Seattle Sounders' 2012 Schedule is MLS' Easiest (Most Advantageous) [Updated]
File this one under the category: most likely to attract choice commentary from Seattle Sounders supporters.
As the Sounders-less MLS First Kick fast approaches, we here at Stumptown Footy are spooling up the statistical analysis drives in preparation for the 2012 campaign. Lacking much in the way of hard data so far, with just one preseason match under our belt, we've decided to start with the schedule. It's a pretty straightforward process.
Step 1. download an MLS schedule in .csv format (the linked schedule has three errors in it -- bonus points to whomever finds them first!)
Step 2. link it to 2011 stats
Step 3. feverishly comb the data for interesting tidbits.
As we've gleaned from the discussion to date about the unbalanced schedule, Western Conference teams up and down the 2011 table will almost certainly have a more difficult 2012 schedule, because of the disparity between the conferences. Two thirds of the Portland Timbers' matches will come against Western competition, including three matches each against the MLS' top four teams. Eastern Conference teams will have it much easier, as they must play those four top teams only once each.
But adding insult to injury for a Timbers fan is this: while the Sounders are facing a challenge similar to the rest of the Western Conference, they will enjoy a distinct home/away advantage in the unbalanced schedule -- a greater advantage, in fact, than any other team, in either conference. The teams the Sounders will face in Seattle this year won an average of almost two more matches in 2011 than the teams they will face away from home.
In other words, on average, Seattle will have home field advantage against the league's best teams, while they enjoy one of the easiest road schedules.
I'll explain my bold claim after the jump.
For each match each team plays in 2012, I've calculated the 2011 points per match of each opponent. For the 2012 season, then, each team gets an average opposing ppm in home matches, and an average opposing ppm in away matches. Then I subtracted the average away from the average at home to get a home/away advantage in each team's schedule. Finally, I multiplied the difference by 34, the number of matches in the season.
*Note: for the purposes of this analysis I gave the Montreal Impact the 2011 record of the Vancouver Whitecaps.
As you can see, the Sounders' 2012 home opponents took an average of 5.47 more points in 2011 than did their 2012 road opponents. Indeed, the Sounders have the benefit of facing the Los Angeles Galaxy, Real Salt Lake, and the Colorado Rapids twice each at home. They also get to play host to the top teams in the east, Sporting Kansas City, Houston Dynamo, Philadelphia Union, and the Columbus Crew, while playing their Eastern Conference away matches in places like New England, Montreal and DC.
Contrast Seattle's cushy schedule with RSL's -- their away opponents earned an average of 5.71 points more in 2011 than their home opponents. The LA Galaxy's schedule is no picnic either. No wonder the Emerald City Supporters went along with the unbalanced Cascadia Cup math -- if they play as well as they did in 2011, their home/away advantage should be more than enough to hand them the Supporters Shield.
Of course, that's a big "if." Stay tuned in the coming weeks for more preseason analysis, including whether "der Schatz aus Graz" can fill the big, bald shoes of Kasey Keller.
Update, 2/8/12: at the thoughtful suggestion of several commenters, I've adjusted the table below, giving Montreal the average of the 2011 records of the Portland Timbers and the Vancouver Whitecaps. In this adjusted scenario Seattle's advantage remains the strongest, albeit somewhat less so, while Toronto FC slips past RSL for the distinction of having the least advantageous schedule.
83 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
*Note: for the purposes of this analysis I gave the Montreal Impact the 2011 record of the Vancouver Whitecaps.
That’s rather bold. Why not give them the record of the Portland Timbers? Why not somewhere in between the Timbers and the Whitecaps?
Chicago, D.C., New York, and Montreal away look to be pretty tough this year. New England should be awful though. I’ll grant you that.
