Last year, I used Statcast data to subtract a team’s expected weighted on-base percentage (xwOBA) from what they allowed. The better teams were expected to do well in actual wins, and the worse teams were poorly forecast. And that was mostly the case. The outliers identified in the state performed as expected going forward in the standings rather dramatically. So let’s do it again, this time about 30 games later into the season.
Expected stats are more descriptive of how teams hit and pitch than actual ones. All luck is removed. Only Ks walks and contact quality matter.
What did the data say last year? “The Yankees have been THE most unlucky team in baseball. To bring this luck into sharper relief, the teams around the Yankees have a .612 winning percentage (99 wins over 162 games).” From that point forward, the Yankees played (this is incredible but true): EXACTLY .612 baseball (52-33). Talk about calling your shot!
Also, from the article: “The other interesting finding is that the Braves have been much stronger than the Mets, yet are +700 to win the NL East while the Mets are -350. It would seem that even 4.5 games back as of Tuesday, the Braves are priced attractively.” From that point forward, the Braves played .607 ball (51-33), and the Mets were 36-52, finishing 17 games behind the Braves, a swing of 21.5 games.
In the NL West, following the data from late June last year, the conclusion was “the Giants are significantly better than the Padres yet the Padres, who are four games back of the Giants, have better division odds than San Francisco. That seems like a very inefficient line. There’s been nothing lucky about the Giants’ performance to date. They have just been really good (fourth in xwOBA differential).”
From that point forward, the Giants played .671 ball (57-28), and the Padres were 32-50.
In the NL Central, the takeaway was, “The Cubs (+300 to win the NL Central), for example, are a popular team and have a good record. But a deeper dive shows they seem closer to a slightly below average team (22nd in the state).” The Cubs went 29-55 the rest of the year, although they were sellers after an almost immediate collapse by the trade deadline about a month later.
The only miss was the Reds, who were then the best team in the NL Central in the state but went 45-41 the rest of the year.
Still, this is an outstanding performance. Can it possibly repeat? Let’s find out.
| Rank | Team | O xOBA | D xOBA | Diff | win% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
0.334 |
0.279 |
0.055 |
0.694 |
|
|
2 |
0.341 |
0.288 |
0.053 |
0.645 |
|
|
3 |
0.326 |
0.288 |
0.038 |
0.636 |
|
|
4 |
0.330 |
0.297 |
0.033 |
0.582 |
|
|
5 |
0.326 |
0.296 |
0.030 |
0.556 |
|
|
6 |
0.334 |
0.306 |
0.028 |
0.528 |
|
|
7 |
0.319 |
0.298 |
0.021 |
0.645 |
|
|
8 |
0.317 |
0.300 |
0.017 |
0.537 |
|
|
9 |
0.312 |
0.297 |
0.015 |
0.495 |
|
|
10 |
0.332 |
0.320 |
0.012 |
0.550 |
|
|
11 |
0.315 |
0.309 |
0.006 |
0.532 |
|
|
12 |
0.304 |
0.303 |
0.001 |
0.545 |
|
|
13 |
0.300 |
0.299 |
0.001 |
0.537 |
|
|
14 |
0.304 |
0.304 |
0.000 |
0.454 |
|
|
15 |
0.306 |
0.307 |
-0.001 |
0.509 |
|
|
16 |
0.318 |
0.321 |
-0.003 |
0.491 |
|
|
17 |
0.312 |
0.318 |
-0.006 |
0.556 |
|
|
18 |
0.303 |
0.311 |
-0.008 |
0.427 |
|
|
19 |
0.305 |
0.314 |
-0.009 |
0.444 |
|
|
20 |
0.305 |
0.322 |
-0.017 |
0.407 |
|
|
21 |
0.302 |
0.320 |
-0.018 |
0.454 |
|
|
22 |
0.298 |
0.316 |
-0.018 |
0.519 |
|
|
23 |
0.308 |
0.327 |
-0.019 |
0.523 |
|
|
24 |
0.295 |
0.316 |
-0.021 |
0.407 |
|
|
25 |
0.311 |
0.334 |
-0.023 |
0.324 |
|
|
26 |
0.308 |
0.334 |
-0.026 |
0.404 |
|
|
27 |
0.307 |
0.334 |
-0.027 |
0.432 |
|
|
28 |
0.285 |
0.321 |
-0.036 |
0.373 |
|
|
29 |
0.288 |
0.325 |
-0.037 |
0.391 |
|
|
30 |
0.290 |
0.330 |
-0.040 |
0.404 |
There are four takeaways we can glean from it.
Bet Mets-Phillies in NL East?
The market is very convinced that the sequence in the NL East is going to be Mets first and Braves second. But the better bet by far is the Mets first and the Phillies second (+290). The Phillies are about as good in the state as the Braves. The Phillies also did more at the trade deadline and could get Bryce Harper back last month. The Phillies are three games behind the Braves. Should an evenly-matched team have just a 26% chance to win? Feels more like +150 (40%).
Could the Braves beat the Mets because Atlanta has been much better in the state than the Mets, who seem to have been quite lucky in compiling their current sterling record? The model would say yes, but the model doesn’t know the Mets have been playing almost all year without Jacob deGrom and went six weeks without Max Scherzer.
Twins should be favored in the AL Central
Minnesota has a lead and is by far the best team in the division, yet is a slight underdog at +125 (44.5%) to win the AL Central. (The Twins are sixth in the state, the White Sox 15th and the Guardians 22nd.) The xwOBA data says the Twins should be about a 60% favorite (minus-150).
St. Louis is overrated?
Finally, the Cardinals are pretty overrated, according to the stat. The Brewers should be favored to win the division even down two games; that’s how stark the differential is (Milwaukee ranks eighth in the state and St. Louis 17th). So you could go +160 on the Brewers to win the division, thinking their chances are better than 38.5%, that’s implied, OR take +290 on the Cardinals not to make the playoffs (Mets, Braves, Phillies, Brewers, Dodgers, Padres ). Is there a better than 29% chance the Cardinals will fall behind the Phillies, Brewers and Padres? The model says, “Yes.”
Fade the Padres?
XwOBA differential doesn’t like the Padres either. But this is a much different Padres team from now on than we’ve had. So you could argue that their slim .001 advantage in their differential is not indicative of how they’ll play for the remainder of the season.
(Photo of Byron Buxton: Nick Wosika / USA Today)
.