PATTERNS DON’T LIE

by Holly Horning

I’m hearing the rumors about the Oakland A’s Billy Beane possibly becoming a new GM with another team. I’m also wondering whether hiring him will finally solve the decades-old dysfunction of NY’s second baseball team.  The Mess, er, the Mets.

Don’t you ever wonder about teams that exhibit the same old patterns year after year?  The same teams doing well, others wandering in the dark, the frequently scandal-ridden and those constantly mired in the mud?  Or the ones that simply have a pulse and not much else?

Why is it that some organizations just keep their heads down and do their jobs the right way like the Cards?  Or others, like the Angels, have players die and employees committing illegal acts?  Yet others that allow a pervasive culture of sexual harassment to thrive?

Why are there patterns?

It all boils down to the corporate culture.  It’s about leadership – or the lack of it. 

It’s about those who truly want to be the best and pay attention to the details.  For others, the focus is on profits.

It’s about some teams being proactive – and others being reactive.

The owners also serve as a huge influence.  Look at those like George Steinbrenner.  Look at the meddlesome owners who force their GMs to make unwise moves.  Even consider how teams change dramatically, like the Baltimore Orioles, when they get new owners.

There are lots of factors at play. And when you have teams that consistently win year after year, teams should take note.  More importantly, when organizations struggle year after year, they need to look inward.  It’s the organization holding them back.

If you’re a baseball fan, you know what I’m talking about. Even when there is great fanfare attached to a certain team, you tell yourself that you’ll believe it when you see it. Expectations, for certain organizations, are ingrained.

So how would we break down all 30 MLB teams? 

I’ve taken each of the organizations and assigned them to 7 different categories that describe the perception of their overall corporate culture.  It helps to explain their performance, esp. when they often spend lots of money and get little to show for it.

It’s not all about the talent on the field.  What it is about is how well the organization runs overall and the expectations that are set from above.

What I’ve used in my analysis is recent history going back approximately 10 years.  Sometimes more.  I’ve gone through their win-loss records for each year.  And I don’t just analyze the past year.  It’s about more than that.  We’re looking at patterns. 

I also look at what is going on behind the scenes. Where are the problems? Why are they in the news?

I’ve taken into account teams that were purposely rebuilding and having some bad years, but have bounced back nicely when the rebuild was complete.

I have also defined each of the categories to give you an idea of the pattern seen for each of the teams sitting together. Each category is ranked from best to worst.

Ready?

TOP TIER

These are teams that take great pride in winning and being the best.  They are consistently good, if not great.  They rarely have down years.

• Astros

• Braves

• Cardinals

• Dodgers

• Giants

• Yankees

STABLE

They generally have more good years than bad.  The bad periods are limited and these teams can usually be counted on to be regular contenders.

• Blue Jays

• Brewers

• Cubs

• Indians

• Nationals

SCRAPPERS

These teams do way more with much less.  Instead of money, they have top brains in the Front Office who develop all the ideas that other teams copy.  Their goal is not necessarily to win championships, but to put out a quality product that is competitive.

• A’s

• Rays

ROLLERCOASTERS

Like the little girl with the curl on her forehead, when they are good, they are very good.  And when they are bad, they are very bad.  These teams go from the top of the heap one year to the depths of the cellar the next.  They do epic tanks, change personnel frequently and have clubhouse problems that contribute to changes in performance.  You never know what you are going to get year to year.

• Red Sox

• Twins

CLUELESS

They always seem to be the last to know what to do.  Their practices are dated and even with money, tend to under-perform.  They are the last to adopt the newest strategies and implement new ways of play.

• Phillies

• Pirates

• Tigers (We’re now just seeing the first evidence that the Tigers are leaving this category.)

MIRED IN MEDIOCRITY

These teams are boring and predictable, characterized by seasons that hover just below or around .500.  No big effort to measurably improve and when they do, it lasts for only a year or two.

• Rangers

• Reds

• Royals

• White Sox

DYSFUNCTIONAL

These teams always seem to have drama attached to them.  Whether it be meddling owners who overrule their Front Offices, in-fighting throughout the organization and the trashing of current and cherished former players.  Scandals involving pervasive sexual harassment, drugs, promoting illegal practices (ie, giving sticky stuff to pitchers) and the constant turnover of managers, coaches and Front Office personnel.  The one thing they all have in common?  They rarely have decent seasons and constantly under-perform even when they throw money at the team.

• Angels

• Diamondbacks

• Mariners

• Marlins

• Mets

• Orioles

• Padres

• Rockies

---

What did you miss on our Twitter feed yesterday?

• The evidence that Chris Ilitch is no longer pursuing his own sports network.

• Totally Tigers poll about Bally’s sportscasters. YOU CAN STILL VOTE!

• Totally Tigers personal plea to Bally Sports about hiring new broadcasters.

---

Get your Totally Tigers fix beyond this blog.  We publish breaking news, national stories of note, videos, observations and polls throughout the day.  Every day.

Click here: https://twitter.com/totallytigersbb or simply enter “totally tigers bb” (make sure you add the “bb”!) in the search box at twitter.com and click on “Follow.”

---

Totally Tigers loves your comments but please be aware of the rules for posting.  Comments may be edited and responses are only published if they address today’s topic, are respectful and do not exceed the maximum number of 3-4 sentences.  All rules may be found by clicking on the link at the top of the page.