Getting the Orioles and Royals to 120 Losses

Great teams may dream of winning 116 games in a season, but for losers, whether of the lovable or non-lovable stripe, 120 is the number at which they gaze, gimlet-eyed. The 1962 Mets, with their inaugural band of cast-offs, left behind a legacy of being great at being not-so-great, losing 120 games and planting their flag in the Mt. Everest of Terrible.

Yes, 120 losses isn’t actually the MLB record, that feat being accomplished by the 1899 Cleveland Spiders, who lost 134 of their 154 depressing games. But it took a bit of chicanery to reach that sum. Frank and Stanley Robison owned both the Cleveland Spiders and St. Louis Perfectos and transferred most of the good 1898 Spiders over to St. Louis in an attempt to build one superteam and one comedy legend. Cleveland was doomed by design, though the Perfectos failed to be a superteam.

Incidentally, the Brooklyn Superbas pulled this off more successfully, looting the Baltimore Orioles to put together a 101-win roster (though I’d have penalized them a few wins for the confusing team name, which was swiped from an acrobatic act of the time and awkwardly made into a plural noun).

The 1962 Mets earned their infamy on the square and now serve as the gold standard for seasonal ineptitude. But as we head towards the trade deadline, we have two teams trying to make it interesting, the 25-66 Baltimore Orioles and the 25-65 Kansas City Royals.

Both teams stand slightly behind the Mets’ fierce pace, with winning percentages that round to 45-117, tantalizingly close to bleak greatness, but not quite there. Like when a batter tries to hit .400 over the course of the season, you want to have a cushion over the mark, since the natural course of regression will stamp down on the extremes.

But there’s at least a chance, which is really all that matters. What fun is a record if it’s likely to be surmounted? And it gives an additional layer of excitement to losing seasons when you need a break from wondering in what wacky way the Baltimore Orioles will mess up a Manny Machado trade or being astounded that the Royals actually advertise that it took them years to spare the roster from even a single game of Alcides Escobar’s services.

Powering up the ZiPS SuperComputer (it’s really just a regular computer), I cranked up the old simulations to get the latest probabilities that either the Royals or Orioles pull off the 120-loss feat.

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. In case you didn't read all that, here's the short version. Membership includes:
✓Ad-free browsing
✓Unlimited FanGraphs & RotoGraphs articles
✓Historical & platoon projections
✓Leaderboard & player-page stat heatmaps
✓One-click data exports
✓Customizable player-page dashboards
✓Dark & Classic site modes
✓Weekly Members-only mailbag
✓FanGraphs Walk-Off, your year in review
✓Optional homepage photo removal
✓Gift articles to non-Members
✓Full postseason coverage

Through Monday night’s games, ZiPS places the mean final records for the Orioles and Royals at 54-108 and 52-110, respectively. These are terrible numbers, but just not quite elite terrible. To lose 120 games, ZiPS put the Royals probability at 0.3%, the Orioles a hair over 0.1%.

But there’s a beautiful black cloud to that silver lining! We haven’t hit the trade deadline, and given the relative positions of these teams, there’s a great shot that they’ll trade away enough players to make the rosters significantly worse. ZiPS is assuming that the Orioles have Manny Machado, Adam Jones, and all their relievers. ZiPS lets the Royals keep Mike Moustakas and… err… yeah.

Trading away Machado, Jones, Britton, and one additional reliever on July 31st (and Machado immediately), knocks 11 wins off ZiPS’ estimate for the O’s roster over 162 games, moving them from a relatively positive 66-win-a-year club to a 55-win one.

All of a sudden, the O’s have a mean final record projection of 49-113, which is where things get interesting. Playing seven games worse than a projection is not all that unlikely over a two-month period. That’s enough to boost Baltimore’s probability of 120 losses from 0.12% to 3%.

Nor does that even require the construction of an outlandish scenario — just the minimal effort required to demonstrate an actual understanding of the team’s present situation. It’s a bit of a moonshot possibility, but what if the Orioles go full tear-down, trade Kevin Gausman (only two years from free agency), two more relievers, Jonathan Schoop, and then also shut down Dylan Bundy in September to protect his arm.

Every marginal loss has incredible value at this point, bumping the projected probability to 10%. Still an uphill fight, but that’s about the same chance that Barry Bonds would hit a home run in any given at-bat and was anyone really gobsmacked when that would happen? The Mets would still have the losing percentage record (they played only 160 games), but the Orioles would be a deserving award-mate, thanks to the fact that they’d be a 42-120 team who’d entered the season with ambitions of being serious contenders.

Getting the Royals even worse is a bit more of a challenge. ZiPS thinks Salvador Perez will play much better than he has, but he’s extremely unlikely to be traded. Moving Mike Moustakas isn’t improbable, same goes for Lucas Duda. That’s enough to get the Royals to almost 1%.

A less likely result in which the team moves Danny Duffy and Whit Merrifield boosts them to 3%. A bit disappointing, but still possible.

