As always, nice read, Doc. But, one area where I think both you and USSM are off-base. Stars & Scrubs does NOT work. Nor does Civics. What works is Stars & Civics. In the past decade, only ONE team made the World Series with more than one bat posting an OPS+ under with 300 ABs during the season, (The 2004 BoSox, had Kapler and Reese).
The very team you cite - the Angels, won it all in 2002 with a rotation *LED* by Wsahburn, (18-6, 3.15 ERA), backed up by Appier, Sele, Ramon Ortiz and the rookie Lackey. They had ZERO starters breaking the 7-K per game threshold. The offense that won it all didn't have one - not ONE guy with any shot at all at Cooperstown. Brad Fullmer was the best bat for the team that year, (.888), Salmon (.883), Anderson (.871), Spezio (.807), and Glaus (.805). That's 5 guys hitting .800 -- but it AIN'T a bunch of stars. But THAT was the team that won.
Adding Vlad and Colon didn't get the job done. Adding Hunter and Teixeira last year wasn't enough, either.
Based on history, a team can have *ONE* weak hitting link - (OPS+ below 80), and still make the WS with one bat hitting above a 130 OPS+. If you get two below 80 guys, then you MUST have two guys above 130 -- and the only team that managed to succeed with two bats below 80, happened to have two bats at 145+.
Tampa had ZERO bats hitting above 130 OPS+ in 2008, and they made the series, (Vlad hit 130 and sat home). The WhiteSox had Quentin hitting 148 - not in the series. And Boston had Youkilis (143), and Drew (137) watching the games on TV.
Of course, that ignores the pitching side completely. But, in truth, EVERY AL rep in the last decade has had 1 or 2 guys posting 130+ OPS+ figures, (except Tampa). But, there were a roughly equal number of 130 guys for the teams that didn't make it. The big diff (offensively), was HOW MANY weak links were there. The data suggests it is not how bad the one guy is -- but how many sub-par guys you have that is more important.
TODAY - the Mariner's offense has two bats over 130, (Branyan and Ichiro). But, they have 4 positions in a 9-man lineup below the 80 OPS+ barrier.
The Yankees didn't make the post-season in 2008. They had AROD (150), Giambi (128), Abreu (120), Damon (118) all putting up great numbers. Tons of stars, (though only one over 130). But, they had TWO (2) positions under 80 (catcher - where Molina posted a 51 replacing Posada), and Melky (68).
You are correct to plead for stars. But, my position has been ORDER matters. I believe the optimal approach is to FIRST remove the guys posting sub-80 OPS+ figures. THEN, go after the star, (or spend the big bucks to retain him, if you've got him). But, a "big bat" won't solve anything for Seattle, as long is there are 2 or more positions who cannot break that 80 barrier.
Having Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz in the rotation - and Chipper and Andruw and Sheffield in the lineup was STILL no guarantee of winning in the post-season. All those trips, and one title. Having the "Big Dogs" is nice. It guarantees nothing. Stylistically, I understand the allure. But, baseball is the one sport where you CANNOT go to your star in crunch time. This is why weak links are MORE critical in the playoffs. How many rings did Barry win?
Add new comment
1