Earlier this season, ChrisF and I were discussing how we should look at the wins versus the Phillies. The crux of the issue was: Could we claim them as “good” wins as the Phillies were under .500 at the time the Mets played them? This discussion came to mind yesterday while reading this comment from Gus:
I feel the Padres and Giants are both as big a threat to the Dodgers as the Braves/Phillies are to the Mets
In one way, it’s hard to argue with this, as any team that you play 19 times is a threat. But can two teams hovering around .500 as the Braves (28-27) and Phillies (25-29) be thought of as equal threats as two teams in the Padres and Giants who are a combined 16 games over .500? It seemed a tiny bit crazy to me. Then Wobbit chimed in with, “Couldn’t agree more with Gus. The Braves and Phillies might wind up close to 90 wins in the end.”
In the past two full seasons, we’ve witnessed NL East clubs who started off poorly storming back to make the playoffs and win the World Series. In 2019, the Nationals were 19-31 before finishing with 93 wins. Last year the Braves were 30-35 yet ended the season with 88 wins and a division title, as they finished with a 12-2 run in their final 14 games.
Those two teams prove it can be done. But we would have no trouble at all finding teams with similar records who didn’t come close to duplicating what the Nationals and Braves did. In 2019, when the Nats were 12 games under .500 with a .380 winning percentage, on the same day the Blue Jays were 20-30 (.400) and the Tigers were 18-30 (.375) making them good comps. The Blue Jays finished 67-95 and the Tigers’ final record was 47-114.
Last year on the same date that the Braves were 30-35 with a .462 winning percentage, the Royals were 30-37 (.448) and the Nats were also 30-35. The Royals finished 74-88 and the Nats were 65-97 at the end of the season.
So, in our tiny six-team sample, four teams finished under .500 while the other two teams won at least 88 games. My opinion is if we went back 10 years and took the teams closest to the respective records of the 2019 Nationals and 2021 Braves at their lowest, we’d find more of the same. In fact, if our sample was 20 teams, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if not another club finished with 88 wins.
Essentially, if you bet on teams under .500 in late-May, early-June to finish with 88 or more wins, you’re going to lose many, many more times than you win. So, why do Gus and Wobbit think that both the Braves and Phillies can turn that trick this season? Darned if I know.
But pondering that helped me think of a way to potentially answer the original question of how should we view the wins against the Phillies. Thru roughly one-third of the season, the Phillies have played a disproportionate number of games against the Mets and have a 3-9 record in those contests. What if we look at their record against the rest of MLB? Take away the results versus the Mets and the Phillies are 22-20. That’s not great but at least it shows a winning record.
What follows is a chart of teams in the National League and includes their current results along with what their record would be if we eliminated their results against the one team that had their number. The final columns is the team we are eliminating from their results:
| Team | Record | Adj. Record | Team |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mets | 38-19 | 37-17 | Mariners |
| Braves | 28-27 | 27-25 | D’Backs |
| Phillies | 25-29 | 22-20 | Mets |
| Marlins | 22-30 | 21-25 | D’Backs |
| Nats | 21-35 | 19-27 | Mets |
| Brewers | 33-23 | 30-19 | Padres |
| Cardinals | 32-23 | 30-18 | Mets |
| Pirates | 24-28 | 24-22 | Brewers |
| Cubs | 23-32 | 23-29 | Dodgers |
| Reds | 19-35 | 19-29 | Padres |
| Dodgers | 35-19 | 34-14 | Pirates |
| Padres | 33-22 | 33-19 | Cardinals |
| Giants | 29-24 | 29-22 | Dodgers |
| Diamondbacks | 26-30 | 24-21 | Dodgers |
| Rockies | 23-31 | 23-27 | Braves |
It’s hard to say that this means anything; it might be nothing more than somewhat interesting. However, if you want it to mean something, you might target the Phillies, Pirates and D’Backs as teams with losing records to potentially make a run towards 88+ wins.
While compiling this, one thing jumped out to me. The Braves have played 13 different opponents and against 12 of those, they are either one game above .500 or .500 or one game below .500 against that team. The only exception is the Rockies, who they just swept in a 4-game series. Against the rest of baseball, they’re 24-27.
