Deadline precedents

[gregmag]

(This isn’t a trade rumor of proposal, so I figured it belonged here.)

The Brewers as currently constructed are highly likely to win the division and a good bet to get as far as the NLCS, given that they did so last year and are probably better now. When we talk about improving the team now, beyond maintenance changes like getting a McCullers type to eat some innings, we’re talking about getting to, and hopefully winning, the World Series.

The argument that the Brewers should go “all in” at the deadline is an argument that one or more deadline trades would be substantially likely to elevate the Brewers at least from NLCS loser to NLCS winner and maybe to a championship.

Has that ever happened before? Has any team as good as the Brewers already are ever made a deadline deal that you can point to and say there’s a good chance that trade lifted them from top four in the postseason to top two? I can’t think of one, but I’m miles from having a comprehensive knowledge of MLB, and obviously this question involves some subjectivity – you can never say for sure that one deadline trade does or doesn’t make the difference. But I’m curious if others can think of cases where that even arguably happened. If the Brewers embrace this “all in” strategy, it would be nice to know the strategy has worked before.

[igor67]

I'm not aware of one either and I think part of it is that people tend to over estimate how good the 7 game series at letting the best team win. Bill James worked up his log5 model to calculate head to head probabilities. It assumes team strength is equal to their winning percentage. So for example a .600 team with homefield advantage playing a .500 team in a 7 game series wins 80% of the time.

Obviously using that approach at the moment with the Brewers and Dodgers nearly identical records and you would get close to a 50-50 split. So let's indulge a bit. Argument 1 the Brewers are playing over their heads. So let's bump them down from a .627% to merely a .600 team. Similarly in various ways people have suggested that the Dodgers just kind of cruise through the regular season and then dial it up during the playoffs when it matters. So let's bump them up to a .700% which is close to the best win% of all time. Under this the Brewers still have a 1/3 chance. Interestingly if the Brewers some how ended up with home field in that scenario the Dodgers would only be 55/45% favorites.

You can use the calculator here to play around https://basketbols.com/nba-win-predictor/

One surprising thing for me is that the calculator suggests getting home field is more important than a major improvement. Since you only get near that same 55/45 split if the Brewers have the same win% as the dodgers

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

Blue Jays 1992

[bjkrautk]

Logging some quality time between Wikipedia and Baseball Reference, the most recent possible example I can find is Justin Verlander going from the Tigers to the 2017 Houston Astros.

[MadScientist]

You could argue that the 82 Brewers getting Don Sutton help push them enough to get to the WS.  Might not have even made the playoffs without him.

[owbc]

1 hour ago, igor67 said:

I'm not aware of one either and I think part of it is that people tend to over estimate how good the 7 game series at letting the best team win. Bill James worked up his log5 model to calculate head to head probabilities. It assumes team strength is equal to their winning percentage. So for example a .600 team with homefield advantage playing a .500 team in a 7 game series wins 80% of the time.

Obviously using that approach at the moment with the Brewers and Dodgers nearly identical records and you would get close to a 50-50 split. So let's indulge a bit. Argument 1 the Brewers are playing over their heads. So let's bump them down from a .627% to merely a .600 team. Similarly in various ways people have suggested that the Dodgers just kind of cruise through the regular season and then dial it up during the playoffs when it matters. So let's bump them up to a .700% which is close to the best win% of all time. Under this the Brewers still have a 1/3 chance. Interestingly if the Brewers some how ended up with home field in that scenario the Dodgers would only be 55/45% favorites.

You can use the calculator here to play around https://basketbols.com/nba-win-predictor/

One surprising thing for me is that the calculator suggests getting home field is more important than a major improvement. Since you only get near that same 55/45 split if the Brewers have the same win% as the dodgers

Getting beat by the lower seed in the 5-game NLDS is the biggest risk and would be really bad optics for this FO, especially if we lose to the Cubs. The best way to give yourself more of an advantage in a short series is to get more pitching. We saw what Skubal did for Detroit last year -- he got them through the Wild Card and then started twice in the ALDS and put Detroit in a position to win both of those games. They didn't win but it turned a series where Detroit was a strong underdog into a coin flip with Seattle's pitching depth being the main difference maker. 

We've also been on the other side of this. We took the Dodgers to 7 games in 2018 when we were the inferior team. 

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

Interesting analysis.  I’ll reference this when people say that getting a top-2 seed has a bigger difference than getting the 1-seed.

I would stipulate that for the brewers to have any realistic chance at beating LA would require us to be the 1 seed

- as this article substantiates, a 1 seed is a bigger home field advantage than a deadline deal

- the 1 seed avoids another division champ until the NLCS.   Last year (and likely this year) there is a massive drop off between the Top 3 and the remaining NL playoff teams.

 

[owbc]

8 minutes ago, TwinsBrewersWorldSeries said:

Interesting analysis.  I’ll reference this when people say that getting a top-2 seed has a bigger difference than getting the 1-seed.

I would stipulate that for the brewers to have any realistic chance at beating LA would require us to be the 1 seed

- as this article substantiates, a 1 seed is a bigger home field advantage than a deadline deal

- the 1 seed avoids another division champ until the NLCS.   Last year (and likely this year) there is a massive drop off between the Top 3 and the remaining NL playoff teams.

 

It's worth noting that home advantage in MLB is only about half that of the NBA -- 54% vs. 59%. 

So if my math is correct I think it's a 36% win probability for the Brewers if they are the away team vs. 43% if they are the home team, assuming the Brewers are a .600 team and the Dodgers are a .700 team. NBA series are also 2-2-1-1-1 vs. 2-3-2 in MLB but that doesn't change the math. 

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

36 minutes ago, owbc said:

It's worth noting that home advantage in MLB is only about half that of the NBA -- 54% vs. 59%. 

So if my math is correct I think it's a 36% win probability for the Brewers if they are the away team vs. 43% if they are the home team, assuming the Brewers are a .600 team and the Dodgers are a .700 team. NBA series are also 2-2-1-1-1 vs. 2-3-2 in MLB but that doesn't change the math. 

I think the difference between the NBA and Major league baseball might be the location of game six.

once you get to the playoffs, you have only the best teams left.  Winning a series 4 to one would seem to be more challenging than winning 4 to 2.

given the current situation, I think the recent dominance of the Dodgers also might skew those home-field advantage numbers.

looking back to last year, I’m pretty sure that the Brewers don’t beat the Cubs game five is on the road

[gregmag]

Those are all great cases — Cone, Verlander, Sutton. I think they meet all the criteria. The ‘82 Brewers lost, but I think everyone was ecstatic about getting to the World Series. 

All starting pitchers, which makes sense. At the level the Brewers have reached, you’re really trading to swing two or three postseason games. Position players and closers are far less likely to do that.

I’m seeing the Skubal argument a lot more clearly, and I’m feeling more secure in my resistance to trading potential difference-makers for a bat or reliever. 

[igor67]

Interesting counter example. D-backs traded for Schilling in 2000 but missed the post season that year. Won World Series the next year though.

[wibadgers23]

6 minutes ago, igor67 said:

Interesting counter example. D-backs traded for Schilling in 2000 but missed the post season that year. Won World Series the next year though.

Also, the Dodgers traded for both Max Scherzer and Trae Turner in 2021 but ended up losing in the NLCS. I'm sure there are tons of other examples.