Good week for the Blue Jays!!

[LedRush]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

[LedRush]

They should be in first place by next week, the Yankee fans will start to squirm.

 

I haven't heard from Yankees fans that believe this team is a real contender. They over-performed for so long and we're seeing a correction to their actual talent level. The Yanks might still win the division or the wild card, but I don't think that the average fan's expectation that of success this year.

 

I think I said they would be in first place by next week we'll they are already their. I hope the Yankees continue to fade, yes they've overachieved so far this year.

 

Did you say they would be out of first place or in first place?

[laughedatbytime]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

[LedRush]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

[laughedatbytime]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

[The Analog Cub]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

[CygnusGal]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

Edited August 19, 2015 by CygnusGal

[LedRush]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

 

The point is that whatever algorithms or criteria are set up to conduct a ranking of which team is better will be biased around that criteria and weighting. Using a computer program doesn't eliminate bias, it formalizes it.

[laughedatbytime]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

 

The point is that whatever algorithms or criteria are set up to conduct a ranking of which team is better will be biased around that criteria and weighting. Using a computer program doesn't eliminate bias, it formalizes it.

Good systems (and I'd be the first to admit not all are) are ones which correlate the factors that make up the eventual result with that result. I suppose you can consider that bias, but it's bias toward those factors that actually matter. It's far superior to the silly power rankings you see in most publications that are purely opinion based with all of the biases inherent in such.

[laughedatbytime]

Jays knock around Buck Farmer. If it would have been anyone else, I wouldn't have posted, but it's always nice to mention Buck Farmer.

[WorkingAllTheTime]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

 

The point is that whatever algorithms or criteria are set up to conduct a ranking of which team is better will be biased around that criteria and weighting. Using a computer program doesn't eliminate bias, it formalizes it.

Good systems (and I'd be the first to admit not all are) are ones which correlate the factors that make up the eventual result with that result. I suppose you can consider that bias, but it's bias toward those factors that actually matter. It's far superior to the silly power rankings you see in most publications that are purely opinion based with all of the biases inherent in such.

 

All analytics and sports statistics are, frankly, rooted in bias, if not BS.

 

An example.... the run differential point above in the thread.

 

Let's throw in strength of schedule and injury realities and see if we can't shoot a few holes in the concept of run differential....

 

1) St. Louis will play nearly one quarter (23.45% to be exact) of its games against Pitt and Chicago (#2 NL, #3 MLB record and #3 NL, tied #4 MLB - with Toronto, ironically - record, respectively). That alone sets St. Louis' record, and entire season, on a different mathematical level if you tweak the numbers well.

 

2) Furthermore, because of the "natural rivalry" formula with interleague play, St. Louis played KC ( #1 AL, #2 MLB record) 6 times. Toronto's "natural rivalry" set? 6 games against Philadelphia (tied for the second worst record in baseball)

 

3) St. Louis lost their ace pitcher in April. and has had key offensive players (Holliday, Adams, etc.) on the DL for extended runs throughout the season, yet did not dramatically alter their 25 and 40 man roster by way of trades (which Toronto did). There are all sorts of ways to play that out.

 

Basically, any of us could easily create a formula that suggests St. Louis' run differential is much more impressive given those factors. Any of us could find ways to suggest saying run differential is a superior statistic is akin to saying the guy with the best batting average is the overall best hitter in the game.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love analytics. I love stats. I love to look at them, compare them, deconstruct them, etc. They actually help me appreciate the game and many nuances in it. But, in the end, the programs are still limited by the parameters (and bias) of their creators.

 

Power rankings are turds. Mathematical rankings are gold plated turds. One may look more impressive, but deep down, they are all the same thing.

 

That's probably why the leagues go ahead and play out the entire season and playoffs, you know?

Edited August 30, 2015 by WorkingAllTheTime

[laughedatbytime]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

 

The point is that whatever algorithms or criteria are set up to conduct a ranking of which team is better will be biased around that criteria and weighting. Using a computer program doesn't eliminate bias, it formalizes it.

Good systems (and I'd be the first to admit not all are) are ones which correlate the factors that make up the eventual result with that result. I suppose you can consider that bias, but it's bias toward those factors that actually matter. It's far superior to the silly power rankings you see in most publications that are purely opinion based with all of the biases inherent in such.

