Most Post-Season Quality Starts Since 1995
Posted by Steve Lombardi on August 1, 2011
Since 1995, what team had the most quality starts in a given post-season?
Here is the list -
.
So, is it safe to say "If you get 8+ Quality Starts in the post-season these days, you have a 60% chance of winning a ring"?
August 1st, 2011 at 1:36 pm
Great list, Steve. Thanks.
So 19 post-season games in one year is the maximum possible under the current playoff format ...... hmmm. And the Atlanta Braves played 16 post-season games in 1996 before bowing out to the Yankees.
That's fairly impressive. 15 quality starts in 16 games played with an overall record of 9-7 for Atlanta. Unfortunately, not four wins when it ultimately counted.
So the way my mind works, what does that tell me about the list-leading team, the 1996 Atlanta Braves? That they had a great starting rotation (given) and that their batters choked under pressure.
New York Yankees on the list 13 times, Atlanta 11 times, Boston 9 times.
My team is not on the list so I cannot cast stones at another, but are the Atlanta Braves not the Buffalo Bills of baseball? (I know the Braves won one.)
August 1st, 2011 at 2:34 pm
I think it's worthy of note that the Angels only had 2 quality starts in 02. That's where having Troy Glaus and K-Rod help the most, I guess.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:35 pm
118 teams on the list. 128 playoff participants in the last 16 years. 10 teams missing. I don't have time to go through the list and find all 10 teams, but my guess is most of these teams bowed out quickly in the first round.
What I'd be interested to see, and I have no idea how you'd do this, is the frequency of QS in the playoffs relative to the regular season.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:42 pm
@2/ Neil L. Says: "... ... My team is not on the list so I cannot cast stones at another, but are the Atlanta Braves not the Buffalo Bills of baseball? (I know the Braves won one.)."
Neil L., I'd say they are more like the Vikings (to use another NFL team). Both were great teams over an extended period of time, frequently contending, but never winning The Ultimate Prize. The Bills contended over a shorter period of time.
The anology breaks down, because the Braves were in the postseason literally _every_ year for fourteen straight years, and more importantly, they actually won the WS in 1995.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:04 pm
@3
BSK, 1995 Orioles and Indians, 2000 Braves, 2002 Yankees, 2005 Padres, 2006 Dodgers, 2007 Angels, 2008 Brewers, 2010 Reds and 2010 Twins, I think.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:07 pm
@5, The O's didn't make the playoffs that year. The Red Sox did though, so that's probably it.
Those Indians teams...man. Every game was like 9-6.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:16 pm
@6
Thanks John. Was just eyeballing quickly.
What the list makes me wonder is if it takes a different "kind" of team to win a World Series than to merely make the post-season. For one thing, I guess you only need three top-flight starters
August 1st, 2011 at 3:26 pm
What I'd be interested to see, and I have no idea how you'd do this, is the frequency of QS in the playoffs relative to the regular season.
I wasn't sure if you mean just comparing each postseason team to its own performance in that regular season? I'm guessing you mean how all teams do in the regular season vs postseason.
For 1996-2010, 48.4% of regular season starts were quality starts, and 49.4% of postseason starts were quality starts.
Here's how you'd do it: Use the pitching game finder. Select 1996-2010. Pitcher's role: Starter. Get report. Scroll down to the bottom of the screen and it says "Games found: 72,228." That's how many regular season games have been played (total games started) in that period. Now go back, and click the postseason option. Run the report for the same time period, and you get 962 postseason starts. Now go back again, and add in the qualifications for a quality start: IP >= 6, ER <= 3. Do it for regular season and postseason and you have the total quality starts thrown during those periods. Let me know if that doesn't make sense.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:28 pm
What would be interesting is to compare the regular season QS% of only the pitchers who started in the postseason. I assume that number actually goes down a bit, but by how much?
More work than I can do right now.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:32 pm
What the list makes me wonder is if it takes a different "kind" of team to win a World Series than to merely make the post-season. For one thing, I guess you only need three top-flight starters
Intuitively, that makes sense, and yet the '90s-'00s Braves and '00 A's each had that, yet were notorious for their postseason flameouts. I'd guess there are particular qualities which give teams advantages in the postseason compared to regular season, but which such small samples it's hard to identify them and know if they're actually making a difference.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:45 pm
I am surprised that the percentages of QS in the regular season and in the post season are so close (48.4% & 49.4%).
The regular season has a lot more starts by 4th, 5th, and spot starters.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:51 pm
Or, for individuals in that time period....
http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/shareit/Er3EY
August 1st, 2011 at 3:52 pm
I think that Maddux and the Big Unit prove that run support and who your opponent is matter.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:04 pm
Tmck, yes, but the postseason offenses are better too.
Still, I wonder if SP will get pulled sooner in a do-or-die game, even if not pitching that badly, preventing them the chance to get a QS. It seems that way. Those games are managed differently.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:08 pm
I'm running a search for starts of 3 innings or less and 3 ER allowed or less.
In the regular season, those have been 1.7% of all starts. In the postseason, 2.7%. Not sure if that's statistically significant, given the much smaller number of postseason starts, but it gives some support to my hypothesis. In the regular season, I think a lot of those pitchers would be given a longer leash, and some of those starts could turn into QS.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:14 pm
1995 Orioles and Indians
It was actually the 1995 Rockies and Yankees. The 1995 Indians had 12 QSs in 15 games, the 1995 Red Sox, one QS in three games.
