(Not) Written In the Stars: Postseason Failures

On October 27, 2011, the Texas Rangers were one strike away from their first World Series championship. They carried an impressive resume to that point: a franchise-leading 96 wins, their second consecutive division title in 12 seasons, and a six-game showdown against Detroit that culminated in a 15-5 finale for the league title.

Anyone glued to his TV last autumn knows how this story ends. David Freese ripped a triple off Neftali Feliz and the Cardinals shifted both the momentum and the result of the Series.

On September 27, 2012, the Texas Rangers are three games away from taking the AL West again. This year will mark their third succedent run at a postseason slot, an unprecedented event in club history. While it’s entirely possible that the Rangers could choke in yet another playoff push, they wouldn’t be the first to do so. In fact, nine MLB teams have clinched their division in 3+ consecutive seasons without locking down a World Series title:

Atlanta Braves, 1991-1993, 1996-2005
New York Yankees, 2001-2006
Cleveland Indians, 1995-1999
Philadelphia Phillies, 1976-1978, 2009-2011
Kansas City Royals, 1976-1978
Pittsburgh Pirates, 1990-1992
Houston Astros, 1997-1999
Minnesota Twins, 2002-2004
Los Angeles Angels, 2007-2009

During this 35-year span, the teams completed 340 playoff games out of a potential 679. Four teams—Atlanta, Philadelphia, New York, and Cleveland—qualified for the World Series, but the Braves were the only ones to fall short in back-to-back seasons (1991-1992).

Less rare are the teams who froze in the Championship Series, or worse, barely toed the starting line in the Division Series. The Royals, Astros, and Pirates all failed to advance past the first round of playoff games, with Houston seeing just 11 of a possible 51 games, and Kansas City and Pittsburgh posting their respective losses in a pre-NLDS era. Only the Angels managed to improve their streak with each attempt, reaching the ALDS in 2007-2008 and the ALCS in 2009.

While it’s unusual for a team to suffer for very long in the postseason, these droughts overlapped from the get-go. Twelve times, one division champion from each league faltered in the playoffs in the same year. From 1991-1992, the Braves and Pirates squared off in the NLCS, with both match-ups resulting in a Game 7 heartbreaker for Pittsburgh. A decade later, the Yankees and Twins met in back-to-back ALDS. Sporting an identical 101-61 record in both seasons, the Yankees went 4-1 in each series, putting up three straight wins after surrendering the series opener to the Twins.

The unluckiest team by nearly a decade is the Atlanta Braves, who watched ten consecutive seasons roll by without winning a single Fall Classic. They made two bids for the title in 1996 and 1999, the first a six-game wrestling match against the New York Yankees, and the second a rematch and clean sweep by New York. In the latter half of their quest for a World Series trophy, the Braves fell in the NLDS five times, pushing the series to five games from 2002-2004 and finding themselves unable to muster more than a single run in each game—save for the 2004 ALDS, when they surrendered to a 12-3 whipping by the Astros.

Since their playoff streaks concluded, only two of nine teams have clinched a World Series championship. Most successful were the Yankees, who needed just three years to make their comeback in the 2009 Series, while the Royals took seven years to bounce back to postseason success. Of the six teams who are still vying for another World Series berth, the Astros remain the only franchise without a championship to their name.

Take heart, Rangers fans. Your team may have ill luck in the playoffs, but the streak is bound to end eventually. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go finish watching the 72-83 Mariners spoil the Angels’ chances of grabbing that second wild card.

Note: As graciously pointed out by John, the previously listed 2000-2002 Cardinals did not clinch the NL Central title in 2001. They tied the Astros with a record of 93-69, and were booted to a wild card spot due to Houston’s superior head-to-head record.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

73 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John
John
12 years ago

This is pretty nitpicky, but the Cardinals didn’t technically win the 2001 NL Central. They tied the Astros (for best record in the league) but got the wild card.

That would really stink if it happened today with the Wild Card playoff.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
12 years ago

I don’t know that I’d call the Rangers’ postseason luck “ill.” Last year, was there any reason to believe they were really the best team in the AL? I don’t think there was. And the prior season, they had the worst record of any AL playoff team… so couldn’t one actually argue that their postseason luck has been good?

