Saturday, January 16, 2010
CAIRO Projected 2010 AL East Standings as of January 16
Obviously it's way too early to make much of these, but here's how I have the AL East projected with CAIRO given current rosters and my estimated playing times.| Team | W | L | RS | RA | Div% | WC% | PL% |
| Yankees | 100.3 | 61.7 | 864 | 664 | 66.4% | 24.5% | 90.9% |
| Red Sox | 94.9 | 67.1 | 861 | 700 | 26.1% | 44.8% | 70.9% |
| Rays | 89.3 | 72.7 | 804 | 706 | 7.4% | 21.9% | 29.3% |
| Blue Jays | 70.1 | 91.9 | 696 | 761 | - | 0.2% | 0.2% |
| Orioles | 70.4 | 91.6 | 778 | 854 | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.3% |
W: Average projected win total
L: Average projected loss total
RS: Projected runs scored
RA: Projected runs allowed
Div%: Percentage of times team won division
WC%: Percentage of times team won wild card
PL%: Percentage of times team made the playoffs (Div% + WC%)
Although it looks like Boston's offense is on par with the Yankees superficially, it's not once you consider the park factors. The Yankees are probably about forty runs better than Boston offensively in a neutral park right now, although the converse applies to the pitching staffs.
Interestingly enough, for all the talk about Boston's great defense, they're not even the best defense in the division, with Tampa Bay projecting close to 20 runs better than Boston.
Anyway, expect lots to change before we can really have useful projected standings, so please don't take these too seriously.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Oakland 9, Texas 1
With Texas losing to Oakland tonight, the Yankees have backed their way into clinching a playoff spot. Yay, I guess.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
When Might the Yankees Clinch the AL East (if they do)?
A few weeks back, I got an email from a reader who wondered if I could give him the probability of the Yankees clinching the division on certain dates. With a little bit of tweaking, I was able to rig my Monte Carlo simulator to do just that. I didn't want to post about it then because of the whole jinx/karma thing, but I think I can post it now.Again, this is only IF the Yankees somehow manage to win the AL East against a clearly better Red Sox team. Nothing is decided yet.
| Date | % |
| 9/19/2009 | 0.1% |
| 9/20/2009 | 0.8% |
| 9/21/2009 | 2.4% |
| 9/22/2009 | 6.1% |
| 9/23/2009 | 9.8% |
| 9/24/2009 | 5.0% |
| 9/25/2009 | 18.1% |
| 9/26/2009 | 16.5% |
| 9/27/2009 | 13.4% |
| 9/28/2009 | 10.6% |
| 9/29/2009 | 7.3% |
| 9/30/2009 | 4.8% |
| 10/1/2009 | 1.0% |
| 10/2/2009 | 2.1% |
| 10/3/2009 | 1.2% |
| 10/4/2009 | 0.8% |
Hmm, clinching at home against Boston on Friday, September 25 has the hightest probability right now. That'd be fun.
For all you pie chart freaks, here's how that looks in pie chart form.
And updating last week's post about win probabailities:
| Win Totals | % |
| 97 | 0.3% |
| 98 | 0.7% |
| 99 | 1.8% |
| 100 | 4.6% |
| 101 | 8.2% |
| 102 | 12.5% |
| 103 | 16.5% |
| 104 | 18.6% |
| 105 | 15.6% |
| 106 | 10.8% |
| 107 | 6.2% |
| 108 | 3.1% |
| 109 | 0.9% |
| 110 | 0.3% |
Yeah, there's a 2.8% chance this team WON'T win at least 100 games. I like that.
If the Yankees go 10-11 from here on out, Boston would have to go 20-3 to tie them.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
August 2009 Yankee Splits
Unfortunately for us as Yankee fans, August ended with yesterday's 5-1 victory over Baltimore. Why is that unfortunate? Here are a few reasons.The Yankees went into August with a 62-41 record and a 1.5 game lead in the AL East, having scored 569 runs and allowing 491 to that point. Today they sit at 83-48, having scored 744 runs and allowing 614. More importantly, they've now got a 6.5 game lead in the AL East.
So in August, the Yankees went 21-7, scored 175 runs, and allowed 123 runs. Here's how the individual players performed offensively, defensively, and in pitching.
| Player | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | HBP | K | SB | CS | AVG | OBP | SLG | BR |
| Derek Jeter | 122 | 27 | 46 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 17 | 5 | 1 | 14 | 4 | 1 | .377 | .403 | .574 | 24 |
| Mark Teixeira | 109 | 17 | 32 | 7 | 0 | 6 | 26 | 17 | 1 | 19 | 1 | 0 | .294 | .391 | .523 | 22 |
| Robinson Cano | 118 | 19 | 41 | 13 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 2 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 1 | .347 | .358 | .585 | 21 |
| Johnny Damon | 98 | 21 | 32 | 8 | 0 | 7 | 16 | 7 | 0 | 14 | 2 | 0 | .327 | .371 | .622 | 21 |
| Alex Rodriguez | 92 | 19 | 29 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 12 | 18 | 3 | 23 | 2 | 0 | .315 | .442 | .500 | 20 |
| Nick Swisher | 94 | 14 | 26 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 16 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 0 | .277 | .378 | .500 | 18 |
| Hideki Matsui | 89 | 16 | 25 | 3 | 0 | 8 | 25 | 6 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 1 | .281 | .333 | .584 | 16 |
| Jorge Posada | 75 | 9 | 21 | 7 | 0 | 4 | 16 | 8 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 0 | .280 | .345 | .533 | 13 |
| Melky Cabrera | 103 | 14 | 23 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 13 | 5 | 1 | 12 | 3 | 0 | .223 | .264 | .350 | 10 |
| Jerry Hairston | 41 | 10 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 7 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | .293 | .400 | .512 | 8 |
| Eric Hinske | 29 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | .172 | .265 | .276 | 2 |
| Jose Molina | 40 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | .200 | .283 | .200 | 2 |
| Ramiro Pena | 8 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .375 | .375 | .375 | 1 |
| Cody Ransom | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | .000 | .000 | .000 | 0 |
BR: Batting runs using linear weights
| Player | G | GS | W | L | Sv | Sho | IP | H | R | ER | HR | BB | K | HBP | ERA | FIP | K9 | BB9 | HR9 | RSAR |
| CC Sabathia | 6 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 44.3 | 36 | 14 | 13 | 5 | 6 | 49 | 0 | 2.64 | 2.86 | 10.0 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 15.5 |
| Andy Pettitte | 6 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 39.7 | 29 | 13 | 11 | 2 | 12 | 39 | 0 | 2.50 | 2.80 | 8.9 | 2.7 | 0.5 | 13.4 |
| Mariano Rivera | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 11.3 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 12 | 0 | 0.79 | 3.29 | 9.5 | 3.2 | 0.8 | 6.5 |
| Brian Bruney | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.3 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 0.87 | 4.55 | 4.4 | 6.1 | 0.0 | 5.9 |
| Phil Hughes | 11 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.3 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 16 | 0 | 1.74 | 1.26 | 13.9 | 3.5 | 0.0 | 4.9 |
| Chad Gaudin | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14.0 | 13 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 10 | 14 | 1 | 3.21 | 6.34 | 9.0 | 6.4 | 1.9 | 4.3 |
| David Robertson | 11 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9.7 | 11 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 17 | 0 | 2.79 | 2.27 | 15.8 | 3.7 | 0.9 | 3.4 |
| Alfredo Aceves | 8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19.0 | 17 | 10 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 15 | 2 | 4.74 | 4.15 | 7.1 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 2.7 |
| Damaso Marte | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0.00 | 1.91 | 11.6 | 3.9 | 0.0 | 1.6 |
| Mark Melancon | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.00 | 5.20 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 0.0 | 1.3 |
| Sergio Mitre | 5 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 23.0 | 26 | 14 | 11 | 5 | 6 | 14 | 1 | 4.30 | 5.72 | 5.5 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 1.3 |
| A.J. Burnett | 6 | 6 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 37.3 | 38 | 25 | 25 | 5 | 17 | 40 | 1 | 6.03 | 4.24 | 9.6 | 4.1 | 1.2 | -0.1 |
| Anthony Paul Claggett | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 18.00 | 7.20 | 9.0 | 18.0 | 0.0 | -1.3 |
| Phil Coke | 12 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9.7 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 11.17 | 7.03 | 6.5 | 3.7 | 2.8 | -5.6 |
| Joba Chamberlain | 5 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 23.0 | 31 | 21 | 21 | 3 | 15 | 18 | 0 | 8.22 | 5.29 | 7.0 | 5.9 | 1.2 | -5.7 |
RSAR: Runs saved above replacement
| Player | Tm | Lg | Pos | G | GS | INN | CH | PM | ZR | AvgPM | Diff | RS |
| Rodriguez, Alex | NYY | AL | 3B | 23 | 22 | 201 | 55 | 46 | .835 | 43 | 3 | 2 |
| Swisher, Nick | NYY | AL | RF | 24 | 23 | 196 | 56 | 51 | .911 | 49 | 2 | 2 |
| Damon, Johnny | NYY | AL | LF | 23 | 22 | 202 | 36 | 33 | .919 | 31 | 2 | 2 |
| Hinske, Eric | NYY | AL | RF | 10 | 5 | 52 | 14 | 14 | 1.001 | 12 | 2 | 2 |
| Teixeira, Mark | NYY | AL | 1B | 26 | 25 | 229 | 36 | 32 | .893 | 30 | 2 | 1 |
| Hairston Jr., Jerry | NYY | AL | 3B | 9 | 6 | 52 | 23 | 19 | .826 | 18 | 1 | 1 |
| Swisher, Nick | NYY | AL | 1B | 3 | 2 | 20 | 3 | 3 | 1.001 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Hairston Jr., Jerry | NYY | AL | SS | 4 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1.000 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Ransom, Cody | NYY | AL | 1B | 1 | 1 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 1.000 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Pena, Ramiro | NYY | AL | 2B | 1 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1.000 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Hairston Jr., Jerry | NYY | AL | RF | 6 | 0 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 1.000 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Hinske, Eric | NYY | AL | LF | 2 | 1 | 17 | 8 | 7 | .875 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
| Swisher, Nick | NYY | AL | LF | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Molina, Jose | NYY | AL | 3B | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Pena, Ramiro | NYY | AL | 3B | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ransom, Cody | NYY | AL | 3B | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Hairston Jr., Jerry | NYY | AL | LF | 5 | 4 | 35 | 6 | 5 | .833 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Cano, Robinson | NYY | AL | 2B | 28 | 27 | 251 | 82 | 66 | .805 | 66 | 0 | 0 |
| Cabrera, Melky | NYY | AL | CF | 27 | 26 | 242 | 59 | 53 | .899 | 54 | -1 | 0 |
| Pena, Ramiro | NYY | AL | SS | 3 | 1 | 16 | 8 | 6 | .749 | 7 | -1 | 0 |
| Hairston Jr., Jerry | NYY | AL | CF | 2 | 2 | 15 | 4 | 3 | .750 | 4 | -1 | -1 |
| Jeter, Derek | NYY | AL | SS | 27 | 27 | 235 | 76 | 62 | .817 | 63 | -1 | -1 |
| Total | 1799 | 472 | 406 | .861 | 397 | 9 | 8 |
INN: Defensive Innings at Position
CH: Playable Chances
PM: Plays Made
ZR: Zone rating (PM / CH)
AvgPM: PM by an average defender at same position over the same # of chances
Diff: PM minus AvgPM
RS: Runs saved above average using zone rating.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
The Importance of This Red Sox Series
You may or may not be aware that there’s a somewhat important series coming up between the Yankees and the Red Sox. After a 5-4 road trip where the Yankees were able to maintain a 2.5 game lead, here’s a look at how things stand.
Yankees: 65-42, 58.7% Div, 29.4% WC, 88.1% PL (chances at winning division, wild card, and making playoffs respectively)
Red Sox: 62-44, 36.7% Div, 41.4% WC, 78.1% PL
So let’s run through the possible outcomes:
Red Sox sweep
Yankees: 65-46, 31.4% Div, 45.4% WC, 76.8% PL
Red Sox: 66-44, 62.1% Div, 28.0% WC, 90.0% PL
Me breaking lots of stuff.
Red Sox take three of four
Yankees: 66-45, 43.4% Div, 42.5% WC, 85.9% PL
Red Sox: 65-45, 50.2% Div, 38.1% WC, 88.4% PL
Me breaking a fair amount of stuff.
Red Sox and Yankees split four
Yankees: 67-44, 60.7% Div, 30.3% WC, 91.0% PL
Red Sox: 64-46, 33.6% Div, 48.1% WC, 81.6% PL
Me breaking a thing or two.
Yankees take three of four
Yankees: 68-43, 69.4% Div, 24.8% WC, 94.2% PL
Red Sox: 63-47, 25.5% Div, 51.4% WC, 76.9% PL
Me slightly happy.
Yankees sweep
Yankees: 69-42, 80.2% Div, 15.9% WC, 96.1% PL
Red Sox: 62-48, 15.6% Div, 53.4% WC, 69.0% PL
Me very happy.
The Yankees realistically don’t have to win this series to remain solidly in the playoff hunt. Even if they get swept, their playoff odds still look to be around 77%. Split, and they are better off than they were entering the series.
However, after dropping eight of eight to a team that I’m very comfortable is no better than them, I think they need to win this series just to shut some people up.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
MLB Monte Carlo Playoff Odds As Of August 4, 2009
| Last Upate | 8/5/2009 | |||||||||
| Iterations | 10,000 | |||||||||
| Team | W | 1 Std | RS | RA | TmStr | Div | WC | PL | Max | Min |
| Dodgers | 99.3 | 94-105 | 810 | 688 | .595 | 91.1% | 7.2% | 98.3% | 112 | 86 |
| Angels | 95.9 | 90-102 | 851 | 770 | .567 | 88.8% | 2.2% | 91.0% | 112 | 81 |
| Phillies | 93.5 | 88-99 | 836 | 762 | .583 | 87.8% | 1.5% | 89.3% | 109 | 78 |
| Yankees | 95.9 | 90-102 | 874 | 748 | .587 | 53.3% | 33.3% | 86.6% | 110 | 80 |
| Red Sox | 95.1 | 89-101 | 843 | 703 | .597 | 42.0% | 39.4% | 81.4% | 108 | 80 |
| Cardinals | 89.3 | 84-95 | 746 | 701 | .543 | 49.4% | 8.3% | 57.6% | 103 | 73 |
| Tigers | 85.8 | 80-92 | 765 | 749 | .534 | 56.3% | 0.2% | 56.4% | 101 | 69 |
| Cubs | 89.0 | 83-95 | 769 | 687 | .550 | 47.0% | 6.6% | 53.6% | 103 | 73 |
| Rockies | 89.3 | 84-95 | 802 | 766 | .534 | 5.0% | 38.3% | 43.2% | 102 | 74 |
| Giants | 88.5 | 83-94 | 679 | 655 | .543 | 4.0% | 30.9% | 34.9% | 106 | 74 |
| Twins | 82.9 | 77-89 | 772 | 776 | .510 | 25.7% | 0.2% | 25.9% | 97 | 68 |
| Rays | 88.8 | 83-94 | 820 | 707 | .561 | 4.7% | 17.1% | 21.8% | 104 | 74 |
| White Sox | 82.1 | 76-88 | 752 | 779 | .505 | 17.9% | 0.1% | 18.1% | 96 | 68 |
| Rangers | 87.0 | 81-93 | 774 | 797 | .515 | 9.9% | 6.1% | 15.9% | 106 | 73 |
| Marlins | 84.7 | 79-90 | 736 | 782 | .521 | 7.7% | 4.5% | 12.2% | 99 | 71 |
| Braves | 83.1 | 77-89 | 746 | 700 | .521 | 4.4% | 1.9% | 6.3% | 97 | 69 |
| Brewers | 80.3 | 75-86 | 768 | 790 | .489 | 3.0% | 0.5% | 3.5% | 93 | 64 |
| Mariners | 82.8 | 77-88 | 670 | 718 | .499 | 1.4% | 1.4% | 2.8% | 98 | 67 |
| Astros | 77.9 | 72-84 | 697 | 777 | .464 | 0.6% | 0.3% | 0.9% | 93 | 60 |
| Mets | 76.2 | 71-82 | 766 | 757 | .474 | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 92 | 62 |
| Blue Jays | 76.9 | 71-83 | 800 | 800 | .500 | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 92 | 63 |
| Indians | 69.7 | 64-75 | 816 | 817 | .456 | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 86 | 54 |
| Pirates | 69.5 | 64-75 | 700 | 781 | .441 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 86 | 57 |
| Orioles | 68.0 | 62-74 | 769 | 851 | .442 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 83 | 55 |
| Royals | 63.0 | 57-69 | 678 | 807 | .410 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 77 | 50 |
| Athletics | 71.9 | 66-78 | 746 | 770 | .465 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 88 | 58 |
| Nationals | 55.4 | 50-61 | 744 | 865 | .383 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 71 | 40 |
| Reds | 70.1 | 64-76 | 690 | 777 | .443 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 84 | 56 |
| Diamondbacks | 73.7 | 68-79 | 732 | 740 | .481 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 88 | 60 |
| Padres | 64.9 | 59-71 | 659 | 794 | .400 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 81 | 51 |
W: Projected wins
1 Std: Win range within one standard deviation (Standard deviation is set to .035 on winning percentage over remaining games)
RS: Projected runs scored
RA: Projected runs allowed
TmStr: Team strength (estimated using 1/3 YTD WPCT, 1/3 YTD Pythagenpat, 1/3 2009 Projection). Team strength is also adjusted to reflect mid-season trades.
Div: Division title percentage
WC: Wild card percentage
PL: Div + WC
Max: High wins
Min: Low wins
As I mentioned in this previous post, these playoff odds are calculated using a Monte Carlo simulator that I downloaded from xlssports.com. I've tweaked it to work mid-season, and to allow me greater latitude when determining team strength, but the basic framework is the same. The odds are generally right around the average of Baseball Prospectus's various playoff odds reports. Simulations were run 10,000 times.
Teams are sorted in decreasing likelihood of making the postseason.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
What a Difference Three Crappy Days Can Make
| Date | Team | W | L | RS | RA | TmStr | Div | WC | PL |
| 29-Jul | Yankees | 96.9 | 65.1 | 877 | 741 | .592 | 64.8% | 25.0% | 89.8% |
| 1-Aug | Yankees | 95.3 | 66.7 | 873 | 749 | .583 | 51.2% | 29.9% | 81.0% |
| Diff | Yankees | -1.6 | 1.6 | -4 | 8 | -.009 | -13.6% | 4.8% | -8.8% |
W: Projected wins
L: Projected losses
RS: Projected runs scored
RA: Projected runs allowed
TmStr: Team strength (estimated using 1/3 YTD WPCT, 1/3 YTD Pythagenpat, 1/3 2009 Projection)
Div: Division title percentage
WC: Wild card percentage
PL: Div + WC
These playoff odds are calculated using a Monte Carlo simulator that I downloaded from xlssports.com. I've tweaked it to work mid-season, and to allow me greater latitude when determining team strength, but the basic framework is the same. The odds are generally right around the average of Baseball Prospectus's various playoff odds reports. Both sets of simulations were run 10,000 times.
The Yanks will have to beat Mr. Perfect Mark Buehrle tomorrow to avoid a brutal sweep. Good luck with all that...
Monday, July 27, 2009
The Importance of This Tampa Bay Series
I was fiddling around with the standings to see how important this next series against Tampa Bay was. Coming off their 9-1 home stand, the Yankees are 60-38 and lead Tampa Bay (54-45) by 6.5 games. Here are the four scenarios:
Tampa Bay sweep
Yankees: 60-41
Rays: 57-45, 3.5 GB
Tampa Bay takes two of three
Yankees: 61-40
Rays: 56-46, 5.5 GB
Yankees take two of three
Yankees: 62-39
Rays: 55-47, 7.5 GB
Yankees sweep
Yankees: 63-38
Rays: 54-48, 9.5 GB
If the Yankees can take two of three then go 31-30 over their final 60 games of the season, the Rays would have to go 38-22 (.633 WPCT) over their final 60 games to catch them. That’s the equivalent to a 103 win pace. If the Yankees sweep, the Rays would have to go 40-20 (.666 WPCT / 108 win pace) to catch a 31-30 Yankee team.
Log5 would tell us the Rays should take two out of three, but if the Yankees can improve on that, they’ll be setting themselves up really nicely for the rest of the season.
Matchups for the series are:
Monday July 27
NYY: A.J. Burnett, RHP (9-4, 3.74) vs. TB: James Shields, RHP (6-6, 3.70)
Tuesday July 28
NYY: CC Sabathia, LHP (10-6, 3.67) vs. TB: Scott Kazmir, LHP (4-6, 6.69)
Wednesday, July 29
NYY: Joba Chamberlain, RHP (6-2, 3.86) vs. TB: Matt Garza, RHP (7-7, 3.68)
Since a wise man once said ‘You can’t predict baseball’, I won’t try. In fact, I may throw all my stats into the East River. But I will say that the first and third matchups look like they’re basically tossups, and the middle matchup seems like the key one for the Yankees, although we know Kazmir is better than he’s pitched so far this year.
Update: Part 2 of Chris Jaffe’s look at the best teams to never win a World Series is posted at the Hardball Times for anyone who may be interested.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Yankees.com: Yanks roll to their seventh straight win
NEW YORK—Mark Teixeira homered and drove in three runs to back CC Sabathia, as the Yankees earned their seventh straight win, posting a 6-3 victory over the A’s on Thursday at Yankee Stadium.
Teix and CC earned their salary tonight.
Before and After
Apr 6 - May 7
Runs Scored: 158
Runs Allowed: 178
PythagenPat Winning Percentage: 0.439
162 Game W-L: 71-91
May 8 - July 22
Runs Scored: 360
Runs Allowed: 271
PythagenPat Winning Percentage: 0.632
162 Game W-L: 102-60
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Yankees.com: Mitre doesn’t disrupt Yankees’ roll
NEW YORK—Prior to Tuesday’s game, Joe Girardi took time to denounce the notion that he is managing a rather streaky team. Then the Yankees went out and proved him wrong again.
Their 6-4 win over the Orioles was their fifth straight since the All-Star break, after a three-game losing streak in Anaheim that followed a run of 13 wins in 15 games. The Yankees are quite streaky, no question about it. But so far, their good streaks have far outweighed the bad.
This latest effort came thanks in large part to Sergio Mitre, joining the Yankees before the game to make his first start since Sept. 15, 2007. Mitre allowed four runs (three earned) in 5 2/3 innings, striking out four and walking one. Other than the three singles he allowed in the sixth inning—the third of them a two-run hit off the bat of Melvin Mora—Mitre remained in control of the game.
I was pretty happy with Mitre’s performance. I’m not expecting a ton out of him, but if he can pitch 5-6 innings and keep the other team at 3-4 runs most of the time, he’ll be in line to help this team win a fair amount of games.
Oh, and with Boston losing at Texas, guess who’s in sole possession of first place in the AL East? I’ll give you a hint, it’s not ‘the best team in baseball.’
Still, would it kill these guys to win a game by more than two runs once in a while?
Monday, July 20, 2009
Remaining Strength of Schedule for Boston, Tampa Bay and the Yankees
I was curious about the remaining strength of schedule for the big three in the AL East to see if it would impact what looks to be a tight race for the division and wild card, so I played around with Bill James's log5 to see if I could estimate it. Regular readers are probably familiear with log5, but if you're not there's a good synopsis of it here.Although the original formula is a little more involved, it can essentially be reduced to winning percentage = .500 + A - B (where A is the estimated WPCT of one team, and B is the estimated WPCT of the other team). This assumes the teams are in the .400 to .600 area, which is generally true in 2009 MLB aside from Cleveland and Washington.
So, I looked at the strength of schedule using a few different ways of estimating team true talent. I'm looking at games from July 20th forward. Team winning percentages are adjusted for home field advantage (add .02 to WPCT for the home team, subtract .02 from WPCT for the road team). 2009 projection data is adjusted for roster changes, but projections themselves were not revised.
2009 WPCT(33.3%), 2009 PythagenPat WPCT(33.3%), 2009 Project WPCT(33.3%)
| Team | GR | HGR | Opp W% | log5 W | Final W |
| Yankees | 71 | 36 | .512 | 40.8 | 94.8 |
| Red Sox | 71 | 36 | .512 | 41.7 | 96.7 |
| Rays | 70 | 36 | .521 | 38.6 | 89.6 |
GR: Games remaining
HGR: Home games remaining
Opp W%: Estimated winning percentage of remaining opponents, adjusted for home field advantage
log 5 W: Estimated log 5 wins over remainder of season
Final W: Final estimated wins (YTD wins + log5 W)
2009 WPCT(25.0%), 2009 PythagenPat WPCT(25.0%), 2009 Project WPCT(50.0%)
| Team | GR | HGR | Opp W% | log5 W | Final W |
| Yankees | 71 | 36 | .511 | 41.1 | 95.1 |
| Red Sox | 71 | 36 | .511 | 41.6 | 96.6 |
| Rays | 70 | 36 | .518 | 38.7 | 89.7 |
2009 PythagenPat WPCT(100.0%)
| Team | GR | HGR | Opp W% | log5 W | Final W |
| Yankees | 71 | 36 | .516 | 39.1 | 93.1 |
| Red Sox | 71 | 36 | .516 | 41.3 | 96.3 |
| Rays | 70 | 36 | .525 | 39.7 | 90.7 |
2009 WPCT(50.0%), 2009 PythagenPat WPCT(50.0%)
| Team | GR | HGR | Opp W% | log5 W | Final W |
| Yankees | 71 | 36 | .514 | 40.1 | 94.1 |
| Red Sox | 71 | 36 | .514 | 41.9 | 96.9 |
| Rays | 70 | 36 | .528 | 38.5 | 89.5 |
No matter which methodology you look at, the numbers say the Yankees and Red Sox essentially have the same schedule going forward, with Tampa's schedule about one game harder. Realistically, what this tells me is that head-to-head matchups are probably going to be the determining factor going forward.