 

All analytics and sports statistics are, frankly, rooted in bias, if not BS.

 

An example.... the run differential point above in the thread.

 

Let's throw in strength of schedule and injury realities and see if we can't shoot a few holes in the concept of run differential....

 

1) St. Louis will play nearly one quarter (23.45% to be exact) of its games against Pitt and Chicago (#2 NL, #3 MLB record and #3 NL, tied #4 MLB - with Toronto, ironically - record, respectively). That alone sets St. Louis' record, and entire season, on a different mathematical level if you tweak the numbers well.

 

2) Furthermore, because of the "natural rivalry" formula with interleague play, St. Louis played KC ( #1 AL, #2 MLB record) 6 times. Toronto's "natural rivalry" set? 6 games against Philadelphia (tied for the second worst record in baseball)

 

3) St. Louis lost their ace pitcher in April. and has had key offensive players (Holliday, Adams, etc.) on the DL for extended runs throughout the season, yet did not dramatically alter their 25 and 40 man roster by way of trades (which Toronto did). There are all sorts of ways to play that out.

 

Basically, any of us could easily create a formula that suggests St. Louis' run differential is much more impressive given those factors. Any of us could find ways to suggest saying run differential is a superior statistic is akin to saying the guy with the best batting average is the overall best hitter in the game.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love analytics. I love stats. I love to look at them, compare them, deconstruct them, etc. They actually help me appreciate the game and many nuances in it. But, in the end, the programs are still limited by the parameters (and bias) of their creators.

 

Power rankings are turds. Mathematical rankings are gold plated turds. One may look more impressive, but deep down, they are all the same thing.

 

That's probably why the leagues go ahead and play out the entire season and playoffs, you know?

I couldn't disagree more. First of all, they play the entire season and playoffs to determine the champion, not the best team. No matter which analytics you use the 2006 Cardinals were not the best team in baseball, far from it. But, and I wretch when I write this, they won the World Series, due to an extreme outlying performance in pitchers' fielding performance. And playoffs are pretty much the ultimate in small samples. A 108 win team will lose a 7 game series to a 54 win team about 1/9 of the time IIRC.

 

Secondly, the nuances you bring up are taken into account in real advanced analytics. The reason they're usually ignored in mainstream sites is that they're too complicated for the average sports fan, let alone people who listen to sports talk radio, to understand. The second reason is that, a majority of the time there's not a significant difference. It's pretty unusual that the situation the Cardinals find themselves in occurs. Even with that, I'd be willing to bet that the weighted average record of the Cardinals' opponents, even taking into account the distortion in the schedule and removing the 46-83 record vs the Cardinals, is less than .525.

 

Any "bias" in advanced analytics continues to be refined until causative relationships are understood better. There's a reason why all of these teams hire dorks who have never played the game and make them integral parts of their front offices. Well, all the teams except for the Phillies. And maybe the Marlins.

[liquidcrystalcompass]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

 

The point is that whatever algorithms or criteria are set up to conduct a ranking of which team is better will be biased around that criteria and weighting. Using a computer program doesn't eliminate bias, it formalizes it.

Good systems (and I'd be the first to admit not all are) are ones which correlate the factors that make up the eventual result with that result. I suppose you can consider that bias, but it's bias toward those factors that actually matter. It's far superior to the silly power rankings you see in most publications that are purely opinion based with all of the biases inherent in such.

 

All analytics and sports statistics are, frankly, rooted in bias, if not BS.

 

An example.... the run differential point above in the thread.

 

Let's throw in strength of schedule and injury realities and see if we can't shoot a few holes in the concept of run differential....

 

1) St. Louis will play nearly one quarter (23.45% to be exact) of its games against Pitt and Chicago (#2 NL, #3 MLB record and #3 NL, tied #4 MLB - with Toronto, ironically - record, respectively). That alone sets St. Louis' record, and entire season, on a different mathematical level if you tweak the numbers well.

