BtB Power Rankings: Week 12

by JinAZ on Jun 23, 2010 11:30 PM EDT in Power Rankings

"On Paper" Playoff Rankings

American League: E=Yankees, C=Twins, W=Rangers, WC=Rays
National League: E=Braves, C=Cardinals, W=Padres, WC=Giants

Under the Hood

Converting Runs to Wins

Team	G	RS	eRS	RA	eRA	W%	pW%	cW%	xtW	LgAdj	TPI
ARI	72	323	320	394	322	0.389	0.404	0.497	73	-9	0.470
ATL	71	354	357	289	294	0.592	0.594	0.591	96	-9	0.566
BAL	70	229	250	374	365	0.271	0.287	0.332	50	9	0.356
BOS	72	380	393	317	329	0.597	0.585	0.584	96	9	0.607
CHW	69	294	286	307	300	0.507	0.480	0.478	79	9	0.505
CHC	70	283	293	299	287	0.443	0.474	0.509	78	-9	0.482
CIN	72	334	354	319	340	0.542	0.521	0.520	86	-9	0.495
CLE	69	294	287	355	351	0.377	0.411	0.405	64	9	0.430
COL	70	290	294	250	296	0.529	0.566	0.496	83	-9	0.469
DET	69	312	337	306	309	0.551	0.509	0.541	88	9	0.566
FLA	70	337	326	308	315	0.486	0.543	0.516	82	-9	0.491
HOU	71	239	199	364	324	0.366	0.316	0.290	52	-9	0.263
KCR	72	315	320	354	366	0.403	0.444	0.436	68	9	0.461
LAD	70	334	332	332	335	0.543	0.503	0.496	84	-9	0.471
LAA	73	351	320	358	354	0.548	0.490	0.452	80	9	0.478
MIL	70	344	364	380	356	0.429	0.452	0.510	77	-9	0.487
MIN	70	334	348	281	286	0.571	0.580	0.590	94	9	0.615
NYY	71	393	396	291	296	0.620	0.640	0.636	102	9	0.659
NYM	70	332	321	282	314	0.571	0.576	0.510	87	-9	0.485
OAK	73	296	305	320	317	0.466	0.463	0.483	77	9	0.510
PHI	68	301	290	280	287	0.529	0.534	0.505	83	-8	0.478
PIT	70	233	244	389	359	0.357	0.278	0.327	55	-9	0.303
SDP	70	319	301	253	248	0.586	0.604	0.588	95	-9	0.559
SEA	70	242	243	308	313	0.414	0.392	0.387	65	9	0.415
SFG	69	296	304	241	289	0.565	0.592	0.523	88	-9	0.497
STL	70	325	331	262	275	0.557	0.598	0.585	93	-9	0.559
TBR	70	365	345	273	277	0.600	0.634	0.603	97	9	0.628
TEX	70	354	344	296	309	0.600	0.584	0.551	93	9	0.576
TOR	71	336	318	315	304	0.535	0.530	0.520	85	9	0.547
WSN	72	296	302	331	339	0.458	0.449	0.447	73	-9	0.421

G=Games
RS = Actual Runs Scored, after a park adjustment
eRS = Estimated Runs Scored, after park adjustment (see "Offense" table below)
RA = Actual Runs Allowed, after a park adjustment
eRA = Estimated Runs Allowed, after park adjustments (see "Defense" table below)
W% = Actual Winning Percentage
pW% = PythagenPat Winning Percentage, based on actual runs scored and run allowed totals
cW% = Component Winning Percentage, using estimated runs scored and estimated runs allowed totals. If you don't like the league adjustment, click in the header and sort by this column.
LgAdj = League adjustment, based on differences in league quality (justification here and here).
TPI = Team Performance Index, a hypothetical winning % based on component estimates of runs scored and runs allowed after the league adjustment.

