The National League Is Winning
I don’t mean to alarm you, but it’s true. I know that, as I write this, the A’s are clobbering the Padres. And earlier on Wednesday, the Blue Jays took a one-run game over the Braves. But also, the Reds beat the Tigers. There is plenty of season left to go, and it’s a guarantee that there will be events that surprise all of us, yet for right now, at this moment in time, in interleague play, the National League has a better record than the American League. You can understand why this is notable.
I write a post like this once or twice every season. I mean, not a post like this, but a post that serves as a midseason interleague update. The posts have generally all said the same thing: The AL still looks like it’s the better league. That statement has been true for quite some time. Because there’s still so much baseball left, the AL could end up better in 2018 once again, but I thought I’d give you a snapshot of our present reality. I think we’ve all been waiting for this!
If you’re not familiar with the background here, this first plot should tell you what you need to know. Here is the AL’s year-to-year interleague winning percentage, stretching back to 1997. As of right now, there are 116 interleague games in the books, meaning there are 184 remaining. Our sample is small, but not so small as to be completely and utterly useless.
The leagues kind of alternated there at the start, but the AL took over in 2004. That’s precisely what makes this remarkable. Under ordinary circumstances, we might not care very much which league fares better in a given season. But the AL has taken interleague play for 14 years in a row. That’s a streak that’s almost old enough to start learning to drive. Some years have been more lopsided than others. In 2004, the AL won just two more games. In 2006, it won 56 more. The margins have risen and fallen, but they haven’t fallen into the negatives. Not until now.
I always like to look at other measures, besides just wins and losses. Might the record be misleading in some way? This should be treated as if we’re looking at an individual team. So for this plot, let’s check out the AL’s interleague run differential on a per-game basis. Think of this as looking at interleague play through a Pythagorean lens.
Nope, nothing misleading — the NL so far has outscored the AL by nearly half a run a game. The AL, again, has had the run-differential advantage since 2004. It had a massive advantage in 2015. Back in 2008, the AL outscored the NL by an average of almost an entire run. The NL is in the process of turning the tables. And now it’s time for just one final measure.
Several weeks ago, I got a random text message from some baseball person pointing out that the NL was off to an early interleague lead. Indeed, it was, but I noticed at the time that, despite that, AL hitters had generated the superior interleague OPS. This plot is similar to the one above, but showing OPS differential instead of run differential. OPS is a good indicator of expected runs. So, before, we looked at a proxy for Pythagorean record. This is a proxy for BaseRuns record.
It all lines up. In interleague play, the NL has won more games. It’s also scored more runs, and generated the better OPS. The current OPS differential is 13 points, and the AL has finished with the OPS lead for 15 years running. You can see things got close in 2013, but, close isn’t enough. The NL finally has an actual advantage.
For the sake of being more accurate, I could’ve calculated interleague wOBA instead of OPS, but I got all my information from Baseball Reference, and they don’t have wOBA displayed. It shouldn’t make a significant difference; wOBA and OPS are tightly correlated, and switching to wOBA wouldn’t reverse the NL’s present lead. Maybe calculating wOBA is something I’ll have to do later on, should the gap narrow, and when even more games are in the books.
There is just one asterisk. To this point, through 39% of the interleague schedule, the NL has outplayed the AL. And by the end, everyone will have played an equal number of interleague games, barring the rare cancellation. So, by the end, the league numbers can be taken as being representative. But the AL teams who have played the most interleague games are the Twins, White Sox, Orioles, and Blue Jays. The NL teams who have played the most interleague games are the Nationals, Brewers, Pirates, and Cardinals. The weighted average winning percentage of the AL interleague participants so far is .477. The weighted average winning percentage of the NL interleague participants so far is .513. That is presumably responsible for some of the NL’s performance. Maybe all of it. Moving forward, better AL teams will play more often against inferior NL teams, and the numbers will likely reflect that.
We’ll see, then, if the AL manages to climb back to a better-than-.500 winning percentage. There should be 184 more interleague games. If the AL wants to get to a final record of 151-149, it’ll need to go 99-85, good for a winning percentage of .538. Last year the AL finished with a winning percentage of .533; the year before that, it was .550. This is absolutely doable. It’ll just require teams to beat the teams they should be beating.
So concludes this June 20 interleague update. I never really know if anyone truly cares about this, since nobody roots for leagues, but even if you’re not interested in interleague play itself, you might be interested in a jeopardized streak. The AL has taken this for so many years. The AL has been the better league for so many years. If it wants to keep that up, well, there’s work to do.
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.



This surprises me, because AL players have been dominating the FG leaderboard, all but two of the top thirteen currently. It’s possible, of course, that the AL has more elite talent, but the NL makes up for this with better players in the second tier.
It could also mean (if indeed the AL is worse overall than the NL) that if you put the top NL players in the AL that their stats would be better.
Stupid question, but I’ve always wondered this… Are AL players penalized by context-neutral stats such as wRC+ or OPS+? Having a DH instead of a pitcher batting raises the leaguewide offensive output, so it kinda waters down context-neutral stats. Would that mean Mike Trout would put up even better numbers in the NL? Am I reaching hard to find another reason to glorify Trout? Probably.
wRC+ is calculated against a baseline of non-pitchers’ performance. The NL’s overall wRC+ is 94, the AL’s overall wRC+ is 99 (because their pitchers do hit a bit in interleague games), but if you filter to non-pitchers each league’s overall wRC+ is 100.
So pitcher hitting itself wouldn’t water down context-neutral stats–a player still has to hit as well as the average non-pitcher to get a wRC+ of 100. The one thing is that the DH does boost league stats a bit because DHs are above-average hitters (wRC+ of 108).
It always seemed unfair, until a few years ago the A’s had the best interleague record overall, like at one point Houston was like 3-24 against Oak. Im not sure if they are still tops after a rougher couple of years.
“nobody roots for leagues”
*thousands of children who’s crews rep the NL burst into tears*
Bizarrely, college sports fans seem to do this a lot. I think it is all an orchestrated ploy by ESPN to create more interest in games. Why try to pull an audience from two teams’ fan bases when you can pull from 20+ teams’ fan bases? Personally, I think it is stupid to cheer for your rivals to succeed.
NCAAF and to a much lesser extent men’s basketball it makes some sense.
In 2004 the Auburn Tigers went undefeated in the SEC, and didn’t get into the BCS playoffs. I don’t want this to happen to Alabama, if that means rooting for Auburn when they’re playing a non-SEC foe so as to make sure that the best team(s) in the SEC get into the playoffs.
As long as people are rating teams based on schedule difficulty, and that has a substantial influence on the post-season, I want my teams foes to beat everyone ELSE on their schedule.
A fourteen year streak over or under .500 sounds very unlikely… unless you’re from Pittsburgh, of course.
Today’s random non-baseball fact: the Steelers’ last losing season was in 2003. Admittedly, their streak includes three separate 8-8 finishes. And their current streak isn’t even the longest in the NFL – New England has had only winning seasons since Tom Brady took over in 2001.
bizarre
That’s so weird, you’d expect the exact opposite: Yankees and Red Sox are both dominant for the first time in a decade. Angels are relevant again. Astros are now in the AL. Mariners are actually good, etc… So many AL teams have experienced resurgences, so I would have expected them to dominate interleague play.
While this is true to a degree, the AL also has a lot more teams that really suck. Meanwhile, 9 of the 15 teams in the NL currently have a winning record, and only 3 of the others have totally fallen out of the playoff race so far.
I think what it speaks to is how putrid the AL Central is….
East vs East- NL up 22-20
West vs West- AL up 16-13
so other 2 divisions are 36-35 AL leading…..
Central vs Central- NL up 29-18.
I’d say that .513 plays .477 explains practically everything.
No need to obfuscate with “a small sample” which isn’t actually a small sample at all — it’s about 40% of the inter-league season — because it’s simpler to admit that, so far, better teams have, on the whole, played worse teams.
That doesn’t explain things like Pittsburgh being 10-2 in interleague play and 26-35 vs the NL. Or Cincy being 6-1 in interleague play. Part of the records that the NL has includes the really good interleague play of especially Pittsburgh.
Perhaps not. But Jeff’s hypothesis is based upon a comparison of all AL teams in 2018 against all NL teams in 2018. I think it explains that… mostly.
Unless the Pirates and the Reds are stalwart long-term representatives of NL interleague play, and they might very well be … I don’t see them factoring into the numbers as presented here.
Pittsburgh went 9-1 vs Detroit and Chicago WS. I don’t think anyone thinks of Pittsburgh as being that much better than either of those teams. The only reason why Pittsburgh’s record is where it is right now is those 10 games. Cincy went 6-1 vs Detroit, Kansas City, and Minnesota. Those are equal teams and Cincy destroyed them.
As my post earlier showed- the entire reason why the NL has the lead right now is the Central vs Central games. The East/East and West/West games right now are tied- 36-36. But NL Central has beaten AL Central 29-18 so far.
what do we have left? East/East have 57 games left with each other. West/West have 71 games left with each other. 128 games there. Central/Central has 53 games left with each other. So would say that the area where the NL has had the big advantage will have fewer games the rest of the way.
Also would say the AL Central really sucked this bad last year as well. Last year- the AL Central was only 42-58 in interleague play. Division champ Cleveland was only 6-14 in interleague play last year. Only Minnesota had a winning record. Only the NL East had a worse interleague record last year(at 40-60- playing mostly AL west teams).
So the fact that we’ve had more central/Central games than East/East and West/West has skewed the numbers towards the NL.
The Al has bigger and wealthier franchises on average than the NL. Houston is the 4th largest city in the USA and has its own team . Boston its own team. The Yankees are by far the biggest market in all of sports. You could put 3 more franchises in NY and NJ and the Yankees would still be mid market. The AL has a market called Canada for one team. Baltimore is still a decent market. Detroit has fallen, but it still has solid resources. The Angels have tons of resources. I can go on.
The NL has DC, SF, Atlanta, Philly, Phoenix, the Cubs, the Mets and maybe Denver as its biggest markets. None are close to Boston or houston and or they share their market with another team . more small market and fewer big market resources. More resources nowadays often equals wins!
Thanks for that insightful analysis! You’ve saved me untold wasted hours of my life spent reading thoughtful pieces put together by people who have varying viewpoints on a sport I love and related matters that interest me.
Just a quick technical issue that I have with this: your graphs should not have the various points connected. They should be separate dots representing different statistical points (in this case winning percentage, OPS, and run differential in any given year).
Nobody roots for leagues? Try telling that to anybody who watches the All-Star Game.