SI.com: Why the O's Post Season Dream is all but Impossible

[LookinUp]

...

Personally, I do not believe it is all luck, but I also believe we should not expect to be another +4 or +5 over the final third of the season.

By the way, the O's were 2 games over their Pythag in 2011, and 3 games over in 2010. The 2010 Orioles were even with their Pythag before Buck arrived and 3 games over in the 57 games in which he managed the team. So, in the 328 games Buck has managed in an Oriole uniform, the Orioles are 14 games over their Pythag. Maybe that's not a coincidence, or maybe it is.

Any idea how Buck has performed against the pythag prior to joining the O's? Is a team's distribution around the pythag truly random (luck) or are there managers/teams who consistently do better than the pythag suggests?

The pythag itself is clearly flawed, but still a solid general indicator. Maybe Buck is more willing to let a guy get shelled when we're losing, or more likely to field a team of backups on Sunday or when a bad starter is scheduled. That could skew the pythag without telling the full story.

This is sort of like Andre Agassi returning serves. Dude got aced all the time because he guessed so much. However, when he guessed right he was the best return of serve you could find. The answer depends on the context of the question.

[VeveJones007]

And that is one of the points I was trying to make. This big a departure from the Pythag is rare, but not so rare that it's unprecedented or close to unprecedented. And, at this point the first 109 games are water under the bridge. We're not any more likely to underperform our Pythag over the last 53 games than any other team, and arguably we are more likely than other teams to continue outperforming our Pythag (if you believe there is a reason other than luck why we have done so this far). Personally, I do not believe it is all luck, but I also believe we should not expect to be another +4 or +5 over the final third of the season.

By the way, the O's were 2 games over their Pythag in 2011, and 3 games over in 2010. The 2010 Orioles were even with their Pythag before Buck arrived and 3 games over in the 57 games in which he managed the team. So, in the 328 games Buck has managed in an Oriole uniform, the Orioles are 14 games over their Pythag. Maybe that's not a coincidence, or maybe it is.

If it is luck, sure, there is no reason to assume that it will change (except for the fact that we're Orioles fans). If it is performance (primarily of the bullpen), then it is reasonable to expect a regression over the remainder of the season. There is still a third of the season to be played, so there's plenty of time for the numbers to sway either way.

I feel like a lot of this debate is premature. While it isn't a SSS, there's enough sample remaining to significantly alter the final results.

[Lucky Jim]

If more than half of the teams in the AL have ERA's under 4.00, I might conclude that overall offense is down. I see offense as a team stat as it's normally the same 9 guys +/- a couple night in and out. I see pitching as an individual stat because Hammel brings a high level of competing than Hunter does, as Chen does with Britton. Looking at team ERA from a pitching perspective doesn't really reflect that difference.

You've successfully rendered a fairly straightforward statistic, of some (even if limited) utility, absolutely meaningless.

Why would any of this have any impact on the Orioles pythag, and why would it have an effect on only the Orioles?

[Lucky Jim]

I think we all have enough evidence that team chemistry plays a roll in performance. So does managing. There are a lot of arguments about whether clutch performance is an actual ability or whether its simply a measurement of past results that has no predictive value, but one can argue that some players and teams simply perform better when the game is close and on the line.

I think you'll find that many people would argue much of this.

It's possible that the team OPS+ of 83 with RISP, 95 with RISP and two outs, 94 in tie game situations, or 101 in high leverage situations has really put us over the top. (We do have a 105 OPS+ in late & close).

[Fan4Life]

You've successfully rendered a fairly straightforward statistic, of some (even if limited) utility, absolutely meaningless.

Why would any of this have any impact on the Orioles pythag, and why would it have an effect on only the Orioles?

