Let's put Strasburg's 90-100 pitch limit aside. If given the opportunity, in a neutral-context world, what are the odds that Strasburg throws a perfect game tonight vs. the Pirates? Outs Probability (OP) is calculated as 1-OBP. Thus, a player with a .400 OBP has a .600 OP. Calculating the OP for an NL-team for a whole game is a tricky thing, as the pitcher bats and lineup changes are more prolific per game than in AL matchups. To simply it all, I will do the following. For the Pirates non-pitcher hitters, I will use the player's actual in-season outs percentage. For the pitcher, I will use the team's cumulative average OP (.693) in my equations. Of course, all of this assumes that each player's current OP is accurately representative of their true OP level (a bold and overwhelmingly fallacious assumption; still, this is for fun and theoretical so shut up and enjoy).
Tonight's Pirates lineup (and their respective OP's) will probably look as follows:
C - Ryan Doumit (.434)
1B - Jeff Clement (.770)
2B - Ned Walker (.620)
SS - Ronny Cedeno (.714)
3B - Andy LaRoche (.692)
RF - Garrett Jones (.661)
CF - Andrew McCutchen (.619)
LF - Lastings Milledge (.678)
P (AVG OP) - Jeff Karstens (0.693)
The product of each player's OP cubed yields a theoretical and neutral context perfect game probability (or improbability) of 0.00000762%, or a little more than 50% the odds that the Indians would get perfect gamed the other night.
But who is to say a perfecto is reasonable? Too much luck involved. We all know the 20 K game is much more likely for "the next Mark Prior"...right?
Showing posts with label Perfect Game. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Perfect Game. Show all posts
What Are The Odds That The White Sox Throw A Perfect Game Today Against The Indians? (06/05/2010)
Don Leypoldt over at The Hardball Times wrote an interesting article about the odds of throwing a perfect game. According to his estimates, the chances of three perfectos occurring in one month is approximately 1 in 2,000,000. Leypoldt's article and analysis inspired me to look at the odds of a perfect game occurring today.
On Base Percentage (OBP) is the likelihood of getting on-base. Outs Percentage (OP), calculated as 1-OBP, is the chance that an out is made. I wanted to take this and look at the possibility of the Cubs throwing a perfect game today, but the variability of pitchers hitting (and the double switch) makes lineup prediction for a whole game more volatile in the NL than AL. So, instead, I will look at the White Sox's opponent, the Cleveland Indians, and assume that there are no late-inning defensive replacements which will occur and that the OPs to date represent their true OBP ability (no sample size/random noise issues).
The Sizemore-less Indians lineup (.324 team OBP), in terms of OP, is as follows:
C - Lou Marson = .727
1B - Russell Branyan = .683
2B - Luis Valbuena = .706
SS - Jason Donald = .714
3B - Jhonny Peralta = .671
RF - Shin-Soo Choo = .620
CF - Austin Kearns = .629
LF - Shelly Duncan = .579
DH - Travis Hafner = .639
The product of each Indian's OP cubed yields a neutral context perfect game probability (or improbability) of 0.00001423%.
By contrast, the Yankees have a team OBP of .366 and their starting lineup's OP, as currently situated, looks like this:
C - Frank Cervelli = .625
1B - Mark Teixeira = .664
2B - Robinson Cano = .593
SS - Derek Jeter = .648
3B - Alex Rodriguez = .626
RF - Nick Swisher = .599
CF - Curtis Granderson = .658
LF - Brett Gardner = .622
DH - Jorge Posada = .607
The product of each Yankee's OP cubed yields a neutral context perfect game probability (or extreme improbability) of 0.00000328%. That means that, as currently situated, the Yankees are 4.34 times less likely to have a perfect game thrown against them than the Indians.
And thus explains the Armando Galarraga "perfect" game. Anyone want to calculate the odds of a no-hitter?
On Base Percentage (OBP) is the likelihood of getting on-base. Outs Percentage (OP), calculated as 1-OBP, is the chance that an out is made. I wanted to take this and look at the possibility of the Cubs throwing a perfect game today, but the variability of pitchers hitting (and the double switch) makes lineup prediction for a whole game more volatile in the NL than AL. So, instead, I will look at the White Sox's opponent, the Cleveland Indians, and assume that there are no late-inning defensive replacements which will occur and that the OPs to date represent their true OBP ability (no sample size/random noise issues).
The Sizemore-less Indians lineup (.324 team OBP), in terms of OP, is as follows:
C - Lou Marson = .727
1B - Russell Branyan = .683
2B - Luis Valbuena = .706
SS - Jason Donald = .714
3B - Jhonny Peralta = .671
RF - Shin-Soo Choo = .620
CF - Austin Kearns = .629
LF - Shelly Duncan = .579
DH - Travis Hafner = .639
The product of each Indian's OP cubed yields a neutral context perfect game probability (or improbability) of 0.00001423%.
