Braves’ playoff chances only ‘cool,’ according to website
This would be Bobby Cox's reaction . . .
So if you’re obsessed with this Braves’ stretch drive and you bow at your Brian McCann shrine every morning and you’re wondering if a six-man rotation with Tim Hudson would blow away the rest of the National League and the last thing you want to hear is how two numbers geeks from MIT believe the outlook doesn’t look so good – well then, you may not want to read this. (No wait! Stay! I need the page views!)
There’s a website you may have heard of: coolstandings.com. It actually has been around since 2005. But since I’ve never been a big numbers guy, I guess it has eluded me, until alert reader “Stephen” tipped me off.
In short, coolstandings.com calculates every team’s division, wild card and overall playoff chances based on a half-dozen statistical factors, which I’ll get to in a minute. Bottom
. . . if you asked him what he thinks of coolstandings' view of the Braves
line: According to the site’s co-creator, Sean Walsh (possibly the first MIT grad I’ve ever spoken to, or at least understood), the Braves have only a 10.3 percent chance of winning the National League East, and a 12 percent chance of winning the wild card berth.
Overall, coolstandings.com lists the Braves’ playoff chances at 22.2, behind Los Angeles (94.2), St. Louis (92.4), Philadelphia (90.9) and wild card leading Colorado (63.5). San Francisco is listed as having a better chance than the Braves of winning the wild card (16.4 to 12) but a lower overall playoff chance (20.1 to 22.2) because the Giants are running third in the N.L. West.
Walsh says the site’s formula has an error rate of less than two percent. He would change that if he could because he’s also a big Red Sox fan, and right now the math says they’re dead, too.
Walsh said he and partner Greg Agami adapted the numbers-crunching formulas of baseball writer Bill James (who now works for the Red Sox) and “tweaked” them a bit. “We went back and looked at data for every game played since 1903, running a million simulations, to see if we could project how a team would do,” Walsh said by phone. “Like, in July of 1914: How did it look for the Boston Braves at this point and how did they fare in the end?”
The formula factors in runs for and against, home and road success, remaining strength of schedule, league scoring averages and the previous season’s results (the weight of which decreases as the year goes on). The model doesn’t take into account injuries or trades (although we’re past the trade deadline), but it heavily weighs late-season hot streaks (like the Braves’ current one).
For what it’s worth, Walsh wanted Braves fans to know that they also calculated the top comebacks and collapses in baseball history, and at at the top of the list is the 1914 Boston Braves (later of Atlanta), who only July 4 were given less than a 1 percent chance of winning the pennant but overcame a 15-games deficit.
OK, so I’m guessing I know what you think of all this. Feel free to vent. Meanwhile, here’s how the standings look today, according to the MIT grads. (Key: RS and RA stand for runs scored and runs against. EXPW and EXPL stand for expected win and loss totals. DIV and WC stand are calculated percentages for winning the division or the wild card spot. POFF is overall playoff chances.)
East W L Pct. GB RS RA EXPW EXPL DIV WC POFF
Philadelphia 71 50 .587 — 641 538 95.4 66.6 86.9 4.0 90.9
Atlanta 66 58 .532 6.5 563 503 87.9 74.1 10.3 12.0 22.2
Florida 65 59 .524 7.5 588 588 84.9 77.1 2.8 3.6 6.4
New York 57 67 .460 15.5 526 580 73.7 88.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Washington 44 80 .355 28.5 565 672 59.7 102.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Wild card W L Pct. GB RS RA EXPW EXPL DIV WC POFF
Colorado (W) 70 54 .565 — 632 549 91.7 70.3 16.7 46.8 63.5
San Fran. (W) 67-57 .540 3 501 464 87.7 74.3 3.7 16.4 20.1
Atlanta (E) 66 58 .532 4 563 503 87.9 74.1 10.3 12.0 22.2
Florida (E) 65 59 .524 5 588 588 84.9 77.1 2.8 3.6 6.4
Chicago (C) 62 60 .508 7 533 514 84.2 77.8 7.0 2.1 9.1
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
156 comments Add your comment
OptimisticInTexas
August 24th, 2009
2:19 pm
Not so cool…
Brian
August 24th, 2009
2:32 pm
I like things like this. I don’t think it’s necessarily good to use as a prediction tool, but I think it’s a good way to gauge how difficult it would be to overcome a certain deficit. The fact that they project us at 22% tells you just what an uphill climb it will be to make the playoffs.
The main reason the Giants have a higher percent chance of winning the wild card is because the Braves won the division more often in their simulations (in which cases they obviously wouldn’t win the wild card). They project the Braves with slightly more wins than SF.