I suggested it might. I didn't say it did. If offense is down, then a bad offense like ours has a better chance to compete when our better pitchers are in the game and this could lead to winning close games. Not saying it is so, but could be. When our not so good pitchers are in the game, Matusz, Arrietta, Hunter earlier in the year, Eveland, we lose that advantage and on many occasions are blown out. Together they could affect run differential etc etc. It affects just us because no other team is constructed with some very good pitchers, very bad pitchers, and a putrid offense. Close wins, bad losses affects Pythag.

[Pickles]

I am not "heavy" in any belief. I am, however, "heavy bored"* w/ the constant mischaracterizations of other posters' thoughts and opinions - and the rampant, aggressive mischaracterization of statistics in general.

I believe it is unlikely that the Orioles will continue to outplay their pythag and thus continue to compete for a wildcard if their run-differential does not change. It's my opinion that the most likely forward scenario w/ this kind of run differential will be a redistribution of those runs into lesser outcomes. There's no certainty, however - merely probabilities (a fact this article makes clear).

Of course, it is also possible the team will improve their run differential, and compete for the rest of the year w/ a differential that's not so anomalous. And it is also possible they will start to lose more games. We have a strange team, with some enormous flaws. But we're in it, and will continue to be until we're not.

Arguing that we have an entirely (or nearly) new rotation is fine and good: it's a variable that may distinguish our case from other teams throughout history. But the point stands that, in general: having your entire rotation falter during the season isn't a particularly safe bet as a catalyst for positive results.

*DREAM SONG 14

John Berryman

Life, friends, is boring. We must not say so.

After all, the sky flashes, the great sea yearns,

we ourselves flash and yearn,

and moreover my mother told me as a boy

(repeatingly) "Ever to confess you're bored

means you have no

Inner Resources." I conclude now I have no

inner resources, because I am heavy bored.

Peoples bore me,

literature bores me, especially great literature,

Henry bores me, with his plights & gripes

as bad as Achilles,

who loves people and valiant art, which bores me.

And the tranquil hills, & gin, look like a drag

and somehow a dog

has taken itself & its tail considerably away

into the mountains or sea or sky, leaving

behind: me, wag.

I know I'm on ignore for you because I have a different pov on "numbers" than you, but great, great reference. That book is the greatest piece of American poetry of the second half of the 20th century (and probably by extension, the English speaking world).

And small piece of advice, if you're so "heavy bored" you can always find an out. I suggests Berryman's route.

[primetime]

This doesn't make the pythag a crapshoot. It makes the Orioles a flawed team.

Actually, by greatly outperforming our Pythag record, doesn't that make us awesome? :2yay-thumb:

[OFFNY]

Actually, by greatly outperforming our Pythag record, doesn't that make us awesome? :2yay-thumb:

And happy. Wins, however they may come, always make the fans happy.

[Lucky Jim]

Actually, by greatly outperforming our Pythag record, doesn't that make us awesome? :2yay-thumb:

Well, it's definitely made us fun.

[TiredofLosing20]

Any idea how Buck has performed against the pythag prior to joining the O's? Is a team's distribution around the pythag truly random (luck) or are there managers/teams who consistently do better than the pythag suggests?.

Looking back at his full seasons, the most he has beaten the Pythag is by 4 games. But generally he has been within 2 games. One season with the Rangers they underperformed it by 6. So the answer is no, it doesn't appear to be a result of Buck (at least it doesn't appear to be the case looking at his track record)

[LookitsPuck]

I think it's relatively easy to understand why we are where we are at this point:

1. Great pitching from Hammel

2. Great pitching from Chen

3. Great pitching from Tillman

4. Good-Great pitching from Miguel Gonzalez

5. Terrible pitching from Matusz, save for a few starts

6. Terrible pitching from Arrieta, save for a few starts

7. Bad pitching from Hunter, save for a few starts

8. Terrible pitching from Britton

What this leads to, IMHO, is a rotation that will pitch very well or very poorly. Occasionally we'll get an average start.

So, our bullpen is locking down the close games (as evidenced by our 1 run wins as well as our extra inning wins). We have the very rare laugher in our wins, and more often than not we're getting blown out in laughers against us.

