Paper detail

Relieving and Readjusting Pythagoras

Bill James invented the Pythagorean expectation in the late 70's to predict a baseball team's winning percentage knowing just their runs scored and allowed. His original formula estimates a winning percentage of ${\rm RS}^2/({\rm RS}^2+{\rm RA}^2)$, where ${\rm RS}$ stands for runs scored and ${\rm RA}$ for runs allowed; later versions found better agreement with data by replacing the exponent 2 with numbers near 1.83. Miller and his colleagues provided a theoretical justification by modeling runs scored and allowed by independent Weibull distributions. They showed that a single Weibull distribution did a very good job of describing runs scored and allowed, and led to a predicted won-loss percentage of $({\rm RS_{\rm obs}}-1/2)^γ/ (({\rm RS_{\rm obs}}-1/2)^γ+ ({\rm RA_{\rm obs}}-1/2)^γ)$, where ${\rm RS_{\rm obs}}$ and ${\rm RA_{\rm obs}}$ are the observed runs scored and allowed and $γ$ is the shape parameter of the Weibull (typically close to 1.8). We show a linear combination of Weibulls more accurately determines a team's run production and increases the prediction accuracy of a team's winning percentage by an average of about 25% (thus while the currently used variants of the original predictor are accurate to about four games a season, the new combination is accurate to about three). The new formula is more involved computationally; however, it can be easily computed on a laptop in a matter of minutes from publicly available season data. It performs as well (or slightly better) than the related Pythagorean formulas in use, and has the additional advantage of having a theoretical justification for its parameter values (and not just an optimization of parameters to minimize prediction error).

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.