OVER/UNDER (2007 - 2012)

Hate to say it, The Orioles will be playing in front of empty stands in 2013.

I decided to jot down some teams that over-achieved & under-achieved in the last 5 Major League Baseball Seasons, I had a feeling that the 2012 Baltimore Orioles over-achieved, but didn't realize by how much; according to their Pythagorean baseball record (of 82-80), they were nothing but a .500 team that rode clutch bats in September -- they won 11 games more than they should have. So news flash to those in Baltimore, don't expect a repeat performance in 2013. I believe I have the Orioles in last place in my early sketch of a MLB Preview for 2013, and this was before I did my little investigation of OVER/UNDER.

So here is looking back at the Overachievers & Underachievers from 2007 through 2012:

2007

The Three biggest over-achievers were the St. Louis Cardinals, the Seattle Mariners & Arizona Diamondbacks. The Cardinals couldn't defend their 2006 World Title, they were actually worse than their real-life record of 78-84 with a Pythagorean record of 71-91. The Mariners won nine more games than they should have with 88 victories & the D-Backs were basically a fluke in 2007 that (would go on and beat the Chicago Cubs as well in the playoffs) won 90 games, eleven more than they should have.

The N.L. West should have came down between the San Diego Padres & Colorado Rockies.

The Cubs should feel really bad losing to a sub-.500 team actually in 2007.

The entire A.L. East on the most part should have won 3-to-4 more games each. In the central, the Cleveland Indians over-achieved by 5 games (96 victories), the Tigers were right on and should have only lost that division by two games, I always felt if it wasn't for Cleveland's second-half surge that we should have returned to the playoffs in 2007. The Indians would blow a 3-1 ALCS lead against Boston.

2008

The Houston Astros should have really started rebuilding much, much sooner, they kept trying to tread water when all the entire time was actually sinking. The Astros' actual record in 2008 was 86-75, they should have only won 77 games. This trend continues the next couple years, here's a look from 2008 - 2010.

Houston Astros' actual records
2008:     (86 - 75)
2009:     (74 - 88)
2010:     (76 - 86)

Houston Astros' Pythagorean records
2008:     (77 - 84)  
2009:     (68 - 94)
2010:     (68 - 94)

It's also fair to mention that they had a losing record in 2007 with a 73-89 record (the Pythagorean was basically the same with 72 wins), this being said that 2006 was the last time that this team was actually a competitor, 80+ victory team. From 2007 -2010, this team at best was a 77 win team. Ranging around it's average that was pretty much the 2007 team of 72 victories.

Glad to Jays back to their glory days uniforms!

Now onto the Toronto Blue Jays, this is a team that from 2007 - 2010 was on a completely different parallel than that of Houston, the entire division under-achieved by 3 or 4 games in 2007. In 2008, the Blue Jays (besides their 2013 expectations) had their best chance of making the playoffs since 1993. Let's look at their outcomes & Pythagorean records as well...

Toronto Blue Jays' actual records
2007:     (83 - 79)
2008:     (86 - 76)
2009:     (75 - 87)
2010:     (85 - 77)

Toronto Blue Jays' Pythagorean records
2007:     (87 - 75)
2008:     (93 - 69)
2009:     (84 - 78)
2010:     (84 - 78)

The Toronto Blue Jays under-achieved by 19 games ranging from 2007 - 2009. The 2010 Season is the only season that the Jays lived up to their possibilities. They'll sit there with the Orioles through these seasons, making every excuse possible, about how the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees are just too strong! The Tampa Bay Rays, on the other hand, kept quiet and slowly started executing their plan that started showing rewards in 2008.

Speaking of 2008, below is the actual standings & records
1. Tampa Bay     (97 - 65)     ---
2. Boston            (95 - 67)       2
3. New York       (89 - 73)       8
4. Toronto           (86 - 76)      11
5. Baltimore        (68 - 93)      29

The 2008 Standings - Pythagorean records
1. Boston             (95 - 67)      ---
2. Toronto           (93 - 69)        2
3. Tampa Bay     (92 - 70)        3
4. New York       (87 - 75)        8
5. Baltimore        (73 - 88)      22

Very interesting to know that the Jays were actually so, so close! Maybe they should have also switched back to their historic uniforms much sooner as well (So glad to see them back in their classic threads).

The biggest over-achieving team of 2008, goes to the Los Angeles Angels who won 100 games, they were nothing more than a 88-74 team that probably preyed on a weak division.

2009

The World Champion New York Yankees actually over-achieved with their additions of C.C. Sabathia and Mark Teixeira, how is that possible?! Possibly due to Boston losing a few more than they should have, not to mention the typical under-achieving Toronto Blue Jays losing 9 more games than they should have; Blue Jays should have had a winning record of 84-78. The Yankees would have won the division barely over the Boston Red Sox by only 2 games. The Yankees in real life won 103 games, they should have only won 95.

