Stache-Off: 1984 Tigers vs. 1986 Mets

by Misopogon | April 10th, 2009

TWS Detroit Bureau Chief Misopogon is back with another dispatch from America’s burningest city.  This time around, he looks at the 1984 Detroit Tigers and their mustaches.  Can the kittens maul the Amazins?  Will the presence of HoJo on both rosters cause the space-time continuum to implode?  Is the devise of asking myself questions being overused?  Anyhoo, Misopogon gives us the longest and most meticulously cited in this blog’s short history.

So the ‘82 Brew Crew went down to the might of the Metstache, but if there’s one team that could compete with the ‘86 Amazins, it’s the stachiest of the stachiest, the team that put the zap in Zappa, the “Bless You Boys,” your 1984 Detroit Tigers.

Let’s see how they stache up after the jump.

Record:

‘86 Mets: 108-54

‘84 Tigers: 104-58

Of course, the Tigers were almost perfect in the playoffs, while the Mets went for max games with the Astros and Red Sox. But playoff records included, that gives the ‘86 Mets a 115-59 record on the season, and the ‘84 Tigers a total tally of 111-59. Advantage: Mets

Pitching

‘86 Mets: 3.11, 1st in NL (2nd was 3.15)

‘84 Tigers: 3.49, 1st in AL (2nd was 3.71)

The Mets’ sterling 3.11 is hard to ignore. On the other hand, the Tigers’ 3.49 stands out far above the rest of the AL and is one of the best ever put up in a DH-ing league. The Mets had a strong edge in starting pitching. The Tigers had by far the better bullpen. The difference is what you’d expect from the DH. I’m calling it a draw.

Hitting:

‘86 Mets: .263, 783 runs, 148 HR

‘84 Tigers: .271, 829 runs, 187 HR

Again, the stupid DH screws this all up.^[1] But stacking them up against their competition, the Amazins scored 44 more runs than the next closest NL team (that being Philly — naturally 2nd to the Mets in all things). The Tigers outscored Boston for first in the AL by 19 runs, though no other teams came close.

Mean differential?

Mean differential.

AL league average: 648 runs.

NL average: 604.

‘84 Tigers’ distance from mean: 181.

‘86 Mets: 225.

Math offset  so it looks official: check.

Mets win.

Defining Moment:

‘84 Tigers: Up 5-4 in the bottom of the 8th, Kirk Gibson hits a Series-clinching, 2-out, 3-run homer off the Goose, who had been instructed to walk him.

‘86 Mets: The out that would have clinched a BoSox championship in Game 6 dribbles through the legs of 1st baseman Bill Buckner

Even though Gibby’s homer was a de facto walk-off, it gets overshadowed by the one he hit four years later for L.A. On the other hand, if you were to make a list of things that some guy will never live down,^[2] Buckner’s classic boner would be the instant favorite. Another point Mets.

Keith Hernandez Factor:

Guys named Keith Hernandez who played for a National League franchise in New York on the ‘86 Mets: 1

Guys named Keith Hernandez who played for a National League franchise in New York on the ‘84 Tigers: 0

Advantage Mets.

[Ed. note: We required Misopogon to include this category.]

So tallying all that up we get:

‘86 Mets: 4

‘84 Tigers: 0

Ties: 1

But c’mon, the Tigers weren’t just another World Series winner. They were Grrrrreat! They dominated ‘84 like Florida State dominated ‘99, like Tom Selleck’s mustache dominated Nazi Germany in ‘45.^[3]

So what did the ‘84 Tigers have that the ‘86 Mets didn’t? In what possible category could this rag-tag midwest team compete with the elite of the East?

Mustaches:

‘86 Mets: 11

‘84 Tigers: 20!!!

That’s right! The Bless You Boys may have won a few less games overall after their torrid start, and their ERA was higher (thank you DH for again being retarded!), but the Tigers did it with almost twice the staches affixed to their upper lips.
Check out this classy, stachey lineup:

1st Base (Dave Bergman):

2nd base:

Yep, Sweet Lou grew a stache.

3rd base:

Nascent Metstache even!

Catcher:

Outfield

How bout off the bench?

Couldn’t find a Tiger photo of the big bat off the bench but:

Even Rod Allen, before he was the Tigers’ broadcast color guy (and before he went batshit on a Japanese pitcher), was on the ‘84 Tigers…

On the mound, too, the ‘84 Tigers had as many staches as arms:

The ALL-STACHE ROTATION:

And the bullpen:

And last but certainly not least, already profiled on the Wrightstache, the Cy Young-winning, MVP stache:

Sure, there were some key cogs who went through 1984 clean-shaven, namely World Series MVP Alan Trammell, setup man Aurelio Lopez, and a few September callups whose mustachioed days were still ahead of them.

Many of these Bless You Boyishas were just unwhiskered goyishas when they hit Spring Training. They grew their staches during March to build team unity. The effect: a blistering 35-5 start. So maybe the ‘84 Tigers weren’t as good as the ‘86 Mets at playing baseball.  But they still got to the same pinnacle, thanks in no small part to their winning whiskers.

Legacy

Also, that spring, mustachioed men Howard Johnson and Tom Brookens battled for the starting gig (and greatest mustache). Johnson won the job, but ultimately Brookens grew the greater lip cover, and HoJo was shipped to the Mets to make room, bringing the power of the stache to Flushing.

