Other titles I considered:
"Eight is More than Enough"
"Crazy (Good) Eights"
I finally settled a take-off on "Eight Men Out" to keep with the baseball motif. Before we get started, though, since we’ll be talking averages and medians and such…..I thought it might be a good time for a little numerical humor.
Sidebar: Fun with Numbers
"I was going 70 miles an hour and got stopped by a cop who said, "Do you know the speed limit is 55 miles per hour?"
"Yes, officer, but I wasn't going to be out that long..."
"Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital."
A statistics student would accelerate before crossing each intersection. His passenger finally asked, "Why do you go so fast through intersections?" The student said, "Statistically speaking, you're far more likely to have an accident at an intersection, so I try to spend as little time there as possible."
A man in a hot air balloon realized he was lost. He spotted a man below. He descended a bit more and shouted, "Can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."
The man below replied, "You're about 40 feet above the ground. You're about 39 degrees north latitude and 94 degrees west longitude, and you’re heading east"
"You must be a statistician," said the balloonist.
"I am." replied the man, "How did you know?"
"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct, but I have no idea what to make of your information, and the fact is I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help at all. If anything, you've delayed my trip."
The man below responded, "You must be in management."
"I am." replied the balloonist, "How did you know?"
"Well," said the man, "you don't know where you are, and you don’t know where you're going. You have risen to where you are due to a lot of hot air. You made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, you expect people beneath you to solve your problems, you are in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but now, somehow, it's my fault."
One day there was a fire in a garbage bin. A physicist, a chemist, and a statistician run in to help.
The physicist starts figuring out the amount of energy that would have to be removed from the fire in order to stop combustion.
The chemist starts developing a substance that could be added to the fire to cut off the supply of oxygen.
The statistician starts setting more fires around the office.
The physicist and chemist ask, "What are you doing!?"
The statistician replies, "Trying to get an adequate sample size!"
A mathematician, a statistician, and an economist are interviewing for a job. The interviewer tells them that the interview will only consist of a single question. He brings them into the interviewing room one at a time.
First, the interviewer brings in the mathematician and sits him down. He asks him, "OK….what is 2 plus 2?". The mathematician doesn’t blink and responds quickly, "Well, of course, 2 plus 2 is 4".
The interviewer escorts the mathematician out of the room and brings in the statistician. Same question: "What is 2 plus 2?". The statistician considers it for a moment and then replies, "Well, I’m not exactly sure, but I’m 95% confident it’s between 3 and 5".
The interviewer escorts the statistician out of the room and finally brings in the economist. "OK….what is 2 plus 2?". The economist gets up, shuts the blinds, locks the door, makes sure no one else is in the room, sits back down, and leans in towards the interviewer, and whispers "What would you like it to be?"
Everybody Line Up
One of my favorite stories about my paternal grandfather relates to baseball. My grandfather came to the U.S. in the early 1900’s. After he had lived here for a while, someone he knew from the "Old Country" immigrated as well and settled in the same community as my grandfather. One of the first things my grandfather did was to take him to a baseball game. He said, "If you’re going to live in this country, you have to understand baseball".
One of the things that appealed to him about the game was the sense of teamwork: the coordination among teammates as they execute a defensive play, working together to move each other along the base paths, etc. It seemed to embody very American traits to him. But, mostly, there was something especially appealing to him about the batting order, a unique trait among team sports…..the requirement that everyone takes turns, that everyone gets a chance, that everyone has a responsibility to contribute. That appealed to him a lot.
Sometimes I think back and reflect on just how much that separates baseball from other sports. I’ve been on other web sites and expressed the observation that I consider baseball to be the ultimate team sport, and invariably someone takes me to task for that, typically of the opinion that football is more so. What I try to convey, though, is this…..that in baseball, it’s very difficult for a single player, no matter how good he is, to dominate the sport, to turn a bad team into a good team.
In basketball, if you have a Lebron James or a Steph Curry, you can literally run every single offensive play through them, if you so choose. They can touch the ball, they can pass, they can shoot. You can have Lebron shoot 20 straight times if you want to (and in last year’s playoffs, it seems like there were stretches where that happened). If he misses a shot, he can take another one right away. A superstar in basketball has a much bigger influence on a game and a season than a baseball star does, because there are only 5 players on the court at a time for team, and you can literally go to him and execute plays through him as many times as you wish. That’s why, if you look through the history of the sport, you almost never see a championship NBA team without at least one superstar. It happens….but it’s extremely rare.
Even in football, it’s rare to have a champion without a star QB. Again, it does happen sometimes that an extremely good defensive squad can overcome a mediocre QB, but it’s fairly rare. More often, a Super Bowl champion needs an elite QB. If you have a superstar QB, he is involved in every single offensive play in one way or another. It starts with him. If Green Bay wants to have Aaron Rodgers throw the ball on 10 consecutive plays, they can do so. If he throws an incomplete pass, he can come right back and try another one.
In baseball…..yes, a starting pitcher may be dominant in a game…..but he only gets to play every fourth or fifth game. Yes, you may have a superstar hitter like a Mike Trout or a Bryce Harper…..but they typically only come to the plate 4 or 5 times in a game. The other players on the team have to take their turns at bat as well. Unlike the other sports, if a star strikes out on one at bat, he can’t come right back and take another one. He has to wait his turn. Baseball is structured in such a way that it diffuses the impact of a single, great player.
Coming from a different angle now…..
One of the things that got me thinking about this article was the current World Series matchup. I’ve seen more than one instance of someone commenting that both the Royals and the Mets were short of superstars a general lack of players that you think may have a good chance of one day making the Hall of Fame. To a degree, I agree with that. It’s difficult (though not impossible) to imagine any of the Royals being a Hall of Famer:
Alex Gordon? A nice all-around player, and he’s doing a decent job of accumulating rWAR (you could say he’s a bit of a WAR "hero"), but he’s 31 years old, and I’d say he’s not on a Hall of Fame track.
Eric Hosmer? Nice player, sort of a poor man’s Keith Hernandez (one of his top comps through age 25) with a little more pop but drawing fewer walks. But, even the real Keith Hernandez, who ended up with a pretty good resume that included a batting title, a co-MVP, another MVP runner-up, being one of the leaders on 2 different franchises that won World Championships in a 5-year span, and probably the consensus top defensive first baseman in history, never received more than about 10% of the writers’ vote in any given year on the ballot. And, since the original Keith Hernandez hasn’t made it in yet, I’m not too optimistic about the poor man’s version. At least not until he makes an All-Star Game….