You shouldn’t base the records on last year. You should base it on how much of everyone’s core is returning. Philadelphia won’t be nearly as good. SKC is a total question mark given the fact they won’t have the comforts of home for two months during the season. D.C. and Chicago figure to be much better. There’s even hope for New York. As for Portland, it doesn’t get much easier than hosting the Union at home for your opener. That’s 3 points gift wrapped.
Hot Time In Old Town SB Nation's blog for Chicago Fire, Soccer, & Chicago History
Historically...
Expansion teams are not like Chicago, Seattle or even Portland… they’re more like Vancouver, Chivas USA, Real Salt Lake, Toronto FC or the Philadelphia Union in that they have a very weak first season.
So is it “bold” to assume that Montreal will? No. In fact, most analysts will tell you that they predict Montreal will finish enar the bottom as they assumed that with Portland and Vancouver in 2011.
RCTID - Stumptown Footy
Moderator of /r/MLS
Any analyst who suggests that would be shading towards being wrong. Philadelphia Union had 31 points in 30 games in 2010. Using PPM, that would put them at 35 points over a 34 game season. Interestingly enough, that’s exactly halfway between the Timbers and the Whitecaps points totals in 2011. Seattle finished with 47 points in 30 games in 2009 (53 points adjusted). San Jose finished with 33 points in 30 games in 2008 (37 points adjusted). The last time a team finished as poorly as the Whitecaps was in 2007 when Toronto FC finished with 25 points (28 points adjusted). The Whitecaps and TFC appear to be more of a floor than anything else. It also helps that Montreal is the only expansion team this year. A distinct advantage over Vancouver last year. TFC’s troubles also show what a mess the front office was back then. The opinion of Montreal’s front office so far is high.
Perhaps leave Montreal off the list, sure. If you are going to leave them on, even better to average out the results of the other recent expansion teams.
Hot Time In Old Town SB Nation's blog for Chicago Fire, Soccer, & Chicago History
by Tweed Thornton on Feb 8, 2012 11:02 AM PST up reply actions
When the schedule was conceived
last year was all they had to look at, so I felt last year’s table was a fair basis. As we get closer to the start of the season we’ll include some offseason transfer factors to take into account teams that have improved.
I went ahead and ran the numbers with Montreal loaded with Portland’s 2011 record. In this scenario Seattle, Chicago and Chivas all remain in the top three spots, but with Seattle dropping below Chicago. Chicago’s 4.9 point advantage remains about the same. Meanwhile Toronto’s disadvantage gets even worse, as they pull ahead of RSL for the league’s toughest schedule.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 9:47 AM PST up reply actions
It would maybe make more sense to remove the Impact from the equation
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 9:48 AM PST up reply actions
Maybe.
But teams in the east get to play an expansion team three times. Wouldn’t you like to get to play an expansion team three times?
Contributing Editor for Stumptown Footy
by William Conwell on Feb 8, 2012 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
Abosolutely
It also highlights the problems with making any kind of authoritative statement about the strength of schedule before the season. Sounder at Heart ran into same problem when we did similar process, with notably different results, a couple months ago.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 9:57 AM PST up reply actions
I definitely agree
As much of a stat geek as I am, it’s not usually enough to overcome my desire to fan the flames of our rivalry. :)
Same time, though, I’m always interested in looking at the data in different ways.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:12 AM PST up reply actions
I am curious about that
but the calculation was made far easier by giving them a dummy record. And Mr. Conwell makes a good point — leaving out Montreal would give each EC team two fewer matches than WC teams, making them somewhat less comparable.
But I’ll see if I can make that analysis happen at some point today.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
I am curious
How you came to such drastically different results as Sounder at Heart while using seemingly similar criteria:
http://www.sounderatheart.com/2012/1/5/2685284/2012-mls-strength-of-schedule
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 9:59 AM PST up reply actions
Ok, looking at your spreadsheet...
I used the overall ppm of all the opponents, not the opposition’s home/away ppm. Your dataset is superior to mine in that regard. Would you mind terribly if I used the home/away ppm data you used in your analysis?
