Remaining Schedules ← FREE KRAUT!

Remaining Schedules 84

5 Aug 2013  |  mikeA  |FK-All

Tags: · ·

There’s been some consternation by many (including me, in my head), about the Rangers’ easier remaining schedule.

Excluding head to head, Tx has:
10 vs. Ana
10 vs. Hou
6 vs. Sea
4 vs. TB
3 vs. KC
3 vs. Min.
3 vs. CHW
3 vs. Pit
2 vs. Mil
The aggregate winning percentage of these teams, weighted by number of games, is .443.
6 vs. Ana
7 vs. Hou
6 vs. Sea
3 vs. TB
3 vs. Bal.
4 vs. Tor.
4 vs. Det
3 vs. Cle
7 vs. Min
2 vs. Cin
Aggregate winning percentage of these teams is .451.

For purposes of figuring out the advantage of that difference, I assumed both Tx and the A’s are .59 true talent. Based on that assumption, Tx should have a .644 winning pct against .443 opposition, and the A’s would have a .636 winning pct.

That would give Tx an expected .4 game advantage from the remaining schedules. N, again excluding head to head… Not huge of course, but probably actually somewhat substantial as these things go.

84 thoughts on “Remaining Schedules”

  1. Kay Aug 5,2013 4:26 pm

    This is actually quite reassuring, at least to me. The now A’s have a 2.1 game advantage (2.5 -0.4), excluding head-to-head, right?

    \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
    • mikeA Aug 5,2013 4:35 pm || Up

      At least for the next few hours…

      • Future Ed Aug 5,2013 6:16 pm || Up

        no faith in Jerome Williams?

        I have $5. No I don\'t.
  2. dmoas Aug 5,2013 5:59 pm

    The part that concerns me is it’s easier to stay ahead than catch up. By the end of the month, because of the August schedule, we could be playing from behind and I’m mostly concerned about that.

  3. ptbnl Aug 5,2013 6:03 pm

    I’m confused by your numbers (but then I’m also jet-lagged up the wazoo)

    How do you get 0.4 wins? Using your 0.644/0.636 win probabilities over 44 and 45 games respectively I get 29.2 and 28.6 wins, for a delta of 0.6 wins.

    Beyond that, how are you getting the win probabilities? If I assume a linear function then I’m getting Texas winning 0.647 against 0.443 opponents, and Oakland 0.639 against 0.451 opponents.

    Beyond beyond that, a linear function can’t be right (since it should go to 0.0 against 1.0 opponents and 1.0 against 0.0 opponents) but if it isn’t linear I don’t think you can do the aggregating.

    If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
    • FreeSeatUpgrade Aug 5,2013 6:19 pm || Up

      There was a time I considered myself a reasonably numerate fellow. Then I met you people.

      "Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
      • Soaker Aug 5,2013 6:27 pm || Up

        “…if it isn’t linear I don’t think you can do the aggregating” made me think IYCDTWB…

        What I discovered Blew. My. Mind. -- Pat Boone
      • mikeA Aug 5,2013 7:24 pm || Up

        You (and I) are reasonably numerate, some people here are unreasonably numerate.

        • Soaker Aug 5,2013 7:38 pm || Up

          At Cal I passed up Math 1A on the AP and did fine in 1B. I got into 1C (quarter system in those days), looked around at all the engineers and waved the white flag.

          What I discovered Blew. My. Mind. -- Pat Boone
          • Future Ed Aug 5,2013 8:06 pm || Up

            by waiving the whit flag you mean, ripping off one of their short sleeve button up white shirts?

            I have $5. No I don\'t.
            • Englishmajor Aug 5,2013 9:39 pm || Up

              Waving the Whit flag = sticking up for Blevins’ girlfriend?

      • ptbnl Aug 5,2013 7:28 pm || Up

        The first part is just

        expected number of wins = win probability x number of games

        so 0.644×44=29.216 and 0.636×45=28.620, and 29.216-28.620=0.596 (which I just called 0.6).

