Remaining Schedules

[PinaMadness]

2007? 2014? Now 2021? Is it the 7 year itch?

[BruisedCrew]

I don’t consider something that happens 5-10% of the time to be “super rare”.

 

I mean, to put it in perspective that would literally mean that out of 100 hypothetical MLB seasons, it would happen 5-10 times in every 100 years. That's basically super rare.

 

The Brewers are at 96%ish right now. If they were in this exact same position for the next 100 seasons, they'd make the playoffs 96 of those 100 years. The problem is, and the counter-argument being made is that it feels like our fan base feels like those 4 times they wouldn't will take place every single year.

 

I can’t speak for the whole fan base, but I think you are really misinterpreting the tone of this thread. I think there have been several contributors who have said as clearly as possible that the Brewers are in good position but that they won’t feel comfortable until the division is locked up. I think that’s a common sentiment among fans of every team, especially teams that haven’t been showered with lots of success over the course of 50 years.

 

I guess my suggestion for anyone who doesn’t want to hear discussion about how the upcoming schedules could affect the Brewers position in the standings would be to stay away from this thread.

 

Maybe I should analogize the 95% probability factor to having a 95% chance of winning a game. If a team has a 2 run lead with 2 outs in the 9th inning, and, according to the projections, has a 95% (or higher) chance of winning, do you turn the game off because a comeback would be “super rare”, or do you stick with it until that 95% becomes 100%?

[BruisedCrew]

Teams gaining or losing 7 or 8 games in the standings over the last quarter of the season is far from “super rare”.

 

How often do teams lose a 7-8 game lead over the last quarter of the season?

 

There were 20 full seasons / 60 division races from 2000-19. The largest division leads as of August 15th blown during that stretch were 2006 Tigers at 6.5 games & 2012 Rangers at 6.0 games.

 

Of the 60 races, there were 21 that were separated by between 6-9 games as of August 15th, the other 19 held.

 

The only recent team to blow a division lead over 7.5 games as of August 15th were the California Angels in 1995.

 

So, if we just look at the snapshot of August 15, the success rate of teams with division leads of 6-9 games is a little over 90%. Not surprising.

 

That doesn’t include teams that acquired and lost leads later than that.

 

One that comes right to mind is the 2007 Mets, who led by only 3.5 games on August 15, but extended the lead to 7 games by August 24, and still led by 7 games on September 12 with just 17 games to go. They lost 12 of their last 17 and finished a game behind the Phillies.

[PeaveyFury]

I think you are really misinterpreting the tone of this thread.

 

When you repeatedly post reasons why something could happen despite statistical improbability, then challenge the validity of said statistical improbability, it's because at least SOMEPLACE in your consciousness or subconscious mind, you're thinking that it's going to happen. Again, just IMO.

[BruisedCrew]

I think you are really misinterpreting the tone of this thread.

 

When you repeatedly post reasons why something could happen despite statistical improbability, then challenge the validity of said statistical improbability, it's because at least SOMEPLACE in your consciousness or subconscious mind, you're thinking that it's going to happen. Again, just IMO.

 

Thank you Dr. Freud.

[PeaveyFury]

I think you are really misinterpreting the tone of this thread.

 

When you repeatedly post reasons why something could happen despite statistical improbability, then challenge the validity of said statistical improbability, it's because at least SOMEPLACE in your consciousness or subconscious mind, you're thinking that it's going to happen. Again, just IMO.

 

Thank you Dr. Freud.

 

Welcome, I'll send a bill shortly. It's a lot like the guy in High School that admits that he doesn't have a chance with the hottest girl in school, yet continues to mention all the scenarios where she might say yes. When you keep talking about ways it could happen despite insisting that it probably won't, it's because you actually think it will.

 

Again, sadly the nature of a lot Wisconsin sports fans currently.

[DuWayne Steurer]

The Brewers are up 8 1/2 games with less than 50 to go. They technically "could" blow the lead. They shouldn't. They probably won't. If someone wants to mention daily how/why/when/if, I mean, that's their prerogative, but I personally don't know how leaning into that kind of anxiety can be enjoyable.

 

I'm not gonna look over my shoulder at the Reds unless/until it gets down to a couple game lead.

[Eye Black]

Brewers and Reds now have 44 games remaining. The Brewers magic number is 37.

 

If the Brewers go .500 over their remaining games (22-22) the Reds would need to go 30-14 over their remaining games to tie the Brewers.

 

If the Brewers are a little better than .500, like say 24-20 over their remaining games, then the Reds would need to go 32-12 to tie the Brewers.

 

As long as the Brewers don’t experience a late season collapse where they play sub-.500 baseball it would be very difficult for the Reds to catch them. Assuming the Brewers stay relatively healthy down the stretch, it’s hard to envision a total collapse.

