Comments on: 04-03-06, Red Sox at Rangers [Swing Score: Sox +1] http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/ ...and a few more to think about. Mon, 04 Apr 2011 21:57:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Scott Janssens http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-33 Scott Janssens Wed, 05 Apr 2006 14:21:29 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-33 Gah, my math is wrong, it would be 31 and 31 for the .500 team. But I still feel too many are being handed out. Gah, my math is wrong, it would be 31 and 31 for the .500 team. But I still feel too many are being handed out.

]]> By: Scott Janssens http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Scott Janssens Wed, 05 Apr 2006 14:18:43 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-32 Originally I had the Cubs as 0, I'm a Sox Fan (The original White variety) and wondered if there were some bias in play. Sure the Reds suck, but 16 runs is 16 runs even if 6 were unearned. I think it'd be a +1 if it was the Yankees beating the Reds. Teams don't regularly score in double digits, therefore it's a swing. At least that was my logic. I think the trend should be toward 0. I gave the White Sox a 0 for their opener even though they played a contender and scored six runs more than their average last season. The White Sox are supposed to and expect to win against contenders. The Red Sox played a team that's projected to come in last and had an easy time of it. I'd say game two for both Sox was a 0 as well. Teams will lose games. Most losses, especially on day 2, affect fans much worse than the players. Remember, it's not the fans emotions that are being measured. If 100 games are expected to be 0, then one would assume that the average .500 team would have 16 pluses and 16 minues. A plus or minus should be due to a significant event: scoring 16 runs, a come from behind victory (especially a walk off), a no hitter, 20 strikeouts, snapping a losing streak > 3 games, a victory (or loss) the leads to a change in the standings, sweeping a significatly better team. Actually, I probably handed too many out. Consider me off this project. It's an interesting idea, but I see too many biases (including my own) along with a lack of a solid definition of what constitutes a "swing" game preventing the project from working. I suspect the best route would be to assign values by committee to compensate for biases, but setting that up after the season has started is problematic. Good luck with it. Originally I had the Cubs as 0, I’m a Sox Fan (The original White variety) and wondered if there were some bias in play. Sure the Reds suck, but 16 runs is 16 runs even if 6 were unearned. I think it’d be a +1 if it was the Yankees beating the Reds. Teams don’t regularly score in double digits, therefore it’s a swing. At least that was my logic.

I think the trend should be toward 0. I gave the White Sox a 0 for their opener even though they played a contender and scored six runs more than their average last season. The White Sox are supposed to and expect to win against contenders. The Red Sox played a team that’s projected to come in last and had an easy time of it. I’d say game two for both Sox was a 0 as well. Teams will lose games. Most losses, especially on day 2, affect fans much worse than the players. Remember, it’s not the fans emotions that are being measured.

If 100 games are expected to be 0, then one would assume that the average .500 team would have 16 pluses and 16 minues. A plus or minus should be due to a significant event: scoring 16 runs, a come from behind victory (especially a walk off), a no hitter, 20 strikeouts, snapping a losing streak > 3 games, a victory (or loss) the leads to a change in the standings, sweeping a significatly better team.

Actually, I probably handed too many out.

Consider me off this project. It’s an interesting idea, but I see too many biases (including my own) along with a lack of a solid definition of what constitutes a “swing” game preventing the project from working. I suspect the best route would be to assign values by committee to compensate for biases, but setting that up after the season has started is problematic.

Good luck with it.

]]> By: Trey Peiffer http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-31 Trey Peiffer Wed, 05 Apr 2006 04:29:11 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-31 monday was a +1 for the sox: schill "the ace" is back, coco impressive tueday was a -1 for the sox: wakefield-bard combo doesnt look good i feel the next week or so will bee breakeven now that the excitement of the beginning of the season is over. unless we pitch a one hitter or sweep the up and coming bluejays. monday was a +1 for the sox: schill “the ace” is back, coco impressive
tueday was a -1 for the sox: wakefield-bard combo doesnt look good

i feel the next week or so will bee breakeven now that the excitement of the beginning of the season is over. unless we pitch a one hitter or sweep the up and coming bluejays.