On an unrelated note, Chris Jaffe from The Hardball Times asked me to help out with an article he wanted to write about the best teams to never win a World Series. Part 1 is up for anyone who may want to check it out.
Thursday, July 9, 2009
AL 3B Run Values Through the First Half of 2009
| Player | Team | Pos | PA | AVG | OBP | SLG | BRAR | RSAA | TRAR |
| Inge, Brandon* | DET | 3B | 330 | .267 | .362 | .505 | 18 | 11 | 28 |
| Rolen, Scott | TOR | 3B | 308 | .325 | .386 | .480 | 20 | 6 | 26 |
| Longoria, Evan* | TB | 3B | 333 | .285 | .363 | .536 | 21 | 3 | 24 |
| Figgins, Chone | LAA | 3B | 371 | .310 | .393 | .402 | 19 | 4 | 23 |
| Crede, Joe | MIN | 3B | 262 | .230 | .298 | .438 | 4 | 13 | 17 |
| Rodriguez, Alex | NYA | 3B | 231 | .246 | .411 | .514 | 18 | -2 | 16 |
| Young, Michael* | TEX | 3B | 355 | .313 | .369 | .492 | 22 | -10 | 11 |
| Teahen, Mark | KC | 3B | 319 | .288 | .348 | .445 | 12 | -2 | 10 |
| DeRosa, Mark | CLE | 3B | 314 | .270 | .342 | .457 | 10 | -2 | 9 |
| Beckham, Gordon | CHA | 3B | 110 | .265 | .339 | .418 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Hinske, Eric | NYA | 3B | 6 | .400 | .500 | 1.000 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Hannahan, Jack | OAK | 3B | 134 | .193 | .278 | .303 | -5 | 6 | 1 |
| Woodward, Chris | SEA | 3B | 45 | .300 | .341 | .325 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Wood, Brandon | LAA | 3B | 10 | .333 | .400 | .333 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lowell, Mike | BOS | 3B | 282 | .282 | .319 | .470 | 6 | -6 | 0 |
| Salazar, Oscar | BAL | 3B | 26 | .385 | .385 | .500 | 1 | -2 | 0 |
| Gordon, Alex | KC | 3B | 26 | .095 | .269 | .238 | -1 | 1 | 0 |
| Buscher, Brian | MIN | 3B | 117 | .198 | .333 | .302 | 0 | 0 | -1 |
| Pena, Ramiro | NYA | 3B | 92 | .267 | .308 | .349 | -1 | 0 | -1 |
| Wilson, Josh | SEA | 3B | 2 | .000 | .000 | .000 | -1 | -2 | -2 |
| Mora, Melvin | BAL | 3B | 248 | .257 | .316 | .314 | -5 | 2 | -3 |
| Wigginton, Ty | BAL | 3B | 220 | .256 | .295 | .391 | -2 | -2 | -4 |
| Chavez, Eric | OAK | 3B | 31 | .100 | .129 | .133 | -5 | 1 | -4 |
| Beltre, Adrian | SEA | 3B | 313 | .259 | .291 | .374 | -4 | 0 | -4 |
| Berroa, Angel | NYA | 3B | 24 | .136 | .174 | .182 | -3 | -2 | -5 |
| Ransom, Cody | NYA | 3B | 66 | .177 | .227 | .306 | -4 | -3 | -7 |
| Fields, Josh | CHA | 3B | 236 | .230 | .312 | .359 | -2 | -6 | -8 |
BRAR: Batting runs above replacement level (position and park-adjusted) using linear weights
RSAA: Runs saved above average defensively using zone rating for non-catchers
TRAR: Total runs above replacement level (BRAR + RSAA)
* denotes All Star
** stats were compiled as of July 7
Were Brandon Inge not voted in by the fans, he'd have been the top 3B in the AL so far but not an All Star. Inge's always had a very good glove at third, but this year he's hitting better than he ever has. Scott Rolen's having a good year on both sides of the ball, but apparently no one really cares. Evan Longoria's a very good player, and a worthy All Star, even if these particular metrics show him as a few runs worse than Inge and Rolen.
Obviously we know that Alex Rodriguez hasn't played a full season. If we gave him 350 PAs he'd slot in between Rolen and Longoria. But we can't. So he doesn't.
Michael Young's been the most valuable offensive 3B in the AL, but zone rating isn't a fan of his glove, which takes a big chunk out of his overall value. I thought this may be a ZR specific issue, but UZR has Young at -11, so there's not much disagreement there. And look at Cody Ransom. He's not the least valuable 3B in the AL this year after all.
Oh, and this is pretty cool.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Yankees.com: Yanks make it six straight, pick up Bruney
NEW YORK—When Brian Bruney came off the disabled list, the plan was to immediately insert him back into the eighth-inning setup role. That was about two weeks ago, when there was nothing but doubt surrounding the Yankees’ bullpen situation. When the bridge to Mariano Rivera was teetering and in danger of crumbling, the Yankees took comfort in knowing Bruney would soon be back.
Then, suddenly, the bullpen without Bruney righted itself. Alfredo Aceves and David Robertson demonstrated they could pitch key innings. Phil Hughes went from being a struggling starter to a seemingly unhittable reliever. It wasn’t that they didn’t need Bruney. Instead, he would fit in as just another cog in a sturdy machine.
It hasn’t been quite that easy. Bruney has struggled of late in the eighth and has not slid back into the bullpen the way the Yankees hoped. True, they won on Tuesday, beating the Mariners, 8-5, in front of 46,181 at Yankee Stadium for their sixth straight victory. But in many ways the contest raised more questions than it answered.
PHil Hughes should pitch the eighth…
Bruney’s struggles were the major negative in last night’s win. I didn’t get to watch the game as I was on the road, but I listened and it sounded like Joba wasn’t great, but serviceable. It sounded like Phil Coke and Hughes were great, and then Bruney just stunk. Of course, John Sterling’s too busy telling us that you can’t predict baseball to give much in the way of details about how the game is actually unfolding, although I digress.
Anyway, the Yankees win coupled with the Red Sox blowing a 10-1 seventh inning lead made for a fun night in the AL East, with the Yankees moving within two games in the loss column of the AL East lead.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Yet Another Example of Why Interleague Play Stinks
| Team | W% vs AL | W% vs NL | Diff |
| Min | 0.486 | 0.702 | 0.216 |
| Det | 0.484 | 0.681 | 0.197 |
| KC | 0.422 | 0.596 | 0.174 |
| LAA | 0.574 | 0.702 | 0.128 |
| Bal | 0.416 | 0.532 | 0.116 |
| Tex | 0.477 | 0.574 | 0.098 |
| TB | 0.499 | 0.553 | 0.055 |
| Oak | 0.458 | 0.511 | 0.053 |
| Sea | 0.461 | 0.511 | 0.050 |
| Bos | 0.588 | 0.617 | 0.029 |
| CWS | 0.493 | 0.478 | -0.015 |
| NYY | 0.568 | 0.532 | -0.036 |
| Tor | 0.533 | 0.447 | -0.086 |
| Cle | 0.542 | 0.383 | -0.159 |
W% vs AL: Team winning percentage vs. other AL teams (2007 - 2009)
W% vs NL: Team winning percentage vs. NL teams (2007 - 2009)
Diff: W% vs. NL minus W% vs. AL
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Yankees.com: Yanks mash to earn win for Burnett
ARLINGTON—A.J. Burnett hurled six scoreless innings for his first victory in more than a month and Hideki Matsui homered twice as the Yankees routed the Rangers, 9-2, on Wednesday at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington.
After winning his first two starts as a Yankee, Burnett had not posted a victory since April 14 but came out firing against Texas in an effort to snap that string, hurling six innings of three-hit ball, walking four and striking out seven.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Yankees.com: Yanks walk off on Cabrera’s hit in ninth
NEW YORK—Much has been made of the abundance of home runs flying out of the new Yankee Stadium. And while Saturday afternoon’s game saw four balls leave the park, it was another trend in the Yankees’ new digs that landed them the win.
With one out in the ninth inning, Melky Cabrera laced a single into right-center, scoring Robinson Cano and giving the Yankees a 5-4 walk-off win over the Phillies, in front of a crowd of 46,889.
Melky’s making a lot of us look dumb, huh? I hope he can keep it up.
This team sure has been fun to watch lately.
And this is cool too.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Playing Out the Rest of May Another 1000 Times
Same idea as in this post, playing out the rest of May from today forward.| Team | W | L | RF | RA |
| Baltimore | 6 | 8 | 66 | 71 |
| Boston | 8 | 6 | 72 | 59 |
| Yankeees | 9 | 5 | 77 | 59 |
| Tampa Bay | 9 | 6 | 75 | 63 |
| Toronto | 6 | 8 | 58 | 64 |
Now, that's obviously not likely to happen exactly, but if it did, here's how the AL East standings would look on June 1.
| Team | W | L | RF | RA | GB |
| Toronto | 31 | 22 | 281 | 234 | 0.0 |
| Boston | 30 | 21 | 278 | 246 | 1.0 |
| Yankeees | 28 | 22 | 272 | 269 | 1.5 |
| Tampa Bay | 27 | 26 | 276 | 250 | 4.0 |
| Baltimore | 22 | 29 | 254 | 289 | 8.0 |
Friday, May 8, 2009
Log5 Checkpoint Through Games of May 7
When we last checked in on the Yankees and how their performance stacked up compared to log5 expectations, the Yankees were 9-6 compared to an estimated 8.6-6.4.Here's how their actual performance compares to what log5 would have expected for the games between April 24 and May 7.
| Date | Game | Yankee W% | Opp W% | log5 W | log5 L | Act W | Act L | Diff |
| 4/24/2009 | Yankees at Red Sox | .462 | .538 | 9.1 | 6.9 | 9.0 | 7.0 | -0.1 |
| 4/25/2009 | Yankees at Red Sox | .462 | .538 | 9.5 | 7.5 | 9.0 | 8.0 | -0.5 |
| 4/26/2009 | Yankees at Red Sox | .462 | .538 | 10.0 | 8.0 | 9.0 | 9.0 | -1.0 |
| 4/27/2009 | Yankees at Tigers | .541 | .459 | 10.5 | 8.5 | 9.0 | 10.0 | -1.5 |
| 4/28/2009 | Yankees at Tigers | .541 | .459 | 11.1 | 8.9 | 10.0 | 10.0 | -1.1 |
| 4/29/2009 | Yankees at Tigers | .541 | .459 | 11.6 | 9.4 | 11.0 | 10.0 | -0.6 |
| 4/30/2009 | Angels at Yankees | .600 | .400 | 12.2 | 9.8 | 12.0 | 10.0 | -0.2 |
| 5/1/2009 | Angels at Yankees | .600 | .400 | 12.8 | 10.2 | 13.0 | 10.0 | 0.2 |
| 5/2/2009 | Angels at Yankees | .600 | .400 | 13.4 | 10.6 | 13.0 | 11.0 | -0.4 |
| 5/4/2009 | Red Sox at Yankees | .545 | .455 | 14.0 | 11.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | -1.0 |
| 5/5/2009 | Red Sox at Yankees | .545 | .455 | 14.5 | 11.5 | 13.0 | 13.0 | -1.5 |
| 5/6/2009 | Rays at Yankees | .565 | .435 | 15.1 | 11.9 | 13.0 | 14.0 | -2.1 |
| 5/7/2009 | Rays at Yankees | .565 | .435 | 15.6 | 12.4 | 13.0 | 15.0 | -2.6 |
Yankee W%: Yankees expected winning percentage adjusted for home/road games.
Opp W%: Yankee opponents' expected winning percentage adjusted for home/road games.
log5 W: Expected wins based on Yankee and opponent winning percentage using the log5 formula.
log5 L: Expected losses based on Yankee and opponent winning percentage using the log5 formula.
Act W: Actual wins.
Act L: Actual losses.
Diff: Act W - log5 W (Greater than 0 means ahead of pace, less than 0 means behind pace)
Winning percentages are based on PythagenPat and are calculated using a weight of 10% for 2009 actual performance and 90% for the cumulative 2009 projections from the Diamond Mind projections I ran in March.
Basically, what this is saying is that if the Yankees really were expected to win around 95 games, they're now on pace to win 92.4. A 2.5 game underperformance over just 13 games is pretty Veras-y. Still, a a little hot streak should be able to get them back to where they need to be. The question is, do they have that in them?
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
MLB.com: No panic, but no comfort, for Yankees
“We know why,” said Damon, when asked how the Red Sox had been able to coast through the first five games of the season series. “They outplayed us. They outpitched us. All of the games were fairly close, but at this point of the season, they’re a better team than we are.”
With their loss on Tuesday in the finale of an abbreviated two-game series, the Yankees have lost their first five games against the Red Sox for the first time since 1985. That year, the punishment was manager Yogi Berra’s job—he was fired one series later, after 6-10 start. The Yankees have not lost their first six contests against the Red Sox since 1912, when they finished the season 50-102 and were still called the New York Highlanders.
The Yankees are back at .500 with a record of 13-13. When #13 returns, can the real season begin?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Log5 Checkpoint Through Games of April 22
| Date | Game | Yankee W% | Opp W% | log5 W | log5 L | Act W | Act L | Diff |
| 4/6/2009 | Yankees at Orioles | .584 | .416 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 1.0 | -0.6 |
| 4/8/2009 | Yankees at Orioles | .584 | .416 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 2.0 | -1.2 |
| 4/9/2009 | Yankees at Orioles | .584 | .416 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 2.0 | -0.8 |
| 4/10/2009 | Yankees at Royals | .591 | .409 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 2.0 | -0.3 |
| 4/11/2009 | Yankees at Royals | .591 | .409 | 2.9 | 2.1 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 0.1 |
| 4/12/2009 | Yankees at Royals | .591 | .409 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 3.0 | 3.0 | -0.5 |
| 4/13/2009 | Yankees at Rays | .483 | .517 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | -1.0 |
| 4/14/2009 | Yankees at Rays | .483 | .517 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 4.0 | 4.0 | -0.5 |
| 4/15/2009 | Yankees at Rays | .483 | .517 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 0.0 |
| 4/16/2009 | Indians at Yankees | .597 | .403 | 5.6 | 4.4 | 5.0 | 5.0 | -0.6 |
| 4/17/2009 | Indians at Yankees | .597 | .403 | 6.2 | 4.8 | 6.0 | 5.0 | -0.2 |
| 4/18/2009 | Indians at Yankees | .597 | .403 | 6.8 | 5.2 | 6.0 | 6.0 | -0.8 |
| 4/19/2009 | Indians at Yankees | .597 | .403 | 7.4 | 5.6 | 7.0 | 6.0 | -0.4 |
| 4/21/2009 | Athletics at Yankees | .617 | .383 | 8.0 | 6.0 | 8.0 | 6.0 | 0.0 |
| 4/22/2009 | Athletics at Yankees | .617 | .383 | 8.6 | 6.4 | 9.0 | 6.0 | 0.4 |
Yankee W%: Yankees expected winning percentage adjusted for home/road games.
Opp W%: Yankee opponents' expected winning percentage adjusted for home/road games.
log5 W: Expected wins based on Yankee and opponent winning percentage using the log5 formula.
log5 L: Expected losses based on Yankee and opponent winning percentage using the log5 formula.
Act W: Actual wins.
Act L: Actual losses.
Diff: Act W - log5 W (Greater than 0 means ahead of pace, less than 0 means behind pace)
After splitting with Cleveland, the Yankees were about 0.8 wins behind where they should have been. However, after taking two straight from Oakland they're now about 0.4 games ahead of where they should be. Log5 says that the Yankees should go 1.4-1.6 in Boston, which basically means as long as they take 1 of 3 they will remain on their expected pace for 95 wins.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Revised CAIRO Playoff Odds through games of April 9
While tooling around the internets, I found a cool Monte Carlo simulator spreadsheet for the baseball season at a site called xlsSports. I've modified it to import the current standings and then run the season going forward, and I've set it up to use a weighted average of YTD and 2009 projections to figure out the strength of the teams. I've also modified the basic Pythagorean theorem formula it uses to the more accurate PythagenPat formula. Both of those formulas use a team's runs scored and runs allowed to determine the strength of the team and calculate it's winning percentage going forward.Anyway, what this will let me do is run updated playoff odds for the six projection systems I used in the Diamond Mind Projection Blowout, as well as with the combined projections whenever I feel like it. I'll create a page where I will keep these updated, but for now here's a sneak peak at the CAIRO version, run 10,000 times.
| System | cairo | |||||||||
| Div | Team | W | L | RF | RA | Div% | WC% | PO% | Max | Min |
| ALE | TAM | 94.2 | 67.8 | 804 | 695 | 38.9% | 29.1% | 68.0% | 121 | 67 |
| ALE | NYA | 93.7 | 68.3 | 867 | 724 | 35.1% | 29.8% | 65.0% | 122 | 62 |
| ALE | BOS | 92.1 | 69.9 | 843 | 739 | 25.4% | 28.6% | 54.0% | 118 | 67 |
| ALE | TOR | 77.4 | 84.6 | 690 | 717 | 0.5% | 1.6% | 2.0% | 105 | 50 |
| ALE | BAL | 73.5 | 88.5 | 801 | 870 | 0.1% | 0.4% | 0.5% | 100 | 48 |
| Div | Team | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | PO% | Max | Min |
| ALC | CLE | 84.4 | 77.6 | 810 | 808 | 38.6% | 1.3% | 39.9% | 112 | 53 |
| ALC | DET | 84.2 | 77.8 | 774 | 764 | 37.4% | 1.2% | 38.6% | 110 | 56 |
| ALC | MIN | 79.2 | 82.8 | 718 | 748 | 13.7% | 0.6% | 14.3% | 106 | 52 |
| ALC | KC | 76.2 | 85.8 | 717 | 835 | 6.5% | 0.3% | 6.8% | 103 | 50 |
| ALC | CHA | 74.1 | 87.9 | 739 | 782 | 3.7% | 0.2% | 3.8% | 102 | 46 |
| Div | Team | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | PO% | Max | Min |
| ALW | LAA | 86.2 | 75.8 | 768 | 729 | 41.9% | 2.5% | 44.4% | 112 | 57 |
| ALW | OAK | 85.4 | 76.6 | 767 | 752 | 35.7% | 2.6% | 38.3% | 110 | 58 |
| ALW | SEA | 81.7 | 80.3 | 721 | 728 | 17.6% | 1.6% | 19.2% | 114 | 52 |
| ALW | TEX | 76.2 | 85.8 | 820 | 881 | 4.7% | 0.4% | 5.1% | 103 | 47 |
| Div | Team | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | PO% | Max | Min |
| NLE | NYN | 91.5 | 70.5 | 842 | 778 | 42.4% | 16.3% | 58.7% | 118 | 62 |
| NLE | ATL | 91.3 | 70.7 | 800 | 730 | 40.7% | 16.3% | 57.1% | 119 | 63 |
| NLE | PHI | 86.0 | 76.0 | 834 | 798 | 13.9% | 10.4% | 24.3% | 113 | 54 |
| NLE | FLA | 79.3 | 82.7 | 777 | 836 | 2.6% | 2.4% | 5.0% | 105 | 53 |
| NLE | PIT | 74.2 | 87.8 | 799 | 903 | 0.3% | 0.5% | 0.8% | 102 | 50 |
| Div | Team | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | PO% | Max | Min |
| NLC | CHN | 96.3 | 65.7 | 845 | 730 | 77.2% | 7.7% | 85.0% | 124 | 69 |
| NLC | STL | 86.7 | 75.3 | 797 | 745 | 13.8% | 14.6% | 28.4% | 113 | 58 |
| NLC | MIL | 82.9 | 79.1 | 780 | 784 | 5.6% | 7.0% | 12.6% | 112 | 55 |
| NLC | CIN | 80.9 | 81.1 | 738 | 781 | 3.1% | 4.0% | 7.2% | 111 | 53 |
| NLC | HOU | 72.8 | 89.2 | 740 | 829 | 0.2% | 0.3% | 0.5% | 100 | 47 |
| NLC | WAS | 70.8 | 91.2 | 763 | 885 | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 97 | 42 |
| Div | Team | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | PO% | Max | Min |
| NLC | LAN | 90.7 | 71.3 | 818 | 761 | 56.1% | 5.9% | 62.0% | 118 | 63 |
| NLC | SF | 84.7 | 77.3 | 764 | 746 | 18.0% | 5.6% | 23.6% | 112 | 56 |
| NLC | COL | 83.2 | 78.8 | 841 | 822 | 13.1% | 4.4% | 17.5% | 111 | 58 |
| NLC | ARI | 82.5 | 79.5 | 739 | 724 | 11.0% | 3.8% | 14.8% | 111 | 57 |
| NLC | SD | 75.8 | 86.2 | 729 | 820 | 1.8% | 0.6% | 2.4% | 101 | 49 |
RF: Runs for
RA: Runs against
Div%: Percentage of times the team won their division
WC%: Percentage of times the team won the wild card
PO%: Playoff % (Div% + WC%)
Max: High win total
Min: Low win total
One note, this is a blatant ripoff of Baseball Prospectus's various Playoff Odds Reports, except that I know what the input data is so I'm more comfortable with it. If anyone sees anything that doesn't look right, let me know.
Monday, March 30, 2009
The 2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - American League Edition
Opening Day is almost here, so it’s time to present my annual Diamond Mind Projection blowout. The idea behind this is to take several projection systems and run the 2008 season through Diamond Mind Baseball, which I consider to be the most statistically accurate baseball simulator out there.
I’ve done this for the last few years. If you want to see how previous runs have gone, here are the links:
As you can see if you look at the prior runs, the results can be hit and miss, but that’s certainly understandable. This year, I’m again using six different projection systems, and I’ve run each one 1000 times for a total of 6000 iterations.
Before I present the projected standings, it’s disclaimer time.
1) Projection systems are inherently limited in their accuracy, particularly for pitchers. We can get a rough idea of how most players will perform by looking at their past histories and how similar players have performed, and factoring in aging and regression, but abilities/talent can change in ways that can’t be forecasted.
2) Playing time distribution in these simulations will not match the actual playing time of the players involved. I used the rosters and depth charts available at MLB.com and Baseball Prospectus as my guide to set these up as realistically as possible, but it’s a possible source of error. Rosters were set up to have 35-40 or so active players per team, and to get a reasonable amount of playing time from the bench and extra pitchers, to more closely model reality.
3) We cannot predict injuries and/or roster changes. These simulations do include projected playing time based on past health issues, so someone like Rich Harden is not expected to make 30 starts. I’ve also included random injuries which may lead to some of the outlying results you see, but there’s no way to account for all the fluctuations that will happen with rosters this season.
4) These are the averages of 1000 seasons, so the results will tend to regress towards the mean. The final standings will not look like this, because they only play the season once.
5) These are NOT my predictions. These are projections based on running a computer simulation thousands of times with projection data that is inherently limited. If your favorite team doesn’t project well, don’t blame me, blame the computers and spreadsheets that projected them. I guess you can blame me for the CAIRO results if you want, otherwise you can take heart in the 2005 White Sox projecting to win 79 games, the 2006 Tigers projecting to win 80, or the 2007 Rockies projecting to win 79.
6) Since this is all automated, I don’t break ties. I simply award all ties a share of either the division title or wild card when it happens which is why you may see some funny decimal places in the standings that follow.
OK, so now that the disclaimers are out of the way, onto the projected standings. I am showing W-L to one decimal point to deal with displayed rounding issues and so I don’t get people asking me why the wins and losses don’t add up to exactly 2430, not to imply that these results are that precise.
There’s too much crap to fit it all into one post, so I’ve created separate posts for both leagues, and then a separate post for each projection system.
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - National League Summary
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - CHONE edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - Hardball Times edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - Marcel edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - PECOTA edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - ZiPS edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - CAIRO edition
| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYA | 95.9 | 66.1 | 853 | 711 | 2908.8 | 1776.2 | 90 - 102 | 813 - 894 | 673 - 749 | 96 | 98 | 3058 | 1897 | 963 | 74 | 8 | 0 | 100 | 95 - 104 |
| BOS | 94.3 | 67.7 | 837 | 703 | 2157.3 | 2053.4 | 88 - 101 | 796 - 879 | 667 - 739 | 94 | 94 | 2295 | 2205 | 1351 | 130 | 19 | 0 | 94 | 90 - 98 |
| TAM | 90.1 | 71.9 | 795 | 695 | 916.3 | 1591.2 | 84 - 96 | 756 - 834 | 659 - 732 | 90 | 89 | 1009 | 1735 | 2753 | 431 | 72 | 0 | 88 | 83 - 92 |
| TOR | 75.6 | 86.4 | 691 | 742 | 9.4 | 80.3 | 69 - 82 | 654 - 728 | 705 - 780 | 76 | 74 | 14 | 100 | 410 | 2979 | 2497 | 0 | 78 | 74 - 83 |
| BAL | 74.5 | 87.5 | 781 | 844 | 8.3 | 46.3 | 68 - 81 | 742 - 820 | 803 - 885 | 74 | 74 | 10 | 63 | 320 | 2457 | 3150 | 0 | 71 | 66 - 76 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CLE | 85.5 | 76.5 | 803 | 754 | 2958.1 | 110.7 | 79 - 92 | 763 - 843 | 716 - 792 | 86 | 88 | 3092 | 1619 | 775 | 378 | 136 | 0 | 89 | 85 - 94 |
| DET | 81.4 | 80.6 | 784 | 775 | 1526.9 | 77.7 | 75 - 88 | 745 - 822 | 736 - 814 | 82 | 83 | 1629 | 1751 | 1159 | 901 | 560 | 0 | 83 | 80 - 87 |
| MIN | 79.5 | 82.5 | 748 | 769 | 1017.4 | 75.1 | 73 - 86 | 710 - 786 | 729 - 808 | 79 | 78 | 1102 | 1378 | 1558 | 1262 | 700 | 0 | 79 | 76 - 82 |
| KC | 74.6 | 87.4 | 728 | 801 | 259.1 | 18.5 | 68 - 81 | 690 - 766 | 761 - 841 | 75 | 75 | 291 | 746 | 1328 | 1652 | 1983 | 0 | 75 | 71 - 78 |
| CHA | 74.1 | 87.9 | 751 | 826 | 238.5 | 17.5 | 68 - 80 | 713 - 790 | 787 - 865 | 74 | 74 | 266 | 676 | 1188 | 1674 | 2196 | 0 | 69 | 65 - 74 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAA | 85.4 | 76.6 | 777 | 734 | 3356.4 | 55.8 | 79 - 92 | 737 - 816 | 696 - 772 | 85 | 86 | 3498 | 1607 | 708 | 187 | 0 | 0 | 88 | 84 - 93 |
| OAK | 81.1 | 80.9 | 768 | 755 | 1563.4 | 60.3 | 75 - 87 | 728 - 808 | 717 - 793 | 81 | 82 | 1673 | 2155 | 1607 | 565 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 78 - 86 |
| SEA | 77.8 | 84.2 | 710 | 737 | 882.8 | 26.9 | 71 - 84 | 673 - 746 | 698 - 775 | 78 | 77 | 961 | 1631 | 1998 | 1410 | 0 | 0 | 77 | 73 - 80 |
| TEX | 72.1 | 89.9 | 776 | 879 | 199.1 | 10.2 | 66 - 79 | 737 - 815 | 835 - 924 | 72 | 72 | 227 | 672 | 1578 | 3523 | 0 | 0 | 70 | 64 - 75 |
| Avg WC | 93.3 |
Legend
W:Average wins over 6000 seasons
L:Average losses over 6000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 6000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 6000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 6000 seasons. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
I'll run through the divisions and teams briefly:
AL East
Regular readers know that this whole exercise is just an excuse to make use of pie charts, so I'll start off each division writeup with a pie chart showing the breakdown for how the division titles were distributed. The pie charts here are for the combination of all projections. To look at the same thing for each separate projection just go to the appropriate link(s) above.
