Pythagoras Unbound

by fjm235 on Aug 27, 2007 3:18 AM EDT

After winning another series despite being outscored, the D'backs are closing in on an amazing record. They are now 11.6 wins above where the Pythagorean formula (which really has nothing to do with Pythagoras) says they should be. Since 1901, only 3 teams have finished the season with a bigger (positive) differential than that: the 1905 Tigers (14.0), the 2004 Yankees (12.2) and the 1984 Mets (11.8). With 32 games remaining, if they maintain their current pace they will finish with 91 wins. That would put them 14.4 wins above where the formula says they should be.
What I find truly amazing is that this is the 2nd time they've done this in the Melvin era. In 2005 they finished 11.2 wins above Pythagoras at 77-85 despite being outscored by 160 runs. That's the most wins ever by a team that was outscored by 100+ runs, to say nothing of 160. Maybe there is something to this Mad Professor business.

Tweet Comment 4 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Devil's Advocate

Maybe, but doesn't it kinda seem like we give up after we go down by 4 runs? Pitchers that are pretty good come in and start lobbing up batting practice fastballs, hitters go to sleep.

Maybe it's a lack of discipline that makes these games get so out of hand?

Then the team comes back the next day, focused (see arguments on how/why in another diary), and our starter that day doesn't give up 6 runs in a third of an inning.

Bob Melvin Sucks

by nihil67 on Aug 27, 2007 10:29 AM EDT reply actions

I'm proud of them

I'm a big stathead, but am an equally firm believer that there are intangibles, which do not necessarily show up in the box-scores. Run differential strikes me as an over-rated statistic, and we're demonstrating exactly why this year: lumping together the runs scored from all the games into one figure is a mistake, because it assumes that all runs are created equal. That is so unbelievably not the case, for obvious reasons. This team is brilliant in close games (29-16 in one-run games), and feeble in blowouts (13-23 in games decided by five runs or more). In the former, every run is crucial, but there's a reason Dustin Nippert has one decision in 25 games. [Though he has some way to go to beat the all-time champ: Larry Andersen, who threw 79.2 innings for the 1982 Mariners, but ended with a 0-0 record!]

by Jim McLennan on Aug 27, 2007 11:38 AM EDT reply actions

nice job evoking Larry Anderson!

Not exactly a name that pops up on a lot of blog posts!

by johngordonma on Aug 27, 2007 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions

I posted this in the Daily Dump

But it probably fits just as well here. Tom Verducci sharpens a steak knife and tucks in his napkin to take on the sacred cow of run differential. Defying the odds: Can D'backs, Mariners continue to overachieve?

[Josh] Byrnes listed five reasons why Arizona has exceeded expectations: 1) in-game decisions by manager Bob Melvin; 2) a reliable bullpen; 3) a lineup with production spread throughout, rather than one that waits for one or two spots to come up; 4) a good bench, and 5) excellent defense. Those qualities, Byrnes said, have served Arizona well in close games. The D-Backs are playing .644 baseball in one-run games (29-16).

In other words, you need to see how Arizona plays rather than what it produces. Perhaps the D-Backs' inspiration should be the 2005 White Sox, who ranked ninth in the AL in scoring and sixth in run differential (tying the '06 Cardinals and '03 Marlins for the worst league rank by a Wild Card Era pennant winner), but played .648 baseball in one-run games (35-19) and won the World Series. Better to be just a little bit lucky than very good.

I'm beginning to think that baseball's improved competitive balance is making run differential less reliable than it was before so much revenue-sharing, new revenue streams, and the across-the-board increases in front office intellect. I've been saying that the gap between the best team in baseball and say the 15th best team in baseball has been shrinking, and it keeps showing up in postseason series "upsets." So why wouldn't that be true of run differential, too?

Look at like this: In the first six full years of the wild-card format, only three teams made the postseason without finishing among the top five teams in its league for run differential. But in the five years since then, nine teams out of the top five have made the playoffs, and now Arizona (10th) and Seattle (eighth) could make it 11 teams in six years. So maybe, just maybe, the Diamondbacks and Mariners are more legitimate than we think, and our conventional wisdom about run differential less so.

by Jim McLennan on Aug 28, 2007 5:20 PM EDT reply actions