 

2) Furthermore, because of the "natural rivalry" formula with interleague play, St. Louis played KC ( #1 AL, #2 MLB record) 6 times. Toronto's "natural rivalry" set? 6 games against Philadelphia (tied for the second worst record in baseball)

 

3) St. Louis lost their ace pitcher in April. and has had key offensive players (Holliday, Adams, etc.) on the DL for extended runs throughout the season, yet did not dramatically alter their 25 and 40 man roster by way of trades (which Toronto did). There are all sorts of ways to play that out.

 

Basically, any of us could easily create a formula that suggests St. Louis' run differential is much more impressive given those factors. Any of us could find ways to suggest saying run differential is a superior statistic is akin to saying the guy with the best batting average is the overall best hitter in the game.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love analytics. I love stats. I love to look at them, compare them, deconstruct them, etc. They actually help me appreciate the game and many nuances in it. But, in the end, the programs are still limited by the parameters (and bias) of their creators.

 

Power rankings are turds. Mathematical rankings are gold plated turds. One may look more impressive, but deep down, they are all the same thing.

 

That's probably why the leagues go ahead and play out the entire season and playoffs, you know?

I couldn't disagree more. First of all, they play the entire season and playoffs to determine the champion, not the best team. No matter which analytics you use the 2006 Cardinals were not the best team in baseball, far from it. But, and I wretch when I write this, they won the World Series, due to an extreme outlying performance in pitchers' fielding performance. And playoffs are pretty much the ultimate in small samples. A 108 win team will lose a 7 game series to a 54 win team about 1/9 of the time IIRC.

 

Secondly, the nuances you bring up are taken into account in real advanced analytics. The reason they're usually ignored in mainstream sites is that they're too complicated for the average sports fan, let alone people who listen to sports talk radio, to understand. The second reason is that, a majority of the time there's not a significant difference. It's pretty unusual that the situation the Cardinals find themselves in occurs. Even with that, I'd be willing to bet that the weighted average record of the Cardinals' opponents, even taking into account the distortion in the schedule and removing the 46-83 record vs the Cardinals, is less than .525.

 

Any "bias" in advanced analytics continues to be refined until causative relationships are understood better. There's a reason why all of these teams hire dorks who have never played the game and make them integral parts of their front offices. Well, all the teams except for the Phillies. And maybe the Marlins.

Precisely. Teams catch on fire at certain times and the momentum carries them. There is no way to predict it.

[Syrinx]

Very in depth discussion guys. All I know is.....the Blue Jays are still in first place!!!!! :7up:

[liquidcrystalcompass]

Very in depth discussion guys. All I know is.....the Blue Jays are still in first place!!!!! :7up:

And murdering the baseball. And with Price, you guys can make some serious noise in the playoffs. My Rangers have heated up too.

[Chicken hawk]

Since Red Sox dont have a chance...i'd love to see Toronto win it all.

[Syrinx]

Rangers are a great team. Being such a big Cowboys fan, I automatically have an affection for the Rangers. They will make the playoffs.

[liquidcrystalcompass]

Rangers are a great team. Being such a big Cowboys fan, I automatically have an affection for the Rangers. They will make the playoffs.

It's been a weird year for sure. At the all-star break, I was certain that we were circling the drain. I've always like the Blue Jays. Cool uniforms and some pretty damn good teams in the 90s. We may meet in the playoffs. Y'all are some hitting mofos. I don't see the Blue Jays cooling off. They may have one more lull because that's baseball.

[Syrinx]

Funny Blue Jays related story. A friend of mine who I golf with several times a week, was invited by a buddy to play at the National, one of Canada's most exclusive courses. His buddy is a member and also a cousin of the Blue Jays bat boy. The foursome would be buddy, bat boy, my friend and Chris Colabello of the Jays. So friend gets a call last night and is told sorry you were bumped from the foursome......Josh Donaldson wants to play!

[liquidcrystalcompass]

Funny Blue Jays related story. A friend of mine who I golf with several times a week, was invited by a buddy to play at the National, one of Canada's most exclusive courses. His buddy is a member and also a cousin of the Blue Jays bat boy. The foursome would be buddy, bat boy, my friend and Chris Colabello of the Jays. So friend gets a call last night and is told sorry you were bumped from the foursome......Josh Donaldson wants to play!