Team: New York Yankees
Avg Prj W: 96
2008 Actual W: 89
2008 PythagenPat W: 87
W Diff: 7
PythagenPat W Diff: 9
Avg Prj RF: 853
2008 RF: 789
RF Diff: 64
Avg RA: 711
2008 RA: 727
RA Diff: -16
RF+RA Diff: 80
Division %: 48%
Wild Card %: 30%
Playoff %: 78%
High W: 98 (hbt)
Low W: 94 (marcel)
Gap: 4
Avg Div Plc: 1
Are the Yankees the best team in baseball? The numbers think so, although they thought so last year as well. The pitching and defense projects to be about two wins better than last season, but the bigger gain is on the offensive side (+65 runs) based on adding Mark Teixeira and Nick Swisher, plus more expected contributions from Robinson Cano, Jorge Posada and Hideki Matsui. So a projected 81 run differential improvement adds about seven wins to last year's actual 89 win team, and about nine to their PythagenPat 87 wins.
Why they might be better than projected: We can't predict injuries, but in order to handle some of the downside risk I restricted Alex Rodriguez's playing time to around 120 games and Jorge Posada to around 100 games. On the pitching side I assumed that they will not get full seasons out of any of A.J. Burnett (around 27 starts), Chien-Ming Wang (around 26 starts), Andy Pettitte (around 25 starts) and Joba Chamberlain (around 23 starts). If those four are able to make more starts than that the Yanks should be a little better.
Why they might be worse than projected: They're not as deep as they could be. Having the loser of the Nady/Swisher battle around for corner oF and 1B depth will help, but they're susceptible at other positions. Right now the rotation looks solid, and with Phil Hughes, Ian Kennedy and Alfredo Aceves around they have some decent projected depth, but it's a reasonable question how good any of those three may be in 2009 if pressed into duty. The bullpen has some talented arms who project fairly well, but aside from Mariano Rivera they all carry some risk.
Legend
Avg Prj W: Average projected wins
2008 Actual W: Actual wins in 2008
2008 PythagenPat W: 2008 PythagenPat Wins
W Diff: Avg Prj W - 2008 Actual W
PythagenPat W Diff: Avg Prj W - 2008 PythagenPat W
Avg Prj RF: Average projected runs scored
2008 RF: 2008 runs scored
RF Diff: Avg Prj RF - 2008 RF
Avg RA: Average projected runs allowed
2008 RA: 2008 runs allowed
RA Diff: Avg Prj RA - 2008 RA
RF+RA Diff: Projected run differential delta
Division %: Percentage of times the team won their division
Wild Card %: Percentage of time the team won the wild card
Playoff %: Division% plus Wild Card %
High W: Higest average W projection and system
Low W: Lowest average W projection and system
Gap: Gap between High W and Low W
Avg Div Plc: Average place in division
Team: Boston
Avg Prj W: 94
2008 Actual W: 95
2008 PythagenPat W: 96
W Diff: -1
PythagenPat W Diff: -2
Avg Prj RF: 837
2008 RF: 845
RF Diff: -8
Avg RA: 703
2008 RA: 694
RA Diff: 9
RF+RA Diff: -17
Division %: 36%
Wild Card %: 34%
Playoff %: 70%
High W: 96 (chone)
Low W: 92 (marcel)
Gap: 4
Avg Div Plc: 2
Boston returns just about all their key players from last year's 96 win PythagenPat team, but they are projected to score a few less runs and allow a few more, which knocks them down by a win. Given the margin of error we're dealing with here, I'd say they are basically even with the Yankees, although they're tough to project given the uncertainty of some of their off-season signings.
Why they might be better than projected: The biggest reason is Jon Lester. Lester was outstanding last year as he appeared to finally have regained his strength after his cancer scare. However, the projection systems don't care about why Lester struggled in his prior seasons. They just see that he did and that suppresses his projections in 2009. While the jump in his innings last year is a possible concern, I'd estimate that a healthy Lester should be at least a win better than projected. The projection systems also expect Dustin Pedroia and Kevin Youkilis to regress somewhat. It's tough to say what kind of contributions they'll get out of Smoltz/Penny and Saito, all of whom are talented but who are all working their way back from injuries. If any of them can rebound somewhat, that will help out a bit.
Why they might be worse than projected: Daiskuke Matsuzaka outpitched his peripherals last year and may struggle to match his efficacy of last season. David Ortiz is projected to bounce back a fair amount but it's possible that his wrist injury may make that hard. Jed Lowrie looks entrenched as the starting SS, and while his defensive metrics were very good in a very small sample size last season, his minor league scouting reports are less sanguine about his defense. It's entirely possible that none of Penny/Smoltz/Saito contribute anything meaningful. Still, I unfortunately have a hard time seeing them being much worse.
Team: Tampa Bay
Avg Prj W: 90
2008 Actual W: 97
2008 PythagenPat W: 92
W Diff: -7
PythagenPat W Diff: -2
Avg Prj RF: 795
2008 RF: 774
RF Diff: 21
Avg RA: 695
2008 RA: 671
RA Diff: 24
RF+RA Diff: -3
Division %: 15%
Wild Card %: 27%
Playoff %: 42%
High W: 92 (pecota)
Low W: 88 (chone)
Gap: 4
Avg Div Plc: 3
The upstart Rays (Tampa Bay fans have to be tired of the word upstart by now) surprised most of the mainstream media with their performance last season, although CHONE and PECOTA both expected them to be pretty good. The secret's out now, but this is a very talented group of players and they should be in the thick of the AL East and wild card race all season.
Why they might be better than projected: 23. 24. 25. 27. Most of their key players are young and have the potential for growth beyond what the typical aging patterns built into projections systems would assume. They've got a deep farm system which can help them patch from within or go out and trade for help if needed. David Price's projections are pretty conservative in general based on the little pro experience he has. Although he'll start the season in AAA, he has a good chance to be up soon and to contribute more than projected if you go by his stuff and his scouting reports.
Why they might be worse than projected: They got some out of character performances from several relievers last year, and some or all of them could digress a touch. Like everyone, injuries could hurt them, although their overall organizational depth should mitigate that. They're in probably the toughest division in baseball, although they're a big part of that.
Team: Toronto
Avg Prj W: 76
2008 Actual W: 86
2008 PythagenPat W: 93
W Diff: -10
PythagenPat W Diff: -17
Avg Prj RF: 692
2008 RF: 714
RF Diff: -22
Avg RA: 742
2008 RA: 610
RA Diff: 132
RF+RA Diff: -154
Division %: 0%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 1%
High W: 77 (cairo)
Low W: 74 (pecota)
Gap: 3
Avg Div Plc: 4
Why they might be better than projected: Travis Snider is a very good prospect, but his average projection is only .255/.321/.426. He has the talent to exceed that although he's still very young. They have arguably the most valuable pitcher in baseball at the front of their rotation. Vernon Wells could play a full season.
Why they might be worse than projected: They've got a lot of question marks in their rotation, and their offense looks unimpressive. If Baltimore makes a leap forward, it will likely come at the expense of the Jays.
Team: Baltimore
Avg Prj W: 74
2008 Actual W: 68
2008 PythagenPat W: 73
W Diff: 6
PythagenPat W Diff: 1
Avg Prj RF: 781
2008 RF: 782
RF Diff: -1
Avg RA: 844
2008 RA: 869
RA Diff: -25
RF+RA Diff: 24
Division %: 0%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 1%
High W: 76 (chone)
Low W: 73 (pecota)
Gap: 3
Avg Div Plc: 5
Baltimore's not really a bad team right now. Unfortunately for them, they're in the AL East. I calculate a rough dvisional penalty using the formula N - N/2 times Opponent's winning percentage, where N is the number of interdivisional games. In Baltimore's case, their collective AL East oppenents project to a winning percentage of .5495, so their AL East penalty is around 4 wins. Out of curiosity, I flipped Milwaukee with Baltimore and ran 100 simulations. Baltimore went from 74-88 on average to 81-81, and Milwaukee went from 83-79 on average to 75-87.
Why they might be better than projected: They have Matt Wieters 'Nuff said. Actually, that's lazy. They also have Nick Markakis, who's awesome, and Adam Jones and Felix Pie who have the talent to be awesome. Rich Hill looked like he was on the verge of being a solid lefty starter until his back and control deserted him. While the odds of it are small, he could return to where he was in 2007.
Why they might be worse than projected: Their rotation is full of question marks. Adam Eaton may actually pitch for them. They are going to have a crap load of tough games.
Here's a clustered column look at how many times each team placed 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.,
AL Central
Team: Chicago White Sox
Avg Prj W: 74
2008 Actual W: 89
2008 PythagenPat W: 89
W Diff: -15
PythagenPat W Diff: -15
Avg Prj RF: 751
2008 RF: 811
RF Diff: -60
Avg RA: 826
2008 RA: 729
RA Diff: 97
RF+RA Diff: -157
Division %: 4%
Wild Card %: 0%
Playoff %: 4%
High W: 77 (cairo)
Low W: 72 (zips)
Gap: 5
Avg Div Plc: 5
Why they might be better than projected: Because they almost always are?
2005: +20
2006: + 8
2007: - 4
2008: +15
Those are the differences between the White Sox projections I've run since 2005 and their actual win totals. When a model misses once, it could be luck. When it misses twice it could also be luck. When it misses three times, it could conceivably still be luck, but more likely it points to some kind of systemic error in the model.
They may not project well statistically, but I think Kenny Williams and his scouts do well in identifying breakout candidates and players who are better-suited to their ballpark. I also think Don Cooper is one of the best pitching coaches in baseball and that helps them too. The projections generally assume regression from Carlos Quentin, Gavin Floyd and John Danks, but it's certainly possible all have improved tangibly enough to make those projections pessimistic given their ages (26, 26 and 23 respectively).
Why they might be worse than projected: Their young players could all hit/pitch like their projections say, and their older players like Jermaine Dye and Jim Thome could start to show the effects of their age.
Team: Cleveland
Avg Prj W: 86
2008 Actual W: 81
2008 PythagenPat W: 85
W Diff: 5
PythagenPat W Diff: 1
Avg Prj RF: 803
2008 RF: 805
RF Diff: -2
Avg RA: 754
2008 RA: 761
RA Diff: -7
RF+RA Diff: 5
Division %: 49%
Wild Card %: 2%
Playoff %: 51%
High W: 88 (chone)
Low W: 84 (hbt)
Gap: 4
Avg Div Plc: 1
Why they might be better than projected: After leading the league in OPS+ in 2004 and 2006, Travis Hafner's performance has plummetted. He's still fairly young and a rebound by him would be a big boost to the Indians' lineup. Grady Sizemore's already playing at an MVP-level clip but he's still young enough to have some more growth in him. Cliff Lee's probably not going to be as good as he was in 2008, but he also may not regress as much as the projections expect.
Why they might be worse than projected: Hafner may not rebound at all. They've got Carl Pavano as their #3 starter. They could use a little more power from the infield and OF corners than they project to get.
Team: Detroit
Avg Prj W: 81
2008 Actual W: 74
2008 PythagenPat W: 78
W Diff: 7
PythagenPat W Diff: 3
Avg Prj RF: 784
2008 RF: 821
RF Diff: -37
Avg RA: 775
2008 RA: 857
RA Diff: -82
RF+RA Diff: 45
Division %: 25%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 27%
High W: 85 (chone)
Low W: 76 (marcel)
Gap: 9
Avg Div Plc: 2
Why they might be better than projected: Their defense should be better with Inge at third and Adam Everett as short. Miguel Cabrera is still one of the best hitters in baseball. Gary Sheffield looked cooked in 2008, but if healthy he could exceed his projections. Justin Verlander also has the talent to outpitch his projections by a non-trivial amount.
Why they might be worse than projected: Their rotation is still a little iffy with Jeremy Bonderman's health status and Dontrelle Willis's lost talent. Brandon Lyon's penciled in as the closer right now but his health and effectiveness are legitimate concerns.
Team: Kansas City
Avg Prj W: 75
2008 Actual W: 75
2008 PythagenPat W: 72
W Diff: 0
PythagenPat W Diff: 3
Avg Prj RF: 728
2008 RF: 691
RF Diff: 37
Avg RA: 801
2008 RA: 781
RA Diff: 20
RF+RA Diff: 17
Division %: 4%
Wild Card %: 0%
Playoff %: 5%
High W: 77 (chone)
Low W: 70 (cairo)
Gap: 7
Avg Div Plc: 4
Why they might be better than projected: Alex Gordon improved his OBP by 37 points and his SLG by 21 pts in 2008 and could possibly make more improvements in 2009. Billy Butler disappointed in 2008 but he's still really young (23) and still has that prospect sheen. Zack Greinke was very good last year and over his last 11 starts he had a 2.34 ERA and struck out 69 hitters in 69.1 innings. The projections expect him to give some of those gains back, but he may not.
Why they might be worse than projected: Kyle Farnsworth. Right now 2B looks suspect, although Mark Teahan may be able to make the transition.
Team: Minnesota
Avg Prj W: 79
2008 Actual W: 88
2008 PythagenPat W: 89
W Diff: -9
PythagenPat W Diff: -10
Avg Prj RF: 748
2008 RF: 829
RF Diff: -81
Avg RA: 769
2008 RA: 745
RA Diff: 24
RF+RA Diff: -105
Division %: 17%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 18%
High W: 85 (chone)
Low W: 78 (chone)
Gap: 7
Avg Div Plc: 3
Why they might be better than projected: Most of their core players are relatively young. Their defense projects to be around 20 runs above average using a combination of zone rating and Fan Graphs' UZR, something that may or not be factored in adequately in the various projection systems.
Why they might be worse than projected: Joe Mauer is probably their most important player, and he's dealing with knee and back issues this spring. Joe Crede's back may not hold up that well playing half his games on turf,
AL West
Team: Los Angeles Angels
Avg Prj W: 85
2008 Actual W: 100
2008 PythagenPat W: 88
W Diff: -15
PythagenPat W Diff: -3
Avg Prj RF: 777
2008 RF: 765
RF Diff: 12
Avg RA: 734
2008 RA: 697
RA Diff: 37
RF+RA Diff: -25
Division %: 56%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 57%
High W: 87 (pecota)
Low W: 84 (hbt)
Gap: 3
Avg Div Plc: 1
Why they might be better than projected: Their division isn't particularly strong, which may help them win a few more games than they project to. Howie Kendrick hasn't been able to stay on the field. The ability to stay healthy is a skill, but he may be able to crack the magic 500 PA barrier. They may get more innings from Kelvim Escobar than I have him projected for (around 80 innings).
Why they might be worse than projected: Ervin Santana and John Lackey are likely to open the season on the DL. While I assume that just about every pitcher will miss at least 2-3 starts a season in my depth charts, they could both miss more than that. Vlad Guerrero looks like he may be slowing down a little, and could underperform his projections. I've assumed Bobby Abreu will DH more than play the field, and his glove could hurt them if he sees too much time in the OF.
Team: Oakland
Avg Prj W: 81
2008 Actual W: 75
2008 PythagenPat W: 76
W Diff: 6
PythagenPat W Diff: 5
Avg Prj RF: 768
2008 RF: 646
RF Diff: 122
Avg RA: 755
2008 RA: 690
RA Diff: 65
RF+RA Diff: 57
Division %: 26%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 27%
High W: 83 (chone)
Low W: 78 (chone)
Gap: 5
Avg Div Plc: 2
Why they might be better than projected: The projections all generally agree that Matt Holliday's performance will take a fairly significant hit by moving to the AL and from Colorado to Oakland. While I can't speak for the exact park/league factors of all the different systems, I can tell you that in CAIRO, Coors Holliday projected to hit .334/.409/.576 vs. Oakland Holliday hitting .295/.374/.501. If Holliday's game translates better than that, the A's should be able to snag another win or two. Even with Jason Giambi at first base, the A's look to have enough good defenders to have an above average overall defense. They've also got one of the deeper farm systems in baseball, which should help them with both filling in holes from within and acquiring pieces if needed.
Why they might be worse than projected: The health of some of their key players is usually an issue, particulary Eric Chavez. They'll also be relying on some pretty young pitchers who are talented, but notoriously difficult to project.
Team: Seattle
Avg Prj W: 79
2008 Actual W: 61
2008 PythagenPat W: 67
W Diff: 18
PythagenPat W Diff: 12
Avg Prj RF: 712
2008 RF: 671
RF Diff: 41
Avg RA: 725
2008 RA: 811
RA Diff: -86
RF+RA Diff: 127
Division %: 9%
Wild Card %: 4%
Playoff %: 13%
High W: 81 (cairo)
Low W: 78 (hbt)
Gap: 3
Avg Div Plc: 3
Why they might be better than projected: Felix Hernandez is already really good, but it wouldn't surprise anyone if he became the best pitcher in the majors as soon as this season. They've shored up their defense (the projected difference between a full season of Endy Chavez vs. Raul Ibanez is around 20 runs just by itself). Erik Bedard could make more than the 24 starts I have him penciled in for.
Why they might be worse than projected: The Mariners have several veterans in the last year of their contracts who they may decide to trade as part of their rebuilding. Trading any of them may cost them some wins in the short-term. The Mariners still haven't annointed a closer. While the role is generally overrated, it's still nice to have a decent one.
Team: Texas
Avg Prj W: 72
2008 Actual W: 79
2008 PythagenPat W: 75
W Diff: -7
PythagenPat W Diff: -3
Avg Prj RF: 776
2008 RF: 901
RF Diff: -125
Avg RA: 879
2008 RA: 967
RA Diff: -88
RF+RA Diff: -37
Division %: 3%
Wild Card %: 0%
Playoff %: 3%
High W: 75 (marcel)
Low W: 69 (zips)
Gap: 6
Avg Div Plc: 4
Why they might be better than projected: The Rangers probably have the best farm system in baseball. Neftali Feliz and Derek Holland should begin the year in AAA and be available for a boost in the rotation at some point during the season. Ian Kinsler out-OPS+'ed AL MVP Dustin Pedroia by 12 points (134 to 122) and could outperform his projections.
Why they might be worse than projected: Michael Young's transition to 3B may not work out real well. Kinsler hasn't been able to play more than 130 games yet in his MLB career so his health is a potential concern.
Anyone who wants to look at or play around with the raw team level data from the simulations can download this Excel spreadsheet.
And that's your 2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout. Like I say every year, results are not guaranteed.
The 2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - National League Edition
Continuing off where the American League Edition left off, here are the results for the Senior Circuit.
Here are the results for the Senior Circuit.To read all the caveats and disclaimers that you should keep in mind when looking at these, check the main post.
To see the individual projection systems, go to these links:
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - CHONE edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - Hardball Times edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - Marcel edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - PECOTA edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - ZiPS edition
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - CAIRO edition
And here are the combined standings of all 6000 projections:
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYN | 88.1 | 73.9 | 832 | 764 | 2409.0 | 803.8 | 82 - 94 | 791 - 873 | 726 - 802 | 88 | 89 | 2539 | 1808 | 1243 | 335 | 75 | 0 | 93 | 88 - 97 |
| ATL | 86.7 | 75.3 | 784 | 727 | 1793.8 | 795.1 | 80 - 93 | 745 - 823 | 690 - 764 | 87 | 88 | 1907 | 1940 | 1620 | 438 | 95 | 0 | 87 | 84 - 91 |
| PHI | 86.0 | 76.0 | 816 | 772 | 1654.8 | 775.7 | 80 - 92 | 776 - 855 | 733 - 811 | 86 | 85 | 1769 | 1879 | 1692 | 489 | 171 | 0 | 82 | 79 - 86 |
| WAS | 72.7 | 89.3 | 763 | 844 | 64.7 | 52.2 | 66 - 79 | 725 - 801 | 804 - 884 | 73 | 74 | 76 | 217 | 624 | 2423 | 2660 | 0 | 75 | 71 - 80 |
| FLA | 72.5 | 89.5 | 736 | 813 | 80.4 | 53.5 | 66 - 79 | 698 - 773 | 773 - 853 | 73 | 72 | 89 | 252 | 678 | 2290 | 2691 | 0 | 68 | 63 - 73 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CHN | 91.5 | 70.5 | 815 | 713 | 3933.8 | 534.5 | 85 - 98 | 776 - 855 | 675 - 750 | 92 | 93 | 4057 | 1248 | 466 | 159 | 58 | 12 | 93 | 89 - 98 |
| STL | 84.1 | 77.9 | 771 | 740 | 1036.5 | 728.9 | 78 - 90 | 732 - 810 | 702 - 778 | 84 | 85 | 1125 | 2060 | 1519 | 778 | 392 | 126 | 87 | 83 - 90 |
| MIL | 81.9 | 80.1 | 778 | 769 | 636.8 | 517.8 | 75 - 88 | 740 - 815 | 730 - 808 | 82 | 82 | 699 | 1619 | 1605 | 1109 | 655 | 313 | 82 | 78 - 85 |
| CIN | 77.8 | 84.2 | 739 | 769 | 261.5 | 208.4 | 72 - 84 | 702 - 776 | 730 - 807 | 78 | 78 | 291 | 752 | 1359 | 1817 | 1205 | 576 | 77 | 74 - 81 |
| HOU | 73.0 | 89.0 | 729 | 806 | 70.8 | 79.3 | 67 - 79 | 691 - 766 | 766 - 846 | 73 | 75 | 80 | 347 | 676 | 1233 | 2045 | 1619 | 73 | 69 - 76 |
| PIT | 69.8 | 92.2 | 731 | 842 | 60.5 | 43.7 | 63 - 76 | 693 - 769 | 801 - 883 | 70 | 71 | 66 | 194 | 407 | 886 | 1488 | 2959 | 66 | 61 - 71 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAN | 87.8 | 74.2 | 805 | 743 | 3114.0 | 430.8 | 81 - 94 | 766 - 845 | 705 - 781 | 88 | 88 | 3246 | 1560 | 701 | 368 | 125 | 0 | 91 | 87 - 96 |
| ARI | 83.7 | 78.3 | 735 | 715 | 1559.7 | 428.8 | 77 - 90 | 698 - 772 | 677 - 753 | 84 | 82 | 1662 | 1751 | 1229 | 836 | 522 | 0 | 85 | 82 - 89 |
| SF | 79.3 | 82.7 | 712 | 725 | 554.0 | 211.5 | 73 - 86 | 675 - 749 | 687 - 763 | 79 | 80 | 609 | 1157 | 1627 | 1578 | 1029 | 0 | 81 | 77 - 84 |
| COL | 79.0 | 83.0 | 798 | 818 | 577.7 | 233.4 | 73 - 85 | 757 - 838 | 778 - 858 | 79 | 79 | 630 | 1162 | 1475 | 1563 | 1170 | 0 | 76 | 73 - 80 |
| SD | 74.5 | 87.5 | 714 | 773 | 194.7 | 102.7 | 68 - 81 | 677 - 751 | 735 - 810 | 74 | 74 | 218 | 555 | 978 | 1502 | 2747 | 0 | 71 | 66 - 75 |
| Avg WC | 89.5 |
Legend
W:Average wins over 6000 seasons
L:Average losses over 6000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 6000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 6000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 6000 seasons. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
I'll run through the divisions and teams briefly:
Legend
Avg Prj W: Average projected wins
2008 Actual W: Actual wins in 2008
2008 PythagenPat W: 2008 PythagenPat Wins
W Diff: Avg Prj W - 2008 Actual W
PythagenPat W Diff: Avg Prj W - 2008 PythagenPat W
Avg Prj RF: Average projected runs scored
2008 RF: 2008 runs scored
RF Diff: Avg Prj RF - 2008 RF
Avg RA: Average projected runs allowed
2008 RA: 2008 runs allowed
RA Diff: Avg Prj RA - 2008 RA
RF+RA Diff: Projected run differential delta
Division %: Percentage of times the team won their division
Wild Card %: Percentage of time the team won the wild card
Playoff %: Division% plus Wild Card %
High W: Higest average W projection and system
Low W: Lowest average W projection and system
Gap: Gap between High W and Low W
Avg Div Plc: Average place in division
NL East
Team: New York Mets
Avg Prj W: 88
2008 Actual W: 89
2008 PythagenPat W: 90
W Diff: -1
PythagenPat W Diff: -2
Avg Prj RF: 832
2008 RF: 799
RF Diff: 33
Avg RA: 765
2008 RA: 715
RA Diff: 50
RF+RA Diff: -17
Division %: 40%
Wild Card %: 13%
Playoff %: 54%
High W: 91 (zips)
Low W: 85 (marcel)
Gap: 6
Avg Div Plc: 1
Why they might be better than projected: Jose Reyes and David Wright may not be done improving. Daniel Murphy's projections are somewhat uninspiring but he looked good in his time in MLB and may outperform them.
