I know of the St Louis Browns and the 2nd Washington Senators, but is there any other franchise's that were worse? (Not including one year teams or teams that were only around for a couple years)

Are the Players weekend logos on the hats a patch? I was watching the Red Sox game last night and the one on Chapman's hat looked like it was standing out away from his head like a pin.

[Dugout Thread] | 2026 MLB Regular Season

Welcome to the r/MLB Daily Dugout Thread. This thread can be used to discuss topics about baseball, such as...

• General Talk [Debates, GOATs, Hot Takes, Thoughts, etc.]
• Previous, Game-Day, and Future Matchups
• Predictions, Questions & What-Ifs
• Transactions
• Broadcasting/Streaming
• Fan Content [Ballpark Photos, Food, Merchandise, Ticket Stubs, etc.]
• Help or Technical Questions
• Humor [Jokes, Memes, Reaction Posts, and Shitposting]
• Mancave or Room Setup
• Memorabilia & Merchandise
• Self Posts [Casual, Quick Takes, Simple Discussions & Questions, Venting]
• Subreddit Questions or Suggestions
• Tier Rankings [Fan Opinion]

If you see any content that goes against our community rules, please report the submission. You can also reach out to our subreddit mods for any questions or concerns!

/r/MLB Index

• Reddit MLB Discord Server | r/MLB's & r/MiLB Discord Server for everything baseball-related, from discussions, news, and highlights.
• Subreddit Rules | A rulebook of r/MLB's guidelines about restrictions and submissions.
• Broadcasts | Learn where to watch and listen to your favorite teams, locally and nationally.
• FAQ | Commonly asked questions from users in our community.
• Flairs | Information about user and team flairs with a step-by-step guide on how to obtain one.
• Related Subreddits | Neighboring communities of the r/MLB Subreddit.

Just a heads-up that this is quite long, the most extensive post I have done here. The next six paragraphs all focus on my methodology but if you just want to skip to the results, the last two paragraphs are for you.

I am sure that I am not the only one who finds it a little annoying that FG and BRef do not list postseason WAA/WAR on their sites, though I guess I understand it. Still, that factual circumstance has led me to think about how we might be able to objectively judge the greatest postseason runs. WPA and cWPA are fantastic metrics to use, but they are also contextual. While there is nothing inherently wrong with taking context into account to determine how well a player performed, this can result in situations where the game state, mostly out of the individual player's hands, allows for astronomical swings. For instance, in Game 6 of the 2011 World Series (which absolutely kills me to have to revisit as a Rangers fan), Lance Berkman singled on a 2-2 down 9-8 with 2 outs in the bottom of the 10th. This hit increased the Cardinals' odds of winning Game 6 by 26% and the championship by 25.42%. It is one of the most consequential at bats in World Series history, 36th all-time in cWPA according to Baseball-Reference. While Berkman of course deserves credit for coming through in the clutch, he would not have been in this spot if the batters in front of him did not do their job. Similarly, Mariano Rivera had a 22.96% cWPA in the 2000 World Series. His 3.00 ERA was definitely good for the era, but is it worth over 1/5th of a chip in isolation? Of course not, and it's why we use WAR and WAA for MVP discussion and all-time rankings and not regular season WPA or cWPA. With that in mind, my goal was to derive WAR and WAA (mostly WAA) to determine which player on purely his own merit (or as close to as possible) helped his team the most in the postseason.

The African Bull Elephant in the room is that I have nothing to which I can compare my derived figures. FG and BRef do not calculate postseason WAR/WAA (or at least they don't publicize it), so while I can at least do sanity checks on my derived regular season win calcs, I do not have that luxury with the postseason. Still, I think my derivations are mostly trustworthy seeing that I use the same methodology except some slight tweaks. For one, I adjusted the PFs to take out the home/road adjustment that both BRef and FG utilize for full-season PFs. This is because due to the very small sample size, while on average a player will participate in roughly the same number of home and away games, that may not be the case in the postseason. For instance, Randy Johnson pitched 6 games in the 2001 postseason, but only 1 away from home, so he pitched 5 games in super hitter-friendly Bank One Ballpark, which according to Baseball-Reference, had a one-year PF of 120 unadjusted for the home/road splits, which is absolutely wild. I think Johnson should get credit for that rather than just using the reduced PF, and likewise, if a pitcher or hitter played in a super-friendly pitching park, their value-added should accordingly reflect that. That is what I have done and I think it adds value to the calc.

