BtB Power Rankings: Through Tuesday, July 7th 2009
Welcome to our weekly ranking of all the MLB teams! In this ranking, we use aggregate team hitting, pitching, and fielding statistics--not team wins, losses, runs scored, or runs allowed--to evaluate the performance of teams to date. You can think of the estimated winning percentage (eW%) below as how we'd expect teams to fall out if we threw teams with these aggregate statistics into one big league and let them battle it out for thousands of games.
The table is sortable if you click in the header. All data are park-adjusted when possible. A legend is below the table, followed by commentary. There is also a table comparing actual vs. expected run scored and run allowed totals, as well as actual vs. expected winning percentages. Methods note: as per our discussion last week, I've scaled back the league adjustment a tad--there was a slight amount of double dipping going on. As you'll see, it doesn't make much of a difference. The "Chg" column below is based on re-rolled rankings last week vs. this week.
BtB Power Rankings: Through Tuesday, July 7th 2009
| Rank | Chg | Team | wOBA | eRS | tRA | tRns | Fld | eRA | eW%lg | LgAdj | eW% |
| 1 | 0 | TB | 0.357 | 472 | 4.74 | 388 | 22.1 | 366 | 0.619 | 10.5 | 0.642 |
| 2 | 0 | NYA | 0.362 | 491 | 4.82 | 399 | 0.4 | 398 | 0.602 | 10.3 | 0.624 |
| 3 | 0 | BOS | 0.341 | 424 | 4.18 | 344 | -14.7 | 358 | 0.580 | 10.3 | 0.604 |
| 4 | +1 | LAN | 0.335 | 415 | 4.12 | 346 | 13.9 | 332 | 0.604 | -10.3 | 0.579 |
| 5 | -1 | TOR | 0.337 | 427 | 4.62 | 394 | 8.9 | 385 | 0.550 | 10.6 | 0.574 |
| 6 | 0 | CHA | 0.324 | 363 | 4.06 | 330 | -3.3 | 333 | 0.540 | 10.3 | 0.567 |
| 7 | +4 | LAA | 0.343 | 419 | 5.05 | 407 | -3.5 | 410 | 0.510 | 10.2 | 0.534 |
| 8 | +2 | TEX | 0.334 | 389 | 4.98 | 406 | 21.0 | 385 | 0.506 | 10.2 | 0.531 |
| 9 | 0 | MIN | 0.334 | 406 | 4.68 | 389 | -13.0 | 402 | 0.505 | 10.5 | 0.530 |
| 10 | -3 | COL | 0.322 | 366 | 3.97 | 324 | -2.0 | 326 | 0.554 | -10.3 | 0.526 |
| 11 | -3 | DET | 0.328 | 375 | 4.81 | 391 | 15.8 | 375 | 0.500 | 10.3 | 0.525 |
| 12 | +4 | PHI | 0.342 | 423 | 4.97 | 404 | 3.4 | 401 | 0.526 | -10.1 | 0.502 |
| 13 | -1 | CLE | 0.339 | 427 | 5.20 | 430 | -21.7 | 451 | 0.473 | 10.5 | 0.496 |
| 14 | +1 | SEA | 0.317 | 347 | 4.83 | 399 | 21.4 | 378 | 0.461 | 10.3 | 0.488 |
| 15 | +7 | ATL | 0.319 | 361 | 4.07 | 337 | -15.3 | 352 | 0.511 | -10.3 | 0.484 |
| 16 | -3 | KC | 0.314 | 332 | 4.32 | 351 | -14.6 | 365 | 0.456 | 10.3 | 0.483 |
| 17 | -3 | MIL | 0.332 | 393 | 4.97 | 404 | 15.5 | 388 | 0.506 | -10.3 | 0.481 |
| 18 | +1 | ARI | 0.311 | 348 | 4.17 | 354 | 8.4 | 346 | 0.503 | -10.5 | 0.475 |
| 19 | +2 | STL | 0.324 | 372 | 4.46 | 374 | 1.9 | 372 | 0.500 | -10.6 | 0.474 |
| 20 | -3 | BAL | 0.327 | 378 | 4.83 | 397 | -27.5 | 424 | 0.445 | 10.5 | 0.470 |
