As Good As This Team Has Been, They Seem To Have Trouble Beating Talented Teams Outside The Division.

[drjohnnyfever1]

6 hours ago, TheWall said:

Holy small sample size Batman. We have one of the best records in the MLB against teams above .500, but for some reason you think the team inherently struggles against good NL teams? 

Despite it's size, it is, perhaps, noteworthy.  Similarly, against the AL West we are 14-10.  We've split with the Rangers, are 1-2 against Houston, 2-2 against the Angels, 4-2 against Seattle, 4-1 against Oakland so far.  What do those NL teams and the Rangers, Astros, and Angels have in common?  The best pitching we've faced.  If we can manage to 2-1 the Angels and 2-1 the Astros in their remaining series, both in September, then, for me, the NL stat is less meaningful because our record against those better NL teams is only due to the single series we have with them, giving us no chance to balance out the stat as we do when we see the AL teams at least twice.

Not disputing our overall record at all.  As someone earlier in the discussion said, you hope to go .500 against the good teams and beat up on the sub .500 teams.  We've done that.  And I grant that other than "feeling" that we don't do well against good NL teams, it's likely not that meaningful, particularly if we do well against .500+ teams like the the rest of the way.  Makes you confident that given the chance the O's would balance those out too. 

[TheWall]

9 minutes ago, drjohnnyfever1 said:

Despite it's size, it is, perhaps, noteworthy.  Similarly, against the AL West we are 14-10.  We've split with the Rangers, are 1-2 against Houston, 2-2 against the Angels, 4-2 against Seattle, 4-1 against Oakland so far.  What do those NL teams and the Rangers, Astros, and Angels have in common?  The best pitching we've faced.  If we can manage to 2-1 the Angels and 2-1 the Astros in their remaining series, both in September, then, for me, the NL stat is less meaningful because our record against those better NL teams is only due to the single series we have with them, giving us no chance to balance out the stat as we do when we see the AL teams at least twice.

Not disputing our overall record at all.  As someone earlier in the discussion said, you hope to go .500 against the good teams and beat up on the sub .500 teams.  We've done that.  And I grant that other than "feeling" that we don't do well against good NL teams, it's likely not that meaningful, particularly if we do well against .500+ teams like the the rest of the way.  Makes you confident that given the chance the O's would balance those out too. 

If Felix doesn't give up a Grand Slam against Houston we're 2-1 against them. That's how small sample sizes work and we hit fine in that series.  We have easily the 2nd best record in the Majors against teams above .500 and if your cherry picked stats are noteworthy than every team except for Atlanta is in trouble. 

Edited August 19, 2023 by TheWall

[drjohnnyfever1]

9 minutes ago, TheWall said:

If Felix doesn't give up a Grand Slam against Houston we're 2-1 against them. That's how small sample sizes work and we hit fine in that series.  We have easily the 2nd best record in the Majors against teams above .500 and if your cherry picked stats are noteworthy than every team except for Atlanta is in trouble. 

No cherry picking.  It's a fact.  A small sample size, but it doesn't diminish it truth.  We'll have to agree to disagree.  Go O's.

[foxfield]

It is a fact. And it is a small sample size. You cannot dismiss it outright, but it would be a mistake to put too much emphasis on it. 

[tntoriole]

15 hours ago, drjohnnyfever1 said:

Despite it's size, it is, perhaps, noteworthy.  Similarly, against the AL West we are 14-10.  We've split with the Rangers, are 1-2 against Houston, 2-2 against the Angels, 4-2 against Seattle, 4-1 against Oakland so far.  What do those NL teams and the Rangers, Astros, and Angels have in common?  The best pitching we've faced.  If we can manage to 2-1 the Angels and 2-1 the Astros in their remaining series, both in September, then, for me, the NL stat is less meaningful because our record against those better NL teams is only due to the single series we have with them, giving us no chance to balance out the stat as we do when we see the AL teams at least twice.

Not disputing our overall record at all.  As someone earlier in the discussion said, you hope to go .500 against the good teams and beat up on the sub .500 teams.  We've done that.  And I grant that other than "feeling" that we don't do well against good NL teams, it's likely not that meaningful, particularly if we do well against .500+ teams like the the rest of the way.  Makes you confident that given the chance the O's would balance those out too. 

