Yeah, Houston was supposed to have a fatal flaw in its bullpen last year and then they started to use starters instead.
We're halfway through the season
- Thread starter Rasputin
- Start date
I'm done worrying about the opponent ever since 2016. Cleveland was supposed to be devastated missing both Salazar and Carrasco and the easy path for the Red Sox. Instead we got swept with the final insult being a loss to Josh Tomlin in Fenway Park.
And your'e right about the "fatal flaws". Especially for pitching. They can disappear in the post season with all hands on deck and more off days in between games.
Those projections take into account YTD results
But keep in mind the delta between the Red Sox-Yankees-Astros is so far within the range of error that any difference between the teams in their projections is meaningless.
I don't care what they incorporate, projections should never be stated as fact or, really, as anything even close to substantive.
They're (somewhat) educated guesswork that's essentially meaningless.
If the Red Sox go 34-33 the rest of the way, we end up with 100 wins on the season.
I think we will do better than that.
I think we will do better than that.
Well, it's definitely true that projections do a worse job than past results at telling you what happened in the past.
If you want to talk about the future, though, projection systems substantially outperform simple extrapolations of "actual results". They aren't perfect, and like any other guess at what the future may hold they definitely aren't "facts," but in an environment like this one where we are all making our own idle projections of what is to come, they clearly have a place.
Sorry if I'm skeptical of something coming from a "place" that seemingly ignores reality and jumps to a different conclusion.
Nearly everything tells us the Sox are slightly better than the Yankees. The Sox have a better record. Better differential. Better offense and pitching. They've got less games to play in the same amount of time. They're more effective away from home. So where is this "outperformance" compared to "simple extrapolations" pulling this shit that the Yankees are expected to be better from here on out from?
Not buying it.
Strength of schedule matters. According to a couple of places the MFY have played a slightly tougher schedule to date, and have an easier schedule going forward (.477 vs. .503)
You basing any of this on anything but your gut?
The Yankees currently have a ton more resources and reinforcements than we do. Any of their underperforming guys (Stanton, Sanchez, Kahnle, Gray) could regress at any time.
Optimism is great and I share it. But there’s no reason to get angry at science online.
Of course NY has been much better against good teams than bad ones so far, 17-6 against BOS/HOU/CLE/SEA combined and 5-5 against BAL.
Less days off and they play worse on the road than home.
.477 to .503 is an essentially meaningless difference.
Science. You use that word, but I do not think it means what you think it means.
Yeah, there's a perfectly good reason, when it's stated as something substantive but it goes completely against every ACTUAL thing in front of us that's actually happened.
So yeah, Stanton and Sanchez could get hot. So could Price, Pomeranz, and Thornburg. Your point, or are your "what ifs" more valuable than "my gut"?
Projection systems are bullshit. Said it before, will continue to say it.
Houston' bullpen was pretty awful last year in the playoffs. But they had a great lineup and Justin Verlander, who pitched out of his mind. (And is doing so again this year)
To further my point, PECOTA had Boston "projected" to win 88 games before this season.
FanGraphs at a slightly more optimistic 93. We'd have to go, what, 8 games under .500 from here on out for that one to be correct, right?
Tell me again why I should give a shit what these systems and their "science" say?
FanGraphs at a slightly more optimistic 93. We'd have to go, what, 8 games under .500 from here on out for that one to be correct, right?
Tell me again why I should give a shit what these systems and their "science" say?
As much quality as you bring to this board, jon, it bothers me that you can't see to get this acronym correct.
To build on this point with the days off and road/home splits:
Remaining Schedule
Sox: 37 Home Games (currently a .727 win%) and 30 Road Games (.667 win%) - projecting the same win% going forward is 47 wins.
MFY: 35 Home Games (currently .717 win%) and 35 Road Games (.609 win%) - projects to 46.5 wins
Obviously predicting the same rates going forward is the simplest way of looking at this but as said about the difference is negligible but I think the days off part is more important to look at as fatigue is a real thing going down the stretch. By my count the MFY have 7 days off after the break while the Sox have 9 days off - additionally the MFY have a double header scheduled in August in the middle of a 13 day in a row run.
I'd give the slight edge to the Sox based on those facts but too many other factors would carry more weight.
When you already hate a player, him getting traded to the team you hate the most multiplies the hate.... Beating then becomes harder, but oh so much sweeter!
So, a few things to unpack.
