What's the deal with the Dodgers?

[barrysloate]

So the Dodgers had perhaps the greatest two month run in baseball history, going something like 55-11, and immediately follow it with some of the worst baseball ever played, going 1-17. How is this possible?

If you're a fan of unusual stats, these back-to-back streaks have to be among the most bizarre ever. What's going on? Can anyone explain what is happening?

[clydepepper]

Certainly, these Dodgers are the streakiest team around...with apologies to the Indianss.

the Dodgers: ---------------------the Indians:

6/7-6/26 16W-1L--------------first six post-AS games 1W-5L

6/29-7/19 14W-1L--------------since then, CLE had a 9 & 6-game win streak

7/22-8/6 13W-1L--------------before the current 20-game winning streak


8/26-9/11 1W-16L

Interesting to note: 24,654 attended Cleveland's 20th straight victory (at home) while 50,161 attended the Dodgers 10th straight loss (also at home).

[TUM301]

They had a poll during the Red Sox game last nite for the viewers at home, vote for one as more surprising, Indians 20 game winning/L A`s 11 game losing streak. Thought it was a cool poll and know how I voted. The T V broadcasters, one being Dennis Eckersley, were split.

[clydepepper]

Always a thorn in the Yankees' paw:

These streaking Cleveland Indians are being comparing, due to their run differential during the streak, to the 1939 Yankees who hold the all-time single season run differential of an amazing 411!

The Yanks were 106-45 that year. They started the year beating the Red Sox 2-0, HOF Ruffing over HOF Grove.

However, this great team's longest loosing streak - 6 games - beginning with 5straight losses to those same Red Sox at Yankee Stadium.

Boston finished fourth that year, but, they did have something to say for 5 games.

.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

So the Dodgers had perhaps the greatest two month run in baseball history, going something like 55-11, and immediately follow it with some of the worst baseball ever played, going 1-17. How is this possible?

If you're a fan of unusual stats, these back-to-back streaks have to be among the most bizarre ever. What's going on? Can anyone explain what is happening?

At least the Dodgers are in 1st place. The 1916 Giants started the season 2-13, then they won 17 games in a row. At the end of the season they won 26 in a row to finish in 4th place.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by rats60

At least the Dodgers are in 1st place. The 1916 Giants started the season 2-13, then they won 17 games in a row. At the end of the season they won 26 in a row to finish in 4th place.

The Dodgers could still finish behind the Dbacks, Nationals, Red Sox, Astros and Indians, all of whom could end the season with more than the Dodgers' current 96 wins.

[KMayUSA6060]

26 days ago, the Indians were 20 games in back of the Dodgers for the best record in baseball. After last night, they are 1 game back. Come on Phillies!

[packs]

The other day I heard analysts discussing who would start game 2 of their eventual playoff series. But in my mind they should be talking about who will start game 1. Wood, Darvish, Kershaw, none of them have particularly good track records in the post-season.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

26 days ago, the Indians were 20 games in back of the Dodgers for the best record in baseball. After last night, they are 1 game back. Come on Phillies!

How did home field work out for the Indians last year?

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by rats60

How did home field work out for the Indians last year?

Worked pretty well. Swept the Red Sox, cleaned Toronto's clock pretty good, then reached extra innings of Game 7 of the World Series. Mind you, this was all without their #2, #3, and for a period their #4 starters. They also didn't have their All Star LF, and their starting C was out until late in the World Series.

Jumped out to a 1-0 series lead in the World Series thanks to home field advantage, too. Couldn't finish, but that was largely due to the injuries mentioned above.

Additionally, if it does happen to be the Indians vs. a West Coast team, home field advantage would play a much larger role due to the strenuous travel across the US.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

So the Dodgers had perhaps the greatest two month run in baseball history, going something like 55-11, and immediately follow it with some of the worst baseball ever played, going 1-17. How is this possible?

If you're a fan of unusual stats, these back-to-back streaks have to be among the most bizarre ever. What's going on? Can anyone explain what is happening?

Of course. There is nothing at all wrong with the Dodgers--they simply descended back to reality, i.e., came back to earth. Among position players, they really only have 3 outstanding players--Bellinger, Seager and Turner--and other than Kershaw, the balance of the starters were pitching well above their norm. A lengthy losing streak is precisely how reality corrects for the statistical anomaly of their unlikely winning streak. In short, they never, ever were truly a 115-116 win team.