Bat Masterson
August 24th, 2009
2:37 pm
I recently read ” Better Off Flipping The Switch On Technology”, by Eric Brende. He is an MIT guy too and the premise is, what is the least we need to achieve the most. Damn little apparently. What’s my point? I don’t have one, I’m just playing with one of my technological toys. Why not just let the computers play the games and everyone can go sit under a tree and read ” Look Homeward Angel”
Bat Masterson
August 24th, 2009
2:38 pm
Oh yeah…. first
AndyC
August 24th, 2009
2:49 pm
This sounds about right. I think the division is out of hand. The Phils are playing too good right now. No way to catch them. The wildcard is feasible but when you look at the Rockies schedule the rest of the way, they play San Fran 4 times and the Dodgers 3 times this week. In September, their schedule is very light playing mostly teams under .500 with only a 3 game series with San Fran and a 3 games series with St. Louis, if memory serves. They finish the season with an 8 game home stand. I think the Braves need to be at least tied by the end of the month to have any real shot, and even then it will be difficult. I haven’t given up, but it doesn’t look good.
Jeff Schultz
August 24th, 2009
2:50 pm
Bat — I feel a headache coming on.
Dan
August 24th, 2009
2:51 pm
Something doesn’t quite add up here. If The Atlanta Braves’ EXPW is 87.9 and EXPL is 74.1, how is it possible that they have a lesser chance of winning the WC (12%) than San Francisco (16.4%), which has an EXPW of 87.7 and EXPL of 74.3?
Hmmm… I guess the formula is telling us that the number of times that the Braves win the East set off from the number of times they would have won the WC (because they would not qualify for the WC, being the divisional winner) is greater than the number of times the Phillies would displace SF when SF would have otherwise won in that Braves-win-the-East scenario?
Okay, I just re-read that last sentence– perhaps this is best left to numbers and not words. But certainly rating another team more likely to win the WC when the same formula rates that team as more likley to win less games seems counter-intuitive.
18 Wheels of Love
August 24th, 2009
2:52 pm
What was the % of the Mets making the playoffs 2 years ago when they blew a 8 game lead the last month of the season. This is baseball, MIT geeks should spend their time trying to get my office print/fax/scanner to accept a 15 page document.
Bob Horner had a sweet compact swing
August 24th, 2009
2:56 pm
Wow this guys error rate is only 2%…..Do you believe him Jeff..?? now I’m depressed…I was hoping we would get that wild spot…
Bryan G.
August 24th, 2009
2:56 pm
Dan,
I think that can be explained because the Braves have a higher chance of winning their division than San Fran. Thus, under some of the models, the Braves win the division and SF wins the wild card. Therefore, the Giants are more likely to win the wildcard because they almost certainly will not win their division.
Blackberry Cobbler
August 24th, 2009
2:57 pm
If and when we get Prado back and if and when Chipper gets out of his funk and if and when Lowe and Vasquez start to pitch worth their salary, THEN I like our chances. THEN the Braves will be a better team than the Rocks or the Giants and be able to also hold off the Fish.
Until then, I think our chances are 50/50 at best.
Rick
August 24th, 2009
2:58 pm
Pretty interestingstats tool, but since the Braves need to be just about perfect the rest of the way to make the play offs, lest we forget that at the All Star break they were 43-45 Win % .489
Winning 3-6 games more in the first half of the season woul eliminate the need to be perfect now.
Whoever says April games don’t mean anything?
John
August 24th, 2009
2:59 pm
I went to college in Boston. Not MIT, but across the river in boston. I used to get up at 5:45 every morning at go play pickup hockey at the rink over there. It was a beautiful rink, and a blast to play there. One time i got there and the zamboni was broken, so we couldn’t play. The zamboni, at MIT, was broken…these kids build the space shuttle for homework. There is probably no simpler machine besides maybe the Foreman grill on the planet than the zamboni. But, now, I guess this is why I was denied my hour and a half of hockey and budweiser that morning.
pessimistic optimist
August 24th, 2009
3:00 pm
I wonder what our % chance was in July 1991 and August 1993? Probably about what it is now.
100% chance of death and taxes.
McCann Fan
August 24th, 2009
3:01 pm
I just spoke to the team. After reading this they have decided to give up hope and forefeit the rest of the season.
I guess we will just look forward to 2010 now.
gene garbage
August 24th, 2009
3:04 pm
looks about right to me also…sure would like to have 2-3 games back we lost at the beginning of the year. that’s why you play em all, right? only hope we have is the wild card. we need to start thinking sweeps instead of just winning series’….
didn’t realize lowe has ADHD until i read the story a couple days ago..find this funny cuz i actually made the statement 2 starts ago that he sometimes looks like he totally loses focus….hum….