First, Fangraphs is projecting the Red Sox to win the division right now, and thinks the Red Sox have a better crack at winning the world series. They expect the Red Sox to win at a .588 clip the rest of the way, against a strength of schedule of .505. New York, on the other hand, is expected to win at a .613 clip against a strength of schedule of .485. That difference in SoS over each team's remaining games would cost the Red Sox 0.33 wins and gift the Yankees 1.04 wins, both a non-neglegible difference in a close division race and well within the margin of error for these systems.
Helpfully, Fangraphs also has a different page where they show rest of season projections without accounting for strength of schedule, and things look a whole hell of a lot closer: .593 for the Red Sox, .598 for the Yankees. That is a trivial difference.
Looking at the player projections for each team in more detail, Fangraphs thinks the Red Sox have a slight edge in position player talent (WAR/650 PAs of 3.29 vs 3.23) and starting pitching (WAR/200 IP of 3.15 vs 3.07) but gives the Yankees a larger edge in relief pitching (WAR/200 IP of 1.75 vs 2.85). This is pretty understandable: Kimbrel vs Chapman is certainly a tight race, but Robertson, Betances, and Green have notably longer and better track records than Barnes, Kelly, and Hembree, and things just get more lopsided further down the list.
It is also worth noting that the Red Sox have benefited from sequencing more than the Yankees have. Looking at the Fangraphs Base Runs standings, the Yankees have outperformed their Base Runs record by one game, the Red Sox have outperformed theirs by five. There are ways to explain differences like that, but historically teams with large differences tend to regress towards their "expected" performance, and projection systems are implicitly aware of this.
Projections systems are a "science", in that they take an objective look at a large dataset of past events and draw inferences from them in order to better understand why things happen and what will likely happen in the future. Like more "serious" scientific projects, they are continuously tweaked and reevaluated, resulting in incremental improvements. What we have now is better than what we had five years ago, and what we have five years from now will be better than this.
Projections systems are not an exact science, and never claim to be. It's very easy to find situations where they were wrong. A far harder task is to find something that consistently does a better job at predicting the future than these projections do, and that is where they show their value.
Currently, these projections are not taking Statcast data into account, so they will probably be a little pessimistic about Betts, Moreland, Bradley, and others who we can see have made adjustments and are crushing the ball. They also aren't accounting for the Yankees lack of off days, which you brought up and is definitely a factor. There are no doubt other specific areas where the projection systems we have now are going to be systemically lacking. Those are things that should be brought up and adjusted for, not raised as an excuse to throw out the whole system.
The systems also have error in them, like every other projection system. At the beginning of the year, the 95% confidence interval could be +/- 15 games. They don't really know how new players will integrate into the team, how good young players will be, what injuries will crop up or not be healed from the last season, or how coaching changes will pan out. On the last week of the year it would be much smaller, of course, because there is little left to project, and they have a lot more information to make the projection on. So yeah, if a projection predicted a team would have 92 wins before the season, and now predicts the same team will win 98, that is a sign of a good system, not a bad one. If it was still predicting 92 wins even though the team was playing considerably better than that for 3 months, then something would be wrong.
Past the current day and maybe the next? Yes.
Look, I'm not writing 19 paragraphs to refute everything said above, but putting weight into projection systems is a fool's errand. They're meaningless estimates that ignore real-life variables.
Oh, okay. But when people do this, they're blasted for using "their gut" or talking out of their asses.
Not to derail this thread, but, weather models are actually incredibly accurate out to 3 days, and the better ones have great verification out to 5.
Model Verification from WPC.
As long as you understand how the margin can break, models are a useful tool. I'm sure someone has done the analysis to show how close a prediction model like FanGraphs gets when measured against the number of games left.
Wasn't it found that after a certain point in a season projecting the rest of the way by actual record was more accurate than using run scored and allowed? Teams that underperform or overperform their Pythagorean record over enough games tend to continue to do so. I can't find the column about it, so it's possible it's a figment of my imagination.
Not your imagination. Pythag overperformance is usually luck (although a great bullpen helps), but teams that get really lucky and place themselves in a playoff position tend to make trades to increase their true talent level, while teams that get really unlucky and fall out of the race tend to make trades that make them worse. This really muddies the water for straight up "what did they do after" comparisons.
17-3 in the first 20 games of the half, 17-3 in the last 20 games of the half, 34-24 in between. So much for the notion that this team isn't as good as they look because of an unusually hot start.
