Playoff Picture for 2021

[adambr2]

I definitely like the potential matchup with the Dodgers the least. Not that we can't win or can't lose to the others but they are the only team that can really match up with us pitching wise, even without Bauer.

 

Getting the 2 seed in the NL but finishing with a better record than the Rays is probably our best chance at winning the World Series in terms of win probability.

[PeaveyFury]

I definitely like the potential matchup with the Dodgers the least. Not that we can't win or can't lose to the others but they are the only team that can really match up with us pitching wise, even without Bauer.

 

Getting the 2 seed in the NL but finishing with a better record than the Rays is probably our best chance at winning the World Series in terms of win probability.

 

I have to agree, especially if the Giants can hang on. Having the Dodgers in a one-gamer and another five gamer before we’d even play them is probably the best path for Milwaukee.

[BruisedCrew]

Thank you all for the unnecessary “lessons” about probabilities and projections.

 

I understand perfectly how those projections work and what they mean.

 

It seems like the differences here are over how fans should respond to those probabilities.

 

Some fans can look at a 95% probability of winning the division on August 13 and still want to discuss the remaining schedules and look for the potential rough spots that their team has to overcome. And hope that things like injuries, slumps, or a hot streak from an opponent don’t significantly cut into that probability. When that is interpreted as “panic”, or expecting a negative outcome, there is a disconnect.

 

Since we all seem to agree that a 95% probability of a team winning a division or a playoff spot doesn’t mean that the race is “statistically over” (whatever that even means) maybe we should just leave it at that. It’s obvious that some people are more comfortable when their team has that 95% chance than others are. To me that doesn’t make those feelings right or wrong. I’m just glad that it appears that the 2021 Brewers aren’t going to join the ranks of the 2007 Mets, 2011 Red Sox, 2011 Braves, and others over the years that have seen those probabilities of 5% or less play out. Or even see those 95% probabilities of success drop to 50% or lower.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Thank you all for the unnecessary “lessons” about probabilities and projections.

 

I understand perfectly how those projections work and what they mean.

 

It seems like the differences here are over how fans should respond to those probabilities.

 

Some fans can look at a 95% probability of winning the division on August 13 and still want to discuss the remaining schedules and look for the potential rough spots that their team has to overcome. And hope that things like injuries, slumps, or a hot streak from an opponent don’t significantly cut into that probability. When that is interpreted as “panic”, or expecting a negative outcome, there is a disconnect.

 

Since we all seem to agree that a 95% probability of a team winning a division or a playoff spot doesn’t mean that the race is “statistically over” (whatever that even means) maybe we should just leave it at that. It’s obvious that some people are more comfortable when their team has that 95% chance than others are. To me that doesn’t make those feelings right or wrong. I’m just glad that it appears that the 2021 Brewers aren’t going to join the ranks of the 2007 Mets, 2011 Red Sox, 2011 Braves, and others over the years that have seen those probabilities of 5% or less play out. Or even see those 95% probabilities of success drop to 50% or lower.

 

I don't think it was so much that people were throwing probabilities back in your face, moreso that you have seemed so certain at various points through this season that the Reds were a better team than the Brewers, and that it was only a matter of time before they passed up the Brewers in the standings. People were using probabilities in an effort to point out that you were incorrect, while you seemingly clinged to those ever-dwindling chances of the Reds passing up the Brewers, as you seemingly dug in your heels on the idea that the Brewers were going to blow this.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

No idea who it was, but I remember reading a post a few weeks back from someone who speculated that the Reds could go undefeated in something like 13 remaining games against the Cubs and Pirates. That was far more ridiculous of a notion than anything anyone raised about the certainty of probabilities. This discussion has probably run its course.

[PeaveyFury]

Thank you all for the unnecessary “lessons” about probabilities and projections.

 

I understand perfectly how those projections work and what they mean.

 

Perhaps others don't. Hence, 'helpful clarification'.

 

Since we all seem to agree that a 95% probability of a team winning a division or a playoff spot doesn’t mean that the race is “statistically over”

 

No, if that's your takeaway, we absolutely do not agree. The race for the NL central was statistically over nearly a month ago. Citing a race in-progress as an example of a contradiction to the projections does, in fact, suggest continued confusion about what the projections are actually saying.

 

(whatever that even means) maybe we should just leave it at that. It’s obvious that some people are more comfortable when their team has that 95% chance than others are. To me that doesn’t make those feelings right or wrong.