Bat Masterson
August 24th, 2009
3:05 pm
Jeff, there is a cure for that in the book. Where you get the eye of newt locally, I don’t know, sorry.
Brian
August 24th, 2009
3:06 pm
FYI, usually I look at Baseball Prospectus’ postseason odds page. It runs almost the same numbers, but I like the cleaner look.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php
It also has a neat PECOTA-adjusted standings, which runs the simulation with PECOTA projections of player performance. In other words, it actually projects the wins and losses based on projections on what the individual players will do. The Braves look better in that one. That would seem to indicate PECOTA likes the talent the Braves have assembled going forward, but it’s still an uphill climb.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_oddspec.php
UGASlobberknocker
August 24th, 2009
3:07 pm
This dude is probably related to whoever came up with the BCS. Im glad the game is played on the field. The way I see it, the Braves are playing great..they have to make up 4 games in the loss column and have 7 weeks to do it (for wildcard)..i think we have better than a 10% chance..but then what do I know.?I’m merely a UGA Business grad, not an MIT braniac.
Do the math!
August 24th, 2009
3:08 pm
It’s actually quite simple.
For the Braves to get to 90 wins, they need to go 24 – 14 the rest of the way. 10 gms over .500, a .632 clip.
For the Rockies to get to 91 wins, they need to go 21 – 17 the rest of the way – a mere 4 games over .500, a .553 rate.
No further analysis needed…
Braves73
August 24th, 2009
3:10 pm
What does all of this mean…ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
Braves73
August 24th, 2009
3:13 pm
I am sure that Bobby is sitting at home right now calculating how he can get Greg Norton into more critical game situations. Maybe, just maybe, if Norty can get 25 more CRUCIAL game breaking at bats, we can get his average above his weight.
Evil Richt 2009 S.E.C. World Tour: "Banned in Columbus"
August 24th, 2009
3:15 pm
Wasn’t it MIT grad types, using predictive models based upon analysis of millions of simulations, who gave us (and by “us” I mean Wall Street banks and other related geniuses) the assurances that there was NO WAY the real estate market would crash all at once all over the country?
I think it was!
Hillbilly Deluxe
August 24th, 2009
3:16 pm
The only thing better than September baseball is October baseball. That’s not really relevant to anything but it is another page view for Jeff. Just trying to do my part.
Jeff Schultz
August 24th, 2009
3:16 pm
Dan – I see your point and I can’t answer you.
Bob Horner – Actually, it’s not a matter of believing or disbelieving – those are the numbers. Doesn’t mean it’s gonna happen, of course.
John – great story. But are you dissin’ the George Foreman Grill? It KNOCKS OUT the fat!
Pessimistic optimist – click the link in the story on comebacks. I think Braves made it from those years.
Bat – Newt (Gingrich) is using both eyes. But the brain’s barely been used. (Thanks you. Try the veal).
Brian – Thanks, I’ll check it out.
Jeff Schultz
August 24th, 2009
3:17 pm
Hillbilly: Check’s in the mail.
Najeh Davenpoop
August 24th, 2009
3:20 pm
That’s all well and good, but what are the percentages that, if baited, Jeff Shultz will correct ‘website’ with its correct spelling, ‘Web site’ in the article above? And are the percentages greater that I get a big “stuff it” comment back? I hate myself for being this way, I really do, I just can’t help myself.
Sonny Clusters
August 24th, 2009
3:22 pm
We Clusters was always able to play ball and we was real good at it. We was started out when we was young with a ball and a glove. The bat came later after we could catch. Maybe that’s what the Johnsons shoulda done with Kelly. We had a pretty good glove and could catch most anything with it. That glove was cowhide. We was never aware that gloves come made from deer. When we was told by a reliable major league source that Chipper was using a deerskin glove we was shocked. We still are.
Brian
August 24th, 2009
3:23 pm
Dan, think of it in this sort of simplified way. The simulation says the Braves are a little better than the Giants. So the Braves finish first 10 times and second 10 times. The Giants finish first 3 times and second 11 times. The Giants finished 2nd more often, but they’re not better. When the Giants finished second, it was usually because the Braves finished first.
Freddie G
August 24th, 2009
3:23 pm
I haven’t given up the possibility of making the playoff, and telling us the percentage of difficulty is not surprising to anyone, as we should all realize it. I still believe we can win the Division based on our play in the division. We will need to focus on each game rather than series as winning series will not help if the Phillies and WC leaders are also winning series.
