User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.3132 seconds
53 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. DanO Posted: December 10, 2012 at 02:15 PM (#4321030)No.
I'd put the O/U closer to 93. Unless '12 showed us the real Gonzalez and Beckett, then O/U ~88.
Exactly what came to my mind. I seemed to remember a lot of people thinking the Red Sox team was going to be one of the greatest teams of all time.(or 2012 Angels)
If every player on the team matches his best season from the last 3 years, measured by the stat site most favorable to him, how many wins does that get you? The Dodger's 110 might not even be the best out there. The average team under the same conditions would obviously come out way above 81 wins. Not sure if "average" would work out to 90, 95, or even 100.
Beyond that the reliever WAR includes leverage index - except you can't give everyone high leverage innings next year even if they all pitch at their best rates.
Or '12 Rangers early on.
edit: coke to NJ.
The article was a fun exercise from an optimistic fanboy point of view on the team(at least I hope it was)
War is not a good predictive stat anyway, as your point points out. Of course the article ended up using fWar for most of the pitchers, which ignores the defense that is going to be behind them.
Unless math has changed the rules to keep the deficits from scaring too many people, 72.7+50 = 122.7
Well this would overrate those teams composed primarily of veterans just out of their peak phase and underrate teams with a lot of young players like the Royals or a lot of rookies like the 2o12 A's. That would probably bring down the average a bit.
I think they are on the list of 8 likely NL playoff teams (Nationals, Braves, Phillies, Cardinals, Brewers, Reds, Giants and Dodgers) I don't see anything that clearly separates any team from that group. Add in a surprise team or two, and I can see them not making the playoffs.
True that it would overrate a veteran team (been there) over a team with talented rookie (no WAR in their past). But otherwise may not be a terrible way to look at things, as long as you did it consistently for every team and found your true baseline (which would be way over 81 wins).
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I would have guessed the Diamondbacks over the Phillies, and I think the Dodgers, Nationals and Cardinals are better than the others, but I agree they're all within striking distance of each other.
The Dodgers are now the team that America would most like to see fail. Congrats, Yanks -- you finally made it off the hot seat.
Not the same thing. Sure you can add WAR as long as you restrain the playing time. Adding Kemp, Ethier, and Crawford is fine. Adding Pujols + Fielder + Votto, with no DH and without handling a position change, would be the equivalent of Kareem + Wilt + Bill.
If one season of spending by this mostly mediocre bunch is all that it takes to push them past the Yankees on any such list, then America really ought to be ashamed of itself.
CC 7
TEx 7
Cano 8
Jeter 8
Granderson 7
Pettitte 8
Rivera 5
Gardner 7
Kuroda 5
Nova 3
Pindeda 2
Hughes 2.5
That's almost 80 already and there's still no C and I haven't bothered with the rest of the pen or the bench. Granted, they are going to sorely miss Andruw's 8 WAR.
That some of these career highs were in the last century and that Mo is unlikely to pitch 100 innings in a season again might suggest it's a bit unrealistic. :-)
The Dodgers are about 20 titles short of that title. Not to mention they have Vin Scully and Magic Johnson, as opposed to Michael Kay and the family Steinbrenner.
That said, if the Dodgers win 110 or more games this season, I will speak in Pig-Latin the day after 162.
Russell would be a power forward in today's game. Wilt led the league in assists one year so we're gonna put him at the point. :-)
I actually flipped flopped between those two. I gave it to the Phillies since they are only a year removed from being very good.
And it's too early for me to trust myself with anything more than surface analysis, which means basically I rank the teams five ways Horrible/poor/average/good/great....and you don't make it to great unless you have almost no holes on your roster or question marks. (right now that is)
Actually, though, the Red Sox ownership remains far more unlikeable than any of these guys.
Not really what the writer was doing though. He only used war from 2010-2012 in his article.