 

I think this the heart what I and some others were saying 3-4 weeks ago. It's perfectly reasonable to be worried on a personal level and not be accepting of the division race being over until it 'officially is'. But, when that bleeds into questioning the math behind others' opinions, based on that math and historical facts, that something else is actually the true possible outcome, it takes on a different spin entirely. One side of that opinion was supported by probabilities and precedent, the other by personal opinion and a choice to not be 'comfortable'. Doesn't mean you can't have the opposing opinion, just that it's a personal belief. No more, no less.

 

Again, you're free to feel the way you want, and for 9 more 'magic number' events whoever wishes to do so would be completely able to do so if you wish, but in reality, the division race was over weeks ago.

[BruisedCrew]

Thank you all for the unnecessary “lessons” about probabilities and projections.

 

I understand perfectly how those projections work and what they mean.

 

It seems like the differences here are over how fans should respond to those probabilities.

 

Some fans can look at a 95% probability of winning the division on August 13 and still want to discuss the remaining schedules and look for the potential rough spots that their team has to overcome. And hope that things like injuries, slumps, or a hot streak from an opponent don’t significantly cut into that probability. When that is interpreted as “panic”, or expecting a negative outcome, there is a disconnect.

 

Since we all seem to agree that a 95% probability of a team winning a division or a playoff spot doesn’t mean that the race is “statistically over” (whatever that even means) maybe we should just leave it at that. It’s obvious that some people are more comfortable when their team has that 95% chance than others are. To me that doesn’t make those feelings right or wrong. I’m just glad that it appears that the 2021 Brewers aren’t going to join the ranks of the 2007 Mets, 2011 Red Sox, 2011 Braves, and others over the years that have seen those probabilities of 5% or less play out. Or even see those 95% probabilities of success drop to 50% or lower.

 

I don't think it was so much that people were throwing probabilities back in your face, moreso that you have seemed so certain at various points through this season that the Reds were a better team than the Brewers, and that it was only a matter of time before they passed up the Brewers in the standings. People were using probabilities in an effort to point out that you were incorrect, while you seemingly clinged to those ever-dwindling chances of the Reds passing up the Brewers, as you seemingly dug in your heels on the idea that the Brewers were going to blow this.

 

If we want to deal with facts here, the last time I said that I thought the Reds were better than the Brewers was during the All Star break, just after the Reds completed winning the last 3 games of their series against the Brewers. That made it 6 of 7 for the Reds over the Brewers at AFF and cut the Brewers division lead to 4 games, down from a high of 8 after the Brewers 11 game winning streak.

 

Once the Brewers swept the series in Cincinnati right after the break, I never again said that I thought the Reds were better. But, I still looked at them as the biggest threat, and a legitimate threat, to the Brewers winning the division. That really didn’t change as the teams pretty much matched win for win through the rest of July and most of August, including on August 14 when the “statistically over” discussion took place. During that 6 week period the Brewers lead fluctuated between 5 and 9 1/2 games and stood at 7.5 games when the Reds came to AFF with a chance to make a big move if they could win 3 in a row against the Brewers like they did twice already this season at AFF.

 

I have freely owned up to the “Reds are better” statements I made in June and July. I don’t think those thoughts were that outrageous at the time. I remember sending a friend who is a Reds fan a link to this article that appeared on mlb.com as games resumed after the ASB:

 

https://www.mlb.com/news/second-half-prediction-for-each-mlb-team

 

To me, the Reds were still a legitimate threat until the Brewers won the late August series at AFF and followed it up by winning 3 of 4 in SF.

 

If it takes more for me to be comfortable that the team I root for is going to succeed, so be it. But the issue isn’t that I don’t understand how sports probabilities and projections work.

[PeaveyFury]

Probabilities also don't guarantee anything it is just stating that there is a probability of 97.8% of whatever will happen. That 97.8% probability may still be right even if the Yankees only win the wildcard by 1-game. You are conflating probabilities with something completely different. Again the probability of the Brewers winning the division is showing to be correct and there was no need to even panic in August like you were. You need to take these things in with the other variables that were out there a 10-game lead with 30 games left to play is completely different than a 3.5-6.5 game lead with 30 games left to play. You also have to take into account the Yankees had 3 spots that could win a playoff birth which also increases their probability of making the playoffs. Now that the probability is down to basically 2 spots their probability of making the playoffs has gone down.