BBrown
August 24th, 2009
3:27 pm
When did MIT grads actually begin to like or follow sports? Ok, maybe neither, rather they just saw an opportunity to perform a statistical analysis.
I think the analysis by “Do the math!” sums it up best. Thus, we can only hope for a Braves surge or Rockies collapse (think Mets type collapse).
CaliChopper
August 24th, 2009
3:27 pm
And what were the odds and chances of the Brave chasing down SF years ago? Exzactly!!!
Brian
August 24th, 2009
3:27 pm
One other sobering thought from these projections: Right now both the Phillies and Rockies are the highest they’ve been all season in playoff chances. They’re going to have to start losing for the Braves to have a real chance.
Keeper
August 24th, 2009
3:29 pm
Jeff,
What I find intriguing is the remarkable difference last night’s result seems to make. I know there’s more that goes into this – such as remaining strength of schedule – but if the Marlins had held last night’s lead, would they be at roughly 22 percent to our 6 percent?
And now that the numbers geeks have deflated us, I thought of an interesting way you could use their data to get us charged back up – ask them to compare our odds (as of both the All-Star break and Aug. 24) of reaching the playoffs in 1991 and 1993, vs. now. (Yes, we don’t have three Cy Youngs and Fred McGriff today, but those teams didn’t have the back-door option of the wild card.)
I’d also be curious to know the Colorado Rockies’ minuscule odds as of Aug. 24, 2007.
If, as I suspect, we have better odds this year, then we’ll know where to tell the stat geeks to go stuff it!
NC Braves Fan
August 24th, 2009
3:30 pm
I don’t put a lot of stock in this stuff. Simulations based on the past can’t predict all the variables that happen in a baseball season … including injuries to key players.
Plus, if I’m understanding this correctly, the percentage expressed is the most likely outcome. I think we can all agree those percentages do favor the Rockies since they are first in the WC — but this prediction ultimately says nothing about what will actually happen on the field.
Do the math!
August 24th, 2009
3:30 pm
The Phills only have to go 20 -21 the rest of the way to get to 91!!! Yeah, we can catch them…
Sheesh.
CaliChopper
August 24th, 2009
3:32 pm
Mathmatical models don’t mean squat – the games still have to be played and anything can happen….
Sonny Clusters
August 24th, 2009
3:34 pm
When we got hurt in the middle section we called it a pull but we never called it an oblique. Coach taught us health and never mentioned oblique once. We did a lot of giggling in that class because Coach would call things by they right names and Jeff would snicker and say, “you mean (deleted from blog for objectionable content)” and we’d all laugh and Coach would get mad. We was always drawing things on the board in health class and Coach would come in ask “who did that?” but he knowed it was Jeff when he asked. Hitting into a triple play could happen to anyone and the fact that it never happened like that before in the National League don’t mean nothing because they has to be a first for everything.
Brian
August 24th, 2009
3:34 pm
Keeper, to partly answer your question. I can’t tell you exact numbers, but if the Marlins had won last night, it probably would have been more like 15-15 than 22-6. The projections aren’t purely based on current wins and losses. Despite the fact that the Marlins and Braves had the same record going into yesterday’s game, the Braves have a significantly larger run differential, which the simulations use to project how the teams will do going forward. You can say the Marlins have been “lucky” to have the number of wins they have based on their run differential. They have actually scored and allowed the same number of runs this year. The Braves have scored 60 more than they’ve allowed.
George
August 24th, 2009
3:35 pm
Can this guy his a curve ball?
George
August 24th, 2009
3:35 pm
Opps, Can this guy HIT a curve ball
Doug
August 24th, 2009
3:37 pm
So if the Braves get the WC…how does this “adjust” his “error” rate of 2%?? I wonder what the % was that the Mets would blow the division lead in 2006 & 2007?? How could something like that be accounted for and still claim a 98% success rate? If the Braves win 12 n a row what does that do? The formula basically assumes that all teams will continue performing at their present pace…so of course since the Braves are not presently in the playoffs they are not projected to get in
Bat Masterson
August 24th, 2009
3:37 pm
Jeff.. Bravo, well played.
Sonny Clusters
August 24th, 2009
3:39 pm
We was doing statistical inference at Parkview way before we was championship. We was probably the best in the school because we studied how many first pitch strikes was thowed and we told Coach we was going to study it for the science and math fair. We used Jeff for example and ever pitch thowed to Jeff was a strike all season. That made us statistical championship as well as state championship.
bill_in_atl
August 24th, 2009
3:43 pm
HOGWASH. This reminds me of the “can’t miss” stock and commodity trading programs that have been around forever. They use back-data modeling to create a software that predicts the future based on past events. They NEVER WORK because the variables are constantly changing and the results are impossible to predict. It’s garbage.
