'Tis Better to Have Played and Lost

Once the New York Yankees were eliminated in the American League wild card game, it was clear that the theme of this postseason was going to be one of redemption. Of the eight teams in the Division Series (other than the St. Louis Cardinals), the Toronto Blue Jays were the team that had most recently won the World Series, and that was back in 1993. Last night, the Kansas City Royals ended their 30-year World Series drought by extending the New York Mets' streak of not winning the Series to 29 years.

Even so, the reaction from a number of teams is legitimately, "cry me a river." Here are a list of the teams that have gone the longest without a World Championship:

ORIGINAL 16 MAJOR LEAGUE FRANCHISES

• Chicago Cubs: Last won in 1908. Last appeared in 1945. You may have heard about this.
• Cleveland Indians: Last won in 1948. Last appeared in 1997.
• Pittsburgh Pirates: Last won in 1979. Last appeared in 1979.
• Baltimore Orioles: Last won in 1983. Last appeared in 1983.
• Detroit Tigers: Last won in 1984. Last appeared in 2012.
• Los Angeles Dodgers: Last won in 1988. Last appeared in 1988.
• Oakland Athletics: Last won in 1989. Last appeared in 1990.
• Cincinnati Reds: Last won in 1990. Last appeared in 1990.
• Minnesota Twins: Last won in 1991. Last appeared in 1991.
• Atlanta Braves: Last won in 1995. Last appeared in 1999.
• Chicago White Sox: Last won in 2005. Last appeared in 2005.
• Philadelphia Phillies: Last won in 2008. Last appeared in 2009.
• New York Yankees: Last won in 2009. Last appeared in 2009.
• St. Louis Cardinals: Last won in 2011. Last appeared in 2013.
• Boston Red Sox: Last won in 2013. Last appeared in 2013.
• San Francisco Giants: Last won in 2014. Last appeared in 2014.

EXPANSION FRANCHISES

• Texas Rangers: Never won (franchise established in 1961 as the Washington Senators). Last appeared in 2011.
• Houston Astros: Never won (franchise established in 1962). Last appeared in 2005.
• Milwaukee Brewers: Never won (franchise established in 1969 as the Seattle Pilots). Last appeared in 1982.
• San Diego Padres: Never won (franchise established in 1969). Last appeared in 1988.
• Washington Nationals: Never won (franchise established in 1969 as the Montreal Expos). Never appeared.
• Seattle Mariners: Never won (franchise established in 1977). Never appeared.
• New York Mets: Last won in 1986 (franchise established in 1962). Last appeared in 2015.
• Toronto Blue Jays: Last won in 1993 (franchise established in 1977). Last appeared in 1993.
• Colorado Rockies: Never won (franchise established in 1993). Last appeared in 2007.
• Tampa Bay Rays: Never won (franchise established in 1998). Last appeared in 2008.
• Arizona Diamondbacks: Last won in 2001 (franchise established in 1998). Last appeared in 2001.
• Los Angeles Angels: Last won in 2002 (franchise established in 1961). Last appeared in 2002.
• Miami Marlins: Last won in 2003 (franchise established in 1993). Last appeared in 2003.
• Kansas City Royals: Last won in 2015 (franchise established in 1969). Last appeared in 2015.

So yeah, it's a bummer being a Mets fan today. But 11 of the 30 teams in the majors have been waiting longer for a World Series championship team, including three (the Cubs, Indians, and Senators/Rangers) who've been waiting longer than the Mets have existed.

Going For The Hat Trick

My latest Banished to the Pen article is here. In it, I talk about fastballs. If you've been watching the postseason at all, you know that the Mets have pitchers who throw the ball really, really hard. If you've been paying a lot of attention, you may have read that the Royals were arguably the most successful team in the majors this season at hitting the fastest pitches. As I point out, both those are true. However:

1. The Royals were very successful at hitting pitches thrown 95+ mph, but less so with really, really fast pitches, based on work by mlb.com's Mike Petriello.
2. The Royals pitching staff throws very hard as well, and the Mets hitters struggled against very fast pitches.

I conclude that while people may be overestimating the ability of the Royals to hit the pitches the Mets are likely to throw at them, they may also be underestimating the problems Mets hitters may have with Royals pitchers.

On that note, I'd like to point out my record for predicting this year's postseason series. Let's ignore the wild card games, because they were just one game each. (I got the Cubs right and the Astros wrong). Among the four Division Series games, I was 3-0 (correctly predicting Cubs over Cardinals, Royals over Astros, and Blue Jays over Rangers) if you exclude the Mets (whom I thought would fall to the Dodgers). In the Championship Series, I was 0-1 (play along with me here - I thought the Blue Jays would beat the Royals) if you exclude the Mets (whom I thought would lose to the Cubs). In other words, I was 3-1 if you exclude the Mets. That's not bad! But I got the Mets wrong twice, making me as good as a coin flip at 3-3. 

