Death of a 14-Year Streak

Monday evening, the Pirates beat the Royals, 7-6. The Royals were up by two in the bottom of the eighth, but the Pirates rallied to tie, and then they walked it off an inning later. With Kevin Kramer leading off second base, Jacob Stallings sent a low line drive into left field, and Kramer beat Alex Gordon’s throw home. The Pirates rushed out of the dugout to celebrate the victory:

Now, this season, the Pirates are going nowhere. The Royals are even worse. The win did, I suppose, push the Pirates back over .500, but it’s worth remembering that every game is a competition. Every game features major-league baseball players trying to win, and so every actual win legitimately feels like an achievement. Especially for teams full of players just trying to make a good impression to extend their careers. Recently, the dreadful Royals walked off against the dreadful White Sox, after a throwing error on a would-be sac bunt. The Royals celebrated in regular fashion:

So part of this is just that a walk-off is fun. You never know when you’re going to be part of another. Seize happiness; it’s fleeting. Celebrate your achievements. Few people in the world ever get to participate in a win in the major leagues. What an incredible thing it is to experience.

There’s something else about the Pirates’ victory, though. None of the players would’ve known it at the time, but you can see their celebration as symbolic if you want. The win was the Pirates’ 75th of the season. But it was also the National League’s 151st win in interleague play. Every year, every team plays 20 interleague games. That means there are 300 interleague games in all. And for the first time since 2003, the American League isn’t going to win the majority of them. It won’t win exactly half of them. Interleague play, in 2018, belongs to the senior circuit.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

I wrote about this as it was developing back in June. But, back in June, when I first took a look, the interleague schedule was only 39% complete. More than that, the AL side had been skewed by some of its worse teams, and the NL side had been skewed by some of its better teams. In other words, the data then was interesting, but there was a lot more left to play. That’s not the case anymore. The regular season is just about finished. There are but nine more interleague games to play, and, on the AL side, they’ll all be played by the Royals, Tigers, and White Sox. So we can go through identical data plots. This post is an update of the last one, which is convenient for me, because it means I have to be minimally creative.

All interleague data comes courtesy of the Baseball Reference Play Index. I’m going to show you three images. The first one is the simplest one — here is AL interleague winning percentage, stretching back to 1997:

For 14 straight years, from 2004 through 2017, the AL finished over .500. Obviously, some years were more dominant than others, but the NL never quite had the edge. Last year, the AL won 53.3% of the games. This year, it’s down to 47.8%. If the AL wins out — which is unlikely — it will have an interleague winning percentage of 49.3%. If it loses out, it will be 46.3%. The worst year for the AL was 1997, the first year of interleague play, when the AL won just 45.3% of the time. This year won’t be quite that lopsided, but what’s most important here is just the general shift in the balance of power.

Now, anyone who hangs out at FanGraphs knows there’s a little more than just overall winning percentage. Sometimes, even over 300-game samples, winning percentage can mislead. Going to the next level, let’s look at the year-to-year run differentials per game:

Same idea here. This is like a proxy for looking at the Pythagorean record. From 2004 through 2017, every single year, the AL outscored the NL. Last year, on a per-game basis, the AL outscored the NL by 0.35 runs. This year, the NL has the advantage, by 0.22 runs. That would stand as the second-greatest NL advantage on record, behind only 1999. So the winning percentage isn’t deceptive.

One last plot now. Our first looked at winning percentage, which is first-level stuff. Our next looked at run differential, which is second-level stuff. Now let’s look at OPS differential, which is third-level stuff. Run differential mirrors Pythagorean records. OPS differential mirrors BaseRuns records. I recognize that OPS isn’t quite as effective as wOBA, but the two numbers move in parallel, and with differences like what you’re about to see, it’s hardly worth the extra effort to run manual calculations.

Here we see something that’s even more striking. The AL actually had the OPS edge for 15 straight years, including 2003. Last year, the AL out-OPSed the NL in interleague play by 33 points. This year, the NL has out-OPSed the AL in interleague play by 26 points. That’s never happened before — the biggest NL advantages have been by 16 points, once in 1997 and once in 1999. Technically, because the interleague schedule isn’t entirely over, these numbers still have time to shift, but at least by this one measure, the NL looks stronger than ever, relatively speaking. I know the ultimate goal is to win, and not simply to out-OPS your opponent, but this is fairly convincing evidence that the NL has taken a significant step forward.