In addition, it looks like your analysis sums the home/away ppm to get an overall ppm, while mine subtracts one from the other to determine the strength of the home field advantage over the course of the season.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:08 AM PST up reply actions
Feel free to use it
I’ll see if I can’t get you the more granular data.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 10:11 AM PST up reply actions
I would love that.
Thanks.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
I think the linked spreadsheet has all of the granular stuff
On separate sheets. Let me know if it looks like there’s anything missing. Also note that I averaged the Por/Van results to project Montreal. Either individually seemed to be a bit of an outlier for an expansion team (though Canadian expansion teams have been consistently awful).
Nos Audietis
That's what happens...
When the Sounders have to play the Timbers, Whitecaps, and Chivas twice away.
Would have only been made easier for them if they played the Quakes twice away instead of the Timbers (since Portland had 4pts on SJ).
On the flip side, they might have it tougher next year when they play more games at home against these weaker teams.
That of course assumes
That 2013 sides would be similar to 2011 sides. That’s a stretch.
Also a stretch to assume 2012 sides will be similar to 2011, but this type of analysis has to start somewhere.
WOW
It was really surprising to see who wrote this when I saw the preview. (sarcasm)
MLS seasons seem to play out uniquely because of the all the player movement or lack there of.
Making a case for the sounders to win the supporters shield on a Timbers Blog is ridiculous. Especially with so much amazing Timber stuff going on.
by portlandpadre on Feb 8, 2012 10:12 AM PST up reply actions
Not making a case at all
Just pointing out that making assumptions about future seasons based on past performance can lead to false conclusions when there’s so much happening in the league with this level of parity.
My comment about “that’s what happens”.. was a bit of sarcasm regarding the methodology (essentially saying that if they played lower ranked 2011 teams more in 2012, this analysis would be more skewed).
The Timbers have done a lot in the offseason, and I expect them to compete at the top of the West this year with LAG, SEA and RSL.
Wasn't replying to you BM
Sorry it was a comment in general about the article
by portlandpadre on Feb 8, 2012 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
I agree
It’s still a somewhat interesting exercise, but I don’t think this league yields very well to strength of schedule discussions for a few reasons.
I don’t know if any geeks (used affectionately) are projecting wins like they do in baseball (obviously a much more analyzable sport), but if they were to do so, you’d want them to run those projections (a nightmare given where all these players are coming from in MLS) from the current rosters.
volatilelyle.com
by almost awesome on Feb 8, 2012 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
I would absolutely love to have the capacity to do analysis at the player level
Nate Silver-style. Baseball stats are much more plentiful, since stat-worthy events happen at easily collectable moments, and there are about three or four top(ish)-flight baseball leagues in the world to keep track of.
Still, player level soccer stats are available at stat warehouses like Opta, and I imagine they do some kind of win-projection analysis there.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:54 AM PST up reply actions
What?
Contributing Editor for Stumptown Footy
by William Conwell on Feb 8, 2012 10:26 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah, sadly, I'm always the one drawing the short straw
whenever a Sounders-focused article comes up in the rotation.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:30 AM PST up reply actions
In all seriousness
How many Sounders-focused articles really come up naturally in your rotation? I can’t think of any Timbers focused stories that naturally come up in Sounder at Heart’s rotation.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
In reality
Only when we try and cover the play-offs or something to do with the rivalry. I think we have had 3 total in a year.
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
and as portlandpadre will point out
I wrote all three of them.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:40 AM PST up reply actions
Oh, Andy.
You trouble maker.
Contributing Editor for Stumptown Footy
by William Conwell on Feb 8, 2012 10:45 AM PST up reply actions
Not all of them :)
I wrote the one about Portland-Seattle rivalry being a good thing which brought a lot of Seattle fans to the sit
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
whew.
see, padre? it’s not just me. :)
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:57 AM PST up reply actions
That was completely a joke
and in all seriousness, we would have published this article all the same no matter what the data ended up showing. I was in no way mining for Sounders-related data.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
That Cascadia Cup comment is a bit odd
considering that the ECS has been consistent through the years in wanting all matches to count.