The point is, I'm going to try to keep the streak going. I'm going to pick the Royals in the World Series. I think their hitters will have more success against the Mets pitchers than people may think, and I think their pitchers will have more success against the Mets hitters than people may think. Specifically, as I pointed out in the article linked above, the Mets were one of the worst teams in baseball at hitting very fast fastballs, which the Royals throw a lot. Further, the Mets' hitters' tendency to hit fly balls (fifth most frequently in the majors) plays into the Royals' pitchers' tendency to yield fly balls third most frequently in the majors). Fly ball/ground ball tendencies are similar to rightly/lefty match-ups: Hitters tend to do better against the opposite type of pitchers. So the fly ball-hitting Mets should do better against a ground ball-yielding team (like, e.g, the Dodgers, who were second in the majors at yielding ground balls) than against the fly ball-yielding Royals, and the fly-ball yielding Royals should do better against the fly ball-hitting Mets than against a ground ball-hitting team (like, e.g., the Pirates, who were sixth in the majors at hitting ground calls). (Neither the Mets pitchers nor the Royals hitters had a pronounced fly ball/ground ball tendency, so there isn't a notable match-up when the Mets are pitching.)

That being said, my choice of Kansas City probably means that New York will win. You're welcome, Mets fans.

Your On the Field of Play Postseason Guide - Championship Series Edition

I batted .500 in the wild cards round, getting the Cubs over the Pirates but not the Astros over the Cubs. I did better in the Divisional Series round, correctly picking Toronto over Texas, Kansas City over Houston, and Chicago over St. Louis, missing New York over Los Angeles. (For those of you who listened to my Banished to the Pen podcast appearance, my pick of Toronto over Los Angeles in the World Series is already kaput.) 

AMERICAN LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES - TORONTO VS. KANSAS CITY

The American League Division Series offered the possibility of interesting Championship Series matchups: Power vs. power Toronto/Houston. All-Lone Star State Texas/Houston. Instead, we've got what was probably the most likely outcome: The two teams with the best record in the American League. Both American League Division Series went the full five games, so the teams have equally depleted pitching staffs. Toronto will start Marco Estrada tonight, David Price tomorrow afternoon, and Marcus Stroman Monday night against the Royals' Edinson Volquez, Yordano Ventura, and Johnny Cueto, respectively.

This series, like Kansas City's against Houston, features some contrasts in hitting, though fewer than in the Division Series. The Blue Jays led the league in home runs; the Royals were second to last. Toronto drew the most walks, Kansas City the fewest. But the Blue Jays don't pair strikeouts with power: They had the fourth lowest strikeout rate, though Kansas City had the lowest by far. As a result, while the Royals get kudos for making contact when they swing, their contact rate, second in the league, isn't dramatically higher than that of the Jays (seventh), and the Jays are less free-swinging, chasing the second lowest percentage of pitches outside the strike zone as the Royals chased the second highest

Both teams made big pitching acquisitions at the trade deadline, with the Royals adding Cueto and the Blue Jays getting Price. Since the All-Star break, Blue Jays pitchers allowed the lowest rate of hard contact on batted balls, the third highest rate of soft contact, and the lowest rate of home runs on fly balls. The Royals were seventh on all three measures. Over the full season, the Royals had the better bullpen, but the two teams' relievers were very close in the season's second half, with a 3.33 ERA for Kansas City and a 3.35 ERA for Toronto. Toronto's relievers struck out fewer batters but walked a lot fewer. 

Toronto got here by playing one of the most memorable playoff games ever in the deciding Game Five. Kansas City's Game Five win was much less exciting. But it's not a carryover of momentum or emotion or heart that's going to decide the series. It's talent, and from what I can see, the Blue Jays have more at the plate and in their starting rotation, with the Royals having better fielders and a better bullpen. I'll take the Blue Jays' plusses over the Royals'. Toronto in six.


NATIONAL LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES - CHICAGO VS. NEW YORK

There could be as many four dates on which there will be both ALCS and NLCS games: Saturday the 17th and Tuesday the 20th for sure, Wednesday the 21st and Saturday the 24th depending on how far the series go. Gee, which of the two games on those dates do you think will get the prime time slot: Kansas City (No. 31 media market in US) vs. Toronto (No. 1 in Canada, a nation with a population less than that of California), or Chicago (No. 3 in US) vs. New York (No. 1)? [UPDATE: I wrote that before MLB announced the official start times. I was 75% right. The Cubs-Mets game is prime time on October 17, October 20, and, if the ALCS goes to five games, October 21. It'll be the afternoon game on October 24, but only if the ALCS goes to seven games.]

