2018 Standings and Playoff Race Discussion

[82brewcrew82]

Until you can figure out a way for the Brewers to be able to subtract losses from their W/L record, the loss column is and always will be the only thing that matters.

 

You can't subtract from the W column either. So, doesn't it matter as well? Yes it does. That's why the standings are calculated using both the wins and losses of respective teams. Yes, the Cubs have 5 less losses, but they also have to play 4 more games than the brewers from here on out. On average you can expect the Cubs to lose at least 1 of those, if not two. Of course, they could win them all, but that still doesn't matter.

 

Anyway, if your logic was correct (it isn't) I assure you that MLB would show the Brewers 5 games back on their standings page.

 

Back to reality though, right now the biggest thing that matters is these two games coming up against the Cubs. Brewers will be either 1,3, or 5 out after this series. In my opinion this could either make the race tight to the end or make it very hard for the Brewers to realistically keep up with the Cubs.

So, the simple question here is how many more times would the Cubs need to lose than the Brewers for the remainder of the season for the two teams to end up tied. You can turn it around and ask how many more games the Brewers would need win than the Cubs over the remainder of the season in order to catch them. The answer doesn't change. It's five either way meaning the Brewers have to make up five games on the Cubs from now until the end of the season, which means they are five games back.

 

The Brewers can win all the games they want and it won't matter unless the Cubs lose five more times than the Brewers (hence, you can make up wins but not losses). Not only is the logic sound, it is an absolute mathematical certainty that the Brewers are currently five games behind the Cubs.

[82brewcrew82]

5 back after the mini Cubs series would be the straw that breaks the camel's back imo.

 

If we looked like we have the capability to go on a run, and nothing in the second half can even come close to suggesting that, I wouldn't feel so gloomy about our chances.

They are already five back. Losing both games to the Cubs would put them 7 back.

[SomewhereInTime]

5 back in the loss column is 5 back. I know on the internet we are supposed to argue everything but this is not a fact that is up for that treatment.

 

The loss column is all that matters in the playoff chase.

 

What if I told you the win column has exactly the same amount of meaning in the standings as the loss column. This is why they use games back or winning percentage. The Cubs are more likely to have less losses than us when they've played less games, so that's why the current standings base the rankings off of best record, not losses.

 

Until you can figure out a way for the Brewers to be able to subtract losses from their W/L record, the loss column is and always will be the only thing that matters.

 

Is there a way to subtract wins from the total?

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

 

Is there a way to subtract wins from the total?

 

You are right. It is so stupid that this continues to be argued about. Standings are presented the way they are for a reason.

[xisxisxis]

 

Is there a way to subtract wins from the total?

 

You are right. It is so stupid that this continues to be argued about. Standings are presented the way they are for a reason.

 

I'm shocked, shocked, that there are arguments just for the sake of arguments at brewerfan.net.

[DaSpark]

Okay, I understand the logic some are presenting here by saying the Brewers are 5 games back. Yes, the Cubs have to lose at least 5 more times this year for the Brewers to even have a chance to tie. That is correct.

 

However, and there is really no reason to debate this because the MLB standings page is proof enough, the Brewers are only 3 games back. The MATH proves that the Cubs are only 3 games up.

 

The magic number to win the division for the Cubs is currently 41

The magic number to win the division for the Brewers is currently 47

 

magic number is how far you are from winning whatever you are after (division or wildcard in MLB's case). Of course, we are only focusing on the magic numbers for the division here.

 

Oh, and yes, even the Brewers technically have a magic number, even though they are not in first.

 

Each game played by either team will either

 

1) With a win, lower your magic number by 1 (a good thing)

2) With a loss, lower the magic number of everyone in the division by 1

 

For this reason each game can swing things by 2 points. You're either gaining one or losing one. Difference between -1 and 1 is 2.

 

Okay, now that we understand that the magic number for the Cubs is 41 and the magic number for the Brewers is 47, and understanding that each game has a swing of 2 points we can prove how many games back (or rather, how farther they are from clinching the division) the Brewers are.

 

To do this we take the difference between the two numbers and divide the result by 2 (for reason stated above).