But maybe that was just intended to get Sounders supporters all riles up. =)
Heh heh. Yup.
We appreciate you playing along. :)
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 10:35 AM PST up reply actions
The rivalry needs no flaming
The Cascadia Rules were drawn up by all three supporter groups. The home field dis/advantage will flow from year to year until the MLS wises up and unbalances that part of the sched
by portlandpadre on Feb 8, 2012 10:34 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
I like this site
and I follow the fb links and the twitter ones when they come out.
My only suggestion is less fan boy and more analysis. Which the analysis this preseason has been fine.
Thanks to all three for your hard work.
3/12 can’t get here fast enough
Which three?
Contributing Editor for Stumptown Footy
by William Conwell on Feb 8, 2012 11:17 AM PST up reply actions
Thanks
We appreciate your contribution to the community.
We are really trying to have a lot of analysis and looking at different things. This article too was analysis just ended up that Seattle was the “easiest” schedule and we like to poke fun of Seattle a little. It is a rivalry, a civil one but still a rivalry. One last thing is we are fans of the team first. I can’t tell you how hard it is not to cheer when I am in the press box and suppress some of the things I want to say because I need to be more professional. At home when I am watching the game at least I can scream at the TV :)
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
All I know is our 2 away match schedule is brutal
any team that plays 2 road matches against RSL AND Colorado, well it just ain’t right…
"What and how much had I lost by trying to do only what was expected of me instead of what I myself had wished to do?"
— Ralph Ellison (Invisible Man)
Are you trolling?
I ask this question honestly. You have effectively demonstrated that the Sounders could reasonably be expected to have the league’s largest expected HFA going into this season. That doesn’t translate into the league’s easiest schedule, though.
Taking one more step and averaging the first two columns of your table, you get each team’s expected opposition PPM overall, for the whole season. By that measure, Sporting Kansas City has the league’s easiest schedule (not terribly surprising given that they are in the East and will play more games against teams from the East, which was much weaker than the West last year, and we are using last year’s results to create next year’s expectations.) SKC is followed by Columbus, Philadelphia, Houston, NYRB, DCU, Chicago, Montreal, Toronto, LAG, NER, and then comes Seattle, at 12th on the list.
Overall, Seattle’s schedule (1.30 opponent PPM) looks easier than Portland’s (1.36 opponent PPM), and Vancouver’s looks the hardest (1.39 opponent PPM). But the difference between Portland and Seattle is about 2 points over 34 games, rather than the 5-6 points you indicate on your chart. And the difference between easiest (SKC) and hardest (Vancouver) is about 5-6 points rather than the 10-11 points that you list on your chart.
by ubelmann on Feb 8, 2012 12:52 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
First off: Don't title you legitimate arguments claiming the author is trolling.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
What's the second thing?
Go banana!
by Disco_Stew on Feb 8, 2012 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Trolling?
Wouldn’t Trolling be going over to SaH and then posting this?
You may disagree with his methods and you point out your opinions based on this but let me ask you this: Is it trolling on your part to ask if we are trolling our own site? Also how else are we supposed to generate a strength of schedule by using data from this year? Even SaH used last years data.
Starting with an Ad Hominem attack in your title probably isn’t the best idea. As Andrew posts above he is open to hearing differing opinions but attacking him because of those opinions is just plain silly.
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
Trolling is the wrong word
I shouldn’t have used it, my apologies. But from my seat, it seems like either Andrew: a) selectively interpreted the data to put the Sounders in the headline or b) just made a error in his analysis, mistaking home-away differential for strength of schedule. If it is A, then cool, I can be on my way. If it is B, then I hope my comments are taken constructively.