These two teams are surprisingly similar. You think of the Cubs, and you think of young hitters, and you'd be right: per Baseball Reference, Cubs hitters are the second youngest in the league. You think of the Mets, and you think of young pitchers, and you'd be kind of right: Baseball Reference lists the Mets as the seventh youngest, but that's thrown off by the presence of 42-year-old Bartolo Colon; remove him and they're second or third youngest. But here are the similarities:

• On offense, both teams are extreme fly ball hitters. The Cubs and Mets were 1-2 in the 15-team National League in percentage of batted balls that were fly balls, and 14-15 in the percentage of batted balls that were grounders.
• When they hit the ball in the air, they left the park more than average: the Cubs were fourth in homers/fly balls, the Mets fifth.
• They both refused to chase pitches outside the strike zone. The Mets swung at the lowest percentage of pitches outside the zone, the Cubs the second lowest.
• Batters had a hard time making contact against both pitching staffs: The Mets were 11th in contact rate, the Cubs 12th. And they kept fly balls in the yard, as Mets pitchers were tenth in homers/fly balls, the Cubs eleventh.
• Both pitching staffs struck out a lot of batters, though, contrary to perception, the Cubs hurlers struck out more, with the highest strikeout rate in the league. The Mets were fifth. Both avoided bases on balls, as the Mets had the second lowest walk rate and the Cubs the fourth lowest.
• Both teams' pitchers induced a lot of grounders, with the Cubs and Mets ranking sixth and seventh in percentage of batted balls hit on the ground.

There were some differences. The Cub hitters struck out more (first in the league) than the Mets (eighth), but they also walked more (second highest walk rate, the Mets were sixth). Mets pitchers were more fly ball prone, and Cubs pitchers more line drive prone.

I'm picking the Cubs in seven for three reasons. First, once you adjust for their respective home fields, the Cubs had a better pitching staff. Park-adjusted offense is a bit of a tossup (the Mets overall appear to be a bit better), but park-adjusted pitching isn't. Second, the Cubs's last game was on Tuesday, so their pitching staff will enter the NLCS pretty well rested, while the Mets won't have Jacob deGrom available until the third game of the series, and it's not clear when Noah Syndergaard, who pitched only one inning yesterday but warmed up multiple times, will be ready to go. Third, while both teams came on strong during the second half of the season, the Mets had a considerably easier schedule. Beginning July 28, the Mets played 63 games, going 39-24: Six against the Yankees and Pirates, against whom they went 1-5; nine against the Nationals, who were in meltdown mode; and 48 against teams that finished .500 or worse. The Cubs, over the same stretch, played better--45-19--against a much tougher schedule that included 19 games against teams that qualified for the postseason. As a result, Baseball Prospectus calculates the Cubs with 96 third order wins (based on run differential and quality of opponents) compared to 88 for the Mets. I expect a close series between two similar and evenly matched teams, but I think the Cubs are the better club.

Let's Go Mets

In case you missed it, last night's Mets-Dodgers game was marred by a nasty play in the seventh inning. In a move that Pirates fans will find depressingly reminiscent of the season-ending injury to Bucs shortstop Jung Ho Kang, the Dodgers' Chase Utley, running from first on a ground ball, tried to break up a double play by barreling into Mets shortstop Ruben Tejada, not starting his "slide" until he was nearly past second base, well to the right of the bag, breaking Tejada's leg. If you want to see the play, it's all over the Internet. I'm not going to link to it here. As the owner of precisely zero healthy knees, I tend to turn away when it comes to leg injuries.

Utley's slide--like that of the Cubs' Chris Coghlan into Kang--was fairly clearly legal under baseball rules. The question is whether it should be. People say, "it's part of baseball," but that's not a compelling justification. Hitting a baserunner with a thrown ball in order to put him out used to be part of baseball. Spitballs used to be part of baseball. Home plate collisions used to be part of baseball. Baseball's gotten rid of of these. The NCAA requires players to slide on the ground--not perform rolling blocks aimed at the fielder's knee--and only along a straight line between the bases (Coghlin was well to the outfield side of second when he hit Kang, Utley less so), and baseball's survived.

Several smart commentators--Grant Brisbee of SB Nation and Dave Cameron of FanGraphs, to name two--already have pieces up calling for changing the rule on takeout slides. Such a rule change will undoubtedly lead to howls of protest. Remember that this is the same mindset that predicted myriad problems and threatened a boycott when the rules were changed to make players stop leaving their gloves on the field between innings. Tradition dies hard, but sometimes it really does need to die.

I really had no rooting interest in this series. After last night, though, let's go Mets.

Your On the Field of Play Postseason Guide - Division Series Round

Well, that was clever. Wrote the previews, then forget to publish them. These are a day old. Sorry.

AMERICAN LEAGUE

Texas vs. Toronto: This series is viewed as the most lopsided among the Division Series, with Toronto heavily favored. I agree. Texas' big trading deadline acquisition, lefthanded starter Cole Hamels, will start in the second game on Friday and, if necessary, in the fifth game on Wednesday. However, the Blue Jays have the best record in the American League against lefties. They scored the most runs in the league (5.7 per game; the Rangers were a distant second at 5.1) and gave up the fewest (3.7; the Rangers were eighth at 4.6). I could see the Blue Jays sweeping this one. [Note: I wrote this before the Rangers won last night's game, 5-3. I still think the Jays will win the series. I'm assuming third baseman Josh Donaldson and right fielder Jose Bautista, who left Thursday's game with injuries, are healthy.] For a more comprehensive look at this series, see my Banished to the Pen colleague Barry Gilpin's preview here.

