Stat Splits, or Why a Stache Would Help D-Wright
by Teufel Stubble | March 18th, 2009
A mustache is a much better way to stay warm than whatever the hell that is on his head.
Baseball is a numbers game. No sport is more evaluated in terms of statistics than baseball is. Everyone talks about BA, OPS, VORP, WHIP, OPS, AARP and NAMBLA. You are only as good as your numbers. So today we’ll take a statistical look at how a mustache could aid David Wright by looking at some of his stat splits. Join me, won’t you?
First, let’s discuss the weather. It’s hard enough to play in cold weather without your face shivering. How can you focus on a 95mph fastball when your top lip is quivering? It is my contention that a mustache would keep David Wright’s face warm during colder months of the season and thus improve his performance.
Let’s take a look at the average monthly temperatures of the National League cities:
As interleague games comprise such a small segment of the overall season, I decided to focus exclusively on the National League. With a few West Coast exceptions, there are major fluctuations in average temperatures when you compare the early and late portions of the season to the dog days of summer.
The early weeks of the season are much colder than the hot mid-season months. And how do David and his bare lip perform in the cold? Clearly, not as well as when things heat up.
Without a doubt, there is a major spike in David’s power numbers in the summer. His slugging percentage is significantly higher and his batting average even more so. His bare lip just can’t handle those cool Spring days and nippy nights.
What about David’s performance in the chilly postseason? Well, that sample set is small, consisting of the 2006 NLDS against Los Angeles and 2006 NLCS against St. Louis. But he clearly had some struggles as the October temperatures dipped.
His numbers dropped across the board in his one postseason as compared to his career averages in warmer months. Extrapolate that out and you can imagine what a little lip warmer might do to improve David’s cold weather performance.
Now let’s look at things on a micro level. As games progress, one must consider the “5 o’clock shadow” factor. Later in the day, a man’s stubble begins to grow back. Thus, enhanced face protection from midday sun or late night cold is provided and its benefits can be reaped by the batter. So, let’s take a look at David’s numbers in innings 1 through 3 as compared to extra innings, when a day’s facial growth finally becomes tangible.
Once again, we see improved statistics in terms of average and OPS once facial hair becomes a factor. The decreased slugging percentage can easily be attributed to the situational hitting that dominates extra inning at-bats.
So, what can we take away from this quick statistical breakdown? David needs help in the colder temperatures. Well, a mustache is like a mink coat for your lip, providing you warmth that even PETA would approve of. If David grows a stache, we could see major improvements in his cold weather play. And when games run long and David’s stubble spresents itself, he responds by coming through in the clutch. Beard-related benefit? I like to think so. Mostly because it’s convenient for my argument.
There you have it. The numbers don’t lie. Mustache good. No mustache bad.
Eat your heart out, Nate Silver.
Tags: extra innings, fuzzy math, mustache, statistics, stubble, weather
Stats | Teufel Stubble | 
March 18, 2009
By SNANO, March 18, 2009 @ 8:48 pm
THE FACTS ARE THE FACTS. THEY CANNOT BE DEBATED!!!
[Reply]
By Jisc23, March 19, 2009 @ 11:00 am
Kudos!
[Reply]
By Joe Mauertonchops, March 19, 2009 @ 3:04 pm
David, forget the ’stache. ‘Burns are where it’s at, baby!
[Reply]
By Teufel Stubble, March 19, 2009 @ 3:36 pm
Joe, are they mutually exclusive? I’m totally behind David growing out burns and stache!
[Reply]
By Joe Mauertonchops, March 20, 2009 @ 11:09 am
That could work, TS. It’s the old Asa Brainard look.
[Reply]
By Teufel Stubble, March 20, 2009 @ 1:11 pm
For the uninitiated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asa_Brainard
Genius, Joe. Well played.
[Reply]