Clay Davenport projects Orioles at 62-100

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

Maybe.  Not sure how to measure it.  But replacement level defense is just that...replacement level.  League average.  How many wins would that have added to last years total?  Not sure.  

Still too early to make a prediction, but I'm gonna do it anyway.  I think this is a 55 win team or so.  I'd be shocked if they get to over 60 wins.

I'm all in on a #1 draft pick for two years in a row.  

 Your prediction is perhaps a little pessimistic in my view, but it’s not necessarily wrong. Because problems tend to create other problems, the reverse is also true. Solving problems will tend to solve other problems. So I’m a little bit more optimistic than you might be, although I won’t be surprised if you turn out to be exactly correct. 

 The most important thing to do is play clean baseball. The Astros of six or seven years ago were not just a bad team, they were an incredibly sloppy team. If we can avoid that slop, and play average baseball, I think we can do better than you think. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Frobby said:

There isn’t.   That’s a misnomer.    Drungo has explained this numerous times.   

I don't think we are talking about the same thing.

I'm not saying you can add dWAR and oWAR and get WAR.

What I am saying is that since WAR incorporates defense a baseline for what is replacement level defense HAS to exist.  The player is graded against that scale. 

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think we are talking about the same thing.

I'm not saying you can add dWAR and oWAR and get WAR.

What I am saying is that since WAR incorporates defense a baseline for what is replacement level defense HAS to exist.  The player is graded against that scale. 

 

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 

I'm not saying that.

In order for a player to be graded at above, at, or below replacement level as a defender you have to know where that point is.

The point is well below the point for average defense.

You can't grade without some starting point.

 

This is exactly what I told you I wasn't talking about.

Quote

But in reality people gravitate towards oWAR and dWAR as distinct things that add up to WAR, when they're not that at all.  They both contain positional adjustment, which means they're not additive.  On their own oWAR and dWAR don't really mean anything.  

 

[Moose Milligan]

21 minutes ago, Philip said:

 Your prediction is perhaps a little pessimistic in my view, but it’s not necessarily wrong. Because problems tend to create other problems, the reverse is also true. Solving problems will tend to solve other problems. So I’m a little bit more optimistic than you might be, although I won’t be surprised if you turn out to be exactly correct. 

 The most important thing to do is play clean baseball. The Astros of six or seven years ago were not just a bad team, they were an incredibly sloppy team. If we can avoid that slop, and play average baseball, I think we can do better than you think. 

Correct.  And I don't disagree with your ideas. 

The defense last year was so damn terrible that a mediocre defense this year will look great in comparison.  My point is that an elite defense will make a big difference.  As it stands, I don't see an elite defender at any position on the diamond.  I see mediocre defenders and subpar ones.  I'm not sure the defense will be markedly better this year but we can hope.  

I agree with your final stance on clean baseball.  Not giving extra outs, not making boneheaded throws.  I can deal with an infielder booting a ground ball as long as the rest of the time they're playing heads up ball and know where to go with it.  I can deal with an outfielder that has limited range as long as he can hit the cutoff man and balls don't clank off his glove when he goes to catch them.  

[connja]

Here's the thing - the difference between a 62 win team and an 81 win team is at least 2 months of games that matter.  When teams only win 62 games, they are typically not playing meaningful games and fans have given up by end of June.  If you're a .500 team you will likely be scoreboard watching into Sept.  I'd like to see them interesting later in the year sooner rather than later.

[Frobby]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm not saying that.

In order for a player to be graded at above, at, or below replacement level as a defender you have to know where that point is.

The point is well below the point for average defense.

You can't grade without some starting point.

 

This is exactly what I told you I wasn't talking about.

 

I guess we are talking past each other.    Imagine you have a player with Mike Trout’s offensive profile. The level of defense it would take to get him replaced would be abysmal.    Now take a player with Jon Andreoli’s offensive profile.   The level of defense he has to play to stay in the majors is entirely different.   There’s above average defense and below average defense but there’s no such thing as replacement level defense.  

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I guess we are talking past each other.    Imagine you have a player with Mike Trout’s offensive profile. The level of defense it would take to get him replaced would be abysmal.    Now take a player with Jon Andreoli’s offensive profile.   The level of defense he has to play to stay in the majors is entirely different.   There’s above average defense and below average defense but there’s no such thing as replacement level defense.  

Yes there is.  It exists so the defense players play can be judged against it.  A "replacement level" player brings expectations both on offense and defense. 

If you are looking at a hypothetical replacement level first baseman to judge Chris Davis against that hypothetical player has both offensive and defensive statistics that Davis is compared to.   If Davis can not meet the standards on defense that the hypothetical replacement level sets his defense is below that level.

[jrobb21613]

10 hours ago, Ohfan67 said:

Love the enthusiasm, but there’s almost no way this happens. There’s not a lot of talent on the team and if some players perform well they will be traded. I don’t see a lot ceiling if guys “played up to their ability”.  If Cobb and/or Cashner start the season well, then there’s a great chance they will be traded at the deadline. Bundy and Givens might even be trade bait if they pitch well. 