Houston vs. Kansas City: Another series with a clear favorite, as the Astros fell out of the American League West lead late in the season and struggled to qualify as a wild card, while the Royals had the best record in the American League. However, the Astros overall played better ball than their record indicated, based on the underlying statistics, while the Royals won five more games than their run production would predict. These two teams are a stark contrast: Houston hits home runs and strikes out in bunches, Kansas City batters led the league in contact and had the lowest strikeout rate, by far. Kansas City had a surprisingly weak rotation and a shutdown bullpen; Houston's rotation was solid, anchored by likely Cy Young Award winner Dallas Keuchel, and a bullpen that looked gassed down the stretch. I'm favoring the Royals in five because the Astros will get only one game from Keuchel and because the Royals pitchers were very effective against fly ball hitters, and no team hit a larger proportion of fly balls than the Astros. [Note: I wrote this before the Astros won last night's game, 5-2. I'm not feeling good about that prediction; if the Royals don't win today, it's going to be a real struggle for them.] For a more comprehensive look at the series, see my Banished to the Pen preview here.

NATIONAL LEAGUE

Chicago vs. St. Louis: The Cardinals had the best record in baseball, but the Cubs had the third best. Like the Astros, the Cubs have a Cy Young candidate, Jake Arrieta, who was used in the wild card game and will thus be available in only Game 3 of this series. Unlike the Astros, who faded in the stretch, the Cubs had the best record in the National League in the second half of the year, scoring the second must runs in the league and allowing the third fewest since the All-Star break. The Cardinals are relying on a number of players coming off injuries who may or may not be at their best: catcher Yadier Molina, pitcher Adam Wainwright (who'll be available only out of the bullpen), and outfielders Randal Grichuk, Matt Holliday, and Stephen Piscotty. Pitcher Carlos Martinez is out with a shoulder injury and first baseman Matt Adams, recovering from a leg injury, is not on the Division Series roster. I pick the Cubs in four games. For more detail, see my Banished to the Pen preview here.

New York vs. Los Angeles: It's hard to imagine a New York vs. Los Angeles series not getting top billing, but the longtime Chicago/St. Louis rivalry and the Cubs' history (107 years since their last World Series championship) may take center stage. The story of this series will be pitching: the Mets' young guns vs. the Dodgers' two Cy Young contenders, lefty Clayton Kershaw and righty Zack Greinke. (The secondary story will be the Madoff-scammed financially constrained Mets vs. the more-money-than-God Dodgers.) Both teams had surprisingly good offenses (the Dodgers were seventh in scoring and the Mets eighth despite both playing in pitcher-friendly parks) and strong closers with OK-not-great middle relief. I'm taking the Dodgers in five games, as the Mets' record was juiced by playing in the very weak National League East (the club was 43-43 outside of their home division) while the Dodgers bullpen, a perennial weakness that helped torpedo their last playoff appearances, seemed to have found its footing after the All-Star break. For more detail, see my Banished to the Pen colleague Darius Austin's very thorough preview here.

Next Up: The New York Mets

Two things about the series with the Cardinals: First, this excellent article by Grantland's Ben Lindgergh describing how the Cards, while admittedly a very good team, have also been lucky. Second, hate to be the voice of doom, but if the Cardinals play .500 ball the rest of the way, they'll finish 97-65. If the Pirates area going to overtake them, the Bucs need to go 32-18 the rest of the way. That's a .640 winning percentage. That's a really tall order, given that only one major league team--the Cardinals, of course--have been able to sustain that level of success.

With that behind them, the Pirates now move on from playing the best-pitching team in the National League on the road, playing the the second-best pitching team in the National League, the New York Mets, on the road.

How Are They Doing Lately? The Mets are 16-10 over the last 30 days, the fourth-best record in the National League. They've scored 4.7 runs per game, tying the Diamondbacks over the past 30 days, while giving up 3. 4 runs per game, the second-fewest. Those are all solid numbers. Their record's well-deserved. More recently, they've won 11 of 13, moving into first in the National League East, and becoming the "it" team in New York.

What's Going Right? The Mets starters have a 2.83 ERA over the last 30 days, the second best in the National League. They've struck out the batters the fifth most frequently, been the stingiest at allowing walks, allowed the third-lowest rate of hard contact. Opposing batters have made contact on only 73% of their swings against Mets relievers, resulting in the highest rate of soft contact and the fourth lowest rate of hard contact over the period. 