Team Offenses and Defenses

Team	RS	eRS	wOBA	OBP	SLG	wRC	EqBRR	Clutch	RA	eRA	ERA	FIP	xFIP	xFIPrns	Field	Catch	BABIP
ARI	323	320	0.327	0.330	0.429	326	-6	-11	394	322	5.49	4.90	4.53	332	9	-5	0.322
ATL	354	357	0.338	0.351	0.400	353	5	1	289	294	3.79	3.87	4.10	294	8	1	0.295
BAL	229	250	0.303	0.310	0.363	252	-2	-7	374	365	5.03	4.92	4.84	342	-28	1	0.313
BOS	380	393	0.353	0.353	0.465	397	-4	0	317	329	4.20	4.21	4.54	342	0	1	0.291
CHW	294	286	0.318	0.323	0.401	286	0	7	307	300	4.40	3.88	4.12	292	-5	-1	0.311
CHC	283	293	0.319	0.327	0.404	296	-4	-36	299	287	3.94	3.98	4.15	294	-7	2	0.303
CIN	334	354	0.337	0.339	0.444	352	2	1	319	340	4.48	4.31	4.51	336	-4	-1	0.311
CLE	294	287	0.317	0.323	0.373	287	0	-4	355	351	4.66	4.55	4.79	336	-4	-1	0.309
COL	290	294	0.315	0.330	0.410	288	6	-30	250	296	3.61	3.73	4.18	300	22	-2	0.298
DET	312	337	0.338	0.342	0.425	337	0	15	306	309	4.24	4.05	4.52	317	6	-1	0.299
FLA	337	326	0.329	0.329	0.405	321	4	-21	308	315	4.01	3.88	4.34	311	-5	1	0.307
HOU	239	199	0.281	0.283	0.333	197	2	38	364	324	4.68	3.99	4.29	309	-18	1	0.331
KCR	315	320	0.324	0.335	0.408	318	1	-11	354	366	4.86	4.56	4.67	343	-33	0	0.309
LAD	334	332	0.330	0.334	0.406	327	5	2	332	335	4.15	3.96	4.19	303	-35	-1	0.306
LAA	351	320	0.327	0.323	0.413	323	-3	22	358	354	4.50	4.34	4.48	333	-15	-2	0.312
MIL	344	364	0.342	0.337	0.433	364	0	-21	380	356	5.07	4.44	4.48	322	-42	-1	0.333
MIN	334	348	0.339	0.348	0.417	349	-1	-14	281	286	3.85	3.92	4.17	302	8	3	0.304
NYY	393	396	0.355	0.359	0.440	396	0	4	291	296	3.89	4.20	4.23	304	9	0	0.282
NYM	332	321	0.328	0.327	0.402	317	4	-7	282	314	3.76	4.15	4.51	328	11	1	0.304
OAK	296	305	0.320	0.323	0.382	308	-3	-3	320	317	4.04	4.28	4.31	321	4	2	0.291
PHI	301	290	0.323	0.327	0.412	297	-7	7	280	287	4.01	4.28	4.23	293	11	3	0.293
PIT	233	244	0.302	0.305	0.360	247	-3	7	389	359	5.18	4.81	4.72	334	-23	-1	0.318
SDP	319	301	0.321	0.319	0.367	301	0	-3	253	248	3.07	3.54	3.78	278	21	4	0.283
SEA	242	243	0.301	0.309	0.345	244	-1	16	308	313	3.92	4.10	4.49	321	16	-2	0.292
SFG	296	304	0.325	0.330	0.409	304	0	-3	241	289	3.28	3.79	4.34	311	26	-4	0.280
STL	325	331	0.333	0.335	0.415	333	-2	-16	262	275	3.20	3.78	3.97	288	12	3	0.291
TBR	365	345	0.335	0.336	0.408	340	5	-13	273	277	3.55	4.10	4.19	304	28	0	0.285
TEX	354	344	0.334	0.341	0.426	336	8	15	296	309	3.94	4.33	4.46	324	12	0	0.285
TOR	336	318	0.330	0.308	0.449	319	-1	19	315	304	4.28	3.98	4.15	302	12	-3	0.300
WSN	296	302	0.321	0.326	0.404	306	-4	-13	331	339	4.17	4.36	4.62	340	-8	3	0.306

RS = Actual Runs Scored
eRS = Estimated Runs Scored: wRC + EqBRR
wOBA = The Book's statistic, but park adjusted, and using data from both wRC and EqBRR
OBP = On Base Percentage (Times on Base / Plate Appearances)
SLG = Slugging Percentage (Total Bases / At Bats)
wRC = From FanGraphs, with baserunning removed, after park adjustments
EqBRR = Dan Fox's composite baserunning statistics from Baseball Prospectus, minus stolen bases since they are included in wRC.
Clutch = "Clutchiness" measure from fangraphs; difference between actual WPA and expected WPA based on component statistics. We report this in runs.

