The 2020 Schedule Meets the Chopping Block

Life isn’t fair, as it continually reminds us, but we try to keep sports as far from the harsh light of reality as we can. The New York Yankees and Tampa Bay Rays certainly don’t start in the same place when creating a roster, but when those players are on the field, everybody has to play by the same rules. Whether you’re facing Gerrit Cole or whatever fifth starter the Baltimore Orioles Mad-Libbed onto the roster, you have to get actual hits, score actual runs, and make actual Statcast-blessed defensive plays.

It’s extraordinarily difficult to keep the schedules teams face fair. Ideally, we’d want every team to face the same strength of schedule. With complete discretion over the design of the season, that’s still a nearly impossible task, without knowing which teams will be the best and worst ones ahead of time. And it becomes definitely impossible with unbalanced division schedules, series played mostly in three or four-game chunks, and a need to avoid having teams travel thousands of miles every day, like some character in the final season of Game of Thrones.

And even if you avoid all these things using some dark magics from the Necronomicon or Carson Cistulli’s personal notes, you’re still bound by the laws of the physical universe. Teams can’t play themselves, so even if every team played every other team the same number of games each season, the Yankees get a bonus by not having to play the Yankees, while Orioles’ hitters never get the opportunity to feast on Orioles pitching.

Under the normal, 162-game schedule, here’s what ZiPS thinks of each team’s strength of schedule, including the mix of home-road opponents. This table is sortable:

ZiPS Strength of Schedule, Normal 2020
Team Opponent WPCT Wins/162
New York Yankees .482 78.1
Minnesota Twins .486 78.8
Houston Astros .486 78.8
Tampa Bay Rays .486 78.8
Cleveland Indians .486 78.8
Oakland Athletics .489 79.3
Chicago White Sox .490 79.4
Los Angeles Dodgers .493 79.8
Boston Red Sox .495 80.2
Texas Rangers .498 80.6
Washington Nationals .499 80.8
Los Angeles Angels .499 80.8
Kansas City Royals .499 80.8
San Diego Padres .500 81.0
Chicago Cubs .501 81.2
St. Louis Cardinals .502 81.3
Toronto Blue Jays .503 81.4
Atlanta Braves .503 81.5
Milwaukee Brewers .504 81.6
Cincinnati Reds .505 81.8
Detroit Tigers .505 81.8
Arizona Diamondbacks .507 82.2
Philadelphia Phillies .508 82.2
Pittsburgh Pirates .509 82.5
New York Mets .512 82.9
Colorado Rockies .512 83.0
Seattle Mariners .513 83.0
San Francisco Giants .515 83.4
Baltimore Orioles .516 83.5
Miami Marlins .521 84.4

These numbers may seem small when you look at them straight-up, but in terms of a pennant race, these are fairly large differences. Based on the projected team strength, the Marlins essentially start the 2020 season with six fewer wins than the New York Yankees. This has the effect of slightly but artificially magnifying the strengths of great teams and the weaknesses of lousy ones.

We’ve talked a lot about various Cactus and Grapefruit League 2020 season scenarios, but with so many unknowns given COVID-19, there’s no scenario that’s realistically off the table outside of a normal season. One of the possibilities, though probably not the most likely one, is that teams start play in their normal stadiums without fans, with attendance hopefully allowed by the end of the season. Another possibility is that everybody plays in Arizona, which would allow MLB to hold the 2020 season without changing the leagues and divisions.

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.

Baseball’s easiest solution for the schedule at this point would be to simply chop the first 50 games or so off the season and play regular season games through the end of October. The problem is that while MLB’s schedule was hardly a utopian ideal of balance beforehand, simply chopping off a portion of it leads to some odd results. Starting with Game 112 — I moved games at the dividing line to the nearest full series because not every team’s 51st game is on the same day — we would completely lose 40 team vs. team matchups, losing some of the variety.

