Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, October 02, 2008

S.I.: Donovan: Which playoff teams have what it takes to win it all?

Or as King Donovan (as Ramblin’ Jack Belicec) said..."Stop trying to rationalize everything, will ya? Let’s face it, we have a mystery on our hands!”

Every time you think you have a handle on what it takes to win in baseball’s postseason, along comes, say, the 2006 Cardinals, the 1988 Dodgers or the ‘87 Twins, to prove there’s no sure-fire way to pick a World Series winner. Success in the playoffs, in many ways, comes down to a roll of the dice. Luck will play as big a part in the next three weeks as a clever manager, a deep bench or a slugger on a tear.

Still, there are smart ways to pick the teams that will fare best in the playoffs. Nate Silver and the hard-thinkers over at Baseball Prospectus have looked at tons of data and come up with a formula that identifies the three main characteristics of a successful playoff team. They are:

1. Pitchers that strike out batters.

2. A stud closer.

3. A good defense.

You might notice there’s no mention of home runs or the ability to squeeze a guy to second with one out against a left-hander. There’s not anything in there about crafty managers or experience or a versatile bench, either. Momentum? History? Don’t even bother. Speed? Pssh. Clutchness? Please, save it.

Repoz Posted: October 02, 2008 at 03:08 PM | 16 comment(s)
  Related News: GeneralSabermetricsProjections

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages
   1. Robert Machemer Posted: October 02, 2008 at 03:38 PM (#2964867)
The Rays have the best defense in the playoffs, according to BP's defensive efficiency ratings
But they're not Baseball Prospectus's defensive efficiency ratings. They were created by Bill James (or am I misattributing?), and BP just keeps track of them. In fact, Baseball Prospectus has its own means of measuring defense... which oddly enough isn't used to evaluate defense in this article. Hmmm...
   2. cardsfanboy Posted: October 02, 2008 at 03:53 PM (#2964894)
What I don't really understand is why do they use the team level for this, instead of using the post-season roster? it's why they missed on the Cardinals to be perfectly honest. If they would have looked at the Cardinals post season roster the "secret sauce" would have scored better.

I find it funny that the lead in talks about the suprising teams, and then admits that the formula wouldn't have accounted for the surprising teams either.
   3. Robert in Redondo Posted: October 02, 2008 at 04:25 PM (#2964949)
What I don't really understand is why do they use the team level for this, instead of using the post-season roster?

It would have been more work. That's a good default answer to use whenever you wonder why someone didn't do something.
   4. JoeHova Posted: October 02, 2008 at 04:35 PM (#2964974)
Couldn't they just answer the question by saying "all of them" and leave it at that?
   5. Robert Machemer Posted: October 02, 2008 at 04:35 PM (#2964975)
My problem with the special sauce is that it would have you believe that offense is irrelevant. I don't buy it. Of course it's relevant.

This is just another version of the Bill James Playoff Prediction System which also was derived from past results and which also didn't actually work all that much better than flipping a coin. That's not to say that there might not be a system which does work, but one which basically ignores half the game? I don't buy it. I want to see it work better than a coin-flipping monkey on future events first.

Research I did on the Bill James Playoff Prediction System through 2003

Research I did on predicting playoff winners based on differences in won-lost records and projected won-lost records, through 2003.
   6. cardsfanboy Posted: October 02, 2008 at 04:36 PM (#2964980)
It would have been more work. That's a good default answer to use whenever you wonder why someone didn't do something.

probably, but usually they don't seem to mind the work. It's just somewhat annoying seeing your team getting bashed by everyone (keith law predicted the Mets beat the Cardinals in three games in a seven game series) and watching them judge the team solely based upon their regular season roster, not the roster they had in the series.