Maybe the Rockies series is the start of an extended streak of good results for Atlanta. Or maybe the Braves just got a Coors Field boost (30 runs scored in four games against a sub-par team) and the reality is they’re nothing more than a .500 club.
Old baseball wisdom is that you spend 1/3 of the season figuring out what you need, the next 1/3 getting what you need and the final 1/3 playing with the best team you can get. Both the 2019 Nats and the 2021 Braves bolstered their teams in a big way in the middle 1/3 of the season. Until we see what teams do to improve their chances at winning this season, it’s next to impossible to predict how they’ll finish the year.
But I’d still wager against every team with a sub-.500 record falling short of 88 wins. Maybe one team does it but with 16 teams currently with a losing record, those are some bad odds.
The Phillies are perhaps one of the worst defensive teams I have ever seen, and unless they start scoring 10 runs a game no new manager is going to make Nick Castellanos the better right fielder. That is an 81-81 team if I ever saw one. The Braves get the benefit of the doubt as the reigning Champs, and they have Acuna back. But I think 88 is their cap. Neither it’s likely to make the playoffs at this rate.
With 107 games left, the Braves would have to go 60-47 to get to 88 wins.
That team is certainly capable of that. Olson, Albies, Swanson, and Riley an elite infield; Acuna and anyone else a respectable OF. Add a better than average pitching staff and superior coaching… uh, yeah. The one factor standing in their way… playing the Mets too many games.
The Phillies would need to go 63-45. A tougher road for not as complete a team as Atlanta. But if Wheeler, Nola, Suarez, and Efflin get going, they could have quite the late season. I can’t imagine that they could overtake either the Mets or the Braves, but they are going to hurt a lot of teams in the warmer weather.
These things tend to come down to injuries and other hardships… in other words depth and character. The Braves won it all last year so they believe in themselves. The Mets are getting there. The Phillies are ragtag by comparison, but still dangerous… they have an MVP. Any way you look at it, the NL East is better than people think.
The point of Chris is the old adage that division wins are more important. I belive that. Winning the division positions the team better when it comes to Playoffs. I feel the Mets fortunate that the East is weaker than the West so that they can get the coveted two positions for the playoffs. The Brewers are the most fortunate because their division is very weak.
I would not like to play 19 games against the Giants and Padres instead of the Braves and Phillies. Would you Gus and Wobbit? Even Jill from Accounting wouldn’t!
Right now, in the NL, 88 wins (.547 %) will did you go to the diluted playoffs.
Just take a look at the intra-league standings only for the NL by Division 6/6/22
West 91-80 ( vs E 50-48, vs C 41-32)
East 68- 70 ( vs W 48-50, vs C 20-20)
Central 52-61 ( vs E 20-20, vs W 32-41)
Good stuff – thanks for posting!
Divisional wins are problematically paradoxical. When you win, you worsen the strength of schedule because the division foe just lost another game! The key to raising the level of one’s conference is beating the teams outside the conference. We want the Braves and Phillies to beat up on the Cubs, Reds, DBacks, Cards, etc, but lose to us.
I believe both the Phillies and Braves will do excessively well against lower foes, and maybe even hold their own against Giants, Pads, Dodgers, and Brews. Might I suggest that the NL East will emerge as the strongest in the NL.
The question is quite interesting and highlights (1) the oddities of an unbalanced schedule and (2) the size of the country leading to divisions and unbalanced schedules.
I also follow Premier League football. All 20 teams are in essentially 1 division. Each plays each other the same number of times. Of course, the entire league has an areas about Boston to DC and west to Ohio so travel is pretty small. The schedules are balanced and these kinds of discussions dont exist.
Unbalanced schedules make for the inequities we see in divisions. But one thing that never changes is just how good is the win against a team at any particular time. When we first talked about this, the Angels were a serious threat when looking at the June schedule. I no long see the Halos as a good team after the 12 loss run.
Chris, Next year the schedule will be more balanced and I’m for it.
14 ×4 = 56 intra division
6 × 10 = 60 intra league
14 x 3 = 42 inter league
4 x 1 = 4 your rival
162 total
I am thrilled with the current lead the Mets have built. Nonetheless, the Braves and Phillies are most certainly still a threat to the Mets, and more so the Braves given their pedigree. But, at this stage, that has more to do with the Mets than it does with the Braves or Phillies.