Why they might be worse than projected: Livan Hernandez. Tim Redding.
Team: Atlanta
Avg Prj W: 87
2008 Actual W: 72
2008 PythagenPat W: 78
W Diff: 15
PythagenPat W Diff: 9
Avg Prj RF: 784
2008 RF: 753
RF Diff: 31
Avg RA: 727
2008 RA: 778
RA Diff: -51
RF+RA Diff: 82
Division %: 30%
Wild Card %: 13%
Playoff %: 43%
High W: 88 (pecota)
Low W: 85 (chone)
Gap: 3
Avg Div Plc: 2
Why they might be better than projected: Their rotation looks pretty solid with the additions of Derek Lowe, Javier Vazquez and Kenshin Kawakami. They've got Tommy Hanson in the wings if they need reinforcement there and he's emerged as one of the better prospects in baseball (#4 on Baseball America's top 100, #13 on Baseball Prospectus's top 100), Jeff Francouer has been pretty awful the last two seasons, but he has the physical talent to become useful, although he'll have to do it soon.
Why they might be worse than projected: Tom Glavine may not be any better than replacement level now but may pitch more than he deserves to due to his history with the Braves. Francouer may get more playing time than he deserves based on his popularity with the fans and his tools. The health of Chipper Jones, who has hit .342/.435/.592 over the last three seasons, is an annual concern. The health of their top two relievers (Rafael Soriano and Mike Gonzalez) is one as well.
Team: Philadelphia
Avg Prj W: 86
2008 Actual W: 92
2008 PythagenPat W: 93
W Diff: -6
PythagenPat W Diff: -7
Avg Prj RF: 816
2008 RF: 799
RF Diff: 17
Avg RA: 772
2008 RA: 680
RA Diff: 92
RF+RA Diff: -75
Division %: 27%
Wild Card %: 13%
Playoff %: 40%
High W: 89 (zips)
Low W: 83 (marcel)
Gap: 6
Avg Div Plc: 3
Why they might be better than projected: Jamie Moyer breaks projection systems. His average projected ERA is 4.72 which is a full run worse than last year. The difference between his 2008 and his projected 2009 if he makes 30 starts would be somewhere between two and three wins. Carlos Carrasco's projections aren't very impressive, but he's only 22 and has the talent to be a very good starter.
Why they might be worse than projected: Swapping Pat Burrell for Raul Ibanez may make them a little bit too left-handed and could pose some potential matchup problems. It's also a slight defensive downgrade. Cole Hamels's spring training elbow scare may be a precursor to something that would cause him to miss some time. Chase Utley's recovery from his hip surgery may necessitate some missed time.
Team: Florida
Avg Prj W: 73
2008 Actual W: 84
2008 PythagenPat W: 81
W Diff: -11
PythagenPat W Diff: -8
Avg Prj RF: 735
2008 RF: 770
RF Diff: -35
Avg RA: 813
2008 RA: 767
RA Diff: 46
RF+RA Diff: -81
Division %: 1%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 2%
High W: 76 (chone)
Low W: 66 (zips)
Gap: 10
Avg Div Plc: 4
Why they might be better than projected: They've got a good amount of young talent on both sides of the ball. A rotation of Josh Johnson, Ricky Nolasco, Anibal Sanchez, Andrew Miller and Chris Volstad is long on potential.
Why they might be worse than projected: Matt Lindstrom's shoulder looks like it may be a concern. They'll be relying on a lot of players with sketchy health in their recent past. Hanley Ramirez has played through shoulder issues the last few seasons but at some point he may not be able to.
Team: Washington
Avg Prj W: 73
2008 Actual W: 59
2008 PythagenPat W: 62
W Diff: 14
PythagenPat W Diff: 11
Avg Prj RF: 763
2008 RF: 641
RF Diff: 122
Avg RA: 844
2008 RA: 825
RA Diff: 19
RF+RA Diff: 103
Division %: 1%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 2%
High W: 76 (chone)
Low W: 69 (hbt)
Gap: 7
Avg Div Plc: 4
Why they might be better than projected: Maybe Cristian Guzman will actually be the MVP candidate PECOTA seems to think he is. Maybe Nick Johnson will play in more than five games.
Why they might be worse than projected: Their pitching staff is a little frightening.
NL Central
Team: Chicago Cubs
Avg Prj W: 91
2008 Actual W: 97
2008 PythagenPat W: 99
W Diff: -6
PythagenPat W Diff: -8
Avg Prj RF: 815
2008 RF: 855
RF Diff: -40
Avg RA: 713
2008 RA: 671
RA Diff: 42
RF+RA Diff: -82
Division %: 66%
Wild Card %: 9%
Playoff %: 75%
High W: 95 (zips)
Low W: 88 (chone)
Gap: 7
Avg Div Plc: 1
Why they might be better than projected: I restricted Milton Bradley to around 500 PA a season in RF given his past health issues. He could play more than that. I gave Rich Harden 19 starts, but he made 25 last year.
Why they might be worse than projected: I restricted Milton Bradley to around 500 PA a season in RF given his past health issues. He could play less than that. I gave Rich Harden 19 starts, he could pitch less than that.
Team: St. Louis
Avg Prj W: 84
2008 Actual W: 86
2008 PythagenPat W: 87
W Diff: -2
PythagenPat W Diff: -3
Avg Prj RF: 771
2008 RF: 779
RF Diff: -8
Avg RA: 740
2008 RA: 725
RA Diff: 15
RF+RA Diff: -23
Division %: 17%
Wild Card %: 12%
Playoff %: 29%
High W: 87 (zips)
Low W: 82 (pecota)
Gap: 5
Avg Div Plc: 2
Why they might be better than projected: They have the best player in baseball in Albert Pujols, and nothing he might do would surprise me. Chris Carpenter has looked good this spring, but I restricted him to around 15-16 starts a season. In his career, Khalil Greene has hit .270/.318/.484 on the road compared to .225/.289/.369 at home. In some research I did on home/road splits I've found that the average player hits about 10% better at home, so if Greene suffered unduly from PETCO he may exceed his projections handily.
Why they might be worse than projected: Pujols plays through a lot of nagging injuries and there's a possibility he won't play as much as projected. They may get nothing out of Carpenter. Their bullpen looks like a work in progress and may cost them a few wins.
Team: Milwaukee
Avg Prj W: 82
2008 Actual W: 90
2008 PythagenPat W: 87
W Diff: -8
PythagenPat W Diff: -5
Avg Prj RF: 777
2008 RF: 750
RF Diff: 27
Avg RA: 769
2008 RA: 689
RA Diff: 80
RF+RA Diff: -53
Division %: 11%
Wild Card %: 9%
Playoff %: 19%
High W: 86 (pecota)
Low W: 78 (marcel)
Gap: 8
Avg Div Plc: 3
Why they might be better than projected: Prince Fielder was over two wins worse offensively in 2008 than he was in 2007. Rickie Weeks was a win worse. Ryan Braun was a win worse in more playing time. All are young enough to still be improving and could exceed their projections.
Why they might be worse than projected: Their rotation is going to be relying on good performances by some young pitchers(Yovani Gallardo and Manny Parra), which is always a calculated risk.
Team: Cincinnati
Avg Prj W: 78
2008 Actual W: 74
2008 PythagenPat W: 71
W Diff: 4
PythagenPat W Diff: 7
Avg Prj RF: 739
2008 RF: 704
RF Diff: 35
Avg RA: 768
2008 RA: 800
RA Diff: -32
RF+RA Diff: 67
Division %: 4%
Wild Card %: 4%
Playoff %: 8%
High W: 82 (chone)
Low W: 76 (pecota)
Gap: 6
Avg Div Plc: 4
Why they might be better than projected: Jay Bruce. Joey Votto. After a couple of disappointing seasons, Homer Bailey may be able to put it together at age 23. Edinson Volquez was amazing through the All Star Break, 117.2 IP, 126 Ks, 2.29 ERA but scuffled a little after 78.1 IP, 80 Ks, 4.60 ERA. If that was due to fatigue, then he has decent chance to exceed his projections, which also include 80 innings of 7.20 ERA pitching for Texas.
Why they might be worse than projected:
Willy Taveras is a decent glove in CF but he might kill them at the top of the order. The rest of their defense still looks like a possible concern as well. Team: Houston
Avg Prj W: 73
2008 Actual W: 86
2008 PythagenPat W: 78
W Diff: -13
PythagenPat W Diff: -5
Avg Prj RF: 729
2008 RF: 712
RF Diff: 17
Avg RA: 806
2008 RA: 743
RA Diff: 63
RF+RA Diff: -46
Division %: 1%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 2%
High W: 77 (hbt)
Low W: 69 (pecota)
Gap: 8
Avg Div Plc: 5
Why they might be better than projected: They get to beat up on Pittsburgh.
Why they might be worse than projected: The rotation? The bench? Miguel Tejada, Ivan Rodriguez and Geoff Blum as starters?
Team: Pittsburgh
Avg Prj W: 70
2008 Actual W: 67
2008 PythagenPat W: 67
W Diff: 3
PythagenPat W Diff: 3
Avg Prj RF: 731
2008 RF: 735
RF Diff: -4
Avg RA: 842
2008 RA: 884
RA Diff: -42
RF+RA Diff: 38
Division %: 1%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 2%
High W: 76 (chone)
Low W: 60 (zips)
Gap: 16
Avg Div Plc: 6
Why they might be better than projected:They get to beat up on Houston.
Why they might be worse than projected: 70 wins would be an upgrade of three wins from last year's 67 win squad, which has since lost a half-season of Jason Bay and Xavier Nady. In 6000 iterations, the Pirates won fewer than 50 games 322 times, and fewer than 60 games 942 times.
NL West
Team: Los Angeles Angels
Avg Prj W: 85
2008 Actual W: 100
2008 PythagenPat W: 88
W Diff: -15
PythagenPat W Diff: -3
Avg Prj RF: 777
2008 RF: 765
RF Diff: 12
Avg RA: 734
2008 RA: 697
RA Diff: 37
RF+RA Diff: -25
Division %: 56%
Wild Card %: 1%
Playoff %: 57%
High W: 87 (pecota)
Low W: 84 (hbt)
Gap: 3
Avg Div Plc: 1
Why they might be better than projected: Strong bullpen, mostly young offensive core, Clayton Kershaw and Chad Billingsley.
Why they might be worse than projected: Manny's hammy. Tanyon Sturtze in the role of Scott Proctor.
Team: Arizona
Avg Prj W: 84
2008 Actual W: 82
2008 PythagenPat W: 82
W Diff: 2
PythagenPat W Diff: 2
Avg Prj RF: 735
2008 RF: 720
RF Diff: 15
Avg RA: 715
2008 RA: 706
RA Diff: 9
RF+RA Diff: 6
Division %: 26%
Wild Card %: 7%
Playoff %: 33%
High W: 88 (pecota)
Low W: 79 (marcel)
Gap: 9
Avg Div Plc: 2
Why they might be better than projected: Most of their key players are young enough to improve more than projected.
Why they might be worse than projected: Injuries.
Team: San Francisco
Avg Prj W: 78
2008 Actual W: 72
2008 PythagenPat W: 68
W Diff: 6
PythagenPat W Diff: 10
Avg Prj RF: 711
2008 RF: 640
RF Diff: 71
Avg RA: 737
2008 RA: 759
RA Diff: -22
RF+RA Diff: 93
Division %: 14%
Wild Card %: 0%
Playoff %: 15%
High W: 81 (chone)
Low W: 72 (marcel)
Gap: 9
Avg Div Plc: 4
Why they might be better than projected: Tim Lincecum was so good last year that no projection system expects him to repeat it. Randy Johnson was effective last year in Arizona and made 30 starts, but I restricted him to 25. If he can go more often, that obviously helps. It may not take more than 85 wins to take the NL West, although the average wins for the first place winner was 91 over the 6000 iterations.
Why they might be worse than projected: Johnson may not make 10 starts given his age and his injury past. Bengie Molina is their cleanup hitter. General offensive issues could sink them.
Team: Colorado
Avg Prj W: 79
2008 Actual W: 74
2008 PythagenPat W: 74
W Diff: 5
PythagenPat W Diff: 5
Avg Prj RF: 798
2008 RF: 747
RF Diff: 51
Avg RA: 818
2008 RA: 822
RA Diff: -4
RF+RA Diff: 55
Division %: 10%
Wild Card %: 4%
Playoff %: 13%
High W: 81 (chone)
Low W: 74 (pecota)
Gap: 7
Avg Div Plc: 3
Why they might be better than projected: Chris Ianetta and Ryan Spilboroughs both hit better in 2008 than they are projected to in 2009. Todd Helton battled back issues last year and was restricted to just 361 PA while slugging just .388 which is obscenely bad for a 1B in Colorado. If he can bounce back to his 2007 or 2008 level he would be more valuable than projected. A full season of Troy Tulowitzki on both sides of the ball should help. Ubaldo Jimenez has top shelf stuff but bottom shelf command of it most of the time. A little bit better command and he could be one of the pitchers in baseball.
Why they might be worse than projected: Garrett Atkins (-7 projected UZR) and Brad Hawpe (-18 projected UZR) are among the worst defenders in MLB at their positions. Greg Smith's peripherals did not support his ERA last year(FIP of 4.82 compared to an ERA of 4.16) in Oakland, and he could be a disaster in Coors this year.
Team: San Diego
Avg Prj W: 74
2008 Actual W: 63
2008 PythagenPat W: 67
W Diff: 11
PythagenPat W Diff: 7
Avg Prj RF: 714
2008 RF: 637
RF Diff: 77
Avg RA: 773
2008 RA: 764
RA Diff: 9
RF+RA Diff: 68
Division %: 3%
Wild Card %: 2%
Playoff %: 5%
High W: 78 (chone)
Low W: 71 (zips)
Gap: 7
Avg Div Plc: 5
Why they might be better than projected: They have Jake Peavy and Adrian Gonzalez.
Why they might be worse than projected: Jody Gerut projects pretty well in most of the systems, but a repeat of last year is probably a big question mark. Peavy and Chris Young are injury concerns.
Anyone who wants to look at or play around with the raw team level data from the simulations can download this Excel spreadsheet.
Back to the American League edition.
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - CHONE edition
Below are are the results of Sean Smith’s 2009 CHONE projections when run through Diamond Mind 1000 times. Sean’s projections rated as some of the best last year.
To read all the caveats and disclaimers that you should keep in mind when looking at these, check the main post.
Standings| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| BOS | 95.6 | 66.4 | 825 | 678 | 495.7 | 311.8 | 89-102 | 785-866 | 643-713 | 96 | 99 | 517 | 343 | 119 | 19 | 2 | 0 | 99 | 94-104 |
| NYA | 94.4 | 67.6 | 845 | 718 | 387.2 | 353.2 | 88-101 | 805-884 | 679-756 | 94 | 93 | 409 | 393 | 178 | 17 | 3 | 0 | 93 | 89-97 |
| TAM | 87.8 | 74.2 | 779 | 702 | 111.2 | 201.7 | 81-94 | 740-818 | 665-738 | 88 | 89 | 122 | 234 | 518 | 105 | 21 | 0 | 87 | 82-91 |
| BAL | 76.1 | 85.9 | 753 | 804 | 2.5 | 13.0 | 70-82 | 714-792 | 765-844 | 76 | 73 | 3 | 16 | 95 | 485 | 401 | 0 | 78 | 74-83 |
| TOR | 74.6 | 87.4 | 677 | 738 | 3.5 | 10.5 | 68-81 | 641-713 | 701-776 | 74 | 74 | 4 | 14 | 71 | 379 | 532 | 0 | 71 | 66-76 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CLE | 87.9 | 74.1 | 792 | 721 | 540.0 | 32.2 | 81-94 | 753-831 | 685-757 | 88 | 89 | 560 | 307 | 91 | 34 | 8 | 0 | 91 | 86-96 |
| DET | 85.4 | 76.7 | 771 | 725 | 344.3 | 32.5 | 79-92 | 733-809 | 688-763 | 85 | 84 | 365 | 430 | 135 | 52 | 18 | 0 | 85 | 81-88 |
| MIN | 77.6 | 84.4 | 738 | 781 | 79.8 | 6.7 | 71-84 | 699-776 | 741-822 | 77 | 77 | 85 | 161 | 360 | 238 | 156 | 0 | 79 | 75-82 |
| KC | 73.3 | 88.7 | 716 | 795 | 22.2 | 2.2 | 67-80 | 678-753 | 756-834 | 73 | 74 | 24 | 76 | 221 | 327 | 352 | 0 | 74 | 70-78 |
| CHA | 72.7 | 89.3 | 730 | 815 | 13.7 | 0.3 | 67-79 | 693-767 | 775-855 | 73 | 74 | 16 | 59 | 198 | 345 | 382 | 0 | 68 | 64-73 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAA | 86.2 | 75.8 | 774 | 725 | 599.3 | 18.3 | 80-93 | 735-812 | 688-761 | 86 | 86 | 622 | 252 | 93 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 89 | 84-93 |
| SEA | 81.2 | 80.8 | 695 | 688 | 247.6 | 11.3 | 75-87 | 659-731 | 652-724 | 81 | 82 | 264 | 388 | 251 | 97 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 78-86 |
| OAK | 77.9 | 84.1 | 747 | 762 | 120.1 | 5.0 | 72-84 | 708-787 | 723-801 | 78 | 78 | 130 | 269 | 384 | 217 | 0 | 0 | 77 | 73-81 |
| TEX | 71.9 | 90.1 | 766 | 872 | 33.5 | 1.3 | 65-79 | 727-804 | 815-929 | 72 | 71 | 40 | 107 | 248 | 605 | 0 | 0 | 70 | 64-75 |
| Avg WC | 92.9 | ||||||||||||||||||
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| PHI | 86.8 | 75.2 | 803 | 755 | 395.8 | 138.6 | 80-93 | 763-842 | 717-793 | 87 | 85 | 418 | 285 | 206 | 75 | 16 | 0 | 92 | 87-96 |
| NYN | 85.9 | 76.1 | 801 | 756 | 315.4 | 133.9 | 80-92 | 760-841 | 719-794 | 86 | 86 | 334 | 310 | 259 | 82 | 15 | 0 | 86 | 83-90 |
| ATL | 85.0 | 77.0 | 768 | 727 | 257.2 | 128.9 | 79-91 | 729-806 | 693-762 | 85 | 85 | 275 | 315 | 274 | 116 | 20 | 0 | 82 | 78-85 |
| FLA | 75.1 | 86.9 | 702 | 756 | 28.5 | 21.7 | 69-82 | 666-739 | 718-793 | 75 | 74 | 30 | 75 | 155 | 434 | 306 | 0 | 76 | 72-80 |
| WAS | 71.1 | 90.9 | 729 | 829 | 2.5 | 5.8 | 65-77 | 692-767 | 791-868 | 71 | 69 | 3 | 29 | 74 | 302 | 592 | 0 | 69 | 64-74 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CHN | 88.2 | 73.8 | 781 | 712 | 521.0 | 101.3 | 82-94 | 741-820 | 676-747 | 88 | 91 | 546 | 242 | 115 | 66 | 24 | 7 | 91 | 87-96 |
| STL | 84.3 | 77.7 | 743 | 710 | 240.3 | 116.3 | 78-91 | 707-779 | 672-747 | 84 | 84 | 259 | 302 | 213 | 133 | 72 | 21 | 86 | 82-89 |
| CIN | 81.3 | 80.7 | 726 | 721 | 121.3 | 73.9 | 75-87 | 691-761 | 685-757 | 81 | 81 | 132 | 199 | 261 | 208 | 145 | 55 | 82 | 79-85 |
| MIL | 79.6 | 82.4 | 748 | 758 | 76.8 | 62.8 | 73-86 | 711-785 | 719-796 | 79 | 78 | 87 | 178 | 218 | 230 | 178 | 109 | 78 | 75-81 |
| PIT | 75.9 | 86.1 | 714 | 759 | 35.5 | 26.2 | 69-82 | 675-752 | 722-796 | 76 | 78 | 39 | 74 | 142 | 230 | 261 | 254 | 75 | 71-78 |
| HOU | 71.9 | 90.1 | 700 | 785 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 66-78 | 663-737 | 747-823 | 72 | 72 | 6 | 31 | 67 | 146 | 260 | 490 | 69 | 64-74 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAN | 87.2 | 74.8 | 785 | 731 | 562.8 | 53.3 | 81-94 | 746-825 | 696-767 | 87 | 86 | 586 | 228 | 100 | 63 | 23 | 0 | 90 | 85-94 |
| ARI | 79.7 | 82.3 | 705 | 721 | 139.3 | 38.5 | 73-86 | 670-741 | 684-758 | 80 | 76 | 152 | 237 | 226 | 211 | 174 | 0 | 84 | 81-87 |
| SF | 79.6 | 82.4 | 689 | 697 | 121.8 | 33.8 | 74-86 | 654-723 | 660-735 | 80 | 80 | 128 | 232 | 251 | 207 | 182 | 0 | 80 | 77-83 |
| COL | 78.4 | 83.6 | 766 | 793 | 97.0 | 35.8 | 72-85 | 727-806 | 756-829 | 78 | 75 | 108 | 204 | 193 | 228 | 267 | 0 | 77 | 73-80 |
| SD | 77.5 | 84.5 | 693 | 725 | 79.0 | 24.3 | 71-84 | 657-729 | 688-762 | 78 | 79 | 87 | 163 | 213 | 259 | 278 | 0 | 72 | 68-76 |
| Avg WC | 88.4 |
W:Average wins over 1000 seasons
L:Average losses over 1000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 1000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 1000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 1000 season. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
Pie Chart Madness!
Clustered Column Charts of Divisional Placings
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - ZiPS edition
Below are are the results of Dan Szymborski’s 2009 ZiPS projections when run through Diamond Mind Baseball 1000 times.
To read all the caveats and disclaimers that you should keep in mind when looking at these, check the main post
Standings| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYA | 96.5 | 65.5 | 883 | 732 | 501.8 | 300.8 | 90-103 | 840-925 | 694-771 | 97 | 97 | 531 | 317 | 136 | 15 | 1 | 0 | 100 | 95-105 |
| BOS | 94.8 | 67.2 | 857 | 713 | 360.0 | 362.2 | 89-101 | 815-899 | 676-750 | 95 | 94 | 387 | 369 | 227 | 13 | 4 | 0 | 94 | 90-98 |
| TAM | 90.2 | 71.8 | 791 | 681 | 136.8 | 264.7 | 84-96 | 752-830 | 644-718 | 90 | 89 | 154 | 279 | 490 | 68 | 9 | 0 | 88 | 84-92 |
| TOR | 76.4 | 85.6 | 687 | 730 | 1.3 | 13.3 | 70-83 | 651-724 | 693-767 | 77 | 74 | 3 | 16 | 63 | 514 | 404 | 0 | 79 | 74-84 |
| BAL | 74.8 | 87.2 | 796 | 851 | 0.3 | 5.3 | 69-81 | 757-834 | 809-892 | 75 | 72 | 1 | 8 | 50 | 403 | 538 | 0 | 72 | 67-77 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CLE | 85.4 | 76.6 | 810 | 763 | 484.3 | 6.2 | 79-92 | 769-850 | 725-802 | 86 | 87 | 507 | 282 | 124 | 61 | 26 | 0 | 89 | 85-94 |
| DET | 83.5 | 78.5 | 816 | 785 | 327.2 | 15.0 | 77-90 | 777-855 | 744-825 | 84 | 85 | 348 | 320 | 189 | 102 | 41 | 0 | 84 | 80-87 |
| MIN | 78.7 | 83.3 | 758 | 793 | 120.0 | 11.3 | 72-85 | 720-795 | 751-836 | 78 | 76 | 132 | 211 | 277 | 262 | 118 | 0 | 79 | 76-83 |
| KC | 76.4 | 85.6 | 739 | 802 | 55.2 | 3.5 | 70-83 | 699-778 | 762-843 | 77 | 77 | 62 | 153 | 257 | 291 | 237 | 0 | 75 | 71-79 |
| CHA | 72.0 | 90.0 | 773 | 868 | 13.3 | 0.3 | 66-78 | 733-813 | 828-908 | 72 | 70 | 17 | 70 | 127 | 272 | 514 | 0 | 69 | 64-74 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAA | 85.3 | 76.7 | 784 | 738 | 563.0 | 7.0 | 79-92 | 744-824 | 700-777 | 85 | 85 | 582 | 285 | 113 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 88 | 83-93 |
| OAK | 80.8 | 81.2 | 756 | 753 | 256.0 | 8.3 | 74-87 | 716-795 | 715-791 | 80 | 79 | 273 | 344 | 310 | 73 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 78-86 |
| SEA | 79.2 | 82.8 | 721 | 729 | 174.0 | 2.0 | 73-85 | 684-758 | 690-767 | 79 | 81 | 185 | 339 | 356 | 120 | 0 | 0 | 76 | 73-80 |
| TEX | 69.2 | 92.8 | 783 | 920 | 8.0 | 0.0 | 63-75 | 744-822 | 877-964 | 69 | 69 | 8 | 57 | 191 | 744 | 0 | 0 | 68 | 63-73 |
| Avg WC | 93.5 | ||||||||||||||||||
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYN | 91.2 | 70.8 | 849 | 749 | 470.8 | 154.1 | 85-97 | 808-890 | 711-787 | 91 | 89 | 492 | 314 | 166 | 25 | 3 | 0 | 95 | 90-100 |
| PHI | 88.6 | 73.4 | 822 | 751 | 301.8 | 148.7 | 82-95 | 782-862 | 714-789 | 89 | 88 | 323 | 340 | 295 | 38 | 4 | 0 | 89 | 85-93 |
| ATL | 87.5 | 74.5 | 791 | 729 | 223.8 | 153.6 | 81-94 | 753-830 | 691-766 | 88 | 88 | 237 | 340 | 356 | 64 | 3 | 0 | 84 | 80-88 |
| WAS | 75.0 | 87.0 | 769 | 827 | 4.5 | 7.3 | 69-81 | 730-808 | 788-866 | 75 | 74 | 6 | 26 | 132 | 678 | 158 | 0 | 75 | 71-80 |
| FLA | 66.4 | 95.6 | 717 | 855 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 60-73 | 681-754 | 815-896 | 66 | 68 | 0 | 2 | 14 | 188 | 796 | 0 | 65 | 60-71 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CHN | 95.0 | 67.0 | 839 | 706 | 730.2 | 96.8 | 89-101 | 799-880 | 668-744 | 95 | 95 | 747 | 202 | 45 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 96 | 91-101 |
| STL | 87.2 | 74.8 | 777 | 713 | 195.2 | 163.5 | 81-93 | 737-816 | 676-749 | 87 | 85 | 212 | 459 | 241 | 73 | 15 | 0 | 88 | 84-92 |
| MIL | 82.5 | 79.5 | 802 | 785 | 66.7 | 83.3 | 76-89 | 763-841 | 745-825 | 82 | 82 | 74 | 268 | 387 | 211 | 58 | 2 | 82 | 79-86 |
| CIN | 77.1 | 84.9 | 749 | 785 | 6.0 | 16.8 | 71-83 | 713-786 | 747-823 | 77 | 79 | 6 | 80 | 245 | 457 | 190 | 22 | 77 | 73-81 |
| HOU | 71.0 | 91.0 | 723 | 824 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 65-77 | 685-762 | 784-864 | 71 | 73 | 2 | 20 | 82 | 207 | 583 | 106 | 70 | 65-74 |
| PIT | 60.2 | 101.8 | 678 | 880 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 54-66 | 641-715 | 839-921 | 60 | 61 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 23 | 143 | 832 | 60 | 54-65 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAN | 89.1 | 72.9 | 817 | 747 | 574.8 | 50.8 | 83-95 | 778-856 | 710-785 | 89 | 88 | 601 | 266 | 98 | 28 | 7 | 0 | 92 | 87-96 |
| ARI | 84.6 | 77.4 | 733 | 709 | 228.7 | 69.5 | 78-91 | 696-769 | 670-748 | 85 | 82 | 251 | 340 | 255 | 127 | 27 | 0 | 86 | 82-90 |
| COL | 81.1 | 80.9 | 799 | 798 | 118.0 | 30.7 | 75-88 | 758-839 | 758-838 | 81 | 78 | 128 | 225 | 290 | 263 | 94 | 0 | 81 | 78-85 |
| SF | 79.0 | 83.0 | 698 | 713 | 73.2 | 18.0 | 73-86 | 661-735 | 673-752 | 79 | 79 | 83 | 151 | 261 | 347 | 158 | 0 | 77 | 73-80 |
| SD | 71.4 | 90.6 | 703 | 788 | 5.3 | 1.0 | 65-78 | 666-739 | 749-828 | 71 | 74 | 7 | 34 | 86 | 219 | 654 | 0 | 70 | 65-75 |
| Avg WC | 91.1 |
W:Average wins over 1000 seasons
L:Average losses over 1000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 1000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 1000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 1000 season. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
Pie Chart Madness!
