FWIW, Fangraphs Projects O's in Last Place in 2015

[AlbionHero]

only 3 games? More like 10 games.

[BohKnowsBmore]

Fangraphs conducted a fan poll regarding the projections they made. 67% of those voting (1785 voters) thought the Orioles' projection was too low, with 38% voting that the O's were underestimated by more than three wins.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/your-opinions-of-the-team-projections-american-league/

But the Orioles are an outlier, so they weren't actually wrong about them in the past

[waroriole]

But the Orioles are an outlier, so they weren't actually wrong about them in the past

They've never been wrong. Teams just don't do what they're supposed to do.

[Frobby]

They've never been wrong. Teams just don't do what they're supposed to do.

In all seriousness, you don't judge a model like this on whether specific results varied from predictions. You base it on how they did as a whole. However, over the years, the more time I've spent studying all the offseason projections, on either a team or individual level, the more I realize that these projections are just a way to pass the time in the winter months, not anything that will come anywhere close to predicting the real outcomes. The projections are better than throwing darts, but still not at all close to reality.

[FlipTheBird]

In all seriousness, you don't judge a model like this on whether specific results varied from predictions. You base it on how they did as a whole. However, over the years, the more time I've spent studying all the offseason projections, on either a team or individual level, the more I realize that these projections are just a way to pass the time in the winter months, not anything that will come anywhere close to predicting the real outcomes. The projections are better than throwing darts, but still not at all close to reality.

If some of the more dedicated writers at FanGraphs would admit this, they probably wouldn't get so much flak when things don't come out as they project. But the staff is so insistent that they've got everything "figured out," that they invite criticism.

[33rdst]

Never had an affinity for FIP. Basically for the same reasons most people who don't like it have. It ignors defense. A team like the O's that relies on defense is not going to fair well if you remove one of its main variables for success.

Having said that, I'm actually kind of pleased with the offensive projections they make for the O's, especially in light of the disastrous predictions some people are making as a result of our loss of Markakis and Cruz. I think we can find 0.14 runs per game in the free agent market. Getting Delmon back will help and if we sign Rasmus, even with his downside, we could easily make up for the projected offensive shortfall. The defensive shortfall projection, as has already been stated, is a mirage.

[waroriole]

In all seriousness, you don't judge a model like this on whether specific results varied from predictions. You base it on how they did as a whole. However, over the years, the more time I've spent studying all the offseason projections, on either a team or individual level, the more I realize that these projections are just a way to pass the time in the winter months, not anything that will come anywhere close to predicting the real outcomes. The projections are better than throwing darts, but still not at all close to reality.

I think an objective projection by folks at OH is much closer to reality than any projection system. Same goes for all teams and their hard core fans.

[Frobby]

I think an objective projection by folks at OH is much closer to reality than any projection system. Same goes for all teams and their hard core fans.

I'm not sure "objective" and "folks at OH" belong in the same sentence. Honestly, it's really hard to make projections, either for teams or individuals. However, it's not an accident that most of the fangraphs voters think that Steamer has the Orioles too low. Their pitching projections make little sense.

[Can_of_corn]

Never had an affinity for FIP. Basically for the same reasons most people who don't like it have. It ignors defense. A team like the O's that relies on defense is not going to fair well if you remove one of its main variables for success.

Having said that, I'm actually kind of pleased with the offensive projections they make for the O's, especially in light of the disastrous predictions some people are making as a result of our loss of Markakis and Cruz. I think we can find 0.14 runs per game in the free agent market. Getting Delmon back will help and if we sign Rasmus, even with his downside, we could easily make up for the projected offensive shortfall. The defensive shortfall projection, as has already been stated, is a mirage.

The whole idea of FIP is that it ignores defense. It is in the name and everything. It is expressly designed to eliminate defense.

It isn't a shortcoming, it's a feature.

It isn't exactly hard to rough estimate how the O's defense will interact with FIP.

[33rdst]

The whole idea of FIP is that it ignores defense. It is in the name and everything. It is expressly designed to eliminate defense.

It isn't a shortcoming, it's a feature.

It isn't exactly hard to rough estimate how the O's defense will interact with FIP.

Gotcha. Fips seems really good at telling me why Clemons, Pedro, Mussina, Smoltz, Glavin and Maddox are really good. But it doesn't provide an explanation for the effectiveness of Tillman, Gonzalez, Chen or Norris. In fact, it tells me that they're not very good at all. Or am I missing something?

[Can_of_corn]

Gotcha. Fips seems really good at telling me why Clemons, Pedro, Mussina, Smoltz, Glavin and Maddox are really good. But it doesn't provide an explanation for the effectiveness of Tillman, Gonzalez, Chen or Norris. In fact, it tells me that they're not very good at all. Or am I missing something?

You are missing the content of my last post.

You can use FIP as a baseline to which you then add layers. Defense would be a layer, home ballpark would be a layer, the run scoring environment would be a layer.

[33rdst]

You are missing the content of my last post.

You can use FIP as a baseline to which you then add layers. Defense would be a layer, home ballpark would be a layer, the run scoring environment would be a layer.

Okay. So are you saying that we need to consider these other "layers" before determining a pitchers effectiveness?

[Can_of_corn]

Okay. So are you saying that we need to consider these other "layers" before determining a pitchers effectiveness?

I certainly do.

[33rdst]

I certainly do.

I thought you would say that.

My point regarding Fips is simply this. Taken alone, I think it states the obvious. The great majority of pitchers in baseball are not going to throw like those who were nominated and or inducted into the hall of fame today. They're not going to have high K rates, low walk rates and keep the ball in the park. By and large the going to have to pitch to contact. I think that has a lot of value. And yes I think Jack Morris should be in the Hall.

[Can_of_corn]

I thought you would say that.

My point regarding Fips is simply this. Taken alone, I think it states the obvious. The great majority of pitchers in baseball are not going to throw like those who were nominated and or inducted into the hall of fame today. They're not going to have high K rates, low walk rates and keep the ball in the park. By and large the going to have to pitch to contact. I think that has a lot of value. And yes I think Jack Morris should be in the Hall.

I danced a little jig when he fell off the ballot.

As for FIP sure it's obvious....now.

It wasn't obvious at all for a very long time.