Lorenzo Cain? Great year, probably the team MVP. Has really developed offensively, and is a terrific defensive player and base runner. But, he’s already 29 years old and has just 521 career hits. I’m guessing his odds are slim.
Mike Moustakas? Had a really good year, his best year so far. He made the All-Star team. Still, he’s probably no better than the 4th best 3B in the league (I’d put Donaldson, Machado, and Beltre above him, and maybe Longoria and Seager too). And, that’s just the AL. If you include the NL too, now you’ve got Arenado, Bryant, Frazier, Carpenter. Put it all together, and Moustakas is, depending on your taste, somewhere between the #6 and #10 third baseman in MLB.
Ben Zobrist? A fascinating player, and he’s had 2 years (’09 and ’11) where he had rWARs of 8.6 and 8.7, respectively, and those are up in the area where you start to think about someone as an MVP-level type performer. In fact, he was 1st in the AL in rWAR among position players both of those years. So, a very valuable and extremely versatile player, and certainly among the best of his particular type in history. But….Hall of Fame? He’s 34 years old. I’d say his chances are virtually nil.
Salvador Perez? Certainly has his weaknesses as a hitter, but he’s only 25 and a 3-time All-Star and a 2-time Gold Glover. He keeps hitting more HR’s each year. But a Hall of Fame track? At this point, I’d say he’s an excellent match for Benito Santiago. Now, Santiago had a good career, hung around for 20 years, and won his share of honors….but he got less than 1% of the vote when he appeared on the Hall of Fame ballot.
So, while we can’t say for sure that none of these players are Cooperstown-bound, and it will be years before their cases are thoroughly vetted, it’s a stretch to envision any of them making it. And the Mets are more of the same story, although some think that David Wright has a decent chance at the Hall of Fame, although I think he’s a long shot too. He’s tracking similar to (though probably behind) Scott Rolen, and Rolen’s no lock either.
The pitchers? Who knows? No matter how talented they are, trying to figure out if pitchers this young will end up in Cooperstown is folly, unless it’s someone like a Clayton Kershaw that just overwhelms you with his achievements at an early age.
However…what the Royals do have going for them is that, while they’re lacking in star power, and none of their players are the "best" in the league at their respective positions, the lineup doesn’t have a lot of weak spots either. You go through the order, you see the everyday lineup, and they’re just about all quality players.
If you look at the Royals vs. the rest of Major League Baseball for the 2015 seasons, they are basically in the upper half at every position (assuming you count Zobrist, who came over mid-way through the season, instead of Infante at 2B) except SS (Escobar) and RF (Rios). And, both of them have been good enough at some point to make the All-Star team (although Rios’ selections are pretty far in the past at this point). And, sometimes, that can be more devastating than having a handful of stars who are offset by weaker players.
When people started talking about this, it also reminded me of something Bill wrote about in the New Historical Abstract, in one of several segments related to "The Best Team What Ever Was" topic. He made a reference as to how rare it was for a team to be above average at every position (especially if you include pitchers). He called out the 1941 Dodgers as being above average at every position. Their primary regulars were:
C Mickey Owen
1B Dolph Camilli
2B Billy Herman
3B Cookie Lavagetto
SS Pee Wee Reese
LF Joe Medwick
CF Pete Reiser
RF Dixie Walker
That was a terrific everyday lineup. The team won 100 games and led the NL in runs scored. There are 3 Hall of Famers (Herman, Reese, Medwick), Camilli won the MVP, Reiser finished 2nd in the same balloting (and finished 6th in ’42), Walker would win a batting title in ‘44, Owen finished 4th in the MVP voting in ’42 and was in the middle of a 4-year run as a NL All-Star, and Lavagetto was a 4-time All-Star in his age 25-28 seasons, then lost 4 straight years to the war. In addition, the team had a good 1-2 staring pitcher combo in Kirby Higbe and Whitlow Wyatt, and a good relief ace in Hugh Casey.
So, it was a great lineup that made the World Series, and then followed that up with winning 104 games in ’42, with another Hall of Famer (Arky Vaughan) basically taking over for Lavagetto at 3B. Of course, as Bill pointed out, as good as they were, they didn’t win. The Cardinals were a little better in ’42 and won 106 behind the likes of a young Stan Musial, Enos Slaughter, Walker & Mort Cooper, Marty Marion, Terry Moore, and White Kurowski.
In any case….this got me thinking about lineups and how many teams were able to field lineups that were "above average" throughout.
Positions Above Median
I didn’t really have a database handy that I felt would help me tackle this, so I did a little more of a manual approach using a feature on baseball-reference.com. Let’s look at the ’42 Brooklyn team, since they actually qualify by my approach (the ’41 team technically, during that year, weren’t above average at all positions). If you click on seasons, then go to the year you want (in this case 1942, NL), and then click on 1942 MLB, you’ll get something that says "1942 MLB Wins Above Avg By Position." You can then choose to highlight a particular team. If you highlight Brooklyn, you get something that looks like the table below (I eliminated a few columns to focus just on the 9 positions. Note that this uses Wins Above Average (WAA) instead of rWAR).
