How’s the East look now?

[Moose Milligan]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

PECOTA is making a big bet on the Yankees’ offense bouncing back.  If they stay healthy, there’s a good chance it will.  They had a 113 OPS+ in 2022, 91 in 2023.   

Judge had two DL stints totaling 52 games last year, and the Yankees averaged 3.81 runs per game in those games.  The rest of the time, they averaged 4.32 runs/gsme.  So Judge’s absence was a huge factor for them.  Add Soto to the mix with a healthy Judge and that’s a really potent lineup.  

Here’s a reminder of the Yankees’ games lost to injuries last year, as previously compiled by me: 1,835 games lost to injury (521 for position players, 600 for starting pitchers, 714 for relievers)

Position players: Bader 46, Trevino 78, Rortvedt 38, Donaldson 91, Stanton 43, Judge 49, Peraza 13, Bauers 12, Allen 40, Rizzo 54, McKinney 38, Dominguez 19 = 521

Starters: Gil 162, Rodon 111, Montas 160, Severino 69, Cortes 98 = 600

Relievers: Trivino 162, Kahnle 77, Leffross 162, Loaisiga 113, Weber 103, Hamilton 28, Middleton 23, Abreu 21, Misiewicz 13, Peralta 12 = 714

By comparison, the Orioles lost 758 games to injury.

 

Giancarlo Stanton has tested positive for strikeouts and a terrible OPS+.

I agree that they should be much better in 2024.  

[CaptainRedbeard]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Last year, a 1.4 WAR would have been 24th (and far from 23rd) in the league.  Basically, they feel the Os will be a bottom third BP. 
 

I personally think that’s possible but I wouldn’t predict it. However, if you told me right now that our pen will be league average, I would take that.

I agree, I would take league average. But that would still be about 2 wins more than what the projection systems think.

I’m just explaining the bullpen is a big reason why the equation is not “101 wins last year, minus Bautista and Gibson, plus Burnes, Kimbrel and Holliday, equals 100+ wins.”

The Orioles were “lucky” in both Pythagorean record and in sequencing of stringing together offensive production. By Fangraphs’ BaseRuns, they were an 89 win team last year.

Then while Burnes/Holliday/Kimbrel > Gibson/Frazier/Bautista, the projections are also expecting significant regression from the bullpen as a whole that works in the opposite direction. That’s basically why they will come out to slightly under 89 wins, rather than getting bumped up by Burnes and Holliday. I’m expecting some regression from the bullpen, but not that much.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, CaptainRedbeard said:

I agree, I would take league average. But that would still be about 2 wins more than what the projection systems think.

I’m just explaining the bullpen is a big reason why the equation is not “101 wins last year, minus Bautista and Gibson, plus Burnes, Kimbrel and Holliday, equals 100+ wins.”

The Orioles were “lucky” in both Pythagorean record and in sequencing of stringing together offensive production. By Fangraphs’ BaseRuns, they were an 89 win team last year.

Then while Burnes/Holliday/Kimbrel > Gibson/Frazier/Bautista, the projections are also expecting significant regression from the bullpen as a whole that works in the opposite direction. That’s basically why they will come out to slightly under 89 wins, rather than getting bumped up by Burnes and Holliday. I’m expecting some regression from the bullpen, but not that much.

There are lots of reasons why:

1) Team outperformed pythag theorem by 7 wins in 2023

2) The pen stands to be worse as of now..you can lose or win a lot of extra games because of your bullpen. I think that’s a big reason why the Os outperformed last year.

3) These projection systems rely on past performance and the Os are lacking in that in many ways. Guys who have very little big league experience or will be rookies this year.

4) They had good performances from guys out of nowhere last year..again, these system use history and history doesn’t favor several members of the team.

5) Bautista gone.

6) RISP numbers not likely to be as good.

7) Record in 1 run games not likely to be as good.

So yea, I can see how 84-88 wins would be the expectation.  I said 85-95 wins pre Burnes.  I would up that to 88-98 wins.

[Just Regular]

6 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

We still have to dodge Montgomery and Snell. Odds are that one ends up in our division. Let’s hope not both. Let’s hope the Mariners somehow created some payroll, or an NL team gets involved. 

Others failed to dodge Burnes.    A Montgomery/Snell win now lowers opponents odds for a Burnes/Sasaki/Wheeler/Fried win later...I am basically hoping an AL rival deploys a top-level contract on today's guys.