MikeD
MikeD
12 years ago

Regarding the Rangers, is failing to win the World Series after winning a division crown for three straight years the new definition of choking? What about a team that in the past made the postseason for three straight years, but didn’t win their division, but also didn’t win the World Series? Are they choking less? With the ever increasing number of rounds and teams in the playoffs, the odds of the best team winning the World Series really aren’t all that high. We saw that last year. The Wild Card era has been good financially for the game, but something… Read more »

MikeD
MikeD
12 years ago
Reply to  Ashley

I understood. The word “choke” gets a bit overused, so I was taking offense for Ranger fans out there!

Now if you want to talk about Ron Washington’s bad managing, which totally did cost the Rangers the World Series last year… 🙂

Hartvig
Hartvig
12 years ago

Two teams towards the top of the list of also-rans really give lie to the old adage that pitching is what wins in the post-season. Say what you like about Billy Beane but he was spot on when he said that luck plays a huge part in who wins a 5 or 7 game series. Still, if I were to put down a bet on who’s going to win it all this year my money would be on the Rangers. Unless my Tigers make it of course in which case I’m going with my heart and not my head- and… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
12 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Hartvig: Bill James—naturally—might have been the first to point out the at-best middling performance of top pitching staffs in the WS, notably the 1954 Indians, but several others, such as the Orioles’ four 20-game winning staff in 1971. Atlanta’s playoff record in the last twenty years is a slightly different situation, but it supports the notion that good pitching is for the long haul, not necessarily the short series. I disagree with the idea that “luck” is the major factor in short series, though. Quite often a player simply gets hot at the right time. Example: the 1954 Series is… Read more »

birtelcom
Editor
12 years ago

NSB: We seem to have differing definitions of “luck”. You seem to be saying that “a player getting hot at the right time” is something other than “luck”, whereas I would categorize it as a classic example of luck. The bottom line is, even the worst team in the majors will beat the best team in the majors once in every four games or so. No team is good enough and no team is bad enough, that every game between them will come out the same way. Thank goodness, otherwise baseball would be pretty boring. But that does mean that… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
12 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

Time and chance happeneth to them all. Can’t disagree, except on what to call it, but I don’t believe in determinism, so Dusty Rhodes to me wasn’t an instrument of fate. He had the opportunity to fail but didn’t. Chance may have put him there, but he swung the bat.

bstar
12 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

b-com, how about the luck element in a one-game playoff series?

C’mon, Bud, next year please make the wild-card round 2 out of 3. At least.

Jim Bouldin
Jim Bouldin
12 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

“You seem to be saying that “a player getting hot at the right time” is something other than “luck”, whereas I would categorize it as a classic example of luck.” Praytell…WHY? If a hitter went to the plate blindfolded and ripped a double off the wall, then yes, I’d attribute that to luck (blind luck in that case). But when a player “gets hot” he is simply displaying his ability to perform at a level that, well, he’s by definition capable of performing at. Without a single exception, any player who “gets hot” in a playoff series is only carrying… Read more »

tag
tag
12 years ago
Reply to  Jim Bouldin

Jim, I think the crux of all our arguments come down to how to define “luck.” And I’m in the birtelcom camp here. Baseball depends far more on what I call “luck” than any other sport. Larry Bird demonstrated over many seasons that he could hit free throws at 90% rates and field goals at 50% rates, Peyton Manning that he can complete passes at 67% rates. But the best baseball players contact the ball for gain (i.e., hits), what (and here you have to factor in swings and misses and foul balls of course), once out of every 7… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
12 years ago
Reply to  Jim Bouldin

tag and others: One of the problems I have with the free and easy use of the term Luck on this site is that it so often is used as a label for the unlikely result, or especially the result that contradicts the advanced stats. Example: In 1996 Clemens had a WAR of 7.4, but a W/L of 10-13, so he must have had bad luck coming out the ears and all other orifices, right? In the spring there was a long post here on the subject, in fact. I’m no statistician, first to admit it, but I can read… Read more »

John Autin
Editor
12 years ago
Reply to  Jim Bouldin

NSB @61 — Re: Clemens in ’96: The ’96 Red Sox averaged 5.7 R/G over all. They averaged 5.0 for Wakefield, 5.3 for Sele, 7.3 for each of Gordon, Eshelman and Moyer … but 4.3 for Clemens, which was tied for 4th-worst among regular AL starters. The other AL starters supported by 4.5 R/G or less had a combined record of 67-113 (.372). The other two getting exactly 4.3 R/G went a combined 16-28 (.364). So Roger’s 10-13 (.435) looks damn good just on that level. In 10 of Clemens’s 13 losses, the team scored 3 runs or less, including… Read more »

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
12 years ago
Reply to  Jim Bouldin