        The second part is the question of determining a team’s win probability against a particular opponent. When we say the A’s are a 0.590 team, that’s against a notional “average” (0.500) team; equally we know that they should have a win probability of 0.500 against another 0.590 team. Assuming that win probability is a linear function of opponent’s strength we can then extrapolate from these two points to any other opponent. My problem is doing that gives me different values to mikeA’s so we must be using a different model.

        The third part is that the assumption of a linear function has to be wrong at some level, since the win probability should be 1.000 against a (hypothetical) 0.000 team and 0.000 against 1.000 team, whereas the linear model predicts win probabilities of 1.009 (!) and 0.009 respectively. However, if the function isn’t linear then you can no longer say simply aggregate all the individual teams to get an effective schedule strength.

        If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
        • andeux Aug 5,2013 7:30 pm || Up

          The formula mikeA cited is called the odds ratio or Log5 method.

          TINSTAAFK
          • andeux Aug 5,2013 7:55 pm || Up

            Basically, imagine that they each flip coins weighted according to their own winning percentage, and if there is a tie they each flip again. It’s a reasonable model that behaves as it should at both the middle (evenly matched teams) and the boundaries.

            Also, yes, it’s non-linear, but the non-linear effects are second order, and probably not going to make any difference when the first order value is 0.4 wins.

            TINSTAAFK
          • ptbnl Aug 5,2013 8:21 pm || Up

            Cool – thanks. And yes, doing everything right (including the extra game and not aggregating) the delta comes out to 0.444 wins.

            If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
          • elcroata Aug 5,2013 11:58 pm || Up

            As a proxy, even the adapted second order run-differential Pythagorean will do:

            WPHexp = \dfrac{WPH^2}{(WPH^2+WPA^2)}

            Which is basically just like using runs scored and scored against and gives very, very similar results.

            Because survival is insufficient
            • nevermoor Aug 6,2013 9:16 am || Up

              Woo! Someone used the LaTeX plugin.

              "There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want"
            • Bed Aug 6,2013 11:02 am || Up

              My nose started to bleed just looking at that.

              But seriously, folks....
    • mikeA Aug 5,2013 7:07 pm || Up

      1. I used the same denominator because I considered the extra game not to be a s.o.s. difference.
      2. The probabilities are beyond my ability to figure out on my own. I used a formula from bill James purporting to be a way to calculate single game odds based on winning %. Formula is (a-a*b)/(a+b-2*a*b). Whatever you used might be better.
      3. I don’t see the 1 and 0 thing as a problem. No baseball teams like that would ever exist, but its not incoherent,and the exercise is just using approximations of “true” winning pct. Not being able to aggregate would be counterintuitive to me…

  4. bear88 Aug 5,2013 6:57 pm

    I posted a few times yesterday about my fears, but I think the most likely outcome is the A’s start playing better, and things take care of themselves (even if it means the Wild Card), or they don’t.

    • mikeA Aug 5,2013 7:15 pm || Up

      Well, the problem as I see it is the Rangers have a better team.

  5. Kay Aug 5,2013 8:15 pm

    I took a casual look through the minor league rosters, and it looks like the only guys down there that might be able to help the A’s in September are Sonny Gray and Michael Choice.

    \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
    • 5Aces Aug 5,2013 8:22 pm || Up

      You have no faith in a Sept Jemile Weeks miracle?

      Camelot sure fell apart, didn't it? -Steve McCatty
      • Kay Aug 5,2013 8:36 pm || Up

        I can see Montz or Vogt hitting a monster late-September homer, Dan Johnson-style.

        \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
        • Soaker Aug 5,2013 8:39 pm || Up

          (it will be Rosales doing that)

          What I discovered Blew. My. Mind. -- Pat Boone
          • Future Ed Aug 5,2013 8:47 pm || Up

            lets hope angel hernandez isn’t on the crew

            I have $5. No I don\'t.
          • FreeSeatUpgrade Aug 5,2013 8:47 pm || Up

            Ouch, that would hurt a lot.

