Schoenfield's ESPN Sweet Spot featuring the O's today

[Lucky Jim]

Or conversely, they pick and choose their battles more carefully than other teams. They know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.

Wait. I thought this was the "never-say-die" team that fights with heart when down by 5?

Basic logic is, like, weeping in some supply closet somewhere.

<object width="512" height="288"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/xgqkvtsw5zxduvipuhxzxg"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/xgqkvtsw5zxduvipuhxzxg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="288" allowFullScreen="true"></embed></object>

[Pedro Cerrano]

Right. Once again, we're arguing that, because the Orioles perform horribly more often than other teams that they're actually a pretty good team.

Well, I'm arguing, mostly, that a small percentage of the team was really lousy. Unfortunately, that small percentage has a much larger impact on something like run differential.

I'd just really like to know what our RD would be if we had Tillman and Gonzalez in the rotation from the beginning. Maybe I'd be making the argument that if we'd only had Matusz and Arrieta up here, our RD would be better. Maybe not though.

[Mondo Trasho]

Why would that effect wins and not runs?

We got to lay TB without Longoria all season. We just played New York without Rodriguez. We've also got to play Boston without Ellsbury and Crawford, and even in some games no Youkilis either.

That's gotta help wins.

[Mondo Trasho]

Wait. I thought this was the "never-say-die" team that fights with heart when down by 5?

Basic logic is, like, weeping in some supply closet somewhere.

Perhaps. I always thought logic was overrated anyway.

But, maybe this is the team that says "we'll fight sometimes, when we think we can win. If we're not feeling it, we'll quit."

[crawjo]

There is no doubt in my mind--none--that the Orioles have been very lucky this year, and that includes the bullpen. I mean Pedro Strop has an ERA of 1.27 and a BB/9 rate of about 4.5. That's luck, there's no doubt about it.

But at this point, it also doesn't really matter anymore. The Orioles are 59-51. There are only 52 games left in the season. If they find better pitching and some of the slumping hitters get hot between now and the end of the season--something that is very possible--then the Orioles are capable of finishing with a winning record and maybe even snagging a playoff spot. I don't think they are the favorites, but they've already banked those 59 wins despite the awful run differential. If this team plays the equivalent of 49-60 baseball (what their record "should" be at this point) the rest of the way, then they will finish somewhere around 82-80. Given where the teams currently are, a positive bump in run differential could have this team fighting for a playoff spot the last two weeks of the season. Remember, the 1987 Twins, who won the World Series, had a -20 run differential on the season. This has happened before.

[Dark Helmet]

Yes. And this is a limit to the predictive power of the formula - to apply it predictively, you have to assume that over however many games, a team's inputs will remain roughly the same (i.e., that they're indicative of some true talent). This is a relatively safe assumption: the addition of individual players usually results in a fairly small bump in run production (there aren't many Mike Trouts); it is also (relatively) safe to assume that a team will send its best MLB-level pitchers to the mound to start the season, or those individuals will rise up quickly (though there is also room for a Mike Trout pitcher, I would guess).

What we're asking by judging fairness is that pythag take into account that we're replacing something like 60% of our rotation with better MLB pitchers. If this is true, then pythag will be of limited predictive value - of course, pythag generally recognizes that because better pitching would result in a change in differential. But no one has said anything else - they've just said that it's a low-probability bet that we'll find the kind of substantial internal improvement needed to contend. By making the argument that it's unfair, we're essentially saying that pythag should optimistically take into account that the franchise couldn't field more than two decent starting pitchers for something like 65% of the season.

What's amazing to me - and this has been stated elsewhere - is that we're arguing that pythag can't account for the awesomeness of Chris Tillman and Miguel Gonzalez when one was a pariah not two months ago and the other a complete unknown.

Good points. I understand one has to take a non optimistic look making these predictions. But at what point do the predictions change, when the players here now are indeed outplaying the guys they replaced? Its like a weatherman saying expect rain, until the sun comes out. Wheres the gray area in between?

[Lucky Jim]

Good points. I understand one has to take a non optimistic look making these predictions. But at what point do the predictions change, when the players here now are indeed outplaying the guys they replaced? Its like a weatherman saying expect rain, until the sun comes out. Wheres the gray area in between?

The grey area is that outlined by many posters on here who utilize pythag correctly. The grey area is probability .

[Lucky Jim]

We got to lay TB without Longoria all season. We just played New York without Rodriguez. We've also got to play Boston without Ellsbury and Crawford, and even in some games no Youkilis either.

That's gotta help wins.

Why would it not help runs?

[LookinUp]

I'd just really like to know what our RD would be if we had Tillman and Gonzalez in the rotation from the beginning. Maybe I'd be making the argument that if we'd only had Matusz and Arrieta up here, our RD would be better. Maybe not though.

This would be appropriate for better projecting our record going forward, rather than using historical pythag alone.

[Mondo Trasho]

Why would it not help runs?

I don't know. I can't seem to find anyone who does.

The Orioles are what the "Toxic Lady" is to medical science. There's a rhyme and reason somewhere, just hasn't been discovered yet.

[Dark Helmet]

We got to lay TB without Longoria all season. We just played New York without Rodriguez. We've also got to play Boston without Ellsbury and Crawford, and even in some games no Youkilis either.

That's gotta help wins.

TB still had Price, Shields etc..The Yanks still had Jeter, Cano, Tex, Granderson etc..Through all the Red Sox injuries, they still score a ton of runs. You could argue that with those injuries the Yankees still have better players at 6 spots, and the Red Sox at 5.

[Pedro Cerrano]

This would be appropriate for better projecting our record going forward, rather than using historical pythag alone.

Isn't that essentially what people are doing when they cite our RD as a reason for an impending collapse? They aren't throwing concrete numbers out there but they're sure begin suggestive.

[Lucky Jim]

Perhaps. I always thought logic was overrated anyway.

I appreciate the foreshadowing.

I don't know. I can't seem to find anyone who does.

The Orioles are what the "Toxic Lady" is to medical science. There's a rhyme and reason somewhere, just hasn't been discovered yet.

[Dark Helmet]

The grey area is that outlined by many posters on here who utilize pythag correctly. The grey area is probability .

So its either right or wrong, with probable being the gray area. But it doesnt take unlikely into account? Im only asking because id be lying if i said i completely understood how the pythag works.

[Lucky Jim]

So its either right or wrong, with probable being the gray area. But it doesnt take unlikely into account? Im only asking because id be lying if i said i completely understood how the pythag works.

It's neither right nor wrong. It's a guide post. That's it.