Is pitching the ticket to the play-offs?

The answer to such a question has to be yes and the proof is in the pudding. Pitching is the foundation for a team to be successful and, more often than not, it overtakes good hitting.

Look at how play-offs began. In the opening games on Wednesday October 3rd, the two teams in each game scored totals of 4, 4, and 6 runs and only "banged" out 10, 13, and 10 hits. In fact, of the two worst hitting teams in each league, Arizona and the Chicago White Sox, even one of them, the Diamondbacks, made it to the postseason so what gives?

There could be any number of reasons for the decline in the batter's box in October, but more than any other, it is a simple matter of the clubs having to face the best pitching teams in the play-offs. Let's take the National League as an example. Of the 16 teams on the senior circuit, four of the top eight in team ERA advanced to the playoffs and of the remaining four, only the San Francisco Giants were not in the pennant race in the last two weeks. Furthermore, Arizona finished last in hits and runs in the NL, but they had the fourth-best team ERA in the league and they had the most saves, 51, including a league-leading 47 by Jose Valverde.

Speaking of Valverde, a closer examination of his stats as a closer is a microcosm of Arizona's success. Valverde appeared in 65 games, but only pitched 64 innings and had only 5 decisions (1-4) and 47 saves in 54 opportunities. In addition, his ERA was 2.66 and hitters only averaged .196 against him.

What does this all mean? Well, the number of innings compared to his appearances is a 1-to-1 ratio implying that he is a short reliever. In addition, when combining Arizona's lack of offensive prowess with Valverde's numbers the indication is that he generally entered into low-scoring affairs and rarely blew a save opportunity. Thus, the Diamondbacks rarely lost a lead when he entered a contest and as a result, of the 65 games in which Valverde appeared, the Diamondbacks finished 54-11 (.831 winning percentage) compared to their overall mark of 90-72 (.554).

The positive mark solid pitching makes on a team is hardly a new trend. In fact, good pitching combined with timely hitting is rarely on the losing end. Let's look at the mustachioed Oakland A's of the early '70s. Those teams rivaled the Baltimore Orioles of the late '60s/early '70s in pitching even though the O's would put up four 20-game winners in '71 (sweeping Oakland in the '71 play-offs in the process).

As a rabid fan who attended numerous games every year from '71-'79, I can remember how the team, in spite of stalwarts like Joe Rudi, Bert Campaneris, Sal Bando and Reggie Jackson, would barely hit .250 for the year. In fact, the '72 team hit .240 for the season and only Rudi hit at least .300 (.305), yet they finished 93-62 (yeah, I know, it was 155 games because of the strike/lockout that ate into the beginning of the season). How did they do it? Pitching, plain and simple.

Jim "Catfish" Hunter won 21 games (as he did in '71 and would do in '73 plus 25 in '74) and lefty Ken Holtzman won 19 (and he would earn 21 and 19 wins in the next two seasons). In addition, there was the emergence of backup catcher Gene Tenace (five homers and 32 RBI all year in '72, but four homers in the World Series that year), a solid bullpen featuring the rise of Rollie Fingers as one of the premiere closers in the game, and third starter Vida Blue. Blue, just 6-10 with a sub-3.00 ERA in '72 after a contract dispute following his un-forgettable 24-8, 1.82 ERA performance the previous season, would rebound to win 20 and 17 games in '73 and '74. Blue also won a memorable 1-0 game with a masterful two-hitter win over the Orioles and Hall of Fame pitcher Jim Palmer in the '74 play-offs.

All, of the aforementioned players, but especially the hurlers, were a huge reason the A's won the World Series the next two seasons to make it a hat trick and become the first baseball dynasty since the Yankees of the 50's (they beat Cincinnati's mighty "Red Machine" in '72, the NY Mets featuring Ton Seaver in '73, and the L.A. Dodgers in '74). In the '74 series, Oakland's stingy staff, allowing only 16 runs the entire series (with three 3-2 victories), combined that performance on the mound with flawless fielding and timely hitting to upend the Dodgers in five games.

Still not convinced? Well, fast-forward to 2007 and after two games look at the Colorado Rockies-Phillies series, Philadelphia averaged 5.5 runs a game this season, but they've only put up seven runs in two games (3.5 runs/game) and thus find themselves in a big 0-2 hole.

Ultimately, it is all about who is on the hill in the middle of the field throwing sixty feet and six inches to home plate. They are the difference between a 13-12 slugfest and a 2-1 pitcher's duel. Whatever the case, in basketball and football offense sells tickets and defense wins championships, but in baseball, no matter how much analyzing we do, it all comes down to the same old story: good pitching will always beat good hitting.