 

Probabilities also have nothing to do with enjoyability or comfortable situations. The probabilities are just stating that it is X% probable that X team makes the playoffs nothing more and nothing less.

 

Thanks for making this point clearer than I was. To extrapolate: In late August, a projections system ran X number of possible scenarios and kicked out a rate of 97% that the Yankees would make the playoffs. For this example, let's say X=1000. So, 970 trials led to the playoffs, and in 30 they missed. Undoubtedly, some of those 970 trials contained scenarios where the Yankees' lead shrunk, very likely some to even .5-1 games, as we have now. Still, despite that lead shrinking in such a trial, it was a successful trial because the benchmark of success is making the playoffs, not making the playoffs 'comfortably' or with the same margin as when the projections were run. Is it possible that what has unfolded is one of the 30? Yep. Absolutely possible. Is it far more likely statistically that it's one of the 970 that still led to the playoffs? Also yep.

 

Again, clarification simply for the good of the board.

[BruisedCrew]

 

No, if that's your takeaway, we absolutely do not agree. The race for the NL central was statistically over nearly a month ago. Citing a race in-progress as an example of a contradiction to the projections does, in fact, suggest continued confusion about what the projections are actually saying.

 

.

 

I think we’ve boiled the disagreement down to the semantics of whether a 95% probability equates to something being “statistically over”. Maybe we should ask Nate Silver if he would agree with that description.

 

When it comes to sports, teams and their fans want real victories, not statistical ones. I don’t think the Cardinals were too happy about their game on Sunday that was “statistically over” when their probability of winning reached 99%.

 

We’re going around in circles here. I understand the cold hearted mathematics of these probabilities and projections.

 

That might not mesh perfectly with the human emotions of fans who can name off the top of their heads at least four teams in the last 15 years that have had probabilities of over 95% of winning a division or wild card berth and failed to succeed.

Edited September 11, 2021 by BruisedCrew

[DuWayne Steurer]

Let's go back to talking about the remaining playoff races instead of sniping back and forth about how everyone individually interprets data and statistics.

[PeaveyFury]

Who are we rooting for as Brewer fans in the final NL wildcard race? On the one hand, I do think the Padres are the better overall team and stand a better chance of winning vs. SF or the Dodgers than the Reds do. On the other hand, if the Reds DO win, they're my preferred opponent in any round we can get them.

 

But, there's also the thought of the Padres spending like drunken sailors last offseason and falling on their faces, so that's kind of fun to root for as well....

[DuWayne Steurer]

Who are we rooting for as Brewer fans in the final NL wildcard race? On the one hand, I do think the Padres are the better overall team and stand a better chance of winning vs. SF or the Dodgers than the Reds do. On the other hand, if the Reds DO win, they're my preferred opponent in any round we can get them.

 

But, there's also the thought of the Padres spending like drunken sailors last offseason and falling on their faces, so that's kind of fun to root for as well....

 

 

I do think the Pads have a better chance of taking out the Dodgers or Giants, and that's who I'd rather have win that game. I know that regular season doesn't = post-season, but at the same time, we haven't matched up well at home against the Reds this year, and if they somehow snuck all the way to the NLCS against us (if we make it that far), that's just not a series I'd look at super eagerly. I know their bullpen is hot garbage, and we'd be solid favorites, but I'd feel yuck about it all the same.

[BruisedCrew]

Who are we rooting for as Brewer fans in the final NL wildcard race? On the one hand, I do think the Padres are the better overall team and stand a better chance of winning vs. SF or the Dodgers than the Reds do. On the other hand, if the Reds DO win, they're my preferred opponent in any round we can get them.

 

But, there's also the thought of the Padres spending like drunken sailors last offseason and falling on their faces, so that's kind of fun to root for as well....

 

I’m rooting for the Reds pretty much for the reasons you mention.

 

One game is such a crapshoot that it’s hard to say whether the Reds or Padres would have a better chance of winning over the Giants or Dodgers.

 

In addition to the spending, I’ve come to dislike the Padres because of the ads that run ad nauseum on mlb tv, including several that feature the Padres TV announcer screaming like a madman about FERNANDO TATIS JUNIOR, SAN DIEGOS OWN JOE MUSGROVE, and others.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I'd pull for the Reds, particularly if the Dodgers don't overtake the Giants. I'm of the opinion that even if the Pads may be best equipped to beat the dodgers in a 1 game wildcard round, I'm looking to limit teams with the best pitching for series the Brewers would have to get past. I view that 1 game wildcard round as a dice roll game regardless of who the dodgers would face, simply because its just one game. A Padre team with a resurgent Snell and Darvish would be tougher to beat in a 7 game set than the Reds.

