BP's early season record projections

[JGalt73]

Each year BP uses their PECOTA projections for players and combines them with more subjective estimates of playing time to predict RS/RA and team records. This year looks ugly as projected:

 

NL Central

St Louis 89-33

Cincinnati 82-80

Chicago 77-85

Milwaukee 75-87

Pittsburgh 70-92

 

Cubs RS = 754

Cubs RA = 873

[TruffleShuffle]

fannnnnnnnnnntastic.

[JGalt73]

Perhaps this is all statistical anomaly - or at least perhaps the data are not clean enough for the team usage:

 

Mike (Chicago): Just looking at the depth charts page, it seems that the total runs scored/runs allowed is much higher than last year. Any reason for that assumption?

 

Christina Kahrl: Yes, because the depth charts page hasn't been pared down yet in terms of reflecting projections of individual player's PT. Right now, what's up and useful are the individual projections for players in terms of what PECOTA's saying about their potential production.

[Guest]

873 runs allowed?

 

Don't think they've got this one quite right.

[Cubbie Swagger]

873 runs allowed?

 

Don't think they've got this one quite right.

Yeah... that would be alot of runs. Even with how crappy our rotation looks.

[Cubswin11]

873 runs allowed?

 

Don't think they've got this one quite right.

Yeah... that would be alot of runs. Even with how crappy our rotation looks.

That's closing in on 06' rotation badness

[TruffleShuffle]

man soriano is projected to be horrendous. well maybe not horrendous but certainly way, way, way below what he's paid to do.

 

i will probably [expletive] myself if the nationals end up above .500. and it would be wonderful to see the yankees have the third-best record in baseball and miss the playoffs, though that's extremely unlikely to happen.

[TruffleShuffle]

also, jake fox is projected to hit 30 hr's for oakland.

[Derwood]

I ask this every year (and rarely get an answer) but.....

 

How accurate have their predictions been in the past?

[chasinf5s]

I ask this every year (and rarely get an answer) but.....

 

How accurate have their predictions been in the past?

 

in 2009

 

The A's were supposed to win the AL west last year with 82 wins

 

The Phillies were 3rd in the NL east

 

Had texas winning 73

 

Cubs had 96 wins

 

They are hit and miss, If baseball was this easy to predict, no one would watch.

 

I think the average miss for 2008 was 9 games or something

[UMFan83]

2 of their better bold predictions that hit were the 2008 Rays having a sharp rise and becoming a postseason contender (I don't quite think they predicted them to make the playoffs, I think it was 88 wins or something), and the 2007 White Sox, off of 99 and 93 wins finishing in last place (they were close).

[SouthSideRyan]

2 of their better bold predictions that hit were the 2008 Rays having a sharp rise and becoming a postseason contender (I don't quite think they predicted them to make the playoffs, I think it was 88 wins or something), and the 2007 White Sox, off of 99 and 93 wins finishing in last place (they were close).

 

They nailed the '07 White Sox exactly with 72 wins. (and Will Carroll embarrassingly gloated over it as if he had anything to do with the projection.)

[NCCubFan]

St Louis 89-33

Wow, 40 rainouts. :D

[wvcbxl]

St Louis 89-33

Wow, 40 rainouts. :D

 

Even more impressive: a .73 winning percentage. 8-)

[Soul]

8 under .500? Seriously?

[Lefty]

8 under .500? Seriously?

 

May be a little low. But it seems to me it's on the right side of .500. This team is lousy.

[jersey cubs fan]

8 under .500? Seriously?

 

They are still short a good starter, and have serious holes in the rotation and questionable lineup. I think they'll end up better than that, but the potential is clearly there for this team to tank. They are an older version of last year's disappointment with no significant improvements from acquisitions.

[Bull]

I think they're close. .500 and third place is my prediction. Hope I'm wrong.

[MSG T]

Each year BP uses their PECOTA projections for players and combines them with more subjective estimates of playing time to predict RS/RA and team records. This year looks ugly as projected:

 

NL Central

St Louis 89-33

Cincinnati 82-80

Chicago 77-85

Milwaukee 75-87

Pittsburgh 70-92

 

Cubs RS = 754

Cubs RA = 873

 

Did Houston secede from the Central?

[AlwaysaCub]

I think the large number of runs allowed is as much a function of a terrible team defensive projection as regression/suck from the pitchers (and we "added" Carlos Silva).

[Guest]

If someone can explain to me how our pitching staff got 201 runs worse this offseason, I'll buy into the projection.

 

Whoever replaces Harden will be a worse pitcher, but Harden didn't pitch great in 2009 so his production from last year isn't that difficult to replace.

Gregg...well, that's a net positive right there.

Heilman...more of the same.

 

Sure, there are question marks on this staff heading into the season. But 201 runs is a heck of a lot. There's no way they regress that much this season.

[Guest]

I think the large number of runs allowed is as much a function of a terrible team defensive projection as regression/suck from the pitchers (and we "added" Carlos Silva).

Why would the team defense be worse than last year? Kosuke is a better defender in right than Bradley. Byrd is a better defender in CF than Kosuke. Everyone else is the same.

 

Good try, but can't see it.

[jersey cubs fan]

If someone can explain to me how our pitching staff got 201 runs worse this offseason, I'll buy into the projection.

 

Whoever replaces Harden will be a worse pitcher, but Harden didn't pitch great in 2009 so his production from last year isn't that difficult to replace.

Gregg...well, that's a net positive right there.

Heilman...more of the same.

 

Sure, there are question marks on this staff heading into the season. But 201 runs is a heck of a lot. There's no way they regress that much this season.

 

I think runs are up across the board because they didn't do much work with the depth part of the equation. I don't think the totals are all that meaningful.

[Guest]

If someone can explain to me how our pitching staff got 201 runs worse this offseason, I'll buy into the projection.

 

Whoever replaces Harden will be a worse pitcher, but Harden didn't pitch great in 2009 so his production from last year isn't that difficult to replace.

Gregg...well, that's a net positive right there.

Heilman...more of the same.

 

Sure, there are question marks on this staff heading into the season. But 201 runs is a heck of a lot. There's no way they regress that much this season.

 

I think runs are up across the board because they didn't do much work with the depth part of the equation. I don't think the totals are all that meaningful.

So it is pretty much totally meaningless, then.

[jersey cubs fan]

If someone can explain to me how our pitching staff got 201 runs worse this offseason, I'll buy into the projection.

 

Whoever replaces Harden will be a worse pitcher, but Harden didn't pitch great in 2009 so his production from last year isn't that difficult to replace.

Gregg...well, that's a net positive right there.

Heilman...more of the same.

 

Sure, there are question marks on this staff heading into the season. But 201 runs is a heck of a lot. There's no way they regress that much this season.

 

I think runs are up across the board because they didn't do much work with the depth part of the equation. I don't think the totals are all that meaningful.

So it is pretty much totally meaningless, then.

 

I don't know about totally. I think it shows where teams are in comparison to other teams, with their system.