02-27-2013, 09:31 PM #1
Spring Training vs. Regular Season
Does anybody know if there is any correlation between how well a team does in Spring Training and how they do in the Regular Season?
02-27-2013, 11:21 PM #2
I think most people tend to adamantly state that spring training means absolutely nothing... standings, stats, etc. They cannot be relied upon for any true measure of a team's regular season performance. While I think that a month's worth of stats, even against inferior competition, can't be completely ignored, I do think the standings can. My guess is that if any team's regular season and spring training win % were close to the same, it was mere coincidence.
02-27-2013, 11:27 PM #3
It's a couple years old, but this article does a pretty good job of explaining that there is virtually no correlation.
The 30 MLB teams have played 240 seasons over the last eight years. Of those, 163 (67.9%) had a regular season winning percentage that differed from Spring Training by at least 100 points. For a perspective, 100 percentage points over the course of 162 games is the difference between finishing .500 (81-81) and winning 98 games (.605).
Almost one out of every five teams (18.3%) finished with a regular season record that was at least 200 points different than their Spring record. Over 162 games, 200 percentage points is the difference between winning 98 games and winning 64 games. In other words, one-fifth of the teams played like a playoff team in the spring and then lost nearly 100 games during the regular season (or vice-versa)
02-28-2013, 10:04 AM #4
02-28-2013, 10:19 AM #5
I'd say that there is no correlation, but maybe there is some correlation to how a team does in the final 2 weeks of spring training to the regular season. At that point, the rosters are generally down to 30 and the starters are playing 6-7 innings instead of 2-4 innings.