Shedding the Underdog and Embracing the Probable

Blue-Jackets-logo-740

I like order, and I like numbers. I don’t assume either trait of other people, and that’s fine. I like the world to be predictable (or at least for phenomena to have some explanation). I also love underdog stories; the little guys coming from the woods, beating the champ, showing up those big-city folks, overcoming the odds. Holding both opinions brings cognitive dissonance.

In sports we can find a blurry edge where both ideas try to coexist. Something feels logically right when a (true) favorite comes up with another win. They’ve (probably) done the right things to deserve rewards. There’s also a voice that cheers as a dynasty falls, new blood ushering in new eras with fresh fans. The unexpected in sport is what drives us to watch.

The former (favorites winning) isn’t a perfect system, so we’re left confused or (in some cases) disappointed when the best can’t close out. This does, of course, need an accurate gauge of “goodness.” The Penguins can be an example: merely having Crosby and Malkin doesn’t make them a default favorite. They’ve had glaring depth problems each of the past few years.

On the other hand, there’s vastly less certainty in the underdog situation. A perfect combination of factors is needed to push those on the low rungs. In hockey, that might mean high shooting percentage, strong goaltending, and a weak division to thrive around. If any of those are missing? A “lesser” team will sit in purgatory or sink below peers. Even harder? Having everything click twice. And good luck picking which “bad” teams will win.

Numbers and order can provide accountability and checks to sports that didn’t exist before. Expecting wins when a team is consistently outshot? We know that’s silly now, and it’s thanks to numbers adding context to results (including selected work from JLikens, Eric Tulsky, or visually from Chris Boyle).

We also know that there’s context needed for numbers, and that numbers aren’t perfect… and that’s fine. Refinement is happening all the time either at the team level (score adjustment) or individual level (Steve Burtch’s dCorsi, usage adjustment featured in Domenic Galamini’s work, among others), tweaking the tools available. Even without approaching perfection (which won’t happen anyway), having some way to measure “goodness,” some way to predict beyond use of helpless intuition? It’s important, and we should use the information.

Effectively, I like the story involved with an underdog. What I hate: the uncertainty, the high chance of failure at any corner.

That’s where my fandom with the Columbus Blue Jackets comes in. I don’t want the Blue Jackets to be underdogs. At least, not real underdogs. The story can be about a young franchise finding its first success. That’s a nice tale to share. The narrators won’t see it coming.

The onus is on management to ignore any underdog label, to ensure the changes this summer are defensible and logical (even when the shortest-term isn’t always perfect). The hands behind the curtain need to pull the levers toward sustainable winning. There are impressive assets in place, and work to do (especially on defense). In the draft and free agency we’ll see just how much a favorite the Blue Jackets can become.

I want to celebrate the inevitable.

Arrow to top