If you look at any other team in baseball except the Braves, then their record is worse than ours.  Meaning they have had more bad games, more losses this season than us.  Meaning this season we are better than they are.  Sheesh 

[tntoriole]

There are some people who if we went 161-1 would say .. well those wins were all close ones, those teams we beat are really superstars even though they have played like crap, we do need to add to our pitching next year to really compete, our prospects aren’t getting promoted fast enough, and that one loss was a bad one against a team we have to beat to get to the World Series.  
sheesh 

[drjohnnyfever1]

39 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

If you look at any other team in baseball except the Braves, then their record is worse than ours.  Meaning they have had more bad games, more losses this season than us.  Meaning this season we are better than they are.  Sheesh 

 

35 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

There are some people who if we went 161-1 would say .. well those wins were all close ones, those teams we beat are really superstars even though they have played like crap, we do need to add to our pitching next year to really compete, our prospects aren’t getting promoted fast enough, and that one loss was a bad one against a team we have to beat to get to the World Series.  
sheesh 

Totally agree about post 1, it's an observation that some of us noticed about our record against good NL teams, not a condemnation of the Orioles and what they continue to accomplish.  What is so difficult to understand about that?  Goodness, mole hill meet mountain.

On the flip side of your position, any seeming criticism of a good team is met with publik shaming.  Sad. 

Go O's.

Edited August 20, 2023 by drjohnnyfever1

[drjohnnyfever1]

51 minutes ago, foxfield said:

It is a fact. And it is a small sample size. You cannot dismiss it outright, but it would be a mistake to put too much emphasis on it. 

I don't think I did.  I also pointed out that we don't get another shot at those teams unless we see them in the WS.  But I think it points to paying particular attention to any remaining series against the Astros and other AL teams who have similar + pitching staffs.  That was the only point of stat.  And in an earlier post I conceded that if there is a split or better in those types of series than it is a non-stat, meaningless.

[Nite]

The problem with the vs good NL team argument is that it's a single series. The O's if I remember also blew a game in Atlanta and should have beat them. It's hard to take anything from a single series that doesn't have a second one to balance out.

[drjohnnyfever1]

4 minutes ago, Nite said:

The problem with the vs good NL team argument is that it's a single series. The O's if I remember also blew a game in Atlanta and should have beat them. It's hard to take anything from a single series that doesn't have a second one to balance out.

Thanks.  That's correct... as I also pointed out earlier.

[baltfan]

Looks like the Seattle team they took 2/3 from had like an 8 game win streak before and is unbeaten since the Orioles left.  Pretty impressive by the Orioles. 

[SteveA]

17 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Looks like the Seattle team they took 2/3 from had like an 8 game win streak before and is unbeaten since the Orioles left.  Pretty impressive by the Orioles. 

Yep Seattle has won 21 of 28 yet we managed to take 2 of 3 from them on the road against 3 of their best pitchers.   

[SteveA]

2 hours ago, Nite said:

The problem with the vs good NL team argument is that it's a single series. The O's if I remember also blew a game in Atlanta and should have beat them. It's hard to take anything from a single series that doesn't have a second one to balance out.

Exactly.  And let's say we had won 2 out of 3 vs Atlanta and a couple of those other teams, but we still had the same record we do.  That means we would have lost a bit more to some other subset of teams, maybe teams with bird mascots or teams with blue uniforms.  So our record would be weaker vs those and someone could cherry pick that stat and pretend it means something other than random variance.

There's nothing inherently different about NL teams than AL teams anymore.  We all have the DH and the same rules.  Any cherry picking of stats based on league is just an example of the human tendency to try to find a "pattern" in random data and attach meaning to it.  We have a great record but natural variance means that there is going to b some randomly chosen breakdowns where we did not so well and some where we did great.  I'm sure if you broke down our record on each day of the week, the day of the week we have the highest win% on would look really impressive while the day of the week we do the worst on would look pretty poor in comparison.  And while the data would be factually true, it wouldn't have any real importance.   I don't care what the number show, this team doesn't have a problem winning in Tuesdays!

[tntoriole]

3 hours ago, drjohnnyfever1 said:

 

Totally agree about post 1, it's an observation that some of us noticed about our record against good NL teams, not a condemnation of the Orioles and what they continue to accomplish.  What is so difficult to understand about that?  Goodness, mole hill meet mountain.

On the flip side of your position, any seeming criticism of a good team is met with publik shaming.  Sad. 

Go O's.

No public “shaming” and your critical stance is echoed by many others on this board who focus selectively on the warts as if other teams, even the Braves, have so much superior depth, players, TOR aces etc.

 

Other teams in 2023 are much worse than we are .. ie meaning we are arguably with Atlanta the very best team in baseball in 2023. 
 

San Diego is not a “good” team either.. they are 59-66 and 18 games back in the NL West and lost 2 in a row after we left.  They suck. 

[drjohnnyfever1]

2 hours ago, tntoriole said:

No public “shaming” and your critical stance is echoed by many others on this board who focus selectively on the warts as if other teams, even the Braves, have so much superior depth, players, TOR aces etc.

 

Other teams in 2023 are much worse than we are .. ie meaning we are arguably with Atlanta the very best team in baseball in 2023. 
 

San Diego is not a “good” team either.. they are 59-66 and 18 games back in the NL West and lost 2 in a row after we left.  They suck. 

Thanks for your analysis.