ESPN 2016 Preseason Power Rankings: Orioles @ #23

[FlipTheBird]

We have 9 games left against the Red Sox. Plenty of time to change those power rankings. I never saw any reason to be concerned about power rankings. This isn't college football we will decide our own destiny. Rankings are meaningless.

And, most importantly, most of those games are @ Camden Yards. Time to do work.

[BMann]

These rankings are not records. They are trying to say how good a team is. Records can be misleading, so relying on indicators that have proven themselves better at predicting how good a team performs going forward just seems like common sense, no?

If your argument is, "we have a better record" then you don't want to look at power polls. That's what standings are for.

IMO, the most useful tool that a person compiling a Power Rankings list should use is his/her own eyes. If a team is clinging to first on a five-game bender, than their Power Rankings should reflect that - maybe put the surging team ahead of the leaders. But the O's just swept the higher-ranked, lower-winning-percentage Indians. This is where Power Rankings come in handy. The Tribe and the O's are virtually identical, record-wise, but the unbound-by-specific-rules Power Rankers should look at not just their head-to-head record (which the O's dominate) but also what have they done lately... Hey, what do you know, the O's and Indians just played each other! And the O's won convincingly, three straight! Sabermetrics or whatever Expected Wins falls under are just more stats. The Rankers should do some actual thinking here.

[Phantom]

The Rankers should do some actual thinking here.

Well, if I were a ranking, my thinking would involve NOT overreacting to recent results and NOT overrating teams that have won a bunch of close games and got blown out a lot more. You are asking them to use their eyes, but demanding they come to your conclusion.

[schittenden]

Well, if I were a ranking, my thinking would involve NOT overreacting to recent results and NOT overrating teams that have won a bunch of close games and got blown out a lot more. You are asking them to use their eyes, but demanding they come to your conclusion.

Maybe, they should do more than just rank the teams in order of expected wins or some other fancy stat too. Otherwise, they're no more useful than if they just ranked them by record. They're just different.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Phantom]

Maybe, they should do more than just rank the teams in order of expected wins or some other fancy stat too. Otherwise, they're no more useful than if they just ranked them by record. They're just different.

They are different in that those "fancy stats" are better at predicting future wins, and thus, perhaps, better at determining a teams true talent (AKA power).

But the fact is, they aren't even doing what you are saying. They are clearly taking a bunch of inputs (record, advanced stats and subjective eye tests) and ranking the teams.

[survivedc]

Well, if I were a ranking, my thinking would involve NOT overreacting to recent results and NOT overrating teams that have won a bunch of close games and got blown out a lot more. You are asking them to use their eyes, but demanding they come to your conclusion.

Yeah but these rankings are done weekly, so you would think any progression the team makes in the course of that week would be reflected. Numbers projections aside, the O's showed themselves as a more competent team than the Indians this week, IMO. Splitting that Yankees series would've really helped though.

That being said, always something satisfying about maintaining some bit of that underdog status.

[Ohfan67]

The goal of the ranking is not to be accurate, but to get you to click on the link and read it. Seems to be working just fine.

[Phantom]

Yeah but these rankings are done weekly, so you would think any progression the team makes in the course of that week would be reflected. Numbers projections aside, the O's showed themselves as a more competent team than the Indians this week, IMO. Splitting that Yankees series would've really helped though.

You really think the O's showed themselves to be a more competent team than the Indians? I mean, one play goes slightly differently and we take 2/3 from them after losing 3/4 to the Yankees. Are the Yankees a more competent team than the Orioles?

[OFFNY]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/page/2016mlbpowerrankings_week16/mlb-ranking-mlb-teams-16-weeks

4. Indians

5. Red Sox

6. Orioles

I can't even ......

We have 9 games left against the Red Sox. Plenty of time to change those power rankings. I never saw any reason to be concerned about power rankings. This isn't college football we will decide our own destiny. Rankings are meaningless.

I really hope so.

Because if the Orioles don't change their minds, they might not get invited to the Sugar Bowl ...... which we all know is their only chance at getting a share of the national championship with Georgia Tech.

[DirtyBird]

You really think the O's showed themselves to be a more competent team than the Indians? I mean, one play goes slightly differently and we take 2/3 from them after losing 3/4 to the Yankees. Are the Yankees a more competent team than the Orioles?

Which "one play"?

[BMann]

Which "one play"?

Any close game could turn on one play. I don't know why an 8-1 win seems to count more than a 3-2 win to some fans. IMO, those 3-2 wins are much tougher, much higher stress, certainly on us fans!

The O's have proven they win the close games - it's not all because of luck. Their shutdown bullpen isn't going anywhere, so I expect a lot more close wins as the season rolls on...

[Ruzious]

I thought we had a good shot at .500 going into the season. And the pitching has been pretty much just like I thought it would be.

Is it too early to give Buck the Manager of the Year award?

[survivedc]

You really think the O's showed themselves to be a more competent team than the Indians? I mean, one play goes slightly differently and we take 2/3 from them after losing 3/4 to the Yankees. Are the Yankees a more competent team than the Orioles?

I do. I think a series sweep where you exhibit better starting pitching, batting and bullpen is a good barometer on your competency as a team (especially in relation to the team you played.

As far as the MFY, we are 7.5 games better than them, so while they were better than us in that series, overall they are not.

[O's84]

Well at least the RPI rates us as the #1 team at .526.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi

[scOtt]

Why is it ridiculous to think that the Orioles are the 6th best team in baseball?

Because we have the 3rd best record in the majors. Best in the AL. And won 4 in a row.