Big Ten Baseball Scores and Standings (4/2)

[Alum-Ni]

Penn State 7, Purdue 2
Penn State 7, Purdue 6 (12 inn)
Indiana 9, Rutgers 2
Rutgers 3, Indiana 2
Nebraska 9, Illinois 8
Ohio State 11, Bethune-Cookman 2
Maryland 13, High Point 5

Oregon at Michigan State (canceled - snow)
Iowa at Minnesota (postponed to Sunday - field conditions)

Standings
1. Michigan (19-5, 2-0)
1. Michigan State (19-4, 3-0)
1. Minnesota (14-9, 1-0)
4. Nebraska (18-8, 4-1)
5. Ohio State (18-7-1, 2-1)
6. Penn State (15-12, 4-2)
7. Illinois (11-13, 3-2)
8. Iowa (10-13, 2-2)
9. Indiana (13-13, 1-2)
9. Maryland (14-13, 1-2)
9. Rutgers (11-16, 2-4)
12. Northwestern (7-20, 1-4)
13. Purdue (4-20, 0-6)

Games for Sunday, April 3
Iowa at Minnesota (doubleheader)
Oregon at Michigan State
Bethune-Cookman at Ohio State
High Point at Maryland
Illinois at Nebraska (12:00 p.m.)
Michigan at Northwestern

 

[Kleitusbpn]

In baseball-standings we're actually tied with michigan state for first. It doesn't go by winning percentage, it goes by games ahead/back. if we win tomorrow we're in first place by ourselves.

 

[Alum-Ni]

In baseball-standings we're actually tied with michigan state for first. It doesn't go by winning percentage, it goes by games ahead/back. if we win tomorrow we're in first place by ourselves.

Big Ten lists teams via winning percentage on their site.....so that's how I list them. And because of weather it's possible teams won't all play the same number of league games, that's why they go of win percentage

 

[Kleitusbpn]

... and they're still wrong.

using winning percentage when you've got a lot of games left is an assumption that you will keep that winning percentage. you never, ever assume a win in a game you haven't played yet. the team with more games played has an advantage when it comes to wins -- you can't lose a game you've already won.

even if they play one or two less games over the course of the season, that'll show up in the final standings regardless.

 

[Alum-Ni]

... and they're still wrong.

using winning percentage when you've got a lot of games left is an assumption that you will keep that winning percentage. you never, ever assume a win in a game you haven't played yet. the team with more games played has an advantage when it comes to wins -- you can't lose a game you've already won.

How is it an assumption on anything? It's a listing by current winning percentage. They don't do the same thing MLB does in terms of standings

 

[Kleitusbpn]

... and it's wrong. there's a reason mlb does it that way... as does minor league baseball.

you never assume wins. that's why it's wrong. doing it by winning percentage assumes wins.

 

[Alum-Ni]

... and it's wrong. there's a reason mlb does it that way... as does minor league baseball.

you never assume wins. that's why it's wrong. doing it by winning percentage assumes wins.

Again, how is it assuming? The win percentage is calculated from the current record.

The B1G will never go off the MLB method of standings to determine a champion because it's possible that not all teams will play the same number of games and also could have games end in ties.

 

[Kleitusbpn]

it assumes that the team with less games played keeps winning at the same rate.

if the B1G denies a champion with 3 games less played and 2 more wins (where they would be a half game up), then they screwed up. plain and simple.

that is EXTREMELY unlikely. maybe one out of 50 years something like that would happen. if it did, there would be a rightful uproar.

more likely one team has 1 or 2 less games played. in that case, winning percentage would be accurate but irrelevant (the team in first would have more wins or less losses... one of those "duh" moments at who actually won the league).

the way mlb does it is the proper one for a reason. it takes into account games yet to be played.

 

[gunNrun]

I had to doublecheck but
D1Baseball.com is now listing their B1G standings the same way...
Sorry I am a terrible linker
not trying to get 'too involved'
just thought interesting

 

[RobsterMobster]

Either way the Big Ten goes by winning percentage not by total wins when seeding the tourney.

 

[k9_r]

Big Ten standings per Warren Nolan - Huskers in the lead. This is the 'games back' method.

I'm not bothered by the % method though, and if it's what the Big Ten uses then it's what the reporting must use. Nolan is going against the principle but that's his business.

I know that MLB doesn't have to consider unequal games played b/c they require the contenders to make up lost games. Can't do that in college.

 

[k9_r]

I have no idea what D1Baseball is using b/c they aren't consistent from conference to conference.

Their B1G ranking is following overall win %. The conference win% and GB columns are jumbled.

Their ACC, SEC, PAC 12 rankings follow both conference win % and GB order b/c both columns are in order for those three conferences.

And their Big 12 ranking clearly follows the GB column b/c it's the only one in order.