What's Going Wrong? The offense has been just okay. Over the last 30 days, the Mets are eighth in the 15-team National League in batting average (.252), eighth in on base percentage (.317), and seventh in slugging percentage (.408). They've walked at the fifth-highest rate, but their eight stolen bases are last in the league.

Who's Hot? The offense has been carried over the past 30 days by first baseman Lucas Duda (team-leading nine homers, .640 slugging percentage, but out with a sore back) and right fielder Curtis Granderson (team-leading 20 runs scored and 20 driven in, .291/.373/.553 slash line). Saturday's starting pitcher, Jon Niese, has a 2.93 ERA over the past 30 days, and Sunday's starter, Matt Harvey, has been nearly unhittable, with a 1.23 ERA and .162 batting average over the period. 

Who's Not? The Mets traded for Kelly Johnson and Juan Uribe to fill in for the injured David Wright at third, and they've combined for a .207 batting average and .263 on base percentage. Bartolo Colon, Friday's starter, is the only Mets starter with an ERA above 3.00 over the past 30 days. His 5.93 isn't close. Closer Jeurys Familia has a 4.38 ERA and nearly as many blown saves (three) as saves (five) over the period.

What's the Outlook? The Pirates don't have the meat of their pitching rotation (J.A. Happ, Charlie Morton, Jeff Locke) against the Mets. So the offense, which has scored 5.0 runs per game over the last 30 days, second in the league, will have to keep it going in order to overcome the Mets' starters.

Quality of Competition

The Pirates were swept over the weekend by the Nationals. Going into the series, Pittsburgh was on an eight-game winning streak. The reversal of form isn't a complete surprise, though, given that the winning streak was against three of the worst teams in baseball (Brewers, Phillies, White Sox), while Washington leads the National League East (after sweeping the Bucs).

This raises a concern: Are the Pirates a team that beats up on weak teams, but can't compete with good ones? Studies have shown that a poor record against teams with winning records portends problems in postseason play.

So far, the Pirates are, indeed, doing well against poor competition. Here's the record of National League teams against clubs playing below .500:

 Cardinals    22- 9 .710  Braves       21-16 .568  Rockies      17-18 .486
 Dodgers      31-13 .705  Padres       14-12 .538  Nationals    16-17 .485 
 Pirates      24-12 .667  Cubs         17-16 .515  Giants       21-23 .477
 Mets         19-10 .655  Reds         14-14 .500  Phillies     10-15 .400
 Diamondbacks 15-10 .600  Marlins      10-10 .500  Brewers       5-14 .263

Uh-oh. The Pirates have the third best record in the league against teams below .500. So they've been vulnerable to better clubs, right? Here are the NL teams against opponents playing .500 or better:

 Giants       17-10 .630  Reds         18-22 .450  Marlins       20-31 .392
 Cardinals    23-15 .605  Padres       20-26 .435  Brewers       20-32 .385
 Cubs         20-14 .588  Diamondbacks 19-25 .432  Rockies       13-21 .382
 Nationals    21-16 .568  Braves       14-19 .424  Dodgers        8-18 .308
 Pirates      15-18 .455  Mets         17-25 .405  Phillies      14-32 .304

So, yeah, the Pirates have a losing record against teams that are playing .500 or better. But so do most teams. And, in fact, they're fifth best in the National League against teams with winning records. So there's really nothing to worry about, so far, which is more than can be said for the playoff contenders in New York and Los Angeles.
  

Next Up: The Miami Marlins

I was at a college reunion over the weekend so I didn't do a preview of the Pirates' series against the Mets. I would've said some of the same things I'd said about the Twins: team's been a pleasant surprise to date but appears to be overachieving. What I wouldn't have said was that the series would turn out to be a shellacking: Pirates outscoring the Mets 21-4, beating Thor and The Dark Knight along the way. As a result, the team's offense looks less inept: tied for the fourth-worst park-adjusted OPS, fourth-worst on base percentage with the bases empty, below-average offensive performance at three positions (first base, shortstop, and right field). Hey, those are all improvements! The two most disappointing players in April are having a May resurgence. Josh Harrison's slash line has improved from .213/.250/.363 in April to .312/.333/.455, while Andrew McCutchen's gone from .194/.302/.333 in April to .321/.411/.580 in May. The Pirates will attempt to keep it going, hosting three games against a Miami Marlins team that appears to be in disarray, before starting a West Coast swing on Thursday.

How Are They Doing Lately? The Marlins' 12-16 record over the past 30 days is the fifth-worst in the National League. Over the past two weeks, they're 3-10, the worst record in the league. A week ago today, they fired their manager, Mike Redmond, and replaced him with their then-general manager, Dan Jennings. Jennings' managerial experience consisted of...well, he coached at a high school in Alabama in the 1980s. Seriously. Redmond was fired following after a 1-7 run, culminating in the loss of three straight to the Braves. Under Jennings, the Marlins extended the losing streak to eight straight before taking two over the weekend from Baltimore.