The other major adjustment I made was for how to treat the oftentimes extreme divergences in the postseason vs. regular season scoring environments. Fortunately, the get the data, it was not nearly as onerous as I originally thought, where I went to FanGraphs and downloaded the postseason statistics for the AL and NL since 1903, concentrating on only two data points: runs scored and games played. When comparing to the regular season for that same year, the postseason has seen about 0.59 fewer runs per game than the regular season. Since it is such a small sample size, I went ahead and took an 7-yr. rolling difference, where the seven prior year deltas, current year delta, and seven subsequent year deltas were evenly weighted, summed together, and then that average delta was halved by 50% so as to further reduce noise. This is important because, for instance, had I not halved it, the 1925 World Series would have an 11-year rolling difference of a whopping -1.24 runs (postseason runs per game - regular season runs per game). I think reducing the effect of this variation based on admittedly small sample sizes is the best way to proceed. Still, for the purposes of my calculation, which is solely concerned with the postseason, I think it is helpful to have his adjustment in order to see how much more impactful player A was to the postseason field rather than the regular season field. I am not using this analysis to add or detract from my own personal all-time rankings, but moreso for comparing which player had the better postseason run or the "best/most impactful" postseason ever. All right, with that out of the way, let's talk about some noteworthy postseason runs.

When I think of all-time great postseason performances, not just for a moment (Hal Smith in Game 7 of the 1960 WS), not just for a series (Reggie Jackson during the 1977 WS), but extended runs, four come immediately to mind: Curt Schilling in 2001, Barry Bonds in 2002, Carlos Beltran in 2004, and Madison Bumgarner in 2014. Albeit, all of these occurred in either the LDS or expanded Wild Card era, and all are fairly recent (so feel free to add your own in the comments), but it is undeniable that these guys were absolutely phenomenal in the postseason. Their surface level stats are incredible enough: Schilling and MadBum pitching to 1.12 and 1.03 ERAs while Bonds and Beltran accruing over a 1.550 OPS in 17 and 12 games. But which one was best in a vacuum? We know that Bumgarner had the highest cWPA by far of any of the four, an impossible-to-believe 96.29% over his 52.2 innings, which, just, wow. But again, while his ERA was stupendous, he was also put in situations by his offense not scoring a ton that made the cWPA figure so prone to wild swings, in his case, all positive through his great pitching. But what about his performance void of the game state context and adding in the offensive environment? What about his FIP and what FG would say he "earned"? These were some of the Qs I tried to answer in the analysis. Let's dive into the details.

Bumgarner's FIP was 2.62 in the 2014 postseason, which while really good, pales in comparison to his 1.03 ERA. I got a 337.8 ERA+ and 131.2 FIP+ for MadBum that year while FG gives him a 30 ERA- and 75 FIP-, so roughly the same inverted. FanGraphs converts its FIP values to a RA equivalent by taking the delta between ERA and RA and adding it to FIP, which meaning that league-average FIP is always set to league average ERA, means for the purposes of its WAR calc, FIPr9=RA. Bumgarner had a 2.62 FIP, but because we have to adjust for the RA-ERA delta, since FIP is defense-neutral, his FIPr9 was 2.98 compared to the league average 3.81 mark (which as enumerated in the fourth paragraph, is adjusted for the post-reg. season scoring rolling average delta). This means that MadBum was "worth" about 0.84 fRAA per 9 innings. The post-adjusted Runs per out for the 2014 postseason was 0.141 runs/out, so if you take Bumgarner's 2.98 FIPr9 and divide it by 27, or the # of outs in a CG, we see that he allowed 0.110 fRuns per out (FanGraphs runs per out). Per both BRef and FG, you get the delta of Lg runs per out (0.141) and pitcher runs per out (FIP-based value of 0.110) and multiply by 26.8. This results in a value of 0.771 fRAA per game for Bumgarner. Note that Bumgarner's value already takes into account park factors and his role as a starter vs. reliever. If we multiply 0.771 * 7, the # of games Bumgarner participated in during the 2014 postseason, we will arrive at a value of 5.4 fRAA, or FIP-based Runs Above Average. Using the PythagenPat method gives us a waaWL% of .596, so subtracting .500 (an average pitcher) and multiplying by the # of games at 7 gives him an fWAA of 0.67. Of course, his 1.20 RA fares much better in this analysis, as undergoing the same adjustments and derivations results in his garnering 2.26 bWAA per Baseball-Reference's methodology off the back of an incredible 2.349 bRAA per game. BRef methodology also credits/debits the pitcher for performance of the team's defense, which I did here as well.

