What's a Pythagorean Worth, or, Is Milwaukee Playing Way Over Their Heads?

CubsFaninMN

Active member
Joined:
Jan 8, 2018
Posts:
581
Liked Posts:
120
I'm looking to get a little discussion going in re the old saying "They're just playing over their heads". The modern, analytic term for it is a team's Pythagorean number, but it amounts to the same thing, I think. What teams are winning right at their talent level, which are running into a ton of bad luck, and which have made a pact with the devil and are having the coin come up heads toss after every freakin' toss?

There is, I realize, some difference, though. You can play over your head as an individual by having, at least until the league adjusts, your career year in one or more categories. You can also play over your head with the help of PEDs. That's one area. But you can also just get plain dumbshit lucky, have every one of your errors end up being inconsequential and every one of theirs letting you plate a winning run, that kind of thing.

Everyone likes to point out that the Brewers are playing to a projected five to ten wins above their Pythagorean. But what does that really mean? Does it mean they have had a lot of luck in the first half, and we can expect to see that sort of even out as the sample size gets larger? Or does it mean that, like with a 2017 Eric Thames, who at one point in May of that year was projecting to hit 70 to 80 dingers, and ended up with 31, is Milwaukee featuring a bunch of guys who are taking advantage of a new division, facing pitchers who haven't seen them as often, and are having good first half numbers but will see them drop down as the league, and especially the division, makes adjustments?

Or does it mean that the Pythagorean is just an invalid stat, and that, despite that number, the Brewers really do have a better team than others with a better Pythagorean? Like, um, the Cubs?

Let's discuss... :)
 

fatbeard

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2013
Posts:
13,173
Liked Posts:
12,172
I don't know why the Brewers are outperforming their Pythagorean, but I know that you can't outrun it forever. The 2016 Rangers finished the season 95-67 and were regarded by several posters here as a "clutch" team who was a major playoff threat. Their Pythagorean was 82-80. They were swept out of the playoffs in three games.

Baseball comes at you fast.
 

CubsFaninMN

Active member
Joined:
Jan 8, 2018
Posts:
581
Liked Posts:
120
I don't know why the Brewers are outperforming their Pythagorean, but I know that you can't outrun it forever. The 2016 Rangers finished the season 95-67 and were regarded by several posters here as a "clutch" team who was a major playoff threat. Their Pythagorean was 82-80. They were swept out of the playoffs in three games.

Baseball comes at you fast.

Didn't the '16 Rangers also have one of the most lopsided records in one-run games in like decades? A team that sucked bad when losing, and was good at "pulling it out in the clutch", i.e. barely eking it out, when winning? As I recall, with all of their "We Never Quit" and "Comeback Cubs" mantras in '16, the Cubs actually ran pretty close to .500 in one-run games and extra-inning games that year, IIRC. They had fewer of them than most other teams, again IIRC, which helped. But ran pretty even on them.
 

JP Hochbaum

Well-known member
Joined:
May 22, 2012
Posts:
2,011
Liked Posts:
1,281
Good coaching is said to be the difference in finishing well above a pythagorean record.
 

fatbeard

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2013
Posts:
13,173
Liked Posts:
12,172
Didn't the '16 Rangers also have one of the most lopsided records in one-run games in like decades? A team that sucked bad when losing, and was good at "pulling it out in the clutch", i.e. barely eking it out, when winning? As I recall, with all of their "We Never Quit" and "Comeback Cubs" mantras in '16, the Cubs actually ran pretty close to .500 in one-run games and extra-inning games that year, IIRC. They had fewer of them than most other teams, again IIRC, which helped. But ran pretty even on them.

Yep. They were one of the 2-3 luckiest teams in baseball history.

Record in one-run games is another good indicator of whether a team is over its skis or not. One-run games are basically a crapshoot, so anybody who's performing way better than .500 is likely to experience a correction.
 

CubsFaninMN

Active member
Joined:
Jan 8, 2018
Posts:
581
Liked Posts:
120
Yeah -- I always saw one-run games as being two very evenly matched teams, on that given day. Not in total talent, just, for all the reasons that go into it, on that given day.

In that case, it really ought to be a toss of the coin, if each team, right at that point, has played an entire game and each has achieved nearly the same offensive result. Be that 1-0 or 18-17.