Both the Orioles and Royals have a long, painful rebuilding process ahead of them. If you have to hit bottom before you build back up, here’s a toast to these two cellar-dwellers to hit a low worthy of song.





Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.

32 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
YKnotDisco
8 years ago

If the O’s and Royals played each other would they both lose?

CamdenWarehouseMember since 2018
8 years ago
Reply to  YKnotDisco

so would everyone at the game

YKnotDisco
8 years ago

If nobody was there did it even happen?

Edit: Oh yeah, the O’s DID play a game with nobody there. So the answer is yes.

(Marlins and the Rays just about every night, too)

LeeFieux
8 years ago
Reply to  YKnotDisco

May 8 to May 10, O’s took two of three. So, no, but I like your question. 🙂

They play again, Aug 31-Sept 2, which will be a HUGE series in my book. 🙂

jjohnson177
8 years ago
Reply to  YKnotDisco

I actually spent my hard earned money traveling from Denver to Baltimore to watch these two teams play in May (the trip was planned in Jan when the Orioles were only projected to be below-average).
Hopefully that game is Chris Tillman’s last major league appearance.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/BAL/BAL201805100.shtml

RoyalsFan#14321
8 years ago

Hard to see the Royals moving Duffy, and Perez is nearly untouchable. Merrifield is an interesting trade option, but I imagine he doesn’t move the needle much for contenders – he seems more like a 2 WAR true talent. He has 3 more years of team control too, and won’t cost all that much, at this point…

RoyalsFan#14321
8 years ago
Reply to  Dan Szymborski

You were clear, I just felt necessary to preface my comment on the potential for a Merrifield trade. I tend to preface a lot. But not here, aparently.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
8 years ago

The Orioles finish the season with four home games against the Astros. Since you gotta play the Astros, this might be as good a time as any to do so, if they aren’t playing for anything at the time. They also have nine games with Blue Jays after the deadline, and six with the Rays. The Blue Jays will almost surely be sellers and the Rays might be.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

The Astros could easily be playing for best record in the AL. How much they value home field advantage could play a role in their effort.

John DiFool2
8 years ago

“Brooklyn Superbas”

Am I the only one who gets an image of a sheep in a superhero uniform when I read that name?

csw117
8 years ago
Reply to  John DiFool2

The Aristocrats!

Canowned
8 years ago

I have faith the Orioles can pull it off on the 30th anniversary of that incredible losing streak. As consolation prize I’ll take Alex Cobb being the first 20 game loser in a long time. It’s all so exciting!

dl80Member since 2020
8 years ago

I took a look at the 1899 Spiders team, and it’s a doozy. The fourth best BATTER by WAR is a pitcher (Highball Wilson) who went 1 for 3 with a double. Yes, his 0 WAR over 3 at bats was fourth best on the team. Incidentally, he also contributed 0 WAR as a pitcher over one 8-inning start in which he allowed 8 earned runs.

Their best pitcher was Jim Hughey, who contributed 2.1 WAR on 283 innings with a 5.41 ERA and a 1.72 K/9. (For reference, the league leader in K/9 that year by a starter was Cy Seymour with 4.76, followed by Noodles Hahn with a 4.22).

That Spiders team has to be the all-time leader in Great Names:

Crazy Schmit
Highball Wilson
Sport McCallister
Harry Colliflower
Suter Sullivan
Lave Cross
Ossee Schreckengost
Chief Zimmer
Kid Carsey
The famous Chief Sockalexis

dl80Member since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  dl80

Because I was struck by the name “Noodles,” I took a closer look at his career as well. He was remarkably good, putting up 39.4 WAR in 8 years, with 37.3 coming in his first 6 years. He struck out 917 in 2029 innings, which was quite a lot for the time. When he retired in 1906, he was 18th in K/9 among pitchers with at least 1500 innings.

He threw the first no-hitter of the 20th century, on July 12, 1900. The next day, the team he had no-hit scored 23 runs. He lived until 1960.

While not as good as the Spiders, the 1899 Reds have some good names as well:

Noodles Hahn
Ted Breitenstein
Pink Hawley
Bill Dammann
Heinie Peitz
Bid McPhee
Socks Seybold

Also, that was the rookie year for future Hall of Fame outfielder and career triples leader (309) Sam Crawford.

Careless
8 years ago
Reply to  dl80

I remember the 2003 Tigers had some ridiculous stat into probably June where they were hitting worse than the median NL pitcher

NATS FanMember since 2018
8 years ago

I do not wish any player to be on a 120 loss team. 100 losses is depressing enough

LeeFieux
8 years ago

Speaking of the Superbas……….I wonder how good of a team one could craft, if they combined the O’s and Royals?

