BASEBALL 9/26

[heropretend]

given the time of the year, i'll chalk it up or pass. today im a dirty white blackboard. go bosox!

[JTrout]

[ QUOTE ]
In addition to these two I like fading the other must win (Phillies) as well. This line is completely whacked and I believe the "wrong" side is favored.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sweating this one with you! Big rally in top of 8th.
5-5, two on, no outs.....

[JTrout]

6-5 Mets.
thank you, mrbaseball.

[Bill C]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I'm still waiting for an explanation ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hope you brought your lunch.

What I do is what I do. It works for me. I feel no obligation to explain anything to you.

bc

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I'm still waiting for an explanation ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hope you brought your lunch.

What I do is what I do. It works for me. I feel no obligation to explain anything to you.

bc

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine.

No one here can admit they are wrong. It is just frustrating.

Any measure of offense, park adjusted, opponent adjusted, whatever, would show you that the Red Sox offense is VASTLY superior to the Blue Jays offense. I point this out, and your response is "I don't have to respond to you." Not, "Okay, I made a mistake in my analysis."

Bottom line is judging the Sox offense as 10 cents better than the Jays was a HUGE error. I mean, around a 40 cent error or so. That's enough to turn a profitable bet into a loser most the time.

So, fine, just ignore me.

If this works for you, that's all that matters. I highly doubt making extremely inaccurate evaluations works for anyone, though.

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
No one here can admit they are wrong. It is just frustrating.


[/ QUOTE ]

I assume this includes you? We all look at things a bit differently. Doesn't make it right and doesn't make it wrong. If you are losing $$$ day after day you will soon figure out you may be doing something wrong, if not you may just be on to something!

[ QUOTE ]
Bottom line is judging the Sox offense as 10 cents better than the Jays was a HUGE error.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huge? Factoring nothing else but offense I have the Red Sox with a 12 cent advantage over the Jays. 10 cents is a solid ballpark estimate in my view.

[ QUOTE ]
around a 40 cent error or so

[/ QUOTE ]

40 cents is HUGE no way they have 40 cents advantage over anyone just in offense. How you come up with 40 cents? Heres my most simplistic method. Tor scores 4.61 per game and Bos scores 5.61 per game so together they score 10.22 per game. 5.61/10.22=54.8% which is aout 20 cents. Of course there is a lot of other stuff I put into it but just on the surface 20 cents looks fair and doubling it to 40 cents seems ludicrous. And this 20 cents assumes 100% weighting of offense with no other factors.

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No one here can admit they are wrong. It is just frustrating.


[/ QUOTE ]

I assume this includes you? We all look at things a bit differently. Doesn't make it right and doesn't make it wrong. If you are losing $$$ day after day you will soon figure out you may be doing something wrong, if not you may just be on to something!


[/ QUOTE ]
I am willing to admit I am wrong when I am wrong. I have done so several times at twoplustwo. Don't feel like looking up previous posts.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Bottom line is judging the Sox offense as 10 cents better than the Jays was a HUGE error.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huge? Factoring nothing else but offense I have the Red Sox with a 12 cent advantage over the Jays. 10 cents is a solid ballpark estimate in my view.


[/ QUOTE ]
12 cents is a terrible estimate as well.
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
around a 40 cent error or so

[/ QUOTE ]

40 cents is HUGE no way they have 40 cents advantage over anyone just in offense. How you come up with 40 cents? Heres my most simplistic method. Tor scores 4.61 per game and Bos scores 5.61 per game so together they score 10.22 per game. 5.61/10.22=54.8% which is aout 20 cents. Of course there is a lot of other stuff I put into it but just on the surface 20 cents looks fair and doubling it to 40 cents seems ludicrous. And this 20 cents assumes 100% weighting of offense with no other factors.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't do the math myself - 40 cents was a rough guess, but it is much closer to accurate than 12 cents.

However, your math is severely flawed. 5.61/10.22 does equal 54.8%, which is 20 cents (still a very BIG difference from the 10 cents, or even 12 cents - enough to turn a long term winner into a loser).

