Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Sports Forum

Sports Forum

  1. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 15:08
    + 180

    Red Sox: +141
    Phillies: + 136
    Texas +122

    Everyone else: fuggedeabouddit

    For all the smack talk about how the Yankees lost out to Boston and Philly in the offseason, no deadline moves, old team, etc. etc. etc. only bad luck has prevented the Yanks from having the best record in baseball (which they're not far off of in any case).

    So, folks, how do ya like them (big) apples?

    Let the jealousy begin.

  2. 17 Aug '11 15:16
    Originally posted by sh76
    + 180

    Red Sox: +141
    Phillies: + 136
    Texas +122

    Everyone else: fuggedeabouddit

    For all the smack talk about how the Yankees lost out to Boston and Philly in the offseason, no deadline moves, old team, etc. etc. etc. only bad luck has prevented the Yanks from having the best record in baseball (which they're not far off of in any case).

    So, folks, how do ya like them (big) apples?

    Let the jealousy begin.

    2011 Red Sox vs Yankees

    Red Sox 10 wins, 2 losses

    Yankees 2 wins, 10 losses

    Smack That......
  3. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 15:37
    Originally posted by mudpie
    2011 Red Sox vs Yankees

    Red Sox 10 wins, 2 losses

    Yankees 2 wins, 10 losses

    Smack That......
    It's a good thing the rest of the games count too.
  4. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    17 Aug '11 16:27
    Originally posted by sh76
    + 180

    Red Sox: +141
    Phillies: + 136
    Texas +122

    Everyone else: fuggedeabouddit

    For all the smack talk about how the Yankees lost out to Boston and Philly in the offseason, no deadline moves, old team, etc. etc. etc. only bad luck has prevented the Yanks from having the best record in baseball (which they're not far off of in any case).

    So, folks, how do ya like them (big) apples?

    Let the jealousy begin.

    Last time I checked, you get the same credit for a 1-0 win as you do for a 20-0 win.
    That run differential doesn't matter.

    It is run total at the end of each game that matters and outscoring your opponent that day.

    Debate that.
  5. 17 Aug '11 17:53
    Originally posted by sh76
    + 180

    Red Sox: +141
    Phillies: + 136
    Texas +122

    Everyone else: fuggedeabouddit

    For all the smack talk about how the Yankees lost out to Boston and Philly in the offseason, no deadline moves, old team, etc. etc. etc. only bad luck has prevented the Yanks from having the best record in baseball (which they're not far off of in any case).

    So, folks, how do ya like them (big) apples?

    Let the jealousy begin.

    the big wins mean nothing if you can't convert the close games into victories...
  6. 17 Aug '11 18:41
    I'm a big Yankee fan but I think their winning percentage (100 win pace) is real deceiving. Assuming they make the playoffs, who is starting for them after Sabathia? Colon? Garcia? Nova? Burnett? None of those choices sound like championship to me. Texas and Boston have quality bullpens and hiting too so its not like they are the class of the AL in the other phases of the game either.
  7. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 18:53
    Originally posted by quackquack
    I'm a big Yankee fan but I think their winning percentage (100 win pace) is real deceiving. Assuming they make the playoffs, who is starting for them after Sabathia? Colon? Garcia? Nova? Burnett? None of those choices sound like championship to me. Texas and Boston have quality bullpens and hiting too so its not like they are the class of the AL in the other phases of the game either.
    The Yanks' bullpen has been absolutely lights out for months and after Beckett and Lester, the Red Sox are worse than the Yanks in the starting rotation. I'm not saying Boston will be a cakewalk, but they have an even chance of beating them.
  8. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 18:54
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Last time I checked, you get the same credit for a 1-0 win as you do for a 20-0 win.
    That run differential doesn't matter.

    It is run total at the end of each game that matters and outscoring your opponent that day.

