|
http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2008/05/15/night-and-day-you-are-the-one/ So, I promised to get back to you on this quirky Brian Bannister day-night split issue. First, just as a reminder, here are Banny’s day and night splits for this year.
Brian Bannister by day (this year):
– 4-0, 0.62 ERA, 29 ip, 12 hits, 3 runs, 2 earned runs, 0 homers, 7 walks, 18 K.
Batting average against: .126; OPS: .320; OPS+ -10(!)*, Babip: .156.
Brian Bannister by night (this year):
– 0-4, 8.02 ERA, 21 1/2 ip, 33 hits, 19 runs, 19 earned, 5 homers, 5 walks, 11 K,
Batting average against: .344; OPS .960; OPS+ 158(!), Babip: .350.
Obviously it’s a very small sample size. Still it’s weird and, as mentioned here, his career numbers (also a relatively small sample size, though he is 10-1 during the day) are also quite skewed toward day baseball.
So, I asked Banny about this (through the magic of phone texting*) … his answer in a moment. First a quick look at the whole question of day-night splits … I have always been led to believe that it’s easier for hitters in the daytime. I think that’s just something as baseball fans you grow up believing. Well, it only makes sense. You would expect the light to be better.
*I don’t know … sometimes I wonder why old farts my age do not want to embrace new technologies. I keep hearing about people who hate phone texting … it’s moving us apart and all that. You know what? I love the phone text. I’m really not bothered at all that people aren’t talking as much as they used to talk … it seems to me that before there was a lot of POINTLESS talk going on. You wanted to call someone to ask one question, and you ended up having to talk about a lot of about the weather and gas prices and shallow family updates (“Yep, the kids are growing up all right!”). If I want to talk to someone, I can do that. But if I just want an answer, whammo, phone text … one question, one answer, no fuss. Nobody types more than they had to in a phone message — it’s a monument to conciseness.
To me this is like the pay-at-the-pump technology — I have heard some people say, “Well, this just makes us the kind of society where people don’t talk to each other as much.” No, it makes us the kind of society where I don’t have to deal with the person in the gas station who, in my general experience, had absolutely ZERO interest in my life except for what pump my car was at. Which is understandable. The days of people going into the filling station to talk to Goober about happenings around town are pretty far back in the rear view mirror. I swear, I think sometimes people just make up reasons to hate progress.
But, as Bill James often asks: Is it true? Do hitters have more success in the daytime.
And as Bill James often finds out: No. It’s not true.
Major League Baseball averages for day games, 2000-2007: .265/.335/.425
Major League Baseball averages for night games, 2000-2007: .267/.335/.426
There you go. So … forget that whole line of thinking, please. Teams scored very, very slightly better at night, are just slightly more likely to hit doubles and triples at night, and strike just an itty-bitty bit less often at night. Everything else, best I can tell, is identical. I don’t think this says batters hit BETTER at night … it seems likely to me that more often starting players play at night (managers seem likely to use backup catchers and rest some of their stars in a day game after a night game). I would guess that if you could ever remove the noise, day and night work out to be the same thing.
I think that if you really consider the factors, this makes sense. Lights are now so much better than they ever were before. Maybe hitting during the day was an advantage, you know, when they were playing night games in the Negro Leagues and the lights were roughly about the same height as Eric Montross. Plus, these players play more than twice as often at night so that becomes more the norm. Plus, there are advantages to hitting at night too — less glare, maybe, a more consistent light, and whatever else.
In other words, I don’t think any crazy day-night splits can be easily explained by baseball talk like “He hides the ball better at night” or whatever. Many point to the strange case of Bronson Arroyo, who ever since he has arrived in Cincinnati has had extreme night-day splits.
This year:
Night: 2-2, 4.46 ERA
Day: 0-2, 15.43 ERA
Last year:
Night: 8-9, 3.93 ERA
Day: 1-6, 5.35 ERA
2006
Night: 9-5, 2.52 ERA
Day: 5-6, 5.29 ERA
Well, a couple of things. For one … before he got to Cincinnati, he had not shown this nutty day-night tendency. So maybe it’s a lifestyle change. Maybe the day problems gotten to his head. Maybe he has vampire issues. Maybe it’s just a weird fluke. Or maybe there’s something deeper. I don’t really know. But I have a strong suspicion this doesn’t have much to do with hitters seeing the ball better against him during the day or whatever.
To Banny. I texted him the question: So what’s the deal with the day-night split? He texted me the sort of answer that, once again, explains why he’s the coolest guy in the game:
“The hitters tell me my fastball looks faster when they’re still a little hungover.”
So there you go. And then, because he is Banny, he delved a little deeper. “I don’t change anything,” he wrote. “The reasons have to do with:
1. Facing lower OPS lineups during the day.
– There could be something to this. Look at the lineups he’s faced in day games:
April 2: Threw seven shutout innings against Detroit — Edgar Renteria was the only Tigers player who got a hit the whole game (he got three). This was more or less the regular Tigers lineup, but Curtis Granderson was out, and Jacque Jones was still with the club.
April 8: Five tough innings against New York — really fought off the Yankees, allowing five hits and four walks. Derek Jeter did not play.
April 14: Complete game three hitter against Minnesota, which played without Joe Mauer and Michel Cuddyer.
May 11: Eight innings, two hits, zero runs against Baltimore … Michael Young did not play.
2. The difficulty of sweeping a team.
– Brian believes, a lot of people believe, that most teams play differently when they’ve won the first two games of a series (or, in the case of Baltimore, the first three). Maybe they get content. Maybe they lose a little edge. I’m not sure I completely into this … I haven’t really studied how teams do in third games after they’re won the first two. I probably wouldn’t know how to study it. I do know that Pete Rose says the same thing … he said what those great Reds teams had (did I mention this book … oh, never mind) was a killer instinct and this sort of unquenchable desire to win games just because they just really, really liked winning games, and really, really hated losing them.
Anyway, Brian has pitched a couple of times with his team facing a potential sweep, and he thinks that’s given him an edge. And he’s been on the other side of it too, and that’s given the other team an edge.
3. And it’s a small sample size, plus the day conditions have generally benefitted my pitching style so far this year (No Texas and hurricane conditions).
- This part is definitely true. Banny’s struggles at night are, in large part, due to two games. He got hit pretty good by the California Angels … I thought the Angels basically attacked Banny early in the count, had a good plan, and hit him a little bit. The other tough performance was in Texas, a home run park, and the wind was howling out, horrible conditions for any pitcher and especially Banny. He has given up five homers all year, three of them in that game. In those two games combined, he pitched 9 2/3 innings and gave up 12 runs. Take away those two games, Banny’s ERA is 1.99 this year.
Which just goes to show you how small a sample size we are dealing with here. I think it’s something worth watching because, hey, it’s baseball, and it’s Banny. But my opinion is that this is more or less just small sample size talking. | 
amused![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
tired