C Martin .282, 10 HR (cheating a bit, this is his 2006 rookie season)
1B Tex .301, 43, 144 (RBI and OPS+)
2B Cano .297, 14 HR
SS/DH Jeter .309, 19 HR gold glove (awarded)
3B/SS/DH A-Rod .321, 48 hr, 173 ops+
3B Chavez .269, 27, 101 rbi, gold glove (earned)
RF Ichiro .303, 15 HR, 12 3B, 33 SB, gold glove (earned)
CF Jones 51 HR, 128 RBI, gold glove (earned)
LF Ibanez .280, 20 HR, 115 OPS+
4th OF Granderson 47g, 114 OPS+
5th OF Swisher 102 OPS+
Pettitte 17-9, 177 ERA+, 222 ip
Garcia 14-8, 116+, 228 ip
Derek Lowe 12-15, 114+, 222 ip
Sabathia 15-10, 104+, 196 ip
Colon 21-8, 122+, 222 ip (cheating a bit, Colon was a 2011 Yankee)
Rivera 1.38 ERA, 43 saves
I think hypnotism gone wrong, radiation poisoning, and falling into the Springfield Mystery Spot are more likely.
I thought the little we see of Fenway and 'Henry' in Moneyball was just amazing.
yes!
and i'm not saying that just because i live in L.A. and sometimes get free tickets!!!
well, maybe i am.
I don't really get why spending lots of money to improve your team makes you unlikeable. Most fans wish their teams would do that. The perverse appeal of the A's with their low payroll and crappy stadium escapes me.
While the 102 win Phillies were much better in 2011, the D Backs were pretty good too. 94 Wins, 88 Pythag. And they are a lot younger, so I would bet on more upside swing for D Backs roster....IF Kevin Towers doesn't dump Justin Upton for a no hit all glove shortstop like Elvis Andrus.
He's also using a mix of fWAR and bWAR and they have different replacement levels.
But, fair enough, using just bWAR:
AROD 4
CC 7
TEx 4
Cano 8
Jeter 2
Granderson 5
Pettitte 2.5
Rivera 3
Gardner 7
Kuroda 5
Nova 3
Pindeda 2
Hughes 2.5
Still no C and RF or DH but their best seasons at C/RF are 2 and 3.5 WAR. Filling out the bullpen (not necessarily with the current roster, I'm too lazy to check) looks to add about 10-12. Bench (most of the DH I guess) looks to add about 4. All told that comes to about 85 WAR.
Now the Angels:
Trout 11
Bourjos 5
Pujols 7
Kendrick 4
Aybar 4
Callaspo 3
Trumbo 2.5
Morales 2
Ianetta 3
Wells 3.5
rest of bench 3
(this will teach them to get rid of pitchers):
Weaver 7
Wilson 4.5
Hanson 2.5
(who is the rest of their rotation?)
bullpen 8
That's 70 plus 2 rotation slots
Looked at BB-ref for a team that had more recent success like
RF (6 years ago) 29 HR .308/.361/.501 121 OPS+ 4.5 oWAR
LF (5 years ago) 19 HR .321/.408/.521 153 OPS+ 4.3 WAR
1B (5 years ago) 27 HR .299/.366/.511 125 OPS+ 4 WAR
CF (4 years ago) 215 H 13 triples 97 BB .350/.440/.441 136 OPS+ 7.0 WAR
2B (3 years ago) 103R 30 2B 11 3B 19 HR .287/.337/.464 4.2 WAR
pretty solid nucleus! Gus Bell, Gene Woodling, Gil Hodges, Richie Ashburn, Charlie Neal...1962 Mets.
I think you could make it work. You'd play some kind of weird zone on defense, and make teams shoot over you. You would, of course, punish teams down low on the other end.
Wilt and Kareem running a high-low game would be something devastating to watch.
Ellis 3
AGon 3
Ellis 2
Hanley 1
Cruz 2 (rest on the bench)
Crawford 0
Kemp 2
Ethier 3.5
bench 0
Kershaw 5
Greinke 3
Beckett 1
Harang 1.5
Capuano 2
Billingsley 1.5
bullpen 7 (give or take)
That's 38 WAR or 90 wins (as I understand b-r replacement level). That's about a 5-6 WAR improvement on last year. Obviously things might change as the rotation sorts itself out. Impressively whatever you lose from an AJ Ellis regression you probably make back with Kemp and AGon.
You are forgetting Tommy Lasorda.
Wouldn't any study that shows fip is better predictor than era be pretty much the same thing?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main