    Debate that.
    Run differential is and always has been a fantastic way to measure the quality of teams. Read Baseball Dynasties by Rob Neyer and Eddie Epstein.
  9. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 18:56
    Originally posted by trev33
    the big wins mean nothing if you can't convert the close games into victories...
    Good teams do much better in blowouts than they do in 1 run games. 1 run games have a much higher luck factor in them than blowouts. Read a little bit about Sabermetrics. This business about "good teams know how to win close games" is nonsense. 1 run games tend to gravitate towards .500 for all teams given a large enough sample size.
  10. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    17 Aug '11 19:23
    Originally posted by sh76
    Run differential is and always has been a fantastic way to measure the quality of teams. Read Baseball Dynasties by Rob Neyer and Eddie Epstein.
    Do you think the 1969 NY Mets read that book?
  11. 17 Aug '11 19:57
    Originally posted by sh76
    The Yanks' bullpen has been absolutely lights out for months and after Beckett and Lester, the Red Sox are worse than the Yanks in the starting rotation. I'm not saying Boston will be a cakewalk, but they have an even chance of beating them.
    I hop I am wrong but I feel that the two major reasons the Yankees have a good run differential (1) they beat up bad teams and (2) they don't take off innings are fairly meaningless in the playoffs.
    You only use three or four starters so I think the Red Sox are a lot closer to pitching a good starter every game than the Yankees.
    I'd rather have the better record in head to head match ups than have a better season long run differential but hey, that's why they play the games.
  12. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 21:03
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Do you think the 1969 NY Mets read that book?
    Logical fallacy.

    The a team did win the WS without a great run differential does not mean that it does not have a good predictive value.

    In Baseball Dynasties, the measure run differential based on how many standard deviations the team is better than the mean.

    Incidentally, in case you're wondering, by the measure, the greatest seaon of all time was the 1998 Yankees.
  13. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 21:06
    Originally posted by quackquack
    I hop I am wrong but I feel that the two major reasons the Yankees have a good run differential (1) they beat up bad teams and (2) they don't take off innings are fairly meaningless in the playoffs.
    You only use three or four starters so I think the Red Sox are a lot closer to pitching a good starter every game than the Yankees.
    I'd rather have the bet ...[text shortened]... ups than have a better season long run differential but hey, that's why they play the games.
    Trying to explain away run differential is like trying to explain away a won-loss record. Run differential evens out over the course of a long season and, in the minds of most good sabermetricians, is as good or better an indicator of how good a team is as/than is wins-losses.

    Good teams win blowouts. Bad teams lose blowouts. Close games are where luck has its greatest impact.
  14. 17 Aug '11 21:39
    Originally posted by sh76
    Trying to explain away run differential is like trying to explain away a won-loss record. Run differential evens out over the course of a long season and, in the minds of most good sabermetricians, is as good or better an indicator of how good a team is as/than is wins-losses.

    Good teams win blowouts. Bad teams lose blowouts. Close games are where luck has its greatest impact.
    I like statics but there are limitations and people who write about baseball statics call everything they aren't measuring "luck". They devalue bullpens because they throw fewer innings then starters and then decide that winning close games is based on luck. Meanwhile top teams always have excellent pens and win more than their fair share of close games.

    I'm more interested in the health of Garcia and Colon down the stretch and how they do against good hitting teams (especially Boston) than I am in plus/ minus run differential.
  15. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Aug '11 23:02 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by quackquack
    I like statics but there are limitations and people who write about baseball statics call everything they aren't measuring "luck". They devalue bullpens because they throw fewer innings then starters and then decide that winning close games is based on luck. Meanwhile top teams always have excellent pens and win more than their fair share of close games do against good hitting teams (especially Boston) than I am in plus/ minus run differential.
    That is incorrect. Good teams almost always win FEWER than their fare shares of 1 run games. Bad teams typically win more than their share of one run games.

    This year, the 3 best teams are the Yankees, Red Sox and Phillies. They EACH have a winning percentage better than .600 and their combined records in one run games is 53-40; a .570 winning percentage.

    Just looking back to 2010:

    TB- record: 96-66; yet only 29-27 in one run games. The Yanks won 95 games and went only 20-19 in one run games. The Orioles, on the other hand, were 66-96 and 29-21 in one run games.

    Oh, and relief pitchers are less valuable that starting pitchers. Baseball 101. He who throws more effective innings is more valuable than he who throws fewer effective innings.