Clay Davenport projects Orioles at 62-100

[ShaneDawg85]

Shoot a 15 game improvement over last season, they'd still suck but I'd consider that hefty progress. 

[foxfield]

11 minutes ago, ShaneDawg85 said:

Shoot a 15 game improvement over last season, they'd still suck but I'd consider that hefty progress. 

process

[Moose Milligan]

The Orioles as a team (non-pitchers) had a whopping .691 OPS in 2018.  That includes Manny, obviously.  

I just averaged out the OPS for the 11 position players he projected.  And I know OPS would be weighed different in a situation like this due to someone in a platoon with a higher OPS getting more at bats vs. someone who's got a lower OPS and getting maybe 20% of the at bats.

That said, the average OPS for those players listed that he's projecting, if my math is correct (I was an English major) is .630.  Now Frobby picked the highlights, I can't imagine he left off any stud OPS projections on that list.

The Orioles as a team last year had a...5.18...ERA last year.  

The average ERA of the pitchers Frobby shared in the projections is 4.99.  Again, Frobby is sharing the highlights, if Cody Carroll was somehow projected to have a 2.32 ERA, I'm assuming he'd have included it.

So we've got a projection here for approximately SIXTY POINTS LESS IN OPS which would make me want to re-name the stadium "Viagra Park at Camden Yards" and we've got a projection here for about 0.16 less in ERA which isn't a lot.  Certainly not enough to offset the offensive offensive (see what I did there?) projections.

So how does he arrive to a 15 game improvement?

 

[foxfield]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

The Orioles as a team (non-pitchers) had a whopping .691 OPS in 2018.  That includes Manny, obviously.  

I just averaged out the OPS for the 11 position players he projected.  And I know OPS would be weighed different in a situation like this due to someone in a platoon with a higher OPS getting more at bats vs. someone who's got a lower OPS and getting maybe 20% of the at bats.

That said, the average OPS for those players listed that he's projecting, if my math is correct (I was an English major) is .630.  Now Frobby picked the highlights, I can't imagine he left off any stud OPS projections on that list.

The Orioles as a team last year had a...5.18...ERA last year.  

The average ERA of the pitchers Frobby shared in the projections is 4.99.  Again, Frobby is sharing the highlights, if Cody Carroll was somehow projected to have a 2.32 ERA, I'm assuming he'd have included it.

So we've got a projection here for approximately SIXTY POINTS LESS IN OPS which would make me want to re-name the stadium "Viagra Park at Camden Yards" and we've got a projection here for about 0.16 less in ERA which isn't a lot.  Certainly not enough to offset the offensive offensive (see what I did there?) projections.

So how does he arrive to a 15 game improvement?

 

Team chemistry

[24fps]

3 hours ago, linedrive said:

But will 62-100 be bad enough to get the #1 pick?

God I hope not.  Being the most contemptible loser in all baseball is bad enough the first time.  Who the hell would want anything other than to end that as quickly as possible?

[hoosiers]

33 minutes ago, 24fps said:

God I hope not.  Being the most contemptible loser in all baseball is bad enough the first time.  Who the hell would want anything other than to end that as quickly as possible?

I'll take the number one pick in the 2020 draft for 800, Alex!

[HowAboutThat]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

So how does he arrive to a 15 game improvement?

I was wondering the same thing. I think the defense will be tremendously improved and the resulting decrease in strain on the pitchers should be worth several wins just by itself. The pitching won’t be significantly better, but fewer base runners, and fewer lazy fly balls “played for a single,” singles misplayed into doubles, and so on, should have a huge beneficial effect.

Unless The Powers think that Mancini in LF and Trumbo in RF remains a good idea, there’s reason for 65-70 optimism.

[Luke-OH]

5 minutes ago, Philip said:

I was wondering the same thing. I think the defense will be tremendously improved and the resulting decrease in strain on the pitchers should be worth several wins just by itself. The pitching won’t be significantly better, but fewer base runners, and fewer lazy fly balls “played for a single,” singles misplayed into doubles, and so on, should have a huge beneficial effect.

Unless The Powers think that Mancini in LF and Trumbo in RF remains a good idea, there’s reason for 65-70 optimism.

It's mostly that the 2018 team underperformed true talent regarding run production and prevention. And then underperformed Pythagorean expectation for those run scored and allowed numbers. 

[scOtt]

6 hours ago, Frobby said:

Clay Davenport has projected the O’s to go 62-100.    Honestly, that would encourage me.    Individual projections are here: http://www.claydavenport.com/projections/BAL.shtml

Some highlights:

Sisco .717 OPS

Davis .662

Villar .725

Nunez .721

Martin .613

Mancini .746

Mullins .706

Stewart .737

Trumbo .737

Hays .667

Wynns .636

Bundy 4.33 ERA

Cobb 4.63

Cashner 4.94

Ramirez 5.01

Hess 5.42

Ortiz 5.36

Akin 5.23

 

 

Does he project anybody at worse than 62-100? Because the #1 pick again in 2020 would be sweet.

[ChuckS]

I give Davis about a 10 percent chance of reaching .662.  That is very generous. 

Everything else is reasonable. 

[scOtt]

1 hour ago, 24fps said:

God I hope not.  Being the most contemptible loser in all baseball is bad enough the first time.  Who the hell would want anything other than to end that as quickly as possible?

Face it, we're going suck for another couple years. Might as well get the #1 pick along the way.

[Moose Milligan]

19 minutes ago, Philip said:

I was wondering the same thing. I think the defense will be tremendously improved and the resulting decrease in strain on the pitchers should be worth several wins just by itself. The pitching won’t be significantly better, but fewer base runners, and fewer lazy fly balls “played for a single,” singles misplayed into doubles, and so on, should have a huge beneficial effect.

Unless The Powers think that Mancini in LF and Trumbo in RF remains a good idea, there’s reason for 65-70 optimism.

Yeah, defense counts for a lot, this is true.  That said, the pitching gave up a lot of dingers last year and I'm assuming hard hit balls that would be viewed as uncatchable.  And to your point, I agree that if Mancini is in LF, that doesn't bode well.  I'm not sure what to expect from Trumbo as far as health goes but if he's in RF and Mancini is in LF...that's terrible.  I think the infield defense should be better, maybe even serviceable.

On the whole, is the defense going to be tremendously improved?  I dunno, I don't see any gold glovers out there.  I don't see anyone who's going to be like a 2 or 3 win player based on defense alone.  

It'll be better, for sure.  Remains to be seen how much better.  

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

On the whole, is the defense going to be tremendously improved?  I dunno, I don't see any gold glovers out there.  I don't see anyone who's going to be like a 2 or 3 win player based on defense alone.  

How many wins would we get just from all the defenders getting back to zero in terms of DRS and dWAR?

Even Manny wasn’t good at SS as at 3B. Valencia, Beckham, Davis, were beyond awful in the infield, and the OF was the keystone cops.

just improving to zero would be a big boost.

[25 Nuggets]

This team as constructed could lose 120 games.

[foxfield]

5 hours ago, 25 Nuggets said:

This team as constructed could lose 120 games.

I know you are trying to be optimistic but are you considering injuries?