It also has an odd effect on division races. Even those 19 games against division rivals are not evenly spread throughout the season. The Cubs would lose 13 of their 19 games against the Pirates, but keep every single game against the Reds. The Arizona Diamondbacks, likely a second-tier contender, would lose 14 games against the Rockies and Giants, but retain all their games with the Dodgers. The truncated schedule is rife with oddities like that.

And more than just being really, well, weird, it can cost additional wins for some teams:

ZiPS Strength of Schedule, Normal vs. Truncated Season
Team Normal Truncated Difference Diff/162
Tampa Bay Rays .486 .474 .012 1.9
Oakland Athletics .489 .484 .006 0.9
Texas Rangers .498 .492 .005 0.9
Pittsburgh Pirates .509 .504 .005 0.8
Detroit Tigers .505 .500 .005 0.8
St. Louis Cardinals .502 .497 .005 0.8
San Francisco Giants .515 .511 .004 0.7
Seattle Mariners .513 .509 .003 0.6
Houston Astros .486 .484 .002 0.4
Toronto Blue Jays .503 .501 .002 0.2
Arizona Diamondbacks .507 .506 .001 0.2
Chicago Cubs .501 .500 .001 0.2
Los Angeles Dodgers .493 .491 .001 0.2
Milwaukee Brewers .504 .503 .001 0.1
Boston Red Sox .495 .495 .000 0.1
San Diego Padres .500 .500 .000 0.0
New York Mets .512 .512 .000 0.0
Washington Nationals .499 .499 .000 0.0
Miami Marlins .521 .522 -.001 -0.1
Cincinnati Reds .505 .506 -.001 -0.2
Cleveland Indians .486 .488 -.002 -0.3
New York Yankees .482 .484 -.002 -0.4
Baltimore Orioles .516 .518 -.002 -0.4
Los Angeles Angels .499 .501 -.002 -0.4
Philadelphia Phillies .508 .511 -.003 -0.6
Atlanta Braves .503 .509 -.005 -0.9
Colorado Rockies .512 .519 -.007 -1.1
Chicago White Sox .490 .500 -.009 -1.5
Minnesota Twins .486 .495 -.009 -1.5
Kansas City Royals .499 .509 -.010 -1.6

In pennant races, a single game can make a significant difference. After all, grabbing a single extra win is why most teams spend so much at the trade deadline pitched in high-leverage battles for playoff pieces. To get an idea of how much this actually affects playoff probability, I ran the projections for a 112-game season using both the 2020’s “normal” strength of schedule and the actual strength of schedule of the truncated season:

ZiPS Playoff % by Strength of Schedule
Team Original SOS Truncated SOS Gain
Tampa Bay Rays 70.5% 77.6% 7.1%
Oakland Athletics 54.8% 59.0% 4.2%
St. Louis Cardinals 31.6% 34.7% 3.1%
Arizona Diamondbacks 23.4% 24.5% 1.1%
Texas Rangers 6.4% 7.4% 1.0%
Pittsburgh Pirates 3.3% 4.0% 0.7%
Houston Astros 80.2% 80.9% 0.7%
Chicago Cubs 42.8% 43.4% 0.6%
Washington Nationals 66.5% 67.0% 0.4%
San Francisco Giants 1.4% 1.8% 0.4%
Los Angeles Dodgers 94.1% 94.5% 0.4%
New York Mets 28.1% 28.3% 0.3%
San Diego Padres 46.9% 47.1% 0.2%
Milwaukee Brewers 33.8% 33.9% 0.1%
Detroit Tigers 0.1% 0.2% 0.1%
Miami Marlins 1.3% 1.4% 0.0%
Seattle Mariners 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%
Baltimore Orioles 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Cleveland Indians 57.1% 57.1% 0.0%
Toronto Blue Jays 3.2% 3.2% 0.0%
Boston Red Sox 19.8% 19.5% -0.3%
Kansas City Royals 2.0% 1.3% -0.7%
New York Yankees 93.0% 92.4% -0.7%
Colorado Rockies 2.7% 2.0% -0.7%
Cincinnati Reds 29.1% 27.9% -1.2%
Philadelphia Phillies 27.6% 25.7% -1.9%
Los Angeles Angels 21.9% 20.0% -2.0%
Atlanta Braves 67.3% 63.8% -3.5%
Chicago White Sox 23.3% 19.1% -4.1%
Minnesota Twins 67.5% 62.3% -5.2%

