80+ Wins In 1st 115 Games
Posted by Steve Lombardi on August 11, 2010
How many teams, since 1920, have won 80+ of their first 115 games of the season?
Here's the answer:
From 1920 to 2010, Wins, In team's first 115 games, sorted by greatest Wins by a Team
| Rk | Tm | Year | #Matching | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NYY | 1998 | 86 | Ind. Games |
| 2 | STL | 1944 | 84 | Ind. Games |
| 3 | SEA | 2001 | 83 | Ind. Games |
| 4 | PHA | 1931 | 82 | Ind. Games |
| 5 | PHA | 1929 | 82 | Ind. Games |
| 6 | NYY | 1927 | 81 | Ind. Games |
| 7 | NYY | 1939 | 81 | Ind. Games |
| 8 | CLE | 1954 | 80 | Ind. Games |
| 9 | CLE | 1995 | 80 | Ind. Games |
| 10 | BAL | 1969 | 80 | Ind. Games |
.
There are some teams here that I expected to see - like the '01 M's, '98 Yanks, the '27 and '39 Yanks, and the '54 Indians and '69 O's. But, I never knew how well the '44 Cardinals started their season. In terms of a World Championship team having a great season, they're right up there - with respect to wins and W% - with the other great teams. But, they don't get as much ink in the "legendary team" department - at least outside of St. Louis. Pehaps that was because of WWII? I don't know...it's just a thought.
August 11th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Wow, they went 49-11 in July & August. They were at one point 61-games over .500. I think the war-year champions are at a disadvantage historically because of the lack of talent league-wide; not to mention that the Cards beat the Brownies in their only WS appearance. The all-St. Louis thing doesn't help either.
August 11th, 2010 at 12:36 pm
I expected to see the 1984 Tigers, but they were 74-41 at the 115 game mark.
August 11th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Tmckelv - Yeah, I would not have been shocked to see the '84 Tigers on the list and am a little surprised that they didn't make it. Guess they somewhat cooled off after their 1st 40-something games...I say without looking.
August 11th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Yeah, the 1984 tigers were 35-5 (after 40) and then went 39-36 (if my math is correct) for a total of 74-41 (after 115). The amount they cooled off really flew under the radar (presumably because of the huge lead they had in the AL east at the time). Being a Yankee fan, I am sure I had long since given up on the Division and spent all of my time concentrating on the Mattingly/Winfield duel for the batting title.
August 11th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
I'm not sure if this applies to any of those teams (since this mostly happaned in the 1800s and is very rare recently), but if a team gets a forfeit win, it will not be counted here.
August 11th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
The "Frivolities" section can do game-log analyses outside of the PI. The full list (since 1871) is here (ties count as games without a decision so not all W-L records add up to 115:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/games/streaks.cgi?games=115&year=ALL&SHOW=TOT&includes=start_year&game_start=10&game_end=135&teams=ALL&orderby=wins&submit=Find+Streaks
1998 Yankees still top the list. 1902,1909 Pirates, 1906-07 Cubs, 1904-05,1915 Giants. The 1919 Reds started 81-34 so they might have had a shot against the Black Sox without the fix. Several 19th Century teams also pepper the top of the list.
The 1886 Detroit Wolverines had the best start of teams that didn't win anything. (Chicago ranked ahead of them and won the pennant). After that, its the 1942 Dodgers, 1897 Orioles, 1962 Dodgers, 1909 Cubs, 1954 Yankees and 1993 Giants.
August 11th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
Along the same lines as this post, it would be interesting to see which teams have finished the most games back in a season. The biggest I can recall is the '62 Mets finishing 60.5 games back. OUCH!
August 11th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
[...] thе rest here: 80+ Wins In 1st 115 Games » Baseball-Reference Blog » Blog Archive Share and [...]
August 11th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
Brian,
Baseball's bid for worst team in the history of sport -- the 1899 Cleveland Spiders -- finished 84 games out.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL/1899.shtml
I happen to know this off the top of my head because I recently noticed that last year's NBA Minnesota Timberwolves, like the Spiders, finished 35 games out of second-to-last place. As far as I know, that may be the furthest out of second-to-last any team has ever finished.
August 11th, 2010 at 3:29 pm
As far as I know, that [35 games] may be the furthest out of second-to-last any team has ever finished.
John, even Spiders and Wolves can't outdo the 1916 Athletics — 40 games out of seventh place.
August 11th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
Just look at who the Cards played in the '44 Series to see how diluted the talent pool was -- the Browns, whose ony appearance in the Classic depended on no little measure on the Nazis and Tojo's crew taking our best players away.
August 11th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
Another thing about that 1944 Cardinals team is that they are the only National League team in the list. I wonder if the NL has been naturally more balanced throughout in the first 2/3 of the season, with eventual league leaders pulling way near the end.
August 11th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
Thanks, Kahuna. I'd been looking for that!
August 12th, 2010 at 3:25 am
[...] the original here: 80+ Wins In 1st 115 Games » Baseball-Reference Blog » Blog Archive Tags: beat-the-brownies, brownies, cards, games, over-500-, talent-league-wide, their-only, [...]
August 12th, 2010 at 8:52 am
I was a little surprised not to see the '86 Mets (108-54)... I remember them starting ridiculously hot and then scuffling a bit at the end... they won 11 straight in the first two weeks of the year and had (I think) four other six-or-more win streaks after that. But looking it up now, I see that they had a rough stretch after the All-Star Break that kept them four wins short.
August 12th, 2010 at 9:20 am
This is interesting -- it implies that truly powerful teams manifest their supremacy by the 80-game mark. My one-and-only article (so far) for SABR's "By the Numbers" newsletter analyzed the standardized run differential adjusted for league size to determine the strongest and weakest teams relative to the level of competition. The 1944 Cardinals came out on top as the best-ever World Series-winning team -- the rest of that war-depleted league was practically uniformly abysmal. The 1919 Reds were indeed better vs. their competition than the Black Sox were against theirs (though the 1919 NL is considered a bit weaker overall), and the 1916 Athletics were indeed the worst team of all time by this measure.
August 12th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
Interestingly, it was an even split on how they finished the year. Five ended up winning the World Series, and five ended up losing. Three organizations (Yankees, Indians and Athletics) have multiple teams on the list, with the Yankees (shockingly) doing best, with all three dominant teams winning the World Series. The Athletics split. Cleveland Indians fans may want root for a slightly less dominant team to make the World Series next time around. Both their teams ended up losing.
August 12th, 2010 at 9:36 pm
Cleveland Indians fans may want root for a slightly less dominant team to make the World Series next time around. Both their teams ended up losing.
It's a slightly different point, but my Padres have got to choose weaker opponents for their (rare) World Series appearances. So far they've played the 1984 Tigers and the 1998 Yankees — arguably the best teams of their respective decades. Any wonder the Padres have won one World Series game ever?