Comments on: The Odds Of Winning

By: Adam S

Adam S — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 23:37:25 +0000

Unless I misunderstood the methodology, one key thing to keep in mind is that the projections take a mean estimate for each team and look at the random variance of playing 162 game season NOT the potential variance of the estimate.

I.e., the experiment says the various projections say the Mariners are a team that will score about as many runs as they allow. And the results show the chance that such a .500 team will win the division given the three opponents. This doesn’t consider the chance that the Mariners “true talent level” actually makes them a .520 team or a .550 team or a .480 team.

By: MKT

MKT — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 22:07:00 +0000

in those 1,000 seasons, the Mariners ended up on top of the AL West 25.6 percent of the time and won the wild card 3.8 percent of the time

If we had total ignorance about the AL West, or for that matter if we had a lot of information and concluded that all of the teams were about equal, we would project the Mariners to win the AL West 25.0% of the time. So the 25.6% figure means that the M’s are pretty much indistinguishable from the average AL West team.

Which is probably a good assessment, more prognosticators seem to agree that the Angels will be less dominant and the rest of the West has caught up. Moreover being even with the AL West is a lot better than being in the cellar. But even so, with all the off-season moves and excitement and what-not, and then the news about Lee being out initially and Sweeney being in and etc., it’s a bit of a letdown to see that in the end, we’re right where the most ignorant initial forecast would put the Ms: 1/4 chance of winning the division.

By: joser

joser — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:11:01 +0000

Whether or not the Ms are playoff contenders could be more or less determined this first month.

It’s going to depend a lot on how the other AL West teams do in that first month, too.

By: PackBob

PackBob — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:00:58 +0000

Seems like 100 years since the Ms got off to a fast start with the bats. If no one’s hitting at the start, it could be a hole too deep to climb out of when/if Lee/Bedard return. On the other hand, good hitting the first month could carry the replacement-level pitchers. Whether or not the Ms are playoff contenders could be more or less determined this first month.

By: RoninX

RoninX — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:36:47 +0000

There’s a difference between how John Kruk arrives at his his opinion and a how a simulation does.

I’ve always said I that the projection system I trust the most is the one with the highest hotdog input. I heart BBTN!

By: Mere Tantalisers

Mere Tantalisers — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:35:10 +0000

Worth pointing out that the Ms are heavily dragged down by a very pessimistic CHONE projection, and these runs on DM were calculated to have about 2 months of Bedard. In a lot of ways the team’s success is tied to his recovery and ability to stay healthy, which pretty much reiterated what you’ve been saying. This is a feast or famine kind of team.

By: jjracoon

jjracoon — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:35:05 +0000

April Fools jokes aside – When Kotchman and Gonzalez are compared side by side, what amount of wins difference would Adrian make?? Obviously he SHOULD get a lot of RBIs with Ichiro & Figgins in front if him but how much more???

By: jjracoon

jjracoon — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:28:21 +0000

If Bradley has the year they want and Griffey doesnt cancel it out and the rest of the oft injured can play most of a full season the playoffs are probable. Like Dave said earlier in the week IF we can get through April in contention then some semblance of a consistent rotation and lineup will take us the rest of the way.

Let’s get this party started!!!!!!!

By: Carson

Carson — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:57:05 +0000

And #2 I’m not sure how much I trust it since every site I read predict every team in tr AL west to be above .500. How canwe finish second with a .500 record??

You don’t have to go that far back to see those same sites picking the M’s to win the AL West with their Felix/Bedard 1-2 punch, while these projection systems disagreed.

There’s a difference between how John Kruk arrives at his his opinion and a how a simulation does.

By: julian

julian — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:45:54 +0000

One of the arguments made about the M’s is that they’re a “high risk, high reward” team who may do really well or very poorly. But the linked simulation results don’t suggest this at all – basically, all the teams have the same standard deviation for wins. Do we have anything more than speculation to support the high-variance theory?