And thus we come back to David Wright. For, as this study demonstrates, the Mets, through Howard Johnson, were the undoubted heirs of the ‘84 Tigers’ stache power.

Since the dawn of history, mankind has known of the mustache’s mystical abilities to win championships; entire empires have arisen from the proper use of stache.^[4] It was no coincidence that the act of David Wright watching the Superbowl with HoJo reawakened this ancient knowledge, for on that day, the stache chose the new vessel by which it could be reborn.

David, I know you are nervous that your lip doesn’t have the mettle. But take heed from these two warm-lipped teams of the ’80s, leave the razor in the drawer, and start your march to October, Metstache held high.

——————————————————

REFERENCES:

1. Also the fault of Designated Hitter rule:

• Frank Thomas
• high salaries
• Yankees
• George W. Bush

2. Someone should make this list. It would be awesome.

3.

4.

8 Comments

• 

  By Tom Stanley, April 10, 2009 @ 11:45 am

  I was on Yahoo and found your blog. Read a few of your other posts. Good work. I am looking forward to reading more from you in the future.

  Tom Stanley

  [Reply]

• 

  By I Love Nerd York City, April 10, 2009 @ 11:57 am

  Interesting to read that HoJo was actually traded to make playing time for Tom Brookens, whose bare-knuckled-boxer looking ’stache was featured on one of our first nerd cards.

  Facial hair aside, this has got to be one of the worst decisions in baseball history. From ‘86 through ‘91, HoJo put up adjusted OPS+ numbers of 118, 133, 124, 169, 106, and 145!!! Also had a career fielding percentage of .940.

  Brookens, on the other hand, was 30 years old in 1984, and was out of baseball after 1990. In the meantime, his OPS+ numbers were 94, 77, 84, 80, 89, 71, and 90. That means that in his BEST YEAR, he was 6% WORSE THAN THE LEAGUE AVERAGE 3RD BASEMAN. And it wasn’t like he was Ozzie Smith. His .943 carrer fielding percentage barely eclipses HoJo’s.

  Besides the facial hair, HoJo mops the floor with Brookens.

  [Reply]

  

  By Misopogon:
  April 10th, 2009 at 5:12 pm

  Ah, yes, but then again Tommy Brookens was a huge fan favorite for all those years. And not only is he still with the organization as manager of the West Michigan Whitecaps (A), but his now fully matured stache is the header of this entire post!

  At the time, HoJo had only played one full season, hitting .248. Johnson’s defense at 3rd was meh at a time when the hot corner was considered of major defensive importance. Brookens’ fielding percentage doesn’t reflect his range — he’d make some SICK plays that pretty much no other AL 3rd baseman could get to. So we shipped Johnson for Walt Terrell (stached), who became a stalwart in our rotation for about the same length of time that HoJo bounced around the New York infield (and gave out hot feet).

  Ultimately, I think the trade worked out for both teams, and I’m more proud that the Motor City kitties were able to contribute such a key cog to the ‘86 Amazins than resentful over losing him.

  [Reply]

  

  By Misopogon:
  April 10th, 2009 at 5:19 pm

  P.S. The link is apparently being all Lastings Milledge so here:
  http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Tom_Brookens_Whitecaps.jpg

  [Reply]

  

  By Teufel Stubble:
  April 10th, 2009 at 5:24 pm

  You mean these West Michigan Whitecaps and their giant hamburgers?

  http://www.mlive.com/whitecaps/index.ssf/2009/04/dave_raczkowski_the_grand.html

  I give you my utmost respect.

  

  By I Love Nerd York City:
  April 11th, 2009 at 8:47 am

  Ok Misopogon, I guess fielding was a big difference…if you look at FRAA (Baseball Prospectus’s Fielding Runs Above Average…considers range factor, etc compared the the league average at that position), HoJo can’t shine Mr. Brookens’s shoes.

  While playing 3B, Mr. Brookens was essentially a league average 3B. Over almost 1100 career games at the hot corner, he saved a total of 6 runs with his glove that the average 3B would have not have contributed.

  HoJo, on the other hand, in the same number of games, performed 59 runs BELOW what the average 3B would have given the Mets.

  Is this enough to offset the offensive disparity? I dont know. But either way, they’re both lagging way behind Mike Schmidt in offense, defense, and facial hair:
  http://autographedpc.home.att.net/TTM/images/mike_schmidt.gif

  [Reply]

• 

  By Mark, April 21, 2009 @ 6:55 pm

  “‘86 Mets: .263, 783 runs, 148 HR

  ‘84 Tigers: .271, 829 runs, 187 HR

  Mean differential.

  AL league average: 648 runs.

  NL average: 604.

  ‘84 Tigers’ distance from mean: 181.

  ‘86 Mets: 225.”
  Actually…
  Tigers v. AL average=829-648=181 run differential.
  Mets v. NL average=783-604=179 run differential.

  The Tigers had a better run differential by 2 runs. That being said, they still did not have a player named Keith Hernandez playing first base…

  [Reply]

1. Week in Wreview | The Wright Stache — April 10, 2009 @ 4:46 pm

Leave a comment

Connect with your Facebook Account

*Name

*Email (not published)

Website

Characters in the image above (required)

Click to cancel reply