We could have a thread about the playoff projection systems and the assumptions they use that go into the simulations they run to produce those probabilities. Some of them provide more details about how they create their models than others, but when you see those assumptions, it helps to explain why I don’t treat a 95% chance produced by these models the same as I might for something for which mathematical probabilities are certain, like tossing a coin, rolling a pair of dice, picking a card out of a deck, spinning a roulette wheel, etc. I think all of the models start with some attempt to place a value on the team. The 538 site provides a pretty thorough explanation of how they do that, and they say it is based on just the last 100 games. It also says that they look at things like margin of victory, and that would likely lead to considering the Dodgers the strongest team in MLB based on things like their run differential, not just the won-loss record. They currently have the Giants at 51% to win the division to the Dodgers 49%, essentially a tossup despite the Giants 2 game lead. That probably also reflects a difference in strength of schedule. There are a lot of things the models can’t account for immediately, like the effect of injuries or teams shedding or obtaining impact players. So, I look at them for information and entertainment, but I wouldn’t assume that the probabilities they produce are that precise. Yeah, this is good, though 538 audits all their predictive models pretty thoroughly. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/checking-our-work/mlb-playoffs/ Their goal really IS to make those probabilities precise, at least with expected statistical variance and within standard deviation margins, etc. They do a pretty good job and adjust their models for accuracy. Since this is the optimism thread, I'll add that the 9% Brewers World Series odds are definitely an undersell!