The teams in my 1969-72 AL league are all nearing 140 games, and I've done full stats for four of the 12 teams, so I thought I'd post an update. I usually do stat updates about every 20 games or so. Some will be done at game 139, some at game 140, or 141 -- depending upon how a series breaks. It's a dice and card league, using actual teams -- three from each of the four years. There's one per franchise. I do all the stats by hand.
Standings:
West East
'69 Minn 93-43 '69 Bal 81-58
'71 Oak 81-54 '70 NYY 73-66
'72 Chi 66-73 '71 Det 69-67
'71 KC 63-72 '72 Bos 67-71
'72 Cal 54-84 '70 Cle 67-72
'70 Mil 48-89 '69 Was 61-74
The Yankees had crept to within four games of the Orioles before losing seven of their last eight.
Here are some highlights and lowlights of the four teams I've done stats for through 139 games:
'69 Orioles: Team BA .256, 134 HR, 544 runs (power lags behind real life), 2.69 ERA. Real life: 2.83.
Hitters: Powell 24 HR, 87 RBI, .278, 5 triples. Blair 23 HR, 68 RBI, 36
SB, .263. Buford 80 runs, .302. FRobinson 25 HR, 62 RBI, 75 runs, .295.
Pitchers: Cuellar 20-9, 2.14, 163 K. Dick Hall 0.90 ERA. Hardin 12-5,
2.96. McNally 9-16, 3.08, 170 K. (ERA is better than IRL, but that
record!). Palmer 12-5, 2.46. Phoebus 13-10, 4.24. Watt 17 saves, 1.19
ERA.
'72 White Sox: Team BA .229, 107 HR, 485 runs. Team ERA 3.21.
Hitters: Dick Allen 39 HR, 93 RBI, 120 K, .285 (only one HR in last 17
games). Carlos May 13 HR, 74 RBI, 31 SB, .299. Andrews .185, Alvarado
.192, Morales .181, Spiezio .217, Reichardt .217.
Pitchers: Bahnsen 12-18, 4.23. Bradley 15-10, 196 K, 2.82. Wood 308 IP, 16-13, 181 K, 2.13. Forster 63 2/3 IP, 73 K, 18 saves.
*Wood has made 40 starts and yet his 308 IP trail his real-life pace of
377 IP (which he got in a 154-game season). He's gonna be working a lot
the last 23 games.
'70 Indians: Team BA .244, 144 HR, 564 runs. Team ERA 3.56, with 958 K.
Hitters: Sims 25 HR, 62 RBI. Fosse 16 HR, 62 RBI, .297. Nettles 14 HR,
51 RBI, .213. Foster 17 HR, 58 RBI, 35 doubles, .294. Pinson 23 HR, 72
RBI, 7 triples, .300. Uhlaender 14 HR, 47 RBI, .271.
Pitchers: Hargan 9-12, 2.73. McDowell 269 IP, 268 K, 15-9, 2.58. (His
real-life numbers 20-12, 2.92, 305 IP, 304 K). Hand 9-8. Paul 8-5.
'70 Yankees: Team BA .246, 105 HR, 534 runs. Team ERA 3.15.
Hitters: Gibbs 11 HR, 30 RBI in 172 AB. Munson .301. Cater .305. Clarke
594 AB, 39 SB, .227. Kenney 11 triples, .194 (.193 IRL). Michael .159.
Blefary 12 HR, .198. Murcer 20 HR, 89 RBI, .268. White 20 HR, 72 RBI,
85 runs, 38 SB, .302.
Pitchers: Bahnsen 13-14, 3.07. Kline 8-8, 3.18. McDaniel 3-5, 1.91, 21
saves. Peterson 15-10, 3.10 (he was 15-7). Stottlemyre 257 IP 134 K,
16-12, 2.62 ERA.
Dana,
Nice proejct - a bell botom classic! It will be interesting to see the Twins' stats in light of how much they're playing above even the Birds!
Ken
Ken, thanks. Just in some off-the-top stats as I've rolled on with the Twins, I know they have some impressive numbers going--Oliva, Tovar, Reese and Carew all at or over .300, Killebrew about 42-44 HR, Oliva with just a ton of extra base hits and RBI. And the pitching: Perry is 24-4, 1.52, Kaat has 17 wins and Perranoski hasn't given up a run in the Twins' last 25 games or so. This is very much a pitcher's league, with some teams, like the Chisox listed here, and the Royals, Angels and Brewers all quite bad offensively. The Brewers were, at last check, hitting .204!
Great stuff, I am interested to see how it all turns out. How do you keep the stats in order for this endeavor? Thats always been my downfall
After each game, I tally the individual stats in a notebook for about 12 hitting categories and seven or eight pitching categories. I do it the very old fashioned way: With slashes in groups of five. //// equal four. //// with a line through it is five, etc. It is faster to do that than write down numbers, and when a batter gets a lot of AB he'll have a lot of groups of fives. I just count them (13 groups is, of course, 65 AB). Then after about 20 games or so, I tally them and add them to a more permanent stat sheet that I keep with actual numbers, and keep updating that as the season goes on. I add the team totals by calculator.
It's a bear, and part of the reason it's taken me about five years to get this far, but I enjoy it. It reminds me of how I used to do stats when I was a kid, and, well, I guess I've never changed!
the notebook method works for me too. Then I shoot the totals into Excel and it calculates avgs and era. I did it that way as a kid as well. Enjoy and kee those results coming
Really great Oliva!.....Motivates me in my own league,seeing how all you guys rollon!
You,Bob,Seaj,Terry,Coach,all you folks, make it that much more enjoyable.
Perry,Kaat,and Perra! They're rollin'!
Thanks for postin'!
Jim
The old fashioned way of record keeping!..... same here!
Thanks guys!
Nice replay. You really got those '69 Twins kick'n butt. I'm curious to see your '71 A'a stats. I'm old school record keeper also . Been doing it the same way for over 30 years. Keep post'n.
Vida's having a great year for the A's, but their offense has struggled.
It's hard to believe that those Twins have such a lead on the '71 A's. I've always considered that team to be at the elite level while looking at the Twins as just very good. Dave McNally much really be pitching in some hard luck. I am also surprised by the good play of the '70 Yanks-they never came close to being good when they were used back in the day. Was 1972 the year that Wood can start every three games?
Yes, '72 was the year Wood pitched every third day. It mainly took place in the second half of the season. The team has three solid starters but could not find that adequate fourth or spot starter. The bullpen was effective as well but as you can see in Olivaforhall's update that the offense was anemic even with Allen and May.
Wood had 49 starts for the White Sox that year, which was shortened by the early-season strike. Prorated, he'd probably have to have 52 starts for a 162-game season!
The '70 Yankees were actually the best team (record-wise) of the drought between '64-76. They won 93, and I've read where Houk said they could've won more. In the book "Dog Days," he predicted before the season they would contend with the O's. Got sort of close.
I have been disappointed by the A's, a bit, too. But they have some holes that they filled better in the next few years. Starting pitching drops off after Catfish and Vida, and the outfield isn't great offensively. Rudi got MUCH better the next year, and Reggie, despite his 32 HR had only 80 RBI in real life. It took them until '74 with Bill North to solve the center field issue. Still, they won 101 in real life in 71 and, even in this league, are on a pace to finish close to that (97 wins at current clip). It's just that the Twins are so wildly overperforming.
Great update oliva, or shall I refer to you as #6. I'm sorry I did not mention that in my original reply to mrpuna. The Royals were tough even though they did not contend. How did you choose the teams for your league?
I tried to get a general representation of each franchise for that period, with the restrictions of having three teams per year as the starting point. From there, I had a few teams I knew I wanted to use: '69 Twins and O's, 71 A's, 71 Tigers and 70 Indians. Then, I basically started filling in the blanks with what I hoped or thought would be the best choices. I actually liked the 71 and 72 Yankees a bit better (better years from Murcer, 72 had the big year from Lyle), but the '70 team had the best record. The 69 Senators were the obvious choice from the Nats/Rangers (best record, big years from Howard and Epstein, good starting pitching). Also, two of the 72 teams were teams I wanted to use — Angels with Ryan's first season, and the White Sox with Wood, Allen and their close finish. So I was left with so-so choices in a couple other spots, yet even they had their bright spots: I went with the '70 Brewers because of Tommie Harper, 72 Red Sox (largely because of the hole to fill, although they gave me Tiant's comeback season and Fisk's rookie of the year season), and 71 Royals (which had a big year from Otis). The '70 Brewers were the best of the choices there anyway. Probably the '69 Red Sox were the best team from Boston, but to have made them work, I would have had to given up either the '69 Twins or O's and, while they both were very good, of course, in '70, it would have required taking a much worse Brewers or Indians team. The Royals were perhaps a bit better overall in '72, with the addition of John Mayberry, but the '71 version is still fun to play. So, just some puzzling together within the confines of my goal of three teams from each year. In the end, I got some big individual card years on pretty much every team (even though not all of them are reflecting that in my league).
Neat concept for playing. I like this league. Looks like fun.
The 1972 Red Sox are by far the team I played the most games with. When I was supposedly doing homework I was rolling the dice on a tablet-muffles the noise-and playing hundreds of series between the Sox and the other conteders. I never could make up for that 1/2 game they lost by, though.
Thanks for the explanation Oliva....I look forward to the final results and good luck. mr puna, I am still shocked to this day that the commissioner did not plan for such events as he had several months to do it. They did a much better job in '81 with not nearly the amount of time to plan. I think what happened to the Red Sox that year was actually the biggest injustice to a team in major league history.
