| sports announcers apparently don't understand comparative advantage |
[Sep. 26th, 2009|08:25 pm] |
| [ | mood |
| |  amused | ] |
The Yankees are going to have a choice for what length 1st round playoff series they want to play - option A is one day longer than option B, which would allow them to play the series on three pitchers.
Every sportscaster I've heard to date has claimed that there's no way the Yankees would ever choose option B. These guys are sportscasters and not economists because they don't understand this sort of situation. Though the Yankees would be able to go with 3 pitchers if they take option A, so will their opponents, and so to make their decision they really have to look at how their #1 and #4 pitchers stack up to their opponents. If the #1 pitchers are evenly matched, but the #4 pitcher for the Yankees is better than the one playing for Detroit, then the Yankees should go with the shorter schedule.
Depending on how soon the second round is to be played, the Yanks might choose the shorter schedule even if it would be locally optimal to choose the longer one, if for example, they judge the rest of their game would make up for any pitching mismatches; going into the second round with a rested top of the rotation may be enough of an advantage to be worth playing for it. |
|
|
| Comments: |
Why do they get to choose? That doesn't seem fair. (If this is something I should just know by living in the American league, I can figure out some way to look it up). Your analysis is clear, but I'd think that not only pitching is relevant in the decision, but the possibility of injuries to other players, the chances of which go up with every game.
They get to choose because they have the best record in the American League. (The National League leader will get a similar choice.) Why their two options have different lengths is because of television, I suspect.
| |
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}