Keep leads in each inning in 2007

Taken from the Baseball-Reference.com Play Index Team Inning Summary, here is a graph of the 2007 performance at all teams keeping leads each inning.


What this tells you, for example, is that when a team entered the second inning with a lead, it kept that lead through the end of the second inning almost 85% f the time in 2007. For the second inning, the actual data was 1063 out of 1254 second-inning leads retained (84.8%)

As the innings go on, the number of leads increases. For example, teams entered the third inning with a lead 1636 times in 2007 (as compared to 1063 second-inning leads,) and retained those leads 1436 times (87.8%.)

Something wacky happened in the fourth inning, though. Those leads weren't as safe. Teams entered the fourth inning with a lead 1904 times, but kept them just 1630 times (85.6%.) Now, this is based on an awful lot of leads, so it's very unlikely to be a statistical anomaly (more on this below.) My guess is that in 2007, the fourth inning saw the top of the lineup come up to bat again a bunch, and this group was able to erase the deficit more often than the bottom of the order could do it in the third inning.

From innings 5 through 8, there was a steadily proportional increase in the lead being retained each inning. Then in the ninth inning, we saw an extra bump up to 93.4%. I assume this bump is due to the use of closers who are good at retaining leads, or at least better than the middle- and late-inning relievers often pitching in the 6th, 7th, and 8th innings.

I went ahead and calculated the same data for 2006 and 2005 as well, and added them to the graph:


So it's the same 2007 data (blue) plus 2006 data (yellow) and 2005 data (green.)

The 2006 data looks pretty similar to the 2007 data, with a drop in the 4th inning, pretty much a steady increase in innings 5 through 8, and then an extra bump in the 9th, keeping those leads safe.

The 2005 data is fairly wacky, though. It shows that there were more rallies in the 3rd inning, and also more rallies in the 6th inning as compared to the 5th. In fact, you notice that even in 2006 (yellow) the 5th and 6th innings were quite comparable. The 2005 data also shows a 9th-inning bump.

What's going on here? Well, it's complicated. I am guessing that the unusual behavior has to do with the size of the leads.

If this data looked only at 1-run leads, then we'd expect it to be very flat in innings 5 through 8. In other words, it's pretty much as easy to lose a 1-run lead in the 5th, 6th, 7th, or 8th innings. But in reality, as games go on, leads tend to get larger. In other words, it's much more like for a team to have a 3-run lead in the 8th inning than it is in the 4th inning. So, on average, an 8th inning deficit would be harder to overcome than a 4th-inning deficit (since it's larger.) But, from year to year, even with 1000-2000 games at play, there are variations. Some years, those later leads are smaller, or early leads are bigger, or teams hit better or worse with runners in scoring position, for example.

So what are the take-home messages?

• Closers do seem pretty effective at retaining 9th-inning leads.
• Teams that enter the 2nd inning with a lead retain that lead by the end of the 2nd inning about 85% of the time.
• Teams that enter the 9th inning with a lead retain that lead by the end of the 9th inning about 93% of the time.
• What happens in between is a roughly linear trend, but it varies from year to year.
  

Elias Sports Bureau

I hate the Elias Sports Bureau. Although Elias holds themselves out as a service for the benefit of the fans' enjoyment of sports, they actually do damage to the pasttimes they cover. Elias monopolizes game statistics and prevents fans and other groups from enhancing analysis and coverage of the games. Mind you, I have no problem with Elias carefully protecting all their own research, such as finding the last 12 times a pitcher got more hits batting in a game than he allowed as the pitcher. But their continued and longstanding tradition of refusing to even sell the basic game event data is disgusting. You can read all about it in Alan Schwarz' amazing baseball statistics book, The Numbers Game.

Meanwhile, Elias' monopoly continues to crumble. With the recent rolling out of Baseball-Reference.com's Play Index, now any common fan can search for batting or pitching events, games, or streaks. Who the hell needs Elias?

B-R.com now has a Stat of the Day blog, for which I am invited blogger. This blog mainly uses the Play Index to find interesting baseball statistics. For the fans, by the fans, with no damned monopoly. Down with Elias.

Designated Hitter

Currently, MLB rule 6.10 (the designated hitter) allows a team to replace the pitcher in the batting order with a replacement batter. I wonder: why isn't this rule more generalized to allow replacement of any one defensive player? I ask because there are quite a few pitchers who are better batters than the weakest everyday player on some teams.

For example, there have been many cases in history where a National League manager chose to bat his pitcher 8th, ahead of a particularly weak-hitting position player. The most recent example is Dontrelle Willis, whom Jack McKeon batted twice ahead of Robert Andino, a very light-hitting shortstop. You can see more info about pitcher hitting 8th on my post over at Baseball-Reference.com here.

There have been quite a few pitchers with great batting seasons. Wes Obermueller hit .385 for the 2004 Brewers. Mike Hampton has hit for both great average and great power in recent years, before his injury troubles. Since 2000, Brian Bohanon, Jason Marquis, Jason Jennings, and Carlos Zambrano have all had seasons above .300.

Forget simply batting these guys 8th. Why not hit them 9th, but use the designated hitter to replace some weak-hitting middle infielder or the catcher? OK, so the National League doesn't have the DH rule. But, NL teams could use such an expanded DH rule when they hit in AL parks during interleague games or the World Series, and there are probably quite a few pitchers in the AL right now who could hit better than some lowly guy, such as Julio Lugo of the Red Sox.