            "Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
            • Soaker Aug 5,2013 8:51 pm || Up

              As mentioned elsewhere the Rangers DFA’d Rosales today. I assume he’ll clear waivers and declare free agency, Billy will re-sign him and he’ll be in Oakland in September.

              What I discovered Blew. My. Mind. -- Pat Boone
              • Kay Aug 5,2013 9:09 pm || Up

                Yay!

                \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
              • FreeSeatUpgrade Aug 5,2013 9:26 pm || Up

                Ah. Though maybe now he becomes a Devil Ray.

                "Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
        • 5Aces Aug 5,2013 8:53 pm || Up

          Im picturing a big CY25 hit at some point. Maybe even a hot Sept or post season.

          Camelot sure fell apart, didn't it? -Steve McCatty
          • Kay Aug 5,2013 9:09 pm || Up

            I’m doing what I can to help manifest that reality.

            \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
          • vignette17 Aug 6,2013 11:58 am || Up

            I see a Johnny Damon style 2 HR game and good playoffs.

  6. elcroata Aug 5,2013 11:39 pm

    Good stuff, thanks for doing it!

    How did you come up with the TTL of 0.59 for each team? OAK has WP% of .577 and TEX of .558. If you regress with 70 games* of .500, you come up with .547 and .536 respectively.

    Or did you use second or third order wins?

    *I think that is the point of r=.7, IIRC and I’m to lazy to calculate now

    Because survival is insufficient
    • elcroata Aug 5,2013 11:43 pm || Up

      And plugging these numbers into the Log5 formula would give Oakland .595 winning percentage the rest of the way and Texas .592.

      Because survival is insufficient
    • mikeA Aug 6,2013 11:08 am || Up

      I wasn’t trying to be accurate with those, just chose a plausible number, probably was too high.
      I used the same number for both teams because the point of the exercise was to estimate the advantage just from different s.o.s. I wasn’t trying to do a projection for the rest of the season. So whatever ttl I chose had to be the same for both.

      • elcroata Aug 6,2013 11:13 am || Up

        OK, thanks. Nothing wrong with that, was just curious.

        Because survival is insufficient
    • vignette17 Aug 6,2013 12:00 pm || Up

      One could use Fangraphs ROS team projection or BBPro if one were so inclined. Then again, if you’re doing that might as well simply use their playoff odds.

  7. SamYam Aug 6,2013 7:56 am

    Just a dumb question- has anyone ever tried to adjust for home vs. away in the odds ratio method, or the second-order pythagorean method? I’m only wondering because the A’s have especially drastic home/away splits due to the pitching staff’s high fly ball rates. I haven’t looked at the schedule, but if there are a larger weight of home or away games for the A’s, it might change things a bit in either direction.

    • colin Aug 6,2013 8:02 am || Up

      I would guess that something like the BPro playoff odds, where they Monte Carlo the rest of the season would account for home/away at some level. On the other hand, it seems like all but the most extreme team splits would be pretty hard to measure, given that you only have 162 games in the full season (and for something like that playoff odds page, you are projecting from less than a full season). But it would make sense to at least include the (well measured) league-wide home/away split.

      • ptbnl Aug 6,2013 11:12 am || Up

        That 14.4% 7-day drop in the A’s playoff likelihood is pretty ugly.

        If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
    • elcroata Aug 6,2013 8:23 am || Up

      If you look at it historically, you will see that home teams win at around .530 clip. This happens mostly because of the batting in the bottom of the inning, but certainly to some extent because of more rested players, familiarity with the field and any roster-to-ballpark construction, such as you mention.