However, wins and losses aren't proportional to RS and RA. They are proportional to the SQUARE of RS and RA (roughly). In other words, the WPCT for offense alone would be:

RS^2/ (RS^2+RA^2). Plugging in your very own numbers, you get a WPCT of 59.6%. That's almost 50 cents. Huge, huge difference.

It's not park adjusted or anything, which works slightly in Toronto's (Bos PF is 1041, Tor's is 1026 - both good for offense but Fenway is better) favor. However, Boston as a team has an Eqa of .273, and Toronto has an Eqa of .249. These are park adjusted, and Boston's offense projects to about .98 runs per game more than Toronto's at a neutral park.

Seriously, if you think the difference is only 12 cents, why the heck is Toronto not leading Boston in the standings? They have vastly superior pitching.

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
if you think the difference is only 12 cents, why the heck is Toronto not leading Boston in the standings?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually ... Bos has won 92 games and Tor has won 76 game which is 168 games so 92/168=54.7% or about that 20 cents we already discussed. So the rpg has pretty good correlation to wins. Or it's a fluke? I don't know for sure.

But this was just a simplistic example. I have the difference in offence greater than 12 cents on its own. But when weighted with all of the stuff I look at offense came out to having a 12 cent impact.

This has been a fantastic season for me so I don't really think I am making grievous errors. If so I've had a lucky run for the past few years!

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you think the difference is only 12 cents, why the heck is Toronto not leading Boston in the standings?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually ... Bos has won 92 games and Tor has won 76 game which is 168 games so 92/168=54.7% or about that 20 cents we already discussed. So the rpg has pretty good correlation to wins. Or it's a fluke? I don't know for sure.

But this was just a simplistic example. I have the difference in offence greater than 12 cents on its own. But when weighted with all of the stuff I look at offense came out to having a 12 cent impact.

This has been a fantastic season for me so I don't really think I am making grievous errors. If so I've had a lucky run for the past few years!

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Huge? Factoring nothing else but offense I have the Red Sox with a 12 cent advantage over the Jays. 10 cents is a solid ballpark estimate in my view.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you doing here? We were talking about offense alone, I proved your analysis way off, and then you come and bring up overall team quality. Your statements contradict.

Well, I think the overall team record has A LOT to do with the fact that Boston has allowed 94 more runs than the Blue Jays, don't you think?

You can ignore offense and instead focus on overall team ratings. IF you choose to do this, you can't look at the pitcher matchup in the same way. You HAVE to compare the pitcher's to their respective teammates.

Since Toronto's starting pitching has been superior to Boston's, that works in Schilling's favor. It's not Schilling vs. Bush, it's Schilling vs. Boston's average starter against Bush vs. Toronto's average starter.

Now, the original analysis did not do this, and thus it was flawed. You can look at pitcher vs. pitcher matchup and ignore teammates - but then you have to correctly account for all other individual factors (bullpen, offense, etc.). And 10 cents was an atrocious estimate as to how much better the Boston offense is than Toronto's.

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
You can look at pitcher vs. pitcher matchup and ignore teammates - but then you have to correctly account for all other individual factors (bullpen, offense, etc.). And 10 cents was an atrocious estimate as to how much better the Boston offense is than Toronto's.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think we once again (as always!) have some massive miscommunications going on and are basically comparing apples and oranges. I look at all sorts of things. When weighted offense for this game came out to 12 cents of impact for all of the stuff I look at. Maybe it's too low? The formulas I use have worked well enough for my purposes.

You seem to always try to tear apart any analysis someone puts up here yet you almost never offer any analysis of your own. It's fun throwing rocks at windows but it doesn't really accomplish much. None of us ever go into a whole lot of depth but at least some of us try to explain our plays. I'd be real interested in seeing how you come up with a line? You obviously have a much better grasp of the statistics and mathematics than I do but I'm not so sure you have any kind of clue what to do with it?