(The following is being syndicated fromThe Captain’s Blog).
The San Francisco Giants’ championship in 2010 was supposed to usher in a new era of pitching dominance. With offense levels reaching long-time lows, the conventional wisdom suggested that only with a strong starting rotation could a team hope to make the World Series. Then, 2011 happened.
The Texas Rangers and St. Louis Cardinals have each advanced to this year’s Fall Classic despite lackluster starting pitching. In fact, the teams’ respective rotation ERAs of 5.62 and 5.43 rank near the bottom among the field of eight that began the postseason. Even more incredibly, the two teams combined had only one starter go at least six innings ( in game 5 of the ALCS) in their recent LCS triumphs, and the Cardinals actually logged more innings from the bullpen than the starting rotation (28 2/3 vs. 24 1/3) during its victory over the Milwaukee Brewers.
Postseason ERAs by Starting Rotation
| Team | G | Avg GSc | IP | ER | ERA |
| PHI | 5 | 57.8 | 34 | 14 | 3.71 |
| DET | 11 | 51.3 | 59 2/3 | 30 | 4.53 |
| ARI | 5 | 49.2 | 28 | 15 | 4.82 |
| NYY | 5 | 47.6 | 20 1/3 | 11 | 4.87 |
| TBR | 4 | 49.5 | 22 2/3 | 13 | 5.16 |
| STL | 11 | 45.5 | 54 2/3 | 33 | 5.43 |
| TEX | 10 | 45.0 | 49 2/3 | 31 | 5.62 |
| MIL | 11 | 40.3 | 55 1/3 | 43 | 6.99 |
| Total | 62 | 47.2 | 324 1/3 | 190 | 5.27 |
Source: Baseball-reference.com
So, how exactly have the Rangers and Cardinals managed to survive with such poor starting pitching? Dominant relief pitching and lots of runs scored. In 42 2/3 innings a piece, Texas’ and St. Louis’ relievers have posted ERAs of 2.34 and 2.55, respectively, while their offenses have averaged at least 5.5 runs per game. Only the Yankees achieved more impressive rates in both categories, which makes the Bronx Bombers’ loss to the Tigers an even greater example of the randomness of postseason outcomes.
Pitching/Offensive Performance of 2011 Playoff Teams
| Team | G | RS | RA | Diff/G | Starters ERA | Bullpen ERA | R/G |
| NYY | 5 | 28 | 17 | 2.2 | 4.87 | 1.90 | 5.6 |
| STL | 11 | 62 | 47 | 1.4 | 5.43 | 2.55 | 5.6 |
| TBR | 4 | 21 | 16 | 1.3 | 5.16 | 2.19 | 5.3 |
| TEX | 10 | 55 | 46 | 0.9 | 5.62 | 2.34 | 5.5 |
| ARI | 5 | 25 | 23 | 0.4 | 4.82 | 4.70 | 5.0 |
| PHI | 5 | 21 | 19 | 0.4 | 3.71 | 4.50 | 4.2 |
| MIL | 11 | 49 | 68 | -1.7 | 6.99 | 4.20 | 4.5 |
| DET | 11 | 42 | 67 | -2.3 | 4.53 | 8.01 | 3.8 |
Source: Baseball-reference.com
What makes the relatively poor pitching in this year’s postseason seem so stark is the comparison to last year. In 2010, postseason starters compiled an ERA of 3.35, the third lowest rate during the wild card era. This year, however, the composite ERA of 5.27 would rank next to last. Although the two run difference represents a seismic shift, it’s worth noting that neither year stands out considerably. Instead, the performance of starters in October has seemed to fluctuate randomly.
Starters’ Performance in the Postseason, Since 1995
Note: Bars depict Game Score. Line depicts ERA.
Source: Baseball-reference.com
So, if starting pitching doesn’t win championships, what does? It might be a simple answer, but the best way to win the World Series is by using the same formula that applies during the regular season: score more runs than your opponent. Whether a team relies on dominant starters, a shutdown bullpen, or a lineup of sluggers, the bottom line remains the same. Championships are won on the scoreboard, not by comparing the line score for each team’s starting rotation.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
I don’t think anyone should look at this years World Series teams and think pitching doesn’t win championships. The Yankees have tried to bash their way to rings before, and it dikdnt work until we had pitching in place to compliment it. You still need great pitching in this league, and you need to hold the runs scored of your opponent down. As we saw against the Tigers even a great offense can go though times when they simply can’t hit well. I think this year the Rangers and Cardinals offenses just got hot at the right time, and to some degree I think it’s an aberration.
I think you can win a World Series with offense, and I think you can win a World Series with pitching, but I think pitching is the more consistent way of doing so. I may be wrong, but it’s my opinion on the subject.
The premise of this post isn’t that pitching isn’t important. However, I am suggesting that the emphasis on elite STARTING pitching is overrated. This year, the Cardinals and Rangers have relied on offense and strong relief pitching, which has proven to be just as viable a means to success (and the chart above shows 2011 isn’t an aberration).
Yet if the same post would have been drafted in 2005, the argument would have been bullpens are overrated. I think there are many paths to the WS goal, and frankly I don’t think October baseball is significantly different than baseball in June. It just gets scrutinized more closely.
Maybe I’m wrong but doesn’t the chart map all starters in the postseason per year? Wouldn’t it be more helpful to map the ERA of teams that make it to the World Series per year? I would be much more interested in seeing that chart.
No, you’re right. I was just responding to his comment about starting pitching being overrated. And that’s not to say I think his argument is wrong either, I’m simply saying there isn’t any one way to do it. William’s post shows that pretty clearly. Frankly I’m not sure what being a WS winner proves, anyway. It certainly doesn’t mean you’re the best team.
It makes you feel happy… haha
You’re correct. The chart above shows all starters. To answer your question (or at least part of it), of the 34 WS participants since 1995, 11 have had a starters ERA below the average for the entire PS. Also, seven had starters’ ERAs above 5.00 and another five had starters’ ERAs between 4.00-5.00. Finally, 11 had starters’ ERA between 3-4.00, while 11 had starters’ ERA below 3.00.
So 22 had ERA’s of 4.00 or lower? I think that shows an importance of starting pitching in reaching the World Series. Which is the Yankees goal year in and year out. I wonder if the numbers show it’s better to have a rotation of good pitchers but not stud, or one stud and fill in starters around him of varying levels?
Good starting pitching is important, but it isn’t the end all. Convention wisdom seems to suggest that you need good starting pitching to make the WS, but 1/3 of teams made it without. That’s a pretty significant number, in my opinion.
The problem with your question is how to define stud. If based on regular season, that diverges from what’s presented here (i.e., actual starters’ performance in the postseason).
I mean it goes without saying that if you can’t hit, you simply can’t win. But I do think it’s easier to hold down and opponents scoring over having to murder every pitcher you face with run after run.
Postseason sample size is too small, you’d have to rank pitchers based on the 170-200+ inning they pitched in the regular season. Put simply I guess, is it better to have CC with some OK guys around him. Or is it better to have a 4 pitchers who while not “aces” are all high number 3′s or better. It may not be a question so easily answered however, since I’m sure GMs have been trying to figure this out for years.