]]> By: Dave Champagne http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Dave Champagne Wed, 05 Apr 2006 02:43:37 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-29 I feel like some of your picks of + or - 1 are just by virtue of the highly lopsided scores in those games and not necessarily that the game was a true swing game. The Cubs for instance I think is one that should be a 0. They have a good team, had a favorable pitching matchup, and the Reds are not a particularly strong team. They scored a lot of runs yes, but this didn't go down to the wire, there weren't a lot of lead changes, and the other team still scored 7; I don't think that can be called a swing game. On the other hand, I want to make the case that Detroit should have a +1. They won the first game under their new manager, with a new controversial ace, and it's divisional. I feel like some of your picks of + or – 1 are just by virtue of the highly lopsided scores in those games and not necessarily that the game was a true swing game. The Cubs for instance I think is one that should be a 0. They have a good team, had a favorable pitching matchup, and the Reds are not a particularly strong team. They scored a lot of runs yes, but this didn’t go down to the wire, there weren’t a lot of lead changes, and the other team still scored 7; I don’t think that can be called a swing game.

On the other hand, I want to make the case that Detroit should have a +1. They won the first game under their new manager, with a new controversial ace, and it’s divisional.

]]> By: Scott Janssens http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-26 Scott Janssens Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:33:42 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-26 Upon further thought I'd give +1 to the Cards and Cubs and a -1 to the Phillies. Upon further thought I’d give +1 to the Cards and Cubs and a -1 to the Phillies.

]]> By: Scott Janssens http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-25 Scott Janssens Tue, 04 Apr 2006 19:37:19 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-25 If you're going to map all teams, you'll need a concensus about where the threshold is, otherwise no valid comparisons can be made. I don't think the Red Sox game comes close to a +1. Yesterday (as I see it): Mariners -1 A's -1 Mets +1 (borderline, I could be persuaded) Rockies +1 Astros +1 Braves/Dodgers I've no idea how to score that one. If you’re going to map all teams, you’ll need a concensus about where the threshold is, otherwise no valid comparisons can be made. I don’t think the Red Sox game comes close to a +1.

Yesterday (as I see it):

Mariners -1
A’s -1
Mets +1 (borderline, I could be persuaded)
Rockies +1
Astros +1
Braves/Dodgers I’ve no idea how to score that one.

]]> By: Scott Janssens http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-24 Scott Janssens Tue, 04 Apr 2006 19:28:10 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-24 You sent me email, and I accidentally deleted it before reading it. Please resend. You sent me email, and I accidentally deleted it before reading it. Please resend.

]]> By: Marshall http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-23 Marshall Tue, 04 Apr 2006 18:32:22 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-23 I went back and forth about it. Every baseball fan is excited on Opening Day and wants to ascribe a world of importance to a first game win, and conversely, to shrug off a loss. You certainly don't know what your team is for a while, so April (and perhaps even May) "Swing" games should be pretty rare. That said, while I think the Red Sox should generally be favored against the Rangers, I think Schilling had (and has) a lot to prove, and it was a pretty well-rounded attack for the entire team. Felt like something to me... ...but so goes the debate. ;) I went back and forth about it. Every baseball fan is excited on Opening Day and wants to ascribe a world of importance to a first game win, and conversely, to shrug off a loss. You certainly don’t know what your team is for a while, so April (and perhaps even May) “Swing” games should be pretty rare.

That said, while I think the Red Sox should generally be favored against the Rangers, I think Schilling had (and has) a lot to prove, and it was a pretty well-rounded attack for the entire team. Felt like something to me…

…but so goes the debate. ;)

]]> By: Scott Janssens http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/comment-page-1/#comment-21 Scott Janssens Tue, 04 Apr 2006 16:35:26 +0000 http://www.ydeologi.com/2006/04/03/04-03-06-red-sox-at-rangers-swing-score-sox-1/#comment-21 I'd score it a 0. This is a game the Red Sox are expected to win and they led the whole game. I’d score it a 0. This is a game the Red Sox are expected to win and they led the whole game.

]]>