Monday, August 22, 2005

Highly Unlikely, but...

Wouldn't it be awesome if the Twins, who are starting a 3-game series against the White Sox tonight came all the way back and won the division?

I know...that is nearly impossible, but what if?

They have 10 head-to-head games. Of course the down side is that even if the Twins take 7 of 10 they only gain 4 games...

But they also have 7 against KC. Now I know that KC has won two in a row, but I think that the Twins could be all right.

I know this isn't going to happen (despite Chicago being 3-7 over their last ten) but wouldn't it be great?


  1. It would be great unless we had to face Santana twice in a 5 game set.

    Sure we swept them, but we didn't face Johan.

    Like you said earlier, we beat CHW pretty well with their best pitchers going, but for some reason I think MIN would match up better (worse for us). Johan is Johan and starting to look more and more like his 2004 self. Silva gives us trouble and Radke is a pretty decent pitcher himself.

  2. At the moment, there's a better chance for Cleveland to do so. And I'd be happier with that, frankly... I have a vague and undefined, yet very real, dislike of the Twins. And I really despise Gardenhire.

  3. Anyone would be better than CHI (as highly unlikley as their collapse is).

    Guillen might be the most arrogant little prick of manager in all of baseball. I loved his comments saturday - that the team is losing cause they are not hitting. Sure it is true, but nothing like hanging your guys out to dry. Plus he has been yapping all year. Are there any bigger dicks managing?

    Supposedly Showalter has mellowed.
    Scioscia was a mean bastard as a player, but I think he has mellowed.
    Bobby cox is a wife beater, but nothing about his baseball skills piss me off.
    Mr. Grieve hates Pinella, but that Pinella was about 20 years ago and I think, to a degree, he has mellowed.
    The real pricks all seem to be out of work - Bobby V, Bowa, Kennedy. Maybe with the realization that managers influence 5-8 years per game strategy wise, teams have gone for more gentle managers. Of course in Kennedy's book he claims a manager influences the outcome of half of all games. Yikes. That book review will be fun. and ruthless.

    I guess they all have to have a certain level of asshole in them.

  4. Check this out, and then consider that about a week ago, the Indians' chances of winning the division stood at about 1%. They've increased their chances by 800%! Why, if they incresae them by another 800% this week, they'll be the favorites!

  5. Wow, Andrew...You're right!

    I am looking at the average wins and losses (they run season simulations one million times to get the average)...When you look at them, they pretty much reflect the standings exactly. Which brings this next question to mind. Why not just look at the standings and winning percentages and then extend it to the end of the season? It looks about the same anyway and it saves you 1,000,000 simulations...

    Anyway, go Indians!

  6. I think they look at a number of factors in addition to how well the team has played - such as home/away and record of remaining opponents.

  7. They also go a fair amount by a variation on the Pythagorean Win formula (they use the BP preferred 'Pythagenport' system) as a pedictive model. Which is why you see the Mets with a better shot at the NL Wild Card than teams that are currently ahead of them in their own division.