If you're at .800 on those games, well, I want the league to investigate that pact with the devil I mentioned. I'd have to think there are some league officials who would have a direct channel to one of the participants in such a pact, to just, ya know, ask about it... ;)
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
Not sure if I'm reading what you're saying wrong but I think you have the wrong idea about expected wins. Having a career year really doesn't matter because it's not tracked on individual stats. It's tracked on run differential. The reason teams under/over perform the number is a sequencing issue. That is to say if you win by 10 runs in one game and then lose the next 9 by 1 run you're obviously not performing to your run differential. Typically that's what you'll see with teams that underperform. They will be bad in one run games. And for "good" teams that's often a problem because you'll blow teams out in wins and lose very close games.

As this pertains to Milwaukee, yes they are playing over their heads but I wouldn't say "way" over. They are +63 in run diff which is 9th in the majors. The cubs who are 3 back in the win column and tied in losses are at +106 despite playing 3 fewer games and dealing with a counting stat. So sure there's a vast difference in performance between the two despite a very close record but I wouldn't say that means MIL is a "bad' team. Last year they finished +35 and won 86 games. They were +1 win over expected. However, this year is sort of different. For one thing they are #1 in fangraph's "def" stat and DRS and #2 in UZR/150. Cubs are #4 and #1 respectively. The other thing is they have an elite bullpen that's #4 in fWAR.

If you combine those 2 factors it largely accounts for why they are better than their expected win total. They are 21-12 in 1 run games. Cubs by contrast are 10-15. Houston is 14-16 to add a little more context with a "elite" team. That's what I mean when I'm talking about it being an issue with sequencing. In fairness to them, they are a team built to win close games and they are doing it. But that swings both ways eventually because even great teams aren't consistently great in 1 run games.
 

brett05

867-5309
Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
Posts:
27,226
Liked Posts:
-1,272
Location:
Hell
I don't know why the Brewers are outperforming their Pythagorean, but I know that you can't outrun it forever. The 2016 Rangers finished the season 95-67 and were regarded by several posters here as a "clutch" team who was a major playoff threat. Their Pythagorean was 82-80. They were swept out of the playoffs in three games.

Baseball comes at you fast.

A hot team is a hot team in the playoffs. Everyone knows that. No correlation to your theory.
 

brett05

867-5309
Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
Posts:
27,226
Liked Posts:
-1,272
Location:
Hell
Not sure if I'm reading what you're saying wrong but I think you have the wrong idea about expected wins. Having a career year really doesn't matter because it's not tracked on individual stats. It's tracked on run differential. The reason teams under/over perform the number is a sequencing issue. That is to say if you win by 10 runs in one game and then lose the next 9 by 1 run you're obviously not performing to your run differential. Typically that's what you'll see with teams that underperform. They will be bad in one run games. And for "good" teams that's often a problem because you'll blow teams out in wins and lose very close games.

As this pertains to Milwaukee, yes they are playing over their heads but I wouldn't say "way" over. They are +63 in run diff which is 9th in the majors. The cubs who are 3 back in the win column and tied in losses are at +106 despite playing 3 fewer games and dealing with a counting stat. So sure there's a vast difference in performance between the two despite a very close record but I wouldn't say that means MIL is a "bad' team. Last year they finished +35 and won 86 games. They were +1 win over expected. However, this year is sort of different. For one thing they are #1 in fangraph's "def" stat and DRS and #2 in UZR/150. Cubs are #4 and #1 respectively. The other thing is they have an elite bullpen that's #4 in fWAR.

If you combine those 2 factors it largely accounts for why they are better than their expected win total. They are 21-12 in 1 run games. Cubs by contrast are 10-15. Houston is 14-16 to add a little more context with a "elite" team. That's what I mean when I'm talking about it being an issue with sequencing. In fairness to them, they are a team built to win close games and they are doing it. But that swings both ways eventually because even great teams aren't consistently great in 1 run games.

For Houston their issue on not being better in one run games is their pen. Games that should be over, aren't thanks to that. Same thing as you said with the Brewers. Great pen, so they can win the close games more often.
 

chibears55

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
13,554
Liked Posts:
1,924
I tthink people need to realize that the Brewers are good this year and better then last year with their new additions..

Just like we shouldn't assume that the cubs are gonna flip a switch and go off and play over .600 ball the 2nd half just because they did it last year, we shouldn't sssume the Brewers are going to fall on their faces again...

Be interesting to see who uses this deadline to strengthen their team and upgrade their weaknesses....

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
Let’s see....Cain and Yelich. Enough said
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
also they might need to keep a eye on Jesús Aguilar....just saying.
 

Top