The Determining Third Index

[G-Fafif]

The bit about "every team's going to win a third, lose a third, it's the other third that determines their season" got me curious. Since the season began, I've been tracking each Mets game in terms of Gonna Win, Gonna Lose and Wins/Losses Allegedly Determining Their Season. If you go by the one-third formula, the Mets, at 27-27, should have a Determining Third Index standing of or near 18-18/9-9 -- after all, a third of their wins should be givens, as should be their losses, right?

But it doesn't seem to be working that way, as discussed in this exploration of The One-Third Myth. As an exclusive to CPFers, here is what my tracking has told me thus far on a game-by-game basis with key events noted (your Met mileage may vary):

GAMES YOU'RE GOING TO WIN 12 001 NYM 7 FLA 1 Opening Day, Santana 6 IP 009 NYM 5 COL 0 Pelfrey 7 IP, 5 H 012 NYM 6 CHI 1 Pagan 2-R HR, Davis debut 017 NYM 5 ATL 2 Davis 1st HR; Takahashi 3.2 IP W; Atl 4 E's 020 NYM 4 LAD 0 Santana 6 IP; Bay 1st HR 021 NYM 10 LAD 5 Wright 4 RBI; Davis 3 RBI 022 NYM 7 LAD 3 Maine 9 K, 6+ IP 023 NYM 9 PHI 1 Niese 7 IP, 1 ER, 7 K; Barajas 2 HR, 3 RBI 046 NYM 8 PHI 0 Dickey 6 IP, 7 K; Reyes 3 H, Valdes 3 IP 047 NYM 5 PHI 0 Takahashi 6 IP 0 BB; Bar 3 RBI; Reyes HR; 4 SB 051 NYM 10 MIL 4 Dickey 7 IP, RBI; Frenchy 4 H, Blanco 3 H 053 NYM 4 SDP 2 Pelfrey 8 IP, 1 ER, 8 K; Wright, Davis HR GAMES YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE 12 003 FLA 3 NYM 1 Badenhop 3 scoreless IP 006 WAS 5 NYM 2 Liv�n Hernandez cruises 007 COL 11 NYM 3 Maine falls apart 015 CHI 9 NYM 3 Bullpen allows 6 runs in 4 innings 024 PHI 10 NYM 0 Halladay CG 3-hitter 025 PHI 11 NYM 5 Santana 3.2 IP, 10 ER 032 WAS 3 NYM 2 Pudge 4-4; Mets Batters 11 K 036 FLA 7 NYM 2 Perez 3.1 IP, 4 HR allowed 037 FLA 7 NYM 5 Maine 4 straight walks to start 1st inning 041 WAS 5 NYM 3 Pagan ITP HR, Starts TP; Dickey 6 IP 050 MIL 8 NYM 6 Nieve 2 IP, 5 ER; Perez 2 IP, 3 ER 052 SDP 18 NYM 6 Takahashi 4 IP, 6 ER; Bullpen 4 IP, 12 ER THE THIRD THAT DETERMINE YOUR SEASON � WINS 15 004 NYM 8 WAS 2 Break 2-2 tie in 7th; 2 HRs Francoeur, Barajas 011 NYM 2 STL 1 (20) Mets win vs. Card position players pitching 014 NYM 4 CHI 0 Reyes 3B, 4H, SB; Tatis PH HR; Pelf 7 IP 016 NYM 5 CHI 2 Santana 6.1 IP; Frankie 5-Out Save 018 NYM 3 ATL 1 Francoeur 7th-Inn 2B breaks tie 019 NYM 1 ATL 0 (6) Pelfrey 5 IP, 105 pitches 027 NYM 5 CIN 4 Barajas T-9 HR; Maine 6 IP 029 NYM 6 SFG 4 Barajas 2 HR (W/O); Davis 2 HR, Foul Catch 030 NYM 5 SFG 4 (11) Blanco 3-5, W/O HR; Santana 7.2 IP 033 NYM 8 WAS 6 6-R 8th; Carter 2-R PH; Davis dugout catch 039 NYM 3 ATL 2 Pelfrey 7.2 IP; Barajas 2-R 2B 042 NYM 10 WAS 7 Valdes 5 Relief IP; Wright 4 RBI 044 NYM 5 NYY 3 Pelfrey 6 IP, 1 R; Bay 4 H; K-Rod 5-out SV 045 NYM 6 NYY 4 Santana 7.2 IP, 1 R; Bay 2 HR 048 NYM 3 PHI 0 Pelf 7 IP 3 H; Reyes 3 H, 2 RBI; 3rd Str SHO THE THIRD THAT DETERMINE YOUR SEASON � LOSSES 15 002 FLA 7 NYM 6 (10) Fight back from 6-1; Tatis out at home 005 WAS 4 WAS 3 Willie Harris diving catch ends game 008 COL 6 NYM 5 (10) Ianetta W/O HR off Mejia 010 STL 4 NYM 3 Felipe Lopez GS off Valdes 012 STL 5 NYM 3 Wainwright CG 4-hitter 026 CIN 3 NYM 2 (11) Laynce Nix W/O home run (Acosta) 028 CIN 5 NYM 4 (10) Orlando Cabrera W/O home run (Feliciano) 031 SFG 6 NYM 5 Perez 3.1 IP, 7 BB; Very Windy 034 WAS 6 NYM 4 Bernadina 2 HR, catch; Stammen 3 RBI 035 FLA 2 NYM 1 Winning run on Nieve wild pitch in 9th 038 FLA 10 NYM 8 Down 7-0, pull to 7-6; Niese injured 040 ATL 3 NYM 2 Wright 3 K, E on throw for losing run in 9th 043 NYY 2 NYM 1 Takahashi 6 IP, 0 R; Cora key error; 4 NYM hits 049 MIL 2 NYM 0 Santana 8 IP 3 H, 0 R, 2-for-3; Gallardo CG 054 SDP 5 NYM 1 (11) Santana 7 IP 0 R; Gonzalez w/o GS