For many teams, there’s no significant effect from a truncated year. For a handful of teams — especially the Rays, A’s, Cardinals on the positive side, and the Twins, White Sox, Braves on the negative end — their playoff probabilities change just as much as they would from a Marcell Ozuna-level free agent or losing a key pitcher in July to injury. These things matter, even if by small amounts.

I have one last chart here, showing the truncated season’s playoff probabilities versus a theoretical 112 game season in which every team plays .500 opponents. This can’t be achieved, of course, but it’s certainly useful to see just how much unfairness would be thrust upon the sport due to the realities of scheduling:

ZiPS Playoff % by Strength of Schedule
Team Truncated SOS Utopian Ideal Gain
Los Angeles Angels 20.0% 27.1% 7.1%
Chicago White Sox 19.1% 23.7% 4.6%
New York Mets 28.3% 32.7% 4.3%
Philadelphia Phillies 25.7% 29.9% 4.2%
Boston Red Sox 19.5% 22.6% 3.1%
Minnesota Twins 62.3% 65.2% 2.9%
Atlanta Braves 63.8% 66.4% 2.6%
Cincinnati Reds 27.9% 29.8% 1.9%
Toronto Blue Jays 3.2% 5.2% 1.9%
Colorado Rockies 2.0% 3.7% 1.7%
Kansas City Royals 1.3% 2.9% 1.6%
Miami Marlins 1.4% 2.8% 1.4%
Arizona Diamondbacks 24.5% 25.6% 1.1%
Texas Rangers 7.4% 8.2% 0.8%
San Francisco Giants 1.8% 2.5% 0.7%
Seattle Mariners 0.1% 0.3% 0.2%
Detroit Tigers 0.2% 0.3% 0.1%
Milwaukee Brewers 33.9% 34.0% 0.1%
Baltimore Orioles 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Pittsburgh Pirates 4.0% 4.0% 0.0%
New York Yankees 92.4% 90.8% -1.6%
Chicago Cubs 43.4% 40.9% -2.5%
Cleveland Indians 57.1% 54.5% -2.6%
Los Angeles Dodgers 94.5% 91.3% -3.2%
Houston Astros 80.9% 77.7% -3.2%
San Diego Padres 47.1% 43.8% -3.3%
St. Louis Cardinals 34.7% 30.4% -4.3%
Washington Nationals 67.0% 62.2% -4.8%
Oakland Athletics 59.0% 53.9% -5.1%
Tampa Bay Rays 77.6% 67.7% -9.9%

The baseball emergency is so dire that I think all 30 teams and 100% of analysts, reporters, and fans don’t really care what the schedule looks like, so long as there is one. But that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be aware of the small but real distortions that schedule could have on the playoff picture.





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.

20 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
The Ghost of Johnny Dickshot
6 years ago

ANY truncated schedule better not worry about inter-league play but really be heavy into the division series and league series, period. I get with the odd number of teams inter-league play is almost a must but it needs to be greatly reduced.

icswirkaMember since 2017
6 years ago

Good call on interleague. I read this article this morning and had been thinking about the schedule and just came back to comment that it might be cool to see what this would look like sans inter-league as that may be more of an honest speculation. Although inter-league is what – 8 series? Maybe not quite enough of a haircut, but to me – the most obviously place to start axing schedule.

Pirates HurdlesMember since 2020
6 years ago

Not to be too snarky Dan, but who cares? Any baseball is better than no baseball this year and your data suggest negligible effects on the order of less than 1 win for most teams. I think this is pretty low on the concern list.

Cole
6 years ago

Feeling the same way.

Joe Panik! at the Disco
6 years ago

Well, I care. It’s interesting and the effects of sched differences is relevant in regular seasons too. We care about trade deadline moves too and they dont move the needle any more than this does.