[BruisedCrew]

 

Thank you Dr. Freud.

 

Welcome, I'll send a bill shortly. It's a lot like the guy in High School that admits that he doesn't have a chance with the hottest girl in school, yet continues to mention all the scenarios where she might say yes. When you keep talking about ways it could happen despite insisting that it probably won't, it's because you actually think it will.

 

Again, sadly the nature of a lot Wisconsin sports fans currently.

 

Have you ever lived anywhere other than Wisconsin? From my experience the nature of Wisconsin sports fans is no different from almost anywhere else, especially for fans of teams who very rarely (or in the case of the Brewers, never) win championships.

[PinaMadness]

The Cardinals are only two games behind the Reds. If the Cards overtake them for second place soon, do we worry about them? This is a hypothetical question.

[areacodes]

There were 20 full seasons / 60 division races from 2000-19. The largest division leads as of August 15th blown during that stretch were 2006 Tigers at 6.5 games & 2012 Rangers at 6.0 games.

 

Of the 60 races, there were 21 that were separated by between 6-9 games as of August 15th, the other 19 held.

 

The only recent team to blow a division lead over 7.5 games as of August 15th were the California Angels in 1995.

 

So, if we just look at the snapshot of August 15, the success rate of teams with division leads of 6-9 games is a little over 90%. Not surprising.

 

That is a little misleading. Yes, teams with 6-9 game leads in August have only blown those leads twice in the last 20 years… but teams with a 7-9 game lead have blown those leads zero times in the past 20 years and haven’t blown a lead as large as the Brewers in 26 years.

 

I’d say that is essentially “super rare” and definitely not “far from ‘super rare’” as you claimed.

[MrTPlush]

The reality is, by this venture of the schedule, the lead is this big for a reason. We are simply that much better than them. They would have to totally flip that script in a major way I’m a short amount of time to HOPEFULLY catch us.

 

Can someone check a Reds fan board? Are they even talking about the division race? I’m guessing 90% of their fans don’t even consider the division race real. I’d guess most are thinking about the wild card spot they are 2.5 games back in. There is probably 10x more worry here about us blowing the lead than there is talking from Reds fans about winning the division.

[rickh150]

We are all saying about the same thing…. Brewers are in a really, really great position to win the NL Central. Some are super comfortable with the lead, yet still won’t proclaim that the division is won. Others are comfortable NOW with the lead but they have some reservations about claiming it’s over because of current play/schedules/matchups/past history,etc.

[BruisedCrew]

There were 20 full seasons / 60 division races from 2000-19. The largest division leads as of August 15th blown during that stretch were 2006 Tigers at 6.5 games & 2012 Rangers at 6.0 games.

 

Of the 60 races, there were 21 that were separated by between 6-9 games as of August 15th, the other 19 held.

 

The only recent team to blow a division lead over 7.5 games as of August 15th were the California Angels in 1995.

 

So, if we just look at the snapshot of August 15, the success rate of teams with division leads of 6-9 games is a little over 90%. Not surprising.

 

That is a little misleading. Yes, teams with 6-9 game leads in August have only blown those leads twice in the last 20 years… but teams with a 7-9 game lead have blown those leads zero times in the past 20 years and haven’t blown a lead as large as the Brewers in 26 years.

 

I’d say that is essentially “super rare” and definitely not “far from ‘super rare’” as you claimed.

 

It is misleading that you picked out the first sentence of that post and ignored the rest. There are multiple teams in the last 26 years that have lost leads of 7 games or more later than August 15 in either division or wild card races. In addition to the 2007 Mets, there’s the 2011 Red Sox who on August 25 had a record of 80-50, led their division, and had a 9 game lead in the wild card race. They managed to miss the playoffs.

 

A lot of this disagreement seems to be a matter of how people react to probabilities. Some people consider a 90-95% probability a sure thing and others consider it a good bet, but not something to take to the bank just yet. I, and a lot of others who have contributed to this thread, are in the latter category.

 

If something that only happens in baseball 5% of the time is “super rare” then we are saying that a home run by someone who hits 30 in 600 ABs is “super rare”. I don’t see it that way.

[adambr2]

We're collectively kind of talking in circles here.

 

It's a nice comfortable lead. If we play decent baseball for the next 6-7 weeks we'll still be at the top in October. I think we can all agree on that.

 

Now if I were the Padres, my concern would probably be a little more immediate.

[igor67]

Responding to the Cards question. As it stands right now they only have 3 games in September against teams under .500. They might continue to look OK for August since they still have 6 games against the Pirates and 2 more against the Tigers, but it would be an impressive feat to qualify for anything.

[BruisedCrew]

The Cardinals are only two games behind the Reds. If the Cards overtake them for second place soon, do we worry about them? This is a hypothetical question.

 

To try to get this thread back to the intended topic, the Cards have been addressed in the thread. The next two weeks will tell us something about where the Cards are headed as they have the first of their 4 series against the Brewers followed by 7 games against the Pirates and 3 against the improving Tigers. They have to make up some ground in this stretch because that is followed by 4 weeks of games against nothing but contending teams, including the Brewers and Reds.

 

As others have pointed out, their schedule gives them opportunities to make progress, but they have a tougher road than the Reds.

[Underachiever]

If the Cards had 13 games against the Dodgers or Giants, who have two of the best three records in the NL, we’d be talking about their uphill climb against a tough schedule. Because it’s the Brewers, the other top-three team, it’s different?

[areacodes]

So, if we just look at the snapshot of August 15, the success rate of teams with division leads of 6-9 games is a little over 90%. Not surprising.

 

That is a little misleading. Yes, teams with 6-9 game leads in August have only blown those leads twice in the last 20 years… but teams with a 7-9 game lead have blown those leads zero times in the past 20 years and haven’t blown a lead as large as the Brewers in 26 years.

 

I’d say that is essentially “super rare” and definitely not “far from ‘super rare’” as you claimed.

 

It is misleading that you picked out the first sentence of that post and ignored the rest. There are multiple teams in the last 26 years that have lost leads of 7 games or more later than August 15 in either division or wild card races. In addition to the 2007 Mets, there’s the 2011 Red Sox who on August 25 had a record of 80-50, led their division, and had a 9 game lead in the wild card race. They managed to miss the playoffs.

 

A lot of this disagreement seems to be a matter of how people react to probabilities. Some people consider a 90-95% probability a sure thing and others consider it a good bet, but not something to take to the bank just yet. I, and a lot of others who have contributed to this thread, are in the latter category.

 

I picked out the first two sentences from your post because you were using misleading data to confirm your previously stated position that it wasn’t super rare for a team to blow a 7.5 game lead at this point in the season. As was stated, in the last 26 years it hasn’t happened once. You then decided to focus on a different set of data (teams that built their lead higher and then collapsed later) but it was still incomplete because you only told us of a few times it happened without looking at how often it didn’t happen.

 

Also, please point out where anybody has said the division is a sure thing. From what I recall, the people disagreeing with you are saying it is extremely likely (not guaranteed) they’ll win the division while you go about finding “super rare” scenarios that prove they could still lose. Just enjoy the ride.

[adambr2]

I know this is odd, but I keep watching the Giants and hoping they remain comfortably ahead of us. I want the Dodgers to play in that WC game with a chance to lose a 50/50 game. That and give me the East winner in the divisional round over the WC winner. I'll take that path any day and have to play one more road game in the NLCS rather than win the 1 seed and possibly have to get through 2 West teams.

[JohnBriggs12]

Today's a big day. Reds have one more against Phils, then play 7 against the woeful Cubs and Miami. Cubs are worse than Pirates at this point. It's not a stretch that they could cut into the lead before the series in Milwaukee. If the lead is 5 or less on Labor Day, it could go to the last week. Good news is that Castillo has struggled his last couple starts. The Padres are in free fall. They're pitching is a mess. The second wild card is up for grabs.

[sveumrules]

The second wild card is up for grabs.

 

The various projections definitely like the Reds wild card chances a lot more than their division chances...

 

538: Division 6% | Wild Card 30%

FanGraphs: Division 3.5% | Wild Card 29.3%

PECOTA: Division 4.7% | Wild Card 14.8%

[brewcrewdue80]

While the Cards do face us a lot to gain games, It is also easy for the Brewers to just win 3 straight and put them outta their misery. Each Brewer win is a 2 game net loss on the magic number. Did anybody see what Rowdy Tellez did to a baseball last night? For nearly half this season we watched Hiura not do anything like that. Have some confidence.

[adambr2]

We would have to absolutely tank against the Cardinals for them to be a serious threat.

 

For perspective even if we had a dreadful 4-9 stretch against St. Louis the rest of the season they would STILL need to make up 5 other games without playing us just to even tie.

 

If St. Louis is sitting atop this division in 7 weeks then we were the problem, not the Cardinals.

[igor67]

I don't want to say the Padres are in trouble, but losing 3 in a row against the D-backs is rough and might be keeping the Reds from an insane amount of frustration since they have been playing quite well and haven't gotten anywhere against the Brewers. Unsurprisingly playing in the West the Padres remaining schedule looks pretty tough 4 games left against Arizona, 3 against the Rockies (but on the road), but everything else practically is playoff teams or teams still battling. The more I look at it, the more I like the Reds chances to snag that spot.