Joe
8 years ago
Reply to  LeeFieux

C: Perez/Sicso
1B: Trumbo/Duda
2B: Schoop/Merrifield
3B: Moustakas
SS: Machado/Mondesi
LF: Gordon/Mancini
CF: Adam Jones/Merrifield
RF: Soler/Merrifield
DH: Duda/Trumbo/Soler

It’s a pretty solid infield, but the outfield is…not great. There’s some decent positional flexibility though and you could see this building into a nice lineup. The pitching on the other hand…yikes. Even combining the two teams, I’m not sure the offense could score enough to keep it under 100 losses.

madfencerMember since 2017
8 years ago
Reply to  LeeFieux

OK, I couldn’t resist. I used the FG depth charts, and just pro-rated the best player at each position to get all of the playing time. Here’s what we get:
Pos Name Proj WAR
C Perez 1.5
1B Duda 0.8
2B Merrifield 1.4
SS Machado 2.6
3B Moustakas 1.6
LF Gordon 0.9
CF Jones 0.9
RF Soler 1.0
DH Trumbo 0.6
SP Gausman 1.1
SP Bundy 0.9
SP Duffy 0.8
SP Cobb 0.7
SP Keller 0.4
RP Britton 0.5
RP Brach 0.4
RP Givens 0.4
Total 16.5

That total rest of season WAR actually ties them for 10th in MLB. They’re tied with… the Mets! That’s right, if you add the Royals and Orioles together you get the Mets. I couldn’t have said it better myself, baseball.

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
8 years ago

The Royals and the Os should redistribute players to create one super team (ok, a .500 team) and one comedic legend. KC can have the good players because screw Angelos is why.

A rotation of Cashner, Cobb, Hammel, Kennedy, and Junis sounds like something but ha ha nope.

A lineup of Sisco, Davis, Schoop, Escobar, Beckham, Peterson, Bonifacio, and Rickard would struggle to hit against an AAA rotation

It would be glorious!

Dmjn53
8 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

A combined Orioles/Royals team wouldn’t sniff .500. I truly think they’d still challenge 100 losses

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

Amazingly, that team would likely have a below-average major league club AND a lousy farm system. It’s downright unfortunate.

Personally, I think the Rays should invade Miami, and take the Marlins’ stadium and players and farm system. That would be my favorite team mashup.

RoyalsFan#14321
8 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

To be fair, Bonifacio does in fact crush AAA pitching, and is doing pretty okay so far this year (116 wRC)…

hopbittersMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

+1 for “because screw Angelos is why.”

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
8 years ago

The Tigers came into their last 6 games in 2003 at 38-118 but avoided the record by winning 5 of their last 6. That finish smells like a week-old flounder, I think the opposition laid down for them.

LMOTFOTEMember since 2017
8 years ago
Reply to  bosoxforlife

I watched some 2003 Tigers. They were very very bad. It’s hard to imagine another team that bad. But it made 2006 awfully sweet.

rss0002
8 years ago

This is the perfect first Dan Szymborski article. I literally laughed when I saw the title. It’s about two teams that have to be in the bottom five for fan interest this year (and one is the Orioles)! It is completely random. It’s not something most fans care about. And yet it’s impeccably well researched and I enjoyed every word.

trevise-en
8 years ago

This fits here. I’ve been updating and posting this at different venues over the past couple days.
———————————————-

I stated elsewhere (7/9/2018) that we are witnessing a historic season in relation to the Orioles and also including the Kansas City Royals. But being the (oh so) meticulous person that am, I wanted data to qualify and quantity my statement. So I went to Baseball Reference and started capturing the data. Early in the process, I decided that my cutoff point would be at a winning percentage of .320 for MLB teams from 1903 and after, and by the end, this worked out quite well.

In summary form, any winning percentage below .279 would put a 2018 MLB team in the Bottom 10, as there is a two team tie for tenth and eleventh place at that point. At .299, there are two teams tied at nineteenth and twentieth, so anything below that point would be Bottom 20. And at .315, anything below that would be Bottom 30. Finally, at .318, two tied teams round out the Bottom 35. After that, there is a gap as the B-36 team has a winning percentage of .325.

Now for some significant ‘historical’ performances. Everyone should know that the worst MLB winning percentage was:

(1) 1916 Philadelphia Athletics 36-117 .235

And since the Expansion era began, there are only six team seasons on this historical list, with the New York Mets owning half of them:

(3) 1962 New York Mets 40-120 .250
(6) 2003 Detroit Tigers 43-119 .265
(24) 1965 New York Mets 50-112 .309
(29) 1963 New York Mets 51-111 .315
(30) 2004 Arizona Diamondbacks 51-111 .315
(31) 2013 Houston Astros 51-111 .315

After last night’s walk off win against the Yankees, the Orioles now have a record of 26-66 and a winning percentage of .283. This would put them in a three way tie with the 1915 Philadelphia Athletics and the 1928 Philadelphia Phillies at (14th) on the list, between the (.279) of the 1932 Boston Red Sox,1939 St Louis Browns, and 1941 Philadelphia Phillies and the (.291) of the 1911 Boston Braves. The Kansas City Royals are currently 26-65 .286.