| 21 | +2 | CHN | 0.310 | 331 | 4.22 | 342 | 1.4 | 340 | 0.487 | -10.1 | 0.459 |
| 22 | -4 | NYN | 0.327 | 377 | 4.66 | 378 | -15.1 | 393 | 0.481 | -10.2 | 0.455 |
| 23 | +1 | OAK | 0.306 | 316 | 4.42 | 361 | -9.7 | 371 | 0.427 | 10.2 | 0.454 |
| 24 | -4 | PIT | 0.322 | 364 | 4.93 | 402 | 21.4 | 381 | 0.479 | -10.5 | 0.453 |
| 25 | 0 | SF | 0.306 | 313 | 4.26 | 348 | 13.9 | 334 | 0.470 | -10.3 | 0.442 |
| 26 | 0 | FLA | 0.322 | 373 | 4.70 | 397 | -14.8 | 412 | 0.454 | -10.6 | 0.428 |
| 27 | 0 | HOU | 0.318 | 352 | 4.81 | 396 | -2.7 | 399 | 0.440 | -10.2 | 0.415 |
| 28 | 0 | CIN | 0.309 | 330 | 4.88 | 403 | 19.7 | 384 | 0.431 | -10.2 | 0.405 |
| 29 | 0 | WAS | 0.327 | 381 | 5.28 | 423 | -22.1 | 445 | 0.425 | -10.1 | 0.402 |
| 30 | 0 | SD | 0.317 | 349 | 5.07 | 421 | -9.0 | 430 | 0.402 | -10.3 | 0.377 |
Offense = wOBA (park-corrected), eRS (estimated runs scored; wRC from FanGraphs, then park adjusted) American League National League American League: E=Rays, C=White Sox, W=Angels*, WC=Yankees The Angels moved up four spots, wrested the lead in the AL West while simultaneously appearing for the first time among the AL's top three offenses. In reality, they've won 10 of their last 14...but unfortunately for The Singing Cowboy's team, 3 of the four losses have come at the hands of the Rangers, who are playing nearly as well. As a result, they are currently tied in the actual standings--and playing tonight! The Phillies surged up the rankings this week, largely on the back of their record-breaking ass-kick of my Reds on July 6. Meanwhile, their principle threat for much of the year--the Mets--are in a freefall, losing 9 of their last 11 and falling to 22nd on our list. But wait--the Braves surged this week through the 0.500 teams, picking up seven spots and are now just 3 spots behind the Phillies. The NL East seems as though it's becoming a battle between the Phillies' offense and the Braves' pitching...at least on paper. In reality, the Marlins are in the mix as well, but our rankings don't think that team has played quite as well as their record indicates: they've scored 20 more runs then their wRC would predict. Finally, it's worth noting that for the first time in weeks, the top four teams are not all in the AL East! The Dodgers crept up a notch to 4th overall behind the again-slumping Blue Jays, who have gone 2-6 against their own division over the past 8 games. Meanwhile, the Yankees are hot-hot-hot (again) and picked up some of the gains the Rays made last week in the rankings. Below are actual vs expected winning percentages, runs scored, and runs allowed. When a team's ranking deviates substantially from their actual performance (e.g. the Giants or Marlins), this table will hopefully help you see why.
Pitching = tRA and tRns are a home-brew version of Graham MacAree's statistic.