 

The difference between 41 and 47 is 6. 6 divided by 2 is equal to 3. The Cubs are 3 games closer to the playoffs than the Brewers. Thus, the Brewers are 3 games back.

 

Now, before someone says this is not the easy way to figure this out, I know. Explaining it this way more clearly shows why the Brewers are 3 games back and what the math is actually determining. Which is, how many games closer to the playoffs/clinching are you.

 

Now, again, I understand the point some are making, and yes, the Cubs do have to lose at least 5 more games from here on out for the Brewers to catch them. However, that doesn't put the Cubs 5 games closer to their clincher which means the Cubs CAN'T be 5 games up. Math proves it.

 

---------------------------------------------

 

Oh, and here might be the true kicker of the logic some are stating here claiming the Brewers are 5 games back. Lets imagine the Brewers next 5 games are in Florida and the Cubs next 5 games are in Chicago. Florida is hit with a major hurricane and all 5 games are rained out. However, the Cubs go on a 5 game losing streak.

 

The records are now

 

Cubs 68-54

Brewers 67-54

 

You said the Brewers were 5 games back because of the loss column. But now those 5 games are made up and we have a tie in the loss column. The Cubs, however, still have 1 more win. So what now? Are the Brewers tied with the Cubs (so you saying the Cubs don't have an advantage here)? Are the Brewers still 1 game back? Are the brewers a half game back (if you admit this then you can no longer count each loss difference as a whole game either).

 

Your logic completely falls apart. You either need to make up a new rule for determining these new standings, or admit that your current stance that the Brewers are 5 games back is completely flawed.

 

Or maybe imagine only 4 out of the 5 games were rained out and the brewers won that game. We are now fully tied at 68-54. However, it took 6 games (5 cubs losses and one brewers win) to reach this tie. Did the Brewers win somehow not affect the standings at all? You would have to accept this fact if you claimed above that the Cubs/Brewers were tied with the Cubs having 1 more win, because they are still tied even with the Brewers winning a game. I guess this win doesn't matter because even if the game was played or not, still tied. Of course, this is just silly.

 

So really, for the logic to hold true throughout the swing of things in the season you would have to give weight to the win column. However, once you start giving weight to the win column your argument that only the loss column matters is gone. Once you lose that argument, the Brewers can't be 5, or even 6 games back. They are 3.

 

Using logic such as only the loss column matters doesn't work throughout the season. At some point, you have to give weight to the win column. Or is a team that is 90-72 no better off than a team that is 80-72 (due to excessive rain-outs)?

 

----------------------

 

So there you have it. The mathematical reason the Cubs are only 3 games up and why the "5 games back" argument is 100% flawed. And if you still don't believe me then I'll end it with this... MLB agrees with me: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/

[TURBO]

NICE! That 'splains that!

[pitchleague]

I just want someone to explain if, say, a team finishes 85-77, are they EIGHT games over .500 or just FOUR?

 

 

Seriously, this is a fascinating discussion and one that is a reason that I love Brewerfan. I'm not going to throw my hat into the discussion because both sides have set up fairly interesting epistles on their stance. I think it's a matter of perspective, really, and everybody is allowed to have their opinion on the matter. I don't know if either side is really "right" nor "wrong." It's just two DIFFERENT ways of looking at the data. And it's fascinating.

 

Oh, and BRAVO! for discussing it in a way that follows board-decorum rules. It's been a pleasure to read a discussion that's been interesting and devoid of name calling, etc. So, big thumbs-up!

[A Swing and A Drive]

[DaSpark]

I just want someone to explain if, say, a team finishes 85-77, are they EIGHT games over .500 or just FOUR?

 

I'd say this is truly all about what your definition is. Of course, in MLB's case it is clearly 8. The difference with this is you can define either one how you like and it will still work out mathematically throughout the season. You can pick your definition and stick with it throughout with no exceptions.

 

However, in the case of the other argument about only the loss column mattering is mathematically flawed throughout the course of the season. At some point you have to change what you factor in or admit that a team with more wins but the same number of losses is no better off than the other team. With that argument it only can truly work if you only apply it to the final results of the season.

