PDA

View Full Version : Hawk's 60/60/42 (my 55/55/52) Theory


BRDSR
04-03-2014, 12:50 AM
Any White Sox fan worth his/her salt has heard Hawk's 60/60/42 theory: every team is going to win 60 games, every team is going to lose 60, and the remaining 62 are up for grabs. It always seemed about right to me, but based on the numbers, I'd make it 55/55/52. In the last 10 years, only 2 teams (.667%) have won or lost less than 55 games. They are the '13 Astros and the '04 Diamondbacks, both of whom won only 51 games. (Over the same time period, there are 11 teams who have won/lost less than 60.)

I've often found myself wondering in which category a certain White Sox win or loss fell. I thought I'd start a thread on it for the 2014 season, just to see how it shakes out.

In determining which category a win/loss falls in, I will consider the quality of the opponent overall, the quality of both starting pitchers, and the "In Game Play." So far, I think this is how the games break down:

Mar 31:
Quality of Opponent: Low
Quality of Sox SP: High
Quality of Twins SP: Medium
In Game Play: Favors White Sox - Sox played a solid all-around game, Twins SP gave up 5 runs in 6 innings.

Strength of opponent and strength of SP both favor White Sox, and they played a solid all-around game. This falls into the "Clear Win" category.

Apr 2:
Quality of Opponent: Low
Quality of Sox SP: Medium
Quality of Twins SP: Medium
In Game Play: Even: First three categories might barely favor White Sox overall, plus game went into extra innings; will almost always be in the "Up for Grabs" Column.

So, for the season:

Clear wins: 1
Clear losses: 0
Up for Grabs: 1-0

To project the White Sox' ultimate record, I'll use 55 clear wins, 55 clear losses, and the current winning percentage of the "Up for Grabs" column to project the other 52 games. So with a winning percentage of 1.000, the White Sox projected record is:

107-55

Obviously the projected record is absurd this early in the season, but I'm interested to see where this goes...

Does this even make sense?

Boondock Saint
04-03-2014, 12:58 AM
Someone should tell the 2003 Tigers that they have some unclaimed free wins coming to them.

The fact of the matter is that there is no number of "going to win" or "going to lose" games.

Brian26
04-03-2014, 08:36 AM
Hawk is not taking credit for the 60/60/42 is he? I heard Tommy Lasorda state this theory 30 years ago. Hawk did not invent this.

Railsplitter
04-03-2014, 08:53 AM
I don't think Hawk has claimed credit for it.

Domeshot17
04-03-2014, 09:58 AM
Nope, Hawk does not take credit for anything...

I believe he did credit this when he said "I tell ya, the best theory I ever heard on winning a number of baseball games by a great manager who was significantly overweight was Tommy Lasorda and his 60-60-42 theory. Tommy had the best baseball mind of any big guy I had ever met"

kittle42
04-03-2014, 10:38 AM
If Hawk has a theory, it's wrong.

34 Inch Stick
04-03-2014, 10:48 AM
If Hawk has a theory, it's wrong.

That is a theory I can agree with

jdm2662
04-03-2014, 10:56 AM
There is no guarentee in life. In baseballl, the crappiest teams win about or slightly below 40% of their games. The best teams win about or slightly more than 60% of their games. All the other professional sports leagues don't have the ratios this close to each other. Every team has at least one good winning streak and one bad losing streak. Of course, the better teams have more winning streaks and the weak teams have more losing streaks... Whether the ol Hawk came up with this theory or not, I stopped taking him seriously over a decade ago.

As for today's game, I doubt they bother trying to play.

Lemon44
04-03-2014, 07:43 PM
I believe in the old days the saying was, "You win 54, you lose 54, it's what you do in the other 54 that counts."

StillMissOzzie
04-05-2014, 02:07 AM
I believe in the old days the saying was, "You win 54, you lose 54, it's what you do in the other 54 that counts."

This was pretty much how I came to understand this "theory" as well. Everyone wins (1/3), or 54. Everyone loses (1/3), or 54. It is the remaining (1/3), the other 54 games, that determine the winners and losers. Sometimes, this is re-stated as something like, "The best teams will lose 54, the worst teams will win 54, it is the remaining 54 that make the winners and losers".

I like this interpretation better than the 60/60/42 version.

SMO
:gulp:

TheVulture
04-05-2014, 04:43 AM
You guys make me laugh, it's a rhetorical truism not meant to be analyzed or considered to be an actual fact. I think Harry Caray used to say you win a third, etc.

waldo_the_wolf
04-05-2014, 05:32 AM
My theory is you're going to play 162 games and the games in which you score more runs than your opponent, you'll win. The games in which you score fewer runs than your opponent, you'll lose.

Red Barchetta
04-05-2014, 10:34 AM
With this theory in mind, it irritates me when I hear players and coaches comment "it's early" and "we still have time" to make a run. Although I understand that they are trying to remain optimistic, every game won in the beginning of the season is one less you need to win during the stretch run. When you end up one game out of the playoffs, that early game in April when you surrendered a 5 run lead is just as important in the standings as the game you lost yesterday.

The "it's still early" mantra was like beating a dead horse during the post WS Ozzie seasons. :angry:

gobears1987
04-05-2014, 10:51 AM
My theory is you're going to play 162 games and the games in which you score more runs than your opponent, you'll win. The games in which you score fewer runs than your opponent, you'll lose.

John Madden, is that you? :tongue:

Chez
04-07-2014, 05:23 PM
My theory is you're going to play 162 games and the games in which you score more runs than your opponent, you'll win. The games in which you score fewer runs than your opponent, you'll lose.

Sabermetric analysis like yours is going to ruin our game.

Shoeless
04-09-2014, 12:09 PM
Play to win every game. The great teams win 100. Win 100. Approach is everything. Win. Every. Game.