So yesterday I found out that Sports Illustrated, in their preview of the 2009 MLB Season, boldly predicted that the Mets would go all the way this year. This despite the way they flamed out in the final week of the season the past two years in a row. Now as a newly minted Mets season ticket holder I’d like to think they’re right, but such is their reputation that the NY tabloids are all calling it “a jinx”.
Which got me thinking: just what IS their track record? How long have they made predictions? I’d imagine going back a pretty long time. They can’t have been wrong EVERY season, can they? How would they compare against a random draw? What about other prognosticators: Sporting News, USA Today, ESPN, etc., etc.? Or other sports?
Well, there’s the infamous SI 1987 cover story on how good the Indians would be that year. In any event I found this, based on the outcome of the '04 season-SI finished in the middle of the pack (higher score=crappy predictions), but did pretty well over a period of several years (again article written 5 years ago).
Thanks for the link. I wanted some concrete data and analysis just like that (it even includes a normalized benchmark of “assume last year is exactly repeated”).
Everyone loves to point out glaringly off predictions, but nobody makes a big deal about “we picked the 1999 Yankees as obvious favorites to repeat and by golly they did” – selection bias on parade.
The Mets didn’t exactly flame out last year. They just didn’t make it to the postseason when they should have, they’re a good team after all.
And since this year’s team is roughly the same as last year’s team, it’s not a leap to say they could go all the way. They won’t, because they’re the Mets, but as a fan it’s nice to dream.