Hi Barry,

Larry

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Of course. There is nothing at all wrong with the Dodgers--they simply descended back to reality, i.e., came back to earth. Among position players, they really only have 3 outstanding players--Bellinger, Seager and Turner--and other than Kershaw, the balance of the starters were pitching well above their norm. A lengthy losing streak is precisely how reality corrects for the statistical anomaly of their unlikely winning streak. In short, they never, ever were truly a 115-116 win team.

Hi Barry,

Larry

Well they did add Yu Darvish who they didnt have in 1h.......Kershaw and a healty Darvish is a tough series

People forget that 60% of the games in the regular season dont really matter when looking into the postseason. Those are games started by #3, #4, #5 and even #6 starters sometimes..

If you are telling me the Dodgers were 1-4 the last 5 games when Kershaw started that would mean something if there was a long losing streak

If the Dodgers only won 8 of their last 20 games..but those 8 wins were by Kersahaw and Darvish..would those 12 losses really mean anything? I know not that simple but you know what i mean. Who cares if they lost the last 5 games started by Brandon McCarthy

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Well they did add Yu Darvish who they didnt have in 1h.......Kershaw and a healty Darvish is a tough series

People forget that 60% of the games in the regular season dont really matter when looking into the postseason. Those are games started by #3, #4, #5 and even #6 starters sometimes..

If you are telling me the Dodgers were 1-4 the last 5 games when Kershaw started that would mean something if there was a long losing streak

If the Dodgers only won 8 of their last 20 games..but those 8 wins were by Kersahaw and Darvish..would those 12 losses really mean anything? I know not that simple but you know what i mean. Who cares if they lost the last 5 games started by Brandon McCarthy

Kershaw's post season record to date isn't all that remarkable and Darvish as a Dodger isn't either. The Dodgers may win it all, but not because of your argument. There is usually a Brandon McCarthy type who plays a pivotal, unexpected role in a short series. Don Larsen was 3-21 with the Orioles (1954) before his World Series Perfecto in 1956.

Identifying which team the unexpected hero plays for before the playoffs is the problem.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Kershaw's post season record to date isn't all that remarkable and Darvish as a Dodger isn't either. The Dodgers may win it all, but not because of your argument. There is usually a Brandon McCarthy type who plays a pivotal, unexpected role in a short series. Don Larsen was 3-21 with the Orioles (1954) before his World Series Perfecto in 1956.

Identifying which team the unexpected hero plays for before the playoffs is the problem.

Understood, but in your argument it doesnt matter if the dodgers won their last 15 games of the year or lost the last 15 if we are just going on what we believe certain pitchers do in the postseason and talking about unknown surprises Last year though Kershaw was very good in the postseason by the way if not great.

Thus, basically it doesnt matter then if a first place teams ends up losing their last 50 games..if their best player are great in the post season and the many many unknown surprises of players who could suck in the regular season be great in the postseason

If kershaw and Darvish win 6 games in the post season etc, that would further show who cares how the #3 to #5 pitchers did for them in many losses..we shall see..

However my point was that if you think regular season record matters during the last 30 games or whatever i would be more concerned how the #1 and #2 pitchers did not the rest of them. In post season #1 pitchers pitch more often as well

.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Understood, but in your argument it doesnt matter if the dodgers won their last 15 games of the year or lost the last 15 if we are just going on what we believe certain pitchers do in the postseason and talking about unknown surprises Last year though Kershaw was very good in the postseason by the way if not great.

Thus, basically it doesnt matter then if a first place teams ends up losing their last 50 games..if their best player are great in the post season and the many many unknown surprises of players who could suck in the regular season be great in the postseason

If kershaw and Darvish win 6 games in the post season etc, that would further show who cares how the #3 to #5 pitchers did for them in many losses..we shall see..

However my point was that if you think regular season record matters during the last 30 games or whatever i would be more concerned how the #1 and #2 pitchers did not the rest of them. In post season #1 pitchers pitch more often as well

.

The reason to play the games is the uncertainty of the outcomes. The 1954 Cleveland Indians won 111 games with four starters who won 80.

No, the regular season is not predictive of post season results. It determines who plays, but not the results.

Ask the 1954 New York Giants who swept the Tribe with the help of their unexpected hero, Dusty Rhodes.