Baseball Handicapping Theory..."Magnet" Lab

[Mistermj]

When a team gets too far away from the expected win/loss number...in theory...it should get pulled back...like a "Magnet" to what is expected according to the formula


I guess the question is, how far away is too far? I'm feeling like 5 games isn't that far away. BTW, i LOVE your other thread. Thanks for that. And I'm not against you at all on this, just putting my two cents in.

No problem daaaaak...I appreciate the comments.

Right now...I kind of disagree with you...I think 5 games is a pretty decent variance from expected. But maybe I'm wrong.

I really don't expect a team to just automatically pull back to the expected number.

I just see it as a factor to consider...you still have to have the other reasons to pick and handicap a game.

By itself...I'm not sure it means very much for any one game.

 

[Mistermj]

I am now looking at third order wins...which is basically the Pythagorean formula...with further adjustments made for Stength of schedule and strength of opposition ect.

It is reported that the third order wins is even more accurate at predicting the future record than first order wins...so I find this very interesting.

These third order win expectations can be found at Baseball Prospectus.

There is quite a bit of variance between some of the third order win expectations ...and the old formula found at ESPN.

I'm going to start using just the third order stats for my tracking.

Here is an explanation from Wiki:

"Second-order" and "third-order" wins
In their Adjusted Standings Report, Baseball Prospectus refers to different "orders" of wins for a team. The basic order of wins is simply the number of games they have won. However, because a team's record may not reflect its true talent due to luck, different measures of a team's talent were developed.
First-order wins, based on pure run differential, are the number of expected wins generated by the "pythagenport" formula (see above). In addition, to further filter out the distortions of luck, sabermetricians can also calculate a team's expected runs scored and allowed via a runs created-type equation (the most accurate at the team level being Base Runs). These formulas result in the team's expected number of runs given their total singles, doubles, walks, etc., which helps to eliminate the luck factor of the order in which the team's hits and walks came within an inning.
By plugging these expected runs scored and allowed into the pythagorean formula, one can generate second-order wins, the number of wins a team deserves based on the number of runs they should have scored and allowed given their component offensive and defensive statistics. Third-order wins are second-order wins that have been adjusted for strength of schedule (the quality of the opponent's pitching and hitting). Second- and third-order winning percentage has been shown to predict future actual team winning percentage better than both actual winning percentage and first-order winning percentage.

 

[Mistermj]

That sounds better. My idea was oversimplified but it was just to get the brainstorming going. It may help to incorporate RPI and SOS.
For example, take a dog in 1st game of series who is -5 ExpW-L with higher RPI than opponent then chase it? I don't even know if this situation would even occur, again, just brainstorming.

I like your idea Candc98.

I'm not doing it with a chase system...but this is the way I'm keeping track of the watch list. This is my explanation from the other baseball thread:

Magnet Picks Watch List (1-0)
+ or - Expected Wins (D3 Third Order Wins)

Toronto -4
Minnesota +5

Stalking these two teams for opportunities.

I have made yet another change to how I'm doing this. Rather than just looking for the highest variance from expected wins...I'm also looking at the power ratings to look for a variance there as well.

In other words, I'm looking for teams that have the highest variance from expected wins and power rating.

Toronto for example is expected to have 4 more wins than it has right now, and its power rating is in the top tier of teams...both of these factors suggest that Toronto might be ripe for some wins.

But we still need to confirm that its a good matchup with the computer...I'm not really changing the way I handicap....I will just note when I think the Magnet theory also applies to a pick.

I hope this makes sense...its not an easy thing to explain.<!-- / message -->