|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE |  |
Picking this season's Ultimate Locks
Posted: Tuesday March 28, 2000 12:06 PM
To send a question to Tom Verducci's Mailbag, click here. "Spring training records are completely
meaningless."
I am here to tell you not to listen to the Yankees and Dodgers, who mostly have stunk up the Grapefruit League. I am here to tell you that sometimes spring training records do matter, that sometimes they are tea leaves. If you know how to read them, they can predict the future. I am here to tell you I have a reserved seat on the Expos' and Twins' bandwagons. All aboard. (Plenty of good seats still available.) Based on what they've done this spring, Montreal and Minnesota are my picks as teams guaranteed to be better than they were last year. The Kansas City Royals are close to joining them. Let me explain the Ultimate Lock Theory. Some years ago the Elias Sports Bureau published an annual statistical abstract that delved into the meaning of numbers with touches of humor, insight and unpretentiousness like no one before or since. The 1990 Elias Baseball Analyst included a nugget that I had forgotten about until this spring, when the woes of New York and Los Angeles prompted complete dismissals of spring training won-lost records. The good people of Elias came up with a formula so foolproof it could have been used as a predictor for such breakout teams as the 1981 Oakland Athletics, the 1987 Minnesota Twins and the 1988 Los Angeles Dodgers. The formula guarantees an improved season for any club that: 1) played at least five games worse than .500 the previous season in one-run games, and 2) posted a spring training winning percentage at least 100 points better than its regular season record the previous season. From 1980-88, 21 teams met those two criteria. Every one of them improved its record from the previous season, by an average of 15 wins. Why would this be? Start with one-run games. Contrary to popular belief, they are a better indicator of luck than skill. Take a six-run game, for instance. The better team almost always wins those. The smaller the margin of victory, the more luck is involved in deciding that game. So teams with a bad record in one-run games one year generally improve the next. As for spring training records, why should they matter? Generally, they do give an indication of how a team will play during the season. Yes, there is a ton of anecdotal evidence to contradict that, but for every 1999 Yankees (14-19 in spring training) there are two 1997 Florida Marlins (26-5). So what do you get when you take a team that had poor luck in one-run games and then had themselves a boffo spring training? Your basic sleeper pick. But wait. You have to wonder if a 21-for-21 track record that worked when Rick Springfield and Gordon Gekko were hot means anything these days. So I ran the formula for each of the past five seasons. Here's what happened: seven teams met both criteria. Every one of them improved its record, by an average of 13 wins. For instance, if you ran this formula on Opening Day last year you would have known that the Diamondbacks (+35), Pirates (+9), Devil Rays (+6) and Mariners (+3) were all locks to improve. In 1998 you would have been unsurprised by a comeback season by the division-winning Texas Rangers (+11). And in 1997 you would have said about the otherwise stunning breakout season by the division-winning San Francisco Giants (+22), "Told you so." So I'd say 7-for-7 makes the formula worth using again. Let's start with the seven teams that played five games worse then .500 last year in one-run games: the Expos, Marlins, Dodgers, Brewers, Royals, Orioles and Twins. Now let's look for signs of improved play this spring. Montreal, winner of 68 games last year, seems more likely to experience the average 13- to 15-game jump the formula portends. A .500 season might not be surprising, given a full year from pitcher Carl Pavano; the rise of pitcher Dustin Hermanson (2.95 ERA after the All-Star break last year); the addition of veteran pitchers Hideki Irabu and Graeme Lloyd; and the lefthanded bat of first baseman Lee Stevens to protect the amazing Vladimir Guerrero (every bit as dangerous as Ken Griffey Jr., though he's six years younger and still is learning the strike zone). "He is a phenom," Montreal manager Felipe Alou says, "and with a phenom you don't put limits on what he can do. He can do whatever he wants. If he wants to hit 50 home runs, he'll hit 50. If he wants to hit 60 home runs, he'll hit 60." As for Minnesota, the Twins are the ultimate test of the Ultimate Lock Theory. They don't have two players who combined will hit as many home runs as Guerrero. They lost their closer (Mike Trombley) and they probably will trade their best starting pitcher (Brad Radke) in July. This is a team that scored the fewest runs and hit the fewest home runs in the American League last year. This is a team that won only 63 games all year. Its biggest new acquisition is Butch Huskey. You tell yourself they can't possibly be as bad as they were last year. Then you look at their spring training record and you are absolutely sure they won't be. They'll be better. Spring training results do matter. Sports Illustrated senior writer Tom Verducci will contribute weekly Inside Baseball columns to CNNSI.com all season. To send a question to Verducci's Mailbag, click here. The opinions expressed here are solely those of the
writer.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