The thick horizontal line divides the upper 8 teams from the lower 8 teams, in essence creating the median. Half are above, half are below. Note that all Brooklyn entries are above the line. Another note is that this grid charts out the WAA for each position on each team, not just the starters. LF for Brooklyn includes Joe Medwick, but also 71 PA of Augie Galan, and 17 PA of Johnny Rizzo. It’s a team figure. Also, it’s important to note that this reflects both offensive and defensive value:
|
Rk
|
P
|
C
|
1B
|
2B
|
3B
|
SS
|
LF
|
CF
|
RF
|
|
| |
|
1
|
STL
|
BSN
|
NYG
|
NYY
|
CHC
|
NYY
|
BOS
|
NYY
|
NYG
|
|
|
16.0
|
2.0
|
4.1
|
6.6
|
2.9
|
4.0
|
8.6
|
4.2
|
4.1
|
|
|
2
|
DET
|
PIT
|
PIT
|
BOS
|
SLB
|
BOS
|
NYY
|
SLB
|
STL
|
|
|
14.7
|
0.9
|
2.7
|
3.8
|
2.0
|
3.8
|
4.8
|
3.5
|
4.0
|
|
|
3
|
CIN
|
BRO
|
CLE
|
CIN
|
PIT
|
BRO
|
STL
|
BOS
|
CHC
|
|
|
6.2
|
0.3
|
2.7
|
3.1
|
1.0
|
3.5
|
3.1
|
2.7
|
3.6
|
|
|
4
|
BRO
|
CHC
|
BRO
|
BRO
|
CLE
|
CLE
|
PHA
|
BRO
|
NYY
|
|
|
6.0
|
0.3
|
2.6
|
0.9
|
0.8
|
2.7
|
1.7
|
2.1
|
1.8
|
|
|
5
|
SLB
|
STL
|
CIN
|
NYG
|
BRO
|
STL
|
CLE
|
WSH
|
SLB
|
|
|
3.0
|
0.3
|
1.0
|
0.1
|
0.5
|
2.4
|
1.5
|
1.0
|
1.6
|
|
|
6
|
NYY
|
NYY
|
DET
|
CHC
|
NYY
|
CHW
|
WSH
|
BSN
|
BRO
|
|
|
1.8
|
0.2
|
1.0
|
(0.5)
|
0.3
|
1.0
|
1.1
|
1.0
|
0.4
|
|
|
7
|
BOS
|
NYG
|
SLB
|
DET
|
STL
|
NYG
|
DET
|
STL
|
CHW
|
|
|
1.8
|
(0.6)
|
0.0
|
(0.6)
|
0.0
|
0.9
|
0.6
|
0.8
|
0.1
|
|
|
8
|
CHW
|
PHI
|
BOS
|
SLB
|
DET
|
SLB
|
BRO
|
NYG
|
WSH
|
|
|
1.1
|
(0.9)
|
(0.2)
|
(1.3)
|
0.0
|
0.7
|
0.5
|
0.2
|
(0.6)
|
|
|
9
|
PIT
|
CHW
|
NYY
|
CLE
|
PHI
|
BSN
|
CHW
|
CLE
|
DET
|
|
|
0.5
|
(1.1)
|
(0.5)
|
(1.4)
|
0.0
|
0.6
|
0.4
|
(0.1)
|
(0.6)
|
|
|
10
|
NYG
|
BOS
|
PHI
|
CHW
|
NYG
|
CIN
|
CHC
|
PIT
|
BOS
|
|
|
(1.1)
|
(1.4)
|
(0.8)
|
(1.5)
|
(0.1)
|
0.2
|
(0.4)
|
(0.5)
|
(0.8)
|
|
|
11
|
CLE
|
CIN
|
CHW
|
BSN
|
WSH
|
CHC
|
SLB
|
CHC
|
PHA
|
|
|
(4.6)
|
(1.6)
|
(0.8)
|
(1.7)
|
(0.5)
|
0.1
|
(0.4)
|
(1.1)
|
(1.0)
|
|
|
12
|
BSN
|
DET
|
STL
|
STL
|
PHA
|
PHI
|
PHI
|
PHA
|
BSN
|
|
|
(5.5)
|
(1.9)
|
(1.1)
|
(1.7)
|
(1.0)
|
(1.4)
|
(0.6)
|
(1.8)
|
(1.4)
|
|
|
13
|
PHA
|
SLB
|
WSH
|
WSH
|
BSN
|
PIT
|
NYG
|
CHW
|
PHI
|
|
|
(5.7)
|
(2.0)
|
(1.2)
|
(2.1)
|
(1.1)
|
(2.5)
|
(0.9)
|
(1.9)
|
(1.6)
|
|
|
14
|
CHC
|
CLE
|
BSN
|
PHI
|
CHW
|
PHA
|
BSN
|
CIN
|
CIN
|
|
|
(5.8)
|
(2.1)
|
(1.2)
|
(2.2)
|
(1.4)
|
(2.9)
|
(1.5)
|
(2.0)
|
(1.7)
|
|
|
15
|
WSH
|
PHA
|
CHC
|
PHA
|
CIN
|
DET
|
CIN
|
PHI
|
PIT
|
|
|
(7.8)
|
(2.3)
|
(1.7)
|
(2.8)
|
(1.5)
|
(5.0)
|
(2.1)
|
(2.1)
|
(1.9)
|
|
|
16
|
PHI
|
WSH
|
PHA
|
PIT
|
BOS
|
WSH
|
PIT
|
DET
|
CLE
|
|
|
(9.2)
|
(2.4)
|
(3.0)
|
(3.0)
|
(1.8)
|
(5.1)
|
(2.5)
|
(2.9)
|
(2.0)
|
|
A simple count reveals that Brooklyn had all 9 Positions Above Median, or "PAM" for short.
So, the first hurdle involves finding out which teams were above median at every position. I made exceptions for teams that were below median at pitcher, but in order to be included for this study, you had to at least be above median at each of the 8 position player slots. If the team didn’t make this first cut, I didn’t go any further with that team. In this study, although I tracked pitchers as well, I was really more interested in being above average at the 8 fielding positions aside from pitchers. I ignored DH’s and PH’s, so that I could have better comparisons among different eras.
Next, I applied a "score" (I’ll just call it "PAM Score") based on the ranking at each position as well as the team WAA. I gave more credit the higher the ranking, but also calculated it such that a team that was ranked 2nd at a position in a 30 team environment got more credit than one that finished 2nd in a 16 team environment. Also, the higher the team’s cumulative WAA for position players, the higher the score.
3 components of the PAM score:
- The WAA of the 8 position players (this was usually between 10 and 25)
- 30 minus the average rank of the 8 players based on WAA (since it’s good to have a low "average rank", I made it a positive by subtracting the average rank from a fixed number). This was done to reward rank regardless of # of teams. This would typically yield a number between 21 and 28.
- A percent figure derived from the rank at each position, adjusted for the # of teams. Ranking first at a position resulted in 100%. Ranking 2nd in a 16-team environment resulted in 93.8% (16+1-2)/16. Ranking 2nd in a 24-team environment resulted in 95.8% (24+1-2)/24. This was done to reward rank while accounting for the # of teams. This would typically yield a percentage between 70 and 90%.
2 and 3 are similar in that they both reward how well you rank, but one rewards absolute ranking, and the other makes adjustments for how many teams there are. The average of A and B, multiplied by C yields the PAM Score.
How Did They Do?
Since 1901 (which is the first year for which I saw the grids listed on baseball-reference.com), there have been 2,422 team-seasons. If all things were equal, and if each team had a 50% chance to be above median at one position, the chance of being above median at all 8 positions would be 0.39%, or about one in every 250 team-seasons.
2,422 x .039% is about 9, so this would imply about 9 teams would be expected to be above median at all 8 positions, or about one every 12-13 years.