You might figure that the top of the AL is superior, but that the league as a whole is brought down by everyone else. That suspicion would seem to be accurate. The five current AL playoff teams have a combined interleague winning percentage of 64.0%. The rest of the AL is at 39.3%. Meanwhile, the five current NL playoff teams have a combined interleague winning percentage of 55.3%. The rest of the NL is at 50.8%. It’s not like every single team in the AL is suddenly inferior to its nearest NL equivalent. But I’m not interested in getting that granular. For one reason or another, the AL overall has lost its advantage. The fact that it won for 14 straight years makes it notable that, this year, it won’t.

I don’t know yet exactly what it means, and this could always just be a blip. The AL could regain its superiority in 2019, and maybe a new streak will begin. All these rebuilding teams have no intention of staying bad forever. For now, we can just officially kiss a long streak goodbye. All those popular theories that the AL gets some kind of structural interleague advantage — I suppose this doesn’t disprove them. But it does show that, if advantages do exist, they’re not insurmountable. Congratulations to the National League. If only you could all celebrate this victory together.





Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

32 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
jamberg
7 years ago

It should also be noted that the NL got some good match-up distribution as well. The best NL division (the Central) matched up against the worst AL division (also the Central). The NL Central (according to my quick calculations) have gone 56-35 against their AL counterpart. Plus, the Brewers and Cubs still have games left against bad AL Central teams to possibly push this number higher. The rest of the NL is 96-105 against the American League. This is in large part due to the AL East matching up against the NL East, but the record discrepancy there isn’t nearly as high as it is in the NL (the NL East is 46-54).

Not saying the whole of the NL hasn’t caught up, because it’s a better league 1-15, but the NL did get a nice match-up this year.

Wu-Bacca
7 years ago
Reply to  jamberg

Not sure I buy this reasoning. If the best NL division (the Central) played the best AL division (the West) this year, they’d surely do worse than if they played the AL Central. But then some other NL division – say, the NL West – would get their shots at the AL Central rather than the AL West, and presumably do much better. IOW, doesn’t it all come out in the wash?

BipMember since 2016
7 years ago
Reply to  Wu-Bacca

yeah this would be correct unless, for some reason, win probability didn’t scale linearly with team strength. In other words, jamberg’s point is valid only if, as the talent gap between teams increases, the chances the better team wins increased geometrically or exponentially. but I don’t think we have any reason to believe such is the case.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago

Like before it’s the Central-
AL East vs NL East- AL 54 NL 46
AL West vs NL West- 50-50
AL Central vs NL Central- AL 35 NL 56(with 9 games left)

Last year we had-
AL East vs NL Central(plus rivals)- AL 59 NL 41
AL Central vs NL West(plus rivals)- AL 42 NL 58
AL West vs NL East- AL 59 NL 41

So looks like 2 things-
1- the AL Central much worse this year vs last year. AL Central should finish at least 3-5 games worse than last year’s 42-58 record.
2- taking out the AL Central- the other 2 divisions- last year AL 118-82, this year 104-96. 14 games worse or 7 per division. So East/West weren’t as dominant this year in interleague play. Still won but not by as much.

Shattenjager
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

The AL West is 9 games worse according to your post. That’s the biggest difference in any of the AL division records, not the 3-5 games of the AL Central. Even if the AL Central loses out, it will still only be seven games worse than last season while the AL West is 9 games. I don’t understand how you’re coming to the conclusion that the AL Central is what’s most important here.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  Shattenjager

The thing is if you look at the divisions year to year-
AL East -5
AL Central -7(9 games left)
AL West -9
NL East +5
NL Central +15(9 games left)
NL West -8

The West teams both collapsed due to the fact that they won their series 58-42(NL West) and 59-41(AL East) last year. So both of them fell almost equally. They went 50-50 this year vs each other.

