Pythagenport teams records

[HOOTIE]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/stati ... ndings.php

In the locked thread, it was said Cleveland has done little, and will finish 3rd or 4th. Balderdash. Chicago was one of the luckiest teams last year, and Cleveland was unlucky. Look at Clevelands edge in run differential, and Chicago's lucky record in 1 run games. It likely won't happen again. Chicago won 8 more then their differential shows, Cleveland lost 3 more then they should have. Tribe should have won by 5 using differential. Tribe should win Central.

Jays and Mets fans rejoice. Your Pythagenport record shows you both should have only been 2 and 1 games behind last year.

[Holy Hand Grenade]

So the luckiest teams last year were White and Red Sox, Yankees, and Padres. The unluckiest were the Mets, Mariners, Blue Jays, and A's. Does this mean that we can expect a big improvement from the latter teams and a fall from the first group? I think the latter teams all improved anyway.

Looks like it's time for a changing of the guard.

[BronXBombers51]

Interesting. Thanks for the post HOOTIE.

[mweir145]

Looks like the Jays are closer to the top then it appears..

[BronXBombers51]

Forgive me if I sound stupid, but what quantifies 'luck'? How is a team lucky?

[mweir145]

Forgive me if I sound stupid, but what quantifies 'luck'? How is a team lucky?

I think in this formula, it is the amount of one run games won and lost that has a lot to do with it. That is why it focuses in on the run differential.

[quietstorm]

Run differential is the primary indicator of performance (in addition to adjustments for opponent strength, etc.).

As such, teams like the White Sox, who win a lot of one-run games, are luckier than teams like the Indians, who win decisively, and lose one-run games.

Basically, it goes like this: It's not quantifiable that players perform differently in "clutch" situations or in different games, aside from by strict probability -- which is to say, if a player hits .333, he'll have some 0/5 games and some 3/4 games. But he's still a .333 hitter.

In run totals, a team with a lot of one-run wins is one run better than their opponents every game. Is a team who wins every game by one run better than a team who wins half their games by five runs but loses the other half by one run?

[HOOTIE]

Forgive me if I sound stupid, but what quantifies 'luck'? How is a team lucky?

Like Mweir said. Chicago had a +96 run differential, to Clevelands +148. Chicago was the best in 1 run games (35-19), unlikely to happen again. Cleveland was 22-36. In the 1st link, look at the explanations for D1, D2, D3.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/stati ... ts2005.php

[mweir145]

Last year, the Jays had a horrible record in one run games, and that is probably one of the main reasons why they finished so far behind in the standings next to the Sox and Yankees. I guess you could say they're "unlucky," but good teams find ways to win those close games.

[Wozzyck]

Blue Jays fans have been quick to point to run differential as proof that their team was much better in 2005 than their record indicated:

Actual record: 80-82
1st order Pythagenport: 88-75

But the 2nd and 3rd order Pythagenports (which are based on Equivalent Runs and Adjusted Equivalent Runs, resp.) present a bleaker (though more relevant) picture:

2nd order Pythagenport: 79-83
3rd order Pythagenport: 80-82

Both are featured (and given more emphasis) in HOOTIE's link.