Lucky Wins and why the NL Wildcard is slipping away

by jmcclain19 on Aug 8, 2006 2:21 PM EDT

The Reds have a lucky record so far this year. Let me explain using the idea of a Pythag Record.

If you're not familiar with the idea of a what a Baseball Pythag record, here the basic idea.

It takes the simplest idea about teams winning in baseball, and puts it into stat form. Essentially, the more runs you score and the less runs you allow the other team to score, the better your record ends up being at the end of the year.

It's based on taking the Runs Scored and Runs allowed, and coming up with a Winning Percentage. Multiply that by the games played and you have your Pythag Record.

To show how this works out - Check out these numbers

Reds RS/RA Actual Pythag Diff
2002 - (709/774) - 75-87 - 78-84 - 3
2003 - (694/885) - 63-99 - 69-93 - 6
2004 - (750/907) - 67-95 - 76-86 - 9
2005 - (820/889) - 75-87 - 73-89 - 2

How does this have anything to do with the Reds and the chase of the 2006 Wildcard?

Let's take a look at the Top 8 Wildcard contender?s actual records

Cincinnati 57-55
Los Angeles 57-55
Arizona 56-56
Philadelphia 54-57
Colorado 54-57
San Fran 54-58
Houston 53-58
Milwaukee 52-59

Now - how about each teams Pythag records

Los Angeles 61-51
Colorado 57-54
San Fran 56-56
Philly 55-56
Arizona 55-57
Houston 54-57
Cincinnati 53-59
Milwaukee 48-63

In tight race, you need everything to go your way to win out. The Reds have been several games lucky on the positive side of the margin, while the rest of the contenders, save Milwaukee, have been unlucky. And in baseball, luck tends to equal out. And with time running out on the Wildcard, the Pythag record is not on the Reds side. Translated over the course of the season, the Pythag Record shows the Reds finishing at 77-85, which won't get them anywhere near the playoffs. Something to think about as the Reds take on the Cardinals.

If you're interested in more about the Pythag Record, MLB.com's Standings page now allows you to follow this easily by selecting the "X W-L" box to go with your Home/Road Splits.

Also, Baseball Prospectus has a more in-depth look at the Pythag Record here. And the actual formula used to compute the Pythag Record Winning Percentage is (RAx1.83)/(RAx1.83) + (RSx1.83).

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

That's why....

... baseball games are played on the baseball field and not in databases or stathead's formulas. The Yankees got 19 put up on them a week ago. The Cards got poured on during their losing streak. The Reds have subpar pitching, why bug out after getting 13 scored on them. Yeah the run differential is substantial, it just means we win closer games and get blown out more in losses, so who cares? Stats mean alot, but sometimes stats involving W's and L's should be decided on the field.

The Worldwide Follower

by buckeye22fox on Aug 8, 2006 2:58 PM EDT reply actions

Slide rules and calculators

I guess I should put down my slide rule and calculator and watch the games then.

Baseball Stats, from the most basic counting stats to the most advanced Sabermetrics, are simply tools to enhance knowledge of the game of baseball.

However much, or little you decide to use the tools available, is completely up to you.

by jmcclain19 on Aug 8, 2006 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions

You must be one of the few

who still know what a slide rule is!

by pw on Aug 8, 2006 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions

I agree...but

We don't need luck to "even out" to reach the conclusion. Expecting luck to "even out" is the classic gambler's fallacy (that if you flip a fair coin 50 times and get 50 heads, that tails is "due" and therefore, it should come up tails the next 50 times).

However, I agree with the overall point of your post, which is that if the Reds have been lucky to this point, they shouldn't count on being so lucky from here on out.

In particular, if you take their overall pythagorean record after 112 games as a winning percentage (.473) and multiply it by the number of games left (50), you get 23 wins over the rest of the season, which means a record of 80-82, clearly not enough to get in the playoffs, so I agree with your analysis (which, by the way, fits with what JD is saying on a more general level in his posts today, that this team is not currently a playoff-caliber team).

Even better would be to take the pythagorean record from July 13 until now and see what you come up with there, then extend that over the remaining 50 games, since there has been such a significant shift in the roster since then.

Don't mind me...just pitching to contact, that's all...

by Paul Householder on Aug 8, 2006 3:15 PM EDT reply actions

Yes

The proper way to look at it is that the Reds will likely play at around a .473 clip for the rest of the season. Since 1900, 111 teams have been 4 games over their pythag after 112 games. The average finish for those teams was 4 games over their end of the season pythag record. I think 80-82 is a likely record for this team at the end of the season.

by Slyde on Aug 8, 2006 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions

Intangibles

I think there is something to be said for the intangibles of winning close games.

In the 1960 World Series, the Pirates got killed in 3 of the 4 games, yet still won the Series.

I see your point of the run differenital, because frankly it is embarassing.... However, the fact that they are still over .500 despite that margin says something about this team.

by indy on Aug 8, 2006 4:22 PM EDT reply actions

correction....

Pirates got killed in 3 of 7** games (16-3, 10-0, and 12-0).

They were out scored on the series 55-27 and were still Wolrd Champs

by indy on Aug 8, 2006 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm not so sure

Winning the close ones in a short series is one thing, but most teams tend to be pretty close to .500 in 1-run games during an entire season. History has shown that the really good teams tend to be the ones that win the blowouts, not the close ones. The reason this is so is because teams that win a lot of close games usually do so because they are overcoming some major flaw within the team.

For the Reds, it has mainly been the bullpen that blows leads and forces the offense to play come from behind. It may be a lot to expect the Reds to maintain their .636 winning percentage in 1-run games. And besides, wouldn't we all rather they just win a couple blowouts now and then? :)

by Slyde on Aug 8, 2006 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Anecdotally...

I do seem to remember that there were a number of games where the Reds were up by four or five runs, and they became one-run games because of the blowpen. To figure out which ones those were, just search the game threads for posts with the word "DFA" or "sucks" near the words "Weathers," "Shackelford," "Mercker," "White," "Majewski" and "Hammond." Alternatively, you can search for posts by certain of us with various expletives.

Don't mind me...just pitching to contact, that's all...

by Paul Householder on Aug 8, 2006 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions

"...search the game threads...

various expletives."

That is so very true, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

by Ash on Aug 8, 2006 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions

short memory

One nice intangible that would be nice for the team to show tonight is a short memory. Cardinals racked up a lot of runs last night, but none of them count today. Let's hope the hometown team realizes that.

by rojosoto on Aug 8, 2006 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions