walking in their footsteps . . . .
left hanging from sunday’s primer on 100-win teams: do the 2004 cardinals bear any meaningful resemblance to any recent 100-game-winners? . . . . well yes, matterafact they do, if we judge "resemblance" on the following set of criteria:
1) wins
2) wins above/below pythagorean w-l
3) games ahead of 2d-place team
4) wins the year prior to 100-win season
5) improvement over previous year
6) order of finish previous year
by this gauge, the team most similar to the 2004 cardinals was the la russa-managed 1988 oakland athletics, tony’s first world series team. here’s how they match up:
1988 OAKLAND ATHLETICS
wins: stl 105, oak 104
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, oak +4
games ahead: stl 13, oak 13
prev year wins: stl 85, oak 81
improvement: stl +20, oak +23
prev year finish: stl 3d, oak 3d
here are some more similarities.
· both teams excelled in hitting and pitching — cards led league in runs and finished 2d in era, a’s 1st in era and 2d in runs
· both had deep, shut-down bullpens
· both teams abruptly stopped hitting in the world series and lost in lopsided fashion.
and here’s a key diff’nce:
· the a’s had four everyday players aged 25 or younger (canseco, mcgwire, walt weiss, and stan javier) and got only 964 at-bats from players aged 34 or older. their position players averaged 28.1 years of age. the cardinals last year averaged 30.7 years of age and had only one regular 25 or younger (pujols). they got 1847 at-bats from players aged 34 or older.
what the a’s did next: returned to the playoffs three of the ensuing four years, winning two more pennants (’89-’90) and one world championship (’89).
1984 DETROIT TIGERS
wins: stl 105, det 104
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, det +5
games ahead: stl 13, det 15
prev year wins: stl 85, det 92
improvement: stl +20, det +12
prev year finish: stl 3d, det 2d
additional similarities:
· the tigers led the league in runs scored and fewest runs allowed
· they had three gold glovers (lance parrish, lou whitaker, and alan trammell)
· they had a hall of fame manager (sparky)
key diff’nces:
· like the ’88 a’s, the tigers were much younger than the cards — position players averaged 28.5 years, only 577 at-bats from players aged 34 and up. their five best hitters all fell between 26 and 29 years old.
· they won the world series
what the tigers did next: finished 3rd the next two years, with 84 and 87 wins (15 games and 8.5 games out of first, respecitvely). in 1987 they won another division crown, beating toronto on the last day of the season in one of history’s best-ever pennant races. in 1988 they won 88 games and finished second by a game to boston. in 1989 they collapsed, finishing last at 59-103, 30 games out.
2002 ATLANTA BRAVES
wins: stl 105, atl 101
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, atl +5
games ahead: stl 13, atl 19
prev year wins: stl 85, atl 88
improvement: stl +20, atl +13
prev year finish: stl 3d, atl 1st
add’l similarities:
· just as old as the cards — avg age nearly identical (30.6); just two regulars 25 or under, with the rest over 30; 1252 at-bats from the 34-and-up set
· like the cards, the 2002 braves had been deemed also-rans by preseason pundits. their main division rival (ie, mets) had made splashy offseason acquisitions (bob alomar, mo vaughan, j burnitz) while the braves essentially stood pat.
· hall of fame manager
key diff’nces:
· imbalanced: led the league in era but finished 10th in runs scored
· unstable: replaced four-fifths of their rotation the ensuing season, plus two position starters
· two hall of famers in rotation (glavine and maddux)
what the braves did next: won division titles in 03 and 04 with 101 and 96 wins, respectively. the braves got younger in 03, with four regulars under 30 years old, and younger still in 04, fielding seven 20somethings and one 32-year-old (chipper jones). the braves’ pitching corps experienced a similar turnover.
1980 NEW YORK YANKEES
wins: stl 105, nyy 103
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, nyy +6
games ahead: stl 13, nyy 3
prev year wins: stl 85, nyy 89
improvement: stl +20, ny +14
prev year finish: stl 3d, nyy 4th
add’l similarity:
· old bats: only one regular 25 or under, four aged 34 and up, with the geezer cohort contributing 2001 at-bats
difference:
· old arms: the yankees got nearly half their starts (76) from pitchers aged 35 or older. one of the old guys (tommy john) won 22 games, and another (rudy may) won 15; the remaining two (el tiante and gaylord perry) went a combined 12-13.
what the yankees did next: went to the world series in strike-marred 1981, then settled in for a decade of above-averageness — four straight finishes of 2d or 3d place, seven straight years between 79 and 97 wins.
these comparisons only go so far, so i’m not drawing firm conclusions. but it is at least encouraging that all four of these similar 100-win teams remained very competitive for quite a few years. three returned to the postseason the following year, with two getting to the world series; and two kept themselves at or above the 100-win mark for several more seasons. i’m not expecting the cardinals to do that — they’re too old — but these four models suggest that 90-95 wins remains a realistic expectation, at least for this year.