By contrast, the Yankees have a team OBP of .366 and their starting lineup's OP, as currently situated, looks like this:
C - Frank Cervelli = .625
1B - Mark Teixeira = .664
2B - Robinson Cano = .593
SS - Derek Jeter = .648
3B - Alex Rodriguez = .626
RF - Nick Swisher = .599
CF - Curtis Granderson = .658
LF - Brett Gardner = .622
DH - Jorge Posada = .607
The product of each Yankee's OP cubed yields a neutral context perfect game probability (or extreme improbability) of 0.00000328%. That means that, as currently situated, the Yankees are 4.34 times less likely to have a perfect game thrown against them than the Indians.
And thus explains the Armando Galarraga "perfect" game. Anyone want to calculate the odds of a no-hitter?
MLB Needs To Allow Galarraga's Perfect Game
What am imperfect way to ruin a perfect game.
For those of you who don't know at this point, after Tigers SP Armando Galarraga had just retired 26 batters, Indians Jason Donald burned a worm towards first. Miguel Cabrera goes and gets it and throws it to Galarraga covering first. Galarraga clearly caught the ball before Donald reached first, but umpire Jim Joyce called the grounder a single and thus Galarraga lost his perfect game (which would have been the THIRD this season).
Joyce was adamant that he got the call correct. Until he looked at the replay and realized what a douche he is. Now he did apologize which is the LEAST he could have done. But the fact remains that Galarraga will never ever ever in his career be able to throw a perfect game.
Everybody knows Galarraga threw a perfect game and that Joyce got the call wrong. EVERYBODY. So you know what needs to be done? MLB needs to change the scorecard so that Galarraga is in the record books.
This is just the back end of a long list of examples of why baseball needs to get with the 21st century and start using technology to dictate the rules of the game. They've already taken a big step by making home runs reviewable.
How many times do you hear this "They need to get the call right" and I'm a big proponent of this. If a pitcher throws a ball within what the rulebook calls the strike zone, that should be a strike. Every single time. It shouldn't be considered a "ball" because the umpire is a dick and won't give the pitcher the outside corner.
No other sport even comes close to being this stone age when it comes to their umpiring. Last night in Game 3 of the Stanley Cup, I saw the refs go back and review two "goals". On one play, it looked like Hjalmarsson made an amazing goal saving play, but upon review, the puck clearly went into over the goal line and the refs got it right and ruled it a goal. Even in football we give the coaches a minimum number of times to tell the refs to go back and review the play.
I watch baseball on ESPN's Gamecast a handful of times (especially during Torts class. I'm sorry professor but your class was BORING). Anyways, on my screen I see a red box for what the designated strike zone is, where the ball fell within the strike zone, and what the umpire actually called said ball. When I watch games on TV, I see a replay of what just happened. So why can't MLB use this new fangled technology?
There are two arguments that I just don't want to hear in contrast to this. I'm going to pull a Boerhs and Bernstein and tell you that you are just flat out wrong.
Argument One: But baseball is a game of tradition. The tradition is that there's a human element of umpires and they will inherently get things wrong. That's just part of the game. (Made by my co-worker today)
1) Baseball was started in the 1800's. They didn't even have freaking cars back then! If I hop in my DeLorean and went back to when the founders created baseball and showed them WiFi and Fangraphs, they would have seen how dumb umpires were and not put them in the game. 2) In every facet of society we have changed since the late 1800's. Our technology is different, our culture is different, our politics are different (well, maybe not here in Chicago), everything else is different and we want things to change. Except baseball. What kind of horse crap is that!? 3) We have rules in every aspect of life and when those rules are not followed, there are negative consequences. Yet umpires don't "follow the rules" often by flat out getting calls wrong. For example, when a player has a ball in play in his glove and touches the base before the runner who hit the ball reaches the base, that runner/hitter is out. So where are their negative consequences?
Argument Two: If MLB changes the rules to allow Galarraga's perfect game, then there's a slipper slope for MLB to change everything. (Made by someone on the Mully and Hanley show on WSCR today).
1) This is obviously a slippery slope argument and it's a logical fallacy. If in academia you shouldn't be allowed to make this argument, then you can't make this argument anywhere else. It doesn't go to the argument in question. This type of argument is the same ones Conservatives use today to justify banning gay rights (We allowed sodomy which in turns will allow gays to get marries which in turn will lead us to eventually legalize polygamy and beasteality). No doing X will not necessarily lead to Y. 2) What is so wrong if this does set a precedence of MLB changing the official scorecard? If any particular call by an umpire never should have been made to begin with, what's wrong with setting things right? If Jim Joyce had gotten the call correctly or MLB makes things correct, then the same outcome occurs.