Clustered Column Charts of Divisional Placings
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - PECOTA edition
Below are are the results of Baseball Prospectus’s 2009 PECOTA projections when run through Diamond Mind Baseball 1000 times.
To read all the caveats and disclaimers that you should keep in mind when looking at these, check the main post.
Standings
| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYA | 96.0 | 66.0 | 822 | 686 | 452.8 | 298.8 | 90-102 | 781-863 | 648-723 | 96 | 94 | 473 | 303 | 214 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 96-105 |
| BOS | 95.1 | 66.9 | 826 | 684 | 365.2 | 343.8 | 89-101 | 785-867 | 649-719 | 95 | 95 | 390 | 369 | 226 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 94 | 90-98 |
| TAM | 91.8 | 70.2 | 785 | 670 | 180.7 | 297.8 | 86-98 | 746-823 | 635-705 | 92 | 94 | 199 | 313 | 452 | 34 | 2 | 0 | 89 | 84-93 |
| TOR | 74.0 | 88.0 | 694 | 759 | 0.3 | 7.8 | 68-80 | 656-732 | 721-796 | 74 | 74 | 1 | 9 | 32 | 530 | 428 | 0 | 77 | 72-82 |
| BAL | 73.2 | 88.8 | 789 | 869 | 1.0 | 7.0 | 67-80 | 749-829 | 828-911 | 73 | 74 | 1 | 7 | 32 | 436 | 524 | 0 | 70 | 65-75 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CLE | 84.5 | 77.5 | 790 | 749 | 526.1 | 5.0 | 78-91 | 751-829 | 711-787 | 85 | 85 | 550 | 246 | 105 | 73 | 26 | 0 | 88 | 83-92 |
| DET | 80.3 | 81.7 | 773 | 774 | 235.1 | 3.3 | 74-86 | 735-811 | 736-812 | 80 | 82 | 254 | 291 | 226 | 150 | 79 | 0 | 82 | 79-86 |
| MIN | 78.5 | 83.5 | 743 | 772 | 151.4 | 3.3 | 72-85 | 704-782 | 732-812 | 79 | 78 | 167 | 249 | 251 | 211 | 122 | 0 | 78 | 75-82 |
| KC | 75.7 | 86.3 | 727 | 782 | 67.9 | 2.0 | 69-82 | 689-765 | 744-821 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 154 | 262 | 283 | 225 | 0 | 74 | 71-78 |
| CHA | 72.1 | 89.9 | 732 | 827 | 19.5 | 1.5 | 66-78 | 694-771 | 787-868 | 72 | 73 | 22 | 94 | 152 | 244 | 488 | 0 | 69 | 64-73 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAA | 86.8 | 75.2 | 756 | 705 | 636.3 | 8.0 | 81-93 | 717-795 | 666-744 | 87 | 89 | 659 | 247 | 78 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 89 | 84-94 |
| OAK | 81.7 | 80.3 | 766 | 745 | 249.3 | 18.0 | 75-88 | 726-807 | 707-783 | 82 | 80 | 268 | 418 | 251 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 78-86 |
| SEA | 77.5 | 84.5 | 702 | 732 | 102.3 | 3.5 | 71-84 | 666-739 | 692-771 | 78 | 78 | 115 | 263 | 411 | 211 | 0 | 0 | 76 | 72-80 |
| TEX | 70.8 | 91.2 | 723 | 836 | 11.3 | 0.0 | 64-77 | 682-764 | 792-880 | 71 | 72 | 12 | 84 | 234 | 670 | 0 | 0 | 69 | 64-74 |
| Avg WC | 94.0 | ||||||||||||||||||
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYN | 89.6 | 72.4 | 826 | 743 | 424.6 | 124.7 | 83-96 | 785-867 | 706-779 | 89 | 89 | 450 | 282 | 203 | 55 | 10 | 0 | 94 | 89-98 |
| ATL | 88.1 | 73.9 | 791 | 720 | 308.1 | 141.7 | 82-94 | 750-831 | 683-758 | 88 | 86 | 331 | 330 | 239 | 84 | 16 | 0 | 88 | 85-92 |
| PHI | 86.7 | 75.3 | 815 | 766 | 242.7 | 121.7 | 80-93 | 775-854 | 727-805 | 87 | 87 | 257 | 323 | 286 | 103 | 31 | 0 | 84 | 80-87 |
| WAS | 75.1 | 86.9 | 786 | 844 | 17.5 | 12.0 | 69-82 | 747-826 | 802-886 | 75 | 77 | 20 | 38 | 122 | 403 | 417 | 0 | 77 | 73-81 |
| FLA | 74.6 | 87.4 | 734 | 788 | 6.3 | 9.5 | 68-81 | 698-771 | 749-828 | 75 | 75 | 9 | 36 | 123 | 360 | 472 | 0 | 71 | 66-76 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CHN | 93.9 | 68.1 | 808 | 680 | 746.8 | 79.2 | 88-100 | 770-846 | 642-718 | 94 | 92 | 762 | 178 | 52 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 95 | 90-100 |
| MIL | 85.8 | 76.2 | 785 | 742 | 173.3 | 145.8 | 79-93 | 747-822 | 703-780 | 86 | 86 | 188 | 468 | 210 | 100 | 27 | 7 | 87 | 83-91 |
| STL | 81.5 | 80.5 | 758 | 756 | 65.8 | 67.7 | 75-88 | 718-797 | 716-795 | 81 | 80 | 74 | 271 | 379 | 190 | 65 | 21 | 81 | 77-85 |
| CIN | 75.8 | 86.2 | 735 | 781 | 14.0 | 13.3 | 69-82 | 697-773 | 743-819 | 76 | 81 | 16 | 74 | 249 | 365 | 216 | 80 | 76 | 72-80 |
| HOU | 69.2 | 92.8 | 720 | 838 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 63-76 | 682-757 | 795-880 | 69 | 68 | 0 | 9 | 76 | 196 | 370 | 349 | 70 | 66-74 |
| PIT | 67.4 | 94.6 | 739 | 876 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 61-74 | 700-778 | 832-921 | 67 | 67 | 0 | 14 | 46 | 139 | 322 | 479 | 64 | 59-69 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAN | 90.3 | 71.7 | 800 | 713 | 555.3 | 109.5 | 84-97 | 759-840 | 676-751 | 91 | 94 | 572 | 312 | 79 | 31 | 6 | 0 | 93 | 89-98 |
| ARI | 88.4 | 73.6 | 779 | 712 | 388.8 | 125.7 | 82-95 | 738-820 | 674-750 | 89 | 87 | 405 | 413 | 129 | 40 | 13 | 0 | 87 | 83-91 |
| SF | 78.4 | 83.7 | 691 | 713 | 36.3 | 28.2 | 72-85 | 657-725 | 677-749 | 78 | 80 | 44 | 156 | 408 | 254 | 138 | 0 | 80 | 76-84 |
| COL | 74.4 | 87.6 | 813 | 879 | 13.5 | 11.3 | 68-81 | 772-853 | 835-923 | 74 | 76 | 15 | 76 | 232 | 330 | 347 | 0 | 75 | 71-79 |
| SD | 73.1 | 88.9 | 697 | 763 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 67-79 | 660-734 | 728-799 | 73 | 74 | 7 | 46 | 192 | 321 | 434 | 0 | 69 | 65-74 |
| Avg WC | 90.9 |
W:Average wins over 1000 seasons
L:Average losses over 1000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 1000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 1000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 1000 season. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
Pie Chart Madness!
Clustered Column Charts of Divisional Placings
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - Marcel edition
Below are are the results of Tango Tiger’s 2009 Marcel projections when run through Diamond Mind Baseball 1000 times.
To read all the caveats and disclaimers that you should keep in mind when looking at these, check the main post.
| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYA | 94.1 | 67.9 | 856 | 727 | 484.0 | 269.2 | 88-100 | 816-896 | 687-767 | 94 | 93 | 514 | 307 | 161 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 98 | 93-102 |
| BOS | 92.3 | 69.7 | 827 | 715 | 332.0 | 321.4 | 86-99 | 785-869 | 678-751 | 92 | 94 | 359 | 370 | 234 | 31 | 6 | 0 | 92 | 88-96 |
| TAM | 88.5 | 73.5 | 817 | 736 | 180.2 | 225.3 | 82-95 | 778-856 | 698-773 | 88 | 87 | 196 | 269 | 411 | 97 | 27 | 0 | 86 | 82-90 |
| TOR | 76.2 | 85.8 | 709 | 755 | 0.3 | 21.3 | 70-82 | 672-746 | 716-795 | 76 | 76 | 1 | 32 | 91 | 485 | 391 | 0 | 79 | 74-83 |
| BAL | 75.1 | 86.9 | 766 | 819 | 3.5 | 8.8 | 69-81 | 728-804 | 779-858 | 75 | 74 | 4 | 19 | 66 | 391 | 520 | 0 | 72 | 67-77 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CLE | 87.7 | 74.3 | 811 | 742 | 516.3 | 47.7 | 81-94 | 771-852 | 705-780 | 88 | 89 | 541 | 270 | 131 | 40 | 18 | 0 | 91 | 87-95 |
| MIN | 85.4 | 76.6 | 794 | 753 | 362.3 | 41.6 | 79-92 | 754-834 | 715-791 | 86 | 90 | 386 | 320 | 181 | 75 | 38 | 0 | 85 | 81-89 |
| CHA | 77.1 | 84.9 | 750 | 788 | 47.8 | 10.3 | 71-83 | 712-788 | 750-825 | 77 | 79 | 54 | 151 | 251 | 278 | 266 | 0 | 80 | 77-83 |
| KC | 76.5 | 85.5 | 712 | 768 | 40.5 | 10.3 | 70-83 | 675-748 | 729-808 | 77 | 77 | 44 | 153 | 244 | 256 | 303 | 0 | 76 | 72-79 |
| DET | 76.1 | 85.9 | 771 | 823 | 33.0 | 11.5 | 70-82 | 733-809 | 784-861 | 76 | 77 | 39 | 126 | 200 | 335 | 300 | 0 | 71 | 66-75 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAA | 84.7 | 77.3 | 775 | 735 | 529.5 | 10.6 | 78-91 | 735-814 | 698-773 | 85 | 86 | 555 | 291 | 117 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 88 | 83-93 |
| OAK | 82.8 | 79.2 | 796 | 772 | 363.5 | 16.0 | 77-89 | 755-837 | 733-811 | 83 | 84 | 388 | 405 | 165 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 78-85 |
| TEX | 75.1 | 86.9 | 796 | 861 | 73.5 | 5.3 | 69-81 | 757-834 | 821-901 | 75 | 74 | 84 | 191 | 417 | 308 | 0 | 0 | 76 | 72-80 |
| SEA | 72.0 | 90.0 | 702 | 795 | 33.5 | 0.6 | 66-78 | 666-738 | 755-835 | 72 | 71 | 38 | 113 | 292 | 557 | 0 | 0 | 69 | 65-74 |
| Avg WC | 91.8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| ATL | 85.8 | 76.2 | 810 | 756 | 381.8 | 100.8 | 79-92 | 769-850 | 718-793 | 86 | 85 | 401 | 284 | 192 | 80 | 43 | 0 | 91 | 86-95 |
| NYN | 85.0 | 77.0 | 854 | 819 | 340.3 | 110.1 | 79-91 | 813-895 | 779-860 | 85 | 83 | 357 | 275 | 215 | 113 | 40 | 0 | 85 | 82-89 |
| PHI | 82.7 | 79.3 | 810 | 798 | 212.2 | 103.8 | 76-89 | 771-849 | 757-839 | 83 | 82 | 228 | 286 | 240 | 151 | 95 | 0 | 81 | 78-84 |
| FLA | 75.9 | 86.1 | 770 | 818 | 32.5 | 15.8 | 70-82 | 731-810 | 778-857 | 76 | 78 | 37 | 92 | 188 | 329 | 354 | 0 | 77 | 73-80 |
| WAS | 75.6 | 86.4 | 787 | 839 | 34.2 | 24.3 | 69-82 | 747-828 | 797-881 | 75 | 75 | 40 | 95 | 169 | 292 | 404 | 0 | 71 | 67-76 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CHN | 89.4 | 72.6 | 807 | 725 | 668.8 | 63.1 | 83-96 | 766-847 | 686-763 | 89 | 89 | 695 | 190 | 73 | 26 | 13 | 3 | 91 | 86-96 |
| STL | 82.3 | 79.7 | 786 | 770 | 178.8 | 98.3 | 76-89 | 747-826 | 732-809 | 82 | 85 | 197 | 318 | 226 | 132 | 100 | 27 | 85 | 81-88 |
| CIN | 77.7 | 84.3 | 753 | 787 | 62.3 | 46.8 | 71-84 | 715-791 | 747-827 | 78 | 79 | 73 | 186 | 226 | 213 | 180 | 122 | 80 | 77-84 |
| MIL | 77.5 | 84.5 | 756 | 795 | 53.0 | 31.2 | 71-84 | 718-794 | 756-834 | 78 | 75 | 59 | 164 | 235 | 227 | 201 | 114 | 77 | 74-80 |
| HOU | 76.1 | 85.9 | 739 | 785 | 30.0 | 29.2 | 70-82 | 703-776 | 747-823 | 76 | 75 | 34 | 140 | 202 | 226 | 230 | 168 | 73 | 70-76 |
| PIT | 70.9 | 91.1 | 729 | 830 | 7.0 | 3.3 | 65-77 | 692-766 | 789-871 | 71 | 70 | 7 | 36 | 76 | 159 | 232 | 490 | 68 | 63-72 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAN | 89.4 | 72.6 | 805 | 726 | 645.5 | 89.3 | 83-96 | 766-844 | 687-765 | 90 | 90 | 667 | 195 | 87 | 35 | 16 | 0 | 91 | 87-96 |
| COL | 81.2 | 80.8 | 790 | 789 | 133.0 | 88.9 | 75-88 | 750-831 | 750-828 | 81 | 80 | 149 | 256 | 236 | 205 | 154 | 0 | 85 | 82-89 |
| SF | 79.5 | 82.5 | 758 | 769 | 82.2 | 67.0 | 73-86 | 716-799 | 729-808 | 80 | 80 | 93 | 215 | 235 | 227 | 230 | 0 | 81 | 78-84 |
| ARI | 79.4 | 82.6 | 715 | 733 | 78.8 | 71.1 | 73-86 | 680-751 | 694-772 | 80 | 80 | 87 | 200 | 238 | 239 | 236 | 0 | 77 | 74-81 |
| SD | 78.1 | 83.9 | 744 | 772 | 60.5 | 57.2 | 72-85 | 705-784 | 734-809 | 78 | 77 | 69 | 168 | 211 | 266 | 286 | 0 | 72 | 68-77 |
| Avg WC | 87.8 |
W:Average wins over 1000 seasons
L:Average losses over 1000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 1000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 1000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 1000 season. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
Pie Chart Madness!
Clustered Column Charts of Divisional Placings
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - Hardball Times edition
Below are are the results of the Hardball Times’ 2009 projections when run through Diamond Mind Baseball 1000 times.
To read all the caveats and disclaimers that you should keep in mind when looking at these, check the main post.
Standings| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYA | 98.2 | 63.8 | 860 | 694 | 552.3 | 272.7 | 92-104 | 820-901 | 657-731 | 98 | 98 | 577 | 277 | 141 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 101 | 97-106 |
| BOS | 95.1 | 66.9 | 832 | 689 | 299.8 | 385.0 | 89-101 | 791-874 | 654-724 | 95 | 95 | 320 | 396 | 266 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 95 | 91-99 |
| TAM | 91.5 | 70.5 | 792 | 683 | 146.8 | 299.2 | 85-98 | 752-831 | 647-718 | 91 | 91 | 163 | 304 | 470 | 55 | 8 | 0 | 89 | 85-93 |
| TOR | 75.6 | 86.4 | 701 | 752 | 1.0 | 11.0 | 69-82 | 664-738 | 715-790 | 76 | 75 | 1 | 10 | 54 | 527 | 408 | 0 | 78 | 74-83 |
| BAL | 74.2 | 87.8 | 789 | 861 | 0.0 | 7.7 | 68-80 | 750-828 | 819-903 | 74 | 73 | 0 | 7 | 39 | 408 | 546 | 0 | 71 | 66-76 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CLE | 83.6 | 78.4 | 805 | 771 | 473.2 | 6.2 | 77-90 | 765-845 | 733-808 | 84 | 82 | 495 | 254 | 151 | 67 | 33 | 0 | 87 | 83-92 |
| DET | 80.7 | 81.3 | 791 | 788 | 262.2 | 1.5 | 74-87 | 752-829 | 750-826 | 81 | 78 | 282 | 284 | 209 | 145 | 80 | 0 | 82 | 79-85 |
| MIN | 77.8 | 84.2 | 728 | 764 | 153.3 | 4.3 | 72-84 | 692-765 | 726-802 | 78 | 78 | 166 | 220 | 227 | 237 | 150 | 0 | 78 | 75-81 |
| KC | 75.4 | 86.6 | 741 | 799 | 62.5 | 0.5 | 69-82 | 704-778 | 758-839 | 75 | 75 | 71 | 167 | 233 | 280 | 249 | 0 | 74 | 71-78 |
| CHA | 73.2 | 88.8 | 764 | 856 | 48.8 | 1.0 | 67-80 | 725-803 | 817-896 | 73 | 74 | 54 | 102 | 188 | 254 | 402 | 0 | 69 | 65-73 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAA | 84.0 | 78.0 | 796 | 768 | 474.2 | 4.0 | 78-90 | 756-836 | 729-807 | 84 | 85 | 499 | 282 | 169 | 50 | 0 | 0 | 88 | 83-92 |
| OAK | 82.1 | 79.9 | 770 | 742 | 316.3 | 2.0 | 76-88 | 731-809 | 705-778 | 82 | 82 | 333 | 371 | 230 | 66 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 78-86 |
| SEA | 78.1 | 83.9 | 717 | 741 | 168.2 | 5.0 | 72-85 | 678-755 | 703-779 | 78 | 77 | 182 | 241 | 353 | 224 | 0 | 0 | 77 | 73-81 |
| TEX | 72.7 | 89.3 | 800 | 900 | 42.3 | 0.0 | 66-79 | 761-839 | 858-942 | 73 | 74 | 47 | 115 | 243 | 595 | 0 | 0 | 70 | 65-75 |
| Avg WC | 94.6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYN | 89.5 | 72.5 | 822 | 743 | 485.2 | 142.8 | 83-96 | 782-862 | 706-781 | 90 | 91 | 509 | 310 | 152 | 28 | 1 | 0 | 93 | 88-98 |
| ATL | 86.5 | 75.6 | 752 | 700 | 278.7 | 140.8 | 80-93 | 716-789 | 664-737 | 86 | 88 | 299 | 353 | 298 | 44 | 6 | 0 | 87 | 83-91 |
| PHI | 85.1 | 76.9 | 804 | 771 | 228.2 | 135.4 | 79-92 | 765-844 | 733-808 | 85 | 90 | 250 | 318 | 355 | 63 | 14 | 0 | 82 | 78-86 |
| FLA | 72.3 | 89.7 | 738 | 819 | 7.5 | 5.2 | 66-79 | 701-775 | 779-858 | 72 | 72 | 8 | 24 | 124 | 547 | 297 | 0 | 74 | 69-78 |
| WAS | 68.6 | 93.4 | 741 | 861 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 62-75 | 704-779 | 820-902 | 68 | 65 | 2 | 8 | 45 | 313 | 632 | 0 | 66 | 61-71 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CHN | 90.9 | 71.1 | 816 | 720 | 635.3 | 102.7 | 85-97 | 778-855 | 682-758 | 91 | 90 | 657 | 212 | 92 | 28 | 9 | 2 | 93 | 88-98 |
| MIL | 83.3 | 78.7 | 787 | 764 | 149.3 | 113.1 | 77-90 | 749-826 | 725-802 | 83 | 82 | 162 | 291 | 232 | 153 | 106 | 56 | 87 | 83-90 |
| STL | 83.2 | 78.8 | 765 | 743 | 136.7 | 116.5 | 77-90 | 726-803 | 705-780 | 83 | 83 | 151 | 296 | 246 | 160 | 102 | 45 | 83 | 79-86 |
| CIN | 78.1 | 83.9 | 735 | 763 | 37.8 | 37.2 | 72-84 | 697-773 | 725-801 | 78 | 75 | 41 | 127 | 189 | 246 | 220 | 177 | 79 | 76-82 |
| HOU | 77.1 | 84.9 | 743 | 778 | 29.8 | 28.3 | 71-83 | 706-780 | 738-819 | 77 | 75 | 33 | 104 | 141 | 255 | 279 | 188 | 75 | 71-78 |
| PIT | 72.9 | 89.1 | 722 | 800 | 11.0 | 8.3 | 66-79 | 684-760 | 760-841 | 73 | 71 | 12 | 40 | 75 | 167 | 250 | 456 | 70 | 65-74 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| ARI | 84.9 | 77.1 | 732 | 704 | 390.3 | 53.2 | 78-91 | 695-768 | 667-741 | 85 | 84 | 415 | 280 | 169 | 98 | 38 | 0 | 90 | 85-94 |
| LAN | 84.4 | 77.6 | 797 | 767 | 377.8 | 57.0 | 78-91 | 758-835 | 727-807 | 85 | 85 | 401 | 273 | 171 | 105 | 50 | 0 | 84 | 81-88 |
| SF | 78.3 | 83.7 | 684 | 704 | 108.3 | 22.5 | 72-85 | 648-720 | 667-740 | 78 | 78 | 121 | 175 | 236 | 245 | 223 | 0 | 80 | 77-83 |
| COL | 77.8 | 84.2 | 788 | 817 | 87.5 | 26.0 | 71-84 | 747-828 | 778-857 | 77 | 76 | 91 | 181 | 238 | 269 | 221 | 0 | 76 | 73-79 |
| SD | 75.1 | 86.9 | 707 | 758 | 36.0 | 10.7 | 69-81 | 669-744 | 721-795 | 75 | 78 | 39 | 115 | 193 | 257 | 396 | 0 | 71 | 67-75 |
| Avg WC | 89.2 |
W:Average wins over 1000 seasons
L:Average losses over 1000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 1000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 1000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 1000 season. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
Pie Chart Madness!
Clustered Column Charts of Divisional Placings
2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - CAIRO edition
Below are are the results of my 2009 CAIRO projections when run through Diamond Mind 1000 times. CAIRO is basically an enhanced version of Tango Tiger’s Marcel projections, with the following key differences:
1) I use park factors to adjust players’ past performance, Marcel does not.
2) I use four years of data instead of three and slightly different weights.