And really, who responds to an article of interesting data they don’t care about with “who cares?”

Bartolo Cologne
6 years ago

Wouldn’t it be great if the article preemptively paid lip service to these types of reactions so we didn’t have to endure them in comments section? Oh wait, I read to the last paragraph…

cdarcyMember since 2016
6 years ago

Would you be able to release Zips player projections for this year with the normal park factors removed?

recoveringbucsfan
6 years ago

Even if it is shortened, as a Pirates fan this season is gonna feel like forever…

cmd600
6 years ago

Can someone smarter than me explain how the Twins and White Sox are the two biggest losers by playoffs odds under a truncated schedule, but the Indians don’t gain anything?

CubsFan23
6 years ago
Reply to  cmd600

Playoff % includes being one of the two wild card teams. Original projection was for the AL Central to provide ~0.5 wild card teams, and that drops to ~0.4.

cmd600
6 years ago
Reply to  CubsFan23

That means then that every single time the Indians bump up from 2nd to 1st, they already had a Wild Card spot, and every single time they bump up from 3rd to 2nd, they still don’t get a Wild Card spot. That seems unlikely just from the start.

But then we’re also saying that a not-insignificant portion of the time the White Sox or Twins fall from 1st to 2nd or 2nd to 3rd, they go from in a playoff spot to no longer in a playoff spot. The team replacing them would go from a non-playoff spot to a playoff spot. The team far and away most likely to take advantage of either of those teams slipping some is Cleveland.

originallyRagsMember since 2018
6 years ago
Reply to  Dan Szymborski

In your example, the Rays do not play *any* of their 2020 games against two good teams: HOU and CLE (amounting to 14 games).

However, they would have the fortune of playing, still, 100% of their games against: BAL, DET and MIA (30 games).

I see your point.

I’ll repeat myself, as I commented elsewhere in the larger thread, this is a good problem for “The Schedule Makers,” Henry and Holly Stephenson. 😉

(Side note: I can’t for the life of me match the SOS figures FanGraphs computes. Is there an article that explains how SOS is computed, or is that proprietary?)

originallyRagsMember since 2018
6 years ago
Reply to  cmd600

CLE would not play 10 of its 19 games scheduled against DET. They still would play all 10 games they have scheduled against HOU and LAD.

I don’t see anything as noteworthy, schedule-wise for MIN and CWS, but if you consider that the Rays get a good bump from a chopped schedule, that would make the wildcard more competitive.

bookbookMember since 2019
6 years ago

There won’t be baseball this year. Or, rather, if there is, we will all regret the number of deaths it will cause. The wet rag speaketh. #StayAtHome

SucramRenrutMember since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  bookbook

It certainly seems pretty unlikely that gatherings of such a large number of people will be permitted by November. Maybe if limits are raised from 50-100 you could get to where the players can play in empty stadiums but my gut says that’s the safest way. of course, not saying that is in any way what the decision makers will prioritize, but we can hope.

aklangMember since 2016
6 years ago

I dont’ think there will be any season. If they manage to pull it off I think they just cut interleague play and make division heavy schedules. Or just go round robin tournaments.

originallyRagsMember since 2018
6 years ago

Thank you Dan for having the curiosity to look into this. Given the complexities of schedule-making, it’s very likely that MLB would simply chop the schedule in order to reconcile for a shortened season. (If there is a season, which I still do not believe there will be. #ontherecord)

My proposal is that MLB ask Henry and Holly Stephenson, aka “The Schedule Makers” to look into this.

For those who haven’t seen it, here is a link to The Schedule Makers 30 for 30 Short on ESPN:

http://www.espn.com/30for30/film/_/page/the-schedule-makers

bronxbill
6 years ago

This really shouldn’t be a problem: a very simple program would be able to generate a balanced schedule based on the length of the season. What complicates the schedule in a normal season is travel (you can’t play a night game in New York and the following afternoon play in Los Angeles); but if everybody’s in the same place, that’s no longer a factor.