M's +12 over .500 according to Pythag
.
Q. I'm not a geek; I just like baseball. What is "Pythag"?
A. Bill James noticed, in like 1984, that if you ratio a team's runs scored to runs allowed, you can come up with an "expected winning percentage." To James, the algebra of it sort of looked like geometry's Pythagorean Theorem.
Then everybody else tried to claim rights to the formula by making little tweaks to it. In this section, (whoever wrote) the Wikipedia (entry) argues ferociously that the original formula Just. Wasn't. Good. Enough. For Real. Scientists, so you should get the current "expected" standings from them.
I can't imagine how James feels, to have 100+ major discoveries co-opted by people who took his INSIGHTS and made them a teeny bit more precise, and then ... sigh. Voros McCracken built a baseball life around ONE James-level insight, the idea of BABIP. Imagine if everybody tweaked that, and then forgot about McCracken. Were the Wright Brothers more important, or the average Boeing engineer?
But hey. James has been named one of the WORLD's 100 most influential people (?!?!), is inside baseball, etc., so it's not like he didn't reap benefits. :- )
.
Q. Wow. He invented Pythag in 1984? That's like before computers.
A. I dunno when it really was. Many of James' discoveries did come in the 1980's, even 1970's.
Actually, much of James' early revolution occurred before computers meant anything to the regular person. "Sabermetrics" was often defined by sportswriters as "the computerized use of baseball statistics." Personal computers were kind of cutting-edge in the 1980's.
(James himself says "I can't imagine a worse definition" and defines his invention --sabermetrics -- as "the search for objective knowledge about baseball." In his zeal for that, he'll listen to anything as evidence. Including public perception, sportwriter HOF balloting, advance scouting reports, etc.
He "gets it," that we are not world-class scientists here, writing for the Journal of the American Medical Association. We're just fans, trying to "see" baseball better. We're surprisingly good at it, but the fact that we use algebra --- > doesn't make us scientists.)
.
Q. Is Pythag reliable?
A. The larger the group of teams you apply it to, yes.
Nobody knows about single teams; a single team might deserve to be +10 or -10 games versus its runs expectation ... bad bullpen or whatever. (Of course, few sabermetricians will concede this point. We have a strong preference that our theories work consistently, like we have a strong preference that our tape measures work consistently.)
.
Q. The Mariners have lost way more games than Runs Scored & Allowed would expect?
A. Right. They "should" be sitting on 59 wins per b-ref.com. This would have them +3.5 games up for the Wild Card and only 4-5 games out of the AL West lead.
.
Q. So ... facing the M's lineup is not the inverse of facing the M's pitching staff?
A. Not by a long ways. We realize it feels that way.
They pointed out on TV that Seager has 43 of his 59 RBI in Mariner wins. It seems like if it isn't Seager, Cano or Zunino bailing us out, it's going to take a lucky "soft" RBI to win 2-1.
.......
But against most M's pitchers, things are virtually hopeless.
Forget Felix and WBC-san ... Charlie Furbush against a left hand hitter? Did you realize that Chris Young has the lowest opponent batting average EVER allowed by an M's starter in Safeco? Wilhelmsen and Farquhar as afterthoughts?
The M's ERA+ is 121; its offense has two Stars, and is 91. Theoretically the lineup is nowhere near as bad, as the staff is good.
Your eyes tell you differently, in July? Good for you. You're watchin' the games.
.........
Did you notice that Brandon Maurer has already been "promoted"? He's pitching in tie games and with leads, after only a handful of "reincarnated" game outings. That's quick.
The growing pains seem a hundred years ago :- )
.
Q. Okay. Does SSI think the M's "should" be -5 wins worse than expectation?
A. Actually -7 wins.
The bullpen is leveraged. James himself found that the teams with the best bullpens will tend to do better vs expectation.
Obviously the bases that are gained and lost -- tie game 7th inning -- count extra. Though none of the formulas account for this.
............
The M's should have SIXTY-ONE wins. According to the formulas we use to calculate these things. Rerun this season 1,000 times via computer simulation, and the M's would tend to be 61-44 right now.
Hey, if there's a PythagenPat (there is), why can't there be a PythagenDoc? Adjust for the bullpen too.
.
Q. Something sounds fishy about this team "deserving" a 61-44 record. Maybe the Runs Scored + Allowed are themselves lucky for the Mariners?
A. They have a "2nd-order" Pythag that does not use the basic Runs Scored & Allowed -- it adjusts those to "Runs Created" by using walks, doubles, etc. to also project how many RUNS the team SHOULD have gained / lost.
By this method, the M's are also +12 over .500. For example, they have hit for 1310 total bases and pitched for 1209 total bases. The 2014 M's simply gain more bases than they concede. A lot more bases!
.
Q. Don't tell me there's a "3rd-order" Pythagorean expectation. :: groan ::
A. There is. It adjusts for strength of schedule, in addition to everything else. I agree that 2nd-order is better than 1st-order, that 3rd-order is better than 2nd, and so on. We got a 4th and 5th for ya :- )
The M's are the same +12 over .500 according to this method.
....
Here are the best 3 teams in the American League, per 3rd-Order Wins:
- Oakland = 1
- LA = 2
- Seattle = 3
- Everybody else = worse than those three teams. Including Detroit
Let me read that section again.
.
Q. What's the key takeaway?
A. Bear in mind that Fangraphs, over the next 5-7 days, will be basing its Trade Analyses on who "should" try to compete for the pennant. Here's an awesome example of how this one factor completely reverses a conclusion.
A person analyzing the M's trades this week should be aware that --- > the M's have the #3 team in the American League. In theory.
.
Q. :: sigh :: Are there really 4th- and 5th-Order Pythagorean Wins.
A. Yes. That's to go ask SSI what is really going on.
;- ) That's an old Steve Mann joke. You do realize we're 70% tongue-in-cheek here.
NEXT --- >