The 1978 Red Sox were also 37 games over. After beating the Blue Jays in the first game of a doubleheader on August 30, 1978, the Red Sox were 84-47.
I think this is the first time they have been 38 over since 1949, though.
The Sox have now put themselves in a position where they have to be a sub-.500 team the rest of the way in order to miss winning 100 games.
That's a hell of a first half.
That's a hell of a first half.
This is correct - T4W was just repeating what ESPN had said in some article but they missed the doubleheader that you pointed out.
The second game of that doubleheader can be summed up in one phrase: BONE CHIP GRUESOME. Hobson's chips were floating as were his throws to first. Stanley had a great year, but this appearance was probably his worst that year aided by the ground ball defense. Toronto was horrid that year. Bad flashback.
Fucking pinch me. And keep the historical comps coming. This could go sideways via injury, but greatness has to be recognized. They closed out against a team 23.5 games out of first place in apex predator fashion.
Cashman is gonna Cashman. He now is probably the third most famous alum of his high school — but may rank first in aptitude.
Sometimes you reach the Break and a GM has done all he could and he fairly says, it’s up to the players to perform. Now it’s up to Dombrowski to perform. Maybe the right thing is doing something; maybe the right think is doing nothing. It’s not easy in this instance, but Dombrowski has to shine.
Yes, unique circumstances. 68-30 but will be in a dogfight to the finish line to win the division. Up against the tax limit with injuries mounting. 2 year window with this core under contract. Lots of decisions over the next 16 days, maybe moreso for Henry.
The Yankees will find a way to add an impact player or two that really helps their club. And they're really freaking good right now as it is. The Sox are gonna have to play their asses off in the second half.
But it's been just an incredible - and incredibly fun - season so far.
But it's been just an incredible - and incredibly fun - season so far.
Is there a place to check Fangraphs SoS calculation? Because .505 versus .485 is close enough to where the Red Sox 6 extra wins and the Yankees 3 extra losses could push those numbers to effectively neutral if they're being included in that math, given that a lot of this would, obviously, include the second half in-division match ups.
Here's a plot to visually compare this season to three recent cherry-picked seasons. The x-axis is days into the season, and the y-axis is games above 0.500.
Those are rest-of-season projected winning percentages for the Red Sox and Yankees opponents over the rest of the season. So both teams are included in their opponent's SoS, but their current win-loss records are not being accounted for.
The projections are all completely meaningless when the teams play each other another 9 times. The Yankees could go into the last 2 weeks of the season with a 3 or 4 game lead and I would still bite all the nails off of my fingers.
To make it more interesting, the Yankees and Red Sox face off the 28th, 29th, and 30th of September with the one-game playoff on the 2nd. That means that unless you pitch Sale or Severino on 3 days rest for the one-game playoff, they won't be lined up to pitch in both. Can you imagine a scenario where either team is ahead by 2 games going into the final series and the manager decides to pitch their ace on normal rest during the season, making them unavailable for the one-game playoff?
To make it more interesting, the Yankees and Red Sox face off the 28th, 29th, and 30th of September with the one-game playoff on the 2nd. That means that unless you pitch Sale or Severino on 3 days rest for the one-game playoff, they won't be lined up to pitch in both. Can you imagine a scenario where either team is ahead by 2 games going into the final series and the manager decides to pitch their ace on normal rest during the season, making them unavailable for the one-game playoff?
Of course. When you’re playing the same team that you would play in the tie-breaker game it makes no sense not to start your ace when his turn comes up.
By not playing the ace and saving him for later you risk either missing the 1-game playoff or else causing it when you would have won outright.
There are 2 interesting scenarios:
- Going into the final game, team A is up 1 game. Lose and you have a 1 game playoff, where the loser will host the wild card game. So 3 straight win & in games. You'd want to maximize your odds of winning game 1, followed by game 2, followed by game 3. The earlier you win, the better shape you're in for the next round (and the less risk you're at).
- Going into the final game, the teams are tied. Lose and you host the wild card game. So 2 straight win & in games. You'd want to maximize your odds of winning game 1, followed by game 2. The earlier you win, the better shape you're in for the next round (and the less risk you're at).
Agree with you - your last scenario (that you’re 1 game back heading into game 162) and there’s a big difference in your win expectancy with your ace vs your other pitchers, it makes sense to hold the ace back for either the tie-break game or the WC game.
