The matchups:

                      246/234   250/244   263/239   253/230
                      Colon(R)  Gray(R)  Parker(R)  Straily(R)
Avila (L)    154/270    255      260       273        263
Fielder (L)  284/282    267      271       285        274
Infante (R)  279/273    246      256       251        242
Cabrera (R)  388/343    309      322       315        303
Iglesias (R) 245/251    226      236       231        222
Dirks (L)    225/250    237      240       253        243
Jackson (R)  240/273    246      256       251        242
Hunter (R)   283/270    243      253       248        239
Martinez (B) 254/284    269      273       287        276

Net Tigers             .2569    .2647     .2677      .2576

                        227/171      237/265     245/200    242/260
                       Scherzer(R) Verlander(R) Sanchez(R) Fister(R)
Vogt(L)      263/290     253          264          273       270
Barton(L)    251/294     257          268          277       274
Sogard(L)    254/252     220          230          237       235
Donaldson(R) 358/296     195          302          228       296
Lowrie(B)    283/287     251          262          270       287
Cespedes(R)  303/241     159          246          185       241
Crisp(B)     245/307     268          280          289       307
Reddick(L)   245/264     230          241          249       246
Moss(L)      230/313     273          285          295       291

Net A's                 .2378        .2655        .2590     .2735

A very even series, with no team having a 60% or better chance in any game.

Game 1, Scherzer v Colon – Tigers 59.5%
Game 2, Verlander v Gray – A’s 50.4%
Game 3, Sanchez v Parker – Tigers 54.1%
Game 4, Fister v Straily – A’s 57.4%
Game 5, Scherzer v Colon – Tigers 59.5%

The total series leans to the Tigers, 55.7%

Here’s how their hitters and pitchers matched up:

Red Sox
                          228/255     171/254   245/226   278/272  
                           Moore(L)  Price(L)   Cobb(R)  Hellickson(R)
Saltalamacchia(B) 229/299                         282      320
Napoli (R)     302/283      296        295        246      296
Pedroia (R)    327/261      321        319        227      273
Middlebrooks(R)274/230      269        268        200      241
Drew (L)       205/304      180        135        286      325
Gomes (R)      277/265      272        271
Ellsbury (L)   245/308      215        161        290      329
Victorino(B)   299/270      293        292        254      289
Ortiz (L)      258/357      226        170        336      282
Ross(R)        273/203      268        267
Nava(B)        236/311                            293      333

Net Sox                     .2650     .2538      .2723    .3008                  

                           231/252     240/265   188/203     252/227
                          Lester(L)   Lackey(R) Buchholz(R)  Peavy(R)
Lobaton(B)   240/266                    246                    258
Loney(L)     265/287        235         265        208         278
Zobrist(B)   241/296        234         273        214         287
Longoria(R)  329/282        319         287        220         246
Escobar(R)   277/248        268         253        194         217
Rodriguez(R) 267/196        259
Jennings(R)  305/259        296         264        202         226
Myers(R)     308/286        299         292        223         250
Young(R)     266/262        258         267        205         229
Molina(R)    234/213        227                    166
DeJesus(L)   111/282                    260        204         273

Net Rays                    .2687       .2680      .2049      .2532

The matchups give the Rays a narrow advantage in three of five games, but the Red Sox advantage in the remaining two is so large that they get the benefit of the overall chances.

Game 1, Lester v Moore – Rays 51.7%
Game 2, Lackey v Price – Rays 56.8%
Game 3, Buchholz v Cobb – Red Sox 80.6%
Game 4, Peavy v Hellickson – Red Sox 70.3%
Game 5, Lester v Moore – Rays 51.7%

That works out to an expected Red Sox series victory 65.53% of the time.

Here’s how their hitters and pitchers matched up:

                           174/199     271/213    276/238    264/245
                          Kershaw(L)  Greinke(R)  Ryu(L)    Nolasco(R)
McCann (L)   227/307       152          320        241       312
Freeman(L)   285/339       191          353        303       344
EJohnson(B)  216/211       165          220        198       214
CJohnson(R)  338/280       259          229        309       264
Simmons(R)   253/254       194          208        232       239
Gattis(R)    285/268       218          220        261       253
Upton(R)     172/231       132          189        157       218
Heyward(L)   288/279       193          291        306       283

Net Braves                .1863        .2519      .2478     .2595  

                           267/249    211/246    294/219     303/240
                          Medlen(R)   Minor(L)  Teheran(R)  Garcia(R)
AEllis(R)     261/259       248         247       218         239
Gonzalez(L)   278/304       312         226       344         354
MEllis(R)     279/251       240         264       211         232
Ramirez(R)    387/353       338         366       297         326
Uribe(R)      285/289       277         270       243         267
Crawford(L)   205/300       308         166       339         350
Schumacher(L) 241/259       266         196       293         302
Puig(R)       336/320       306         318       270         295

Net Dodgers                 .2772      .2558      .2709      .2875

The matchups give the Dodgers an advantage, not just in every game, but in every permutation of matchups except a Minor vs Nolasco battle.