Again, the trolling thing wasn’t what I really meant. But given how it seems pretty universally agreed-upon that the East is weaker than the West and the schedule is so unbalanced to favor intraconference games, I’m surprised that anyone would think any team from the West would have the hardest schedule.
And using data from last year is fine. I think it would be better to use some kind of regression to the mean, but really my critique is that teams were ranked using the difference between home and road opponents’ PPM rather than average home and road opponents’ PPM.
To the point of why it may surprise some a team from the West has the easy schedule
Seattle’s away record and home record are strong in 2011. It also just happens that they have the strongest opponents in the West at home twice [and away once] and the lower half on the road twice [and home once], thus the SOS reflects playing away against teams they would presumably beat twice away with the more difficult contests just once away.
At least that is my impression.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
Understandable
Thanks for understanding and explaining what you meant. I think your bring up valid and interesting points.
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
No problem
Keep up the good work here. I use SBN as my main source of MLS news and you guys do a good job following the Timbers.
Thanks
We are trying to be the best blog out there for SBN :)
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
it's a heady goal
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 3:31 PM PST up reply actions
It is
But not striving to be the best is silly, or at least I think it is. Don’t you try and be the place everyone goes to for Sounders information?
Reading my last sentence over shows me I should re-word that comment to be: We are trying to be the best source of information for the Timbers.
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
Of course we try to do that
And I think we’ve mostly accomplished that. At least, that’s what our readers tell us. I think I’m just mostly playing along and playing the “stoke the rivalry” game.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 4:03 PM PST up reply actions
Flounders!!!!!!
Honest Question, How did the name Sounder come about? I know Timbers was a fall back and some fan came up with it.
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
Yup, Pioneers was first choice in the write in vote.
But the venerable Lewis and Clark College had claim to that name already.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
wow
phone freaked out there. It was supposed to say:
I heard from a guy that a sounder is that squeal that dolphins make, and some how it was chosen as the name, to commemorate dolphins. I was also drunk, and the guy was a friendly hobo outside of what was at the time Seahawks Stadium.
by chrisperry1983 on Feb 8, 2012 8:36 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I thought
“I hwarde” was more appropriate.
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
Always thought
it was the Puget Sound, so if your from the Sound you’re a Sounder.
And take plenty of tissue paper so they can dry their eyes after the game.
I always assumed
it was yet another of Seattle’s many allusions to the speed of sound, as in, a plane that can travel at Mach 1 is a “sounder.”
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 9, 2012 8:30 AM PST up reply actions
That is the real story
The friendly hobo’s was funnier though, at the time at least. Especially the thought that we are named Sounders to commemorate dolphins.
by chrisperry1983 on Feb 9, 2012 9:29 AM PST up reply actions
I think I am going to stick with the hobo’s explanation.
It resonates with me.
Contributing Editor for Stumptown Footy
by William Conwell on Feb 9, 2012 9:35 AM PST up reply actions
As well as in a grindhouse film
“Hobo With a Dolphin.”
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 9, 2012 10:00 AM PST up reply actions
Where is Mr. Disken when you need him?
Contributing Editor for Stumptown Footy
by William Conwell on Feb 9, 2012 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
I'll play along
You are going down!!!! We will be better than you are!
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
Tell that to Robert Kraft
The return of THIERRY
by Kyle Ritter on Feb 10, 2012 10:55 PM PST up reply actions
We appreciate it
And I’m definitely enjoying the discussion.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 2:53 PM PST up reply actions
I think home/away advantage is a valid measure
I get what you mean by trolling — you meant data trolling, not internet trolling. I’m slightly less horribly offended. :)
You bring up some important points, and I think you’re right that home field advantage doesn’t necessarily equate ease.
In responding to the points you bring up: on average, if you compare the overall opponent ppm for all teams, first you’re going to find that nearly all Eastern Conference teams have easier schedules than Western Conference teams.
Secondly, you will find that — on average — the difficulty of a team’s schedule is inversely proportional to the order in which they finished the 2011 season, merely because each team is not required to play against itself. Vancouver’s schedule is among the hardest because they don’t have the benefit of being able to play against the worst team in the league; Seattle’s schedule is one of the easiest because they avoid playing the second best team. And so on. That imbalance would happen in any season, even one with a balanced schedule.
So the more interesting analysis, if perhaps not the more meaningful, is the one that measures the home field advantage as a consequence of the unbalanced schedule.
Now, the fact that the Sounders ended up in the headline is not a result of selective interpretation or cherry-picking — I genuinely and honestly set out to calculate the home/away advantage in this way, and certainly if any other western conference team had ended up at the top of the list we would have considered it just as newsworthy.
Having said that, I admit it: the headline is a little hyperbolic in equating home/away advantage with ease, and yes, that is a consequence of Seattle ending up at the top. Hey, it’s a rivalry. In the words of Colin Meloy, this is why we fight.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
Quantitatively, the "team doesn't play itself" factor is small
It’s also pretty easy to fix here, just add two fake games to each team’s schedule against its 2011 version. In, say, Vancouver’s case, that means adding two games against a team that averages 28 points of 34 games. Vancouver still comes out with the hardest SOS in that case. Seattle still ranks as the 12th easist schedule in the league when you factor in those artificial games.
Here’s a specific example of why I think this home-away differential is bogus: Chicago’s average opposition PPM at home is 1.343 and Seattle’s is 1.384. So you would say that Chicago has an easier home schedule than Seattle. Chicago’s average opposition PPM on the road is 1.197 and Seattle’s is 1.223. So you would say that Chicago has an easier road schedule than the Sounders. But somehow, despite having an easier home and road schedule, Chicago has a tougher overall schedule because the home/road differential is smaller? Does not compute.
Anyway, my main point is just that the teams in the East have much easier schedules. I figure LA has the easiest schedule in the West (barely), followed by the Sounders and RSL. Within the West, the difference is maybe up to 0.03 PPM from most difficult to easiest, probably not worth sweating about. The Sounders do appear to have a marginally easier schedule than the Timbers, though personally I’d trade a tougher schedule for an extra game at home against Portland.
It's small
but not small enough for LA, Seattle, and RSL to end up with the WC’s easiest schedules, not at all coincidentally in the same order they finished the 2011 season.
I think the point we’re trying to make here is that Seattle and Chicago both have the benefit of hosting the stronger teams in their schedules, which any team would want. RSL and Toronto have to play more games against those tough teams on the road. This calculation merely quantifies an otherwise subjective disparity. It’s flawed, no question, but it does reflect an overall trend in the 2012 schedule.
But I think we both agree that scheduling will play a pretty insignificant role in each team’s success this year. After all, the one point the Timbers took from Seattle last year was taken in Seattle — home field ain’t everything.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 2:51 PM PST up reply actions
One more thing, just to clarify
Yes, Chicago definitely has an easier schedule, overall, than Seattle. So do the Red Bulls, Sporting Kansas City, Montreal, etc. Furthermore, I’m in complete agreement that this quantification of opposition home vs away is not truly a measure of ease. That’s where the headline I used doesn’t really connect with the actual analysis.
When I write, I write for the Timbers. Contributing Editor of Stumptown Footy
by Andrew Wheeler on Feb 8, 2012 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
The problem is in your headline
You really don’t illustrate that the Sounders have the league’s easiest schedule. You illustrate how their schedule is relatively more favorable than other teams. There’s a rather signficant difference.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 8, 2012 3:38 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
That being said
Seattle should have an easier time winning the supporter’s shield this year, especially if one factor’s in that they have home field advantage over LA and RSL.
A bunch of PS
After having one of the most difficult schedules last year and getting screwed in the playoff system, it is only fair that the sounders benefit from playing such difficult schedules.
PS= portland scum

by 