3) I use a league adjustment to adjust for the difference between the AL and NL (my estimation is that the AL is about 4% better than the NL right now).
4) I factor in the defense behind the pitchers when forecasting them for the upcoming season.
5) Marcel regresses everyone towards league average, I use a different mean for my regression based on a combination of league average, player age, and player position.
6) Marcel does not use minor league statistics converted to MLEs(major league equivalencies), but I do.
To read all the caveats and disclaimers that you should keep in mind when looking at these, check the main post.
So with that enthralling explanation out of the way, onto the standings…
Standings| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYA | 96.4 | 65.6 | 855 | 711 | 530.7 | 281.5 | 90-102 | 814-897 | 673-749 | 97 | 98 | 554 | 300 | 133 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 99 | 95-104 |
| BOS | 93.1 | 68.9 | 856 | 738 | 304.7 | 329.2 | 87-99 | 813-899 | 701-775 | 93 | 95 | 322 | 358 | 279 | 37 | 4 | 0 | 93 | 90-97 |
| TAM | 90.5 | 71.5 | 806 | 702 | 160.7 | 302.5 | 84-97 | 767-845 | 665-738 | 90 | 89 | 175 | 336 | 412 | 72 | 5 | 0 | 88 | 84-92 |
| TOR | 77.0 | 85.0 | 678 | 719 | 3.0 | 16.3 | 71-83 | 642-714 | 682-757 | 77 | 79 | 4 | 19 | 99 | 544 | 334 | 0 | 79 | 74-83 |
| BAL | 73.6 | 88.4 | 792 | 858 | 1.0 | 4.5 | 68-80 | 753-830 | 817-900 | 74 | 73 | 1 | 6 | 38 | 334 | 621 | 0 | 71 | 66-76 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CLE | 83.9 | 78.1 | 812 | 776 | 418.2 | 13.5 | 77-90 | 771-853 | 736-816 | 84 | 83 | 439 | 260 | 173 | 103 | 25 | 0 | 88 | 84-93 |
| DET | 82.7 | 79.3 | 779 | 755 | 325.2 | 13.8 | 76-89 | 741-818 | 716-794 | 83 | 85 | 341 | 300 | 200 | 117 | 42 | 0 | 83 | 80-87 |
| MIN | 78.9 | 83.1 | 726 | 748 | 150.5 | 7.8 | 72-85 | 687-764 | 711-786 | 79 | 82 | 166 | 217 | 262 | 239 | 116 | 0 | 79 | 75-82 |
| CHA | 77.4 | 84.6 | 759 | 801 | 95.3 | 4.0 | 71-84 | 721-797 | 761-840 | 77 | 78 | 103 | 200 | 272 | 281 | 144 | 0 | 75 | 71-78 |
| KC | 70.2 | 91.8 | 733 | 859 | 10.8 | 0.0 | 64-76 | 696-771 | 817-901 | 71 | 71 | 14 | 43 | 111 | 215 | 617 | 0 | 68 | 63-73 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAA | 85.4 | 76.6 | 775 | 733 | 554.2 | 7.8 | 79-92 | 737-814 | 694-771 | 85 | 85 | 581 | 250 | 138 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 88 | 84-93 |
| OAK | 81.3 | 80.8 | 772 | 758 | 258.2 | 11.0 | 75-87 | 732-811 | 721-795 | 81 | 81 | 281 | 348 | 267 | 104 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 78-86 |
| SEA | 78.7 | 83.3 | 721 | 737 | 157.2 | 4.5 | 73-85 | 685-758 | 699-775 | 79 | 77 | 177 | 287 | 335 | 201 | 0 | 0 | 77 | 73-81 |
| TEX | 72.6 | 89.4 | 789 | 886 | 30.5 | 3.5 | 66-79 | 749-829 | 844-928 | 72 | 71 | 36 | 118 | 245 | 601 | 0 | 0 | 71 | 66-75 |
| Avg WC | 93.2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| NYN | 87.5 | 74.5 | 839 | 775 | 372.7 | 138.2 | 81-94 | 797-880 | 738-812 | 88 | 88 | 397 | 317 | 248 | 32 | 6 | 0 | 93 | 88-97 |
| ATL | 87.5 | 74.5 | 790 | 731 | 344.2 | 129.4 | 81-94 | 752-829 | 692-769 | 88 | 85 | 364 | 318 | 261 | 50 | 7 | 0 | 87 | 83-91 |
| PHI | 86.3 | 75.7 | 840 | 789 | 274.2 | 127.6 | 80-92 | 800-880 | 749-829 | 86 | 85 | 293 | 327 | 310 | 59 | 11 | 0 | 82 | 78-86 |
| FLA | 71.0 | 91.1 | 751 | 842 | 5.5 | 1.3 | 64-78 | 712-790 | 800-883 | 71 | 73 | 5 | 23 | 74 | 432 | 466 | 0 | 74 | 70-79 |
| WAS | 70.9 | 91.1 | 765 | 863 | 4.5 | 2.3 | 65-77 | 728-802 | 822-904 | 71 | 74 | 5 | 21 | 82 | 435 | 457 | 0 | 67 | 62-72 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| CHN | 91.3 | 70.7 | 841 | 735 | 631.7 | 91.4 | 85-98 | 801-882 | 698-773 | 92 | 95 | 650 | 224 | 89 | 26 | 11 | 0 | 94 | 89-98 |
| STL | 85.9 | 76.1 | 799 | 748 | 219.7 | 166.8 | 79-92 | 758-839 | 710-786 | 86 | 82 | 232 | 414 | 214 | 90 | 38 | 12 | 87 | 83-91 |
| MIL | 82.5 | 79.5 | 788 | 774 | 117.7 | 81.6 | 76-89 | 751-824 | 734-813 | 82 | 83 | 129 | 250 | 323 | 188 | 85 | 25 | 82 | 79-86 |
| CIN | 76.7 | 85.3 | 733 | 776 | 20.0 | 20.3 | 71-83 | 696-770 | 737-814 | 77 | 77 | 23 | 86 | 189 | 328 | 254 | 120 | 77 | 74-81 |
| HOU | 72.8 | 89.2 | 746 | 825 | 4.0 | 10.0 | 66-79 | 708-784 | 785-865 | 73 | 73 | 5 | 43 | 108 | 203 | 323 | 318 | 73 | 69-77 |
| PIT | 71.2 | 90.8 | 803 | 909 | 7.0 | 3.8 | 65-78 | 764-843 | 866-951 | 71 | 70 | 8 | 30 | 66 | 168 | 280 | 448 | 67 | 63-72 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | Div | WC | StD W | Std RF | Std RA | Median | Mode | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | APW | Std APW |
| LAN | 86.2 | 75.8 | 828 | 774 | 397.7 | 71.1 | 80-93 | 790-867 | 736-813 | 86 | 85 | 419 | 286 | 166 | 106 | 23 | 0 | 91 | 87-95 |
| ARI | 85.3 | 76.7 | 745 | 710 | 333.7 | 70.9 | 79-92 | 708-781 | 672-747 | 85 | 86 | 352 | 281 | 212 | 121 | 34 | 0 | 86 | 82-89 |
| COL | 80.9 | 81.1 | 831 | 832 | 128.7 | 40.8 | 75-87 | 789-872 | 792-872 | 81 | 83 | 139 | 220 | 286 | 268 | 87 | 0 | 81 | 78-85 |
| SF | 80.8 | 81.2 | 753 | 753 | 132.2 | 42.0 | 74-87 | 715-790 | 714-791 | 81 | 80 | 140 | 228 | 236 | 298 | 98 | 0 | 77 | 73-81 |
| SD | 71.5 | 90.5 | 741 | 830 | 7.8 | 2.5 | 65-78 | 704-778 | 791-869 | 71 | 70 | 9 | 29 | 83 | 180 | 699 | 0 | 70 | 65-75 |
| Avg WC | 89.7 |
W:Average wins over 1000 seasons
L:Average losses over 1000 seasons
RF:Average runs for(scored) over 1000 seasons
RA:Average runs allowed over 1000 seasons
Div: Number of division titles won over 1000 season. Ties are split (ie, if two teams tie for a division, they each get 0.5 Div)
WC: Number of wild cards won. Same deal with the ties here
StD W: Wins within one standard deviation either way
Std RF: Runs for within one standard deviation either way
Std RA: Runs allowed within one standard deviation either way
Median: Median win total
Mode: Mode win total
1: Number of times in first place
2: Number of times in second place
3: Number of times in third place
4: Number of times in fourth place
5: Number of times in fifth place
6: Number of times in sixth place
APW: Average placing wins. This is the average win total to take each place in the division
Std APW: APW within one standard deviation
Avg WC: Average victory total of the wild card winner over 1000 seasons.
Pie Chart Madness!
Clustered Column Charts of Divisional Placings
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Looking Ahead to 2009: Johnny Damon
When the Yankees signed Johnny Damon after 2005, I hated it. I hated it for emotional reasons primarily, but also because I felt he was a poor risk to be productive offensively and defensively through age 35. Heading into 2009 and the final year of his contract, let's take a look at Damon's value to this point.| Player | Year | Age | Pos | PA | AVG | OBP | SLG | BR | BRAR | zr rs | uzr rs | avg rs | WAR | Value | Salary | Difference |
| Johnny Damon | 2006 | 32 | cf | 669 | .285 | .359 | .482 | 101.0 | 40 | 4 | -7 | -2 | 3.8 | $19,014,058 | $13,000,000 | $6,014,058 |
| Johnny Damon | 2007 | 33 | cf | 604 | .270 | .351 | .396 | 78.5 | 11 | -1 | 7 | 3 | 1.4 | $7,397,618 | $13,000,000 | -$5,602,383 |
| Johnny Damon | 2008 | 34 | lf | 621 | .303 | .375 | .461 | 95.3 | 36 | -1 | 3 | 1 | 3.7 | $20,313,310 | $13,000,000 | $7,313,310 |
| Total | 1894 | .286 | .362 | .448 | 274.9 | 87 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 8.9 | $46,724,985 | $39,000,000 | $7,724,985 |
I'm assuming a marginal win for the Yankees was worth $5M in 2006, $5.25M in 2007, and $5.5M in 2008. With that assumption, so far the Damon contract has been worth it and then some.
For information about the projections being used and the acronyms in the tables below, check out the first and second posts in this series.
2008
After a poor 2007, Damon looked like he was on the verge of collapse. Offensively, he slugged under .400 for the first time since his age 23 season, and defensively his range in CF appeared to decline drastically and his poor arm seemed to get even worse. CF also seemed to be taking a physical toll on Damon. Because of all that, the Yankees officially moved Damon to LF to start 2008.
| PA | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | SB | CS | BB | SO | HBP | AVG | OBP | SLG | BR | BR/650 | BRAR/650 | wOBA | |
| 2008 chone | 598 | 535 | 97 | 148 | 26 | 3 | 16 | 63 | 17 | 5 | 60 | 78 | 3 | .277 | .353 | .426 | 80 | 87 | 26 | .334 |
| 2008 marcel | 570 | 507 | 89 | 142 | 28 | 3 | 13 | 63 | 20 | 4 | 54 | 75 | 3 | .280 | .349 | .424 | 76 | 87 | 27 | .329 |
| 2008 pecota | 534 | 471 | 76 | 131 | 25 | 3 | 11 | 59 | 15 | 4 | 55 | 69 | 3 | .278 | .354 | .417 | 70 | 85 | 25 | .330 |
| 2008 zips | 575 | 519 | 93 | 145 | 25 | 3 | 12 | 67 | 17 | 4 | 54 | 73 | 2 | .279 | .350 | .408 | 74 | 83 | 23 | .327 |
| 2008 cairo | 647 | 575 | 101 | 165 | 29 | 4 | 17 | 74 | 21 | 5 | 64 | 81 | 3 | .287 | .358 | .437 | 90 | 90 | 30 | .338 |
| 2008 average | 585 | 523 | 92 | 147 | 27 | 3 | 14 | 66 | 18 | 4 | 58 | 75 | 3 | .280 | .354 | .424 | 78 | 87 | 27 | .333 |
| 2008 actual | 623 | 555 | 95 | 168 | 27 | 5 | 17 | 71 | 29 | 8 | 64 | 82 | 1 | .303 | .374 | .461 | 94 | 98 | 38 | .355 |
| difference | 7% | 6% | 3% | 8% | -4% | 46% | 15% | 2% | 50% | 71% | 5% | 3% | -65% | .022 | .020 | .038 | 15 | 11 | 11 | .021 |
Damon's projections were slightly pessimistic, pegging him to hit for an average line of .280/.354/.424, and projecting him to be worth around 2.4 wins above replacement. It's worth noting that the deadly accurate CAIRO projection system was the closest. Yay CAIRO! Damon instead was worth 3.6 wins above replacement offensively,
Offense
Here's how Damon projects in 2009.
| PA | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | SB | CS | BB | SO | HBP | AVG | OBP | SLG | BR | BR/650 | BRAR/650 | wOBA | |
| 2009 chone | 615 | 551 | 97 | 152 | 27 | 3 | 15 | 65 | 19 | 5 | 62 | 81 | 2 | .276 | .351 | .417 | 81 | 85 | 25 | .330 |
| 2009 marcel | 572 | 507 | 84 | 140 | 26 | 3 | 15 | 62 | 22 | 6 | 58 | 80 | 1 | .276 | .348 | .428 | 77 | 87 | 27 | .329 |
| 2009 pecota | 549 | 486 | 80 | 136 | 26 | 4 | 12 | 62 | 22 | 6 | 55 | 77 | 3 | .280 | .353 | .423 | 74 | 87 | 27 | .331 |
| 2009 tht | 573 | 512 | 74 | 140 | 26 | 3 | 13 | 61 | 2 | 22 | 59 | 80 | 2 | .273 | .351 | .412 | 64 | 73 | 13 | .328 |
| 2009 zips | 628 | 564 | 99 | 164 | 30 | 4 | 15 | 69 | 2 | 25 | 62 | 78 | 2 | .291 | .363 | .438 | 77 | 79 | 19 | .342 |
| 2009 cairo | 634 | 564 | 102 | 159 | 30 | 4 | 16 | 69 | 22 | 6 | 63 | 84 | 2 | .282 | .354 | .433 | 87 | 89 | 28 | .335 |
| 2009 average | 595 | 532 | 90 | 149 | 27 | 4 | 14 | 65 | 15 | 12 | 60 | 80 | 2 | .280 | .355 | .426 | 77 | 84 | 23 | .334 |
The projections are expecting Damon to fall off by about a win and a half. I do expect him to fall off some, although perhaps not quite that much.
Here are his CAIRO percentile forecasts.
| cairo percentiles | PA | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | SB | CS | BB | SO | HBP | AVG | OBP | SLG | BR | BR/650 | BRAR/650 | wOBA |
| 80% | 647 | 575 | 114 | 175 | 36 | 7 | 20 | 79 | 28 | 4 | 73 | 77 | 4 | .304 | .389 | .494 | 108 | 108 | 48 | .372 |
| 65% | 641 | 569 | 108 | 167 | 33 | 6 | 18 | 74 | 25 | 5 | 68 | 80 | 3 | .293 | .371 | .464 | 97 | 99 | 38 | .353 |
| baseline | 634 | 564 | 102 | 159 | 30 | 4 | 16 | 69 | 22 | 6 | 63 | 84 | 2 | .282 | .354 | .433 | 87 | 89 | 28 | .335 |
| 35% | 603 | 536 | 92 | 145 | 25 | 3 | 13 | 62 | 19 | 7 | 56 | 84 | 1 | .271 | .336 | .403 | 73 | 79 | 19 | .316 |
| 20% | 552 | 490 | 80 | 127 | 21 | 2 | 10 | 53 | 15 | 7 | 48 | 81 | 1 | .260 | .319 | .373 | 59 | 69 | 9 | .297 |
Defense
It doesn't seem like the Yankees are entertaining the idea of putting Damon back in CF, although it'd be a way to get the best offense on the field. Since it's still a remote possibility, here are Damon's ZRs and UZRS going back to 2005.
| Year | Age | Pos | GP | Inn | RS (ZR) | RS (UZR) | Avg (ZR/UZR) | p162 |
| 2005 | 31 | CF | 147 | 1225 | 0 | -8 | -4 | -5 |
| 2006 | 32 | CF | 131 | 1087 | 1 | -7 | -3 | -4 |
| 2007 | 33 | CF | 48 | 377 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| 2008 | 34 | CF | 34 | 285 | 0 | -6 | -3 | -14 |
| 2009 | 35 | CF | 89 | 722 | 0 | -4 | -2 | -4 |
That doesn't include his arm, which probably costs about five runs a season.
Damon's LF statistics suffer from small sample size, but here they are anyway.
| Year | Age | Pos | GP | Inn | RS (ZR) | RS (UZR) | Avg (ZR/UZR) | p162 |
| 2005 | 31 | LF | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 32 | LF | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 33 | LF | 32 | 271 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 16 |
| 2008 | 34 | LF | 87 | 659 | -3 | 8 | 2 | 5 |
| 2009 | 35 | LF | 81 | 612 | -2 | 5 | 2 | 4 |
UZR likes Damon's defense more than ZR. As discussed in the Jeter thread, that probably means he saw a more difficult distribution of fieldable chances.
| Dates | Player | TM | LG | Pos | G | INN | Ch | PM | ZR | Diff | RS |
| Through June 16 | Damon, Johnny | NYY | AL | LF | 54 | 443.2 | 119 | 106 | .891 | 6 | 5 |
| After June 16 | Damon, Johnny | NYY | AL | LF | 33 | 215.9 | 58 | 42 | .724 | -8 | -7 |
| Total | Damon, Johnny | NYY | AL | LF | 87 | 659.1 | 177 | 148 | .836 | -2 | -2 |
Damon's zone rating was solid through June 16, then tanked. I blame Snacks Pontoon.
It's probably a safe assumption that Damon should be average or slightly above in LF defensively when looking at the combination of his CF and LF projections. A rough rule of thumb is that a league average CF should be anywhere from 10-15 runs above average in LF.
Baserunning
| Year | GA_OPPS | EQGAR | AA_OPPS | EQAAR | HA_OPPS | EQHAR | OA_OPPS | EQOAR | OPPS | EQBRR |
| 2007 | 41 | 0.4 | 42 | 1.7 | 60 | 2.0 | 371 | -0.4 | 514 | 7.5 |
| 2008 | 46 | -0.2 | 54 | -1.1 | 55 | -0.5 | 411 | 1.3 | 566 | 0.0 |
| 2009 Proj | 44 | 0.0 | 50 | -0.1 | 57 | 0.3 | 398 | 0.7 | 549 | 2.5 |
Damon was one of the better baserunners in the league in 2007 but fell to average in 2008. He should probably be somewhere close to that projection if he's healthy.
Value
Well, we already touched on Damon's value to this point, so let's see what the projections see as the final verdict on the Damon contract.
| Category | Runs | Wins |
| Offense | 23 | 2.3 |
| Defense | 2 | 0.2 |
| Baserunning | 3 | 0.3 |
| Total | 28 | 2.8 |
| 2009 Salary | $13,000,000 | |
| Value if:a marginal win is worth: | Value | Difference |
| $3,000,000 | $8,271,727 | ($4,728,273) |
| $3,500,000 | $9,650,348 | ($3,349,652) |
| $4,000,000 | $11,028,969 | ($1,971,031) |
| $4,500,000 | $12,407,590 | ($592,410) |
| $5,000,000 | $13,786,212 | $786,212 |
| $5,500,000 | $15,164,833 | $2,164,833 |
| $6,000,000 | $16,543,454 | $3,543,454 |
It looks like the Yankees will end up ahead on the Damon deal unless disaster strikes.
Conclusion
Damon's possibly playing for his last MLB contract so I think he'll do whatever he can to have a big year. The news that Joe Girardi is going to bat him 2nd this year behind Derek Jeter seems like a smart move. I'd be curious to see the stats of lefty batters with 1B occupied, but I don't have time to run the data right now. Anyway, it makes sense because it splits up the possible Gardner/Damon lefty bottleneck between 9 and 1 and it moves Damon's power down a slot where it should be more advantageous, since he should see more opportunities with runners on.
I didn't think it would happen, but I've warmed up to Damon. I probably wouldn't bring him back in 2010, but he's been solid as a Yank.
It looks like the season is dawning on us faster than I'll be able to get through all the players, but I'll try to double and triple them up to get through them. Also, I expect to have the Diamond Mind Projection Blowout posted early next week.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Still a Touch Early 2009 Projected Standings - ZiPS edition
Dan Szymborski at Baseball Think Factory has created a 2009 ZiPS projection disk for Diamond Mind. so I've run 100 iterations and the results are below. This will probably be the last set of projected standings I post before starting my full set of projections. I'm assuming that Alex Rodriguez will miss 30% of the games here.| AL East | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC |
| NYA09 | 97.6 | 64.4 | 888 | 735 | 50.5 | 29.0 |
| BOS09 | 95.8 | 66.2 | 863 | 706 | 34.5 | 39.0 |
| TB09 | 90.7 | 71.3 | 793 | 678 | 15.0 | 27.0 |
| TOR09 | 76.3 | 85.7 | 686 | 728 | 0.0 | 1.0 |
| BAL09 | 74.7 | 87.3 | 792 | 851 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| AL Central | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC |
| CLE09 | 84.8 | 77.2 | 810 | 760 | 42.5 | 1.0 |
| DET09 | 83.8 | 78.3 | 812 | 773 | 39.0 | 0.0 |
| MIN09 | 79.5 | 82.5 | 753 | 787 | 13.0 | 0.0 |
| KC09 | 76.3 | 85.7 | 740 | 805 | 4.5 | 1.0 |
| CHA09 | 70.9 | 91.1 | 769 | 871 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| AL West | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC |
| LAA09 | 83.0 | 79.0 | 766 | 744 | 40.0 | 0.0 |
| OAK09 | 81.3 | 80.7 | 757 | 749 | 40.5 | 0.0 |
| SEA09 | 78.3 | 83.7 | 712 | 731 | 17.5 | 0.0 |
| TEX09 | 69.9 | 92.1 | 784 | 912 | 2.0 | 1.0 |
| NL East | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC |
| NYN09 | 90.5 | 71.5 | 851 | 759 | 45.5 | 13.5 |
| PHI09 | 88.8 | 73.2 | 825 | 754 | 30.5 | 17.5 |
| ATL09 | 87.0 | 75.0 | 791 | 732 | 24.0 | 16.8 |
| WAS09 | 75.3 | 86.7 | 776 | 829 | 0.0 | 1.5 |
| FLA09 | 66.7 | 95.3 | 720 | 857 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| NL Central | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC |
| CHN09 | 94.8 | 67.2 | 841 | 705 | 76.0 | 7.5 |
| STL09 | 86.8 | 75.2 | 769 | 709 | 17.5 | 16.8 |
| MIL09 | 82.0 | 80.0 | 799 | 787 | 5.5 | 9.0 |
| CIN09 | 76.8 | 85.2 | 742 | 784 | 1.0 | 0.0 |
| HOU09 | 71.4 | 90.6 | 731 | 835 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| PIT09 | 60.5 | 101.5 | 684 | 879 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| NL West | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC |
| LAD09 | 89.0 | 73.0 | 822 | 747 | 52.8 | 2.0 |
| ARI09 | 86.0 | 76.0 | 739 | 705 | 26.8 | 8.5 |
| COL09 | 81.2 | 80.9 | 797 | 796 | 8.5 | 3.5 |
| SF09 | 78.9 | 83.1 | 701 | 720 | 10.8 | 3.0 |
| SD09 | 71.7 | 90.4 | 705 | 785 | 1.0 | 0.3 |
I should be able to start my player previews/projections sometime this week as well. I'm going to shelve the 20 worst seasons by position for now, and probably revisit it later.
Update: Standard deviations for wins added as requested by Mike K.
| AL East | SD W |
| NYA09 | 92 - 104 |
| BOS09 | 90 - 102 |
| TB09 | 85 - 97 |
| TOR09 | 69 - 83 |
| BAL09 | 68 - 81 |
| AL Central | SD W |
| CLE09 | 79 - 90 |
| DET09 | 77 - 91 |
| MIN09 | 73 - 86 |
| KC09 | 70 - 82 |
| CHA09 | 65 - 77 |
| AL West | SD W |
| LAA09 | 77 - 89 |
| OAK09 | 75 - 88 |
| SEA09 | 72 - 84 |
| TEX09 | 64 - 76 |
| NL East | SD W |
| NYN09 | 84 - 97 |
| PHI09 | 83 - 95 |
| ATL09 | 81 - 93 |
| WAS09 | 70 - 81 |
| FLA09 | 61 - 72 |
| NL Central | SD W |
| CHN09 | 88 - 101 |
| STL09 | 81 - 93 |
| MIL09 | 76 - 88 |
| CIN09 | 72 - 82 |
| HOU09 | 66 - 77 |
| PIT09 | 54 - 67 |
| NL West | SD W |
| LAD09 | 82 - 96 |
| ARI09 | 80 - 92 |
| COL09 | 74 - 88 |
| SF09 | 72 - 85 |
| SD09 | 65 - 78 |
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Extremely Early 2009 Projections - Marcel Edition
Same idea as yesterday, but using Tango Tiger’s Marcel projections instead.
.jpg)
Friday, January 9, 2009
Extremely Early Projected Standings
Here are the results of 100 trials of the 2009 season using rosters as of yesterday and projections from the Hardball Times.
W: Average wins
L: Average losses
RF: Average runs for
RA: Average runs against
DIV: Division titles out of 100 seasons (I don’t break ties)
WC: Wild cards out of 100 seasons
There’s still a lot that can change over the next few months, so don’t take these too seriously.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
What Are The Odds That Friday’s Game At Fenway Will Be Meaningful?
Odds were calculated using Baseball Prospectus’s third order winning percentage and Bill James’s log5 method, adjusting for home field advantage.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Yankees.com: Offense wakes up late to lift Yankees
NEW YORK—It wasn’t exactly the start the Yankees envisioned Wednesday night—from the mound or the batter’s box.