Well, in actuality….there have been 58 teams that have achieved this status. That’s a pretty big difference from what I would have expected. I suspect that, maybe, it really isn’t a true 50% chance at each and every position, that there are other factors that cause it to happen at a greater rate. Still, even with 58 teams having achieved this, that’s only about 2% of all teams….or about once every other year or so on average, although it has fluctuated quite a bit over time. Only 2 teams have achieved it since 2000, with the most recent team being the 2009 Angels (although the Blue Jays came close in 2015 with 7 of the 8 positions above median)
At the end of the article, I’ll list all the teams. I can tell you that 17 of the 58 teams were Yankees The next highest were the Orioles with 6. Only 17 of the 30 current franchises have accomplished this status. Here’s the tally by franchise.
|
Team
|
# of Times
|
|
Yankees
|
17
|
|
Orioles
|
6
|
|
Dodgers
|
5
|
|
A's
|
4
|
|
Braves
|
4
|
|
Giants
|
4
|
|
Cardinals
|
3
|
|
Cubs
|
3
|
|
Reds
|
3
|
|
Tigers
|
2
|
|
Angels
|
1
|
|
Indians
|
1
|
|
Mariners
|
1
|
|
Pirates
|
1
|
|
Twins
|
1
|
|
White Sox
|
1
|
|
Phillies
|
1
|
Before hitting the top 12, here are a few teams that were interesting to me for a variety of reasons. For each position, I’ll give the MLB rank for that year, and the primary contributor(s)
#55-1991 Minnesota Twins
One of the lower ranked teams that accomplished this feat, In the prior season, the ’90 Twins were 74-88, and only had 3 positions above the median. In ’91, though, they improved to 95 wins and won the World Series over the Braves.
If you look at the grid below, you’ll see that there was a certain consistency. None of the positions was better than 5th, but everyone was in the upper half (there were 26 teams).
They remind me a little of the 2015 Royals….identical 95-67 records, they both beat the Blue Jays in the ALCS, and they both beat a team noted for its impressive young starting pitching (the Braves had Glavine, Smoltz, and Avery, all 25 or younger). Like the Royals, they were noted as a team that played smart and was good defensively. They had similar stolen base totals, although the Twins did not have a reputation as a speedy ball club, and the Royals did. But, with Gladden, Knoblauch, and Mack, they had some speed in the lineup, and Puckett and Gagne had decent speed. The Royals, who have the image of a speedy team, had 70% of their SB’s rolled up in 3 players (Cain, Escobar, and Dyson). The norms were different in ’91, but the Twins stole 107 bases that year. Last year, the Royals stole 104. Both teams led the Majors in fewest batter strikeouts.
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
7
|
Brian Harper, Junior Ortiz
|
|
1B
|
10
|
Kent Hrbek, Gene Larkin
|
|
2B
|
13
|
Chuck Knoblauch, Al Newman
|
|
3B
|
8
|
Mike Pagliarulo, Scott Leius
|
|
SS
|
7
|
Greg Gagne, Al Newman
|
|
LF
|
11
|
Dan Gladden, Shane Mack
|
|
CF
|
5
|
Kirby Puckett
|
|
RF
|
6
|
Shane Mack, Gene Larkin
|
#37-1932 Philadelphia Athletics
I was fascinated by this team because it made the list but the 3 teams preceding it (the 1929 through 1931 Athletics) that won 3 AL pennants and 2 World Series never had all 8 position players above median in the same season.
The ’32 squad was still good (94-60 record), but the Yankees won 107 that year to run away with the pennant. Still, a lot of the familiar names from those pennant winners were still around and going strong in ‘32:
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
1
|
Mickey Cochrane, Johnnie Heving
|
|
1B
|
1
|
Jimmie Foxx
|
|
2B
|
5
|
Max Bishop, Dib Williams
|
|
3B
|
5
|
Jimmy Dykes
|
|
SS
|
6
|
Eric McNair
|
|
LF
|
4
|
Al Simmons
|
|
CF
|
6
|
Mule Haas, Doc Cramer
|
|
RF
|
8
|
Bing Miller, Doc Cramer
|
#21-1957 Milwaukee Braves
This was the first of 2 consecutive Braves teams that reached the World Series, and is an intriguing team.
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
3
|
Del Crandall, Del Rice
|
|
1B
|
6
|
Frank Torre, Joe Adcock
|
|
2B
|
3
|
Red Schoendienst, Danny O'Connell
|
|
3B
|
1
|
Eddie Mathews
|
|
SS
|
2
|
Johnny Logan, Felix Mantilla
|
|
LF
|
8
|
Wes Covington, Bobby Thomson, Andy Pafko
|
|
CF
|
5
|
Bill Bruton
|
|
RF
|
1
|
Hank Aaron, Bob "Hurricane" Hazle
|
This was the ’57 team, but the ’58 Braves also qualified (#43 on the list) as did the ’61 team (#34). The ’57 and ’58 were basically the same players, but by ’61 Joe Torre was the catcher, Frank Bolling the 2B, Roy McMillan the SS, Frank Thomas the LF’er, and Lee Maye the RF’er (with Aaron moving to CF). Logan, Crandall, and Covington were still on the team, but didn’t play much.
#13 – 1948 Cleveland Indians
This team, which achieved the Indians’ last World Series title, is most notable for the infield, often cited as one of the best ever. Robinson was the weakest of the quartet, but Gordon, Boudreau, and Keltner all ranked #1 in the Majors that year.
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
5
|
Jim Hegan, Joe Tipton
|
|
1B
|
7
|
Eddie Robinson, Johnny Berardino
|
|
2B
|
1
|
Joe Gordon
|
|
3B
|
1
|
Ken Keltner
|
|
SS
|
1
|
Lou Boudreu
|
|
LF
|
5
|
Dale Mitchell, Allie Clark
|
|
CF
|
2
|
Thurman Tucker, Larry Doby, Wally Jundich
|
|
RF
|
6
|
Larry Doby, Hank Edwards
|
The Top Twelve
Let’s do the top 12 teams in a little more depth:
#12 – 1913 Philadelphia A’s
Record: 97-58
Result: World Series Champions
Team Position WAA: 19.7
Avg. Pos. Rank: 3.0 (16 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 87.5%
PAM Score: 20.43
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
1
|
Wally Schang, Jake Lapp
|
|
1B
|
1
|
Stuffy McInnis, Billy Orr
|
|
2B
|
1
|
Eddie Collins
|
|
3B
|
1
|
Frank "Home Run" Baker
|
|
SS
|
2
|
Jack Barry
|
|
LF
|
3
|
Rube Oldring, Tom Daley
|
|
CF
|
8
|
Amos Strunk, Jimmy Walsh
|
|
RF
|
7
|
Eddie Murphy, Danny Murphy
|
This team featured the "Million Dollar Infield" and 4 positions ranked as #1 in the Majors. In terms of WAA, Collins was the highest rated in all of baseball, Frank Baker was #3, Stuffy McInnis #9, and Jack Barry #12. Million Dollar infield, indeed!
