Pages

Saturday, April 18, 2015

On Run Differentials and the Oakland A's

      I'm wondering something-I guess to have an answer I'd have to to speak to Bill James or other baseball forecasters.

      http://www.amazon.com/2015-Baseball-Forecaster-Encyclopedia-Fanalytics-ebook/dp/B00R0IM8OG/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1429365637&sr=1-1&keywords=ron+shandler

      The Oakland A's have a huge run differential (60-39) considering their only 5-6. It's because they games they've won have been lopsided-it helps that a lot of those games came against the Texas Rangers pitching-while the games they've lost have been mostly close.

      Their 5-6 record places them in second in the AL West just half a game behind the Anaheim Angels. Yet the Angels at 5-5 have been outscored (42-40) while the Rangers who are tied with the A's at 5-6 have been outscored by 12 (52-40)-this 12 run margin comes largely from their series with the A's where they split 4 games but in their two losses Oakland won 8-0 and 10-0.

     So the division is pretty tightly bunched right now-with just 2 weeks into the schedule that's what you'd expect-but all the other teams are negative in run differential while the A's have that positive 21 run differential.

     So does this mean that Oakland is really a much better team than the rest? I suspect that's true as I from what I understand run differential-and point differential in football-are good predictors of success.

      http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22297882/30475143

      Then if you look at Oakland last year, it was 88-74 but outscored opponents 729-572 which is in line with a 99 win team-based on the Pythagorean W-L record.

       http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/OAK/2014-schedule-scores.shtml

       I know that run differential or point differential isn't always everything. The San Fransico Giants haven't had an imposing differential in recent years yet they've won 3 of 5 World Series and in football I remember my NY Giants winning the Super Bowl in 2007 with just a 22 point regular season differential (373-351)-this came, of course, against the undefeated Patriots who had a huge point differential and then in 2011 at 9-7 they again beat the Pats who were this time 13-3. That year the Jints were actually outscored in the regular season (400-394).

       Still, I'm guessing the A;s will show themselves to be the class of this division

       You may notice I've written a lot about baseball lately. This is for a few reasons.

       1. All the hectoring of A-Rod in early spring training got under my skin.

       2. However, as I've read more about baseball, I'm struck with how much economics there is in it. Long time Diary of a Republican readers know how much I like to discuss economics; but though I've always been a baseball fan, I'm only now struck with how much you can utilize the tools of economics in baseball-and other sports as well, though baseball is very good for this.

        It strikes me that while Marx talked about the antagonistic relationship of capital and labor-in many ways, these days it's really the big pro team sports you can really see labor relations in its purest form.

       Of course, when people talked about 'surplus value' and 'exploited labor' they never had 'workers' who make millions of dollars in mind. Can you make $10 million dollars and still feel exploited? Well, what's clear today is that despite the record amounts, baseball players have seen their salaries decrease since 2002.

      "After peaking at a little more than 56% in 2002, today MLB player salaries account for less than 40% of league revenues, a decline of nearly 33% in just 12 years. As a result, player payroll today accounts for just over 38% of MLB’s total revenues, a figure that just ten years ago would have been unimaginably low."

     "If I’m an MLB player, reversing this trend is my number one priority heading into the 2016 CBA negotiations. Unlike service time manipulation – which realistically impacts at most a few dozen players each year – the players’ declining share of league revenues is an issue that affects the entire union membership, young and old, rich and (comparatively) poor alike. Unfortunately for the players, solving this problem will not be easy, and may very well require the MLBPA to reexamine some of its bedrock principles."

       http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-mlbpa-has-a-problem/

       What this shows is that Bud Selig and his small market team mafia have won. The NFL has the reputation as having the weak union as the players there thanks to an intricate salary cap don't even have real free agency.

       Still they receive well over 50% of league revenues in the NFL compared to baseball players seeing their share shockingly drop below 40%. Selig and his buddies had egg on their faces after their disastrous lockout in 1994 cancelled the World Series; they had planned that, but what they somehow didn't imagine is how angry this made baseball fans.

       They learned that this couldn't happen again. However, while this was the end of their dream of a salary cap, revenue sharing has ended up doing the trick just fine.

        P.S. Yes, last night was doubly sweet for me as the Yanks won in Tampa Bay and A-Rod carried the team with 2 hrs and 4 RBIs. At this point he's simply the best offensive player on the team..

        https://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/new-york-yankees-tampa-bay-rays-350417130/

       I am disgusted that the Yankees are not honoring A-Rod's achievements and using the suspension as an excuse not to pay him his bonuses. He's 2 away from Willie Mays but they won't even acknowledge it in anyway when he does it, which is just pitiful. I'm not surprised by this but am still repulsed. This is part of the larger response to the steroid scandals by just pretending 20 years of baseball didn't happen at all.

     

     
       

No comments:

Post a Comment