Pythagorian W/L

[pwootten]

Recently I read some sabermetrics that showed the effectiveness of past and present MLB managers based upon how well his teams perform in relation to their pythagorian W/L. Over time even the best managers account for less than one additional win over the Pyth. I did a check of all of my 70's teams and found my actual W/L compared to my teams' pythagorian to be just under 1 wn per season, on average. My managerial skills are significantly less than most guys here, so I'd be interested in how some other guys have fared.

My results: 31 70's teams, Exp. W/L is 25 over actual W/L.

Anyone else care to share? Anyone else even care?

Paul

[voovits]

Decided to do the math on my teams.
7 completed 70s teams.
Actual record: 567-567. Average of 81 wins per season.
Expected record: 554-580. Average of 79.74 wins/season
There have been several season where there have been huge differences in actual to expected. The largest gap was 8, happening once, and 7 happening 2 times.

18 completed 80s teams.
Actual record: 1505-1411. Average of 83.61 wins per season
Expected record: 1503-1413. Average of 83.5 wins pr season
Pretty good I'd say, except for one season which skews the numbers; a 12 win difference. I won 83 games one season when I was expected to win 95.

Only 3 times did I win the same number of games as the expected.

The more seasons you play, naturally the averages should even out.
I would be surprised if a manager with, say 100 teams would ever have an average difference of more than half a game. That would be a total of 50 more or 50 fewer wins. With the constant fluctuations and randomness of the game, a situation like that would be rare.

[Jimmy_C]

Of my 39 completed teams, I have 20 less actual wins than the expected wins (3361 actual to 3381 expected). That's pretty darn close in my book. My teams hit the expected number dead-on only 4 times.

[chess2899]

That is very interesting. I could use this information when I start applying for MLB General Manager positions in 2010.

I wonder what Panzer Ace's stats are. He must be above average.

[JONCHUCKERY]

Interesting topic. Here is my breakdown. This is based upon 32 completed teams

Overall I have +35 difference, meaning I've won 35 more games than my expected w/l record

My extremes are a teams that won 12, 10, & 8 more games than expected with teams that won 7 & 6 games less than expected (1 team won 93 games with a xpec w/l of 100)

For my 5 championship teams they are 5 games under their expected w/l record

So basically my good teams underachieve in the reg season then go on to win in the playoffs or my teams overachieve in the reg season but not enough to get anywhere in the playoffs!!!!!!

[The Senators]

I'm a -15.....I suck.

[coyote303]

I disagree with the whole premise a better manager should do better than their expected pythagorian wins. What makes a manager better (IMHO) is run differential. Plus is good; minus is bad (duh!). Whether you do better or worse than "expected" is mostly a matter of luck.

[pwootten]

[quote:cc736c64cf="coyote303"]I disagree with the whole premise a better manager should do better than their expected pythagorian wins. What makes a manager better (IMHO) is run differential. Plus is good; minus is bad (duh!). Whether you do better or worse than "expected" is mostly a matter of luck.[/quote:cc736c64cf]

Am I wrong in assuming that run differential is what determines expected pythagorian wins/losses. A team that has the exact number of runs given up and scored would have a pythagorian w/l of .500, right?

[TomP]

Yes, you are correct regarding the calculation of the expected Wins/Losses.

I agree with coyote that variances between the actual wins and expected wins measures luck, not the quality of the manager. Also, consider that we have minimal managerial control of in-game situations. We basically set the lineup, starting pitching and some limited strategy settings. That has improved somewhat with the enhanced bullpen controls.

However, we are essentially a spectator during the game. We cannot call for the pinch hitter to drive in a key run (or the correct reliever to counteract the hitting tactic) to turn a 1-run loss into a victory.

I did check some of my teams and there are correlations between my 1-run game winning percentage and the variance between actual to expected. For example, if my team had a high 1-run game winning percentage, the expected wins are usually higher than actual (and vice versa).

[pwootten]

[quote:b7bca6d856="TomP"]Yes, you are correct regarding the calculation of the expected Wins/Losses.

I agree with coyote that variances between the actual wins and expected wins measures luck, not the quality of the manager. Also, consider that we have minimal managerial control of in-game situations. We basically set the lineup, starting pitching and some limited strategy settings. That has improved somewhat with the enhanced bullpen controls.

However, we are essentially a spectator during the game. We cannot call for the pinch hitter to drive in a key run (or the correct reliever to counteract the hitting tactic) to turn a 1-run loss into a victory.

I did check some of my teams and there are correlations between my 1-run game winning percentage and the variance between actual to expected. For example, if my team had a high 1-run game winning percentage, the expected wins are usually higher than actual (and vice versa).[/quote:b7bca6d856]

Thanks Tom. Despite our lack of control, ability to make decision during games, etc. we still wind up with variations pretty close to those of managers in MLB over the course of several seasons. That says something for SOM.

One thing that balances the lack of in-game decision making could be the ability to drop and add players pretty much at will. Wouldn't MLB managers like having that ability!

I finished the sabermetrics book I was reading and moved on to Peter Golenbock's account of the Senior Professional Baseball League's initial season. This was recommended by someone here on the boards, and my wife was nice enough to hunt it down. Really good so far.

Paul