Game 1, Kershaw v Medlen – Dodgers 87.9%
Game 2, Greinke v Minor – Dodgers 51.9%
Game 3, Ryu v Teheran – Dodgers 61.0%
Game 4, Nolasco v Garcia – Dodgers 62.5%
Game 5, Kershaw v Medlen – Dodgers 87.9%

That works out to an expected Dodger series victory 85.45% of the time.

Matchup eqas, based on both the hitters and pitchers splits:

              Wainwright Lynn   Kelly  Miller
Martin          248      256     277     243
Morneau         264      321     286     310
Walker          270      328     291     316
Mercer          220      227     246     216
Alvarez         270      328     291     316
Marte           244      252     273     240
McCutcheon      287      297     322     283
Byrd            263      272     294     259

Net            .2377   .2646   .2644   .2537 (includes a .100 pitcher)

                Burnett Cole Liriano Morton
Carpenter        361    312    167     413
Beltran          344    297    267     394
Holliday         268    303    311     256
Adams            342    295    130     391
Molina           246    278    323     235
Jay              310    268    134     355
Freese           218    247    303     208
Descalso         277    239    111     317

Net              2886  2599   2314    2966

Game 1: The Cardinals, behind Wainwright, are a huge favorite over Burnett and the Pirates in game 1. He’s got a huge lefty split, and the Cards will throw 5 against him (counting Beltran). A .2886-.2377 eqa margin equates to a 72.5% win percentage for the Cards.

Game 2: Lynn vs Cole: This time it is the Cardinal pitcher who has a big platoon split, but the Pirates can only send 3 lefties up to the plate (unless they choose to send Jones up over Marte). It makes for what should be the evenest matchup of the series; the Pirates have a .2646-.2599 eqa advantage, which comes out to a 52.2% chance for the Pirates to win game 2.

Game 3: All those lefties spell trouble for the Cards in game 3, as they have to face Francisco Liriano and his extraordinary lefty-killing splits. Meanwhile, Kelly offers the Cardinals nothing special. Its a .2644-.2314, Pirates, and that makes a 66.1% win chance for the Pirates.

Game 4: But all those Cardinal lefties come back in game 4, because Morton has even worse splits than Burnett. The Cardinals against Charlie stack up as a .2966 eqa, against the .2537 the Pirates manage against Shelby Miller. If it is Miller – Wacha’s numbers would come through as better than Miller’s, so the odds would only go up from the 68.6% in the Cardinal favor.

Game 5 figures to repeat game 1. <Edit: Ah, the Pirates swict to Cole for game 5. That makes it a much tighter .2599-.2377 Cardinal advantage, 61% instead of 73%…without taking into account the rest advantage for the Cardinals.>

Stick those percentages in with a random number generator, and the Cardinals are projected to win the series 67.6958% of the time.

And, with game 1 in the books and a 9-1 win, the Cardinals are up 78% to win the series.

Same setup as with the Reds/Pirates yesterday.

Danny Salazar goes 225 v left, 253 v right, and is RH.

Molina (R) 214 v RH, Salazar 253, net .208
Loney (L) 285 v 225 = 247
Zobrist (B) 295 v 225 = 255
Escobar (R) 252 v 253 = 245
Longoria (R) 281 v 253 = 273
DeJesus (L) 282 v 225 = 244
Jennings (R) 255 v 253 = 248
Myers (R) 291 v 253 = 283
Young (R) 259 v 253 = 252

Team total, .2505. Myers and Longoria are the strengths, Molina the notable weak link.

For the Indians, against Alex Cobb. Cobb is also right-handed, with a 245/226 left/right split.

Gomes (R) 272 v 226 = 236
Santana (B) 293 v 245 = 276
Kipnis (L) 291 v 245 = 274
Cabrera (B) 261 v 245 = 246
Aviles (R) 247 v 226 = 215
Brantley (L) 272 v 245 = 256
Bourn (L) 250 v 245 = 236
Swisher (B) 249 v 245 = 235
Giambi (L) 243 v 245 = 229

Team total, .2459.