As explained in the linked article, this is a touch-and-feel exercise based on well-honed fan analysis -- and leavened by sense of heart and gut -- that attempts to characterize the nature of games in their wake, without knowing, ultimately, if anything about the season in progress has been definitively determined. My preliminary conclusion is the "one-third" formula is a myth devised to make teams that just lost lousy games feel it was nobody's fault. Maybe you could have guessed that, but it's been fun finding out.

[Gwreck]

Perhaps the fact that more of the games are in the "determining third" suggests that the Mets are underperforming and should have a better record than they do.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I tried this experiment a few years ago but didn't bother to define things well and eventually ran out the energy to determine whether the Mets really "deserved" to win or lose. Anyway, I've also heard this as 50/50/62, I;m sure it's not harde and fast.

but with the mets having a below average offense compounded by passive, bunt-first offensive approach, and a paranoid backwards-looking endgame, it's inevitable that they'd get themselves into more close games than you'd like, and have a lousy record in them especially on the road.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Especially on the road.

I got the feeling that, unable to hold Rodriguez out of Wednesday night's tie, having already put him in to protect a lead, he still kept out of the game whoever he thought of has his next-best available reliever, and that's why we got us a family-sized dose of Valdes.

We're not losing because we're failing to execute in close situations, we're losing because we're living to execute in close situations --- instead of obliterating them.

[G-Fafif]

These are good reasons why the Mets may not be doing as well as they could be, but does that mean only teams that are living up to their potential (if not exceeding it) would get the one-third (or 50-50-62) split to work? I really have no idea.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I don't think it's as cut and dried as these games are contestable and these games are not. it's simply that the further a win total or a loss total gets away from the mean of 81, the less likely it is to be reached. but it's a simple bell curve; there's no magical point at which the likelihood falls off a cliff.

[Zvon]

Edgy DC wrote: We're not losing because we're failing to execute in close situations, we're losing because we're living to execute in close situations ---

Most rip-worthy quote of the week.

I smell my new sig.

[G-Fafif]

Updating the Determining Third Index through the two-thirds of the season. The Mets have thus far achieved/accumulated:

28 Wins of the �gonna� win variety
25 Losses of the �gonna� lose variety
26 Wins that �determine your season�
29 Losses that �determine your season�

The "one-third" or even "win 50, lose 50 no matter what you do" equation still strikes me as a myth espoused to excuse managers who don't know what else to say when their teams lose.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I think the myth persists because it's a good perspective to help people put losses behind them. The fact is that every Met fan who knows the team's history knows that 54 wins isn't a given. Win proablllity maps on a bell curve, and going from 75 to 85 wins (or losses) is a lot easier (and more common) than going from 100 to 110, but that doesn't mean 54 losses (or wins) are inevitable by definition.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: I think the myth persists because it's a good perspective to help people put losses behind them. The fact is that every Met fan who knows the team's history knows that 54 wins isn't a given. Win proablllity maps on a bell curve, and going from 75 to 85 wins (or losses) is a lot easier (and more common) than going from 100 to 110, but that doesn't mean 54 losses (or wins) are inevitable by definition.

I think it relates to "You're never as good as you look when you're winning and never as bad as you look when you're losing."

[ashie62]

G-Fafif wrote: Updating the Determining Third Index through the two-thirds of the season. The Mets have thus far achieved/accumulated: 28 Wins of the �gonna� win variety 25 Losses of the �gonna� lose variety 26 Wins that �determine your season� 29 Losses that �determine your season� The "one-third" or even "win 50, lose 50 no matter what you do" equation still strikes me as a myth espoused to excuse managers who don't know what else to say when their teams lose.

Losing 5 of the last 6 to Arizona is all I need to know.

[G-Fafif]

The just completed Determining Third Index (intended to reflect upon the maxim that you're gonna win a third of your games and lose a third of your games no matter what you do, it's the other third that determine your season):

FINAL THIRD, GAMES 109-162:

11 Gonna Win
16 Gonna Lose
14 Season-Determining Wins
13 Season-Determining Losses

FULL SEASON

39 Gonna Win
41 Gonna Lose
40 Season-Determining Wins
42 Season-Determining Losses

In actuality (by my tracking), just over half the games the Mets played determined their season, and the Mets lost just over half of those. The thirds concept may have not withstood my intense scrutiny, but the Mets were a barely sub-.500 team in games whose outcome seemed predestined and in games in which they needed to be managed to a result.

No matter how you look at it, they kind of sucked.