SABR-Heads!! I need your help!!

So I was talking with someone about betting on baseball and I commented that the gap between the worst teams and the best teams in baseball is not as wide as in other sports. In the sense that the winning percentages are a lot closer in baseball than the other major sports. Then the person said, "Why? Obviously not because of the even distribution of talent." I explained as best I could, which wasn't good.

Soooooo I ask the SABR-heads for help. If you could explain this point or point me in the direction of a free site that explaines this phenomenom, then I would be greatly appreciative.

about 1 year ago capper3 5 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Off the top of my head

Without thinking too carefully about it, here are a few reasons off the top of my head:
(1) Pitching matchups; sometimes the bad team may have its ace or #2 going against a lesser pitcher for the other team
(2) High standard deviation on runs scored/runs allowed relative to expected value. For example, baseball may have 4.5 runs scored per team on average, with standard deviation of 1.5. In basketball, it may be something like 95 points with standard deviation of 10. 1.5/4.5 is more than 10/95. Let A be the amount scored by the bad team and B be the amount scored by the good team. Presumably E(B) > E(A), but high randomness increases the chance that P(A>B). Thus, higher randomness in baseball relative to basketball and others increases the underdog’s chances in baseball.

by kgarnett21 on Mar 10, 2011 8:13 AM PST reply actions

An example

As an (exaggerated for emphasis) example for #2, suppose a good basketball team averages 95 points per game and never scores fewer than 94 or more than 96; and suppose a bad basketball team averages 90 points per game and never scores fewer than 89 or more than 91. From the narrow ranges I just specified, the bad team will never beat the good team. But if the good team’s scores range from 80-110 and the bad team’s scores range from 75-105, (largely just from randomness game-to-game), now suddenly there’s a big “overlap” where the bad team can beat the good team.

by kgarnett21 on Mar 10, 2011 8:21 AM PST up reply actions

Thank you.

What you said is kinda how I explained it, but you’re example is very helpful.

by capper3 on Mar 10, 2011 11:22 AM PST up reply actions

kgarnett has some nice ideas.

It’s really just down to luck and randomness. When a bad basketball team beats a good one, it’s surprising, and an upset. When the Royals beat the Yankees, well, that’s just baseball as usual. The best teams every year in baseball have what, a 60% winning percentage? In other sports, that percentage is more like 80 or 90.

by danmerqury on Mar 10, 2011 10:10 AM PST reply actions

I think to expand on the points others provided

Baseball is also unique in that it can’t be dominated by one guy like basketball or a quarterback in football. So over the course of a long season you’re relying upon numerous guys who each have a minimal contribution to the whole as opposed to a majority contribution. So you can have the greatest player ever and he still needs others around him, whereas one single guy can to a greater degree influence the outcome in other sports.

Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!

by dwishinsky on Mar 11, 2011 9:21 AM PST reply actions