MLB Lists/Ranking: How meaningful can some be?

Exactly how much do MLB lists and rankings mean?

The reply to my tweet was the fourth in a friendly MLB dispute with a woman who is a passionate Boston Red Sox fan. It was like those I’ve had in the past with this Twitter correspondent: “Every team in that division sucks. They’re the least sucky.”

This was a response to my assertion that the Minnesota Twins were not as bad she had suggested minutes earlier, after she had launched a rhetorical question into cyberspace: “I thought the Twins were supposed to be good this year?”

She was watching a Twins blown-out loss because the Sawks had been rained out May 30, or that was my assumption. I had replied idly to her question by pointing out Minnesota was in first place by 9½ games.

The intermediate level of the exchange included her assertion that “the AL Central is pathetic.”

Pathetic, then sucky – the whole division. The de facto ranking of the division still led by the Twins several days later as the worst triggered a search through my emails for an unopened message I vaguely recalled, but the Twitter exchange had rung a bell.

The unread email was from The Athletic, and it highlighted an article written May 16 that also ranked another whole division as possibly the worst – again, the whole division, but this time, the NL East. Tim Britton’s title was “What if the NL East is just…bad?”

More from Call to the Pen

• Philadelphia Phillies, ready for a stretch run, bomb St. Louis Cardinals
• Philadelphia Phillies: The 4 players on the franchise’s Mount Rushmore
• Boston Red Sox fans should be upset over Mookie Betts’ comment
• Analyzing the Boston Red Sox trade for Dave Henderson and Spike Owen
• 2023 MLB postseason likely to have a strange look without Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals

Can a Whole Division Be Bad?

When, I wondered, did condemning whole divisions become a thing? Or more precisely, how meaningful is such analysis when an MLB season is inside a third of the way finished?

Britton’s condemnation of the NL East, thought to be quite powerful after several teams significantly reloaded in the off-season, is quite a careful and thorough piece. For those who don’t pay for The Athletic, our analyst begins by pointing out those pre-season assumptions, highlighted by pertinent quotations, and eventually works himself around to:

“The Phillies have the worst record of any first-place team. The Braves have the second-worst record of any second-place team. The Nationals have the worst record of any fourth-place team. The Marlins have the worst record.” Who knows what was up with the mysterious exclusion of the New York Mets.

After these observations, Britton goes on to point out generally unpleasant facts about the NL East, ranking by records outside a team’s division, ranking the division’s aggregate record in terms of series against out-of-division teams, ranking winning percentages against other divisions’ teams, and ranking total run differentials by team.

Oops, the Phillies came in third in the NL in that last consideration, so better keep going. And so Britton does. Next he decides “to use second-order winning percentage, which looks at what your winning percentage should be based off projected run differential.” And then there comes “third-order winning percentage, which accounts for schedule strength,” but by then, I’d bet, most readers were skimming, always a problem lurking around the corner for anything read on a screen, as studies have shown.

Does Such Thoroughness Count for Anything at All?

OK, analysis can be dry, but this is the 21st century, and writers assume that fans want it.

We know the general and field managers do, but do those individuals and their analytic wonks actually ever sit back and say, “Hey, we’re in good shape because 12 of our next 16 are against the worst division”?

I don’t think so, and here’s why: Any such analysis is quickly, if not instantly, meaningless. Here’s how we know that. On June 1, I went to MLB.com with the intention of testing the durability of Britton’s implied ranking of the NL East as worst. It was mid-afternoon.

The writer’s initial ranking system was somewhat rearranged. The Phillies, that day, were no longer in last place among first-place teams. They were second to last.

The Braves had also moved up, from second to third worst among second-place teams, which is to say, pretty much the middle of the pack. There are only six divisions.

The Mets had been ignored by our Athletic writer, so why be any more thorough on that point now?

The Nationals had also moved, from worst fourth-place team to third worst (again, just under the middle), and the Marlins, Britton’s worst team of all was also, just a bit over two weeks later, the third worst last-place team. The other data in The Athletic piece, I guarantee, would have changed as well.

In a matter of another three or four weeks, perhaps somebody will be writing about the NL East – or maybe the AL Central – as the strongest division, and even if true then, it will be no more meaningful.

But hey, arguing is what baseball fandom is all about. Just ask George Will, the Washington Post columnist and baseball fan. That’s what he said on CBS Sunday Morning June 2.