IF THE SEASON ENDED TODAY 06.26.08: Dodgers and the law of mediocrity

First things first, the Dodgers won a game against the American League! Not only that, but it was a complete game shut out by “blink and you’ll miss him” starter Eric Stultz, who is making Brad Penny, Hiroki Koruda, and Jason Schmidt look as worthless as their arms (in all fairness, Koruda is pretty much EXACTLY what the Dodgers and fans expected him to be). Without knowing when or how the Dodgers will win again, considering that this team is as inconsistent as an Tommy Lasorda’s bowel movements, I spend today rejoicing as the Dodgers are now 2-6 against the American League and the National League is a combined 12-infinity against AL as well. While it feels that there has been a dominance of the AL over the NL has been progressively consistent since the new millennium, although the exact opposite is true with the NL posting a 1,104-1095 record over the AL. Since the 2005 season however, the AL hold the advantage with a 292-213 advantage. Never is it more clear in any sport that baseball is held pretty strictly to the “law of large numbers”.

If a good player is hitless in 25 at bats, there is a high probability that he will go on a hot streak. If one team dominates another, the chances are over a long sample size, the team who was initially losing will eventually come within a range that makes it look relatively even. Look at example (using numbers to 2007) the Cubs vs. Cardinals which have played roughly 2,089 times with the Cubs winning 1,067 times and the Cards winning 1,022. The Cubs and the Dodgers nave played roughly 1,858 with the teams splitting it right down the middle. While there are variations such as the Yanks holding 372 game advantage over the Orioles, when you consider that they’ve played 2,072 times, that still means the Orioles have won 826 of those games as well, which is not a poor number (it is a .408 winning percentage, but considering the recent Baltimore teams have been atrocious, that wining percentage ain’t too bad). The Dodgers and Giants (the only significant West Coast baseball rivalry) have played each other 2,109 times with the Dodgers winning 1,046 games and the Giants winning 1,063. There are variations on my theory, but for the most part, the law of large numbers is applicable to baseball more than any other sport, although it affects other sports as well. A star NBA player like LeBron James or Kobe Bryant will shoot roughly 45%-50% from the field over the course of a season, so if they go 0-10 to start a game, you know one thing: watch out. They will probably drop 6-8 baskets in a row to somehow reach the percentage plateau, or they will shoot 80% from the field the next game. Same thing when watching a team. If a team shoots 75% for a quarter, you know they’re going to plummet to 40% in the next quarter, which is why leads are never safe.

This is what annoys me so much “analysis” of sports, especially baseball. There’s no real insight into it. Generally, if a basketball team takes a 20 point lead after the first quarter, if they’re playing a good enough team that team will likely cut it to single digits in the next quarter simply because the team that was “hot” is now “cold”. It has a bit to do with defense, but more to do with the law of averages. In baseball this is more infuriating because they make mention of in their “analysis” by saying things such as “a week ago, those balls were finding holes [writer: that’s what she said], but now he’s hitting them right to players”. THAT has nothing to do with minor tweaks in batting stance or tweaks in pitch delivery. It has EVERYTHING to do with law of averages and law of big numbers. I’m not saying minor tweaks on mechanics does nothing, because it clearly does. What I’m arguing is that the mechanical tweaks are never enough to lead to someone hitting .450 over the course of a season. If mechanical tweaks mattered consistently, players wouldn’t hit .750 over 6 games and then go 0-30. Pitchers wouldn’t throw 3 straight quality starts and then get railroaded the next 4 starts. Hell, we’ll probably never see someone hit .370 like Mike Piazza, Tony Gwynn and Larry Walker flirted with several times.The laws say it will never happen and for it to happen would be a statistical anomaly. I’m not saying it won’t ever happen, but I’m saying it won’t be because of mechanical tweaks, it would be because those “seeing eye singles” aren’t finding gloves like they normally would, they would find the outfield.

I think my want to stick with this law of averages/big numbers argument has more to do with me finding a scapegoat for why the Dodgers are so inconsistent, but it works I tell you! Look for example at the 2006 Dodgers, who went into the playoffs on a high having won 7 straight. I immediately panicked because I knew what was coming: a losing streak. Sure enough they lost 3 straight, and that had a lot to do with the Mets being good, but with all their injuries, they were not the better team. The law of averages hit the Dodgers. But if I’m honest with myself, it has more to do with the law of mediocrity that hits the team.         

Well I had other topics to write about, but my rant went on much longer than I anticipated. I’m off to San Diego this weekend to witness the vile Padres play the awful Mariners. Petco is a pretty stadium, but the Padres stink. Keep an eye out for the NBA Draft tonight and look for some major moves by some teams. I will end with one small tidbit: never try to take Shawn Chacon’s last breadstick (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AgOWsc9go7tJUDlwD8xDwjs5nYcB?slug=ap-astros-chaconsuspended&prov=ap&type=lgns)