Can a Team with No Power Win a World Series?

A familiar sight for Cubs fans.

The Chicago Cubs hit nine home runs in April.

Nine.

That’s abysmal. Not unexpected—the team’s leading power hitters coming into the season were the decrepit Alfonso Soriano (who contributed no homers and a grand total of two extra-base hits in April)  and a 29-year-old rookie, after all—but abysmal nevertheless.

But does a lack of power necessarily preclude a team from winning? After all, the Washington Nationals had the worst slugging percentage in baseball (.328) and hit only 13 home runs in April, yet they finished the month in first place in the National League East with a 14-8 record and a +15 run differential.

From this, one can infer that the Nationals have had brilliant pitching, and that is, in fact, the case. But can a team with an offense as anemic as the Nationals’ or the Cubs’ actually win a championship? Obviously, pitching is important, but has amazing pitching ever overcome an intrinsic lack of pop? Well, yes—but it’s fairly unusual.


In the 42 seasons with a World Series since the pitcher’s mound was lowered in 1969, teams that have finished below their leagues’ average in home runs have won the World Series nine times. (The MLB averages weren’t considered, as the presence of the designated hitter rule dictates that AL teams should not be compared to NL teams in this category.) This occurred most recently in 2003, when the Florida Marlins finished the regular season with 157 home runs against a league average of 169. When you consider that two spots in the Marlins’ everyday lineup were occupied by Juan Pierre (1 home run) and Luis Castillo (6 home runs), and that the then-20-year-old Miguel Cabrera played only 87 games that season, the relatively low home run total begins to make some sense, although it should be noted that Mike Lowell (32 home runs) and Derrek Lee (31 home runs) both had excellent power campaigns.

The largest discrepancy between a World Series-winning team’s home run total and its league’s average since 1969 was posted by the 1982 St. Louis Cardinals, who hit 67 home runs against a league average of 108. Only two players on that team posted double digits in home runs: George Hendrick (19) and Darrell Porter (12). At the time, Busch Stadium had an enormous outfield that punished power hitters, but it also featured a rock-hard AstroTurf playing surface that let ground balls that would elsewhere be innocuous shoot through the infield. Cardinals management wisely loaded the team with speedy slap hitters, including left fielder Lonnie Smith, who finished second in the NL MVP balloting that year on the strength of a .307 batting average, a .381 on-base percentage, and 68 stolen bases (although given what we now know about the value of an out, the fact that he was caught stealing 26 times likely would be held against him a bit more today).

Other World Series-winning teams that finished the regular season with home run totals below their league average were the 2002 Anaheim Angels, the 1997 Florida Marlins, the 1996 New York Yankees, the 1990 Cincinnati Reds, the 1988 Los Angeles Dodgers, the 1985 Kansas City Royals, and the 1969 New York Mets.

I double-checked, and yes, this actually did happen.

It’s even rarer for a World Series-winning team to finish below its league average in slugging percentage. Since 1969, only six teams have finished below their leagues’ average in slugging and gone on to win the Series. (Again, the designated hitter rule affects this statistic, so the NL teams were only compared to NL teams, and AL teams were only compared to AL teams.) This occurred most recently 15 years ago, when the 1997 Marlins finished with a .395 slugging percentage against a .410 league average. Of course, that team was the first Wild Card winner to capture a World Series, and it was a mishmash of up-and-coming youngsters (Luis Castillo, Edgar Renteria, Livan Hernandez) and overachieving veterans (Bobby Bonilla, Jeff Conine) that gelled around excellent seasons by Moises Alou (.292/.373/.493), Gary Sheffield (.250/.424/.446), and Kevin Brown (2.69 ERA, 1.18 WHIP).

The largest difference between a World Series-winning team’s slugging percentage and its league’s average in the designated period was posted by the 1969 New York Mets, who managed a .351 slugging percentage against a .369 league average. That wasn’t just a low mark—it was the worst in the NL. And yet the Mets won 100 games, won their division by 8 games, and romped through the playoffs to claim the franchise’s first championship. So how did they do it? A team ERA of 2.99 (against a league average of 3.59) certainly helped.

Other World Series-winning clubs that finished the regular season with slugging percentages below their league’s average were the 1996 New York Yankees, the 1989 Oakland Athletics (the only team that appears on this list and not the home runs list, due in large part to the fact that 87 of the team’s 123 home runs were hit by four guys—Mark McGwire, Dave Henderson, Dave Parker, and Jose Canseco—while the rest of the team largely consisted of singles hitters), the 1988 Los Angeles Dodgers, and the 1982 St. Louis Cardinals.

So it’s not impossible for a team with below-average power to win a World Series, but keep in mind that clubs that do manage this trick tend to end up with words like “Miracle” attached to their names.