One of the things that sticks in my craw year after year is the way that the sports pundits analyze the relative strengths of playoff teams as if one can easily compare stats between teams in different divisions. Few if any make a serious point of looking at the competitiveness of divisions as a whole. You'll occasionally see reference to a team being in a tough division, but it's rare to see any effort to actually handicap the teams based on the strength of opposition that they faced in the regular season.
Every year I like to do at least a cursory analysis of the relative quality of the divisions in baseball, and this year I also looked at each remaining playoff team's record against other playoff teams during the regular season. Here's what I found:
It's easy enough to look at these numbers and see how they might affect our assessment of the different playoff teams. AL East and NL West teams are probably better than they look, while the Central teams are probably worse than they look. I'm a bit more agnostic on the NL East and AL West, as both of those divisions had tough interleague opposition and both feature winning teams that very solidly outperformed the rest of their division (especially Houston).
Let's look at the playoff teams records against other playoff teams and see if these conclusions are borne out at all.
The relentlessness of the AL-East teams' schedules is really made plain here. Both the Red Sox and Rays played around a third of their games against playoff teams, and that's not counting their games against the Blue Jays who are every bit as good if not better than most of the playoff contenders. Meanwhile the White Sox got away with less than one in five games against a playoff team.
It sure looks like the White Sox and Brewers are a lot weaker than their overall records and run differentials suggest. It also looks that the Dodgers are likely a stronger team than the Giants despite the latter team winning the division. It sure looks like the Dodgers performed far better against playoff quality teams despite the two teams records not being all that different.
One further question that I wonder about is how much of an impact these differences have on individual player stats. The narrative going into the playoffs is that the White Sox and Brewers have these incredible rotations, but how much of that is a product of them facing weak opposition all year long? How much are those pitchers' stats improved by the weaker relative competition? How much better are the Rays and Red Sox pitching staffs than they look on paper given that both had to face relentless offenses on a much more regular basis?
I'd love to see how the Orioles would do if they got to face an AL Central schedule. I don't think they'd be good by any stretch, but I bet they'd look way better than they do now.
Every year I like to do at least a cursory analysis of the relative quality of the divisions in baseball, and this year I also looked at each remaining playoff team's record against other playoff teams during the regular season. Here's what I found:
- AL East: +214 run differential, 173-157 vs AL West+Central, 64-36 interleague
- AL Central: -116 run differential, 151-179 vs. AL East+West, 56-44 interleague
- AL West: -61 run differential, 171-159 vs AL East+Central, 47-53 interleague
- NL East: -83 run differential, 153-176 vs NL West+Central, 36-64 interleague
- NL Central: -183 run differential, 166-164 vs NL East+West, 44-56 interleague
- NL West: +229 run differential, 175-154 vs NL East+Central, 53-47 interleague
It's easy enough to look at these numbers and see how they might affect our assessment of the different playoff teams. AL East and NL West teams are probably better than they look, while the Central teams are probably worse than they look. I'm a bit more agnostic on the NL East and AL West, as both of those divisions had tough interleague opposition and both feature winning teams that very solidly outperformed the rest of their division (especially Houston).
Let's look at the playoff teams records against other playoff teams and see if these conclusions are borne out at all.
- White Sox: 13-19, -1.3125 rpg
- Astros: 19-14, +.606 rpg
- Rays: 29-24, +.9434 rpg
- Red Sox: 26-30, -.1071 rpg
- Braves: 17-19, +.6471 rpg
- Brewers: 20-22, -.4318 rpg
- Dodgers: 23-20. +1.233 rpg
- Giants: 20-21 -.2439 rpg
The relentlessness of the AL-East teams' schedules is really made plain here. Both the Red Sox and Rays played around a third of their games against playoff teams, and that's not counting their games against the Blue Jays who are every bit as good if not better than most of the playoff contenders. Meanwhile the White Sox got away with less than one in five games against a playoff team.
It sure looks like the White Sox and Brewers are a lot weaker than their overall records and run differentials suggest. It also looks that the Dodgers are likely a stronger team than the Giants despite the latter team winning the division. It sure looks like the Dodgers performed far better against playoff quality teams despite the two teams records not being all that different.
One further question that I wonder about is how much of an impact these differences have on individual player stats. The narrative going into the playoffs is that the White Sox and Brewers have these incredible rotations, but how much of that is a product of them facing weak opposition all year long? How much are those pitchers' stats improved by the weaker relative competition? How much better are the Rays and Red Sox pitching staffs than they look on paper given that both had to face relentless offenses on a much more regular basis?
I'd love to see how the Orioles would do if they got to face an AL Central schedule. I don't think they'd be good by any stretch, but I bet they'd look way better than they do now.