If you want to say the Braves have less of a chance than the Phils for the division and the Rockies for the WC then obviously you’d be correct. Just look at the standings and how many games are left.
This guy claiming to be accurate to within 2% is simply a JOKE. Where’s his proof? And how does he grade himself?
Brian
August 24th, 2009
3:44 pm
Doug, I don’t believe the error rate of 2% means that they’re only going to be wrong 2% of the time. It means that the playoff percentage has an error rate of 2% based on the numbers they crunched. In other words, based on their data and formulas, the Braves should make the playoffs 22% of the time, plus or minus 2%. You can also say their projection is that the Braves should make the playoffs between 20% and 24% of the time.
There, that’s not so complicated, right? lol…
Sonny Clusters
August 24th, 2009
3:47 pm
We was playing Cobb County schools a lot in the tournament and the Cobb County boys thought they was smarter than us. They didn’t say it but it showed. We was talking and carrying on and doing some finger pulling jokes before the game and one of them said, “barbarian” to Stinky Wintes and Coach heard it and like to have chased that boy out of the stadium. Stinky was nasty but he wasn’t even in a barber shop and they was calling him barbarian. Its like people calling Jeff names on his own blog. Why would they?
Atlanta Braves Have Less Than 20 Percent Chance Of Making Playoffs | Tomahawk Take | An Atlanta Braves Blog
August 24th, 2009
3:47 pm
[...] loved this piece on AJC from Jeff Schultz that explains why and how two guys who started this numbers and odds Web [...]
Mark D.
August 24th, 2009
3:48 pm
I thought this guy makes some good points related to Schultz article. No one is giving the Braves a chance
http://tomahawktake.com/2009/08/24/atlanta-braves-have-less-than-20-percent-chance-of-making-playoffs/
Keeper
August 24th, 2009
3:52 pm
P.S. 2007 and 2008 Mets. If we gain one more spot (just one game) in the WC race, there’s still a chance that either the Rockies or Phils can pull a similar choke job. All we need is one of the two to do it. I’d say both teams are stronger all the way around (especially in the mental dept.), but never say never.
ernisTbass
August 24th, 2009
3:56 pm
Have these guys ever won a pool for the NCAA tournament? Have they had a winning parlay card , or better yet two in one season? Did they have Tiger or the field at the PGA? Show me the money!!!
Bobby Coccyx
August 24th, 2009
3:56 pm
Never.
Just Pat
August 24th, 2009
3:56 pm
Glad I’m just a fan and NOT a statistical geek.
DIAMOND DAWG
August 24th, 2009
3:57 pm
I SAY THE HECK WITH ALL THE NUMBERS. TIME FOR CHIPPER, MCCANN, ESCOBAR, ETC… TO GET GOING AND EARN THEIR MONEY AND PUT THIS TEAM IN THE PLAYOFFS. TIRED OF SEEING THE BRAVES AND THEIR STARS UNDERACHIEVE DOWN THE STRETCH. GET HOT AND LETS WIN 7-8 IN A ROW. PLAY THE GAME THE RIGHT WAY AND EXECUTE AND GET IT DONE
Joe
August 24th, 2009
3:59 pm
Are you an indiot Blackberry Cobbler? Vazquez has pitched his contract’s worth and more all year. One bad game in the last couple of months and you make a statment like that? You don’t know much do you?
Dan
August 24th, 2009
4:00 pm
BRIAN @2:56– But even if the Braves win their division a bit more often than SF, that would mean that the Phillies are suddenly in the wild card race. Doesn’t seem like the Braves improbably winning the division would make much difference, because the Phillies would be right there…
Anyway, we’ll all find out how this turns out, won’t we? I wonder what the discussion will be like in here in about 2 weeks.
CJG
August 24th, 2009
4:07 pm
One of the main things that apparently aren’t considered is the imporatnce of games at the end of the schedule. For instance, Colorado, how we currently need to pass for the WC plays 3 againist the Dodgers to finish the season. Since those games may probably need to be won by the Dodgers to secure their standings, the Dodges will play to win those games. Other teams may have games againist opponents who don’t neccesarily want to lose, but have bigger agendas such as seeing other players lower in the organization and have less motivation to win. seven of our last 10 are played againist Washington, whose sole motivation to win may just be finish above the Mets. May not matter at season’s end, but if the standings stay roughly the same, can become a factor.
