Baseball By The Numbers By Michael Salfino

May 5, 2006
Are First-Month Surprises Lasting?

The first month of the 2006 baseball season is officially in the books. The only thing not surprising is that the surprises are many.

The home runs are back with a vengeance. Astute observers know they never really left, as last year’s dip was in line with normal variations that have been seen in every decade. Major league teams ended the first month on pace for 5,620 homers, which would be the second highest total in history (just below the record of 5,693 in 2000). This sheds more doubt on just how performance enhancing steroids are, unless you think players are risking 50-game suspensions or have found something they are certain is undetectable through MLB testing.

No one would have predicted that the Reds would end the first month of play with baseball’s best record. The Tigers unexpectedly held their own against the defending champion White Sox, who picked up right where they left off. Meanwhile, the Braves floundered under .500 and the Yankees landed in the middle of the AL East pack, though still within striking distance of the limping Red Sox.

Last year, we introduced a net on base plus slugging percentage (OPS) stat that is meant to cross check won-loss records and isolate luck. For example, truly dominant teams should not only win a lot, but get on base and slug much better than their opponents.

After the first month, the “for real” teams in net OPS were the Tigers (plus .208), Yankees (plus .197), Brewers (plus .130), Mets (plus .108) and White Sox (plus .100).

What about the Reds? They’re 12th at plus .024. This suggests lots of luck to have won so many games. Expect Cincy to quickly fall back to the pack. Meanwhile, the Tigers deserved an even better record, so Motown should be excited.

On the minus side, the Twins are in big trouble, behind even the Royals at minus .209. Other teams expected to contend but struggling in net OPS through the first month were the Red Sox (12th at plus .017), Braves (16th, minus .007), Angels (17th, minus .015) and A’s (20th, minus .037).

The player surprises are many, too. Sample sizes are small with most players not yet having 100 at bats. But looking beyond the category stats allows us to isolate luck and better guess at whether current performance is sustainable.

Buy

Danny Haren (P, A’s): He’s been killed by nine homers allowed. But we put more stock in his 30-to-5 strikeout-to-walk ratio.

Hideki Matsui (OF, Yankees): His first-month woes were totally attributable to his .267 average on balls in play (.318 in each of the last two years).

Carl Crawford (OF, Devil Rays): Balls in play average was .328 and .326 the past two years. The first month of ’06: .282.

Jon Lieber (P, Phillies): His ERA with luck removed after the first month was 3.09 based mostly on 25 Ks vs. just three walks. Actual ERA? 6.87.

Orlando Hernandez (P, Diamondbacks): Luckless ERA should be 3.55, not 6.39 (37 Ks in 31 innings).

Hold

Jonny Gomes (OF, Devil Rays): He still strikes out too much, but now walks enough to sustain slugging success (23 free passes the first month).

Sell

Ty Wiggington (2B, Devil Rays): The clock has already struck midnight for 2006’s Cinderfella (eight homers).

Mike Maroth (P, Tigers): His ERA should be 4.34, not 1.78 (just 12 Ks and 10 walks in 30 innings).

Kris Benson (P, Orioles): The 18-to-13 spread in Ks versus walks isn’t good enough for mixed leaguers; ERA should have been 4.29, not 3.32.

Brian Bannister (P, Mets): The NL’s luckiest pitcher, with an ERA of 2.89 versus the 4.76 his stats earned (more walks than Ks). Trade him as soon as he comes off the DL (hammy).