We're 7 above .500 with a 58-51 record. Our PE has us at 49-60. That's a 11 game swing, and if you go by the 10 run = 1 win standard, that's a 110 run swing.

The question, is what the standard deviation for PE for teams? It has to be a few wins in either direction. I don't know what it is, but I'm going to go with 3 wins (or 30 runs).

So, where are those 80 runs coming from? Huge blowouts? Our offense being shut down after their offense scores 6-7 runs and we only get 3 or so?

After all, if you know that we're a below average offense with a below average pitching staff, this isn't out of the realm of possiblity.

Assuming 80 runs, all this means is that it's roughly 16 losses by 5 runs or 20 losses by 4 runs. Throw in a few 9 or 10 run losses, and we're dealing with a 50 run discrepancy.

Either way, I think it's largely a result of Matusz, Arrieta, Hunter, Britton, etc. having absolutely terrible games and blowing our run differential out of the water. For all the other games, guys like Hammel, Chen, Gonzalez, and Tillman are trying to offset, but for them we may only score 3 or 4 runs and get by with a win of only 1 or 2 runs.

We outperform our PE by having such an odd-ball rotation and constant shuffling of the bullpen. Most teams do get hurt, but we're talking about ineffectiveness. Playoff caliber teams have great pitching for most of the year.

Do I think we're a playoff caliber team? Only if Chen, Gonzalez, Tillman and Hammel (coming back healthy and ready to roll) pitch as well as they have. Otherwise we could very well live up to our PE the rest of the way. Which, oddly enough, would put us at 82-80.

Anyways, we need to beat up on the Mariners, Royals, and hopefully take advantage of a Red Sox pitching rotation which has underperformed as of late. We're going to need it. Because:

8/17-19: Tigers

8/20-22: Rangers

8/27-30: White Sox

8/31-3: Yankees

8/6-9: Yankees

...the only team aside from those in that span? The Blue Jays.

It is NOT going to be a walk in the park for our pitching rotation. That's 17 games out of 23 against playoff caliber teams. Teams that can hit.

[OFFNY]

.

Imagine what it would be like if the standings were keep according to the Pythagorean formula instead of W-L record ???

Players would be stealing bases when the team was up by a score of 13-2 in the 8th inning.

Teams would celebrate one-run losses because they won 2 blowout games earlier in the week, which would far outweigh a silly little one-run loss. If the Orioles were having a good pythagorean year, Jimmy Johnson and Matt Wieters would be smiling and shaking hands when the Orioles lost by a score of 4-3. Nick Markakis, Adam Jones, and Lew Ford would be doing the outfield jump after a 5-4 loss.

Man. That would be more fun that Division I-A college football voting for their champions and voting for which teams get to play for a championship.

[Mondo Trasho]

Well, the O's are not only outperforming their metrics, they're doing so even though the starting left fielder, starting right fielder, two starting second basemen, the starting first baseman, a backup catcher, the starting DH, two starter pitchers (Hammel and Britton), and two decent bullpen arms (Pommeranz and Lindstrom) have all missed significant time with injuries. We probably shouldn't even have 25 victories yet here we are. Why should a little ole SI article or metrics bother us?

[DrungoHazewood]

I'm pretty much throwing past statistics out the window due to the emergence of Tillman and Gonzo and subtractions of Matusz/Arrieta. This can be a competitive rotation for the foreseeable future.

It's funny that at the beginning of the season (hell, six weeks ago) you could have gotten most of the board to trade Tillman for almost anything, and they had no idea who Gonzalez was, and yet now they're locks to be solid rotation anchors for the forseeable future.

[Fan4Life]

It's funny that at the beginning of the season (hell, six weeks ago) you could have gotten most of the board to trade Tillman for almost anything, and they had no idea who Gonzalez was, and yet now they're locks to be solid rotation anchors for the forseeable future.

That foreseeable future could be just 3 starts.