The Greatest Comeback Ever?

[survelvn]

So, for the past 6 months, everybody has been talking about how the 2004 Red Sox made the "greatest comeback ever." Every time I hear that, it bugs me - and not just because I'm a Yankees fan (but mostly because of that). It's bugging me because I'm wondering, is that truly the most improbably comeback in postseason history?

Purely statistically, I don't think it is.

I have this excel spreadsheet I got from somewhere (I'll try to take the time to find the site later) that gives Win Expectancies for a team in any situation in the game. If you don't know, Win Expectancy is the chance a team has of winning a game in any situation. Say you wanted to know the odds of a home team winning a game when they were batting in the 3rd inning with a runner on 1st, 2 outs, and up by 1 run - this chart would tell you the probability of the home team winning was .738.

Anyways, what I did was to figure out the chances of the Red Sox winning the 2004 ALCS, down by one run in the bottom of ninth with 0 outs and 0 on, and down 3-0 in the series.

The odds of them winning game 4 in that situation were .189. Then, multiplying that by the odds of them winning game 5 from the outset (.589, since they were the home team), and game 6 and 7 (.411), and you get their total chance of winning the series to be .0188.

Obviously, quite small chances. But, it seems, not as small as you'd think.

For good measure, I compared it with another famous comeback - that of the 1986 Mets, down by 2 runs in the ninth inning or later, with 2 outs and nobody on, and down 3-2 in the series.

The Mets chances of winning the game in that situation were about .014. Multiply that by their chances of winning game 7 as the home team (.589), and you get .008.

So, statistically speaking, it would appear as the Mets comeback in 1986 was a more unlikely comeback.

I guess what I'm wondering here is whether people think this is a valid comparison. Obviously, this does not say that the Mets comeback was necesarrily greater - it does not take into account alot of other things, such as the mental barrier that seemed to have existed around 3-0 deficits, etc.

But it's an interesting thought. I may try, later, to plug in some other famous postseason comebacks and see what comes up.

[Tifoso]

Wow, very impressive stats, amico mio. Thanks for posting them

[Prickly Pete]

Really interesting question.

Last year's ALCS gets the "Greatest Comeback Ever" tag simply because coming back from 3-0 had never been done before in baseball. So, technically, it's the greatest deficit overcome.

You also have to take into account, I think, the chances of winning Game 4 with the greatest closer in postseason history on the mound to close it out. Does facing Mariano Rivera reduce the chances of a team winning a game down by 1 run entering the 9th? I would think so.

But if you take the Mets example and conclude that it was a a statistically more improbable comeback, then what about the Sox in the 1986 ALCS?

They were down 3 games to 1 and trailing 5-2 entering the 9th against the Angels. Just based on the math you presented, that would seem to be an even more improbable comeback than the World Series that year.

[Prickly Pete]

Say you wanted to know the odds of a home team winning a game when they were batting in the 3rd inning with a runner on 1st, 2 outs, and up by 1 run - this chart would tell you the probability of the home team winning was .738.

Is that true? It seems hard to believe the win probability would be that high with a 1-run lead in the 3rd inning.

[bnorris85]

well the fact that no team had ever forced a game 7 let alone win it probably gives it that title.

[yankswn23]

What about the Yankees winning back to back games in the WS, down by 2 runs with 1 on with 2 outs and down to their last strike two nights in a row? T
The chances of that have to be extremely low.

[BambinosRing]

The odds of them winning game 4 in that situation were .189. Then, multiplying that by the odds of them winning game 5 from the outset (.589, since they were the home team), and game 6 and 7 (.411), and you get their total chance of winning the series to be .0188.

I think the odds in Vegas at the time were a lot longer than a 1.88% chance of winning the ALCS. I definitely saw a chart somewhere with the online betting trading odds being closer to between 500-1 to 1000-1. Does anybody know the chart I'm talking about? It shows the trading price of a bet to win $1 if BOS wins and it dips to just about 0 in the 9th inning of Game 4. I can't find a link, unfortunately.

[BambinosRing]

I still can't find the chart, sorry.

[BoSox04]

Uhmm, besides the 2004 Red Sox and the 1986 Mets, how about the 1986 Red Sox against the Angels in the ALCS? Dave Henderson really broke some people's hearts and it led to the suicide of Donnie Moore after he gave up that 2-run home run in the top of the 9th inning with the Angels leading 5-4 with 2 down. But the chances of the Red Sox winning Game 5 while being down 5-2 in the 9th and 3 games to 1 were really slim, and Gene Mauch totally blew it. He remains one of the greatest managers to never win a pennant (ex. 1964 Phillies)

[anyoneseenthebridge]

That's a very interesting chart you talk about. The problem is that there's way too much variation in a given game for the probability to really mean anything. Perhaps in a larger number of games, your winning percentage may come close to the probability, but for a span of 7 games there are simply not enough trials to make a logical statistical comparison.