[dystopia]

23 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

There are lots of reasons why:

1) Team outperformed pythag theorem by 7 wins in 2023

2) The pen stands to be worse as of now..you can lose or win a lot of extra games because of your bullpen. I think that’s a big reason why the Os outperformed last year.

3) These projection systems rely on past performance and the Os are lacking in that in many ways. Guys who have very little big league experience or will be rookies this year.

4) They had good performances from guys out of nowhere last year..again, these system use history and history doesn’t favor several members of the team.

5) Bautista gone.

6) RISP numbers not likely to be as good.

7) Record in 1 run games not likely to be as good.

So yea, I can see how 84-88 wins would be the expectation.  I said 85-95 wins pre Burnes.  I would up that to 88-98 wins.

Many of these points are just different ways of saying the same thing. The Pythagorean record (which was still 8 wins higher than their projected total this year) was because of things like their 1-run record. The bullpen is projected to be worse because Bautista is out (and now Hall). #3 sounds like a problem with the projection system, not the O’s. None of these justifies a 15 win drop.

And the Pythag disparity was largely a result of the first half. During the second half they actually played like a 100-win team. 

Are you really this big of a slave to shitty new stats and projections or do you actually have the ability to think for yourself?

[CaptainRedbeard]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

There are lots of reasons why:

1) Team outperformed pythag theorem by 7 wins in 2023

2) The pen stands to be worse as of now..you can lose or win a lot of extra games because of your bullpen. I think that’s a big reason why the Os outperformed last year.

3) These projection systems rely on past performance and the Os are lacking in that in many ways. Guys who have very little big league experience or will be rookies this year.

4) They had good performances from guys out of nowhere last year..again, these system use history and history doesn’t favor several members of the team.

5) Bautista gone.

6) RISP numbers not likely to be as good.

7) Record in 1 run games not likely to be as good.

So yea, I can see how 84-88 wins would be the expectation.  I said 85-95 wins pre Burnes.  I would up that to 88-98 wins.

1, 2, 6 and 7 are precisely why the BaseRuns record was 89 wins last year, and that’s the why 89 wins should be viewed as the baseline and not 101 wins.

But 3 & 4 are less significant than you might think, at least for the position players. O’Hearn is surprisingly projected to regress slightly, but not crater. Holliday and Westburg have very good projections. The other rookies Cowser, Kjerstad, Mayo are pretty even with O’Hearn and they’re not projected for a lot of PA. 

And they’re even pretty bought in on Bradish and Grayson, just not to the degree that their second half performances indicate.

The big factor is 5 - no Bautista - and 4 for all the other members of the pen, particularly Cano and Coulombe.

All that to say, this isn’t like the mid-2010 Orioles where the projections were consistently skeptical of many players. Right now it’s pretty much just the relievers. 

[dystopia]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

PECOTA is making a big bet on the Yankees’ offense bouncing back.  If they stay healthy, there’s a good chance it will.  They had a 113 OPS+ in 2022, 91 in 2023.   

Judge had two DL stints totaling 52 games last year, and the Yankees averaged 3.81 runs per game in those games.  The rest of the time, they averaged 4.32 runs/gsme.  So Judge’s absence was a huge factor for them.  Add Soto to the mix with a healthy Judge and that’s a really potent lineup.  

Here’s a reminder of the Yankees’ games lost to injuries last year, as previously compiled by me: 1,835 games lost to injury (521 for position players, 600 for starting pitchers, 714 for relievers)

Position players: Bader 46, Trevino 78, Rortvedt 38, Donaldson 91, Stanton 43, Judge 49, Peraza 13, Bauers 12, Allen 40, Rizzo 54, McKinney 38, Dominguez 19 = 521

Starters: Gil 162, Rodon 111, Montas 160, Severino 69, Cortes 98 = 600

Relievers: Trivino 162, Kahnle 77, Leffross 162, Loaisiga 113, Weber 103, Hamilton 28, Middleton 23, Abreu 21, Misiewicz 13, Peralta 12 = 714

By comparison, the Orioles lost 758 games to injury.

 

Could you ever see PECOTA or whoever betting on any facet of the O’s “bouncing back”? 
 

Of course not, the idea is laughable. 

[jabba72]

52 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Giancarlo Stanton has tested positive for strikeouts and a terrible OPS+.

I agree that they should be much better in 2024.  

I dont know. Judge is a year older and due some regression. He will be horrible in CF. Cant believe thats the Yankees current plan. Its going to backfire. Dominguez could be a wildcard factor whenever he gets healthy. Looks like Mid-July is when they see him coming back. He supposedly plays CF but who knows with TJ surgery how his throwing arm will be.

