As of the end of the 2012 season, there were 200 hitters since 1901 with a career bWAR score of 43 or higher, and 98 pitchers at or above the same WAR level for the same period. Of those 298 players, eight were featured on the roster of the 2012 Yankees, the 11th straight year the Yankees have led the major leagues in having the most such players on one team. In fact, the fewest such players the Yankees have featured in any of those 11 years is 6 in 2011, a figure exceeded in the period only by the 2004 Astros (and, of course, the other 10 Yankee clubs).

One would expect teams to do well when stocked with high career WAR players (or players who will go on to accumulate high career WAR). After all, such players must be doing something right and will probably be a help to your ball club at just about any point in their careers (with the possible exception of the very beginning or very end of a career). Sure enough, the Yankees have been a perennial contender for the past 11 years but yet have recorded just one world championship, something of a drought by Yankee standards.

So, what’s gone wrong with the Yankees’ formula for success? More after the jump.

Note that I started this article some time ago, but never got around to finishing it. With the recent “harmonization” of bWAR and fWAR, I would have to start over with it. Well, I’m interested in this topic, but probably not THAT interested. Anyway, here is the piece as far as I got with it, using bWAR prior to the recent changes to align with fWAR.

To investigate this question, I first looked at teams that had a significant number of such hitters or pitchers on their rosters. I arbitrarily defined “significant” as having 3 or more hitters of the top 200, or 2 or more pitchers of the top 98 making up our two lists. My reasoning is a core of better talent like that should be reflected in better results for such teams. Those numbers, 200 and 98, also seem to ring true since the bulk of a team’s WAR will likely come from its top 8 position regulars plus its top 4 starters, the same 2:1 ratio between hitters and pitchers.

The teams most festooned with such proven talent are listed below. Note that, for recent teams (especially the past 10 years), the numbers may be under-represented compared to earlier clubs as some current players may not yet have compiled adequate WAR and thus are not yet counted.

So, stockpiling mostly older, proven talent is a relatively, recent phenomenon. Which makes sense, since it would be pretty hard to do outside of the free agent era (though Connie Mack may beg to differ). What’s notable also is that only one club in the free agency era has been doing this with regularity (which also makes sense, given how expensive it is to construct a roster in this way).

Of these 17 clubs, there are three WS winners and one other pennant winners. Nice, but probably not as nice as the clubs were expecting with these rosters. Let’s move down the list a bit further.

Getting beyond the immediate past, though still mostly in the free agent era. But, less obviously a result of stockpiling aging but proven talent. Clearly, these teams seem to have more players in or closer to their primes than the clubs at the top of the list. Thus, their results are also better: 5 WS winners and two other pennant winners.

Thus, it would seem then that quantity can make you highly competitive, even with stars who are past their prime  (as the Yankees show just about every year). But, when it comes to championships, quality will trump quantity.

Here are the results summarized by franchise, showing occurrences of 3 or more of our target hitters, 2 or more pitchers, or both at once.

[table id=89 /]

No matter how you look at the table, the Yankees stand out. Which is as you would expect – the most successful franchise has most often had the most top players on its roster. But there are some surprises:

• as mentioned above, only one WS title (and one other pennant) since 2002, despite making the table in pitchers and hitters every year
• Yankees had 3 or more 43 WAR hitters every year in the 1973 to 1988 period, but just two WS titles (and two other pennants) over those 16 years
• Yankees never had 2 or more 43 WAR pitchers in any season from 1940 to 1978, but still managed 14 WS titles (and 7 other pennants) over those 39 seasons

Some other thoughts:

• Hard to fathom that the Reds have never had a team with 3 hitters and 2 pitchers from our lists
• Maybe even harder to grasp is the Pirates not having even one team with either 3 hitters or 2 pitchers, since 1947
• Maybe good pitching doesn’t beat good hitting? Look at the imbalance for the Cards and Reds, especially their lack of teams with 2+ pitchers, but with a goodly number of teams with 3+ hitters they’ve managed to have periods of success.
• The Red Sox seem to be the real underachievers, given the talent they’ve compiled on a consistent basis. But, the Bombers have been even better at the stockpiling game.
• The Twins/Senators have really cashed in the few times the “stars have been aligned” for them
• How did the 1960s Giants manage to win only one pennant?

Your thoughts.