All I want is to get things right. In football, if a pass is caught within bounds, then I want that pass to count. In basketball, if a player shoots the ball a millisecond before the shot clock winds down and the ball goes through the hoop, I want that basket to count. And if a defender touches first before the runner in baseball, I want the defender to be out.
I don't want something official because of a mistake; an untruth.
______________________________
EDITOR'S NOTE: Right after I wrote this post, I read on ESPN that Bud Selig will not reverse the call. I know we're supposed to be P.C., but like Joe West, you're a piece of shit Bud Selig. Obviously not JUST for this, but way to be waste of life and space.
For those of you who don't know at this point, after Tigers SP Armando Galarraga had just retired 26 batters, Indians Jason Donald burned a worm towards first. Miguel Cabrera goes and gets it and throws it to Galarraga covering first. Galarraga clearly caught the ball before Donald reached first, but umpire Jim Joyce called the grounder a single and thus Galarraga lost his perfect game (which would have been the THIRD this season).
Joyce was adamant that he got the call correct. Until he looked at the replay and realized what a douche he is. Now he did apologize which is the LEAST he could have done. But the fact remains that Galarraga will never ever ever in his career be able to throw a perfect game.
Everybody knows Galarraga threw a perfect game and that Joyce got the call wrong. EVERYBODY. So you know what needs to be done? MLB needs to change the scorecard so that Galarraga is in the record books.
This is just the back end of a long list of examples of why baseball needs to get with the 21st century and start using technology to dictate the rules of the game. They've already taken a big step by making home runs reviewable.
How many times do you hear this "They need to get the call right" and I'm a big proponent of this. If a pitcher throws a ball within what the rulebook calls the strike zone, that should be a strike. Every single time. It shouldn't be considered a "ball" because the umpire is a dick and won't give the pitcher the outside corner.
No other sport even comes close to being this stone age when it comes to their umpiring. Last night in Game 3 of the Stanley Cup, I saw the refs go back and review two "goals". On one play, it looked like Hjalmarsson made an amazing goal saving play, but upon review, the puck clearly went into over the goal line and the refs got it right and ruled it a goal. Even in football we give the coaches a minimum number of times to tell the refs to go back and review the play.
I watch baseball on ESPN's Gamecast a handful of times (especially during Torts class. I'm sorry professor but your class was BORING). Anyways, on my screen I see a red box for what the designated strike zone is, where the ball fell within the strike zone, and what the umpire actually called said ball. When I watch games on TV, I see a replay of what just happened. So why can't MLB use this new fangled technology?
There are two arguments that I just don't want to hear in contrast to this. I'm going to pull a Boerhs and Bernstein and tell you that you are just flat out wrong.
Argument One: But baseball is a game of tradition. The tradition is that there's a human element of umpires and they will inherently get things wrong. That's just part of the game. (Made by my co-worker today)
1) Baseball was started in the 1800's. They didn't even have freaking cars back then! If I hop in my DeLorean and went back to when the founders created baseball and showed them WiFi and Fangraphs, they would have seen how dumb umpires were and not put them in the game. 2) In every facet of society we have changed since the late 1800's. Our technology is different, our culture is different, our politics are different (well, maybe not here in Chicago), everything else is different and we want things to change. Except baseball. What kind of horse crap is that!? 3) We have rules in every aspect of life and when those rules are not followed, there are negative consequences. Yet umpires don't "follow the rules" often by flat out getting calls wrong. For example, when a player has a ball in play in his glove and touches the base before the runner who hit the ball reaches the base, that runner/hitter is out. So where are their negative consequences?
Argument Two: If MLB changes the rules to allow Galarraga's perfect game, then there's a slipper slope for MLB to change everything. (Made by someone on the Mully and Hanley show on WSCR today).
1) This is obviously a slippery slope argument and it's a logical fallacy. If in academia you shouldn't be allowed to make this argument, then you can't make this argument anywhere else. It doesn't go to the argument in question. This type of argument is the same ones Conservatives use today to justify banning gay rights (We allowed sodomy which in turns will allow gays to get marries which in turn will lead us to eventually legalize polygamy and beasteality). No doing X will not necessarily lead to Y. 2) What is so wrong if this does set a precedence of MLB changing the official scorecard? If any particular call by an umpire never should have been made to begin with, what's wrong with setting things right? If Jim Joyce had gotten the call correctly or MLB makes things correct, then the same outcome occurs.
