NoMaas writer and ancient Greek mathematician Pythagoras is currently on an international book signing tour, but took a few minutes to draft a year-end wrap up for our readers.
According to one of history’s most influential philosophers, Pythagoras concluded the Yankees should have finished with a 95-67* record, appropriate for the 915 runs scored and 753 runs allowed. However, due to His divine mercy, the Yankees finished with a 103-59 record, exceeding their Pythagorean record by 8 games to the upside.
The Pythagorean records for the rest of the AL East, actual record in parentheses:
Boston: 93-69 (95-67)
Tampa: 86-76 (84-78)
Toronto: 84-78 (75-87)
Baltimore: 69-93 (64-98)
The takeaway from this is that the Yankees likely weren’t 8 games better than the Red Sox, as the final standings showed. It looks like the main contributor for the gap over Boston was the Yankees 7-3 record in extra inning games versus Boston’s 4-6. Praise be to Pythagoras!
*We’ve seen Pythagorean records showing the Yankees anywhere between 95 and 97 wins, but a margin of 2 games over Boston remains constant.
Pythagoras, we are not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and we shall be healed.
15 Comments
steve December 27, 2009 23:15
“Yankees likely weren’t 8 games better than the Red Sox.” huh? But they were 8 games better than the Sox. You can’t play the game on paper, you have to play on the field.
Anonymous December 27, 2009 23:20
Steve, I think this means that the Yanks true talent isn’t 8 games better than the Red Sox. It’s saying they got kinda lucky.
James December 27, 2009 23:28
aren’t there things that traditionally link to outperforming your pythagorean record, like a good bullpen?
juju December 27, 2009 23:34
Those Wang games gave us a few extra dozen runs against, that has something to do with it
YankeesJunkie December 27, 2009 23:34
Might add a game or two if Wang’s games were not so horrible and the great Rivera always adds a couple games.
Matt December 28, 2009 00:21
Well if you go a little deeper:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/standings.php
The 3rd order wins actually predicts the Yankees to have finished with 101 wins, and Boston with only 90. With some of the beatings the Yankees took early in the year and the way that Boston tends to blow teams out in Fenway Park, I feel like the run differentials might have been exaggerated a bit relative to their overall performance.
kei igawa December 28, 2009 01:34
my MLB career ERA is 6.66!
jip bloop December 28, 2009 08:15
Every team gets blown out so discounting Wang’s performance probably isn’t the best way to go. Other teams had Wang like performances.
Ron Jeremy December 28, 2009 11:01
I’ll show you MY Wang-like performance!!
Kevin S. December 28, 2009 11:12
In addition to 3rd-order pythag, FG’s WAR had the Yanks good for 105 wins last year (and Boston 99, FWIW).
Business Suit December 28, 2009 13:08
[jip bloop] This is probably true, but in trying to determine a team’s strength you don’t necessarily want to regress to a mean in this way.
michael kay December 28, 2009 17:33
You are what your record says you are. The theory is just a formula to approximate what teams records should come close to at the end of the year. the closest it came in the AL east was 2 games with and average of 5 games off.
Stats are cool, but the game isnt played on paper.
Matt December 28, 2009 19:32
So I went through and found their 5 worst losses and their 5 best wins. They were by the following scores:
Losses:
15-5
22-4
14-4
14-1
13-4
Wins:
15-0
11-1
10-0
13-3
11-1
Now taking these out yields:
Runs Scored: 837
Runs Allowed: 670
Run Differential: +167 (+162 now)
Which would be worth 97 wins instead of 95 according to the formula if they continued on that pace.
Doing the same for Boston:
Losses:
13-0
14-5
20-11
12-2
12-0
Wins:
12-1
13-3
14-1
10-0
10-1
Taking these out yields:
Runs Scored: 795
Runs Allowed: 659
Run Differential: +136 (+136 now)
Which would be worth 95 wins if continuing on the same pace.
So the difference is still 2 games, but the Red Sox performed exactly to their capabilities last year, while the Yankees slightly overachieved relative to their run differential, but not by as much as seems to be stated here.
Considering the fact that the Yankees had a lot of come from behind wins, this makes sense. In previous years they had underachieved relative to their run differentials. The Red Sox had a lot of trouble on the road as well, while the Yankees were a more consistent team, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see Boston regress a bit this year if they continue that kind of split.
Davidn in Cal December 28, 2009 21:13
I believe the relief pitching, particuarly Mo and Phil, explains the difference. When the Yanks were ahead, they almost always won. When the game was tied, the Yanks won more than their share, not only because of clutch hitting, but because the relief corps was holding the opponents scoreless.
In short, I think the Yanks really were a 103 win team.
Jason December 29, 2009 18:18
Classic way of completely misinterpreting a stat. It’s an interesting exercise to look at the Pythagorean record but to then surmise that the Red Sox and Yankees were almost equal teams last year is pure nonsense. Bullpen effects this tremendously. Just using a shitty stat like save percentage the Yankees saved 77% of their opportunities. It’s foolish to attribute the discrepancy to luck alone. The make up of the team allowed them to win a bit more than they should have.