Fielding = Fld: average of bUZR (from FanGraphs) and THT's batted balls statistic (converted to runs)
eRA (estimated runs allowed) = Pitching - Fielding
eW%lg = estimated winning percentage within the specific league (AL or NL)
LgAdj = league adjustment (bonus to AL teams, penalty to NL teams, because the AL has superior level of play)
eW% = estimated winning percentage if all teams were in one league (after league adjustment)
Methods provided in more detail in the first post in this seriesTeam Leaders (asterisks indicate teams improving in specific ranking):
Offense (wOBA): Yankees*, Rays, Angels*
Pitching (tRA): White Sox, Red Sox*, Royals
Fielding (Fld): Rays, Mariners*, Rangers
Offense (wOBA): Phillies, Dodgers, Brewers
Pitching (tRA): Rockies, Braves, Dodgers
Fielding (Fld): Pirates, Reds, Brewers"On Paper" Playoff Leaders (asterisks indicate new leaders):
National League: E=Phillies, C=Brewers, W=Dodgers, WC=RockiesThis Week's Movers:
Actual vs Expected Performances
| Rank | Team | eW%lg | PythW% | TrueW% | TrueRS | ExpRS | TrueRA | ExpRA |
| 1 | TB | 0.619 | 0.589 | 0.536 | 457 | 472 | 379 | 366 |
| 2 | NYA | 0.602 | 0.577 | 0.590 | 467 | 491 | 399 | 398 |
| 3 | BOS | 0.580 | 0.587 | 0.602 | 415 | 424 | 345 | 358 |
| 4 | LAN | 0.604 | 0.619 | 0.639 | 414 | 415 | 319 | 332 |
| 5 | TOR | 0.550 | 0.540 | 0.506 | 411 | 427 | 377 | 385 |
| 6 | CHA | 0.540 | 0.509 | 0.518 | 361 | 363 | 354 | 333 |
| 7 | LAA | 0.510 | 0.533 | 0.561 | 435 | 419 | 407 | 410 |
| 8 | TEX | 0.506 | 0.538 | 0.561 | 399 | 389 | 368 | 385 |
| 9 | MIN | 0.505 | 0.531 | 0.512 | 399 | 406 | 374 | 402 |
| 10 | COL | 0.554 | 0.539 | 0.530 | 379 | 366 | 349 | 326 |
| 11 | DET | 0.500 | 0.522 | 0.542 | 396 | 375 | 378 | 375 |
| 12 | PHI | 0.526 | 0.546 | 0.531 | 424 | 423 | 385 | 401 |
| 13 | CLE | 0.473 | 0.464 | 0.393 | 433 | 427 | 466 | 451 |
| 14 | SEA | 0.461 | 0.472 | 0.518 | 339 | 347 | 361 | 378 |
| 15 | ATL | 0.511 | 0.486 | 0.482 | 348 | 361 | 359 | 352 |
| 16 | KC | 0.456 | 0.417 | 0.434 | 328 | 332 | 393 | 365 |
| 17 | MIL | 0.506 | 0.502 | 0.518 | 387 | 393 | 385 | 388 |
| 18 | ARI | 0.503 | 0.451 | 0.417 | 350 | 348 | 390 | 346 |
| 19 | STL | 0.500 | 0.532 | 0.541 | 385 | 372 | 359 | 372 |
| 20 | BAL | 0.445 | 0.431 | 0.440 | 391 | 378 | 451 | 424 |
| 21 | CHN | 0.487 | 0.507 | 0.506 | 324 | 331 | 319 | 340 |
| 22 | NYN | 0.481 | 0.464 | 0.476 | 355 | 377 | 383 | 393 |
| 23 | OAK | 0.427 | 0.446 | 0.427 | 350 | 316 | 393 | 371 |
| 24 | PIT | 0.479 | 0.499 | 0.452 | 370 | 364 | 371 | 381 |
| 25 | SF | 0.470 | 0.558 | 0.554 | 342 | 313 | 300 | 334 |
| 26 | FLA | 0.454 | 0.474 | 0.506 | 393 | 373 | 415 | 412 |
| 27 | HOU | 0.440 | 0.456 | 0.488 | 344 | 352 | 379 | 399 |
| 28 | CIN | 0.431 | 0.446 | 0.500 | 331 | 330 | 373 | 384 |
| 29 | WAS | 0.425 | 0.379 | 0.296 | 350 | 381 | 452 | 445 |
| 30 | SD | 0.402 | 0.375 | 0.422 | 346 | 349 | 451 | 430 |
0 recs |
18 comments
|
Comments
Programming Note
The Power Rankings are going on vacation to Ocean City for a week starting this Saturday, so they and I will be back on or about July 22nd. :)
-j
My blog: Basement-Dwellers.com
Also: Beyond the Boxscore
by JinAZ on Jul 8, 2009 9:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sweet, does that mean Poor Man's Projected Standings and I get to go to Ocen City too?
by Dan Turkenkopf on Jul 9, 2009 7:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would, man....
…but someone’s got to hold down the fort!