And the only team with a quality start in every postseason game: the 1998 Astros, who lost to the Padres in four games in the Division Series.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:49 pm
Not really relevant but anyone else having problems with PI season finder, by player, for 2011 screwing up when games played by position is chosen.
that might not make sense: I'm looking for players who have played at least 2 games at multiple positions (or another search I tried was any player who had played At Most 1 game at catcher) and no matter what I do I just get every player who has played in a game this year.
Am I doing something wrong or is something else?
August 1st, 2011 at 5:29 pm
@14 @15
JT, I think your hypothesis about the quick hook for starters in post-season is dead on. Depending on how far from behind your team comes in playoff series, you could face a must-win game four or five times. Too much at stake for the starter to work his way out of a shaky start, even if it less than four earned runs allowed.
@10
I think I remember some of us commenting on ideal post-season pitching rotations in a blog some time ago and concluding that with TV-mandated off-days, you don't really need a deep starting rotation. The regular season, of course, is a grind.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:53 pm
The two teams with the most quality starts have been the two World Series teams every year since 2003. Part of that, I suppose, is a function of playing more games, but it's probably no coincidence.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:10 pm
Hitting will get you through the Regular Season, but it takes Pitching to get through the playoffs.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Is there a way to compile a list of all brother combos in baseball history, sorted by debut year? Is that a PI feature?
August 1st, 2011 at 10:26 pm
@21 Its not a PI feature. It may be somewhere on this site, but I can't find it.
Baseball Almanac has them listed alphabetically.
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/fammenu.shtml
August 1st, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Watching the Phillies struggle against the Rockies this very moment, I would have expected the 2007 team to be one of the ones with zero quality starts, but they actually had two.
By the way, the bug this blog had of erasing the comment detail when the name and/or email address was not filled in has been fixed. The cookie I had for this site got destroyed by my relatively new virus-checking program, so the stored data disappeared. At least I knew what I had to put in there. I had to get password and user ID recovery for the Play Index. Thanks for fixing the problem.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:58 pm
Zambano, 6 strong!
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:05 am
One slightly unfortunate feature of PI is that it lists all 128 postseason teams since 1995, except the ten who had no quality starts.
So here are the 10 teams with no quality starts; the numbers are their numbers of postseason wins:
1995 NYY2, COL 0
2000 ATL 0
2002 NYY 1
2005 SDP 0
2006 LAD 0
2007 LAA 0
2008 MIL 1
2010 MIN 0, CIN 0
All ten lost in the Division Series, unsurprisingly. The 1995 Yankees forced a famous Game 5, but six of the others were swept.
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:05 am
@25
Pete R., thanks for cleaning up my list in #5 and adding the wins.
Your data ties in to #7, #10, and #14, I think. The no-quality-start teams you list qualified for post-season but then went 4-30?!? So what made them good enough to win their division or the wild card yet be so inferior in the playoffs?
Anything can happen in a short series, but that usually favors the underdog, poorer team. And the answer to my question surely has something to do with the individual circumstances of each team.
So does the playoff quality start data just confirm the old axiom that "good pitching beats good hitting", particularly in October?
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:50 am
Neil-
I think we'd have to look at the inverse. What would the criteria be for a quality offensive day? 5+ runs (A QS works out to an ERA of 4.50)? What is the record in the playoffs of teams scoring 5+ runs?
August 2nd, 2011 at 10:13 am
No idea how to link to the PI results, but there have been 409 games in which a team scored 5+ runs in the playoffs since 1995. They have won 80% of those games.
Perhaps 5+ is too much. Lowering it to 4+, we find 553 games that were won 74% of the time.
During that same time frame in the regular season, teams scoring 5+ win 76% of the time and those scoring 4+ win 70% of the time.
Hm... I've thoroughly confused myself. I have no idea what any of this means, since obviously the quality of the team's pitching performance is a factor.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:47 pm
Well, I believe scoring goes down a bit in the postseason (some support for the argument that good pitching beats good hitting), so a team that manages to score 4 (or 5, or however many) runs is more likely to win that game in the postseason than in the regular season.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:51 pm
The no-quality-start teams you list qualified for post-season but then went 4-30?!? So what made them good enough to win their division or the wild card yet be so inferior in the playoffs?
I may be misinterpreting you, but I think you're taking too much from that terrible record. These are already teams which were selected to have performed poorly (by virtue of having no quality starts), so the fact they went 4-30 doesn't mean much beyond teams that don't play well don't win games.
Now, if they were selected for some particular regular season performance, and then we saw they went 4-30 in the postseason, that would be meaningful.
August 2nd, 2011 at 2:23 pm
@30
JT, again resurrecting an old blog and its threads, is this list, then, a good argument for not expanding the playoffs?
That is something I've been a proponent of for biased, home-town reasons. What I'm saying is if so few poor-pitching teams ever win a game in the post-season, then why bother introducing an extra wild-card?
I guess the only baseline for comparison for these ten teams is the rate of quality starts for their playoff pitchers during the regular season. That might show if, somehow, they choked when the national television spotlight was on them.
Hmmm ..... thanks for the food for thought BSK and Johnny. Not sure if I'm any closer to an answer ......
August 2nd, 2011 at 2:41 pm
But I don't think those are necessarily poor-pitching teams. (In fact, I'm sure they're not, or they wouldn't have made the postseason.) They are just teams which didn't pitch well over three or four games. All #25 shows is that teams which don't get quality starts are less likely to win games, which is not news. I don't think it has any bearing on how many teams should be invited to the postseason. Half of them are still going lose.
August 10th, 2011 at 5:33 pm
The designer: