From: drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker)
Subject: Re: '34 & '36 Braves (was Re: Why Rabbit is in the Hall)
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 01:31:18 GMT

Roger Lustig asks, "why were the 35 Braves so very bad, when the 34
and 36 Braves were half-decent?"

1. A lot of bad luck. Their records were 78-73 in 34, then they
dropped to 38-115 (!!!), and then bounced back to 71-83. A 41 game
drop in the standings, followed by a 32.5 game gain. Their Pythagorean
projections for wins are 72.2, 47.9, 67.4; so they were over
projection, by 5.8 in 34 and 3.6 in 36, and under by 9.9 in 35.

If you look at their linear weight projection, they were over by 6.5
in 34, then under by 19 in 35, and on target in 36. That means they
not only had the bad luck to win fewer games than expected from runs
scored/allowed, they also scored fewer runs than their stats
indicated, by about 30. In 34, they had overscored their projection by
25.

Still, their linear weights expected wins go 71.5, 56.9, 71.3. That is
a 14 win difference; huge, but not nearly as much as the 40 wins we
started with.

2. Between 34 and 35, the lwts of every offensive regular declined,
with the exception of Wally Berger. From 35 to 36, 5 of 8 regulars
improved.
                                  34    35   36    D1    D2
1b: B. Jordan                     0.0  -0.8  0.2   -0.8   1.0
2b: McManus, Mallon, Cuccinello   0.5  -0.8  4.2   -1.3   5.0
ss: Urbanski                      0.9  -4.8 -1.3   -5.7   3.5
3b: Whitney, Whitney, Coscarart   0.3  -0.6 -0.9   -0.9  -0.3
rf: Thompson, RMoore, GMoore     -0.4  -0.9  1.6   -0.5   2.5
cf: Berger                        2.9   3.2  1.7    0.3  -1.5
lf: Lee                           0.9  -0.4 -2.8   -1.3  -2.4
c: Spohrer, Spohrer, Lopez       -1.1  -1.6  0.5   -0.5   2.1
Total regulars                    3.1  -6.7  3.2   -9.8   9.9

So Jordan had an off year and then came back; Mallon couldn't replace
the apparently retired McManus, and was replaced by Cuccinello, who
could; Urbanski had a terrible year, and came more than half way back;
Whitney dropped off; the coming of Gene Moore made a great improvement
in 36; and the replacement of Spohrer by Lopez also helped the team in
36.

3. The pitching improved considerably between 35 and 36, after getting
only quite a bit worse from 34 to 35:

p1: Frankhouse, Frankhouse, Chaplin  0.8 -0.9 -0.4    -1.7  0.5
p2: Brandt, Brandt, Lanning          0.0 -1.6  0.0    -1.6  1.6
p3: Cantwell                        -0.9 -0.7  1.4     0.2  2.1
p4: Smith                           -1.2  0.3  0.2     1.5 -0.1
p5: Rhem, MacFayden, MacFayden      -0.4 -1.6 -1.8    -1.2 -0.2
p6: Betts, Betts, Reis              -1.3 -2.3 -0.4    -1.0  1.9
rest of staff                       -4.3 -6.1 -0.1    -1.8  6.0
Total                               -8.9 -12.9 -1.1   -4.0 11.8

The improvement of Smith and Cantwell is offset by the decline of
Frankhouse. That leaves the decline of Brandt, Betts, Rhem/MacFayden,
and others as pure losses. In 36, everyone improved or declined only
very slightly; the pitching of rookie Lanning and journeyman minor
leaguer Chaplin (hadn't pitched in the majors since '31) was notable;
Reis was a lot better than Betts, whose career ended in 35. Cantwell
was a fairly good pitcher (20-10, 2.61 ERA in 33), who was a
junkballer (career 2.0 K/G, 2.2 BB/G), with a career NERA of 1.01
(i.e, just better than league average). His best year was clearly '33,
but it looks as if the 255 innings he threw (by far the most in his
career) killed his arm. His performance dropped drastically in 34 and
35 before recapturing the old form in 36. He had the extreme bad luck
to go 4-25 in 1935, vs. an expected 10-19 with normal Brave run
support, 13-16 with league average support).

4. So to summarize. The dropoff of 41 wins from 34 to 35 is due to: a
net loss of 25 from their expected wins, a drop of 11 wins from the
offense and 4 from the defense. The improvement of 32.5 games in 36
comes from a gain of 18.5 in expectation, an improvement of 2 on
offense and 12 on defense.

5. A big part of the improvement in play were two trades with the
Dodgers. In the two trades they sent Frankhouse, Brandt, and Randy
Moore, who had combined for -3.4 lwts in 35, to the Bums for Gene
Moore, Cuccinello, Lopez, and Reis, who combined for +5.9 lwts in 36;
a turnaround of 9.3 of the total 14.

Clay D.