Our favorite thing to talk about, to witness as sports fans is the immeasurable clutch factor — that ability of a player or team to find a way to win at the most intense moments. In the playoffs, it’s often what separates the good from the great, the wins from the losses, the champions from the finalists. And in the regular season, winning close games is often considered a prelude to winning in the postseason. 

But how many narrow wins is too many? When do the close regular season games become indicators that a team is really good but not great?

The Houston Astros are a case study for this. They’ve led the American League West most of the season. They’re on their way to the playoffs. They’re 23-13 in one-run games, good for the best winning percentage in games decided by a single run in baseball. They’re 8-5 in extra innings. On the surface, they’ve found ways to win — according to their Pythagorean record, which adjusts for runs scored versus runs allowed, they’ve won four more games than their performances would have predicted so far.

All of that could mean they’re built for the intense playoff moments where it’s close late in games. At the same time, they have the lowest run differential among teams leading their division, and I think we should be asking ourselves, “why are they in so many close games in the first place?” It’s not because they’re playing the best teams — the opposite is true. The ESPN Relative Power Index says they rank bottom-third in the league in strength of schedule. That’s a problem in and of itself; they’ve consistently played sub-par teams but they have still struggled.  

Rather, it’s likely because their offense isn’t as deep as it’s been in recent years and their starting rotation is inconsistent. Just this month, they were shut out four times in a six-game stretch. Since July 7, their offense has ranked near the bottom of the league with wRC+ of 84, meaning their run production has been 16 percent below league average over the past two-and-a-half months. 

Starting pitching has looked great from time-to-time but has had stretches of allowing too many runs — Framber Valdez and Hunter Brown have had pretty good seasons, but other than them, eight pitchers have started for the Astros, and they have a collective 4.88 ERA. Not terrible, but when the team relies on starters to pitch five or six innings and hand over a lead to the bullpen, it becomes catastrophic.

And even though that strategy of shortening the game always seems like a good idea, it rarely works over the course of a season or playoff run — back in July, I wrote about how the New York Yankees have found little success with the strategy over the past decade.  It’s a strategy that leads those relievers, often flamethrowers who specialize in shutting down 3-to-5 hitters at a time, to pitch night after night and eventually become overworked. And further, in order for the bullpen to flex its muscle, the team has to be in the lead.

The strategy itself is a microcosm of how the Astros are living in dangerous territory. An offense that has been nearly dormant for months, combined with a top-heavy starting pitching situation, rarely leads to postseason success — and the reality is, the Astros’ success in close games isn’t going to translate to the postseason, when they’ll be up against the best teams and when the margin for error will shrink.