[MrTPlush]

I guess it doesn’t matter to me that much. We should beat either the Reds or Padres. As mentioned the Reds are way better if we can play them. However, the odds they win the WC game and then take down the Giants or the Dodgers is kind of an ‘LOL’ thought. Padres are a less attractive opponent for us, but they also have a better chance to take down the Giants or Dodgers…on paper.

 

I will go with the Reds, I guess…then hope their offense explodes in one game against the Dodgers.

[adambr2]

MLB: "We have a second Wild Card playoff spot available. Any takers?"

 

Padres, Reds, Cardinals, Phillies: "Meh."

[MrTPlush]

Not a single team in the WC race has a winning record in their last 10 games. None of them are on a winning streak. The Padres are the “hot” team going 5-5 in their last ten….however they are the only team on a losing streak.

[mtrebs]

MLB: "We have a second Wild Card playoff spot available. Any takers?"

 

Padres, Reds, Cardinals, Phillies: "Meh."

 

LOL, makes me think of this:

 

Brewers: We’ll finally end our no-hitter streak while getting a franchise high games above .500, but it’ll be a combined no-hitter.

 

Brewerfan.net: meh

[FVBrewerFan]

True, we should be more excited when they hit for the cycle as a team too.

[MrTPlush]

True, we should be more excited when they hit for the cycle as a team too.

 

We have only hit for the team cycle once in our history?

[adambr2]

I think cycles are actually rarer than no-nos, for whatever it's worth. Just hasn't worked out that way for us.

[sveumrules]

141 no hitters vs 167 individual cycles since 1970, who knows about team cycles.

[BruisedCrew]

One number that struck me is that there have been 10 no hitters this year and 27 complete game shutouts. Can you imagine what that ratio would have been in the 50’s and 60’s when the vast majority of shutouts were complete games and no hitters happened once or twice a season if that.

 

ETA: as a sample I looked at 1957 on Baseball Reference. That year the 16 teams combined for 137 complete game shutouts and there was 1 no hitter. There were only 14 combined shutouts.

 

There were 13 individual no hitters in the 1980’s, and there have been 44 since 2010. That probably helps explain why, at least for me, the excitement for no hitters has faded significantly. Something that happens once every couple of weeks like it has this season isn’t that special.

 

Until last Sunday I hadn’t heard of the term “ultimate grand slam” for a walk off grand slam HR with the home team trailing by 3 runs. There have been 30 of them in MLB history. Not only are they rare, but they carry the excitement of carrying what looked like an almost certain defeat into a dramatic victory. That’s more exciting to me than a no hitter.

[82brewcrew82]

True, we should be more excited when they hit for the cycle as a team too.

Heck yeah. I love team cycles. It was still a not hitter whether you like it or not.

[SoCalBrewfan]

I know the thread has moved on, and rightly so, but it's not at all accurate to say that 95% is statistical certainty. Assuming the assumptions in your model continue to hold true (which is in itself an enormous assumption), there's still that one time in 20 you hit the 5% outcome. One in 20 is distinctly not the same as never, which is arguably related to the so-called reproducibility crisis in some fields...and the source of many long arguments about what, for example, a p value actually means. In this case, models have to make assumptions about many things and unforeseen events (Covid outbreak, major injury to key player(s), etc) can change the model quickly. I mean, what is the true talent level of, say, Cedric Mullins or Akil Baddoo? (or Keston Hiura!) Is it the same as it was on April 1? Modelers of course work hard to make their models accurate and I imagine that the sims used in these models are both frequently updated and set up to include outlier outcomes, but they are, in the end, just models.

 

This year, San Diego had playoff odds at FanGraphs as high as 98%. On July 23, Atlanta was 7% and San Diego was at 94.4%. If Atlanta does make the playoffs and San Diego doesn't, what does that mean?

 

Whether a fan feels comfortable saying that a 95% probability being a sure thing is another thing of course, and we obviously all have different thresholds for worrying and uncertainty. But I don't think a modeler or statistician (and I know people in both these categories) would ever say that 95% means 'statistically over.' I'm sure there are Padres fans feeling that pain most keenly right now.