Proof that good pitching matters more than good hitting?

Dr. Giganto

I was looking over some stats, and I came across something interesting from last year.

The top 5 AL teams (because of the DH, you can only compare 1 league at a time) in terms of ERA included 2 division winners (World Champion White Sox and LA Angels) and the 3 teams that were closest to making the playoffs (Indians, A's, Twins). These 5 teams had ERAs within 0.10 of each other, and #5 was 0.30 better than #6 and 0.78 better than #7.

The Yankees and Red Sox were 9 and 11, respectively, out of 14. However, the Yankees and Sox ranked #s 1 and 2 in OPS.

In 2004, the top 4 teams were bunched together, with much lower ERAs than the rest of the league. These 4 teams included 2 division winners (Twins and Angels), the Wild Card team (Boston), and the best team to not make the playoff (Oakland). #5 was the Texas Rangers (the 2nd best team to not make the playoffs), and #6 the best team in the AL (record-wise), the NY Yankees. So, the teams with the 6 best records were the 6 teams with the lowest ERAs.

2003 was a bit of an abberation, as two sub-.500 teams crept into the top 6, but in 2002, all 6 teams that won more than 90 games were in the top 6.

By comparison, the playoff teams in 2005 finished 1, 2, 8, and 11 in OPS. Three sub-.500 teams were in the top 10.

In 2004, they were 1, 2, 9, and 10. Three sub-.500 teams were in the top 7.

In 2003, they were 1, 2, 6, and 10. This was the abberation year, where heavy-hitting teams seemed to outperform strong pitching teams.

In 2002, they were 1, 5 , 6 and 7. Two sub-.500 teams were in the top 4

So, basically, unless you have a ridiculous offense like the Yankees and Red Sox, pitching is the way to the playoffs. You can get by with average hitting if you have good pitching, but generally not vice versa.

Blitzkrieg

Administrator

Very interesting Tom.. I'd like to add a couple things to that..

You can't get by with below average hitting though.. You need at least average hitting because the Twins and A's have never done anything in the playoffs and as you know their hitting is awful during this era.

Also the Yankees are an example of what happens when you have a super great offense but not much pitching the last few years. You win 100 games and then lose in the playoffs..

The Red Sox people talk about having great hitting and winnig the series with that, but I don't buy it.. Their bullpen from games 4-7 was awesome against the Yanks and Pedro and Schilling were good enough.. Plus Lowe played big.

The Angels are another team that people point to that won with only hitting but again not true.. They were on fire, no question in 2002 but they had the best bullpen in the league also..

D-Backs, Johnson and Schilling.. Marlins, Beckett was huge.. White Sox, you know all their guys.. Yankees in the 90's had unreal starting pitching plus Rivera as did the Braves with their starters..

I really can't think of a team that's won the World Series just based on hitting alone.