In 1978, the Red Sox had to start Stanley, Eck, and Tiant in the 3 final games of the regular season in order to secure the one game playoff. Which is why Mike Torrez had to start the Game that Shall Not Be Named - Part 1.
It's still more complicated than this because if you lineup both your ace & number 2 to be ready for the 3rd game of the series AND the one-game playoff, then it implies you've started the very important 3 game series off with your 3/4/5.
I guess I'm not following. You said normal rest. My assumption was that you come to the last game of the season, and your ace is due to pitch. You were asking if you should pitch the ace or save him for one of the two possible play-in games. Am I making a mistake?
Edit: Just to lay down some markers - in 2017, the season ended on Sunday, the AL Wild Card Game was on Tuesday, and the ALDS's started on Thursday. The NL Wild Card Game was on Wednesday and the NLDS's started on Friday. I'm assuming a Sox/Yankees playoff game would be on Monday, the Wild Card game would be on Tuesday, and the ALDS would be on Thursday/Friday/Sunday/Monday/Wednesday. On normal rest, your season-end pitcher would be available for game 2 of the ALDS. Your playoff & Wild Card pitchers would be available for game 3.
If the leagues switch schedules, then the season-end pitcher would be available for game 1, the playoff pitcher would be available for game 2, and the Wild Card pitcher would be available for game 3.
Last edited:
@SirPsychoSquints I'm not talking about the ALDS, simply how you would set up your pitching for the final series of the year if the division is still on the line.
Ideally you want your ace your pitching in the one-game or final game of the season. In order to do that, you may need to start the Sox-Yankees series off with your 3 & 4. In other words, there is virtually no way to have optimal pitching in the final series because by doing so, you forfeit your ace & number two, who can't pitch (on normal rest) in the OGP.
Ideally you want your ace your pitching in the one-game or final game of the season. In order to do that, you may need to start the Sox-Yankees series off with your 3 & 4. In other words, there is virtually no way to have optimal pitching in the final series because by doing so, you forfeit your ace & number two, who can't pitch (on normal rest) in the OGP.
Well, if the division comes down to the three game series then you aren't going to have the flexibility to mess around with your rotation - you're going to be pitching your best pitchers when they're available. If your #1 is due on Friday, that's when you'll pitch him.
So any pitchers you use in the last weekend will be unavailable for the two games that you're actively trying to avoid by winning in the last weekend. You play to win the games you know you're going to play and try to win the division. Delaying your better pitcher for a worse pitcher (which is the only way to screw with your rotation other than going on short rest) is shooting yourself in the foot.
Edit: Again, the interesting game theory is for the team that is trying to FORCE the one game playoff, because regardless of the outcome, they're guaranteed at least one do-or-die game and it might be worth reducing your chance of forcing the one game playoff to make sure you have your ace in the Wild Card game.
98 games played. 68-30 (.694) - on pace for 112 wins. Still, incredibly, only up 4.5 on the Yankees, who check in at 62-33 (.653) - on pace for 106 wins.
I assume NY will make a move or two that is likely more impactful than what the Sox can pull off. Even if Boston were willing to go over the LT threshold, they don't really have the pieces to make a major deal, unless they're willing to move Devers, which has been discussed at length in this forum.
I think Boston can, and will, make a minor move or two, probably to shore up the bullpen or get a veteran starter rental, but that's about it.
I see this going down to the wire, with both teams winning more than 105 games.
I read the Summer of '49 in the fall and I think this season has a chance to play out even better than that. Both teams will make the playoffs, but the specter of the one-game play-in game which can be a total crapshoot (unless NY plays Minnesota, then it's an automatic win for NY) makes this feel like a do-or-die race for the division title.
It's gonna be one hell of a ride these next 2+ months.
I assume NY will make a move or two that is likely more impactful than what the Sox can pull off. Even if Boston were willing to go over the LT threshold, they don't really have the pieces to make a major deal, unless they're willing to move Devers, which has been discussed at length in this forum.
I think Boston can, and will, make a minor move or two, probably to shore up the bullpen or get a veteran starter rental, but that's about it.
I see this going down to the wire, with both teams winning more than 105 games.
I read the Summer of '49 in the fall and I think this season has a chance to play out even better than that. Both teams will make the playoffs, but the specter of the one-game play-in game which can be a total crapshoot (unless NY plays Minnesota, then it's an automatic win for NY) makes this feel like a do-or-die race for the division title.
It's gonna be one hell of a ride these next 2+ months.