I think the 2004 comeback was greater than 1986. Several teams all over sports have come back from 3-2, very few have come back from 3-0. As they say, this game is 90% mental. A four game winning streak during the season isn't much to talk about (unless you're a Tigers fan like me), but doing it in the playoffs down 3-0 is another story. It shouldn't be, but it is. That's why they play them on the field.

[1961]

Really interesting question.

Last year's ALCS gets the "Greatest Comeback Ever" tag simply because coming back from 3-0 had never been done before in baseball. So, technically, it's the greatest deficit overcome.

Bingo! Throw on top of it a 4-0 sweep of a very good Cards team and you have the greatest comeback ever. End of discussion.

[RIyankee]

So, statistically speaking, it would appear as the Mets comeback in 1986 was a more unlikely comeback.

Based on statistical probabilites, I would concur.

Whenever Boston fans throw the 2004 ALCS in my face I make the case for Game 6/1986 WS.

The Mets were down 2 runs and down to their last strike (with nobody on base).

Compare that with winning 4 straight.

In 2004, the Red Sox outplayed the Yankee for the final 4 games of the ALCS (IMO Boston had the better team), but choked in 1986.

JMHO

[mickey mantle]

yeah the 1986 ny mets cinderella story was more amazing than 2004 alcs

[NYYBombshell]

yeah the 1986 ny mets cinderella story was more amazing than 2004 alcs

Especially when you consider they had the game in hand (they even had plastic on the lockers) and they blew it.

[PlsDontTearDownY.S.]

yes it was

[Euclis]

Especially when you consider they had the game in hand (they even had plastic on the lockers) and they blew it.

And even more so when you consider that the Mets had to come back against the immortal Calvin Schiraldi. With Mariano Rivera on the mound in the playoffs, it really was just a matter of time until the Sox starting knocking him around.

[JDPNYY]

1978 Yankees

[NYYBombshell]

1978 Yankees

Good choice, John. That team was what, 14 games out by the All-Star break?

[S2]

But if you take the Mets example and conclude that it was a a statistically more improbable comeback, then what about the Sox in the 1986 ALCS?

They were down 3 games to 1 and trailing 5-2 entering the 9th against the Angels. Just based on the math you presented, that would seem to be an even more improbable comeback than the World Series that year.

I agree. New York's comeback in the 1986 World Series wasn't even the best comeback in the 1986 playoffs.

[CTSoxFan]

I think everyone has touched on what might be the "fatal flaw" of the chart in question (if anyone can ever find it)...it's an accounting of general possibilities and probabilities, but it fails to accomodate specific instances like Mariano Rivera v. Calvin Schiraldi.

Something to keep in mind, I think, the next time I tune in to Baseball Prospectus' odds chart and see that the Red Sox are a mortal lock to win the division, or at least make the playoffs, this year.

[BambinosRing]

I think everyone has touched on what might be the "fatal flaw" of the chart in question (if anyone can ever find it)...it's an accounting of general possibilities and probabilities, but it fails to accomodate specific instances like Mariano Rivera v. Calvin Schiraldi.

Something to keep in mind, I think, the next time I tune in to Baseball Prospectus' odds chart and see that the Red Sox are a mortal lock to win the division, or at least make the playoffs, this year.

The chart I was thinking of was actually the live betting line, which is a little different than the pre-calculated "Batter X against Pitcher Y has probability Z" charts. The live intra-game series betting line was based on people actually being willing to lay down money on the odds (damn I wish I'd put $20 on the Sox), not just the pre-calculated situation odds. That said, I can't find it so it really doesn't matter.

[PinstripeDynasty]

Really interesting question.

Last year's ALCS gets the "Greatest Comeback Ever" tag simply because coming back from 3-0 had never been done before in baseball.

Not true. You need to qualify it by saying not been done before in MLB playoffs. It was done in the 2002 U.S. vs Japan baseball series which included pro stars from both countries. U.S. came back from 3-0 games deficit to win 4-3.

[wexy]

Sometimes you just have to take the pain.

[Herb Pennock]

Not true. You need to qualify it by saying not been done before in MLB playoffs. It was done in the 2002 U.S. vs Japan baseball series which included pro stars from both countries. U.S. came back from 3-0 games deficit to win 4-3.

Even I have to admit, that's a stretch. U.S. vs Japan isn't quite on the same level as the ALCS.

[YankS1302]

I don't believe it is. The media has so much to do w/ hype and giving out these titles of the greatest this and that. When the Yanks were up 3-0, the media wrote them (sox) off. Not the Yanks and not Yanks fans. We know. Just as Yogi said it ain't over til it's over. I had that feeling in my gut. Redsox are to good of a team. 'Still can't stand em'.
Just because it had not happen being down 0-3 and coming back, because history was what the media was basing it off of. We heard it everynight, every sports center. 'No team has ever come back----- It kept getting bigger and bigger. They built it (media).
The Yanks to there own credit and history can really never be the so called underdog. They have a century worth of winning under there belt and vise versa for the deadsox. It was going to happen sooner or later.