They almost didn’t qualify as their CF position was ranked 8th, barely above the median, but this World Championship team (Mack’s 3rd out of his 5 champions) is a worthy member of this club.
#11 – 1976 New York Yankees
Record: 97-62
Result: Lost in the World Series
Team Position WAA: 20.8
Avg. Pos. Rank: 3.88 (24 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 88.0%
PAM Score: 20.65
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
1
|
Thurman Munson, Fran Healy, Elrod Hendricks
|
|
1B
|
4
|
Chris Chambliss, Otto Velez
|
|
2B
|
3
|
Willie Randolph, Sandy Alomar
|
|
3B
|
2
|
Graig Nettes
|
|
SS
|
11
|
Fred Stanley, Jim Mason
|
|
LF
|
1
|
Roy White, Carlos May
|
|
CF
|
1
|
Mickey Rivers, Elliott Maddox
|
|
RF
|
8
|
Oscar Gamble, Lou Piniella
|
I was surprised to see this team on the list, because I figured their SS (Stanley) would have prevented them from meeting the criteria of having every position over the median. As it turns out, it was the one year that Stanley had a positive WAA in his career, and it was enough to allow the Yankees to rank #11 among SS, good enough to be in the upper half. The other factor is that there were a lot of very mediocre SS in the majors at that time, with the likes of Roger Metzger, Enzo Hernandez, Tom Veryzer, Darrel Chaney, and Frank Duffy pulling regular duty. Again, the WAA metric accounts for both offensive and defensive value.
So, they were fortunate to qualify in one regard, but the other positions make for an interesting overall lineup. There are no Hall of Famers in the lineup (Catfish Hunter was the only Hall of Famer on the team), but there are lots of very good players that could make Cooperstown under the right circumstances. Munson is a top-20 all-time catcher, and I’d probably put him top 15. I think Randolph is a top-20 all-time second baseman, and Nettles is probably a top-15 third baseman. White is probably a top-25 left fielder.
Among the other key players, Rivers, Chambliss, Piniella, and Gamble were all good players with long careers, and all were top 100 at their positions in Bill’s Historical Abstract (well, Gamble was actually #103). It was a very good, very balanced lineup. It’s not one of the most memorable Yankee teams because they didn’t win the Series, but they were an important one as they broke the 11-year postseason drought the franchise had experienced between ’65 and ’75, setting the stage for the 2 World Series Champions to follow in ’77 & ’78.
Note – the ’77 team also achieved the 8-positions above median status as well, with Bucky Dent taking over for Stanley and Reggie Jackson signing as a free agent, taking over RF and Piniella moving to left. However, the players didn’t rank quite as high relative to their peers as the ’76 squad did, so they’re a little further down the list (#31).
Another note – although this team is #10 by this methodology, they were only #2 among teams from 1976. You can probably guess who that other one is (coming up later).
#10 – 1971 Baltimore Orioles
Record: 101-57
Result: Lost in World Series
Team Position WAA: 20.7
Avg. Pos. Rank: 3.75 (24 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 88.5%
PAM Score: 20.79
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
5
|
Elrod Hendricks, Andy Etchebarren, Clay Dalrymple
|
|
1B
|
5
|
Boog Powell
|
|
2B
|
2
|
Davey Johnson, Jerry DaVanon, Chico Salmon
|
|
3B
|
3
|
Brooks Robinson
|
|
SS
|
1
|
Mark Belanger
|
|
LF
|
3
|
Don Buford, Merv Rettenmund
|
|
CF
|
5
|
Paul Blair, Merv Rettenmund
|
|
RF
|
6
|
Frank Robinson, Merv Rettenmund
|
More famous for having 4 twenty-game winners in the rotation, this Orioles team also had a very strong and very well balanced lineup, with no one position being ranked less than #6 among their peers. Rettenmund also had a great year with the bat, playing all 3 outfield positions.
Like other Orioles teams of this era, they featured strong offense, good pitching, and stellar defense. Has there ever been a better left side of the infield duo defensively than Robinson and Belanger?
One of the hidden strengths of this team is the catching, where Hendricks and Etchebarren (along with the occasional contribution of Dalrymple) made solid contributions.
#9 – 1952 New York Yankees
Record: 95-59
Result: World Series Champions
Team Position WAA: 19.7
Avg. Pos. Rank: 2.75 (16 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 89.1%
PAM Score: 20.91
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
1
|
Yogi Berra, Charlie Silvera
|
|
1B
|
5
|
Joe Collins, Johnny Mize
|
|
2B
|
4
|
Billy Martin, Gil McDougald, Jerry Coleman
|
|
3B
|
4
|
Gil McDougald, Bobby Brown
|
|
SS
|
2
|
Phil Rizzuto
|
|
LF
|
2
|
Gene Woodling, Irv Noren, Bob Cerv
|
|
CF
|
2
|
Mickey Mantle, Irv Noren
|
|
RF
|
2
|
Hank Bauer, Irv Noren
|
Typical Yankee lineup of that era, good all-around. Berra’s the only #1, but they had 4 players ranked 2nd. Mantle, Berra, and Rizzuto were all top 10 players in WAA, while Woodling and Bauer were top 20. McDougald and Collins were solid players as well.
#8– 1975 Cincinnati Reds
Record: 108-54
Result: World Series champions
Team Position WAA: 22.0
Avg. Pos. Rank: 3.88 (24 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 88.0%
PAM Score: 21.18
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
3
|
Johnny Bench, Bill Plummer
|
|
1B
|
6
|
Tony Perez, Dan Driessen
|
|
2B
|
1
|
Joe Morgan, Doug Flynn
|
|
3B
|
7
|
Pete Rose, John Vukovich
|
|
SS
|
3
|
Dave Concepcion, Darrel Chaney
|
|
LF
|
2
|
George Foster
|
|
CF
|
3
|
Cesar Geronimo, Ed Armbrister
|
|
RF
|
6
|
Ken Griffey, Merv Rettenmund
|
I was a little surprised that they weren’t higher, but there is another Reds team ahead of them, and some other strong lineups as well. No one was lower than 7th at his position, a terrific across-the-board balance for this lineup. They led MLB in runs scored.