What's Going Right? Over the past 30 days, Marlins starting pitchers have a 3.83 ERA, sixth best in the league. They're helped by a home park that suppresses offense, but still, for a team that's had arguably its two best starters (Jose Fernandez and Henderson Alvarez) on the disabled list for all but four starts this year, that's not bad. The relievers have a 3.50 ERA over the past 30 days, sixth best in the league, but that's misleading.

What's Going Wrong? Disregard that reliever ERA: The Marlins have four saves and six blown saves over the past 30 days. By the measure Win Probability Added, which calculates the odds that a team will win a game at any point, the Marlins relievers have been, by far, the worst in the league. On offense, the team has been sixth in batting average over the past 30 days but tenth in on base percentage and thirteenth in slugging percentage, indicating that they've gotten a bunch of singles but little else; they're eleventh in walks, fourteenth in doubles, and tied for twelfth in homers. 

Who's Hot? The Marlins offense consists largely of second baseman and leadoff hitter Dee Gordon and rightfielder and No. 3 hitter Giancarlo Stanton. Over the past 30 days, Gordon's batting .380 with nine stolen bases (both first in the league) while Stanton has eight homers (tied for sixth) and had driven in 26 runs (fourth). Outfielder Ichiro Suzuki, 41, is defying time with a .314 batting average over the past 30 days. The team's best starting pitcher has been Dan Haren, who threatened to retire during the offseason when the California native was traded away from the Dodgers in the deal that brought Gordon to Miami. He's 3-1 with a 2.97 ERA over the past 30 days. Fellow starters David Phelps (1-1, 3.07 ERA) and Tom Koehler (2-1, 2.41) have been solid as well. None of the three get a lot of strikeouts, which suggests they might struggle to keep up their recent performance. Reliever A.J. Ramos, who became the team's closer on May 12, has two saves and a 0.71 ERA over the past 30 days, and setup man Sam Dyson has a 1.93 ERA over 14 innings.

Who's Not? Third baseman Martin Prado exemplifies the problem with the Marlins' offense. He's batting .267 over the past 30 days, above the league average of .255. But he's walked only four times and he's had only five extra-base hits to go with 26 singles, so his on base percentage of .309 compares to a league average of .317 and his .345 slugging percentage compares to a league average of .400. As I said, the Marlins get a bunch of singles and little else. Two players who were expected to be significant contributors to the offense have been awful: Left fielder Christian Yelich has a .189/.283/.264 slash line over the last 30 days, and first baseman Michael Morse has been worse: .203/.239/.234 with no homers. The Marlins starters after Haren, Phelps, and Koehler have been bad, and demoted closer Steve Cishek has two saves, three blown saves, and 6.08 ERA over the past 30 days. 

What's the Outlook? The Marlins were viewed by some as a playoff contender this year. (Not I.) Instead, they're last in the National League East, and their 18-27 record gives them the third-worst winning percentage in baseball. The main hope is the return of Fernandez from Tommy John surgery sometime over the summer. The Pirates will face one of the Marlins' best starters, Phelps, tonight, countering with Charlie Morton's first start following offseason hip surgery. The struggling Jeff Locke (6.67 ERA, fourth-worst in the NL over the past 30 days) and the not-struggling Gerrit Cole (1.95, sixth-best) start the next two nights. The Marlins haven't announced their starters. If the Pirates can take the series 2-1, they'll return to .500. A sweep would put them two games over .500 for the first time since April.

The Most Hopeless Teams of 2014

From the 2015 Bill James Handbook: Teams that didn't spend a single day in first place in 2014

• Astros
• Cubs
• Diamondbacks
• Mets
• Reds
• Rockies
• Twins

If we also include teams that didn't ever have first place to themselves (the best they could do was tie for first), add the Indians, Padres, Phillies, and White Sox.

Not that that's necessarily a measure of hopelessness, though it pretty much was for the teams in question: Cleveland finished three games behind Oakland for the second American League wild card.

Speaking of Oakland, here are the teams that spent the most days in first place:

• Tigers, 153 days: Lost Divisional Series 
• Brewers, 150 days: Missed the postseason, six games behind the second wild card
• Athletics, 129 days: Lost Wild Card

The San Francisco Giants Dynasty (?)

Teams that have won three World Series within five years:

• Philadelphia Athletics, 1910-11-13
• Boston Red Sox, 1912-15-16 and 1915-16-18
• St. Louis Cardinals, 1942-44-46
• Oakland Athletics, 1972-73-74
• Several iterations of the New York Yankees, dating from 1936-37-38-39 to 1996-98-99
• San Francisco Giants, 2010-12-14

So where does San Francisco rate among those dynastic teams?

Well, let's pare down that list first. The wartime Cardinals don't really count, given that many baseball players were in the service, so the talent pool was idiosyncratic. And the Giants...well, let's look at the Giants.