-j
My blog: Basement-Dwellers.com
Also: Beyond the Boxscore
by JinAZ on Jul 9, 2009 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does this account for teams having played uneven numbers of games?
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 8, 2009 11:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes, mostly
The winning percentage is calculated by comparing runs scored and runs allowed. That’s irrelevant to the games played, unless you want to go from winning percentage to expected number of wins.
The league adjustment is specific to games played, though. That’s why everyone doesn’t have the same adjustment.
The only thing that isn’t specific to the games played is that there’s no recognition that some teams have played a tougher schedule than others (within leagues). Someday, I’m sure we’ll get strength of schedule adjustments in…just not yet.
-j
My blog: Basement-Dwellers.com
Also: Beyond the Boxscore
by JinAZ on Jul 9, 2009 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kinda what I was asking.
That, and if two good teams are scoring/allowing runs at the same rate, and one team plays more games, the Pythag records would favor the team with more games, right?
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 10, 2009 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait, these don't use Pythag.
My bad. I really need to go to bed.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 10, 2009 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They do use Pythag, but it spits out a winning percentage, but not number of wins.
Beyond the Boxscore Not a member? Sign up.
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 10, 2009 7:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right, sorry.
My brain was all messed up last night.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 10, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Giants...
have the sixth best record in the majors and yet are 25th? Let’s be real. This system is a little hitting heavy. Pitching and defense should not be underrated.
by BucksForever on Jul 9, 2009 12:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey, it'd make the Rays and MFY look worse.
DO IT!!!
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 9, 2009 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoa whoa whoa! Pitching and defense are there, man!
But seriously, what makes you think we’ve underrated pitching and defense here?
Regarding the difference between win-loss record and ranking, this system purposely ignores record and tries to find ways to measure context-neutral performance. I.e. “how well have these teams played so far?” We’re aware real wins matter in the standings and nobody’s saying wins don’t matter. But you can ask different questions, too, which is what Justin’s done here.
Beyond the Boxscore Not a member? Sign up.
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 9, 2009 8:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pitching and fielding account for roughly 50% of a team's success in these rankings
After estimating runs scored and runs allowed, we just use pythagenpat to estimate winning percentage.
Pitching-heavy teams can do well in this system. The White Sox are a nice example of this. The problem is that you can’t do just offense or just defense and do well. That’s part of the Giants’ problem.
The other problem the Giants have is that they’ve probably been a bit “lucky.” Their offensive runs scored estimates come in 34 runs below their actual total. And their pitching+fielding runs allowed estimate comes in 29 higher than their actual total. As a result, these rankings indicate that they’ve actually played more poorly than their record would indicate.
The Giants’ other problem is that they play in the NL, which features a lower level of competition than the AL. You can’t just look at winning percentage across leagues and argue that a win is a win (well, you can, but you shouldn’t). The same team would do better in the NL than the AL because competition in the NL is weaker.
-j
My blog: Basement-Dwellers.com
Also: Beyond the Boxscore
by JinAZ on Jul 9, 2009 9:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Giants watch:
Yikes, their slow, but powerful surge to the top has hit a stand still.
Beyond the Boxscore Not a member? Sign up.
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 9, 2009 3:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I was surprised too, they had a pretty good week, outscoring their opponents 34-25. But, I guess it’s not about RS vs. RA (which we’re 4th in the NL in). Also, looking back, we really only had the two big shellackings of Houston, 13-0 and 9-0, the rest was pretty bad.
Whatever, my analytical side is turning off. This has been a fun season to watch and I’m going to enjoy it, luck be damned.
Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at second.
by marcello on Jul 9, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
We’re just trying to look at how well teams have played here. But Giants fans should be having a blast this year, and are under no obligation to give a darn about these rankings! :)
-j
My blog: Basement-Dwellers.com
Also: Beyond the Boxscore
by JinAZ on Jul 9, 2009 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
I’m enjoying it, even though I know we’ve been lucky. Not to mention, Timmy’s 6 inning no-hit bid tonight was fun. It really feels like an issue of when, not if, with him.
Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at second.
by marcello on Jul 10, 2009 2:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
















BtB on Facebook














