Posted by cubbies84 on 7/22/2023 12:06:00 PM (view original):
i just dont understand how 100 games in teams are what they are, except when they arent.
I just built a table in Excel to simulate 100 seasons of a team with a "true" winning percentage of .550.
Here are just a few examples:
Season 1:
Record after 100 games: 58-42 (.580)
Record in games 101-162: 32-30 (.516)
Season 3:
Record after 100 games: 47-53 (.470)
Record in games 101-162: 40-22 (.645)
Season 4:
Record after 100 games: 57-43 (.570)
Record in games 101-162: 32-30 (.516)
Season 7:
Record after 100 games: 57-43 (.570)
Record in games 101-162: 28-34 (.452)
Season Season 9:
Record after 100 games: 59-41 (.590)
Record in games 101-162: 26-36 (.419)
Season 13:
Record after 100 games: 56-44 (.560)
Record in games 101-162: 43-19 (.694)
I could go on and on and on...those are just from the first 13 sets of 162 games.
This is as pure a simulation as you can create. No accounting for fatigue or quality of opposition or team matchups or manager decisions or anything - just run the random variable over and over again.
Anyone who thinks there is ANYTHING unusual about a simulated baseball team's performance fluctuating susbtantially after 100 games needs to learn some basic probability and statistics.