I'm going to compare the Giants to a couple teams of relatively recent vintage that didn't make the list and generally aren't thought of as dynasties: the 2003-07 Boston Red Sox (from Aaron Boone's walkoff in the 2003 ALCS to the 2007 sweep of the Rockies) and the 1984-88 New York Mets (Davey Johnson, manager). Here's a summary:

That kind of puts the Giants into perspective. Yes, they're only the second National League team to win three World Series in five years, and that's quite an accomplishment. But dynasties aren't just a function of the postseason. The Giants won, on average, seven fewer games per year than the non-dynasty Red Sox and nine fewer than the non-dynasty Mets. Their run differential (runs scored vs. runs allowed) was nowhere near as good as the Mets and Red Sox. The Mets and Red Sox scored runs in droves, while the Giants were below the National League average. (Technical note: I excluded the Astros in all the Giants' years, since they migrated out of the National League after 2012.) While the Giants were good at pitching and defense, ranking second to the Braves in runs allowed over the past five years, they didn't dominate the league the way the Mets did. And when you consider that Boston's Fenway Park boosted offense by about 5% in 2003-07 while San Francisco's AT&T Park suppressed it by about the same amount 2010-2014, the Giants' advantage in runs allowed narrows considerably.

And it's also worth noting that the Wild Card didn't exist until 1995 and the second wild card until 2012. The 2014 San Francisco Giants were the National League's second wild card, so would not have made the postseason during the Mets' or Red Sox' eras. By contrast, the 1984, 1985, and 1987 Mets, none of which made the postseason, would have won the Eastern Division under the current three-division configuration (they finished behind the Cubs in 1984 and Cardinals in 1985 and 1987). Any one of those teams, victors of 90, 98, and 92 games, respectively, might have added to the Metropolitans' postseason success.

This takes nothing away from the Giants' success this year, and in 2012, and in 2010. Certainly, they earned each of those championships. But let's hold off on calling them one of the greatest teams of all time, OK? 

Hope Springs Eternal, Even When It Probably Shouldn't

Before the season started, both Baseball Prospectus and ESPN predicted this order of finish in the American League East:
1. Tampa Bay
2. Boston
3. New York
4. Toronto
5. Baltimore

Here are the standings, as of this morning:

1. Baltimore

2. Toronto

    New York

4. Boston

5. Tampa Bay

(Technically, New York's ahead of Toronto on percentage points, but they're both four games out of first.)

I'm not picking on BP or ESPN, I'm just showing that the AL East has been a wild division this year. Generally considered the best division in baseball entering the season, its first place team has the worst record of the six divisional leaders, and all of the teams have glaring flaws.

Those flaws, it would seem, create an opportunity for the two worst teams in the division, Boston and Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay's won five in a row and are 16-5 over their last 21 games. The Red Sox are also on a five-game winning streak and have won nine of their last ten. The Rays are 47-53, eight games behind the Orioles. The Red Sox are 47-52, 7.5 games out. The two teams were generally thought to be the best in the division before the season. Is there time for the cream to rise?

Probably not. We're at about the 100 game mark for the 2014 season. I looked for teams with records below .500 after 100 games that also made the playoffs. It's an awfully short list:

• The 1973 New York Mets are the only team to make the postseason with a record worse than Boston's and Tampa Bay's. They were 44-56 after 100 games, then rallied to win a weak NL Eastern division with an 82-79 record. They were the only team above .500. They beat the Reds 3-2 in the NLCS and fell to Oakland in a tight World Series, 4 games to 3.
• A year later, the Pittsburgh Pirates were 48-52 after 100 games. They won the NL East with an 88-74 record but fell to the Dodgers in the NLCS, 3-1.
• The 1981 Kansas City Royals were 49-51 after 100 games and made the playoffs but it doesn't count, because 1981 was a strike-shortened season (Kansas City played only 103 games) and baseball employed a split-season method to determine the playoffs. The Royals made the postseason on the strength of a 30-23 record in the second half of the season.
• Three years later, the Royals were 48-52 after 100 games but won the AL West with an 84-78 record. They were swept in the ALCS by the eventual world champion Detroit Tigers.
• The next team to make the postseason despite a losing record after 100 games was the 2003 Minnesota Twins, who were 49-51. They went on a 41-21 tear the rest of the way to win the AL Central by four games, but were bounced out of the playoffs by the New York Yankees, 3-1.
• The 2006 Los Angeles Dodgers had the same record as the Rays after 100 games, 47-53. They ended the year 88-74, the same record as the San Diego Padres and the best in the NL West. The Padres won the season series, nine games to five, so they were the division champions. The Dodgers were the wild card team, and the New York Mets swept them in three games in the Divisional Series.
• Finally, the 2008 Dodgers, 49-51 after 100, won the NL West with an 84-78 record. They swept the Chicago Cubs in the divisional series and lost to the eventual world champion Philadelphia Phillies in the NLCS, four games to one.