1) wins
2) wins above/below pythagorean w-l
3) games ahead of 2d-place team
4) wins the year prior to 100-win season
5) improvement over previous year
6) order of finish previous year
by this gauge, the team most similar to the 2004 cardinals was the la russa-managed 1988 oakland athletics, tony’s first world series team. here’s how they match up:
1988 OAKLAND ATHLETICS
wins: stl 105, oak 104
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, oak +4
games ahead: stl 13, oak 13
prev year wins: stl 85, oak 81
improvement: stl +20, oak +23
prev year finish: stl 3d, oak 3d
here are some more similarities.
· both teams excelled in hitting and pitching — cards led league in runs and finished 2d in era, a’s 1st in era and 2d in runs
· both had deep, shut-down bullpens
· both teams abruptly stopped hitting in the world series and lost in lopsided fashion.
and here’s a key diff’nce:
· the a’s had four everyday players aged 25 or younger (canseco, mcgwire, walt weiss, and stan javier) and got only 964 at-bats from players aged 34 or older. their position players averaged 28.1 years of age. the cardinals last year averaged 30.7 years of age and had only one regular 25 or younger (pujols). they got 1847 at-bats from players aged 34 or older.
what the a’s did next: returned to the playoffs three of the ensuing four years, winning two more pennants (’89-’90) and one world championship (’89).
1984 DETROIT TIGERS
wins: stl 105, det 104
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, det +5
games ahead: stl 13, det 15
prev year wins: stl 85, det 92
improvement: stl +20, det +12
prev year finish: stl 3d, det 2d
additional similarities:
· the tigers led the league in runs scored and fewest runs allowed
· they had three gold glovers (lance parrish, lou whitaker, and alan trammell)
· they had a hall of fame manager (sparky)
key diff’nces:
· like the ’88 a’s, the tigers were much younger than the cards — position players averaged 28.5 years, only 577 at-bats from players aged 34 and up. their five best hitters all fell between 26 and 29 years old.
· they won the world series
what the tigers did next: finished 3rd the next two years, with 84 and 87 wins (15 games and 8.5 games out of first, respecitvely). in 1987 they won another division crown, beating toronto on the last day of the season in one of history’s best-ever pennant races. in 1988 they won 88 games and finished second by a game to boston. in 1989 they collapsed, finishing last at 59-103, 30 games out.
2002 ATLANTA BRAVES
wins: stl 105, atl 101
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, atl +5
games ahead: stl 13, atl 19
prev year wins: stl 85, atl 88
improvement: stl +20, atl +13
prev year finish: stl 3d, atl 1st
add’l similarities:
· just as old as the cards — avg age nearly identical (30.6); just two regulars 25 or under, with the rest over 30; 1252 at-bats from the 34-and-up set
· like the cards, the 2002 braves had been deemed also-rans by preseason pundits. their main division rival (ie, mets) had made splashy offseason acquisitions (bob alomar, mo vaughan, j burnitz) while the braves essentially stood pat.
· hall of fame manager
key diff’nces:
· imbalanced: led the league in era but finished 10th in runs scored
· unstable: replaced four-fifths of their rotation the ensuing season, plus two position starters
· two hall of famers in rotation (glavine and maddux)
what the braves did next: won division titles in 03 and 04 with 101 and 96 wins, respectively. the braves got younger in 03, with four regulars under 30 years old, and younger still in 04, fielding seven 20somethings and one 32-year-old (chipper jones). the braves’ pitching corps experienced a similar turnover.
1980 NEW YORK YANKEES
wins: stl 105, nyy 103
actual vs pythagorean: stl +5, nyy +6
games ahead: stl 13, nyy 3
prev year wins: stl 85, nyy 89
improvement: stl +20, ny +14
prev year finish: stl 3d, nyy 4th
add’l similarity:
· old bats: only one regular 25 or under, four aged 34 and up, with the geezer cohort contributing 2001 at-bats
difference:
· old arms: the yankees got nearly half their starts (76) from pitchers aged 35 or older. one of the old guys (tommy john) won 22 games, and another (rudy may) won 15; the remaining two (el tiante and gaylord perry) went a combined 12-13.
what the yankees did next: went to the world series in strike-marred 1981, then settled in for a decade of above-averageness — four straight finishes of 2d or 3d place, seven straight years between 79 and 97 wins.
these comparisons only go so far, so i’m not drawing firm conclusions. but it is at least encouraging that all four of these similar 100-win teams remained very competitive for quite a few years. three returned to the postseason the following year, with two getting to the world series; and two kept themselves at or above the 100-win mark for several more seasons. i’m not expecting the cardinals to do that — they’re too old — but these four models suggest that 90-95 wins remains a realistic expectation, at least for this year.
posted by L Boros at 9:18 AM
<< Home