Wow!

[RushCanuck]

Funny Blue Jays related story. A friend of mine who I golf with several times a week, was invited by a buddy to play at the National, one of Canada's most exclusive courses. His buddy is a member and also a cousin of the Blue Jays bat boy. The foursome would be buddy, bat boy, my friend and Chris Colabello of the Jays. So friend gets a call last night and is told sorry you were bumped from the foursome......Josh Donaldson wants to play!

Josh Donaldson is absolutely amazing... MVP, MVP

[Syrinx]

That trade alone should assure Alex Anthopoulous remains GM for along time.

[CygnusGal]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

 

The point is that whatever algorithms or criteria are set up to conduct a ranking of which team is better will be biased around that criteria and weighting. Using a computer program doesn't eliminate bias, it formalizes it.

Good systems (and I'd be the first to admit not all are) are ones which correlate the factors that make up the eventual result with that result. I suppose you can consider that bias, but it's bias toward those factors that actually matter. It's far superior to the silly power rankings you see in most publications that are purely opinion based with all of the biases inherent in such.

 

All analytics and sports statistics are, frankly, rooted in bias, if not BS.

 

An example.... the run differential point above in the thread.

 

Let's throw in strength of schedule and injury realities and see if we can't shoot a few holes in the concept of run differential....

 

1) St. Louis will play nearly one quarter (23.45% to be exact) of its games against Pitt and Chicago (#2 NL, #3 MLB record and #3 NL, tied #4 MLB - with Toronto, ironically - record, respectively). That alone sets St. Louis' record, and entire season, on a different mathematical level if you tweak the numbers well.

 

2) Furthermore, because of the "natural rivalry" formula with interleague play, St. Louis played KC ( #1 AL, #2 MLB record) 6 times. Toronto's "natural rivalry" set? 6 games against Philadelphia (tied for the second worst record in baseball)

 

3) St. Louis lost their ace pitcher in April. and has had key offensive players (Holliday, Adams, etc.) on the DL for extended runs throughout the season, yet did not dramatically alter their 25 and 40 man roster by way of trades (which Toronto did). There are all sorts of ways to play that out.

 

Basically, any of us could easily create a formula that suggests St. Louis' run differential is much more impressive given those factors. Any of us could find ways to suggest saying run differential is a superior statistic is akin to saying the guy with the best batting average is the overall best hitter in the game.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love analytics. I love stats. I love to look at them, compare them, deconstruct them, etc. They actually help me appreciate the game and many nuances in it. But, in the end, the programs are still limited by the parameters (and bias) of their creators.

 

Power rankings are turds. Mathematical rankings are gold plated turds. One may look more impressive, but deep down, they are all the same thing.

 

That's probably why the leagues go ahead and play out the entire season and playoffs, you know?

I couldn't disagree more. First of all, they play the entire season and playoffs to determine the champion, not the best team. No matter which analytics you use the 2006 Cardinals were not the best team in baseball, far from it. But, and I wretch when I write this, they won the World Series, due to an extreme outlying performance in pitchers' fielding performance. And playoffs are pretty much the ultimate in small samples. A 108 win team will lose a 7 game series to a 54 win team about 1/9 of the time IIRC.

 

Secondly, the nuances you bring up are taken into account in real advanced analytics. The reason they're usually ignored in mainstream sites is that they're too complicated for the average sports fan, let alone people who listen to sports talk radio, to understand. The second reason is that, a majority of the time there's not a significant difference. It's pretty unusual that the situation the Cardinals find themselves in occurs. Even with that, I'd be willing to bet that the weighted average record of the Cardinals' opponents, even taking into account the distortion in the schedule and removing the 46-83 record vs the Cardinals, is less than .525.

 

Any "bias" in advanced analytics continues to be refined until causative relationships are understood better. There's a reason why all of these teams hire dorks who have never played the game and make them integral parts of their front offices. Well, all the teams except for the Phillies. And maybe the Marlins.