[Sports Guy]

24 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Many of these points are just different ways of saying the same thing. The Pythagorean record (which was still 8 wins higher than their projected total this year) was because of things like their 1-run record. The bullpen is projected to be worse because Bautista is out (and now Hall). #3 sounds like a problem with the projection system, not the O’s. None of these justifies a 15 win drop.

And the Pythag disparity was largely a result of the first half. During the second half they actually played like a 100-win team. 

Are you really this big of a slave to shitty new stats and projections or do you actually have the ability to think for yourself?

Nah..I’m just not dumb enough to think people rig a system for one team.  That’s just moronic. 
 

As I said, I don’t like these systems and don’t put weight into them.  They are like top 100 lists.  Fine for discussion but nothing else.

[Frobby]

35 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Many of these points are just different ways of saying the same thing. The Pythagorean record (which was still 8 wins higher than their projected total this year) was because of things like their 1-run record. The bullpen is projected to be worse because Bautista is out (and now Hall). #3 sounds like a problem with the projection system, not the O’s. None of these justifies a 15 win drop.

And the Pythag disparity was largely a result of the first half. During the second half they actually played like a 100-win team. 

Are you really this big of a slave to shitty new stats and projections or do you actually have the ability to think for yourself?

Disagreeing with a projection is one thing.  Thinking it’s been rigged to favor one team over another is something else.  

[Sports Guy]

9 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Disagreeing with a projection is one thing.  Thinking it’s been rigged to favor one team over another is something else.  

If you want to say the system is rigged, the concept should be around the idea that projection systems tend to be skewed against teams that play a lot of close games.
 

Winning tight 2-1 games isn’t impressive.  Winning 7-1  is. Projection systems are going to look upon teams that win 7-1 far more favorably..and they should. It’s data. It’s not rigged against those teams, irs just the data.

But at least that’s a sensible argument…not the idea that a system is rigged against one team. 

Edited February 6 by Sports Guy

[CaptainRedbeard]

The error bars on team win projections are so big that they are not very meaningful. And that’s not even counting all of the “luck” factors - pythag, RISP, etc. 

The single projected wins figure also does not really capture upside vs. downside. The projection is in the middle. But the Orioles have a ton of upside with so many young players (and with RP with really good stuff, but not a track record of success), and also a ton of depth that limits the impact of injury downsides.

IMO baseball is, more than any other sport, a “you have to play the games” sport. It doesn’t meant the projections are worthless, they’re a sophisticated attempt at a “best guess” and for that reason they’re heavily influential in player evaluation and roster construction.

But part of what makes baseball great is that anything can happen. Anybody that didn’t learn from the 2012 Orioles not to put too much weight on projections and just enjoy the ride should have learned that from the 2023 Orioles. And if instead you “learned” that the projection systems are biased against the Orioles…you didn’t understand the lesson. 

[foxfield]

I do think it is fair to criticize projections as having some “Yankee” bias. But it should be easy to understand. Their players are big name players who have put up numbers. Repeating those numbers within a certain range makes sense. 
 

Judge for me is an interesting case study. He is amazing when healthy there is no doubt. But he hasn’t been durable and the Yankees insist on playing him in CF which seems to me to speed his decline. 
 

I guess I am saying I don’t think projections are biased, but that they are more likely to inflate the high salary teams because of past performances. 
 

The same is true in reverse for the Orioles with so many young players. The Orioles are more likely to be under rated because they lack the past to project.  Their success in areas like 1 run games should not be repeatable but it’s hard to project player growth for a team that is very young. 
 

I am fine with where the O’s are projected. 

[spleen1015]

Who's more biased?

The fan of a baseball team or a computer program written to predeict the future of baseball teams?

These are wrong so often, you can't give them any real credibility. It's just fun to talk about.

[Frobby]

31 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

If you want to say the system is rigged, the concept should be around the idea that projection systems tend to be skewed against teams that play a lot of close games.
 

Winning tight 2-1 games isn’t impressive.  Winning 7-1  is. Projection systems are going to look upon teams that win 7-1 far more favorably..and they should. It’s data. It’s not rigged against those teams, irs just the data.

But at least that’s a sensible argument…not the idea that a system is rigged against one team. 

Right.  You don’t know before a season is played who is going to win close games, or who is going to hit better with RISP than they do overall.   Those things are unpredictable.