Russell
August 24th, 2009
4:08 pm
One or two wins could very easily end up determining whether or not the Braves make the playoffs. With that fact known pretty much since the start of the season, why would the Braves not called up Hanson earlier instead of trying to get by with a patch-work 5th starter of JoJo Reyes and or Kris Medlen? Why call up Medlen instead of Hanson? I understand it was about the money, but imagine if Hanson would have been in the rotation since the start of the season! This team could easily have 4-5 more victories.
Wren didn’t want to give Glavine the opportunity to pitch in the bigs this year because “every win counts”, but he could afford to keep the hottest pitching prospect we have seen in years stuck in the minors!
Just Pat
August 24th, 2009
4:08 pm
ernisTbass
GOOD points indeed……
scottbravesfan
August 24th, 2009
4:11 pm
This MIT guy is forgetting one thing. The Dodgers have OWNED the Rockies this year. The Rockies are not that good of a team I don’t see how the hell they keep winning so much. If they get in the playoffs they will get beat in the first round by the Cardinals. If the Braves get into the playoffs they will play the Dodgers and they have a very good chance of beating the Dodgers in a five game series.
Najeh Davenpoop
August 24th, 2009
4:12 pm
Nice to see that people are still at it hijacking my screen name…
Sonny Clusters
August 24th, 2009
4:12 pm
Jeff, if the Braves make the playoffs will you take us all to the Dairy Queen? We was thinking that would be nice.
jfreak13713
August 24th, 2009
4:13 pm
One thing the MIT boys didn’t factor is INJURIES! Imagine for a moment if one of the big two in Giants rotation go down? Or if the the one of the big hitters for Colorado go down? Or if one or two of our guys go down for an extended period of time?? Numbers are numbers and they do offer a glimps into the possibilty but they for sure don’t know the future. Last time I checked only God could do that and last I heard he’s a Braves fan!!!!!
Go Braves!
jmart1951
August 24th, 2009
4:13 pm
Could you contact the MIT guru again and ask him to do the calculations on the chances that Bobby Cox will not make lineup and ingame decisions that cost us games the rest of this season?
sidslid
August 24th, 2009
4:17 pm
I wonder if their numbers have been off target the last few years due to the salary balancing going on at the trade date. The Braves are a totally different team with LaRoche in the line up. More vulnerable to left handed pitching (oh no, here comes Sterling Hitchcock), but ‘Roachy” has added a 40 HR power bat based on his second half numbers over the years.
Just Pat
August 24th, 2009
4:21 pm
jfreak13713
LOVED your comment about God being a Braves fan.
Jurrjens4NLCY
August 24th, 2009
4:23 pm
“according to website” sounds like the most unprofessional headline in AJC history.
World is going to end in 2010 according to website
Tupac is still alive according to website.
The government made up aids to thin the population of black people according to website.
Seriously, who cares what a site says…
midnite
August 24th, 2009
4:27 pm
So do we throw in the towel and back away from our tomahawks? Do we even need to play the final 38 games? Those MIT geeks need to go play with their pocket protecters and let us enjoy the Braves at least having a chance at the postseason. Glass half full here.
Nova Scotia Steve
August 24th, 2009
4:27 pm
Well I just noticed a massive S*it cloud hovering over my off-day Atlanta Braves day parade.
- Thanks Jeff
(LOL)
Nova Scotia Steve
August 24th, 2009
4:29 pm
I also hear Mother Theresa used to watch the Braves on TBS…
126 Games a year Dear David DeJesus…
Mitch C
August 24th, 2009
4:32 pm
I dont care what some MIT website says. More important is the pace of this team, and whether or not we can do just a little better.
We have already played eight games over 500 to this point at 66-58, so, there’s no reason we cant do that the rest of the season. If we play eight games over for the remaining 38 games, that means we would go 23-15, and finish at 89 wins. I dont think 89 will do it, even though it has in previous seasons. Jeff, Mitch, and Simpson and Shambi on Sportssouth seem in agreement that 91 is the number we need. That would be 25-13. A good pace, and nearly 667 ball, but not out of the realm.
Personally, I’m going to split the difference between our current pace, and the 91, and say 90 wins gets the wild card, with the thought that the Rockies slow down some. I’m not saying we “will” do that, or that we “will” win the wild card, but I am saying we “Can” win it.
Mitch
the real Old Gold
August 24th, 2009
4:32 pm
What % chance did the Braves have to win 14 straight division titles? I’d think it was less than 3%.