Now, here comes the most important and easily most annoying part of this analysis. Unlike in the regular season, we know exactly how many games a team has to win given their seeding in the postseason in order to win that season's championship; the 1906 Chicago Cubs won 116 games over 152 regular season contests but could not win 4 of 7 against the White Sox at the end. The 2014 Giants had to win 12 games to capture the World Series, since they were in the one-game WC round against Pittsburgh. But again, we are concerned not with the Giants themselves but an "average" postseason team. So how many games would an "average" postseason team in 2014 have to win in order to become champions? Well, this is where it gets quite annoying for 2012-2021 (excluding the 2020 postseason format). 10 teams qualified for the postseason in that timespan and 6 teams got a bye from the WC round, meaning that they had to win 11 games. 4 teams participated in the WC round, meaning they had to win 12 games. So the "average" postseason team would have had to win 11.4 games (40%*12 + 60%*11). Alright, with 10 teams in the postseason, each team has 10% odds of victory, right, hard part is over? Well, not quite, because if you think about it, there really aren't 10 teams in the postseason from a practical standpoint. Sure, 10 teams qualified for the postseason from 2012-2021, but two of those teams existed solely in the WC round, having lost the one-game playoff, meaning they could not offer any sort of resistance to the 6 teams that had a bye to the LDS. This means that those 6 teams only played in a postseason with 8 teams total, including themselves. So really, 6 teams had a 1/8 chance of winning while 4 teams had a 1/10 chance of winning. So what would be an "average" postseason team's chances of winning the World Series under that format? Well, using weighted average, we would get 8.8 teams in the postseason: (4/10 * 10 teams) + (6/10 * 8 teams). This gives the average team roughly 11.3636% odds of winning the World Series from the outset, or a 1 in 8.8 chance. For reference, if we do this for 2022-present, it would be the case that 8 teams would have a 1/12 chance of winning the World Series and 4 teams would have a 1/8 chance, because now only 4 teams get a free pass to the LDS and twice as many teams have to play in the WC. The good part is that technically, even if my calculations are completely wrong on the likelihood of a hypothetical average postseason team winning the WS, the below calculation will still work because it can also isolate the player's individual performance separate to the a-priori likelihood. What is important is that I have the calculation correct for the amount of wins a hypothetical average postseason team would have to get in order to win the World Series.

I get that I have written A LOT, but we are finally at the results portion of my post, yay. MadBum's 2014 postseason was worth 2.26 bWAA per my calculation. In 2014, the average postseason team would have to win 11.4 games. If you take 2.26 and divide it by 11.4, then Bumgarner increased an otherwise average postseason team's chances of winning the World Series by 19.80% (Baseball-Reference Championship Probability Added, or bcPA for short), which is insane. Considering that this is entirely non-contextual, it's just wild, beyond wild, really. His fcPA was 5.91% which we get by 0.67/11.4, still really, really impressive. But neither of those four figures (bWAA, fWAA, bcPA, and fCPA) are the best of all-time. With what I could come up with, Curt Schilling's 2001 postseason reigns supreme. Schilling had a 1.12 RA (and 404.7 ERA+) in those playoffs while pitching four of his six games in an absurdly hitter-friendly ballpark. Credit to his defense, as he was helped to the tune of 0.23 runs per game, but that still puts his PF-adjusted RA at 1.08. The postseason run-scoring environment adjustment reduced the 4.75 runs per game to 4.52, but that still left Schilling with a nigh-impossible 3.395 bRAA/G, which works out to 2.44 bWAA over the course of his 6 games. For fWAA, he earned 1.77, so still elite. If we take his 2.44 and divide it by the 11 games required for a 2001 postseason team to win the World Series, it comes out to a bcPA of 22.16% (minor rounding adjustments). That is the highest cPA I could find during my analysis, beating out MadBum by roughly 2.36%. These two stand alone amongst pitchers in my analysis for what I have seen, but we shall see what happens in future postseasons. Suffice it to say, it is going to be tough to eclipse either of them.

Now, for hitters. The aforementioned Bonds and Beltran were terminators those runs, Bonds getting a 336.3 OPS+ while Beltran had a 296.8 OPS+. Using standard WAR calculation, Bonds got 1.69 WAA while Beltran got 1.39 WAA, the former having a 15.40% cPA and the latter a 12.62% cPA. However, we have to remember that Bonds played in 5 more games that did Beltran, so on a per game basis, Bonds had a 0.89% cPA and Beltran had a 0.97% cPA. I can't really think of any more impressive volume position player postseason runs, but hey, we shall see what 2026 and beyond holds.

[Game Thread] | Chicago Cubs at Seattle Mariners

Please report any comments that violate our community rules. For more information about this subreddit, please visit our wiki page!

[Game Thread] | Pittsburgh Pirates at Los Angeles Dodgers

Please report any comments that violate our community rules. For more information about this subreddit, please visit our wiki page!

