The Curious Case of Pythag

A lot has been made about the 78- 84 Pythagorean expectation record the Royals posted this year based on their runs scored versus runs allowed throughout the course of the season.  Were the Royals unlucky this year?  Does the 78-84 record more accurately reflect the true talent level of the roster over the actual 71-91 record?  Some point to the Pythag total and say the team is close to contention, while others disagree and want to wait it out this offseason.  Who's right, who's wrong, who's to say?

When looking at the Royals actual record versus their Pythag record though, a seven game difference does seem like a wide gap.  So, some digging was done to see just how rare an underperformance of that magnitude really is.  To put it mildly, it is pretty rare.  After looking at every franchise from 1990-2011, the results show that over the course of those 729 seasons of baseball, only 3.98%, or once every twenty five seasons, of the time does a team underperform their Pythag record by at least seven games.  Shockingly, or maybe not so shockingly, the Royals are responsible for 10% of these types of seasons since 1990, having accomplished the feat in 2011, 1999, and 1997.

Most of the time, as would seem fitting, the teams that underperform their Pythag by at least seven games just aren't very good teams.  Of the twenty nine teams since 1990 to have done this, the average record is 73-89.  There are a few outliers to the idea that only bad teams underperform by this degree......

 

• 2002 Red Sox: 93-69 versus Pythag 100-62
• 2003 Astros: 87-75 versus Pythag 94-68
• 1997 Astros: 84-78 versus Pythag 93-69
• 1990 Mets: 91-71 versus Pythag 98-64
• 2008 Blue Jays: 86-76 versus Pythag 93-69

   

Before going deeper into the twenty nine instances since 1990 that a team has been at least seven below their expected Pythag, I thought a start could be made by looking at the 2011 Royals and Padres teams.  Both teams went 71-91 this season, but the Royals had a Pythag of 78-84, while the Padres had a Pythag of 79-83.  Are there similarities?

 

Difficulty In One Run Games

   Neither the Padres, nor the Royals fared well this season in one run contests.  The Royals had a .439% winning rate in these games, which was actually a tiny tick above their rate for the entire season.  On the other hand, the Padres only managed a .392% winning rate in one run games while winning .463% of all their other games, which over the course of a full season would've given them 75 wins.

   Of the eight playoff teams from 2011, only the Rangers and the Yankees were under 500 in one run contests, and both of those teams failed to meet their expected Pythag win total.

Blowouts Are Distorting The Numbers For The Royals

   Both the Royals and Padres played 500 baseball in games that were decided by five or more runs.  But, while the Royals amassed only seven more runs scored than allowed over the course of nineteen games, the Padres scored twenty two more runs than opponents in seventeen blowouts.  The Padres may have gotten a win or two in their Pythag just from these blowouts.

   What could matter is looking at how the runs were spread out during the rest of the game for the Royals.  During blowout wins, the Royals scored 10.4 R/G.  For the other 143 games of the season, the Royals offense score 3.73 R/G.  Also interesting is looking at how the pitching staff performed in blowout losses versus all other games.  The pitching staff had some horrifying results when they got hit hard, giving up on average 13 R/G in nineteen blowout losses.  In the other 143 times the pitching staff took to the mound in 2011, the pitchers only gave up 3.60 R/G.  So, for a large percentage of the games this season, the Royals pitching staff wasn't terrible.

Problems in Middle Relief

   While a lot was made about the exploits of Joakim Soria this year for the Royals, the men bridging the gap to him were a big problem as well in 2011.  Soria only saw 29.6% of the save situations for the Royals this season, down from 2010 when he saw 35.1% of the situations.  Maybe its not related, but the Royals did outperform their Pythag last year when Soria saw more of the save opportunites.  Back to 2011, all Royals not named Soria were unable to hold the lead in 8.3% of their save/hold chances this season.  In San Diego, it was even worse, as all Padres without the name Bell on the back of their jersey blew a staggering 16% of their save/hold chances.  Maybe, just maybe, some wise manager out there will wake up one day and realize it's best to put your best reliever into high leverage situations regardless of inning instead of the likes of Blake Wood or Aaron Crow.

Stay Stealing

   This year, both the Padres and the Royals made a concerted effort to steal more bases.  The Royals stole thirty eight more bases in 2011 than in 2010, while the Padres stole forty six more bases this season than in 2010.  While the totals are important, its also important to look at the success rate of both teams.  For both teams, an increase in efficiency was seen on the bases along with the jump in steals overall.  The big winner here was San Diego, as not only did they steal more bases, but they did it at a clip 11.2% more efficient than last year.  The Royals, while not as improved, still saw their efficiency rise 4.0% when swiping bases.

Power Outage

   When looking at the biggest overachievers this season (Detroit, Milwaukee, and Arizona) one constant is easily seen, power.  Not the small ball power seen at Kauffman and Petco, but big, steroid era flashback power.  All three of those overachieving teams hit at least 169 home runs this season.  And with Detroit playing half their games at spacious Comerica Park, that's pretty impressive.  Unfortunately for the Royals and Padres, that long ball power wasn't seen often enough this season, as the Royals hit 129 homers, while the Padres hit just 91 long balls for the season.  Sure, home runs might be rally killers, but its a lot easier to put runs up with one swing than it is by stringing a bunch of doubles and singles together.  The Pythag overachievers have taken heed to this advice, and look how they fared.

 

While this might not prove anything yet, it appears that a lot hinges on success in one run games, smart use of bullpen arms, and the ability to slug the ball out of the park.  Focusing more on the Royals, can they improve in these areas?  One run games would seem to come down to luck, but through the years, most playoff teams were successful in those games.  Is it luck or just good baseball by good teams being played?  As for the bullpen, improvement could be seen as far as usage goes, but if Ned Yost has his way, Tim Collins will see another sixty five games of work next season.  The home runs could come from the young guys, but thats also assuming that Cabrera and Francoeur combine for 38 home runs again.  Chances of that happening are questionable.  And this hasn't even really gotten around to focusing on the starting pitching yet, has it?  In all likelihood, this Royals team was probably a bit closer to a 71 win team than a 78 win team in 2011.