All I want is to get things right. In football, if a pass is caught within bounds, then I want that pass to count. In basketball, if a player shoots the ball a millisecond before the shot clock winds down and the ball goes through the hoop, I want that basket to count. And if a defender touches first before the runner in baseball, I want the defender to be out.
I don't want something official because of a mistake; an untruth.
______________________________
EDITOR'S NOTE: Right after I wrote this post, I read on ESPN that Bud Selig will not reverse the call. I know we're supposed to be P.C., but like Joe West, you're a piece of shit Bud Selig. Obviously not JUST for this, but way to be waste of life and space.
Dewayne Wise's Amazing Catch
You can see the catch here.
In the top of the ninth, Dewayne Wise, a defensive 9th inning CF replacement, made a fantastic play to rob Gabe Kapler of a HR and preserving Buehrle's perfect game. On ESPN, the BBTN crew said this catch was one of, if not THE, best catches. EVER.'
Now it was obvious this catch was way out of Wise's range and he got a poor start when the ball was hit off of the bat. This made it it LOOK extremely impressive that Wise had to run so far to make that amazing grab. But if a better defender was underneath that ball in time and then timed it perfectly, would people still be clamoring about THAT play?
Now I'm not taking anything away from Wise because in the end he DID end up robbing a HR to save a perfect game (maybe Juan Uribe should learn a thing or two about saving perfect games from Wise), but how good really was that catch?
In the top of the ninth, Dewayne Wise, a defensive 9th inning CF replacement, made a fantastic play to rob Gabe Kapler of a HR and preserving Buehrle's perfect game. On ESPN, the BBTN crew said this catch was one of, if not THE, best catches. EVER.'
Now it was obvious this catch was way out of Wise's range and he got a poor start when the ball was hit off of the bat. This made it it LOOK extremely impressive that Wise had to run so far to make that amazing grab. But if a better defender was underneath that ball in time and then timed it perfectly, would people still be clamoring about THAT play?
Now I'm not taking anything away from Wise because in the end he DID end up robbing a HR to save a perfect game (maybe Juan Uribe should learn a thing or two about saving perfect games from Wise), but how good really was that catch?
MARK BUEHRLE NO-HITTER...PERFECT NO-HITTER
Sexy Rexy should really been writing this post as he is the biggest Sox fan on the blog, but stupid him has a job and a salary. Buehrle did the impossible, again! 27 Rays up, 27 Rays down, 6 on strikes. I only wish I had seen the game and not been playing sports outside like some schmuck. Just an unbelievable individual performance and lets thank god that no defender ruined perfection. Only the 16th perfect game in the 135 year history of baseball. Clemens, Martinez, and Maddux have never thrown a no hitter or a perfect game, let alone both.
As a Cubs fan, I am a Buehrle fan due to his good nature and loyalty to the team and city as a whole. He is the Chicago White Sox, which is why I asked Sexy Rexy on our last podcast what his reaction would be if Buehrle had left, and obviously it would be difficult for all Sox fans to let Buehrle go.
Buehrle claimed that he threw 90% curves and changes in the game, as he was being caught for the first time ever by Juan Castro. A great defensive replacement putting Dwayne Wise into center field may have saved game by Robbing Gabe Kaplar with a Ken Griffey Jr. style catch at the wall.
Side notes, 670 The Score's Ed Framer announced their player of the game, and that player is Dwayne Wise! Of course he is. If there is one thing I will remember from this game it's the Wise home run robbing catch at the wall. Nothing else really stands out from this game. Everyone else was just average. Here's the footage of the entire 9th inning. Enjoy hearing Hawk Harrelson orgasm over his man love for Mark Buehrle
As a Cubs fan, I am a Buehrle fan due to his good nature and loyalty to the team and city as a whole. He is the Chicago White Sox, which is why I asked Sexy Rexy on our last podcast what his reaction would be if Buehrle had left, and obviously it would be difficult for all Sox fans to let Buehrle go.
Buehrle claimed that he threw 90% curves and changes in the game, as he was being caught for the first time ever by Juan Castro. A great defensive replacement putting Dwayne Wise into center field may have saved game by Robbing Gabe Kaplar with a Ken Griffey Jr. style catch at the wall.
Side notes, 670 The Score's Ed Framer announced their player of the game, and that player is Dwayne Wise! Of course he is. If there is one thing I will remember from this game it's the Wise home run robbing catch at the wall. Nothing else really stands out from this game. Everyone else was just average. Here's the footage of the entire 9th inning. Enjoy hearing Hawk Harrelson orgasm over his man love for Mark Buehrle