The Central vs Central being as lopsided as it is- pretty much is the interleague difference this year. Just like the west- they lost their season series last year 41-59(NL Central) and 42-58(AL Central). So for the NL to be up right now 56-35 with 9 games left is a huge difference.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I mean, it’s the bad teams that are the reason the AL was “bad” this year. It’s pretty silly to look at the Central’s futility and say “the AL is better if you don’t include the Central.” They’d also probably be better if you cut out the Orioles, Blue Jays, Rangers, and Angels.

The AL beating the NL every year in the overall interleague series never meant that there weren’t bad teams in the AL. There have always been bad teams in the AL. There are just more of them now, and it shows that the overall strength of the league is lower.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that Boston (or Houston) wouldn’t easily have the best record in the NL if they were to switch leagues. They most definitely would.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

The AL Central though is right now 101 games sub .500. They are .378 outside the division.

The worst division prior to this year was the 2002 AL Central. They had a combined winning percentage of .453. Right now the AL Central this year is sitting at .433. The division has clinched already being the worst division in history.

Oh, Toronto, Baltimore, Angels, and Rangers combined have a 39-41 record interleague this year. So they didn’t kill the AL by any stretch. No, teams like Minnesota 8-12, Detroit 6-11, White Sox 5-12, and Kansas City 4-13 is what did it.

HughesMember since 2016
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Seattle 6-14, Tampa 7-13 are the AL surprise. Toronto was 13-7. Angels pushed 10-10. Those Seattle losses are devastated their wildcard efforts.

Other wise the good teams did good and bad teams did bad, and the NL has more good teams this year.

CozarMember since 2020
7 years ago
Reply to  Hughes

The Mariners have a negative run differential. A poor interleague record is not the surprising part of their season.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Ok, but this is all beside the point of the narrative that goes with these records. The point of these comparisons has always been to say that maybe a team in the AL with the same record as an NL team might be a little better, right? I mean, maybe this is just always nonsense? When the AL was better, they weren’t beating every NL team, either. I’m just saying whatever point there is to be made by this 14 year streak existing in the first place is not thwarted by the AL central being garbage.

Keyser Soze
7 years ago

I expect the answer is pretty simple for the most part – full on tanking as a front office strategy. As it happens this year there were more AL teams that were not really trying to contend than there were in the NL.

In the AL the Royals, White Sox and Tigers were in rebuild mode from the beginning and not really competing. You can throw the Orioles in that group as well. They tried to sell their fans on being competitive but there is no way it was happening with the moves they made. The Rangers, Twins and Jays had ideas of competing but realized it wasn’t going to work out due to injuries and/or other issues so pulled the plug by mid-season and sold off major pieces.

On the NL side there were three teams in rebuild mode from the start – the Marlins, Reds and Padres. A couple of others faded, namely the Giants and Mets, but never really pulled the plug and sold off pieces like the AL teams.

Seven teams in the AL not trying to win versus five in the NL should easily account for the NL taking the edge in victories.

Careless
7 years ago
Reply to  Keyser Soze

We’re talking what, maybe an 18 win difference in interleague games between this year and a typical year? No, I don’t think those two extra tankers lost a combined 18 more interleague games than they would typically have.

RWinUT
7 years ago
Reply to  Careless

The confusion is “tanking.” There are plenty of teams, especially in the AL, who are not technically “tanking” but are making feeble attempts to win. Those teams will more than make up the 18 game variance.

Keyser Soze
7 years ago
Reply to  RWinUT

Exactly. I used pretty blunt language in “tanking” and maybe could have softened that but essentially I meant what you said – that there were more teams in the AL that were making feeble attempts to win this season.

Even the two NL teams mentioned in my original comment that faded out of contention (Mets, Giants) didn’t sell off key pieces at mid-season the way the three AL teams who faded (Twins, Jays, Rangers) did. So you’re really looking at seven teams not fully competing versus three. NL teams would have to had to spectacularly underperform to not win more interleague games overall this season.

mshwiesner
7 years ago

Has anyone looked at the team specific rivalries for each year?