Overachievers? Say what? Yanks added C.C. & Teixiera in  2009.

The Detroit Tigers also over-achieved and should have been nothing more than Even Steven, a 81-81 team, so it would have never came down to Game #163 in which the Minnesota Twins (once again) broke Tigers fans' hearts. Detroit actually went 86-77. Another over-achiever was the Los Angeles Angels winning 5 games more than they should have, but that's nothing compared to their division rival Seattle Mariners who won 85 games when they should have won 75, a ten-game difference!

The other biggest under-achiever next to the Blue Jays was the Cleveland Indians, losing 8 more games than they should have -- yet they still would have had a losing record of 73-89.

2010

Not much differences in 2010 from the real deal, the St. Louis Cardinals under-achieved by 5 games, while the Houston Astros (once again) over-achieved by 8 victories, they should have had a 68-94 record compared to their 76-86 division -- this of course, could be due to the whacky watered-down N.L. Central.

2011

The Detroit Tigers won their first division title since 1987, their first-ever A.L. Central Division crown. According to the Pythagorean record they over-achieved by 6 games, even so, they still win the division since everyone else in the division (except for Kansas City) over-achieved as well. The Cleveland Indians by 5 games & Chicago White Sox by 4 games.

The Milwaukee Brewers won 6 more games than they should have, but still would have won the N.L. Central over eventual World Champion St. Louis. The Cincinnati Reds under-achieved by 4 games, and should have won 83 games.

The Arizona Diamondbacks over-achieved by winning 94 games (6 games over their Pythagorean), sure they still would have won the division, but by only four games over the Los Angeles Dodgers. The San Francisco Giants also over-achieved by 6 games, and should have been sub-.500 at 80-82. The San Diego Padres actually should have been a lot better, 8 games better!

2012

The Athletics won the A.L. West in 2012, catching the Rangers.

Looking at the rest of the recent season of 2012, we have the Chicago White Sox who should have actually won the A.L. Central according to their Pythagorean Record of 88-78, winning the division over the Detroit Tigers by a game. In fact the A.L. Central during this time period of 2007-2012, according to their Pythagorean Records will have the division winners -- winning the division in the high 80's for victories... which is not at all surprising, since the division has kind of declined since peaking around 2006 when the Twins were a force & Cleveland was much better.

Other teams that were slightly over-achievers are the Cincinnati Reds (by 5 games) & actually the World Champion San Francisco Giants (by 6 games), while the St.Louis Cardinals were a much better team than their record indicated (plus I think they proved that in the playoffs as well), in which the team should have won 5 more games & the division by 2 games over the Reds. The Arizona Diamondbacks should have been more competitive than their 81-81 record by winning 86 games.

The Oakland Athletics, a team that wasn't getting any credit whatsoever entering 2012, even flirted with playing headcase Manny Ramirez, was actually on par with their play on the field. Their actual & Pythagorean records are almost identical, a slight difference of winning just two games more than they should have, probably two of those coming at the expense of the Texas Rangers (LOL!)

Last Thoughts
Now someone may argue, I don't buy into these formulas and nonsense, for the most part a lot of these Pythagorean Records matched up perfectly with history's greatest teams, while some of the lousiest teams in history did the same, likewise. Yes, there is a thing called luck & clutch, and there are times we sit back and watch a team do the impossible, and go "How are they doing so well?". I do believe that the Pythagorean records are pretty right on when looking back at history, the Orioles had a great bullpen going for them in 2012, but with bullpens we know it can be hit & miss, and when your team still have a miss of a pitching staff , not to mention that many Asian starting pitchers (like the Orioles' Wei-Yin Chen) usually get figured out -- seriously, name one that has not been figured out -- the team will return to it's state of balance, and in a division where the Rays look good to go, and the Jays are stockpiling, while the Red Sox & Yankees (even if they are not as tough in the past) are still one to battle with... It leaves the O's as the odd man out of the A.L. East in 2013.

My Izzy shout-out to Miguel's accomplishment.

I understand where people come from on these formulas, I agree with Bill James on many things, but then there are times I read his best all-time lists, and I know that he goes on his formulas to decide these lists, I can't say I completely agree with him all the time. So I know there will be someone who will read this, and go 'yeah, well I don't agree with you' & that is absolutely fine.

I heard all the debates when it came to Mike Trout & Miguel Cabrera, who should have won the 2012 American League Most Valuable Player, and I know all these formulas like WAR point towards Trout, but there is two things Trout didn't do, and I think it might just be the old school part of me on this one, but he didn't get the Angels to the post-season and he didn't win the Triple Crown, that took 45 years to finally come around again.

So in many ways, I really believe in this formula.