The Reds Actually Did It
Some time ago, in another InstaGraphs post, I mentioned something that could potentially become true about the 2016 Reds. We spend a lot of time writing about things that could potentially become true, and inevitably, a lot of those paces fall off. There are reasons for that, and that would be a subject for another post. But the 2016 numbers are official now, dammit. There’s no more “on pace for;” there only is. Here is something that is:
That’s bad! Boy, it gets worse. Here are the worst team pitching staffs since 1900, by our version of WAR:
| Team | Season | WAR |
| Reds | 2016 | -0.5 |
| Athletics | 1915 | 0.3 |
| Royals | 2006 | 0.5 |
| Twins | 1982 | 0.9 |
| Athletics | 1964 | 1.4 |
| Marlins | 1998 | 1.5 |
| Mets | 1966 | 1.7 |
| Padres | 1977 | 1.7 |
| Athletics | 1955 | 1.8 |
| Astros | 2013 | 2.0 |
To be absolutely clear about what we have here: By our numbers, the Reds just became the first pitching staff in modern history to finish with a negative WAR. It’s only slight, sure, and the difference between them and those 1915 Athletics is less than one win, but that negative symbol is conspicuous. It pushes the digits over to the right, so they can stand out. The Reds, as a collective, featured a major-league pitching staff that was a worse-than-replacement-level pitching staff. That’s almost unfathomable, is what that is.
Did the Reds really have the worst pitching staff ever? I mean, hell, I don’t know. Their pitching staff had one of the biggest home-run problems ever. By actual runs allowed, they were a little bit better than replacement-level, but you know where we stand on all that. There’s no way to actually compare across seasons or eras, not with the desired level of precision. We just don’t understand pitching that well yet, and we understand it even less the further back we go into history. We can say this: If you wanted to talk about the worst staffs of all time, you might use FanGraphs WAR as a starting point. It couldn’t make the Reds look any worse.
Reds pitchers, month by month:
- April: -1.3 WAR, 30th place
- May: -1.1, 30th
- June: -0.6, 30th
- July: +1.9, 20th
- August: +1.0, 26th
- Sep/Oct: +0.2, 30th
The first half is what did the Reds in. In the second half, they accumulated 3.2 WAR, good enough to edge out the Twins, Braves, and Diamondbacks. In each of the last three months, the Reds’ staff finished in the black. Yet it’s appropriate that, in the final stretch, they were dead last again. All they needed were one or two more good games, to avoid finishing in the…red. But a league-worst September and October locked the Reds into place. They had a chance to run away from history, but instead they suffer its embrace.
A negative WAR. It’s not that there weren’t some success stories. Anthony DeSclafani was pretty good. Dan Straily was all right. Raisel Iglesias adjusted well to the bullpen. Brandon Finnegan got stronger in the second half. But let me tell you: 32 Reds pitchers pitched. Twenty of them finished below 0.0 WAR. Alfredo Simon allowed more runs in 58.2 innings than Jon Lester allowed in over 200. J.J. Hoover allowed more runs in 18.2 innings than Zach Britton’s allowed the last two years combined. For the Reds, 2016 was never going to be about winning. Yet it also definitely wasn’t supposed to be about this.
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.

As a Reds fan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04854XqcfCY
Borkus in the house!!
The Reds must be kicking themselves for firing Dusty Baker.
This whole article saddened me. And I don’t even care about the Reds
I think the best way to think about this is that the top 10 Reds pitchers by WAR produced 6.7 WAR.
They finished with -.5 WAR.
This might suggest that replacement level for relief pitchers is set a bit too high.
The Reds top five starters by games started and innings pitched were all in the black. So their talent evaluation wasn’t totally broken or anything.
Three out of 24 relievers had positive WAR. The rest of the relievers managed a combined -5.1 WAR over the season.
Stuff happens, sometimes a guy you expected to be good has an off year. But out of 24 relievers: 3 above replacement, 1 at replacement and 2 with too few AB to accumulate any value, and 18 below replacement misses?
There may be an overestimate of just how good the replacement reliever actually is. Either that or the Reds owner decided to tank so she can take the team to Florida and no one told her it’s the next millennia and there are two teams in Florida already.
Yep. For some reason Fangraphs has it at .380 win% for starters but .470 for relievers, which doesn’t really make any principled sense: pitching is equally-valuable, on a context-neutral basis, whether it comes from starters or relievers.
This is also an exacerbating reason why WAR underrates relievers: they should be rewarded for how much better they are than starters, but instead they’re punished with a higher replacement level.
I don’t know how to filter for individual team vs team war numbers, but I imagine the bulk of the damage is the beating the Cubs put on the Reds pitching all year:
19 G, 761 PA, 136 R, 187 H, 91 BB, 127 SO, 40 HR (with at least one in 18 of 19 games).
At least the Reds didn’t have anyone named Squiz Pillion pitch for them like the 1915 A’s did.
You could say that they were…. in the red.
Which he did, in the article above.
It seems impossible to me that a pitching staff, taken as a whole, could ever be worse than the 2003 Tigers. Who aren’t even in the bottom 10 here…!