A Quick Look at the Braves Schedule
March 20, 2013 at 3:49 pm by Mark Smith under Atlanta Braves
One of the things that drives me nuts about baseball are the uneven schedules. I really don’t want to have to play our division rivals 18-19 times a season. It’s not because I think the NL East is a tough division (it is), but I just get bored watching the same teams every time. Worse yet, the always seem to condense it further, with the teams facing each other several times over a couple weeks and then not again for a few months. I understand the practical issues that cause this, but it drives me insane from a fan standpoint.
Anyway, all this got me to thinking about the schedule and which months are harder than others. Last season, the Braves ran through a tough first half schedule on the way to a much easier second half. What will it be this season?
The above chart shows the Braves’ opponents W-L records according to PECOTA for 2013. The “Mod” means “modified” as I multiplied the number of wins or losses by the number of games against the individual teams. Looking at the table, it looks like the Braves are in for another tough first half.
April will begin as one of the easiest months, but there are a lot of games on the road. The Braves will get the Marlins, Rockies, Royals, and Cubs, and it would be good to win a lot of those. Detroit and 5 games against the Nationals also await.
May projects as the most difficult month, and it’s a very difficult month on the road as they’ll face the Reds, Giants, Diamondbacks, and Blue Jays away from Turner Field. They’ll get 3 against the Nationals and 2 against the Blue Jays at home, but a slight reprieve against the Twins in the middle of the month needs to net at least 2 wins.
June isn’t much easier, but at least the good competition comes to Atlanta. The Nationals (2), Pirates (3), Giants (3), and Diamondbacks (3) all head to The Ted in June. The Braves will head to the Dodgers and Brewers this month with easier trips to San Diego and Kansas City. If the Braves have an underwhelming record by this point, part of it may be simply that they’re playing a tougher schedule early. For example, the Braves will have played the Nationals 10 times and the Marlins only 3 times.
Things are Jeckyll-and-Hyde in July. The Braves play the Marlins 6 times, the Mets, and the Rockies, but they also have to play the Reds, White Sox, and Cardinals. With the rest of the games against the Phillies and the Mets, the month ends up not as difficult as others.
August, however, may be the most difficult month of the season as most of the difficult games will be on the road. Luckily, there aren’t many away games, but 6 are against the Nationals and Cardinals. At home, the Braves get 1 against Colorado and 5 against Miami along with a trip in from the Indians at the end of the month.
The last month of the season shouldn’t be too difficult. A series against the Nationals and Brewers are really the only tough series of the month, and the Braves will get a little help (hopefully) in series against the Padres and Cubs. The season, however, ends with 6 games against the Brewers and Phillies, so the Braves won’t want to have to make up games in the last week.
Loading ...
I’m with you Mark on the unbalanced schedules. I personally wish MLB would go back to two leagues or even combine all 30 teams into one league and balance out the schedules.
Unbalanced schedules are especially irksome considering the wild card implications.
%100 percent agree about the unbalanced schedule. I get really tired of watching the Mets and Marlins all the time. What’s worse for me, is that when you combing the unbalanced schedule with interleague play, we end up playing some random AL teams just as often as the Cubs or the Dodgers.
I also think this is part of the cause of baseball becoming more of a regional sport instead of a national sport, in that teams or stars are typically now just regionally popular not nationally. If you just watch the games of your team, you don’t get to see the out of division stars for more than two series a year.
Going with two leagues, 15 teams each, with the top 4, 5, or 6 going to the playoffs, makes more sense. Forget the divisions. They don’t make any sense.
MLB really does need to get their shit together and fix the issues. It is the only major sports that treats playing the other league/conference as a novelty instead of Just another game and the only sport where the leagues play under different rules…namely the DH.
Just because the league was created in such a manner doesn’t mean it is the best way. Evolution is good for the sport. They really need to balance the schedules and fix the DH rule. My vote being adding it to the NL side.
Oh, the DH. If we’re on that subject, I have to say get rid of it altogether. It was an “experiment” when they started it. Let pitchers hit everywhere. I think it makes the game more interesting. The problem is the MLBPA will probably never allow it because it keeps aging defensive liabilities that can still swing employed. It’s about the worst reason to keep a rule I can think of. I’d rather see in-game strategy that happens in the NL.
I’m not sure how much “strategy” really goes into it. Yeah, it requires that managers do something, but they all do the same thing and a trained monkey could make a double switch.