Roja
August 24th, 2009
4:32 pm
Given that we did the impossible in 1914 and again in 1993, nothing is beyond the capability of our Braves! Like my daddy used to say figures don’t lie but liars can figure.
bobbymahlon
August 24th, 2009
4:35 pm
If Kelly Johnson continues to play second base like he did yesterday we will never make the playoffs. I’m talking about how he dropped the double play ball that resulted in four runs for florida. Hurry back Marteen we need you.
Russell
August 24th, 2009
4:41 pm
I think everyone agrees 91+ wins will be what it will take to make the playoffs. The Braves will probably finish with 89ish. Imagine what the record would be if they had Hanson in the rotation since the start of the season? An extra 3,4,5 wins? That would put us in the playoffs! I wonder how many of the games that JoJo Reyes & Kris Medlen started that the Braves won?
NO MORE BOBBY
August 24th, 2009
4:41 pm
Your Bobby Cox picture reminds me of that famous Bigfoot picture. Ha!
http://bloggingexperiments.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/patterson_bigfoot.jpg
Gallup
August 24th, 2009
4:51 pm
Is the 2% error on the win percentage? In that case with the Braves expected win pct. at 54.2% and the Rockies at 56.2%, the prediction is well within the margin of error. I’m not impressed. Go Jackets, obviously.
Herschel Talker
August 24th, 2009
4:59 pm
Schultzie:
In the Braves recent “hot” streak, how many games have they picked up? How is it again that people think they’re going to gain a game a week on Colorado considering how many more games they have with the Marlins and Phils? Clearly it’s not impossible, but the numbers are what they are, and it is a much bigger uphill battle than people are admitting.
David
August 24th, 2009
5:07 pm
Stats are good tools, but anything can and will happen. What were the Rockies chances of making the playoffs in ‘07 before they ripped off 20+ straight wins. And those Oakland teams earlier in the decade that put up 20+ win Septembers consistently. All it takes is a few good win streaks and things can change drastically. And don’t forget, the Braves play the Nats for 7 of the last 10 games. The Rocks have Cards/Brew/Dodgers to finish up. I’m more worried about the Giants with their cupcake September schedule.
KEITH MOON LIVES
August 24th, 2009
5:12 pm
Does This report indicate whether these guys have ever had a girlfriend, and do the still live in their parents basement ?
Outside Robber
August 24th, 2009
5:13 pm
Seems right in terms of the chances/odds. The Braves are a longshot, especially with their current leadership. Out.
mudcat
August 24th, 2009
5:25 pm
Keep in mind that in September the Rockies have 18 home games(where they play extremely well) and only 9 games on the road. The schedule favors the Rockies for the wild card. A 6-man rotation is an excellent idea. If we did make the playoffs, our rotation would be much stronger than the rotation of other teams we’d be facing.
Doc Holiday
August 24th, 2009
5:40 pm
One thing to take into account…………..once other teams start to fade….braves % chances of winning the WC increase………..so look for that gap to start closing by the weekend.
Dobearsbare
August 24th, 2009
5:48 pm
I sincerely hope they didn’t get any goverment grants or anything for this work; I didn’t need a huge statistical analysis to know the chances are slim.
tralfaz
August 24th, 2009
5:49 pm
The numbers add up, my own “projection” was about a 16-18% (but I’m a fan). Fact is, there were too dang many games pissed away early on, and they DO count. And now the Delicate Flower Chipper isn’t “Chipping” in, and it will pretty much take a miracle.
TradeMark
August 24th, 2009
5:50 pm
I’m calling sheenanigans on their “2% chance of error”…let’s back it up…I want to see their predictions AT THIS TIME OF YEAR since 2005 and see how “right” they were…considering the Mets collapse just last season ( and I’m sure they did NOT see that coming) they are way over 2% wrong. Just simple math there.
Me
August 24th, 2009
5:55 pm
Jeff, you mentioned a six-man rotation. Here’s another take on what could happen with that.http://bleacherreport.com/articles/241984-derek-lowe-to-the-bullpen-could-be-the-braves-best-move?just_published=1
Charlie
August 24th, 2009
5:57 pm
So, they predicted the 1914 Braves 95 years later. Hmm, so the greatest collapses and combacks been “predicted” after the fact. Wonder if they know Bernie Madoff.
Mitchell
August 24th, 2009
6:02 pm
It’s not going to be easy.
How’s that for an analysis?
Mitchell
August 24th, 2009
6:14 pm
bobbymahlon
August 24th, 2009
4:35 pm
If Kelly Johnson continues to play second base like he did yesterday we will never make the playoffs. I’m talking about how he dropped the double play ball that resulted in four runs for florida. Hurry back Marteen we need you.