 

I'm also glad things have stayed civil. The other side is just putting so much weight on losses that they even ignore the Cubs current 1 game advantage in the win column. With their argument that win for the Cubs must be in some sort of "pending" column and currently has no weight either way in the standings. But if they do factor it in, then all of a sudden their argument is toast because now they are giving weight to both columns.

 

I will say this, if the Brewers and Cubs are neck and neck at the end of the season and lets say in final days the records are:

 

Brewers: 90-72

Cubs: 88-72

 

These same Brewer fans will feel more confident of a division victory than if the record is

 

Brewers: 88-72

Cubs 88-72

 

Why? Because the win column does matter, the odds are much greater that the Brewers will take the division at that point, regardless of the tie in the loss column. They will clearly be saying the advantage is ours. The Cubs must win their final 2 games while we wait and even then must beat us in a tie breaker.

 

You wont see a single Brewer fan on either side of the argument today claiming at that point that the Brewers are not up in the division and hold the advantage. They will be factoring in the win column in their confidence level, and rightfully so, because the win column matters.

 

MLB standings and games back is ultimately all rooted in the magic number like I pointed out in the last post. When you understand that you understand why the Cubs are currently only 3 games up/closer to the playoffs.

 

-----------------------

 

To throw an even bigger wrench into the fire: You can actually have a lower winning percentage but be in first place. Most people believe that the a higher winning percentage is always key. However, take these standings:

 

Cubs 22-16 || Winning Percentage: .579

Brewers 18-13 || Winning Percentage: .581

 

Cubs are 0.5 games up in the above standings. It's all because of the race to that magical number 0. Everyone starts at 163 and the first to reach 0 is the winner. Cubs would be down to 128 in that race, while the Brewers would only be at 129. The Cubs have 3 more losses but ultimately hold the advantage at that point in the season. Magic number trumps all, including the win column, loss column, and even winning percentage. Of course, the magic number is made up of both columns, as each matter.

[adambr2]

Until you can figure out a way for the Brewers to be able to subtract losses from their W/L record, the loss column is and always will be the only thing that matters.

 

You can't subtract from the W column either. So, doesn't it matter as well? Yes it does. That's why the standings are calculated using both the wins and losses of respective teams. Yes, the Cubs have 5 less losses, but they also have to play 4 more games than the brewers from here on out. On average you can expect the Cubs to lose at least 1 of those, if not two. Of course, they could win them all, but that still doesn't matter.

 

Anyway, if your logic was correct (it isn't) I assure you that MLB would show the Brewers 5 games back on their standings page.

 

Back to reality though, right now the biggest thing that matters is these two games coming up against the Cubs. Brewers will be either 1,3, or 5 out after this series. In my opinion this could either make the race tight to the end or make it very hard for the Brewers to realistically keep up with the Cubs.

 

You can add wins but you can’t subtract losses.

 

It’s just math.

 

This is a red herring. Both wins and losses can't mathematically be subtracted from a total, and both can be added on to the total of either team. The Cubs only lead us by 1 in the win column, but they have the chance to add wins. Likewise, no, we can't subtract losses from our total, but Cubs' opponents can add to their loss total.

 

If you had said that a team with a big loss column advantage has a greater control over their own destiny than a team with a straight 3 game lead, sure, I'd agree with that. But to say it's actually a 5 game lead; no, that's just mathematically inaccurate. The Cubs play 4 additional games compared to us the rest of the way. If they won all 4, they'd be 5 games up. If they lost them all, they'd be 1 game up. If they split, 3 games up. Ergo, why the standings list them as 3 games up.

[YelichPosse]

Of note and likely has been stated is we have played more games than a lot of teams in the hunt. The Braves being one - I believe we have played 6 more than them. The Dodgers for instance we have played 4 more than but are 3 up in the win column. There is an advantage to having games ‘in hand’ and when you factor head to head records as a three team tie breaker or a home field tie breaker.... as BAD as it has seemed lately.... especially in the wild card race... we have wins in hand VS many of the close teams (especially the West)... and having more games played can swing to advantage or disadvantage based on a team on a hot or cold streak.

 

3 games behind is 3 games behind no matter the win or loss column. To make up the ground is tougher being behind in the loss column of course ... %% probability wise will tell you that. But that’s why you play the game - you never know what will happen. A 5 game losing streak is as probable as a 5 game winning streak. Especially for teams that are not far ahead like some of the AL teams. More likely would be 3-2 or 2-3. That’s where the 3 game lead comes from as far as games behind. It assumes all things equal, 50/50 shot to win or lose.

 

Of note : even as a kid I was obsessed with games behind and hoping for the possibility of a miracle , such as with the 92 Brewers team. I was hoping we’d catch Toronto even with them having a lead in the last few weeks. It’s about getting hot at the right time. Just ask many Brewers teams who have been in first place recently for long periods lol.

[HarveysWBs]

But what if it were carried by an African swallow?

[DaSpark]

A 5 game losing streak is as probable as a 5 game winning streak. Especially for teams that are not far ahead like some of the AL teams. More likely would be 3-2 or 2-3. That’s where the 3 game lead comes from as far as games behind. It assumes all things equal, 50/50 shot to win or lose.

 

Yea, however, the 3 games specifically come from the difference in the magic numbers. It's purely mathematical.

[YelichPosse]

A 5 game losing streak is as probable as a 5 game winning streak. Especially for teams that are not far ahead like some of the AL teams. More likely would be 3-2 or 2-3. That’s where the 3 game lead comes from as far as games behind. It assumes all things equal, 50/50 shot to win or lose.

 

Yea, however, the 3 games specifically come from the difference in the magic numbers. It's purely mathematical.

 

Yes the 3 games come from the average of the difference of win and loss column , aka magic number... all math all the time !

 

But never predictable! (Unless it’s the Brewers fading in a second half lol)

[DaSpark]

A 5 game losing streak is as probable as a 5 game winning streak. Especially for teams that are not far ahead like some of the AL teams. More likely would be 3-2 or 2-3. That’s where the 3 game lead comes from as far as games behind. It assumes all things equal, 50/50 shot to win or lose.

 

Yea, however, the 3 games specifically come from the difference in the magic numbers. It's purely mathematical.

 

Yes the 3 games come from the average of the difference of win and loss column , aka magic number... all math all the time !

 

But never predictable! (Unless it’s the Brewers fading in a second half lol)

 

Yep. And I pointed out in depth on page 8 of this thread why the math for the other argument simply doesn't work.

[YelichPosse]

Yes the 3 games come from the average of the difference of win and loss column , aka magic number... all math all the time !

 

But never predictable! (Unless it’s the Brewers fading in a second half lol)

 

Yep. And I pointed out in depth on page 8 of this thread why the math for the other argument simply doesn't work.

 

I agree with you 100%. Emotionally it feels better to be ahead in the win column but mathematics say it doesn’t matter. Maybe in some playoff possibility % forecasts. But not in true numbers.

[Boomer5]

Baseball has tried to make everything super complex, and those that don't comprehend the loss column are no exception. Discussing any aspect of loss column, games out, or magic number is somewhat low impact in mid August but it's what we do as fans.

 

Heres the issue; if the Cubs only lose 4 games the rest of the way, they win. So the Brewers being "only 3 out" now is irrelevant. If you want to debate that knock yourself out.

[82brewcrew82]

Yep. And I pointed out in depth on page 8 of this thread why the math for the other argument simply doesn't work.

Well, you typed a whole lot of words but as the old adage goes, if you're explaining you're losing. You're hypothetical arguments where teams are playing unequal amounts of games crumble when you consider that each team is going to play 162 games. There is no scenario in which the Brewers make up only the three games you claim they are behind and finish ahead of the Cubs. The standings show them three games behind right now only because they have played a different number of games and the season is incomplete. If you want to say they are three games out, fine, but as you yourself said, the only way the Brewers catch the Cubs is if the Cubs lose five more games than the Crew by the end of the year.

[adambr2]

Baseball has tried to make everything super complex, and those that don't comprehend the loss column are no exception. Discussing any aspect of loss column, games out, or magic number is somewhat low impact in mid August but it's what we do as fans.

