Through 48 games, nothing has changed.

[Mike Sixel]

They are only advantages if they work.....and he should have stopped two years ago, or at least tried it for a month.

[gunnarthor]

I would think that the Twins 9-9 in interleague play in 2012 is demonstrative of the advantage of playing the NL when you draw the weaker teams of the league- given how weak the Twins were. Now you add 6 more games with the Astros, according to your theory that now should add another win, "not adjusting for opponent strength". I would think that adjusting for opponentsLACK OF STRENGTH enhances my argument even further, perhaps yet another win or two. And that confirms what I was saying originally.

 

I'm not really sure where to even begin with here. 18 games is still a small enough sample size to skew total results - that's why the Twins pyth w/l record against the NL was worse then their actual record. Yes, the Twins schedule is slightly different this year, as is every team in the AL. So, the Twins, like all AL teams, will get a few games against the Astros. Those 6 games aren't enough to make a sizable difference in the final league standings. Heck, the Twins won 3 of 4 at Fenway and no one thought that would skew the final standings either. I suppose if you want, you could break down the schedule by divisions and make estimates about how many games a true .400 team would win. But the 20 game interleague schedule and 6 games against the Astros won't make this team seem better than they are by the end of the season.

 

I'm really not sure why you're fighting this so much.

[jokin]

I'm not really sure where to even begin with here. 18 games is still a small enough sample size to skew total results - that's why the Twins pyth w/l record against the NL was worse then their actual record. Yes, the Twins schedule is slightly different this year, as is every team in the AL. So, the Twins, like all AL teams, will get a few games against the Astros. Those 6 games aren't enough to make a sizable difference in the final league standings. Heck, the Twins won 3 of 4 at Fenway and no one thought that would skew the final standings either. I suppose if you want, you could break down the schedule by divisions and make estimates about how many games a true .400 team would win. But the 20 game interleague schedule and 6 games against the Astros won't make this team seem better than they are by the end of the season.

 

I'm really not sure why you're fighting this so much.

 

I'm not sure why you're opposing what is obvious so much. First off, you are using "final standings" as your measure, which I never did. My criteria for my point was crystal clear-I pointed out that the Twins have a good chance at winning more games than last year because of the good draw of weak interleague teams on their schedule and the fact that they play 6 "instead of" games against last year's worst team, which is currently playing .280 baseball, as opposed to 6 games against clearly superior AL comp. This is simply common sense.

 

This is not to minimizing the timing of when you play a team as also a key factor. You pointed out the Twins winning the series in Fenway. The Twins were fortunate to catch the Sox in right in the midde of a bad 2-9 stretch and coming off of being swept on the road by the Rangers, and shorthanded. Of course, the Sox got back in the saddle and are 10-5 since that bad patch- and swept the Twins on the road.

 

Tonight and this week are perfect examples of what I was referring to. The Twins were absolutely reeling and in crash mode after playing some better teams. What better tonic to getting well quick and getting out of their tailspin than playing the 2nd worst NL team, with a .373 winning record? These are the kind of more winnable games on the schedule that will serve to give the club a reasonable shot at 75 wins instead of last year's 66.