Precisely. Teams catch on fire at certain times and the momentum carries them. There is no way to predict it.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much the bottom line as far as I see it, LCC. If baseball were only about stats and percentages, they'd just play it Star Trek style like A Taste of Armageddon. I just re-watched Joe Carter walk off the 1993 World Series again today (I could watch it a million times) - and that's the sort of humanity that makes the game so thrilling and so unpredictable. Just like Dave Roberts steal in the 2004 Game 4 ALCS that lit the Red Sox on fire and they won the game and the next six and swept the World Series from arguably one of the best teams the Cardinals have ever fielded. The Cardinals won 105 games in 2004 and they were beaten by a wild card Gang of Idiots! :o I don't think any computer program could have predicted that outcome - sure it was possible, but how remote for a team in an 86 year drought? Even I liked the Red Sox that year (the Blue Jays season was over in April that year - it was a really bad year for them).

 

I pay very little attention to power ratings. We were supposed to win the World Series in 2013 according to all of the models and that year was ... er ... less than optimal.

 

Though I admit, I did have the fun today getting a Red Sox fan to admit he was cheering against his own team for the Blue Jays to win and beat the Yankees. I can't imagine a scenario where I'd cheer against the Blue Jays Even for play off advantage, I'd never cheer for the other team. Red Sox fans are funny.

 

But a game and a half lead over the Yankees in early September is heartening. I hope they can hold on and take the division. Oh please, oh please ...

 

Go Blue Jays!!! :cheerleader:

[liquidcrystalcompass]

It's always funny reading the Power Rankings on various websites, even if I never take them seriously. Everyone went apeshit because the Jays won 11 in a row, which is good, but some people shot them up to the #2 spot behind St. Louis.

 

Now that they dropped 2 of 3 to the Yankees, they'll go back down again.

 

 

Cubs are sitting around #4-5 on average from what I've read.

Why is there a need for power rankings? I never understood why. I thought that's what the standings were for. Computer rankings I get, but not subjective ones.

 

Computer rankings are subjective, too.

In a non-biased, and incredibly less significant way. There's no real comparison.

 

The bias is from the programmers, which is incredibly significant.

How so?

 

Led has a point.

 

It's not like we can see how the number crunching is calculated.

huh?

 

"The bias is from the programmers"

 

No. Programmers write algorithms and the result is either correct or it is not. There is no bias. If the result is not accurate it is just wrong. By definition, computers are objective - right/wrong, on/off. The only variable is style of coding. If the input is bad, the result is bad. Garbage In, Garbage Out (we call it GIGO). The ratios and percentages and such are all determined by MLB and Elias Sports Bureau. There are a flurry of swanky new stats and such, but MLB/ESB are the only ones that matter, they are objective.

 

Now what humans do with the results ..

 

Fact: The Blue Jays currently have the highest run differential in baseball at +141 (STL is +122). Any other result from a computer (or human) is incorrect.

Subjective speculation: The Blue Jays are ranked as the number one power team in baseball, blah, blah, blah ...

 

Poor computers. I'm just saying - it's not their fault. :(

 

Don't anthropomorphize machines. They hate that. :tsk:

 

Edit: change objective speculation to subjective speculation ... I'm pretty good with the computers, the English, not so muchly, it is my first language.

 

The point is that whatever algorithms or criteria are set up to conduct a ranking of which team is better will be biased around that criteria and weighting. Using a computer program doesn't eliminate bias, it formalizes it.

Good systems (and I'd be the first to admit not all are) are ones which correlate the factors that make up the eventual result with that result. I suppose you can consider that bias, but it's bias toward those factors that actually matter. It's far superior to the silly power rankings you see in most publications that are purely opinion based with all of the biases inherent in such.

 

All analytics and sports statistics are, frankly, rooted in bias, if not BS.

 

An example.... the run differential point above in the thread.

 

Let's throw in strength of schedule and injury realities and see if we can't shoot a few holes in the concept of run differential....

 

1) St. Louis will play nearly one quarter (23.45% to be exact) of its games against Pitt and Chicago (#2 NL, #3 MLB record and #3 NL, tied #4 MLB - with Toronto, ironically - record, respectively). That alone sets St. Louis' record, and entire season, on a different mathematical level if you tweak the numbers well.