If the young guys on the team especially Mullins, Stewart and Sisco who I imagine will be everyday players can replicate what they’ve done offensively in the minors, Mancini can bounce back and have a season like he did in 2017 which I believe to be more of who he is than last year and Davis can find his stroke maybe not to the level of his all star years but better than last. From what I’ve seen of Villar he’s more consistent than Schoop I really like his speed overall this team will have more speed than last and hopefully transition to better base running While we won’t lead the league in homeruns I think offensively we can be more consistent. The biggest question mark is going to be the pitching while offensively we won’t live by the homerun we sure as heck might still die by it. Pitching is are biggest question mark  but hopefully our new analytics team can see some things that our pitchers can do that will give them better success. Cobb and Cashner have had success in the big leagues before no reason they can’t again. Bundy however I’m afraid might have done in by injury but hopefully he can make the neccessary adjustments and learn to pitch without relying on a mid to high 90’s fb. I fully expect this young team to compete hard and believe in themselves, hopefully play within themselves but with a chip on there shoulder that when channeled the right way this motivated young team could perform much better  than many are expecting.

No matter if you think you can or you think you can’t you’re right!

[foxfield]

1 hour ago, jrobb21613 said:

If the young guys on the team especially Mullins, Stewart and Sisco who I imagine will be everyday players can replicate what they’ve done offensively in the minors, Mancini can bounce back and have a season like he did in 2017 which I believe to be more of who he is than last year and Davis can find his stroke maybe not to the level of his all star years but better than last. From what I’ve seen of Villar he’s more consistent than Schoop I really like his speed overall this team will have more speed than last and hopefully transition to better base running While we won’t lead the league in homeruns I think offensively we can be more consistent. The biggest question mark is going to be the pitching while offensively we won’t live by the homerun we sure as heck might still die by it. Pitching is are biggest question mark  but hopefully our new analytics team can see some things that our pitchers can do that will give them better success. Cobb and Cashner have had success in the big leagues before no reason they can’t again. Bundy however I’m afraid might have done in by injury but hopefully he can make the neccessary adjustments and learn to pitch without relying on a mid to high 90’s fb. I fully expect this young team to compete hard and believe in themselves, hopefully play within themselves but with a chip on there shoulder that when channeled the right way this motivated young team could perform much better  than many are expecting.

No matter if you think you can or you think you can’t you’re right!

You are not wrong.  But what you describe is the ceiling of possible outcomes....the absolute ceiling.  I love it and I'm open to it.  Why not!!!???!!!

[Frobby]

6 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes there is.  It exists so the defense players play can be judged against it.  A "replacement level" player brings expectations both on offense and defense. 

If you are looking at a hypothetical replacement level first baseman to judge Chris Davis against that hypothetical player has both offensive and defensive statistics that Davis is compared to.   If Davis can not meet the standards on defense that the hypothetical replacement level sets his defense is below that level.

There is no point in arguing with you further.   There are many players at roughly replacement level and their offensive and defensive abilities vary.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

There is no point in arguing with you further.   There are many players at roughly replacement level and their offensive and defensive abilities vary.

And I've not said different at any point.

We are obviously talking about two different things, I knew that when you quoted Drungo saying the exact thing I said I wasn't talking about.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

And I've not said different at any point.

We are obviously talking about two different things, I knew that when you quoted Drungo saying the exact thing I said I wasn't talking about.

I think you were reading the wrong part of the quote.    I am not making the point that oWAR + dWAR does not equal WAR.  Read the first paragraph Drungo wrote.   

[Can_of_corn]

9 hours ago, Frobby said:

I think you were reading the wrong part of the quote.    I am not making the point that oWAR + dWAR does not equal WAR.  Read the first paragraph Drungo wrote.   

I'll make one more attempt to clarify what I am trying to say.

We have a position player, we will call him Joe Replacement.  Joe isn't a DH, he plays somewhere on defense, where isn't really important.

Joe is exactly replacement level for his position on offense. 

Now is Joe a replacement level player?  We don't know because WAR factors in offense and defense into their calculations.

How do we figure out if Joe is replacement level, above replacement or below replacement?

If Joe is Belanger at short he's a pretty good player even if he can't hit.  If he's a butcher at first he's going to be well below replacement.

Joe's defense metrics need to be compared to the replacement baseline that is part of the WAR calculation.  If his metrics are superior he's going to be a least slightly above replacement level overall, if they are inferior he's going to be below replacement level.

This break even point is always going to be lower than the league average.  

TLDR: You can't compare a player to a hypothetical replacement level player without defining what the replacement level players skills are.

 

And I'm done.

 

 

 

[Frobby]

44 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'll make one more attempt to clarify what I am trying to say.

We have a position player, we will call him Joe Replacement.  Joe isn't a DH, he plays somewhere on defense, where isn't really important.

Joe is exactly replacement level for his position on offense. 

Now is Joe a replacement level player?  We don't know because WAR factors in offense and defense into their calculations.

How do we figure out if Joe is replacement level, above replacement or below replacement?

If Joe is Belanger at short he's a pretty good player even if he can't hit.  If he's a butcher at first he's going to be well below replacement.

Joe's defense metrics need to be compared to the replacement baseline that is part of the WAR calculation.  If his metrics are superior he's going to be a least slightly above replacement level overall, if they are inferior he's going to be below replacement level.

This break even point is always going to be lower than the league average.  

TLDR: You can't compare a player to a hypothetical replacement level player without defining what the replacement level players skills are.

 

And I'm done.

Thanks for your clarification.   My problem with it is the assumption that there is such a thing as “exactly replacement level for his position on offense.”    Just like there’s no such thing as replacement level defense, there’s no such thing as replacement level offense (whether or not position is taken into account).    It’s only the combination of the two that’s replacement level.    

I’m done too.