against the better teams in the league;

Red Sox: 6-6
Rays: 7-5
White Sox: 2-1
Angels: 2-2
Minnesota: 5-2
Oakland: 5-1 (There was once a point in the season where they were actually doing well)

Total: 27-17

Combined WP% of .561

They show up for the big games and run with their tails between their legs in games that shouldn't all that difficult. Or at least that's the explanation I have.
As I said before, against the mediocre, sloppy teams, they take them lightly and play foolish baseball. Against great teams, they play their best baseball.

This team doesn't know how to take ALL teams seriously.

nyyfanatic85
08-05-08, 10:50 PM
Wow, this thread makes me somewhat optimistic of our chances in the playoffs, if we can get there.

teknetic
08-05-08, 11:19 PM
As I said before, against the mediocre, sloppy teams, they take them lightly and play foolish baseball. Against great teams, they play their best baseball.

This team doesn't know how to take ALL teams seriously.

Well, it falls in line with their performance against scrubs like Harrison and the plethora of garbage that's beaten us all year; to their performance against guys like Lackey, Felix, Bedard, Beckett, Matsuzaka, Shields, and Kazmir. I keep saying it's stupid to question their preparation, but if someone points me in the proper direction, I'll gladly go with that.

BroadwayBomber55
08-06-08, 12:01 AM
Well, it falls in line with their performance against scrubs like Harrison and the plethora of garbage that's beaten us all year; to their performance against guys like Lackey, Felix, Bedard, Beckett, Matsuzaka, Shields, and Kazmir. I keep saying it's stupid to question their preparation, but if someone points me in the proper direction, I'll gladly go with that.
I also question their approach on guys that they have never seen before and think they kill the ball and pull everything.

I don't care what pitcher they face, they need to use the entire field.

Also, if there are close pitches, at least foul tip them and make sure they hit the dirt. Just get a piece and stay alive for another pitch.

brosiusbuddy
08-06-08, 12:19 AM
This team is mediocre. They better win some games and fast so that by the time Tampa and Boston are on the schedule a win might actually mean something.

BRNXBMRS
08-06-08, 08:53 AM
The Yanks of 2008 either play up to or down to their competition.

NYYDragoon
08-06-08, 11:32 AM
Alright. So I did some quick further analysis into this. Mainly, it was to test my hypothesis that the Yanks crash and burn against rookie starting pitchers and excel against vets. Here are the results:

First off, I defined "rookie" as a pitcher who's had two or fewer 25+ start seasons. And I only looked at starting pitchers who got a "W" against the Yanks. As much as I hate pitcher W/L, it was the most straightforward metric to use.

By status:

18 rookies have beaten the Yanks.
23 veterans have beaten them.
Opponents starting winning rookies have outscored the Yankees 143-49, for a run differential of 94.
Opponents starting winning vets have outscored the Yankees 137-62, for a run differential of 75.
Thus, contrary to how it may feel, the Yankees don't lose to new pitchers more than older ones, although they do score fewer runs in the situations overall.By team:

Teams currently above .500 have beaten us with rookies 11 times and with vets 11 times.
Teams currently below .500 have beaten us with rookies 7 times and with vets 12 times.
Thus, "bad" teams still have better success against the Yankees when they start someone with experience.
Above .500 teams have outscored the Yanks 154-61, with means a differential of 93. When they start rookies, they outscore them 89-31, which makes the difference 58.
Below .500 teams outscored the Yanks 126-50, with means a differential of 76. When they start rookies, they outscore them 54-18, for a difference of 36.
Thus, the Yankees still lose harder against better teams.I really wouldn't have expected that.

teknetic
08-15-08, 11:06 PM
3-5 against the Royals. Jays (Burnett goes in game 1) and O's next; pretty sure this is over.

Yankees Empire
08-16-08, 11:37 AM
I totally get the urge to say that the Yankees "play down" to their competition. It's quite natural given the numbers above.

I don't think you succeed in baseball to any degree by going up or down, depending on the day or the opponent. It is a consistent day-to-day approach that brings success.

I think baseball is a weird game and some things just can't be explained about it. This particular split might be one of them.

NYYRules#1
08-17-08, 10:18 AM
Interesting analysis. It is a bit surprising, but I think part of the reason we seem to to terribly against rookies isn't that we're doing any worse against them than we are against veterans, but that we're expected to beat rookies, and consistently don't. When you get mowed down by a veteran, it's not as surprising - they're "supposed" to do that, in a way. But when then same thing happens to you at the hands of a rookie, it's a huge let down, as a lineup of veterans should really be pounding rookie pitchers' heads in. I think that's what's causing so much of the idea that we do worse against rookies - getting shut down by a guy you know and who has been around for awhile is one thing, but getting shut down by a guy who you've never heard of and barely has any ML stats to his name is another.