[Late edit: so it seems it will Chisenhall at third instead of Aviles; he gets 252 v 245 = 237, Likewise, Raburn will play RF, pushing Swisher to 1B, Santana to DH, and iambi to the bench. So, effectively, Raburn (282 v 226 = 245) instead of Giambi. That changes the team total to .2490, which gives the Rays a .508 chance – prior to home field advantage.]

That difference spells a narrow Rays advantage, about a .523 win percentage.

Which I used as my title. However…

I haven’t accounted for home field, which should amount to about +.020 for Cleveland and -.020 for the Rays, which puts us at .503-.497 for the Rays. Nor have I accounted for (or, frankly, have any idea how to quantify) fatigue, as the Rays have been bouncing around the eastern half of North America while the Indians stayed home.

A very quick look at the Reds/Pirates game tonight.

Reds starter Johnny Cueto, this season, had a .207 eqa against left-handed hitters and a .234 eqa against righties. He is himself a RH.

Russell Martin, the Pirates catcher, is right-handed, and hit for a .275 eqa against right-handed pitchers.

Now, if a hitter with a .275 eqa goes against a pitcher who allows a .234 eqa, the expected eqa of the result should be roughly (275*234 / 260), or .248. This value is consistent with converting each of the eqas into winning percentages, letting them go head to head with the log5 method, and converting back into an eqa.

Repeating for the whole Pirate roster

C   Martin (R)      .275v234  =  .248

1b Morneau (L)     .297v207 = .236

2B Walker (S)      .296v207 = .236

SS Mercer (R)       .247×234 = .222

3B Alvarez(L)      .299v.207 = .238

LF Marte (R)        .278v234 = .250

CF McCutcheon (R)  .322v234 = .290

RF Byrd (R)         .291v234 = .262

The average value, for the whole Pirate team, is .249; eqas don’t sum linearly, they sum by the 2.5 power. That’s not a big deal here (a straight mean is .248), but will be for the opposite calculation.

Doing the same thing for the Reds against Francisco Liriano is trickier, because his EQA against lefties is so low as to be below zero. The eqa is low enough that a lineup of average hitters would be better off without that hitter in it, even if they got fewer chances as a result. Using an alternate form of the eqr equation, one that can’t go sub-zero, yields an eqa of .132. Against righties , he’s got a decidedly pedestrian .265 eqa allowed.

C Hanigan (R)    225v265 = 229

1b Votto (L)     303v132 = 154

2b Phillips (R)    271v265 = 276

SS Cozart (R)     245v265 = 250

3B Frazier (R)     278v265 = 283

LF Ludwick (R)   278v265 = 283

CF Choo (L)       243v132 = 123

RF Bruce (L)       262v132 = 133

The average value here works out to a .230 eqa when using the 2.5 power rule, quite a bit higher than the .216 you’d get from a straight average.

The win chance of a .249 eqa team (the Pirates) against a .230 team (the Reds) is .598.

Extending this into bullpens would probably only help the Pirates more. They had a composite .240 eqa from their bullpen in 2013, compared to the Reds .245; their likely top 4 dominate the Reds top 4, in a game theory sense:

Melancon 190 v Chapman 207
Watson 207 v Hoover 231
Wilson 217 v LeCure 232
Grilli 225 v Simon 225

One of the things I do every day is the download from MLB for new players, both new to the majors and to the minors.

This guy showed up as new this morning:

639238,2013,”Arredondo, Edgar”,”Arredondo”,”Edgar”,””,”Edgar”,””,569,”TIG”,11,”OOC”,”1″,”47″,””,”R”,”R”,75,192,1997/04/16,”Culiacan Sinaloa, Mexico”,””,”-“,”-“,””,”-“,”-“,”-”

Without going through all the codes, this Edgar Arredondo has joined the Tigres of the Mexican League, who used to be in Mexico City years ago but have re-established themselves in Cancun (state of Quintana Roo) on the Yucatan coast. The big deal is the birthdate: 4/16/1997. If that’s accurate, it makes him easily the first 1997 player in my database.

And he was the Tigre’s starting pitcher of the night, going two scoreless innings (one hit, one walk). And I do find articles from last year with him pitching in the 15-under world championships, so yes, I’d say this guy’s legit.

In case you couldn’t tell, I have been back home for several days (perfect recovery no, but the trajectory is upwards) and the updates have been going out.

And I think I may have, finally, tracked down all the stupid errors in my software that came from Houston being in the American League now. We’ll see if all the pages load tomorrow like they are supposed to.

Until I return home from surgery. Maybe tomorrow, cialis more likely saturday.

