To the pseudovector belong the spoils.
Now, let’s say that you somehow are god-like, and know momentum when you see it. How much is it worth? As we know, a superstar like Albert Pujols is worth some seven wins, per 162 games, above replacement. That means that if you have a .500 chance of winning with an average team and bad first baseman, adding Pujols will make it a .550 team. Something like that. If you have a great pitcher, C.C. Sabathia or Doc Halladay, you turn a .500 team into a .625 team. How much can momentum be worth? Can it possibly cancel out the Rays bringing in C.C. Sabathia or Roy Halladay? Can it even cancel out bringing in Grady Sizemore or Pujols or Joe Mauer? Is momentum even worth Willie Bloomquist?
...And don’t forget that we’re talking extreme momentum here; in-game momentum in which the team scored five runs in an inning to tie the game. One must believe that the effect of momentum must be even less day-to-day.
Momentum exists. But we’ll be hard-pressed to find it in anything other than in-game scenarios. We can barely find it with the numbers in even the most dramatic come-from-behind games. All you have left to do is enjoy the moment, without having to explain it. If you really have the need to tell people that you have found momentum, then here’s what you do: Find 10 games from now for the next 12 months that you think has momentum or chemistry written all over it. Bet on the game. Then, come back here, on November 1, 2009, and tell me how much money you made. And I don’t want to hear only from the winners.
Repoz
Posted: October 23, 2008 at 01:55 PM |
7 comment(s)
|
Login to Bookmark
Related News:
General,
Sabermetrics
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.
I suspect that if Tango factored in the expected results or win expectancy of the individual matchups, once tied, what little bump he found for "momentum" teams would vanish.
Being a worse team would make you more likely to be at a big deficit, though.
Both teams are tied coming into the, say 7th. One got there by scoring all their runs in the 6th, and the other by scoring all their runs in the first 5 innings. I'm not sure that you can say that there is a bias in team quality based on that information.
The bias may exist in terms of bullpen, and so momentum may simply be "the next hour's relief pitchers". I did not check for that.
That was what I was going to suggest, that the bullpen conditions may be vastly different (one team's guy is more likely to be throwing well, the other one searching for an arm that's useful).
I've always wondered what was included under the momentum umbrella. Increased confidence/loss of confidence? Sure, I think that can lead to continued success. An injury suffered by the other team? Obviously. Better execution (particularly in other sports)? Absolutely. But if it's strictly the idea that good recent results will produce future good results, independent of these more factors, then no.
That's absolutely true, but misses the point. Being down five isn't what gets teams into the sample. Once a team is down five, a better team should be more likely to have one of these comebacks.
While the '03 Tigers are way more likely to be down five than the '27 Yankees, once in that spot, the Yankees are more likely to comeback. And if they do, we'd all agree that being '27 Yankees is more of an advantage going forward in the tie game, than any momentum garnered from coming back.
Tango, I'm not sure of any bias in team quality based on the comebacks themselves, but the records going into the games would certainly be relevant. This study treats both teams like .500 teams subject to league average splits. With a 230 game sample, it could very well be that the teams coming back were .530 coming in, or the teams blowing leads were .470 or somewhere inbetween. If that were the case, it would undermine your results. I wish you had checked.
Regardless, thanks for the article.
Ok, so quality of offense and defense should be included, as well as quality of relievers remaining.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main