I think there are 3 extra games per interleague rivalry. This means …

3 extra games for

NL v. AL
————————————-
Arizona v. Houston (3-3)
Nationals v. Orioles (5-1)
Cubs v. White sox (2-1)
Reds v. Indians (4-2)
Pittsburgh v. Detroit (5-1)
Cards v. Royals (4-2)
Dodgers v. Angels (3-3)
Miami v. Tampa (4-2)
Mil v. Minn (5-1)
NYM v. NYY (3-3)
SF v. OAK (2-4)
ATL v. BOS (1-5)
PHL v. TOR (2-4)
COR v. SEA (5-1)
SDP v. TXR (2-4)
____________________________________
50 – 37

(Overall)
152 – 139 (AL win% — 0.478)

(Without Extra Games)
127 – 120.5 (AL win % — 0.487)

So maybe it doesn’t completely explain the difference, but maybe some of it?

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  mshwiesner

Actually this year being east vs east, etc. all those games are included in the interleague play naturally.

in years 2 and 3 if you will- so east vs central, east vs west, etc.
you play 4 games with your rival
you play 4 games with 1 team from other division
you play 3 games with 4 teams from other division

in years where it’s like this – east vs east, central vs central, west vs west
6 games with rival
4 games with 2 teams from other division
3 games with 2 teams from other division
for 20 games

mshwiesner
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Thanks for the info!

nickolai
7 years ago

not sure why, but the streak ending makes me sad.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
7 years ago
Reply to  nickolai

At least the Red Sox did their part. 16-4 in 2018. That follows 16-4 in 2017 and 14-6 in 2016. That .759 winning percentage helps explain the 3 straight AL East titles

Dominikk85Member since 2020
7 years ago

The NL is currently better. Not the top3-4 teams but many NL clubs have tanked the last 5 years but are actually coming out of it this year or last year (brewers, phillies, braves) while only the padres and marlins are still in full tank mode.

Last year many al teams tried to be semi competitive but are now entering full tank (royals, Orioles, tigers, blue jays).

Basically the AL is now where the NL was two years ago while the NL has reached their low and now is trending up and entering buyers mode.

nktokyo
7 years ago

So many teams tanking in the AL right now.

ascheffMember since 2017
7 years ago

I think next year might even be better for the NL. The AL has a few teams that have already bottomed out, but the Tigers, Mariners, and Rangers have pretty bleak outlooks for next year, and the Angels, Red Sox, Indians, and Astros are getting old in a hurry. The Yankees are really the only team in the AL that is already very good now and has a clear path to maintaining that for years.

The Braves, Phillies, Padres, and Cardinals all look like teams on the rise, and the Cubs and Dodgers are younger and have more team control remaining than Red Sox or Indians. I would have thought the Nats were heading for a cliff, but Juan Soto has really turned their future outlook around. The D-Backs and to a lesser extent the Rockies are the only NL teams that could be in big trouble in the next few years.

ascheffMember since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  ascheff

Oh, and the Giants of course. I can’t believe I forgot them – their future looks bleak. I don’t really consider the Mets as a team approaching the cliff, because they already sucked this year. They have a good core if they could ever keep them all healthy.

texasfury93
7 years ago
Reply to  ascheff

Please explain how the Astros are getting old in a hurry. I’ll wait.

RWinUT
7 years ago
Reply to  texasfury93

They’re shrinking.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
7 years ago

I think a big part of the NL’s losing streak was how bad the NL big market teams were managed. Not on the field, but off.

Before Theo, the Cubs we’re content making money off boozing chicagoans. McCourt’s Dodgers were a mess. And the you have the Madoff-screwed Mets, who also always screw themselves.

Since 1997, these 3 teams have all been below average, right? But obviously the Cubs and Dodgers have turned around for a bit now, so not as much a surprise to see them help drag the NL above .500

NATS FanMember since 2018
7 years ago

Excellent article. I loved it.

dcweber99
7 years ago

Since the Pirates have the best interleague record in the NL, they’re the real pennant winners, right? I’m pretty sure that’s how that works.

(Please give this to us. We’re so desperate)

BillClinton
7 years ago

Fittingly, the Pirates broke the streak *and* iirc have the best interleague record in MLB, too.

Lanidrac
7 years ago

Nice job, National League!

Now if we could only win more All-Star Games…