#7– 1969 Baltimore Orioles
Record: 109-53
Result: Lost in World Series
Team Position WAA: 22.9
Avg. Pos. Rank: 4.0 (24 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 87.5%
PAM Score: 21.39
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
2
|
Elrod Hendricks, Andy Etchebarren, Clay Dalrymple
|
|
1B
|
2
|
Boog Powell
|
|
2B
|
7
|
Davey Johnson, Chico Salmon
|
|
3B
|
6
|
Brooks Robinson
|
|
SS
|
7
|
Mark Belanger, Bobby Floyd
|
|
LF
|
2
|
Don Buford, Merv Rettenmund, Curt Motton
|
|
CF
|
2
|
Paul Blair
|
|
RF
|
4
|
Frank Robinson, Dave May
|
Essentially the same lineup as the 1971 team, which was #10 in this list. Powell, the catchers, Buford, Blair, and Frank Robinson ranked higher in ’69 vs. ’71, with Brooks Robinson, Johnson, and Belanger ranking lower. The average ranking of the ’71 squad was slightly better, but the ’69 team had a higher collective WAA, which gave them the edge.
#6– 1902 Pittsburgh Pirates
Record: 103-36
Result: Won NL Pennant (no World Series yet)
Team Position WAA: 20.2
Avg. Pos. Rank: 2.5 (16 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 90.6%
PAM Score: 21.61
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
7
|
Jack O'Connor, Chief Zimmer, Harry Smith
|
|
1B
|
3
|
Kitty Bransfield, Honus Wagner
|
|
2B
|
2
|
Claude Ritchey, Jimmy Burke
|
|
3B
|
2
|
Tommy Leach
|
|
SS
|
3
|
Wid Conroy, Honus Wagner
|
|
LF
|
1
|
Fred Clarke
|
|
CF
|
1
|
Ginger Beaumont
|
|
RF
|
1
|
Honus Wagner, Lefty Davis, Jimmy Sebring
|
The team won 74% of their games, taking the NL pennant by 27.5 games, and with a record 20 games better than the AL pennant-winning Philadelphia Athletics.
Outside of the catcher slot (split 3 ways by O’Connor, Zimmer, and Smith), the Pirates ranked #3 or better at all other positions, including all 3 outfield slots. Their average rank of 2.5 (unadjusted for # of teams in the majors) is the best of all teams in the study.
Wagner had one of his standard jack-of-all-trade seasons that was common early in his career, spending 61 games in the outfield, 44 games at SS, and 32 games at 1B. Beginning with 1903, he started playing a higher percentage of the time at SS.
A truly great team that overwhelmed the opposition, including 2 Hall of Famers (Wagner and Clarke) in the everyday lineup and other stellar players of that era such as Beaumont and Leach. Smith was pretty bad as the catcher with the most playing time, but O’Connor and Zimmer (who were both pretty good players who were getting up there in age) got in enough time to make it an above-average position. Bransfield had probably his best year, and Ritchey was probably the best 2B in the NL in that first decade of the 1900’s (I think he was better than Evers over that stretch). This might have been the best of all of those Pittsburgh squads of that decade, maybe even better than the 1909 World Series champions that went 110-42.
#5– 2011 Seattle Mariners
Record: 116-46
Result: Lost in ALCS
Team Position WAA: 23.6
Avg. Pos. Rank: 4.5 (30 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 88.3%
PAM Score: 21.69
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
5
|
Dan Wilson, Tom Lampkin
|
|
1B
|
4
|
John Olerud, Ed Sprague
|
|
2B
|
1
|
Bret Boone
|
|
3B
|
10
|
David Bell, Mark McLemore
|
|
SS
|
6
|
Carlos Guillen, Mark McLemore
|
|
LF
|
6
|
Al Martin, Stan Javier, Mark McLemore
|
|
CF
|
2
|
Mike Cameron, Stan Javier
|
|
RF
|
2
|
Ichiro Suzuki, Stan Javier
|
This was an amazing team that, at first glance, doesn’t strike you as a team that would be above median at all positions. A few notes:
- One of their big weapons (Edgar Martinez) was not included, because I didn’t include DH’s, but he was a big part of their success.
- One of the team’s hidden gems was Mark McLemore. He’s not listed as the "starter" at any position, but, much in the manner of a Tony Phillips or a Ben Zobrist, he played all over. He ended up as a significant contributor in LF, at SS, and at 3B. McLemore ended up with nearly 500 PA’s, hit .286 with a .384 OBP, and was 39 for 46 as a base stealer. He played wherever he was needed, and was invaluable in that role.
- Stan Javier was another solid contributor in LF (and the other 2 OF positions), hitting .292 with a .375 OBP. Martin is listed as the "starter", but McLemore and Javier gave them some terrific play out there to boost their final ranking.
Boone, of course, had an amazing year 37-141-.331, and Ichiro hit .350 in his inaugural MLB season. Cameron is certainly not remembered as a great player, but he was phenomenal in 2001. Olerud had one of his typically quiet but still excellent seasons.
One of the fascinating things about this team is that, in contrast to some of the more star-studded teams in prior years featuring Ken Griffey Jr., Alex Rodriguez, and Randy Johnson, this team had a lot less star power, but posted a much better won-lost record. The Yankees knocked them out in the ALCS, but it was an amazing year for that team.
#4– 1976 Cincinnati Reds
Record: 102-60
Result: World Series champions
Team Position WAA: 24.2
Avg. Pos. Rank: 3.75 (24 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 88.5%
PAM Score: 22.33
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
2
|
Johnny Bench, Bill Plummer
|
|
1B
|
8
|
Tony Perez, Dan Driessen
|
|
2B
|
1
|
Joe Morgan, Doug Flynn
|
|
3B
|
4
|
Pete Rose, Bob Bailey
|
|
SS
|
2
|
Dave Concepcion, Doug Flynn
|
|
LF
|
2
|
George Foster, Mike Lum
|
|
CF
|
8
|
Cesar Geronimo
|
|
RF
|
3
|
Ken Griffey
|
Basically a repeat of the ’75 squad that checked in at #8 earlier, but with a little more WAA and slightly better overall rankings. Perez and Geronimo ranked a little lower than ’75, but 5 of the 6 others ranked higher (Morgan was #1 both years). Of course, the team famously swept through the playoffs, winning 7 games without losing any. They also led the Majors in nearly every important offensive category that year.
#3 – 1931 New York Yankees
Record: 94-59
Result: Finished 2nd in AL
Team Position WAA: 24.4
Avg. Pos. Rank: 2.88 (16 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 88.3%
PAM Score: 22.56
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
1
|
Bill Dickey, Arndt Jorgens, Cy Perkins
|
|
1B
|
2
|
Lou Gehrig
|
|
2B
|
8
|
Tony Lazzeri, Jimmy Reese
|
|
3B
|
1
|
Joe Sewell
|
|
SS
|
3
|
Lyn Lary
|
|
LF
|
2
|
Ben Champman, Samuel Byrd
|
|
CF
|
5
|
Earle Combs, Samuel Byrd
|
|
RF
|
1
|
Babe Ruth, Samuel Byrd
|
As good as this lineup was, they almost didn’t qualify, as their second basemen (mostly Lazzeri) were only 8th out of the 16 teams. But, qualify they did, and they come in at #3.