RA = Actual Runs Allowed, after park adjustment
eRA = Estimated Runs Allowed: tRuns - Field - Catch
ERA = Straight-up Earned Run Average
FIP = Fielding-Independent Runs, based strictly on K-, BB-, and HR-rates.
xFIP = Experimental Fielding-Independent Runs from FanGraphs. Like FIP, but with HR/Outfield Fly Ball rates regressed completely to league average. xFIP is as predictive as any other DIPS-like stat.
xFIPrns = Pitching Runs Allowed, based on xFIP
Field = The average of team UZR and team DRS (minus rSB since I calculate catcher fielding separately).
Catch = Catcher Fielding Runs, based on SB's, CS's, WP's, PB's, E's, and this year catcher interference. The methods are essentially those described here. But I'm using B-Ref data this year, and so there are slight tweaks to the methodology, generally in ways that should lead to greater precision.
BABIP = Batting Average on Balls In Play. Fluctuates at the team level with fielding, although chance events can have effects as well.

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Defenses suck this year it seems.

A lot of really terrible ones. Also, the league has a total defense of -12. I thought this was a normalized statistic. Does differences in UZR and DRS account for this? I could understand being off by some small amount, but -12 seems substantial.

Also, do FIP and xFIP account for park and league? Only St. Louis and San Diego have xFIPS under 4, and both are pitchers’ parks.

Thanks, btw. I love these weekly ranking.

"I throw him four wide ones then try to pick him off first base." - Preacher Roe on Stan Musial

by Shi on Jun 24, 2010 12:28 AM EDT reply actions

MLB fielding sums to exactly 0

Just checked my spreadsheet. I actually have to manually force DRS to sum to 0. The average DRS across teams is +14 right now, which is absurd.

xFIP does not account for park. I could park adjust the K and BB rates, but I don’t have updated, regressed park factors for those right now. FIP that I report is straight from FanGraphs, but in the past I’ve done a HR-park adjustment for it. San Diego worries me a little as far as xFIP goes…I’ll look into it when I get a chance.
-j

I write at:
Beyond the Boxscore | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds

by JinAZ on Jun 24, 2010 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Huh, just checked the table above.

And you’re right, it’s summing to +12 runs. I think it’s a rounding issue. Here’s that column with an extra decimal added:

9.4
8.4
-27.6
0.4
-4.6
-6.6
-3.6
-3.6
22.4
6.4
-4.6
-17.6
-32.6
-34.6
-14.6
-41.6
8.4
9.4
11.4
4.4
11.4
-22.6
21.4
16.4
26.4
12.4
28.4
12.4
12.4
-7.6

Those should all sum up to 0. The reason there’s so many 0.4’s and 0.6’s probably has to do with the DRS adjustment, which I’m applying uniformly across all teams.
-j

I write at:
Beyond the Boxscore | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds

by JinAZ on Jun 24, 2010 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm just gonna throw this out there: What are people thinking about the White Sox?

They’ve won 12 out of 13, and in the past two weeks they’ve cut Minnesota’s first-place lead from 9.5 games down to 3.5 games.

Obviously they still have some issues, but does this team stand a chance of sticking around for the long run?

I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy

by Satchel Price on Jun 24, 2010 12:57 AM EDT reply actions

Of course the Rockies are the 23rd best team in baseball

Thanks, statistics!

It's my blog!

by biondino on Jun 24, 2010 6:08 AM EDT reply actions

Why use xFIP runs?

At this point isn’t HR/FB stable?
Also, is there some way to compensate for bullpen runs being more important than starting runs?

by benderbrodriguez on Jun 24, 2010 2:49 PM EDT reply actions

I'm not sure.

I imagine it’s getting more stable, but I’m not sure if it’s stabilized. Part of what I like about xFIP is that it is semi-park adjusted, in that HR park factors—which are very important to overall park factors—are negated. Arizona’s the interesting team on that front to me, and part of the xFIP vs. FIP disparity is probably park effects. Not sure that all of it is, though.

As far as bullpens are concerned…if someone has a specific, reasonable implementation idea, I’m all ears. It’s a pain to deal with, but probably matters on at least some level.
-j

I write at:
Beyond the Boxscore | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds

by JinAZ on Jun 24, 2010 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions