"The Other 42"

[Derwood]

I'm not sure who said it first, but Steve Stone quoted it a few times: "With few exceptions, every team is going to win 60 games and lose 60 games every year. It's what you do with the other 42 that spells the difference between success and failure." (seriously paraphrased)

 

So, here is what all the MLB teams did with "The Other 42" this year:

 

STL: 40-2
CHW: 39-3
LAA: 35-7
NYY: 35-7
BOS: 35-7
CLE: 33-9
ATL: 30-12
HOU: 29-13
OAK: 28-14
PHI: 28-14
NYM: 23-19
MIN: 23-19
FLA: 23-19
SD:  22-20
WSH: 21-21
MIL: 21-21
TOR: 20-22
CHC: 19-23
TEX: 19-23
ARZ: 17-25
SF:  15-27
BAL: 14-28
CIN: 13-29
LAD: 11-31
DET: 11-31
SEA: 9-33
PIT: 7-35
COL: 7-35
TB:  7-35
KC:  0-42 (only won 56 games)

[rawaction]

I've always hated when Stone said that. Not every team wins 60, and not every team loses 60. Granted most do, but you can't simplify the season down to 42 games. If you're a good team you will win games, if you're bad, you will lose. It's about how you do in 162 games.

[erik316wttn]

I'd say it's about win 20, lose 20.

 

There are about 20 games a year that you're going to lose no matter what, and about 20 a year that you're going to win no matter what.

[BigbadB]

I agree with Raw. It's all about 162 games. You can't take a day off.

 

You go out and try to win every game. The fans who paid top dollar to sit in the stands deserve that much.

 

Games in April and May mean just as much as the games in August and September. Home games mean just as much as road games. Night games mean just as much as day games. Intradivision games mean just as much as non division games.

[erik316wttn]

I agree with Raw. It's all about 162 games. You can't take a day off.

 

You go out and try to win every game. The fans who paid top dollar to sit in the stands deserve that much.

 

Games in April and May mean just as much as the games in August and September. Home games mean just as much as road games. Night games mean just as much as day games. Intradivision games mean just as much as non division games.

 

I agree totally.

 

It really irks me when people say "Oh, well it's only April. No biggie."

 

What if you finish a game out? Then I bet that game in April that you deemed "no biggie" looms very large, doesn't it?

 

Games count the same in April, September, or anywhere in between.

[AlwaysaCub]

I think the point is there are 50 games or so a year where the other team will beat itself and so you will win. There are 50 games or so each year in which you will beat yourself. Those other 62 games are the games, when neither team shoots itself in the foot, are the games that matter.

[BigbadB]

I think the point is there are 50 games or so a year where the other team will beat itself and so you will win. There are 50 games or so each year in which you will beat yourself. Those other 62 games are the games, when neither team shoots itself in the foot, are the games that matter.

 

But, since you don't know which game you are currently playing falls within that grouping (shooting self in foot, other team shooting self in foot, or other), you have to play every game as if it is a game that must be won.

[Derwood]

Stone wasn't saying that the 120 games don't matter. He's saying that historically speaking, just about every team will win and lose 60. It's just what happens. So basically if you can put together a streak of good baseball over a 6-8 week span, the rest of the season can be .500 ball and you'll make the playoffs.

[Too Tall]

Stone wasn't saying that the 120 games don't matter. He's saying that historically speaking, just about every team will win and lose 60. It's just what happens. So basically if you can put together a streak of good baseball over a 6-8 week span, the rest of the season can be .500 ball and you'll make the playoffs.

so your saying 3 losing streaks of 7 games or more is not good?

[chopsx9]

Obviously you need to try to win every game and April's games count just as much as October's; I don't think that is what he was talking about.

 

There are going to be games where the team plays as well as it can and they are still going to lose akin to a pitcher throwing a "perfect" pitch and it still getting hit for a homerun. The opposite also holds true. These are the extremes I am not saying all 60 wins or losses are games like this.

 

You could field a team of all the best players and they are still going to lose more than few games.

 

The difference is a good team will execute in those other 42 games and win virtually all of them and a mediocre or bad team will not, and lose more than they win.

 

You can argue about the 60-60-42 split, but historically they hold up pretty well. Obviously it's not exact but I think it's a pretty fair statement. I think it would be pretty tough to go back and determine which games were which but there are lots of games, especially this season, that you could look back and say they could have gone either way. (Most one run games would be good examples)