You like Hall of Famers? We have 6 of them for you here, with Dickey, Gehrig, Lazzeri, Sewell (who had been released by the Indians after a terrific 11-year run with them), Combs, and Ruth. The other 2 (Chapman and Lary) were terrific as well. Chapman led the league in steals that year as a 22-year old, and Lary hit .280 with 35 doubles, over 100 RBI’s, and 88 walks.
Each of the 8 primary players at each position had an OPS+ of over 100. Even though it was a high-scoring era, it was an amazing offense. The team still holds the record for holding the modern day Major League record for team runs scored in a season with 1,067, or nearly 7 per game. They didn’t win the pennant, though, because, despite 3 Hall of Fame starters in Lefty Gomez, Herb Pennock, and Red Ruffing, their pitching was below average, and the Philadephia Athletics won 107 games that year, the last season of their 3-year domination of the American League from 1929-1931.
#2 – 1953 Brooklyn Dodgers
Record: 105-49
Result: Lost in World Series
Team Position WAA: 23.4
Avg. Pos. Rank: 2.75 (16 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 89.8%
PAM Score: 22.56
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
1
|
Roy Campanella, Rube Walker
|
|
1B
|
3
|
Gil Hodges, Wayne Belardi
|
|
2B
|
4
|
Jim Gilliam, Jackie Robinson
|
|
3B
|
5
|
Billy Cox, Jackie Robinson
|
|
SS
|
2
|
Pee Wee Reese, Bobby Morgan
|
|
LF
|
3
|
Jackie Robinson, George Shuba
|
|
CF
|
1
|
Duke Snider
|
|
RF
|
2
|
Carl Furillo, Don Thompson
|
You’re probably very familiar with this lineup. 4 Hall of Famers (Campanella, Reese, Robinson, Snider), another (Hodges) who is a popular candidate, and 2 others (Furillo, Gilliam) who weren’t too far off that standard. Cox was the weakest hitter in the lineup, but he was a stellar defensive 3B, and even he hit .291 that year.
Campy was the MVP that year (the 2nd of his 3 awards), Snider was 3rd, Furillo (who was the batting champion that year at .344) was tied for 9th with team mate and starting pitcher Carl Erskine, Reese was 11th, Robinson was 12th, and Hodgers was 14th.
Robinson was all over the diamond that year, with 75 games in LF, 44 at 3B, 9 at 3B, and 6 at 1B. He even got in 1 game at SS for good measure.
Truly one of the great lineups in history, maybe the best balanced one ever (no player is ranked lower than 5th at his position).
#1– 1927 New York Yankees
Record: 110-44
Result: World Series champions
Team Position WAA: 27.9
Avg. Pos. Rank: 3.00 (16 teams)
Adj. Rank %: 87.5%
PAM Score: 24.02
|
Position
|
MLB Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
6
|
Pat Collins, Johnny Grabowski, Benny Bengough
|
|
1B
|
1
|
Lou Gehrig
|
|
2B
|
3
|
Tony Lazzeri, Ray Morehart
|
|
3B
|
8
|
Joe Dugan, Mike Gazella
|
|
SS
|
2
|
Mark Koenig
|
|
LF
|
1
|
Bob Meusel, Ben Paschal
|
|
CF
|
2
|
Earle Combs
|
|
RF
|
1
|
Babe Ruth, Cedric Durst
|
Similar to the ’31 Yankees, the ’27 squad very nearly didn’t qualify. Their third basemen (mostly Dugan) was just above the median at that position. In the end, the WAA of their position players was the deciding factor and boosted them to the top.
4 Hall of Famers are in the lineup, and of the ones who weren’t, Meusel was ranked as the #1 LF, and Koenig as the #2 SS. To be honest, subjectively I would put the ’31 Yankees over the ’27 Yankees in terms of overall balance, as Dickey was better than the ’27 catchers and Sewell was better than Dugan. But, it’s hard to go wrong with the ’27 Yankees.
Summary of Teams
Below is the list of all teams that qualified with all 8 positions over median, sorted by their PAM scores:
|
Rank
|
Year
|
Team
|
PAM Score
|
Wins
|
Losses
|
# Teams
|
Postseason
|
World Series Champion
|
|
1
|
1927
|
Yankees
|
24.02
|
110
|
44
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
2
|
1953
|
Dodgers
|
22.81
|
105
|
49
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
3
|
1931
|
Yankees
|
22.74
|
94
|
59
|
16
|
|
|
|
4
|
1976
|
Reds
|
22.33
|
102
|
60
|
24
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
5
|
2001
|
Mariners
|
21.69
|
116
|
46
|
30
|
Y
|
|
|
6
|
1902
|
Pirates
|
21.61
|
103
|
36
|
16
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
|
7
|
1969
|
Orioles
|
21.39
|
109
|
53
|
24
|
Y
|
|
|
8
|
1975
|
Reds
|
21.18
|
108
|
54
|
24
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
9
|
1952
|
Yankees
|
20.91
|
95
|
59
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
10
|
1971
|
Orioles
|
20.79
|
101
|
57
|
24
|
Y
|
|
|
11
|
1976
|
Yankees
|
20.65
|
97
|
62
|
24
|
Y
|
|
|
12
|
1913
|
A's
|
20.43
|
96
|
57
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
13
|
1948
|
Indians
|
20.00
|
97
|
58
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
14
|
1974
|
Dodgers
|
19.94
|
102
|
60
|
24
|
Y
|
|
|
15
|
1955
|
Dodgers
|
19.00
|
98
|
55
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
16
|
1905
|
Giants
|
18.82
|
105
|
48
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
17
|
1953
|
Yankees
|
18.65
|
99
|
52
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
18
|
1936
|
Yankees
|
18.57
|
102
|
51
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
19
|
1929
|
Yankees
|
18.51
|
88
|
66
|
16
|
|
|
|
20
|
1973
|
Orioles
|
18.49
|
97
|
65
|
24
|
Y
|
|
|
21
|
1957
|
Braves
|
18.42
|
95
|
59
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
22
|
1944
|
Cardinals
|
18.30
|
105
|
49
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
23
|
1930
|
Yankees
|
18.26
|
86
|
68
|
16
|
|
|
|
24
|
1955
|
Yankees
|
18.07
|
96
|
58
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
25
|
1906
|
Cubs
|
17.93