Before the leagues split into divisions, no team with a losing record over the first 100 games made the postseason, which then was only the World Series. In the 45 years since, only six teams below .500 have made the playoffs. Of them, two lost in the Divisional Series, three lost their league's Championship Series, and only one--the 1973 Mets--made the World Series, which they lost. 

This isn't to say that Boston or Tampa Bay can't rally and win everything. If they make the postseason, it'll be against extremely long odds, and if they win the World Series, it'll be unprecedented. I'd be thinking of next year were I they.

Sweet Play of the Day - May 22

How Yasiel Puig avoided breaking his wrist on this catch, I don't know. I was listening to a Mets broadcast a couple days ago and they were still talking about this catch.

Sweet Play of the Day - May 17

I've contained my Jose Fernandez grief to a manageable level, so it's back to work...I figure it must be laziness or something on my part that I haven't listed a catch by the Mets' Juan Lagares yet. The guy really is an amazing centerfielder.

Sweet Play of the Day - May 4

Nolan Arenado is getting to be a regular here. (Incidentally, he's still top 10 in the majors in assists - currently eighth.)

Last Night's Sweet Play

In case you don't start your day checking mlb.com videos, here's a fantastic double play from last night's Mets-Cards game.

Things I Didn't Know: NL East

In coming weeks, you will have innumerable opportunities to read previews of the upcoming season. I dug through last year's results and came up with items for each team that you probably won't see in the previews but that I thought were interesting.

I started with the NL West and Central. Now, the NL East.

Atlanta Braves, 96-66: So that's why they're giving Craig Kimbrel all that money...Relief pitchers, as a group, are not terribly consistent. A good bullpen one year can be lousy the next. The Brewers were fifth in the NL in reliever ERA in 2011, last in 2012, and third last year. The Dodgers were 14th in 2011, third in 2012, 9th last year. You get the picture. They bounce around. Except the Braves. The Braves have been first, second, and first in reliever ERA the past three seasons. That's amazing consistency. And Kimbrel, who's led the league in saves each of the past three years, has a career 1.39 ERA. You know how many pitchers have an ERA that low through their first four seasons, minimum 200 IP? One guy: Craig Kimbrel.

Washington Nationals, 86-76: The Nats were a team of extremes last year. They had a 24-41 record against teams that finished at .500 or better. No team had fewer wins against such teams. They also had a 62-35 record against teams with losing records. Nobody had more. Part of this was because they play in the NL East, where they were one of only two teams with a winning record, but that was true in the NL West too, and neither the Diamondbacks nor the Dodgers matched the Nationals' dominance of bad teams or inability to beat good ones.

New York Mets, 74-88: The Mets were a losing team last year, but they were the fourth-best road team in the NL last year, one of only four to finish above .500 on the road (41-40). That, of course, meant that they had a losing record at home. Only the Mets and Cubs lost were worse at home than on the road. The Mets were the fourth-best team in the NL on the road and the second-worst at home. Mets fans who wanted to see their team win had to travel. 

Philadelphia Phillies, 73-89: The Phillies scored the third fewest runs in the league last year, 610, which is bad enough, but that figure is inflated by the games they play at home at Citizens Bank Park, a hitters' park, where their 344 runs scored ranked fifth in the league. Which means that on the road...Yeah. Awful. Scored 266 runs; only the Marlins were worse. Fewest road home runs in the league. Second-fewest doubles. This was a terrible offense, masked by the home ballpark.

Miami Marlins, 62-100: The Marlins finished last in the National League East. They had the worst record in the league. They were really bad. So, given my west-to-east order of presentation, they're the last NL team I'll hit. So it's by coincidence, not design, that I saved the best for last: This is the most amazing tidbit I found. THE MIAMI MARLINS HAD THE BEST WINNING PERCENTAGE IN THE NATIONAL LEAGUE WHEN LEADING A GAME AFTER SEVEN INNINGS. I'm serious. Quick, who was their closer? (Steve Cishek, 34 saves) Who were their setup guys? (Mike Dunn, Chad Qualls, A.J. Ramos) How in the world did they win more of the games that they led after seven (41-2, .953 winning percentage) than the Dodgers (71-4, .947), Braves (72-6, .923), Cardinals (86-6, .935), and Pirates 74-5, .937), other than that they played a lot fewer of them? I don't know either. But they did.

Carlos Beltran and an Old-Timer

The ninth and tenth most prolific home run hitters in postseason baseball history:
                G  PA  AB  R  H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS  BA   OBP  SLG
Carlos Beltran 37 164 136 41 49 11  0 16  31 11  0 .360 .463 .794
Babe Ruth      41 167 129 37 42  5  2 15  33  4  3 .326 .467 .744

Yes, I know. Ruth put up his numbers in 41 World Series games, while Beltran has never appeared in the Series - his 37 games comprise a wild card game, 16 Divisional Series games, and 20 League Championship Series games. And, of course, Mets fans will never view him as clutch.

But still. Postseason is still postseason.