Here Are the Projected 2018 Strengths of Schedule
It’s that time again! The time when I get to write the same post I write every March. Oh, every time, the numbers are always different. But the words? The words seldom change. In one sense, that makes this post very easy. In another sense, it makes it hard to change things up. Hopefully you won’t notice if I plagiarize myself.
Strength of schedule. You know what I mean when I say that, right? It’s pretty much self-explanatory — we’re talking about how strong or weak a team’s overall schedule is. I think this gets talked about most often in football. Especially college football, I assume. You don’t hear this much in conversations about baseball, because baseball is widely perceived to have a great deal of parity. And the schedules are so very long that it’s easy to assume everything just averages out in the end. But that’s not what happens! If anything, the schedules are so very long that minor differences have a chance to pile up. What’s the cost of a win on the free-agent market? $8 million? $7 million? $9 million? Schedule strengths can matter by multiple wins. This can be a real and significant variable.
And FanGraphs makes this very simple to calculate. So, come along. I can show you who’ll have it relatively easy, and who’ll find things relatively challenging. I always love a post I can write in an hour.
Many of you have read this post before. But for anyone new, I’ll fly through the explanation. This is our projected standings page. That page is live every day of the year, and it changes with transactions and injuries. If you’d like, you can think of it as showing the true-talent projected standings. But this is our playoff-odds page. That was just re-launched for 2018. If you look closely, you’ll notice the projected standings on the two different pages are a little different. That’s because the playoff-odds-page projections take schedules into account. The other link is schedule-independent. So what do you do when you have two pages and one changing variable? You can isolate that variable by subtracting one projection from the other.
I’ve plotted projected schedule strengths by expressing them in win adjustments. A positive number means the given team should gain X number of wins because of the schedule. That means the schedule is softer than average. A negative number means the given team should lose Y number of wins because of the schedule. That means the schedule is harder than average. Obviously this shouldn’t be taken as the word of God — projections are only best guesses, and this doesn’t consider the timing of when a team plays another. Maybe one rival will keep on missing another rival’s ace. Some teams are going to change around the trade deadline. These are simply more estimates. But there’s also signal in here, so, to get right to the meat of the article, here’s a summary of the National League.
The average NL team gets a slight benefit from the schedule. The average AL team gets the opposite. I don’t know why that is, exactly, since the AL has been better than the NL for the past several years. It might not mean anything, so I’d try not to think about it. (Update: as noted in the comments below, this actually makes perfect sense! I am stupid!) For these purposes, it doesn’t matter how the NL compares to the AL. All we care about are NL and AL teams relative to one another, and so, here, we see the Nationals as having the NL’s softest projected schedule. Their calculated benefit is nearly three wins. The Marlins and Padres are at the other end, down about one win. It should go without saying, but good teams tend to have softer schedules, and bad teams tend to have harder schedules, because good teams and bad teams don’t get to play against themselves. It helps the Nationals that they don’t have to play the Nationals. Not even once! To say nothing of 19 divisional showdowns.
The way this usually works out, the most interesting numbers are linked to the wild-card contenders. The Cardinals might not be as good as the Cubs, but they do appear to have the third-easiest schedule in the NL. If you figure the Cardinals will be competing against the Rockies and the Diamondbacks, well, schedules alone could account for a two-win difference or so. You can never really know when mediocre teams might overachieve, so it’s possible the Cardinals’ schedule will actually end up quite tough, but for now, this is a positive.
I find the American League even more interesting.
The total spread in the NL is 3.6 wins. The total spread in the AL is 5.5 wins, between the Indians and the Rangers. The Indians stand to have it rather easy. The Rangers are going to have to fight and claw. And maybe more relevant to the Rangers, and to the rest of the AL — the Twins could have it almost as easy as the Indians. Even if the Indians are better than the Twins are, by a healthy margin, the Twins are still shooting for one of those wild-card slots, and their schedule should give them a real bump.
The AL’s three worst projected teams play in the same division. Now, again, sometimes teams overachieve. And the Royals have gotten better lately, by adding Mike Moustakas, Jon Jay, and Lucas Duda. But, let’s say you’re a schedule-strength skeptic. Teams play their divisional opponents 76 times. That’s very nearly half the season. The Twins’ four rivals have an average projected win total of 75.6. The Rangers’ four rivals have an average projected win total of 85.0. The Orioles’ four rivals have an average projected win total of 87.2. How can that not matter? Every team in the East and West have some kind of path to the playoffs. The Central, not so much. In theory the Twins could make the playoffs without being one of the AL’s top five true-talent teams, because true talent won’t solely determine the final standings.
To drive the point further home, here are the six projected division strengths. This shows each division’s average projected wins per team.
There’s no division stronger than the AL East. There usually isn’t. I have 14 years of preseason projections in a spreadsheet, meaning I have 84 divisions, and the AL East has nine of the top ten averages. That’s just how the landscape is. But, flip things around. Look at this year’s AL Central, at 77.1. For now, ever so slightly, that is the worst preseason projected division since at least 2005. It’s the worst that I have on record, only by a hair. Maybe one of the teams in the Central is going to improve very quickly, perhaps by signing Alex Cobb or Greg Holland. I don’t know. But the AL Central still appears to be weak, which, again, improves the Twins’ opportunity. Maybe it would mean more if there were still just the one wild card per league, but you figure this has at least in part informed the Twins’ offseason. They have too good a chance to pass up. They get to benefit from their circumstances.
Baseball will play out on the field, and so on and so forth. It’s the actual games that actually matter. What you’re seeing are best guesses. It’s the most we can offer before the games start being played.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.



This is what I’ve been telling people. Even with a shaky offseason, the Indians will still win 95 games and probably the division by at least 4-5 games.
I’d put the Nationals in the same boat too. A superteam in those divisions is just unfair.
This article just confirms everything I was too lazy to research myself. I appreciate your commitment to making me happy.
Fantasizing about Your Team playing in the AL Central is kind of like imagining buying real estate in Detroit.
“The average NL team gets a slight benefit from the schedule. The average AL team gets the opposite. I don’t know why that is, exactly, since the AL has been better than the NL for the past several years”
Ok, maybe I’m just dumb, but if the AL has been better than the NL wouldn’t you expect exactly this outcome – AL is on average playing better teams (each other)? Unless the interleague games really move the needle that much…
Brain fart: we all have them.
Yeah, you’re right! Was writing too fast and over-weighted the interleague games in my head.
There’s also the observation that the interleague games are hardly distributed equally, on basis of expected “true talent.” Which might also make an interesting post.
This would be a very good year for an AL team to be playing the Marlins.
Oddball’s assumption only holds if the deviations from an average schedule in the NL and AL cancel out. If they don’t then there are differing distributions of schedule quality/team skills in either league, leading to this disparity.
The Playoff Odds projection really does not like the NL. You can see it in the SOS graphs above as the NL teams have generally easier schedules. You can also see it in the WS Odds. The AL is being given >60% chance (>67% if Astros win ALCS) to win the World Series.
Astros are projected to win 63% of their games, but have a 67% to win the World Series if they make it that far. That lopsidedness almost has to be wrong.
Your instinct is wrong here. You’d be right that if the World Series were a single game, then the only way that the Astros would be more likely to win the WS than a random game would be if their average world series opponent were worse than their average regular season opponent, which would be extremely unlikely. However, because the World Series is best of 7, they can be more likely to win the world series even though they’re less likely to win any individual game.
For instance, if the World Series were 10,000 games long, the Astros, as the best team in the league, would show up as 100% to win it, even if they’re only 55% likely to win any given game.
Astros would not be playing an average team. 67% odds for a seven game series is saying the Astros would win a game against the NL representative 58% of the time.
This is wrong. If the World Series were 10,000 games long, both teams would be comprised of rotting corpses before it ended and presumably it would be declared a draw.
Orioles fan here, and as a guy with many annoying Nats fans as friends, this article pretty much confirms my suspicions.
“Annoying Nats fan” is redundant.
Aren’t Nationals fans just Orioles fans on Orioles off days?
Most Nationals fans are very casual fans. DC has lots of transplants and if you were a die hard fan, you are likely to stick with your old team. If you are an older, longtime DC area resident and baseball fan, and you are a die hard fan, you probably didn’t change over to the Nationals from the Orioles. All of my friends and colleagues that are huge baseball fans are fans of other teams. All of my friends and colleagues who are casual fans and just like being outside, drinking beer, and eating hot dogs, are Nationals fans.
Where teams are on the competitiveness arc, coupled with large market vs. small market spending, has skewed the idea of a “balanced schedule” since 1969, and it will only grow worse if baseball decides on eight divisions following the next round of expansion.
It’ll never happen, but taking a page from the NHL and eliminating divisions would render this debate moot. In fact, you could easily construct a 140-game intra-league schedule (10 games against each team in your league) plus 22 games of inter-league play. And to completely eliminate schedule bias, only count the 140 toward postseason.
But that would keep ESPN from having 19 Red Sox-Yankees games to televise, so you know nobody at MLB headquarters would seriously consider that proposal.
The NHL didn’t only not eliminate divisions, but they actually made the divisions much more important. Instead of having just 8 playoff teams from each conference- you have the top 3 teams in both divisions in the conference in the playoffs, with the next 2 best teams. Then the 1st 2 rounds of the playoffs are divisional playoffs basically with the top 3 teams and then 1 of the next 2 best teams.
You said that the Projected Standings page is live every day. Is the Playoff Odds page live every day as well (i.e. changes based how teams might look stronger than they were projected at the beginning of the year and, for example, if the Reds get their Cubs games out of the way early in the year, it should project a higher % of W’s for the ROS)? If so, it seems like the Project Odds page would then be the most accurate at any given point during the season, since it sounds like it takes the data from Projected Standings and adds the schedule effect. In fact, the accuracy would increase as the season progressed. Right?
1 thing that’s interesting with SOS is things like injuries. For instance the injury with Turner with the Dodgers. 1st 5 weeks or so, Dodgers have 10 games with both the Giants and D’backs, but 0 with the Rockies. So while the Rockies have the slightly easier schedule on paper vs Arizona, Arizona gets over half their games with LA done w/o Turner, while the Rockies never see that.