While the New York bats sat silent through the first five innings, starter Phil Hughes built up a pitch count of 89 through four innings to make an earlier exit than he would have liked.
But when the Yankees turned to their bullpen with a one-run deficit, the relievers came through, delivering five shutout innings to keep the score close. And the offense came alive to back them up as the Bombers rallied in the late innings for a 5-1 comeback victory over the White Sox (84-67) on Wednesday night at Yankee Stadium. As the lineup cycled through, bats started connecting, and the hits came together.
Offense? What is offense?
I thought Hughes looked ok, although obviously his pitch efficiency sucked. He was hitting 92-93 consistently and featuring a cutter more often. Obviously his command was not right, but I’m more concerned about his physical health and tools right now as far as what that means for his future, and for that I think last night was encouraging.
Phil Coke relieved Hughes and continued his scoreless innings start to his career. If only he had more time he could challenge John Hiller for most scoreless innings at Yankee Stadium over the start of one’s career.
It was a rare day where the Yankees’ tragic number did not go down, still sitting at three. If Boston goes 2-5 over their next 7 games and the Yankees go undefeated over theirs’, that sets up a meaningful first game at Fenway for the final regular season series at least (provided Minnesota/Toronto lose at least one game as well). And that’s not happening, but it’d be cool if it did…
Monday, September 8, 2008
Tragic Number = 12
The Tragic Number is the combination of the number of losses that one team needs plus the number of wins the other team needs in order to be eliminated. So any combination of Boston wins and Yankee losses totaling 12 = Yankee elimination. That’s thanks to losing two of three to the worst team in the AL this season over the weekend. At least they avoided getting no-hit on Friday. Nicely done fellas.
In non-2008 Yankee news, blogger Brent Nycz from the Bronx Block was at Jeremy Bleich’s pro debut and has his impressions and some video. Check it out if you want to forget about WOE.
Oh, and Phil Hughes was dominant in last night’s 2-0 Scranton win over Pawtucket. Hughes went eight scoreless, allowing just four hits, no walks and fanning 11. I know some clowns out there have already given up on Hughes, but for the rest of us this is encouraging. Chad Jennings has more details on his fine blog.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Baseball Prospectus’s Postseason Odds as of August 21
Original Version
ELO Adjusted
PECOTA Adjusted
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Slimmer and Slimmer
Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately), real life intruded in my blogging and Yankee watching over the last few days. So I really have nothing to say about the sweep by LA of A, except that I completely expected it and am thus not really that angry about it.A couple of weeks ago, I took a look at the Yankees' upcoming schedule using log5 to give us an idea of what we should reasonably have expected. Here's how the Yankees have done relative to expectations since then.
| Date | Opponent | Exp W | Exp L | Act W | Act L |
| 28-Jul | Orioles | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 1.0 |
| 29-Jul | Orioles | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 2.0 |
| 30-Jul | Orioles | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 |
| 31-Jul | Angels | 2.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| 1-Aug | Angels | 3.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 2-Aug | Angels | 3.5 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 3-Aug | Angels | 4.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| 4-Aug | @Rangers | 4.6 | 3.4 | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| 5-Aug | @Rangers | 5.1 | 3.9 | 3.0 | 6.0 |
| 6-Aug | @Rangers | 5.6 | 4.4 | 3.0 | 7.0 |
| 7-Aug | @Rangers | 6.2 | 4.8 | 4.0 | 7.0 |
| 8-Aug | @Angels | 6.6 | 5.4 | 5.0 | 7.0 |
| 9-Aug | @Angels | 7.0 | 6.0 | 5.0 | 8.0 |
| 10-Aug | @Angels | 7.5 | 6.5 | 5.0 | 9.0 |
You probably didn't need fancy numbers to tell you the Yankees are playing like crap. They were 2.5 games worse than expected over this 14 game stretch. The Yankees entered play on July 28th 3 games behind first place Tampa Bay in the AL East and 1 game behind Boston for the wild card. Now, they are 8.5 games behind Tampa Bay and 4 games behind Boston for the wild card, and are looking up at Minnesota as well.
As long as the Yankees are mathematically alive I'm not going to write them off, otherwise I may have to deal with Jeter is King reading me the virtual riot act again, but let's face it, it's bleak.
First, let's look at the division. The Rays are 71-46. If they go 22-23 over their remaining 45 games, the Yankees would have to 30-14 just to tie them. There's another problem. Tampa has six games left with Boston. So when those teams are playing the Yankees will not be able to pick up ground on one of the teams ahead of them.
The wild card is still in play, but there are four teams that have better records than the Yankees in Tampa Bay, Boston, the White Sox, and Minnesota. Two of those four will likely win their division, but the other two will be the Yankees' chief competition. The Rangers are 2.5 games behind the Yanks but could also end up in the mix, although their schedule is pretty rough going forward.
The cold hard facts are that statistically, the Yankees' odds of making the postseason at this point are slim, and growing slimmer. It won't be the end of the world if they fail to make the postseason, but it sure will be disappointing.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Baseball Prospectus’s Postseason Odds Report - August 6, 2008
YTD version| AL East | W | L | Pct3 | Avg W | Avg L | Champions | Wild Card | Playoffs | 1D Change | 7D Change |
| Rays | 67 | 45 | 0.587 | 94.7 | 67.3 | 60.5% | 31.4% | 91.9% | 2.1% | 10.7% |
| Red Sox | 65 | 49 | 0.61 | 92.9 | 69.1 | 36.3% | 47.6% | 83.9% | 4.5% | 7.6% |
| Yankees | 61 | 52 | 0.554 | 86.2 | 75.8 | 2.9% | 11.5% | 14.4% | -5.2% | -9.2% |
PECOTA-adjusted version
| AL East | W | L | Pct3 | Avg W | Avg L | Champions | Wild Card | Playoffs |
| Rays | 67 | 45 | 0.594 | 95.1 | 66.9 | 59.3% | 32.4% | 91.8% |
| Red Sox | 65 | 49 | 0.619 | 93.4 | 68.6 | 37.1% | 47.6% | 84.6% |
| Yankees | 61 | 52 | 0.569 | 87 | 75 | 3.5% | 13.3% | 16.8% |
ELO Version
| AL East | W | L | Pct3 | Avg W | Avg L | Champions | Wild Card | Playoffs |
| Rays | 67 | 45 | 1529 | 92.4 | 69.6 | 50.2% | 28.1% | 78.3% |
| Red Sox | 65 | 49 | 1554 | 91.6 | 70.4 | 41.1% | 31.8% | 72.8% |
| Yankees | 61 | 52 | 1541 | 86.5 | 75.5 | 7.8% | 15.0% | 22.7% |
So you're saying there's a chance?
Yankees.com: Joba to visit Dr. Andrews after MRI.
ARLINGTON -- One day later, Joba Chamberlain has results but no answers.
Chamberlain underwent an MRI on his stiff right shoulder Tuesday in New York, but the Yankees did not immediately announce what that exam showed. The team revealed only that Chamberlain will travel to Birmingham, Ala., on Wednesday to receive a second opinion from renowned orthopedic surgeon Dr. James Andrews.
It's just a flesh wound, honestly.
Yankees.com: Ponson aims for another solid start
ARLINGTON -- With Joba Chamberlain out of the rotation for the indefinite future and manager Joe Girardi's bullpen logging an extreme amount of innings, the success of every Yankees starter has become even more critical than usual.
Even under normal circumstances, such success would be a challenge. But considering that this group consists of three pitchers who weren't in the Opening Day rotation, the task of consistency seems even more difficult.
For Sidney Ponson, it seems downright daunting. Though Ponson is coming off his most impressive outing of the year, he remains only one start removed from perhaps his season's worst showing. And considering that the Yankees need length out of their starters -- the bullpen is nothing short of taxed -- consistency is critical.
Good luck with all that...
Monday, July 28, 2008
Is the Yankees’ Schedule About to Get Harder?
Way back on May 19, I used Bill James's log 5 method to assess the difficulty of the Yankees upcoming schedule. From May 20 through the All Star Break, the Yankees projected to go around 29-21 over 50 games. They ended up going 30-21 if you include the makeup game with the Mets on June 27 that was not part of my original forecast.That put the Yankees at 50-45 at the All Star Break. The post-ASB schedule featured three straight series against teams that were in contention for a playoff spot. The expectations using log5 for this stretch were pretty modest.
| Date | Opponent | Exp W | Exp L | Act W | Act L |
| 18-Jul | Athletics | 0.6 | 0.4 | 1 | 0 |
| 19-Jul | Athletics | 1.2 | 0.8 | 2 | 0 |
| 20-Jul | Athletics | 1.8 | 1.2 | 3 | 0 |
| 21-Jul | Twins | 2.4 | 1.6 | 4 | 0 |
| 22-Jul | Twins | 3.1 | 1.9 | 5 | 0 |
| 23-Jul | Twins | 3.7 | 2.3 | 6 | 0 |
| 25-Jul | @Red Sox | 4.1 | 2.9 | 7 | 0 |
| 26-Jul | @Red Sox | 4.6 | 3.4 | 8 | 0 |
| 27-Jul | @Red Sox | 5.0 | 4.0 | 8 | 1 |
| 28-Jul | Orioles | 5.7 | 4.3 | 8.0 | 2 |
Exp W:Expected wins according to log 5
Exp L:Expected losses according to log 5
Act W:Actual win total
Act L:Actual loss total
Despite tonight's 13-4 bloodbath against the Orioles, the Yankees have gone 8-2 instead of going their expected 6-4. So now they sit at 58-46, which is equivalent to around a 90 win pace.
So what's the outlook going forward? Funny you should ask...
| Date | Opponent | Exp W | Exp L |
| 29-Jul | Orioles | 1.3 | 0.7 |
| 30-Jul | Orioles | 2.0 | 1.0 |
| 31-Jul | Angels | 2.5 | 1.5 |
| 1-Aug | Angels | 3.1 | 1.9 |
| 2-Aug | Angels | 3.6 | 2.4 |
| 3-Aug | Angels | 4.2 | 2.8 |
| 4-Aug | @Rangers | 4.7 | 3.3 |
| 5-Aug | @Rangers | 5.2 | 3.8 |
| 6-Aug | @Rangers | 5.8 | 4.2 |
| 7-Aug | @Rangers | 6.3 | 4.7 |
| 8-Aug | @Angels | 6.8 | 5.2 |
| 9-Aug | @Angels | 7.2 | 5.8 |
| 10-Aug | @Angels | 7.7 | 6.3 |
| 11-Aug | @Twins | 8.2 | 6.8 |
| 12-Aug | @Twins | 8.8 | 7.2 |
| 13-Aug | @Twins | 9.3 | 7.7 |
| 15-Aug | Royals | 9.9 | 8.1 |
| 16-Aug | Royals | 10.6 | 8.4 |
| 17-Aug | Royals | 11.3 | 8.7 |
| 19-Aug | @Blue Jays | 11.8 | 9.2 |
| 20-Aug | @Blue Jays | 12.3 | 9.7 |
| 21-Aug | @Blue Jays | 12.8 | 10.2 |
| 22-Aug | @Orioles | 13.4 | 10.6 |
| 23-Aug | @Orioles | 14.0 | 11.0 |
| 24-Aug | @Orioles | 14.6 | 11.4 |
| 26-Aug | Red Sox | 15.1 | 11.9 |
| 27-Aug | Red Sox | 15.7 | 12.3 |
| 28-Aug | Red Sox | 16.2 | 12.8 |
| 29-Aug | Blue Jays | 16.8 | 13.2 |
| 30-Aug | Blue Jays | 17.4 | 13.6 |
| 31-Aug | Blue Jays | 18.0 | 14.0 |
| 2-Sep | @Rays | 18.5 | 14.5 |
| 3-Sep | @Rays | 19.0 | 15.0 |
| 4-Sep | @Rays | 19.5 | 15.5 |
| 5-Sep | @Mariners | 20.1 | 15.9 |
| 6-Sep | @Mariners | 20.7 | 16.3 |
| 7-Sep | @Mariners | 21.3 | 16.7 |
| 8-Sep | @Angels | 21.7 | 17.3 |
| 9-Sep | @Angels | 22.2 | 17.8 |
| 10-Sep | @Angels | 22.6 | 18.4 |
| 12-Sep | Rays | 23.2 | 18.8 |
| 13-Sep | Rays | 23.8 | 19.2 |
| 14-Sep | Rays | 24.3 | 19.7 |
| 15-Sep | White Sox | 24.9 | 20.1 |
| 16-Sep | White Sox | 25.5 | 20.5 |
| 17-Sep | White Sox | 26.1 | 20.9 |
| 18-Sep | White Sox | 26.7 | 21.3 |
| 19-Sep | Orioles | 27.4 | 21.6 |
| 20-Sep | Orioles | 28.1 | 21.9 |
| 21-Sep | Orioles | 28.7 | 22.3 |
| 23-Sep | @Blue Jays | 29.3 | 22.7 |
| 24-Sep | @Blue Jays | 29.8 | 23.2 |
| 25-Sep | @Blue Jays | 30.3 | 23.7 |
| 26-Sep | @Red Sox | 30.7 | 24.3 |
| 27-Sep | @Red Sox | 31.2 | 24.8 |
| 28-Sep | @Red Sox | 31.7 | 25.3 |
I'm using a 50% weight for actual YTD performance and Pythagenpat record, and then 50% for the teams' pre-season projections to calculate the winning percentages to feed into log5. Home teams get a 0.02 boost, road teams get a 0.02 debit. According to these numbers, the Yankee schedule does get a little harder over the next 17 games, with seven games against the infernal Angels. From there it levels out somewhat, and according to log5 overall, the Yankees would end the season at 90-71, which isn't right because I missed a makeup game against Detroit. Log5 says that's basically a split, so we're looking at 90.5-71.5 if things play out how they look on paper. Which they won't, because they never do.
Still, this gives me hope, because I've been hearing and reading quite a bit about how hard the Yankees schedule is over the rest of the year, but the numbers don't really bear that out. The Yankees should be in the playoff hunt for the rest of the season. How rough will that Boston series be at the end of the season if Tampa wins the division and it's a fight for the wild card?
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Where they stand
B-Pro gives the Yankees a little worse than a 9% shot at the playoffs with a 6.7% chance at the WC (9.1% PECOTA adjusted). The Red Sox average 95.3 wins, the Rays, 93.1, and the Yankees, 83.8. Should Tampa Bay continue to play as they are, I can see where the division leader ends up with 96 wins or less. Winning 97 games likely means a playoff spot.
Will the Yankees win 47 more games for a possible playoff spot? Going 47-20 over their final 67 games is really asking a lot. The more prominent question is will they score 47 more runs this season?
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Easy Schedule Checkpoint - June 29
| Date | Opponent | Exp W | Exp L | Act W | Act L |
| 20-May | Orioles | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0 | 1 |
| 21-May | Orioles | 1.2 | 0.8 | 1 | 1 |
| 22-May | Orioles | 1.8 | 1.2 | 2 | 1 |
| 23-May | Mariners | 2.5 | 1.5 | 3 | 1 |
| 24-May | Mariners | 3.2 | 1.8 | 4 | 1 |
| 25-May | Mariners | 3.8 | 2.2 | 5 | 1 |
| 26-May | @Orioles | 4.4 | 2.6 | 5 | 2 |
| 27-May | @Orioles | 4.9 | 3.1 | 5 | 3 |
| 28-May | @Orioles | 5.4 | 3.6 | 6 | 3 |
| 30-May | @Twins | 5.9 | 4.1 | 7 | 3 |
| 31-May | @Twins | 6.4 | 4.6 | 8 | 3 |
| 1-Jun | @Twins | 6.9 | 5.1 | 8 | 4 |
| 2-Jun | @Twins | 7.4 | 5.6 | 8 | 5 |
| 3-Jun | Blue Jays | 8.0 | 6.0 | 8 | 6 |
| 4-Jun | Blue Jays | 8.6 | 6.4 | 9 | 6 |
| 5-Jun | Blue Jays | 9.2 | 6.8 | 10 | 6 |
| 6-Jun | Royals | 9.8 | 7.2 | 10 | 7 |
| 7-Jun | Royals | 10.4 | 7.6 | 11 | 7 |
| 8-Jun | Royals | 11.1 | 7.9 | 12 | 7 |
| 9-Jun | Royals | 11.7 | 8.3 | 12 | 8 |
| 10-Jun | @Athletics | 12.2 | 8.8 | 13 | 8 |
| 11-Jun | @Athletics | 12.7 | 9.3 | 13 | 9 |
| 12-Jun | @Athletics | 13.1 | 9.9 | 14 | 9 |
| 13-Jun | @Astros | 13.7 | 10.3 | 15 | 9 |
| 14-Jun | @Astros | 14.2 | 10.8 | 16 | 9 |
| 15-Jun | @Astros | 14.8 | 11.2 | 17 | 9 |
| 17-Jun | Padres | 15.4 | 11.6 | 18 | 9 |
| 18-Jun | Padres | 16.1 | 11.9 | 19 | 9 |
| 19-Jun | Padres | 16.7 | 12.3 | 20 | 9 |
| 20-Jun | Reds | 17.4 | 12.6 | 20 | 10 |
| 21-Jun | Reds | 18.0 | 13.0 | 20 | 11 |
| 22-Jun | Reds | 18.6 | 13.4 | 21 | 11 |
| 24-Jun | @Pirates | 19.2 | 13.8 | 21 | 12 |
| 25-Jun | @Pirates | 19.7 | 14.3 | 22 | 12 |
| 27-Jun | @Mets | 20.2 | 14.8 | 22 | 13 |
| 27-Jun | @Mets | 20.7 | 15.3 | 23 | 13 |
| 28-Jun | @Mets | 21.2 | 15.8 | 24 | 13 |
| 29-Jun | @Mets | 21.7 | 16.3 | 24 | 14 |
Despite losing 5 of their last 9 games, the Yankees are still ahead of expectations on the easy portion of their schedule. I'd probably extend the easy schedule to include the upcoming 3 game set with the Texas Rangers, who are hitting pretty well (team OPS+ of 116) but pitching poorly (team ERA+ of 83).
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Easy Schedule Checkpoint - June 24
| Date | Opponent | Exp W | Exp L | Act W | Act L |
| 20-May | Orioles | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0 | 1 |
| 21-May | Orioles | 1.1 | 0.9 | 1 | 1 |
| 22-May | Orioles | 1.7 | 1.3 | 2 | 1 |
| 23-May | Mariners | 2.4 | 1.6 | 3 | 1 |
| 24-May | Mariners | 3.1 | 1.9 | 4 | 1 |
| 25-May | Mariners | 3.8 | 2.2 | 5 | 1 |
| 26-May | @Orioles | 4.3 | 2.7 | 5 | 2 |
| 27-May | @Orioles | 4.8 | 3.2 | 5 | 3 |
| 28-May | @Orioles | 5.3 | 3.7 | 6 | 3 |
| 30-May | @Twins | 5.8 | 4.2 | 7 | 3 |
| 31-May | @Twins | 6.2 | 4.8 | 8 | 3 |
| 1-Jun | @Twins | 6.7 | 5.3 | 8 | 4 |
| 2-Jun | @Twins | 7.2 | 5.8 | 8 | 5 |
| 3-Jun | Blue Jays | 7.8 | 6.2 | 8 | 6 |
| 4-Jun | Blue Jays | 8.4 | 6.6 | 9 | 6 |
| 5-Jun | Blue Jays | 9.0 | 7.0 | 10 | 6 |
| 6-Jun | Royals | 9.6 | 7.4 | 10 | 7 |
| 7-Jun | Royals | 10.3 | 7.7 | 11 | 7 |
| 8-Jun | Royals | 10.9 | 8.1 | 12 | 7 |
| 9-Jun | Royals | 11.5 | 8.5 | 12 | 8 |
| 10-Jun | @Athletics | 12.0 | 9.0 | 13 | 8 |
| 11-Jun | @Athletics | 12.4 | 9.6 | 13 | 9 |
| 12-Jun | @Athletics | 12.9 | 10.1 | 14 | 9 |
| 13-Jun | @Astros | 13.4 | 10.6 | 15 | 9 |
| 14-Jun | @Astros | 13.9 | 11.1 | 16 | 9 |
| 15-Jun | @Astros | 14.5 | 11.5 | 17 | 9 |
| 17-Jun | Padres | 15.1 | 11.9 | 18 | 9 |
| 18-Jun | Padres | 15.8 | 12.2 | 19 | 9 |
| 19-Jun | Padres | 16.4 | 12.6 | 20 | 9 |
| 20-Jun | Reds | 17.1 | 12.9 | 20 | 10 |
| 21-Jun | Reds | 17.7 | 13.3 | 20 | 11 |
| 22-Jun | Reds | 18.3 | 13.7 | 21 | 11 |
The good news is that the Yankees are still playing ahead of expectations since the easy schedule started. On May 19th they were 20-24 and 6.5 games out of first. They lost the next game to drop to 20-25 and 7.5 out, and have since then gone 21-10 and now sit 41-35 and 4.5 games back.
So that's the good news. The bad news is that it's almost over.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Easy Schedule Checkpoint - June 15 Happy Father’s Day Edition
On May 19th, I took a look at the Yankees' schedule through the All Star Break. It appeared, at least on paper, that the Yankees were entering a fairly soft part of their schedule. Here's how they've done since then, comparing their expected W/L record using Bill James's log 5 method for calculating expected winning percentage and their actual performance.| Date | Opponent | Exp W | Exp L | Act W | Act L |
| 20-May | Orioles | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0 | 1 |
| 21-May | Orioles | 1.3 | 0.7 | 1 | 1 |
| 22-May | Orioles | 2.0 | 1.0 | 2 | 1 |
| 23-May | Mariners | 2.7 | 1.3 | 3 | 1 |
| 24-May | Mariners | 3.3 | 1.7 | 4 | 1 |
| 25-May | Mariners | 4.0 | 2.0 | 5 | 1 |
| 26-May | @Orioles | 4.6 | 2.4 | 5 | 2 |
| 27-May | @Orioles | 5.2 | 2.8 | 5 | 3 |
| 28-May | @Orioles | 5.8 | 3.2 | 6 | 3 |
| 30-May | @Twins | 6.3 | 3.7 | 7 | 3 |
| 31-May | @Twins | 6.9 | 4.1 | 8 | 3 |
| 1-Jun | @Twins | 7.4 | 4.6 | 8 | 4 |
| 2-Jun | @Twins | 8.0 | 5.0 | 8 | 5 |
| 3-Jun | Blue Jays | 8.6 | 5.4 | 8 | 6 |
| 4-Jun | Blue Jays | 9.2 | 5.8 | 9 | 6 |
| 5-Jun | Blue Jays | 9.8 | 6.2 | 10 | 6 |
| 6-Jun | Royals | 10.4 | 6.6 | 10 | 7 |
| 7-Jun | Royals | 11.1 | 6.9 | 11 | 7 |
| 8-Jun | Royals | 11.8 | 7.2 | 12 | 7 |
| 9-Jun | Royals | 12.4 | 7.6 | 12 | 8 |
| 10-Jun | @Athletics | 12.9 | 8.1 | 13 | 8 |
| 11-Jun | @Athletics | 13.2 | 8.8 | 13 | 9 |
| 12-Jun | @Athletics | 13.7 | 9.3 | 14 | 9 |
| 13-Jun | @Astros | 14.3 | 9.7 | 15 | 9 |
| 14-Jun | @Astros | 14.8 | 10.2 | 16 | 9 |
| 15-Jun | @Astros | 15.4 | 10.6 | 17 | 9 |
So the Yankees have played a little less than two wins better than expected over the last 26 games. They've picked up 1.5 games in the division, and have scored 148 runs while allowing 118. So that's 5.7 runs scored per game and 4.5 runs allowed per game, equivalent to 922 runs scored and 735 runs allowed over a full season.
It's also a Pythagenpat winning percentage of 60.7%, which is equivalent to 16 wins over 26 games and 98 wins over 162 games.
Today's blowout 13-0 victory over Houston also gives them a positive run differential for the first time since May 10.
That's the good news. The bad news is that because of the ridiculous farce that is inter-league play, Chien-Ming Wang injured his foot doing something he shouldn't have been doing. Right now it's being called a sprained foot. Wang will have tests on his foot when the team returns to New York. Let's hope it's not too serious, as Wang appears to have recovered from a rough stretch to throw 12.1 innings of one run ball over his last two starts.
Monday, June 9, 2008
A Graphical Representation of Mediocrity
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Easy Schedule Checkpoint - June 1
| Date | Opponent | Exp W | Exp L | Act W | Act L |
| 20-May | Orioles | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0 | 1 |
| 21-May | Orioles | 1.3 | 0.7 | 1 | 1 |
| 22-May | Orioles | 2.0 | 1.0 | 2 | 1 |
| 23-May | Mariners | 2.6 | 1.4 | 3 | 1 |
| 24-May | Mariners | 3.3 | 1.7 | 4 | 1 |
| 25-May | Mariners | 3.9 | 2.1 | 5 | 1 |
| 26-May | @Orioles | 4.5 | 2.5 | 5 | 2 |
| 27-May | @Orioles | 5.1 | 2.9 | 5 | 3 |
| 28-May | @Orioles | 5.7 | 3.3 | 6 | 3 |
| 30-May | @Twins | 6.2 | 3.8 | 7 | 3 |
| 31-May | @Twins | 6.8 | 4.2 | 8 | 3 |
| 1-Jun | @Twins | 7.3 | 4.7 | 8 | 4 |
Exp W: Expected wins using log5
Exp L: Expected losses using log5
Act W: Actual wins
Act L: Actual losses
Despite falling to the Twins earlier today, 5-1, the Yankees have so far been able to exceed their expected record through what on paper looks like an easy part of their schedule by a little less than a win.
On a completely unrelated note, rilkefan asked if I could plot the distribution of RA-ERA to see if Mike Mussina gives up a larger percentage of unearned runs than the typical pitcher. That's certainly been true this year, with Moose's respectable 4.26 ERA masking 9 unearned runs and an RA of 5.58.