JA (@63), I’m beginning to ride the same points like a hobbyhorse on this issue, but my basic thought is that when you get into the areas where “luck” may be the verdict on a serious point, you generally can’t test the proposition through cumulative statistical measures – those can only raise the question. You have to explore the individual cases in terms of single games or game situations. For example, to take nsb’s argument about Clemens (where I thought the two of you dueled to a draw), I think your arguments had varied relevance. Specifically, you say that in… Read more »

bstar
12 years ago
Reply to  Jim Bouldin

Apparently we read two different posts, epm. JA debunked virtually everything nsb said. We disagree I guess. 🙂

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
12 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

Well, in the case of ’54, luck wasn’t all that random. Rhodes had been doing what he did in the Series all year – walking in to pinch hit and parking bloopers over the extremely short (about 275′) Polo Grounds left field fence (15 HRs and 50 RBIs in 164 ABs). It’s true that his Series OPS of 2.381 was above his norm, but not off-scale for an 1.105 season-long hot streak. (Of course, his skills were generally assisted by a stiff regimen of drugs. As I recall, his PEDs came in a bottles of a fifth, and they turned… Read more »

John Autin
Editor
12 years ago

This doesn’t change munu’s point, but … Only 2 of Rhodes’s 16 HRs in ’54 were as a pinch-hitter.

This was a fun one — see the 6th inning.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NY1/NY1195406200.shtml

Jim Bouldin
Jim Bouldin
12 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

I think the different conceived meanings of the terms used contribute to the confusion and disagreements epm, but I don’t think they’re the only thing. It seems to me that there are also fundamental disagreements regarding what counts as evidence and how different types thereof should be weighted/prioritized/synthesized.

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
12 years ago
Reply to  Jim Bouldin

Agreed, Jim. Your exchange with tag (#66-67) is the sort of thing that can help us identify more clearly what perspectives are contested here.

Ed
Ed
12 years ago

Welcome Ashley and congrats on your first post!

Those ’76-’78 Royals faced the Yankees all three years and went 0-6 in games decided by 2 runs or less. Definitely some bad luck/not coming through in the clutch!

Brent
Brent
12 years ago
Reply to  Ashley

Game 5 in 1977 was worse. A 3-1 lead with 6 outs to go at home. Whitey loses his mind and tries to hold the lead with Dennis Leonard on 1 day rest (Game 3 starter) and Larry Gura on 0 days rest (Game 4 starter) That’s the one that has the classic picture of Freddie Patek crying in the dugout after the game.

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
12 years ago

Ashley, Although divisional play started in 1969, baseball didn’t, and I wonder whether you’d consider adding the Tigers of 1907-9. And although the ’51 playoff wasn’t technically a post-season (since the records were incorporated in regular season stats), it was still a playoff, leaving Brooklyn alone at the altar (as opposed to on it) 1951-53.

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
12 years ago
Reply to  Ashley

That game’s got a good story – the Detroits (as my father would have said) had the game won, but the third strike of the third out in the ninth got away from the catcher. Like Mickey Owen in ’41. The Tigers never managed a win in that series. (There’s a lot of randomness in the post-season – the year before, the Cubs were brought down by the Hitless Wonders, despite having gone 116-36 in the regular season.)

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
12 years ago
Reply to  Ashley

. . . and like bstar at #33, I thought this was your second post and neglected to welcome you. Nice debut!

John Autin
Editor
12 years ago

Along with those 1907-09 Tigers, let’s throw an honorable mention to the 1911-13 Giants. I believe those are the only teams to lose 3 straight WS.

Looking forward to Ashley’s succedent posts. 🙂

bstar
12 years ago

(Not) Written in the Stars: The Story of the Atlanta Braves Ashley, you won’t find me pouting about this. For the majority of the last twenty years, the Braves have either made, or had a good chance to make, the playoffs. As far as the regular season goes, no hardcore fan can ask for anything more: a chance. And even though the cumulative mojo of their teams entering the playoffs has dissolved into a pile of crap every year since ’99, a guy can still dream. I’m still watching every game, whether it be live or on fast forward on… Read more »

Ed
Ed
12 years ago
Reply to  bstar

Bstar – The ’95 WS between the Braves and the Indians has to rank as one of the all-times greats. Granted, it didn’t go 7 games but 5 of the 6 games were decided by one run (the other was a 3 run affair that was tied 1-1 going into the 7th). The finale was a 1-0 affair with Glavine and Wohlers shutting down the Indians’ powerhouse lineup on a one-hitter. Is it me though or does that WS not get the credit it deserves?

bstar
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

I’m with you on that one, Ed. How ’bout that Indians lineup: Lofton in his prime, Baerga when he was relevant, a young Manny and Thome, Albert Belle at his uber-prime, a 39-year-old Eddie Murray with his 35th straight good year. What a machine.