I participated in another “expert” draft on Tuesday night, courtesy of an invitation from Grey Albright at Razzball. It was a 12-team mixed league straight draft, and it was a strange experience – without a doubt the shallowest draft I’ve played in several years.

About the only plan I had going in was to avoid the players I had taken in LABR’s mixed league – spread my risks around, if you will. I wound up breaking that rule, not once, but four times, with players who had been sitting at the top of my boards for a long time by the time I took them.

The most interesting part of the draft for me, though –  and not in a good way – was the physical toll it had on me. It was only about three hours, and I did the whole thing from the comfort of my office chair, but by the last few rounds I was sweating like I was in the Amazon, my stomach was a solid constricted knot, and my head was crossed between a solid compressional pain and a loopy lightheadedness that had me barely able to sit up. It gives me a lot of worry about how I’ll handle upcoming drafts, in person, away from my house, for six+ hours at a time.

I had the six spot in this draft,  a touch better than the 13 I drew in LABR – right in the middle of the pack, with a steady interval between picks. Braun, Cabrera, Trout, McCutcheon, and Cano went before me. I settled for Matt Kemp readily enough.  Those who know me know I tend to value pitchers more than most, so it should not come as a surprise that I took Justin Verlander in the second round (Kershaw had gone a couple of picks earlier, and I probably would have taken him if I could.)

The third round had me salivating for Adam Jones, who was taken right before my turn. Damn. (That was my only real non-self-inflicted Damn of the night, though, so that’s good). I reloaded with Jay Bruce instead, and when the fourth round got back to me I decided to take an infielder with Starlin Castro. The fifth round sent me back to pitchers, and I chose Craig Kimbrel – first closer taken, and with serious misgivings about how he’s looked this spring. Freddie Freeman is one of my favorite breakout guys for the season, and his spring numbers – .346 translated EQA in Florida games – hasn’t done anything to dissuade me. I got him in the sixth. I took Kris Medlen in the 8th – he wasn’t actually next on my list, but only because of my doubts about his endurance, giving me three Braves in a row.

My 8th round went to Carlos Gomez, and I’m not sure why – I seem to have had a sudden panic attack about stolen bases and just flipped his name out there. Number 9 for me was Sergio Romo, who I clearly like a lot better than any other site I’ve seen. Tenth I took the “catcher” who is least likely to catch any games at all this season, Victor Martinez. I’m honestly not sure what to expect from him, but I do love the lineup slot he’s got. Eleven saw me go back to the mound for C.J. Wilson; here’s looking at the minor surgery clearing up the problem that dragged him down the last couple of months of 2012.

Halfway through, and I make my first repeat in Danny Espinosa. I really should have taken Howie Kendrick here – they were essentially equal players on my draft sheet, and I like what Kendrick (.409) has done this spring a lot more than Espinosa (.232).  I think the physical issues were starting to come on and affect me. Went to Doug Fister for my 13th pick, Pedro Alvarez at 14 (there was a run going on 3b going on, and I was getting panicky about being stuck with an even deeper option). Decided to take on some age and get Torii Hunter in the 15th. For 16 I hit my repeat board again, with another player I love as a 2013 breakout – Brandon Belt.

At 17 I went for Jason Vargas, who had actually been atop my board for a couple of rounds – I do love the outfield he’ll be pitching in front of. Alexei Ramirez at 18 wrapped up my infield. At this point I went looking for a pitcher who’s forecast was tolerable – not necessarily the best that’s left, but someone who had value within the format – but was having a strong spring. And I came up Jeff Niemann. I decided to take Joaquin Benoit next – I’ve got Rondon in another league, so I should have a closer in at least one of them. I did sort of the same thing for hitters, bringing up Aaron Hicks and his likely seizure of Minnesota’s center field. Hmm. Probably not my best choice of words. That left one more spot on my roster, and I filled it with a repeat (ugh) of Drew Stubbs (ugh ugh).

I was able to wash that sour taste out of my mouth by taking the hottest of hot bats, Jackie Bradley, with my first reserve pick. I liked him a lot coming into the season – the straight output forecast gave him a .274 eqa and 3.0 WARP, which was the 3rd-best total amongst Boston outfielders (Victorino and Ellsbury were higher). I certainly don’t like him less with his spring. Found my way to taking Hyunjin Ryu, another repeat, next, but I love what I get from the Korean numbers. And with the last pick, I went with a guy whose spring numbers are even better than Jackie Bradley’s, and in an organization where there is a lot less talent blocking his path to the majors – Christian Yelich of the Marlins.

And so to bed.