      However, you are mistaken in assuming that the A’s have a drastic home away split this year. The A’s have a home winning percentage of .636 and an away winning percentage of .518. That’s added home winning percentage of .552, which is just a tad above this year’s average of .546, and ranks them just in the middle of the pack:

      Team	                HW	HL	AW	AL	WPH	WPA	WP	AWPH
Chicago White Sox	23	28	18	41	0.451	0.305	0.373	0.605
San Diego Padres	31	25	21	35	0.554	0.375	0.464	0.596
Atlanta Braves	        38	15	30	30	0.717	0.500	0.602	0.596
Colorado Rockies	31	26	21	35	0.544	0.375	0.460	0.591
Cleveland Indians	37	20	25	30	0.649	0.455	0.554	0.586
Cincinnati Reds	        33	19	28	32	0.635	0.467	0.545	0.583
San Francisco Giants	29	27	21	34	0.518	0.382	0.450	0.575
Miami Marlins	        26	32	17	35	0.448	0.327	0.391	0.573
Philadelphia Phillies	27	26	23	35	0.509	0.397	0.450	0.565
Washington Nationals	31	26	23	32	0.544	0.418	0.482	0.564
Detroit Tigers	        37	19	28	26	0.661	0.519	0.591	0.559
Minnesota Twins	        26	27	22	34	0.491	0.393	0.440	0.557
Milwaukee Brewers	27	31	20	34	0.466	0.370	0.420	0.555
Oakland Athletics	35	20	29	27	0.636	0.518	0.577	0.552
Arizona Diamondbacks	30	24	26	31	0.556	0.456	0.505	0.551
St. Louis Cardinals	32	18	33	28	0.640	0.541	0.586	0.546
Boston Red Sox	        39	21	29	25	0.650	0.537	0.596	0.545
Los Angeles Angels	30	30	21	30	0.500	0.412	0.459	0.544
Pittsburgh Pirates	38	20	29	24	0.655	0.547	0.604	0.543
Seattle Mariners	29	29	23	31	0.500	0.426	0.464	0.538
Toronto Blue Jays	28	28	24	32	0.500	0.429	0.464	0.538
Tampa Bay Rays	        37	21	29	24	0.638	0.547	0.595	0.536
New York Yankees	29	25	28	29	0.537	0.491	0.514	0.523
Baltimore Orioles	33	25	28	26	0.569	0.519	0.545	0.522
Texas Rangers	        33	24	30	26	0.579	0.536	0.558	0.519
Kansas City Royals	28	24	29	28	0.538	0.509	0.523	0.515
Houston Astros	        19	37	18	37	0.339	0.327	0.333	0.509
Los Angeles Dodgers	31	25	31	24	0.554	0.564	0.559	0.496
Chicago Cubs	        23	33	26	29	0.411	0.473	0.441	0.465
New York Mets	        22	32	27	28	0.407	0.491	0.450	0.453
      Because survival is insufficient
      • colin Aug 6,2013 8:25 am || Up

        LOLmets… and LOLcubs, while we’re at it.

      • ptbnl Aug 6,2013 9:58 am || Up

        Have the home and road schedules been comparably hard?

        If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
        • elcroata Aug 6,2013 10:17 am || Up

          The A’s ones? I’m not sure, but it is rather easy to check

          Because survival is insufficient
          • Bed Aug 6,2013 10:20 am || Up

            I’ll have those numbers for you coming right up.

            But seriously, folks....
            • elcroata Aug 6,2013 10:23 am || Up

              If you only wrote this in italics

              Because survival is insufficient
              • Bed Aug 6,2013 10:28 am || Up

                Heh…yeah, I should have done that.

                But seriously, folks....
          • ptbnl Aug 6,2013 10:27 am || Up

            So easy I was hoping someone would do it for me.

            If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
            • elcroata Aug 6,2013 10:54 am || Up

              As tango always says, it is a great opportunity for a young researcher!

              Because survival is insufficient
              • ptbnl Aug 6,2013 11:08 am || Up

                Which rules me out.

                If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
      • dmoas Aug 6,2013 10:59 am || Up

        In fairness, that split was bigger pre-break.

        • elcroata Aug 6,2013 11:12 am || Up

          True, .570, but still good for only 9th in MLB…

          Because survival is insufficient
          • dmoas Aug 6,2013 11:20 am || Up

            Your ranking confuses me. Wouldn’t it be Home WPct – Away WPct?

            • elcroata Aug 6,2013 11:27 am || Up

              It’s home winning percentage divided with overall winning percentage and then multiplied with a .500 record so it brings everybody to the same level.