Ed
Ed
12 years ago
Reply to  bstar

Yet the Braves pitching staff completely shut the Indians down, holding them to a slash line of 179/273/303. Only Albert Belle had a decent series among the Tribe batters.

bstar
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

True, it was their crowning achievement. I think my heart stopped when Bobby Cox brought out Mark Wohlers for the ninth inning after Glavine’s 8 innings of one-hit ball in game 6.

And, per usual, totally lost in the shuffle, is Greg Maddux’s 2-hitter in game 1. Two unearned runs masked his accomplishment, a game Maddog has always called his finest.

Ed
Ed
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

Maddux seems to get unfairly blamed for the Braves’ postseason struggles based on his 11-13 record. Of course the Braves generally give him very little run support. On top of that, a stunning 27.8% of his postseason runs while pitching for the Braves were unearned.

Ed
Ed
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

Just noticed that in all three of the games the Indians lost by one run, Carlos Baerga made the final out. In two of those games, the tying run was in scoring position.

bstar
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

Not only that, Ed, but Maddux was more often than not going against the opposition’s #1 pitcher, sometimes twice in a series, while the self-proclaimed Mr. October (Smoltz) was often getting the sloppy thirds.

Maddux postseason ERA w/Atlanta: 2.81

Maddux reg-season ERA w/Atlanta: 2.63

Not much there.

bstar
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

I didn’t know that about Maddux’s unearned runs, Ed, thanks. I’ll add that to the toolbag of arguments I’m forced to use whenever I need to defend his postseason honor again.

Jimbo
Jimbo
12 years ago
Reply to  Ashley

Where can you buy copies of the past WS?

Jimbo
Jimbo
12 years ago
Reply to  bstar

can’t forget to add in what happened last year to their heartbreak. But yeah, you could do far worse than be a braves fan.

Andy
Admin
12 years ago
Reply to  bstar

When I think of that stretch of Braves teams I have no bad feelings about them winning only 1 World Series, in the sense that I still rate them as an incredibly strong, well-run, well-coached team. Margins in baseball are really small. After 162 games, the majority of teams end up within a margin of +/- 10 games. And unlike every other major pro sport, there is a massive variable game-to-game: the identity of the starting pitcher. NFL teams throw the same QB out there each game. NBA & NHL teams send the same lineup of players out there each… Read more »

Jim Bouldin
Jim Bouldin
12 years ago
Reply to  Andy

Couldn’t agree more. Braves have been the epitome of how to construct and run a baseball team over the last 20 years, and I’ll throw the Twins and A’s in there as well, though each definitely a notch or two below the Braves. What happens in the playoffs is largely irrelevant, and at any rate, they beat an extremely good Indians team in six games.

Evan
Evan
12 years ago

Unless I am missing something, the 2002-2004 Minnesota Twins should be included on this list.

MikeD
MikeD
12 years ago
Reply to  Evan

Evan, I just checked and you’re correct. The Twins did win their division each year, ’02-’04.

Andy
Admin
12 years ago
Reply to  Ashley

Don’t feel bad–I wouldn’t have the patience to research a post like this, and if I did I’d probably miss half of the relevant teams. That’s why I don’t even try anymore.

Andy
Admin
12 years ago

Welcome Ashley!

bstar
12 years ago

Oh, for some reason I thought this was your second post, Ashley. Congrats and welcome!

Mike L
Mike L
12 years ago

Welcome, Ashley, and nice piece. You wonder what’s harder-to win a championship in the pre-1969 era, or now? It’s just not that hard for even a powerhouse to lose 4/7 or 3/5. Just out of curiosity, of the teams that finished with a regular season winning percentage of .667 or better, what were their longest sub-.500 streaks in season.

Ruhee
12 years ago

Hey, this is an excellent post. The Braves’ inability to win a World Series in the early 90s is particularly dear to my heart, of course. I’m surprised at the length of some of these droughts – New York, Cleveland, etc – after having clinched so many consecutive years. I guess you can’t predict baseball.

Doug
Doug
12 years ago

Check oiut the splits for the ’54 Tribe. Despite that 111-43 record, they were only a .500 team against opponents over .500. So, less surprising then that they struggled against the Giants.

