Recovery From Drawdown Metric - O's Must Lead

[JayThomas]

In the financial industry there's a notion of 'drawdown'. Basically, it's the largest peak-to-trough return from any high-water-mark.

Somebody (no, I'm not volunteering) should create a similar metric in baseball.

There could be lots of variations, but basically I'm interested in a per-game metric. What is the largest deficit per game that was overcome in each win. If a team wins a game but never is behind then it's 0 for that game. If a team loses then it doesn't count as a game at all (or it's 0, to be determined). If a team is ever behind and comes back to win, then it is the largest deficit of the game.

This would be interesting in terms of mean() and in terms of sum().

The Orioles, with their abhorable starting pitching but resilient lineup and awesome bullpen rack up big numbers both in mean() and in sum().

Any thoughts?

[Filmstudy]

I like this idea. I'd really like to see the Orioles "sum" this season compared to other teams.

[Frobby]

In the AL, it is almost certainly between us and Texas. Going into yesterday's play, those two teams were tied for the most comeback wins, with 23. For both teams, the largest deficit erased is 5 runs. Only two teams have erased a bigger lead: Seattle, which erased a 10 run lead but has only 16 comeback wins, and Chicago, which erased a 7 run lead but also has only 16 comeback wins. So, it seems logical that the O's and Rangers have overcome the largest aggregate deficits. If I had to guess, I'd guess that we have overcome larger aggregate deficits than Texas because the Rangers' starting pitching is better than ours.

[SteveA]

In the AL, it is almost certainly between us and Texas. Going into yesterday's play, those two teams were tied for the most comeback wins, with 23. For both teams, the largest deficit erased is 5 runs. Only two teams have erased a bigger lead: Seattle, which erased a 10 run lead but has only 16 comeback wins, and Chicago, which erased a 7 run lead but also has only 16 comeback wins. So, it seems logical that the O's and Rangers have overcome the largest aggregate deficits. If I had to guess, I'd guess that we have overcome larger aggregate deficits than Texas because the Rangers' starting pitching is better than ours.

Ranger bullpen is horrendous.

As for their starting pitching being better than ours, I would agree if they were healthy. But with Colby Lewis on the shelf until August, Dervish having spent 85% of the season on the DL, and now Holland on the DL, how much better is their starting. Hamels is certainly good (though so is Tillman). Martin Perez is solid. Nick Martinez? I dunno. The Lewis injury really hurt.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk