← 2007 standings & weekly recaps
Week 5, settled.
Final scores, weekly indignities, and the standings after the dust cleared.
This recap is rebuilt from the recovered ESPN team-level scoreboard. Scores, opponents, standings, awards, power, luck and all-play are on file; weekly player ownership, starts, optimal lineups and bench decisions begin in 2018 and are intentionally omitted here.
Awards
| Highest score | P RIVERS NAS NAS | 110.0 |
| Lowest score | Team 2 | 17.0 |
| Biggest blowout | 99% Domination | +56.0 |
| Heartbreaking loss | Baltimore Stars | −1.0 |
Standings after week 5
| 1 | Brightleaf Yuppies | 4-1 | 513.0 |
| 2 | P RIVERS NAS NAS | 4-1 | 486.0 |
| 3 | Baltimore Stars | 3-2 | 479.0 |
| 4 | Your Worst Nightmares | 3-2 | 478.0 |
| 5 | Durham Bubbs | 3-2 | 476.0 |
| 6 | 99% Domination | 3-2 | 370.0 |
| 7 | The Penthouse Panda Bear | 2-3 | 469.0 |
| 8 | The Penguins | 2-3 | 374.0 |
| 9 | Boston Baked Beans | 1-4 | 347.0 |
| 10 | Team 2 | 0-5 | 277.0 |
Power, luck & all-play after week 5
| # | Team | Power | Luck | All-play |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brightleaf Yuppies | 0.7868 | +0.44 | 3.6-1.4 |
| 2 | P RIVERS NAS NAS | 0.7689 | +0.56 | 3.4-1.6 |
| 3 | Your Worst Nightmares | 0.7210 | -0.44 | 3.4-1.6 |
| 4 | Baltimore Stars | 0.7177 | -0.44 | 3.4-1.6 |
| 5 | Durham Bubbs | 0.6769 | +0.11 | 2.9-2.1 |
| 6 | The Penthouse Panda Bear | 0.6166 | -0.78 | 2.8-2.2 |
| 7 | 99% Domination | 0.5198 | +1.33 | 1.7-3.3 |
| 8 | The Penguins | 0.5049 | +0.17 | 1.9-3.1 |
| 9 | Boston Baked Beans | 0.4305 | -0.50 | 1.5-3.5 |
| 10 | Team 2 | 0.2460 | -0.33 | 0.3-4.7 |
These are reconstructed from team scores and opponents only. Power uses the same model as every other season; luck compares actual wins with schedule-neutral expected wins; all-play is scaled to the number of games actually played.
Old business
The week’s most-established manager matchup. Through this game, the series stood 4-2 from Ryan Mindell’s side across 6 meetings. In 2007, the teams were Durham Bubbs and Your Worst Nightmares.
Talk
Sign in to join the conversation.