Ed
Ed
12 years ago
Reply to  Doug

The ’54 AL was VERY top heavy. The second place Yankees 103 victories, which would have plenty to win the AL in most years, left them 8 games out. And the 25 game gap between the third place White Sox and 4th place Red Sox may be the largest gap between any two teams in MLB history.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

In 1916 The last place A’s were 40 GB the 7th place Senators who were only one game under .500. I don’t know if that is the record but there’s a good chance of it.

John Autin
Editor
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

Ed, you may not have meant to include divisions, but … My 2003 5th-place Tigers trailed your 4th-place Tribe by 25 games.

John Autin
Editor
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

I’m sure Richard has the winner, but anyway…
The 1935 Braves were 26 GB the 7th-place Phillies.

Ed
Ed
12 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Thanks John and Richard! I was mostly talking about the pre-69 divisional split. So Richard is the winner so far. Still I’d be surprised if there are any other 4th place teams that were that far behind the 3rd place team.

John Autin
Editor
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

How about top-heavy *and* balanced at the top? 1950 AL, 4th-place Cleveland (92-62, 6 games out of 1st) was 25 games in front of 5th-place Washington (67-87).

This is divisional, but a 7-team division: 1977 AL East, 3rd-place Red Sox (97-64) were 23.5 games ahead of 4th-place Detroit(74-88).

John Autin
Editor
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

On a tangent … In the 1940 AL, with 14 to 17 games left, the top 5 teams were separated by 6 games. Detroit won by 1 over Cleveland, 2 over NYY, with Boston and Chicago fading to 8 back.

Doug
Editor
12 years ago
Reply to  Ed

Those 25 games separating two teams are more than separated first from last in the NL in both 1958 and 1959. The Phils brought up the rear both times, but also finished just 23 games out each time. The Phils were on top in 1915, but just 21 games ahead of the last-place Giants. The Astros were in 10th place in 1968, but just 25 games behind the first-place Cardinals. In the AL, the 1918 Red Sox were just 24 games ahead of last-place Philadelphia, albeit in a shortened season. In the Browns’ lone pennant year in 1944, the Senators… Read more »

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
12 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug, This came up in a post a couple of months ago, and Ed’s response is to the point. In ’54 there were only two other .500+ teams in the league, and they very high quality teams. The Yankees were .697 against the rest of the league and .500 against the Indians. The White Sox were .629 against the rest of the league and .500 against the Indians. The Yankees and ChiSox were, together, .663 against teams other than the Indians and the Indians made them a .500 pair of teams. The Giants were a .630 team – no reason… Read more »

Jim Bouldin
Jim Bouldin
12 years ago

tag (58), I think you’ve conflated two fundamentally different concepts there. The examples you give are simply reflections of the fact that some activities are harder to succeed at than others for human beings. That is decidedly NOT! the same concept as “luck” (assuming that by that term one typically means random or “chance” outcomes). The fact that it’s harder to hit a hole-in-one on a 300 yard golf hole than to hit a curve ball of defined velocity and break squarely, or throw three consecutive ringers in horeseshoes, or land on a soccer field on a parachute jump from… Read more »

tag
tag
12 years ago
Reply to  Jim Bouldin

Jim, I agree with a lot of what you said. But I think you are the one making a fundamental error. The issue is not whether skill is involved; no one’s arguing that. It’s how much, or to what extent, a particular sport rewards the skill-based elements and minimizes the luck factor when it comes to deciding the outcome of a particular game. The 100-meter dash perhaps, or maybe boxing, minimizes “luck” or randomness the most. Baseball to me is at the upper end of the spectrum in “allowing luck in.” Among team sports, baseball may be unique in that… Read more »

trackback

[…] published at High Heat Stats on September 27, 2012. 47.740478 -121.986148 Share this:TwitterFacebook Posted in: MLBTagged: […]

juegos friv
10 years ago

Hola estoy encantada de visitar vuestra blog me parece super buena.

Yo soy una colegial universitaria que me encanta el desarrollo web,
el bosquejo y sobre todo la creación de aplicaciones de juegos para móviles.

Me gusta mucho vuestra web me parece super interesante.

Os felicito por vuestra web, soy desde hoy una admiradora vuestra.

Hola me ha gustado mucho tu articulo
Es alucinante, buena aclaración la que he encontrado.

Muchos besitos.
Por fin algún que me lo ha explicado para que yo lo puede comprender.
Estoy excesivo contenta.
Grande, que contenta estoy, es lo mas. Gracias.