 

Heres the issue; if the Cubs only lose 4 games the rest of the way, they win. So the Brewers being "only 3 out" now is irrelevant. If you want to debate that knock yourself out.

 

I assure you that outside of a few teams at the bottom of the league, any team that only loses 4 games the rest of the way is going to win.

[Ulice Payne]

Brewers have 41 games left to play, 21 of them being at home. They need to go 23-18 to finish with 90 wins.

 

32 of those 41 games are against the NL Central, the only exceptions being three games against the Nationals and 3 against the Tigers.

 

Including today, they have 8 days off during that stretch. That's 7 more times they can reset the bullpen. They can go with a 4 1/2 man rotation the rest of the way.

 

90 wins should get them some kind of playoff spot. It'll be a fight, but I think they can do it.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Sure, the Cubs could win all four of those extra games and be 5 games better than the Brewers if we put those four games in a vacuum....or they could lose all four and only be 1 game better in a vacuum...

 

That being said, having four fewer off days from this point to the end of the season is no small issue - less time to rest means a bigger grind for all Cubs' remaining games compared to the Brewers or any other team that doesn't have to play as frequently to reach 162 from here on out.

 

It's a circular argument - you can't take away losses, but you also can't take away wins. At the end of the season pretty much everyone has to play 162 (especially now with all the tiebreaker scenarios with two wild card spots), and the standings on Oct 1 are the only ones that truly matter. Right now the standings say the Brewers are 3 games back.

 

Heres the issue; if the Cubs only lose 4 games the rest of the way, they win. So the Brewers being "only 3 out" now is irrelevant. If you want to debate that knock yourself out.

 

That would give the Cubs 109 wins - yeah, them playing 0.911 ball for the final 7 weeks of the season would be tough to catch up...

 

The rest of this road trip is enormous for the Brewers - playing the team you're chasing and the team hot on your tail in succession will either set the Brewers up nicely for the stretch run or potentially crater their chances if they have a 4-1 or 1-4 type stretch of games. The next time the Brewers see the Cubs, they will be in the midst of their brutal late August-Mid September stretch of games without an off day. It would be fantastic leaving Wrigley on wednesday trailing the Cubs by just 1 game and crushing to be down 5.

[BruisedCrew]

It hasn’t taken long for the Dodgers to feel the impact of Kenley Jansen’s absence, as they have lost 3 straight games in the 9th inning, 2 of them with blown saves. After picking up Machado and Dozier it looked like the Dodgers would be the favorite to win the west or at least get one of the wild card spots. Their status is more shaky.

 

Meanwhile, the Braves show the advantage they and the Phillies will have with games against the torn down Marlins as they waltz to a doubleheader sweep.

[DaSpark]

Yep. And I pointed out in depth on page 8 of this thread why the math for the other argument simply doesn't work.

Well, you typed a whole lot of words but as the old adage goes, if you're explaining you're losing. You're hypothetical arguments where teams are playing unequal amounts of games crumble when you consider that each team is going to play 162 games. There is no scenario in which the Brewers make up only the three games you claim they are behind and finish ahead of the Cubs. The standings show them three games behind right now only because they have played a different number of games and the season is incomplete. If you want to say they are three games out, fine, but as you yourself said, the only way the Brewers catch the Cubs is if the Cubs lose five more games than the Crew by the end of the year.

 

 

I do say they are 3 games out (because they are). Here's my reference: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/index.jsp

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Yep. And I pointed out in depth on page 8 of this thread why the math for the other argument simply doesn't work.

Well, you typed a whole lot of words but as the old adage goes, if you're explaining you're losing. You're hypothetical arguments where teams are playing unequal amounts of games crumble when you consider that each team is going to play 162 games. There is no scenario in which the Brewers make up only the three games you claim they are behind and finish ahead of the Cubs. The standings show them three games behind right now only because they have played a different number of games and the season is incomplete. If you want to say they are three games out, fine, but as you yourself said, the only way the Brewers catch the Cubs is if the Cubs lose five more games than the Crew by the end of the year.

 

 

I do say they are 3 games out (because they are). Here's my reference: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/index.jsp

 

And you are 100% correct. I applaud you for your well thought-out post above explaining your thoughts.