2010 CHONE forecasts are out!
Something doesn't look right at all!
over 2 years ago
marc w
28 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Very odd
The M’s have an above average offense, defense (duh), and pitching, yet come out at 77-85. Their WAR would get them 87 wins, but they’re still showing up in the standings at 77. Is this based on schedule? It’s not like the AL West is a juggernaut here, with Texas leading the pack at 85 wins. Something doesn’t make sense.
In addition, Tango’s concerns here…
Aaaand it's the schedule
M’s play 8 teams that are worse on true talent, and a big chunk of that is the NL central in interleague. AL West is fairly talented by this, and they all beat each other up.
Interesting.
Something is very wrong with the pitching estimates.
Texas are not 3.5 wins better than us at pitching. Oakland aren’t 1.5 wins ahead of us. Etc.
Which sould be pretty cool for them
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 9, 2010 7:32 PM PST up reply actions
In addition to the defense issue, there's also this.
Lineups are the starting 8 for NL teams, the starting 9 for the AL teams, 5 starting pitchers, and two top relievers.
and
The results will be biased towards front line heavy teams that have little depth.The fact that the Mariners are probably going to rely heavily on platoons, even in the absolute best case scenario will use 6 starting pitchers, and have bullpen depth as a strength means that they are going to be heavily underrated by the system.
by I Lick Squirrels on Feb 9, 2010 3:14 PM PST reply actions
Right, though it's still odd that Oakland would be so far ahead
Esp. given that they didn’t use Bailey for the A’s, just Ziegler and Devine (and Devine was worth as much as Aardsma and League put together). But putting that aside, I just think the projections are a bit odd. The Rangers starters are great, the A’s are solid, and the M’s have 3 below-average starters. Subtracting Vargas for Bedard (or Bedard+Fister) could add 2+ wins fairly easily.
Fun to look at, but I’m not putting a lot of stock in this.
Maybe it is just me but without looking at the details this tells me nothing new.
An 8 game spread from 1st to last is minuscule over a full season. Just like every other prediction out there this is basically saying the West is too close to call.
It's 2008 all over again.
Bavasi Blissfully Unaware Of Real Analysis
My official prediction: 83-79, one game better than Texas, nowhere close to the playoffs.
PECOTA projections: 76-86, third place, nowhere close to the playoffs.
ZIPS projections: 72-90, third place, nowhere close to the playoffs
CHONE projections: 83-79, nowhere close to the playoffs
Hardball Times projections: 79-83, third place, nowhere close to the playoffs.
PECOTA and CHONE both have the Mariners at 77-85 in 2010.
Also some general notes
Only three 90+ win teams, and they’re not all in the AL East. The worst team has 71 wins.
That makes sense
Same reason you don’t see projections for individual players that are all that extreme.
There is something really wierd
Team totals tab of spreadsheet have us positive in every category and says win% 0.537
These are optimistic depth charts
CHONE is just using the top player at each position, top five starters, and top six relievers. So every team is going to look better in isolation than they would once you account for realistic playing time. So you’re not really seeing a .537 team against .500 competition, you’re seeing it against a league that’s overly optimistic in general.
The spread of true talent is way too big
NYY (true talent on Team totals page) is projected to have 105.4 wins. BOS = 102
Hmm. Average using the win % on team totals page gives the average team winning 87 games.
For those who think its a scheduling thing
SG used the results of one of his Diamond Mind runs to ballpark each AL team’s schedule strength. M’s are 8th on the list, behind both the As and Angels and just a hair above the Rangers.
For what its worth, his CAIRO runs are also projecting the Ms to do poorly (80 wins) which I suspect is partly the result of how he calculates playing time (weighted 4 year average) which will penalize players like Guti, and RRS, and maybe an underestimation of the defense. And of course his commitment to making the Yankees look good on the internet.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 9, 2010 8:28 PM PST reply actions
Re: playing time
For what its worth, his CAIRO runs are also projecting the Ms to do poorly (80 wins) which I suspect is partly the result of how he calculates playing time (weighted 4 year average) which will penalize players like Guti, and RRS, and maybe an underestimation of the defense.
I’m not using the weighted average playing times for the simulations, I’ve built depth charts for them which I am hoping will be closer to reality.
Re: the D, I’ve got the M’s defense projected around +50, which is right around where I have Tampa Bay projected, and IMO they’re the two best defensive teams in the AL.
And of course his commitment to making the Yankees look good on the internet.
Yep, I’m waiting for right before the season to reveal my 120-42 Yankee projection.
Oh, I didn't realize about the playing time projections.
How tedious! By which I mean my god that’s a lot of work.
Your defense estimate sounds right. I think they’ll do better but I wouldn’t project them to.
I guess I’ve spent so much time convincing myself this is an 87-89 win team that when I see evidence to the contrary I start picking at it for errors instead of rechecking my own calculations. Fandom.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 9, 2010 9:54 PM PST up reply actions
A couple of things re: CAIRO
1) These were run pre-Bedard. I’ve added him in for half a season’s worth of starts now.
2) Franklin Gutierrez’s defensive rating was incorrect. He was rated average but I have him projected at around +15.
Re-running with those corrections gives me the following updated AL West standings(I haven’t posted these anywhere yet).
SEA: 82-80, 37.3% Div
TEX: 81-81, 27.5% Div
LAA: 80-82, 22.8% Div
OAK: 77-85, 13.0% Div
Remember, these are the averages over 100 iterations. The actual average win total to take the AL West was 88 wins.
I’d also say that it’s too early for any sets of projected standings to be taken too seriously. We still have roles and playing time to sort out, and it’s going to take through most of spring training to get those somewhat reasonable.
by SGinATL on Feb 9, 2010 9:15 PM PST reply actions 8 recs
I'm starting to think that taking the neutral 81-81 projection for every team in the ALW is going to give the smallest error.
Thanks for the quick response. I know it’s too early to obsess about these things, but hey, doldrums.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 9, 2010 9:28 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