 

2) Furthermore, because of the "natural rivalry" formula with interleague play, St. Louis played KC ( #1 AL, #2 MLB record) 6 times. Toronto's "natural rivalry" set? 6 games against Philadelphia (tied for the second worst record in baseball)

 

3) St. Louis lost their ace pitcher in April. and has had key offensive players (Holliday, Adams, etc.) on the DL for extended runs throughout the season, yet did not dramatically alter their 25 and 40 man roster by way of trades (which Toronto did). There are all sorts of ways to play that out.

 

Basically, any of us could easily create a formula that suggests St. Louis' run differential is much more impressive given those factors. Any of us could find ways to suggest saying run differential is a superior statistic is akin to saying the guy with the best batting average is the overall best hitter in the game.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love analytics. I love stats. I love to look at them, compare them, deconstruct them, etc. They actually help me appreciate the game and many nuances in it. But, in the end, the programs are still limited by the parameters (and bias) of their creators.

 

Power rankings are turds. Mathematical rankings are gold plated turds. One may look more impressive, but deep down, they are all the same thing.

 

That's probably why the leagues go ahead and play out the entire season and playoffs, you know?

I couldn't disagree more. First of all, they play the entire season and playoffs to determine the champion, not the best team. No matter which analytics you use the 2006 Cardinals were not the best team in baseball, far from it. But, and I wretch when I write this, they won the World Series, due to an extreme outlying performance in pitchers' fielding performance. And playoffs are pretty much the ultimate in small samples. A 108 win team will lose a 7 game series to a 54 win team about 1/9 of the time IIRC.

 

Secondly, the nuances you bring up are taken into account in real advanced analytics. The reason they're usually ignored in mainstream sites is that they're too complicated for the average sports fan, let alone people who listen to sports talk radio, to understand. The second reason is that, a majority of the time there's not a significant difference. It's pretty unusual that the situation the Cardinals find themselves in occurs. Even with that, I'd be willing to bet that the weighted average record of the Cardinals' opponents, even taking into account the distortion in the schedule and removing the 46-83 record vs the Cardinals, is less than .525.

 

Any "bias" in advanced analytics continues to be refined until causative relationships are understood better. There's a reason why all of these teams hire dorks who have never played the game and make them integral parts of their front offices. Well, all the teams except for the Phillies. And maybe the Marlins.

Precisely. Teams catch on fire at certain times and the momentum carries them. There is no way to predict it.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much the bottom line as far as I see it, LCC. If baseball were only about stats and percentages, they'd just play it Star Trek style like A Taste of Armageddon. I just re-watched Joe Carter walk off the 1993 World Series again today (I could watch it a million times) - and that's the sort of humanity that makes the game so thrilling and so unpredictable. Just like Dave Roberts steal in the 2004 Game 4 ALCS that lit the Red Sox on fire and they won the game and the next six and swept the World Series from arguably one of the best teams the Cardinals have ever fielded. The Cardinals won 105 games in 2004 and they were beaten by a wild card Gang of Idiots! :o I don't think any computer program could have predicted that outcome - sure it was possible, but how remote for a team in an 86 year drought? Even I liked the Red Sox that year (the Blue Jays season was over in April that year - it was a really bad year for them).

 

I pay very little attention to power ratings. We were supposed to win the World Series in 2013 according to all of the models and that year was ... er ... less than optimal.

 

Though I admit, I did have the fun today getting a Red Sox fan to admit he was cheering against his own team for the Blue Jays to win and beat the Yankees. I can't imagine a scenario where I'd cheer against the Blue Jays Even for play off advantage, I'd never cheer for the other team. Red Sox fans are funny.

 

But a game and a half lead over the Yankees in early September is heartening. I hope they can hold on and take the division. Oh please, oh please ...

 

Go Blue Jays!!! :cheerleader:

Yeah. The Jays are dangerous. My Rangers are making a little noise too. Our pitching is really coming on.

 

When my Rangers get knocked out, and I think they will. I'll pull for the Blue Jays.

 

Joe Carter was pure greatness. That was such a cool team.

[RushCanuck]

The latest starts by Drew Hutchinson and Mark Buehrle are concerning.... thankfully Marcus Stroman returns this weekend.... 4 game series vs the (damn) Yankees starting tonight... this will be important series for Jays...