|
106
|
36
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
26
|
1960
|
Yankees
|
17.89
|
97
|
57
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
27
|
1958
|
Yankees
|
17.77
|
92
|
62
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
28
|
1947
|
Yankees
|
17.64
|
97
|
57
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
29
|
1962
|
Giants
|
17.55
|
103
|
62
|
20
|
Y
|
|
|
30
|
1922
|
Giants
|
17.43
|
93
|
61
|
16
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
31
|
1977
|
Yankees
|
16.87
|
100
|
62
|
26
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
32
|
1910
|
Cubs
|
16.71
|
104
|
50
|
16
|
|
|
|
33
|
1933
|
Yankees
|
16.65
|
91
|
59
|
16
|
|
|
|
34
|
1961
|
Braves
|
16.57
|
83
|
71
|
18
|
|
|
|
35
|
1934
|
Yankees
|
15.87
|
94
|
60
|
16
|
|
|
|
36
|
1998
|
Yankees
|
15.68
|
114
|
48
|
30
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
37
|
1932
|
A's
|
15.66
|
94
|
60
|
16
|
|
|
|
38
|
1948
|
Braves
|
15.52
|
91
|
62
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
39
|
2009
|
Angels
|
15.40
|
97
|
65
|
30
|
Y
|
|
|
40
|
1921
|
Cardinals
|
15.09
|
87
|
66
|
16
|
|
|
|
41
|
1985
|
Yankees
|
15.08
|
97
|
64
|
26
|
|
|
|
42
|
1943
|
Cardinals
|
14.99
|
105
|
49
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
43
|
1984
|
Tigers
|
14.72
|
104
|
58
|
26
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
44
|
1958
|
Braves
|
14.53
|
92
|
62
|
16
|
Y
|
|
|
45
|
1978
|
Dodgers
|
14.52
|
95
|
67
|
26
|
Y
|
|
|
46
|
1975
|
A's
|
14.48
|
98
|
64
|
24
|
Y
|
|
|
47
|
1942
|
Dodgers
|
13.99
|
104
|
50
|
16
|
|
|
|
48
|
1979
|
Orioles
|
12.47
|
102
|
57
|
26
|
Y
|
|
|
49
|
1931
|
Cubs
|
12.32
|
84
|
70
|
16
|
|
|
|
50
|
1968
|
Orioles
|
12.31
|
91
|
71
|
20
|
|
|
|
51
|
1988
|
A's
|
12.30
|
104
|
58
|
26
|
Y
|
|
|
52
|
1960
|
White Sox
|
11.72
|
87
|
67
|
16
|
|
|
|
53
|
1964
|
Tigers
|
11.63
|
85
|
77
|
20
|
|
|
|
54
|
1986
|
Giants
|
10.50
|
83
|
79
|
26
|
|
|
|
55
|
1991
|
Twins
|
10.47
|
95
|
67
|
26
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
56
|
1999
|
Orioles
|
10.39
|
78
|
84
|
30
|
|
|
|
57
|
1984
|
Phillies
|
10.35
|
81
|
81
|
26
|
|
|
|
58
|
1980
|
Reds
|
8.07
|
89
|
73
|
26
|
|
|
You may notice that there are a few teams on this list that seem quite ordinary, especially towards the bottom part of the list. One team, the 1999 Orioles, even had a losing record. Generally speaking, though, these teams were big winners. The aggregate winning percentage of these teams is .619. 67% of them participated in the postseason, and 29% of them won the World Series.
Distribution by Decade:
|
Decade
|
Total
|
|
1900s
|
3
|
|
1910s
|
2
|
|
1920s
|
4
|
|
1930s
|
7
|
|
1940s
|
6
|
|
1950s
|
8
|
|
1960s
|
7
|
|
1970s
|
10
|
|
1980s
|
6
|
|
1990s
|
3
|
|
2000s
|
2
|
I’m not sure what to make of the decade distribution. The 1900’s through 1920’s was seeing about 3 teams per decade achieve this status. Then, it went up to about 7 per year in the ‘30’s through the 50’s.
I don’t see any pattern that implies that the number of teams makes it any more or less difficult to have all 8 positions over median. All decades up through the ‘50’s were played with 16 major league teams per season. In the ‘60’s, expansion lifted that to 18 teams in ’61, 20 teams in ’62 through ’68, and 24 teams in ’69. The next expansion (’77) bumped it to 26, then 28 in ’93, and finally 30 teams in ’98. So, I’m not sure why the ‘70’s were so abundant with these types of teams, or why they have become so rare since the ‘80’s. Is it that much harder to be above the median at all positions with 30 teams as opposed to 26? Then how would we explain why so many more teams accomplished this in the ‘70’s (when there were 24 teams) vs. the early 1900’s (when there were only 16)?
Royal Treatment
One last observation…..
I wasn’t really looking to see if there were any highly successful teams that had every position below the median. However, just in sifting through the data, I stumbled on one team that’s particularly noteworthy in light of the Royals’ triumph in 2015. The last Royals team to win it all, as most know, was the ’85 club. That team came awfully close to having every position below the median. George Brett at 3B was the only one above (and he was way above). Most of the others were not only below, but typically way below:
|
Position
|
Rank
|
Primary Contributor(s)
|
|
C
|
14
|
Jim Sundberg, John Wathan, Jamie Quirk
|
|
1B
|
21
|
Steve Balboni
|
|
2B
|
15
|
Frank White, Greg Pryor
|
|
3B
|
2
|
George Brett
|
|
SS
|
25
|
Onix Concepcion, Buddy Biancalana
|
|
LF
|
24
|
Lonnie Smith, Darryl Motley
|
|
CF
|
15
|
Willie Wilson, Lynn Jones, Omar Moreno
|
|
RF
|
25
|
Darryl Motley, Pat Sheridan, Dane Iorg
|
Their position players combined for a WAA of -2.3. Their DH’s were another -1.5, and pinch hitters were -1.8. Their only saving grace, besides the stellar performance of Brett, was that the had the highest WAA among pitchers in the majors with 13.5. They were 2nd in the AL in ERA. Bret Saberhagen, Charlie Leibrandt, and Danny Jackson were a terrific top 3 starters, and Quisenberry was a workhorse in the pen.
I don’t mean to badmouth them. They had some strengths. Brett and Balboni both hit over 30 HR, and White chipped in with 22. White and Sundberg, although getting a little bit up in years, were 2 of the best ever defensively at their respective positions. Some of it was a little flukey for just that one season….in ’84, they were in the upper half in 4 of the 8 positions. But, they had enough to get to the playoffs, and once there, they proved to be good enough to win.