There are plenty of reasons for optimism going into the last month or so of the season but it’s hard not to be cynical. Why Bobby Cox still let’s Greg Norton swing a bat for this club is beyond comprehension. It’s August 21st. He’s been at it long enough. This is an absolute joke.
As long as Bobby finds ways of defending Norton and Kelly in the face of his horses*** defense, the odds are against us.
I guess given the choice Bobby feels he’s better off with a veteran bat on the bench. Here’s my question though, since when has Brooks Conrad’s 29 years not been considered close to a veteran? He’s a grown ass man. He’s barely younger than I am but he’s still old. I’m in my fourth decade, I’m thinking about life man, how many years do I have on this earth?
Me and Brooks are plenty old for a couple of young dudes. What is the f***ing deal?
I’m laying it out there folks. Greg Norton is not giving us anything of value. It’s one thing to have experience but at this point in his life that’s about all he has.
Cause he’s old! And he can’t hit!
I’m pissed now. It’s not going to be easy.
Jeff Schultz
August 24th, 2009
6:17 pm
Herschel — on June 28, Braves were 5 out of division and 5 1/2 out of WC (though in 10th place).
Jeff Schultz
August 24th, 2009
6:18 pm
Me — Don’t think a Lowe to BP will happen. Still not sure Hudson to rotation will happen. But if he does come back, I’m guessing it’ll be Kawakami.
DamYankee
August 24th, 2009
6:18 pm
Sonny, our Coach called ‘em “Love Handles”, but when we asked why he wouldn’t tell us. I don’t think baseball players are supposed to have love handles.
chemdawg
August 24th, 2009
6:20 pm
…They cited a 1% chance of the 1914 Braves winning the pennant as an example of an outlier not as a correctly predicted outcome. For those who are confused: they are talking percentages not absolutes and there will always be outliers in statistical models. The 2008 mets were an example of such. Since there are 162 games in a season there is typically a good enough sample size to predict performance based on past performance. However, there will be a normal (remember bell curves from high school math) distribution around the predicted value, so you can’t say anything in absolute terms. If you simulate the outcomes enough times you can get a good feel for how many times team A’s wins lies on the bell curve above team B’s.
P.S.
Schultz, you can blow me off, but I’ve mentioned baseballprospectus.com numerous times over the last few months on these blogs when people (including yourself) were claiming that the braves had a better shot at the wildcard than the division.
Snaggle tooth
August 24th, 2009
6:26 pm
chipper jones needs to start contrebuting if the braves are to have any chance to win the wildcard.
Jeff Schultz
August 24th, 2009
6:27 pm
Chemdawg — I’m confused. 1) I don’t know who you are, so I can’t possibly blow you off; 2) I’ve always felt they had a better shot to win the WC than the division and I still think that, because Philadelphia is too good (my opinion). If the Braves win the East, I will gladly admit I was wrong
i cant take it anymore
August 24th, 2009
6:45 pm
Jeff
don’t let the MIT slang and prestige fool you. Its really hard to design statistical measures that have to account for so many different variables. What about rain delays? chino having heartburn after a cuban sandwich? Yunel getting a new haircut?
Herschel Talker
August 24th, 2009
6:48 pm
OK, so in TWO MONTHS, they’ve picked up 1.5 GAMES against the WC leader! They’ve managed to tread water while everyone ahead of them (except Colorado and SF) stopped treading and fell to the bottom of the pond. And that’s when they’ve been playing what we for the most part consider very well. Again, we are banking on Colorado and SF hitting dry spells, which is certainly not impossible, but as I said before, this situation is much more uphill than people will admit considering how far out of the Braves hands it seems to be (unless they go on an out-of-nowhere 8 game winning streak or the like). I’m not being a pessimist, merely a realist. The possibility is there, but it is far harder to make up any deficit, including this one, than people think. I keep going back to your column from a few weeks back about not being able to have one bad week. They haven’t had one bad week, and they’re merely running in place. It seems they’re due for a couple of lemons (as all teams are), in which case they’re in trouble. And if the lemons never come, they still need to win 2 of 3 FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR, including against the Phillies and Marlins, just to have a shot. And even then, we need Colorado to stumble.
Jeff R
August 24th, 2009
7:06 pm
Jeff, I’m not a numbers guy, either. Too many X Factors in the game to go strictly by the numbers.
HAL
August 24th, 2009
7:14 pm
cook going on the dl for rockies leaves them with zero real major league caliber starters a cpl flame thowing youngsters in usbaldo and the left hander whos name escapes me but no real seasoned starters maybe this will be the year of there met like collapse ,one can hope