              Or in other words, it says if each of these teams had an overall .500 record, and won more games at home at the same rate they are doing it now, that would be their home winning percentage (and subsequently 1 – that would be their away winning percentage)

              Because survival is insufficient
              • dmoas Aug 6,2013 9:39 pm || Up

                That seems unnecessarily overly complicated. And it seems to ignore away altogether.

                • elcroata Aug 6,2013 9:46 pm || Up

                  It’s not complicated at all. And it doesn’t ignore away altogether, because away is included in overall winning percentage.

                  It is the number that answers the question What would this team’s home winning percentage be if it were an overall .500 team? The other one is not.

                  Because survival is insufficient
  8. JamesV Aug 6,2013 9:17 am

    Not that the Angels worry me any more, but since Pujols went down:

    • JamesV Aug 6,2013 9:18 am || Up

      That’s 22.1% of the pitches off the outside part of the plate, 21.3% off the inside part.

  9. JamesV Aug 6,2013 9:39 am

    Just in case any of you like attending Gold Rush Days in Old Sacramento, they’re going to be doing recreations of it from roughly 150 years ago, looking like twice daily.

    Keep an eye on the site for scheduling.

    http://sacramentogoldrushdays.com/

    • JamesV Aug 6,2013 9:39 am || Up

      Uh, doing recreations of Old West baseball, that is.

    • Kay Aug 6,2013 9:58 am || Up

      I saw the “suffragists” walking the boardwalk on Saturday when I was down there, and I so wanted to tell those ladies about female supremacy and lesbianism, but then I remembered I’m not actually Dr. Who…

      \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
      • Kay Aug 6,2013 9:58 am || Up

        muahahahahaha

        \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
      • Kay Aug 6,2013 10:17 am || Up

        I’ve kinda moved on from second wave feminism anyway. I’m ensconced in the 3 1/2th wave now.

        Although I’m still a HUGE fan of Shulamith Firestone and I think she should be up there with the other predictors of the singularity, Vinge and Kurzweil. Her prediction was more for a post-gendered post-biologically reproductive internal&externally enhanced human society rather than a post-human society, but she was close enough for 1972 for me to round up…

        \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
      • AV Aug 6,2013 10:26 am || Up

        just wait. 13th doctor will have to be trans, if the kerfuffle over the 12th possibly being a woman is any indicator.

        *i’m* AV. alex vause. put this loon in psych before she hurts someone.
        • dmoas Aug 6,2013 11:09 am || Up

          12th as already announced. It’s a dude.

          • Bed Aug 6,2013 11:11 am || Up

            If it was The Dude I might be interested.

            But seriously, folks....
          • AV Aug 6,2013 11:16 am || Up

            yep, that’s what i was basing my thought on. they’re gonna have to ease into a gender change because reaction seemed to stop it cold this time.

            *i’m* AV. alex vause. put this loon in psych before she hurts someone.
  10. aardvark Aug 6,2013 11:10 am

    • aardvark Aug 6,2013 11:11 am || Up

      crap:

      • elcroata Aug 6,2013 11:14 am || Up

        Has better arm than Coco

        Because survival is insufficient
      • JamesV Aug 6,2013 11:20 am || Up

        Best part is dad not even knowing his kid threw it back.

      • dmoas Aug 6,2013 11:21 am || Up

        I love how the father isn’t even aware as he’s thanking the dude who gave it to him.

      • Jennifer Aug 6,2013 11:38 am || Up

        Didn’t that kiddo throw out the first pitch recently.

      • elcroata Aug 6,2013 11:38 am || Up

        I mean the kid did the right thing, it was Austin Jackson’s home run

        Because survival is insufficient
        • elcroata Aug 6,2013 11:41 am || Up

          Ooops, I stand corrected, it wasn’t a home run ball

          Because survival is insufficient
      • Future Ed Aug 6,2013 12:57 pm || Up

        they threw out the first pitch in may

        I have $5. No I don\'t.
      • Englishmajor Aug 6,2013 1:44 pm || Up

        I like the older boy in the OAKLAND jersey sitting a couple of rows up.

Leave a Reply