By: Chance Harper | sbrforum.com
It's a given that some teams overachieve and others underachieve, but how do you quantify such an intangible in baseball. If seamheads are to be trusted, you use the Pythagorean win-loss totals that estimate, among other things, that little commodity known as 'luck.' Here are some teams that might be good choices to shoot over or remain under win totals in '08.
At the end of the 2006 MLB season, supporters of the Twins, Athletics, Mets and Tigers were ecstatic. They were the top four teams on the baseball betting charts, raking in a grand total of 75.45 units among them. What goes up must come down; in 2007, these four clubs bled 40.03 units of red ink.
Those moneyline figures are de rigueur for handicappers. But if you haven’t dealt with Pythagorean records yet, welcome to the New Age of statistical analysis.
These records try to pin down the quality of a ball team by looking at runs scored versus runs against for the entire season, then boiling it down to a record that represents how well the team should have done in the win-loss column.
In 2006, the A’s were seven wins better than their Pythagorean record. So were the Mets; the Twins were plus-4, and the Tigers were dead even with their 95-67 performance. That’s consistent with Detroit’s slim 1.62 units in profit, the only one of the quartet to escape the poorhouse.
Not that luck actually exists, but from a value perspective, the Mets were lucky in 2006 and significantly less so in 2007. This is the simple theme for Chance’s over/under picks for the 2008 season. We’re going to take the two “luckiest” and “unluckiest” teams from last year, anticipating a regression to the mean. This doesn’t necessarily mean more or fewer wins – not with all those big offseason moves – just more or fewer than expected.
OVER
San Francisco Giants (Total at the open: 73)
Besides having to endure the whole Barry Bonds thing, the 71-91 Giants were unlucky to the tune of seven wins in 2007, finishing worst in the majors at 20.67 units in the red. Bonds was good for 21 Win Shares last year with a 1.045 OPS; replacing those numbers with Aaron Rowand’s (23 Win Shares, .889 OPS in Philly) should immediately improve the Giants by two wins. Add the expected development of young pitchers Matt Cain, Noah Lowry and Tim Lincecum, and the Giants should go over even if they stay as “unlucky” as they were last year.
Kansas City Royals (71)
Last year’s Royals were awful at 69-93, but that was pretty much what was expected from Kansas City, close enough for the team to finish near the break-even point at minus-1.08 units. The Royals would have done better, according to their pythagorean record of 75-87. Perhaps an improved offense will do the trick. Jose Guillen (20 Win Shares, .813 OPS in cavernous Safeco Field) was signed as a free agent, while bigger things are expected at third base from Alex Gordon.
UNDER
Arizona Diamondbacks (86)
The 90-72 Diamondbacks were rolling in green at 19.24 units to the good. But the Snakes were the bane of seamheads in 2008. According to the Pythagorean records, Arizona should have finished at 79-83, just one game ahead of the Giants for the NL West basement. That leaves seven wins for ‘Zona to make up with their roster shuffle. Dan Haren (19 Win Shares, 3.07 ERA in Oakland) is the big addition to the club, but Jose Valverde’s 12 Win Shares (2.66 ERA) will be missed in the bullpen, and he’s just one of several players to leave the desert over the winter.
Seattle Mariners (85)
Seattle being the high-tech center that it is, the Mariners have a devoted and often miserable fan base of seamheads. Miserable because ignorance is bliss, and the M’s front office is positively beaming after last year’s competitive 88-74 season and the eventual completion of the Erik Bedard trade. The locals aren’t impressed. The M’s were actually outscored last year and “should” have finished at 80-82. Bedard’s 19 Win Shares with Baltimore were one fewer than Guillen’s with Seattle.