Completely agree. In the NL, in late innings, in the vast majority of games, it’s a no-brainer that you’re going to pinch-hit for your pitcher when it’s his spot. To call this strategy is quite a stretch. It’s even arguable that oftentimes in the NL, the potentially difficult decision of when to take your starter out is made for you by when his batting spot comes around.
If it’s so simple, how come some AL managers mess it up every year when playing in the NL stadiums?
1) when did this happen?
2) If it’s so hard why can I do it easily enough in a video game?
I remember in Don Mattingley’s first year managing the Dodgers he messed up a double switch.
But anyway either put the DH in both leagues or get rid of it. The DH was only put in as a gimmick back in 1973 because the AL was struggling with attendance.
*extreme homer alert*
Braves will only lose 8 games in May, will go 11-7 against the Nats during the year, 12-6 against the Mets, 14-4 against the Fish, and 10-8 against the Phillies, and thus, will win 99 games.
*homerisms over*
One limitation w the schedule is the preference for 3 games per series. So, if you want more games in your division than in any other division, then you’re stuck w 9 home games per each division opponent. If you go for 6, then either you don’t play the AL or you play a different schedule than division opponents.
As for the DH, bring it on. The game is not better by having lesser skilled players at the plate.
Anti-unbalanced schedule, pro-DH. I’m basically for whatever makes the game more interesting, and watching pitchers bunt or struggle to hit is not interesting.
The early part of our schedule is definitely tough. After opening the season with 6 games at home, we play 16 of the next 18 on the road! I don’t know if I’ve ever seen any team, in any sport, have such a lopsided road schedule over such a long period of time.
I don’t mind the unbalanced schedule, because winning your division should be the most important thing, especially now with the one-game wild card. We know from last year that winning the division is critical, and the best way to do that is to beat your division opponents.
Right, but the problem with that is it’s not fair that the Braves win 90+ games and have to play a do-or-die game to truly make the playoffs while some other team squeaks out a mid-80s win season and get to bypass the play-in game because of a weak division.
I didn’t feel like looking up all the numbers, but I think you catch what I’m saying.
Last year the Braves had a stretch in the early part of the season when they played 16 of 20 games on the road with only 1 off day in that stretch. That was also tough in that they played 3 against the Cardinals and Rays and 6 against the Reds. Braves were handling it quite well into they went to Cincinnati and got swept in a 4-game series on their way to losing 8 straight.
I agree and hate the unbalanced schedule. The best schedule MLB ever had IMO was back in the 90s you played every team in your division 13 times and every team in the other division 12 times. It was perfect.
Agree that MLB scheduling stinks. I would also like to see fewer games against division opponents–about 70 division games out of 162 is too much.
I’d like to see more interleague. Maybe a schedule in which you play a 3-game series against every team from the other side. Rotate half at home and half away so that you get to see every team come through every two years. Play two 4-game (home/away)series against every team from other divisions within your league. That leaves 37 games (9 each +1 other) for division opponents. That’s about as fair a schedule as could be.
Baseball used to be the purest sport in terms of determining the best team. Over the course of 162 games,playing basically the same schedule, you knew who was the best. And, in what is now ancient history for some (but not me), the teams that did best in the regular season played in the World Series. But now, with the unbalanced scheduled, it’s hard to even know what a given W-L record means; if a team is in a weak division, the record may overstate how good they are; conversely, if they are in a strong division and/or have a difficult interleague schedule, they may be better than their record. Then, with the proliferation of the playoffs, the regular season becomes essentially meaningless. Does anyone really think that the Giants have been the best team in baseball 2 of the last 3 years? Or the Cardinals in 2006 and 2011? MLB is trying to maintain the sham that the division races actually matter when they really do not in terms of determining who is the best team. (Of course, with the play-in game, teams are likely to place more emphasis on winning the division.) I’m tired of seeing basically average teams get hot for a few weeks at the end of the season and in October and face off in the World Series. This is probably not the only reason, but is it a coincidence that recent World Series have been so lousy?
Of course, I take all of this back if the Braves win the play-in game and win the World Series. :)
I completely agree. It’s not that divisions are bad. It’s the dadgum unbalanced schedules. You’re correct in that most of the World Series over the past 10 years or so have been duds. The Rangers/Cardinals WS in 2011 was pretty good but the last great WS was 2002 with the Angels/Giants.