I mean it would be like judging the dodgers offense based upon their entire season, and not adjusting for the addition of Manny, Furcal, or even Blake.(except to count their numbers in the team numbers)

in the years that I care(otherwords the years my team is in it) I like to look at the teams rc/27 for their projected lineup and ra/era for their rotation and most likely used relievers and use that as a comparison for quality of the post season team, a 5th guy out of the pen isn't going to make a difference for the most part, the game is probably won or loss by the time he arrives into the game.
   7. Shibal Posted: October 02, 2008 at 05:23 PM (#2965056)
Just go by Vegas. Those are the guys with real money at risk, not the blowhards at BP or on ESPN.
   8. Leroy Kincaid Posted: October 02, 2008 at 06:40 PM (#2965228)
Alright then. How have the Vegas favorites fared over the years?
   9. mopar Posted: October 02, 2008 at 06:50 PM (#2965258)
"why do they use the team level for this, instead of using the post-season roster?"

Because no one wants to be known as the gaywad who invented Adjusted Special Sauce?
   10. Walt Davis Posted: October 02, 2008 at 09:27 PM (#2965569)
tons of data

Really? Are there baseball postseasons I'm not aware of?

Even in this age of expanded playoffs, there are at most 41 postseason games a year. Compare to the regular season where there are roughly 90 games a week, so that's less than half a week. Given the small number of postseason games in previous eras, I'm not sure you'd have one full season worth of games (today's standards) if you went back to the start of the WS.

If they analysed at the level of post-season series, I think you're talking fewer than 200 such series. If they analysed at the level of WS, you're talking just over 100.
   11. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: October 03, 2008 at 08:43 AM (#2965995)
they've solved it for a sphere
   12. Edmundo, more Jules than Jim Posted: October 03, 2008 at 08:50 AM (#2965997)
they've solved it for a sphere
One of the great punch lines of all time, regardless of the lead-in
Aah-zoom-ming ze horze eez sphreeerical ...
   13. OsunaSakata Posted: October 03, 2008 at 08:56 AM (#2966001)
I mean it would be like judging the dodgers offense based upon their entire season, and not adjusting for the addition of Manny, Furcal, or even Blake.(except to count their numbers in the team numbers)


And even that doesn't tell you everything. The Dodgers, even with Manny, looked terrible in three games at Nationals Park.
   14. Mike Emeigh Posted: October 03, 2008 at 09:38 AM (#2966034)
My problem with the special sauce is that it would have you believe that offense is irrelevant.


"Less important" doesn't mean "irrelevant". Pitchers who get strikeouts and quality defense tend to counter or even negate two of the main aspects of offense; in-play hits and non-HR extra bases. What's left is HR power and the ability to get on base by means other than hits - that's still a considerable factor, as the White Sox and Dodgers have shown.

-- MWE
   15. StJoeHawk Posted: October 03, 2008 at 10:48 AM (#2966128)
The Phils topped the NL in home runs with 214, though that's mainly a function of smallish Citizens Bank Park.


Agreed. At home, they hit 109 home runs, while on the road, they only managed to hit 105.
   16. phatj Posted: October 03, 2008 at 12:13 PM (#2966265)
How much difference would it make running the numbers using playoff rosters and adjusting for likely playoff pitching rotations? It seems like the Phillies would look a lot better if you consider that Hamels and Myers will get most of the starts and Lidge, Madson and Romero will get the majority of the relief innings.
Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

My Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Vivid Seats is a sports ticket broker, concert ticket broker and theater ticket broker offering the best baseball tickets like Yankees tickets, Cubs tickets, and Red Sox tickets, as well as Police reunion tour tickets and Jersey Boys tickets.

We have baseball tickets, the NFL schedule, college football tickets and Cowboys tickets. We have NBA tickets like Celtics tickets and Lakers tickets. Plus, buy concert tickets, Patriots tickets and Colts tickets. Also check out our MLB baseball schedule

Baseball Bats

Concerts Theatre NFL Angels Dodgers MLB Celtics Theater NBA Tickets Venues NHL Lakers Tickets NFL Yankees NHL Phillies NBA Wicked Marlins MLB Concerts Cubs Mets Red Sox Wicked WWE Red Sox Mets Yankees Dodgers

Major League Baseball: All Star Game, New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, LA Angels, Washington Nationals, Chicago White Sox, and the Chicago Cubs.

Find terrific deals on Yankees tickets for the new home, Cubs tickets for classic Wrigley, or Red Sox tickets for Fenway with OnlineSeats. We have seats for every baseball game, including Dodgers tickets.

Page rendered in 0.7995 seconds
81 querie(s) executed