Hey GLBers -- I'm about to win a gift certificate to WhatIfSports.com, good for one free season on the self-proclaimed "Internet's foremost authority on simulation".  I'm not really sure what this business is, aside from what's on the website.  Has anyone participated in this before?  Does anyone plan on participating this season?  Wasn't there an Irish guy around here that did this?  Fitz-Hume or something?  Does anyone know what the minimum number of words for a diary entry is?

Hey everyone.  I think it's fair to say that the exodus of perennial trade-bait Scott Linebrink -- regardless of your feelings toward him -- has caused at least some kind of stir on this site.  Perhaps I'm misconstruing my own mixed emotions about his departure, but doesn't it feel like something is in the works?  Like the wheels have been set in motion for something big?  Even if over the next 5 days none of the Milwaukee prospects become trade-bait in their own right, I feel like the Friars are ready to pull themselves out of the funk that is called July Baseball.*

How do we do it?  Well, since none of us is either Kevin Towers nor wonder boy Paul DePodesta we have little power over building the 40-man roster.  And since none of us is Bud Black we have little power over managing the lineup.  However, what we do have in our arsenal is enough unicorns, rainbows and magical robots, enough unconditional love for our team, and enough Wiggins to write the kind of weird and wonderful folklore that will make you shit your pants.

Is it premature or are we ready to bust out the big guns?  Is it time to ban Johnny Dub's cats, at least temporarily (I kind of want to see the final installment of his trilogy)? Should we dissuade Dex from posting first comment on the open thread?  Is that even a superstition?  Are reverse jinxes your thing?  Maybe you think the answer is to help Lindsay Lohan get some coke during her stay at Passages Rehab Center.  Well, even if it is too early for the big guns, I'd like to hear what your superstitions are regardless. Personally, I can't look at our pitcher's pitch count unless our team is at bat.  This has ended disastrously before, whether I take a glance at MLB Gameday or at the wall in left center field.  Also, I'm considering wiping the dust off my #8 Mark Loretta jersey for the Houston series, but I don't have the clairvoyance to see whether or not this is a smart move.  What do all of you have up your sleeves?

* We're 8-13 and we've lost 5 of the last 6.  Chris Young is injured for sure, Peavy is injured and won't tell anyone, Maddux has been crucified by our bullpen so many times that he's grown a beard and now wears sandals when he pitches.  Germano is apparently not the real deal, and Wells -- well, he's been pitching like he has gout.  And then there's our offense.  Actually, forget our offense.

A number of recent conversations on this site (as well as Ducksnorts) have concerned the notion of the "Expected Win-Loss" (X W-L) differential, specifically in its capacity to predict the "Actual Win-Loss" (W-L) differential for any given team.  The formula itself takes into consideration how many runs a team has scored (Runs Scored, or RS), as well as how many it has given up (Runs Allowed, or RA).  The key assumption is that a team's W-L record is significantly correlated with its RS-RA differential.  Hence, a team that scores a lot of runs and gives up few should have a better record than a team that scores few runs and gives up a ton.  I doubt too many people would have a problem with this, especially given a large enough sample size (as Dex noted in a recent post).  In fact, I found out that at the end of the 2006 season the W-L for the league was very highly correlated with the X W-L numbers (r = .91).  Again, no big surprise.

The problem as I see it is that (1) the season is only 162 games, and (2) the division races are usually very tight (last year, 4 of the 6 division races were decided by 4 games or less).  In this case, over the span of 162 games, you would hope that the X W-L formula would have a margin of error less than that, right?  Well, as it turns out, if you look at the distribution of actual-predicted wins for the league in 2006, you would observe a standard deviation of over +- 4 games, which essentially means that only about 68% of the league would come within about +- 4 wins of their predicted totals (assuming a normal distribution - in reality, 53% of the teams came within 3 or fewer wins, and 73% came within 4 or fewer).  Roughly 95% of the league came within +- 8 wins.

Furthermore, the X W-L formula only predicted 2 of the 6 division winners.  And this is after the season has finished!  I can't even imagine what its accuracy was at the All-Star Break or the July 31st trade deadline when a GM might actually need this formula.

So what does all of this mean?  Well, while X W-L is certainly correlated to a high degree with W-L (no shit?), its value in the grand scheme of things is questionable at best.  I don't see how it could play a significant role in whether or not you pick up that "big bat" you've been eyeing, or in an evaluation of the "depth" of your bullpen.  As I see it, there's always room for improvement.

WestCoastBias recently made the following comment in response to an MLBTR posting:

Could Kevin Towers pull off a Linebrink for Glaus swap? That way Kouz could tear up in AAA for a full year. There's been rumbling in the past that the Padres have the money for a big trade and this could be it. KT could add a prospect to sweeten the deal. Chase Headley perhaps? It was rumored that Linebrink/Headley was offered for Sheffield so it's reasonable to expect that to be a solid bounty for Glaus as well.

This would be a trade that would add extremely valuable players to both sides. With Ryan out, JP will want a legitimate back of the bullpen arm and Linebrink can fill that. For the Padres, Glaus could be the power threat they need to go all the way. A 1-2 right side/left side punch by him and Gonzalez could be deadly and too tempting for KT to pass on.

I'm intrigued. As noted in the original posting, Glaus makes $10.75MM this year and $12.75MM in '08. Although injury prone, he's obviously reliable for big numbers and the Blue Jays are all but out of it. We've got the cash. Do we have the cojones?