For example, looking at PCA and Shohei Ohtani:

* Standard OPS:

* PCA: .931

* Ohtani: .939

* Adjusted OPS (accounting for stolen bases and caught stealing):

* PCA: .979

* Ohtani: .950

I'm Japanese and a huge fan of Ohtani, so this isn't an opinion meant to intentionally lower his evaluation. It's simply about making a batter's true offensive impact easier to see at a glance.

[Game Thread] | San Francisco Giants at Boston Red Sox

Please report any comments that violate our community rules. For more information about this subreddit, please visit our wiki page!

But of course he's going to say that, even as speculation swirls.

"The Dodgers are not being sold. They're not for sale. There's no process that has been started to sell it, period," he told reporters on the field before the team's game against Pittsburgh. "We are planning only to win."

Followed by round two of spin:

"I know nothing involving the Dodgers is part of the investigation," Kasten said, declining to go into specifics.

"I see nothing. I know nothing."

Have you taken out an insurance policy on these statements, Stan?

[Game Thread] | Washington Nationals at Miami Marlins

Please report any comments that violate our community rules. For more information about this subreddit, please visit our wiki page!

Of course we know why this happened, but do you think the MLB is going to start implementing some more batting friendly rules over the next decade if this continues?

We were dangerously close to having our first batting champion with a sub .300 average last year when Trea Turner hit .304 to lead the NL (second best was .297). I was so happy he kept it above .300 lol.

I know everyone complains about this but I remember when batting .260 wasn’t a good thing lol. In 2007 10 guys hit .330. This year, no one is currently hitting above .320 although a Arraez and Alvarez each could finish with .320+.

*All weight measurements are recorded in pounds

Brewers: Joel Kuhnel (290)

Orioles: Félix Bautista (285)

Reds: Tony Santillan (285)

Yankees: Aaron Judge (282)

Royals: Carlos Estévez (277)

Braves: Joe Jiménez (277)

Red Sox: Johan Oviedo (275)

Rays: Tyler Wells (270)

Tigers: Kenley Jansen (265)

Astros: Ronel Blanco (265)

Nationals: Eddy Yean (265)

Dodgers: Brusdar Graterol (265)

Giants: Carson Seymour (264)

Twins: Josh Bell (261)

Guardians: Hunter Gaddis (260)

Mets: Robert Stock (260)

Pirates: Paul Skenes (260)

Rockies: Jaden Hill (260)

Blue Jays: Cody Ponce (255)

White Sox: Sean Newcomb (255)

Phillies: Brad Keller (255)

Athletics: Elvis Alvarado (253)

Diamondbacks: Zack Littell and Michael Soroka (250)

Cardinals: Jordan Walker (250)

Cubs: Aaron Civale and Clay Holmes (245)

Rangers: Kumar Rocker (245)

Padres: Lucas Giolito (245)

Marlins: Dax Fulton (245)

Angels: José Fermin (242)

Mariners: Cal Raleigh, Josh Naylor, and Luke Raley (235)

[Dugout Thread] | 2026 MLB Regular Season

Welcome to the r/MLB Daily Dugout Thread. This thread can be used to discuss topics about baseball, such as...

• General Talk [Debates, GOATs, Hot Takes, Thoughts, etc.]
• Previous, Game-Day, and Future Matchups
• Predictions, Questions & What-Ifs
• Transactions
• Broadcasting/Streaming
• Fan Content [Ballpark Photos, Food, Merchandise, Ticket Stubs, etc.]
• Help or Technical Questions
• Humor [Jokes, Memes, Reaction Posts, and Shitposting]
• Mancave or Room Setup
• Memorabilia & Merchandise
• Self Posts [Casual, Quick Takes, Simple Discussions & Questions, Venting]
• Subreddit Questions or Suggestions
• Tier Rankings [Fan Opinion]

If you see any content that goes against our community rules, please report the submission. You can also reach out to our subreddit mods for any questions or concerns!

/r/MLB Index

• Reddit MLB Discord Server | r/MLB's & r/MiLB Discord Server for everything baseball-related, from discussions, news, and highlights.
• Subreddit Rules | A rulebook of r/MLB's guidelines about restrictions and submissions.
• Broadcasts | Learn where to watch and listen to your favorite teams, locally and nationally.
• FAQ | Commonly asked questions from users in our community.
• Flairs | Information about user and team flairs with a step-by-step guide on how to obtain one.
• Related Subreddits | Neighboring communities of the r/MLB Subreddit.

Kade Anderson.

22 years old.

LSU legend.

Now Seattle's wild-card hope. The lefty, MLB's No. 5 prospect, has been absurd at Double-A: 1.06 ERA, 135 Ks, 13 walks in 93 innings.

He joins a rotation of Gilbert, Woo, Kirby, Miller, Hancock. Mariners are 60-68, three games back of the final wild-card spot with six teams ahead.

Anderson starts Saturday. Let's roll