Here's a graph with three sets of data. The blue line is Mussina's RA - ERA for every season of his career. The red line is the AL average for the same numbers. Lastly, the yellow line is for just Moose's teams, to account for the quality (or lack thereof) of the defense behind him in each season.
On average, Mussina's RA - ERA is 0.31, with a standard deviation of 0.28. The league average over that same stretch (1991-2008) is 0.41 with a standard deviation of 0.03. For his teams, the average RA - ERA has been 0.33 with a standard deviation of 0.08. So Moose has actually given up slightly fewer unearned runs than his teammates, but there is a fair amount of volatility in his season to season performance.
Update: yfinBrazil caught something I missed from rilkefan's original question, which is that we should divide RA-ERA by RA to account for the fact that Mussina has typically prevented runs of all kinds better than most other pitchers. Here's how that chart looks.
The numbers here show that on average, Mussina has allowed about 7% more runs than earned runs with a standard deviation of 0.05. The AL over that same stretch has allowed a very consistent 8% more runs than earned runs. Mussina's teams are at 7% as well, with a lower standard deviation (0.02).
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
2007 vs. 2008 through 45 games
Here's a game by game comparison of the first 45 games of the Yankees' 2007 and 2008.| 2007 | 2008 | ||||||
| Gm | W/L | RF | RA | W/L | RF | RA | |
| 1 | 1-0 | 9 | 5 | 1-0 | 3 | 2 | |
| 2 | 1-1 | 6 | 7 | 1-1 | 2 | 5 | |
| 3 | 1-2 | 4 | 6 | 2-1 | 3 | 2 | |
| 4 | 2-2 | 10 | 7 | 2-2 | 4 | 13 | |
| 5 | 2-3 | 4 | 6 | 2-3 | 3 | 6 | |
| 6 | 3-3 | 8 | 2 | 3-3 | 2 | 0 | |
| 7 | 4-3 | 10 | 1 | 4-3 | 6 | 1 | |
| 8 | 4-4 | 1 | 5 | 4-4 | 2 | 5 | |
| 9 | 4-5 | 4 | 5 | 4-5 | 0 | 4 | |
| 10 | 5-5 | 4 | 3 | 5-5 | 6 | 1 | |
| 11 | 5-6 | 4 | 5 | 6-5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 12 | 6-6 | 10 | 3 | 6-6 | 3 | 4 | |
| 13 | 7-6 | 9 | 2 | 6-7 | 5 | 8 | |
| 14 | 8-6 | 8 | 6 | 7-7 | 8 | 7 | |
| 15 | 8-7 | 6 | 7 | 8-7 | 5 | 3 | |
| 16 | 8-8 | 5 | 7 | 9-7 | 15 | 9 | |
| 17 | 8-9 | 6 | 7 | 9-8 | 5 | 7 | |
| 18 | 8-10 | 8 | 10 | 9-9 | 2 | 8 | |
| 19 | 8-11 | 4 | 6 | 9-10 | 0 | 6 | |
| 20 | 8-12 | 0 | 6 | 10-10 | 7 | 1 | |
| 21 | 8-13 | 4 | 11 | 11-10 | 9 | 5 | |
| 22 | 9-13 | 3 | 1 | 12-10 | 6 | 4 | |
| 23 | 9-14 | 4 | 7 | 12-11 | 6 | 7 | |
| 24 | 10-14 | 10 | 1 | 12-12 | 4 | 6 | |
| 25 | 11-14 | 4 | 3 | 12-13 | 3 | 4 | |
| 26 | 12-14 | 5 | 2 | 13-13 | 1 | 0 | |
| 27 | 12-15 | 11 | 15 | 14-13 | 5 | 2 | |
| 28 | 13-15 | 8 | 1 | 14-14 | 4 | 6 | |
| 29 | 14-15 | 5 | 0 | 14-15 | 2 | 6 | |
| 30 | 14-16 | 2 | 3 | 14-16 | 4 | 8 | |
| 31 | 15-16 | 8 | 2 | 15-16 | 5 | 1 | |
| 32 | 16-16 | 6 | 2 | 16-16 | 6 | 1 | |
| 33 | 16-17 | 2 | 14 | 17-16 | 8 | 2 | |
| 34 | 16-18 | 0 | 3 | 17-17 | 3 | 5 | |
| 35 | 17-18 | 7 | 2 | 17-18 | 0 | 3 | |
| 36 | 17-19 | 1 | 2 | 18-18 | 6 | 3 | |
| 37 | 17-20 | 3 | 5 | 18-19 | 5 | 6 | |
| 38 | 18-20 | 8 | 1 | 19-19 | 5 | 2 | |
| 39 | 18-21 | 1 | 4 | 19-20 | 1 | 7 | |
| 40 | 18-22 | 2 | 3 | 19-21 | 1 | 2 | |
| 41 | 18-23 | 7 | 10 | 20-21 | 2 | 1 | |
| 42 | 19-23 | 6 | 2 | 20-22 | 2 | 5 | |
| 43 | 20-23 | 6 | 2 | 20-23 | 4 | 7 | |
| 44 | 20-24 | 3 | 7 | 20-24 | 2 | 11 | |
| 45 | 21-24 | 8 | 3 | 20-25 | 2 | 12 | |
| 244 | 212 | 181 | 209 | ||||
| PtyhagenPat | 26-19 | 20-25 | |||||
| On Pace | 87-75 | 71-91 |
Gm: Game # of season
W/L: Win-Loss record after that Gm
RF: Runs for
RA: Runs against
Although the Yankees are only one game off last year's pace, it's worth noting the difference in run differential between last year. Last year's team was 21-24 but if they played to their run differential for the rest of the season they'd have been expected to win 66 of their remaining games and a end up with a total of 87 wins using Pythagenpat (a more advanced form of the Pythagorean theorem). This year's team has allowed 3 fewer runs than last years, but has scored 63 fewer. The reduced run-scoring this year is part of the offensive reduction, but that also means the pitching/defense has been worse. If the 2008 Yankees play to their current run differential for the rest of the season, they're a 71 win team.
This team's record is reflective of their poor play to this point as opposed to last year, where there were reasonable expectations for improvement based on their runs for and runs against. That doesn't mean we shouldn't expect individual players to improve if they are playing below their talent level, but right now this team is every bit as bad statistically as they are in the standings.
Easier schedule starts tonight, I swear.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Is the Yankees Schedule About to Get Easier?
This was a topic of debate in the last thread, so let's try and look at it empirically. I'll be using Bill James's log 5 method to assign a probability for the Yankees winning each game.I'm assuming a 4/3/2/1 weight for 2008/2007/2006/2005 which means 2008 should be weighed at 15.6%, but I'm going to bump that up to 20% to account for roster changes that weren't captured in the original projections. So a team like Baltimore would have projected to be a 67 win team going into the season but their better than expected play gives them a four win boost to a 71 win team. The Yankees were projected around 95 wins but their underperformance to this point makes them a 91 win team right now.
Home teams get a 0.02 boost, road teams get a 0.02 debit. I then ran each game through the log 5 formula and summed it up.
So here's the Yankee schedule through the All Star Break.
| Date | Opponent | W | L |
| 20-May | Orioles | 0.7 | 0.3 |
| 21-May | Orioles | 1.3 | 0.7 |
| 22-May | Orioles | 2.0 | 1.0 |
| 23-May | Mariners | 2.6 | 1.4 |
| 24-May | Mariners | 3.3 | 1.7 |
| 25-May | Mariners | 3.9 | 2.1 |
| 26-May | @Orioles | 4.5 | 2.5 |
| 27-May | @Orioles | 5.1 | 2.9 |
| 28-May | @Orioles | 5.7 | 3.3 |
| 30-May | @Twins | 6.2 | 3.8 |
| 31-May | @Twins | 6.8 | 4.2 |
| 1-Jun | @Twins | 7.3 | 4.7 |
| 2-Jun | @Twins | 7.9 | 5.1 |
| 3-Jun | Blue Jays | 8.4 | 5.6 |
| 4-Jun | Blue Jays | 9.0 | 6.0 |
| 5-Jun | Blue Jays | 9.6 | 6.4 |
| 6-Jun | Royals | 10.3 | 6.7 |
| 7-Jun | Royals | 10.9 | 7.1 |
| 8-Jun | Royals | 11.5 | 7.5 |
| 9-Jun | Royals | 12.2 | 7.8 |
| 10-Jun | @Athletics | 12.7 | 8.3 |
| 11-Jun | @Athletics | 13.2 | 8.8 |
| 12-Jun | @Athletics | 13.7 | 9.3 |
| 13-Jun | @Astros | 14.3 | 9.7 |
| 14-Jun | @Astros | 14.8 | 10.2 |
| 15-Jun | @Astros | 15.4 | 10.6 |
| 17-Jun | Padres | 16.0 | 11.0 |
| 18-Jun | Padres | 16.6 | 11.4 |
| 19-Jun | Padres | 17.2 | 11.8 |
| 20-Jun | Reds | 17.8 | 12.2 |
| 21-Jun | Reds | 18.5 | 12.5 |
| 22-Jun | Reds | 19.1 | 12.9 |
| 24-Jun | @Pirates | 19.7 | 13.3 |
| 25-Jun | @Pirates | 20.2 | 13.8 |
| 26-Jun | @Pirates | 20.8 | 14.2 |
| 27-Jun | @Mets | 21.3 | 14.7 |
| 28-Jun | @Mets | 21.7 | 15.3 |
| 29-Jun | @Mets | 22.2 | 15.8 |
| 30-Jun | Rangers | 22.8 | 16.2 |
| 1-Jul | Rangers | 23.4 | 16.6 |
| 2-Jul | Rangers | 24.1 | 16.9 |
| 3-Jul | Red Sox | 24.6 | 17.4 |
| 4-Jul | Red Sox | 25.1 | 17.9 |
| 5-Jul | Red Sox | 25.7 | 18.3 |
| 6-Jul | Red Sox | 26.2 | 18.8 |
| 8-Jul | Rays | 26.8 | 19.2 |
| 9-Jul | Rays | 27.4 | 19.6 |
| 11-Jul | @Blue Jays | 27.9 | 20.1 |
| 12-Jul | @Blue Jays | 28.4 | 20.6 |
| 13-Jul | @Blue Jays | 28.9 | 21.1 |
Through June 26th Yankees play enough bad teams that we'd expect them to go somewhere in the neighborhood of 21-14, which is equivalent to a pace of 96 wins over 162 games. That would get them to 41-38 which still doesn't seem all that impressive, so maybe they can steal a few extra games in here.
Looking at the bigger picture through the All Star Break, the schedule gets harder but the Yankees should go 29-21 or so over their next 50 games, which is equivalent to a 93.5 win pace over a full season. If they can do that or something close to that, they'll go into the All Star Break at a record of 49-45.
So I think we'll know by June 26th if this team has any chance at contending.
Friday, May 2, 2008
MLB Actual Standings vs Projected Standings as of May 1,2008
I don't feel about writing about last night's 8-4 loss to the Tigers, so here's a little comparison of how MLB is shaping up so far this season compared to the preseason projections I ran. The first group of columns if or actual YTD performance, the second set is for the average of the projection systems I ran in the post linked above, and then the last set are the differences between the two. So in the case the Yankees, they were projected to win 18 of 30 games and score 171 runs while allowing 142. Instead they've won 4 fewer games and scored 42 fewer runs than expected.This doesn't factor in difficulty of schedule which may impact some teams more than others, I am strictly multiplying overall 162 game projections time actual games played. That shouldn't be a huge impact, but it should be considered.
| American League | Actual | Projected | Diff | |||||||||||
| EAST | W | L | RS | RA | W | L | RS | RA | W | L | RS | RA | ||
| Tampa Bay | 16 | 12 | 134 | 111 | 14 | 14 | 141 | 138 | 2 | -2 | -7 | -27 | ||
| Boston | 17 | 13 | 136 | 133 | 17 | 13 | 159 | 137 | 0 | 0 | -23 | -4 | ||
| Baltimore | 15 | 13 | 118 | 126 | 12 | 16 | 130 | 158 | 3 | -3 | -12 | -32 | ||
| NY Yankees | 14 | 16 | 129 | 141 | 18 | 12 | 171 | 142 | -4 | 4 | -42 | -1 | ||
| Toronto | 12 | 17 | 119 | 112 | 15 | 14 | 139 | 131 | -3 | 3 | -20 | -19 | ||
| CENTRAL | W | L | RS | RA | ||||||||||
| Chicago Sox | 14 | 12 | 131 | 105 | 12 | 14 | 126 | 139 | 2 | -2 | 5 | -34 | ||
| Cleveland | 14 | 15 | 130 | 122 | 16 | 13 | 150 | 132 | -2 | 2 | -20 | -10 | ||
| Detroit | 14 | 15 | 150 | 152 | 16 | 13 | 154 | 136 | -2 | 2 | -4 | 16 | ||
| Minnesota | 13 | 14 | 102 | 122 | 13 | 14 | 121 | 131 | 0 | 0 | -19 | -9 | ||
| Kansas City | 12 | 16 | 101 | 131 | 13 | 15 | 131 | 146 | -1 | 1 | -30 | -15 | ||
| WEST | W | L | RS | RA | ||||||||||
| LA Angels | 18 | 12 | 148 | 144 | 16 | 14 | 148 | 136 | 2 | -2 | 0 | 8 | ||
| Oakland | 18 | 12 | 150 | 110 | 15 | 15 | 141 | 143 | 3 | -3 | 9 | -33 | ||
| Seattle | 13 | 16 | 129 | 122 | 14 | 15 | 128 | 137 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -15 | ||
| Texas | 11 | 18 | 132 | 178 | 13 | 16 | 146 | 160 | -2 | 2 | -14 | 19 | ||
| National League | ||||||||||||||
| EAST | W | L | RS | RA | W | L | RS | RA | W | L | RS | RA | ||
| Philadelphia | 16 | 13 | 136 | 124 | 15 | 14 | 156 | 145 | 1 | -1 | -20 | -21 | ||
| NY Mets | 14 | 12 | 119 | 118 | 15 | 11 | 134 | 113 | -1 | 1 | -15 | 5 | ||
| Florida | 15 | 13 | 124 | 142 | 12 | 16 | 129 | 151 | 3 | -3 | -5 | -9 | ||
| Atlanta | 12 | 15 | 129 | 107 | 15 | 12 | 137 | 127 | -3 | 3 | -8 | -20 | ||
| Washington | 12 | 17 | 107 | 136 | 13 | 16 | 137 | 156 | -1 | 1 | -30 | -20 | ||
| CENTRAL | W | L | RS | RA | ||||||||||
| St. Louis | 18 | 11 | 135 | 104 | 14 | 15 | 136 | 140 | 4 | -4 | -1 | -36 | ||
| Chicago Cubs | 17 | 11 | 174 | 124 | 15 | 13 | 143 | 130 | 2 | -2 | 31 | -6 | ||
| Milwaukee | 16 | 12 | 130 | 131 | 15 | 13 | 142 | 134 | 1 | -1 | -12 | -3 | ||
| Houston | 13 | 16 | 131 | 132 | 13 | 16 | 136 | 148 | 0 | 0 | -5 | -16 | ||
| Cincinnati | 12 | 17 | 124 | 139 | 14 | 15 | 139 | 148 | -2 | 2 | -15 | -9 | ||
| Pittsburgh | 11 | 17 | 130 | 163 | 12 | 16 | 124 | 145 | -1 | 1 | 6 | 18 | ||
| WEST | W | L | RS | RA | ||||||||||
| Arizona | 20 | 8 | 165 | 109 | 15 | 14 | 131 | 127 | 5 | -6 | 34 | -18 | ||
| LA Dodgers | 15 | 13 | 142 | 110 | 15 | 13 | 132 | 127 | 0 | 0 | 10 | -17 | ||
| San Francisco | 13 | 16 | 93 | 131 | 13 | 16 | 122 | 135 | 0 | 0 | -29 | -4 | ||
| Colorado | 11 | 17 | 114 | 144 | 14 | 14 | 143 | 140 | -3 | 3 | -29 | 4 | ||
| San Diego | 11 | 18 | 94 | 133 | 15 | 14 | 132 | 126 | -4 | 4 | -38 | 7 |
So like I said above, the Yankees have been 4 wins worse than projected so far. What's interesting is that despite all the noise/blame being assigned to the young pitching staff, their offense is the real problem. They allowed right around the same number of runs as they projected to, but they scored 42 fewer, which matches up with the 4 win shortfall.
The Yankees are tied with San Diego for the dubious honor of biggest disappointments so far. The Diamondbacks are the biggest positive surprise. Another interesting thing to note is that scoring is down about 7.3% from the projections. It's probably more early statistical noise than anything.
I'm going to be on vacation next week so no posts from me most likely, although I may pipe in if something big happens. Sean and Jonathan will cover for me and hopefully bring better luck than I have been bringing.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Winning Ugly
It wasn’t pretty, but the Yankees managed to take the last game of their four game set with Cleveland last night, 5-2. Mike Mussina pitched well although he was only able to last through five innings. I’m pretty happy with how Moose is pitching this year, although I have to be honest that I don’t know how he’s doing it.
The Yankees didn’t get a hit until the sixth inning, then came the weakest rally ever.
Yankees sixth. Cabrera infield single to third. Jeter infield single to third, Cabrera to second. Abreu singled to left, Cabrera to third, Jeter to second. Rodriguez was hit by a pitch, Cabrera scored, Jeter to third, Abreu to second. Giambi grounded out, first baseman Garko unassisted, Jeter scored, Abreu to third, Rodriguez to second. Matsui grounded out, first baseman Garko unassisted, Abreu scored, Rodriguez to third. Lewis pitching. Ensberg infield single to third, Rodriguez scored. Cano grounded out, pitcher Lewis to second baseman Carroll to first baseman Garko.
That turned out to be enough, as the Yankee pen pitched four scoreless to back up Moose and the Yankee offense added an insurance run in the 8th for the final margin of victory.
At this point, let’s look back at the April Expectations post. Using log5 and the projected winning percentages of the Yankees and their opponents, we see that at this point in the season we should have expected the Yankees to be 15.4 - 11.6. They’re 14-13 instead, so they underperformed by about 1.4 wins. All things considered with injuries and individual players disappointing, that’s not too bad in my opinon.
Alex Rodriguez looks to be out for at least the next two games after re-aggravating his quad injury.
Yanks finally come home after playing more April road games than any team in baseball history to take on the Detroit Tigers, who started out 0-7 but have gone 11-8 since.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Kansas City Here We Come
Behind Bobby Abreu and Mike Mussina the Yankees took the final game of their series with Tampa last night, 6-1., salvaging a series split after losing the first two games. Moose was brilliant, allowing just two hits and one run over six innings. Tampa doesn’t look to have a great offense this season, but they are probably middle of the pack and have some dangerous players in the lineup, so this was a very encouraging outing. Moose’s fastball sat around 85 most of the night, but he had a great slow curve going that helped him keep the Rays off balance. I feel a little more comfortable that Mussina will be serviceable after this game than I did after his first start.
Abreu started the offense off with a two-run HR in the first inning, one of his three hits and a walk on the night. Hideki Matsui also chipped in a couple of hits.
The news wasn’t all good as Derek Jeter left the game with a strained quad and is being listed as day-to-day. While losing Jeter hurts, it shouldn’t be for too long. Also, having Wilson Betemit to replace him instead of my beloved Miguel Cairo makes it sting a little less. With Jason Giambi seemingly unavailable this looks like Morgan Ensberg’s chance for some PT. He hasn’t looked good at scooping throws at first although he seems pretty good at fielding batted balls.
LaTroy Hawkins finally pitched a full scoreless inning as a Yankee. I’m willing to give Hawkins a bit of a long leash because he has a long track record of being useful and he seems like a good guy, as well as our experience with Luis Vizcaino last year. It seems like the fans at the Stadium don’t care about that because he’s had the audacity to wear Paul O’Neill’s number. Hopefully he can get himself sorted out.
Next up, a three game set with the Kansas City Royals. They’re 4-2 and in second place in the AL Central.
To hammer home how early it is, here’s how the final AL standings would look if each team played to their PythagenPat record for the rest of the season.
AL East
TOR 121-41
BAL 98-64
TB 94-68
NYA 65-97
BOS 57-105
AL Central
CHA 105-57
KC 101-61
CLE 78-84
MIN 57-105
DET 26-136
AL West
TEX 94-68
OAK 90-72
LAA 84-78
SEA 76-86
Somewhere Steve Phillips is weeping.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
The 2008 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout Pt 2
Apparently this entry was too big for one post, so I’ve split it up into two.
Lastly, 1000 iterations of CAIRO| Team | High | Low | StD | StD | StD | Median | Mode | Div W | Wild Card | |||||||
| American League | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC | Playoff% | Wins | Wins | W | RF | RA | Wins | Wins | Avg | Avg |
| East | ||||||||||||||||
| Bos08 | 94.2 | 67.8 | 874 | 734 | 488 | 245 | 73% | 114 | 77 | 88 - 100 | 830 - 919 | 696 - 771 | 94 | 93 | 98 | 92 |
| NYA08 | 93.0 | 69.0 | 940 | 802 | 394 | 302 | 70% | 114 | 74 | 87 - 99 | 893 - 986 | 762 - 842 | 93 | 95 | 92 | |
| Tor08 | 86.4 | 75.6 | 779 | 714 | 99 | 182 | 28% | 105 | 67 | 80 - 92 | 737 - 820 | 679 - 749 | 86 | 86 | 86 | |
| Tam08 | 81.4 | 80.6 | 818 | 806 | 19 | 79 | 10% | 101 | 63 | 75 - 88 | 777 - 859 | 765 - 846 | 81 | 80 | 80 | |
| Bal08 | 66.6 | 95.4 | 760 | 948 | 0 | 2 | 0% | 88 | 46 | 60 - 73 | 721 - 799 | 901 - 996 | 66 | 66 | 66 | |
| Central | ||||||||||||||||
| Det08 | 88.5 | 73.5 | 870 | 785 | 496 | 64 | 56% | 107 | 63 | 82 - 95 | 830 - 910 | 745 - 826 | 89 | 87 | 92 | |
| Cle08 | 87.9 | 74.1 | 825 | 739 | 439 | 78 | 52% | 108 | 68 | 82 - 94 | 784 - 865 | 701 - 776 | 88 | 88 | 86 | |
| KC08 | 76.6 | 85.4 | 753 | 813 | 31 | 13 | 4% | 99 | 53 | 70 - 83 | 714 - 792 | 771 - 855 | 77 | 75 | 80 | |
| Min08 | 75.5 | 86.5 | 709 | 765 | 26 | 5 | 3% | 94 | 53 | 69 - 82 | 672 - 746 | 727 - 803 | 76 | 76 | 75 | |
| ChA08 | 73.5 | 88.5 | 769 | 839 | 9 | 5 | 1% | 96 | 49 | 67 - 80 | 728 - 809 | 798 - 881 | 74 | 74 | 69 | |
| West | ||||||||||||||||
| LAA08 | 87.2 | 74.8 | 793 | 731 | 685 | 9 | 69% | 108 | 67 | 81 - 93 | 755 - 832 | 694 - 769 | 87 | 88 | 89 | |
| Sea08 | 80.0 | 82.0 | 741 | 763 | 172 | 11 | 18% | 98 | 63 | 74 - 86 | 702 - 781 | 722 - 804 | 80 | 81 | 82 | |
| Tex08 | 75.9 | 86.1 | 816 | 877 | 84 | 3 | 9% | 97 | 54 | 70 - 82 | 776 - 856 | 834 - 921 | 76 | 75 | 77 | |
| Oak08 | 75.2 | 86.8 | 757 | 816 | 59 | 3 | 6% | 98 | 54 | 69 - 82 | 718 - 795 | 775 - 857 | 75 | 75 | 71 | |
| National League | ||||||||||||||||
| East | ||||||||||||||||
| NYN08 | 94.6 | 67.4 | 833 | 704 | 712 | 125 | 84% | 115 | 76 | 88 - 101 | 793 - 873 | 666 - 742 | 95 | 95 | 96 | 90 |
| Atl08 | 88.4 | 73.6 | 818 | 738 | 243 | 235 | 48% | 109 | 71 | 82 - 95 | 777 - 859 | 700 - 776 | 88 | 88 | 88 | |
| Phi08 | 81.8 | 80.2 | 866 | 839 | 45 | 87 | 13% | 104 | 59 | 76 - 88 | 823 - 909 | 799 - 880 | 81 | 81 | 81 | |
| Was08 | 69.2 | 92.8 | 770 | 888 | 0 | 1 | 0% | 89 | 51 | 63 - 75 | 730 - 810 | 846 - 930 | 69 | 67 | 72 | |
| Flo08 | 68.5 | 93.5 | 743 | 869 | 0 | 3 | 0% | 90 | 48 | 62 - 75 | 705 - 781 | 830 - 909 | 69 | 70 | 65 | |
| Central | ||||||||||||||||
| ChN08 | 88.7 | 73.3 | 839 | 754 | 586 | 41 | 63% | 112 | 72 | 83 - 95 | 798 - 880 | 716 - 792 | 89 | 91 | 91 | |
| Mil08 | 84.0 | 78.0 | 795 | 762 | 231 | 63 | 29% | 105 | 57 | 78 - 90 | 755 - 836 | 725 - 799 | 84 | 84 | 85 | |
| StL08 | 79.7 | 82.3 | 772 | 777 | 84 | 26 | 11% | 100 | 60 | 74 - 86 | 734 - 810 | 738 - 816 | 80 | 83 | 81 | |
| Cin08 | 77.8 | 84.2 | 780 | 825 | 61 | 16 | 8% | 99 | 59 | 71 - 84 | 741 - 817 | 783 - 867 | 78 | 77 | 77 | |
| Hou08 | 75.7 | 86.3 | 780 | 823 | 37 | 11 | 5% | 98 | 57 | 69 - 82 | 740 - 819 | 784 - 863 | 76 | 77 | 73 | |
| Pit08 | 68.2 | 93.8 | 715 | 875 | 2 | 0 | 0% | 88 | 49 | 62 - 74 | 678 - 753 | 833 - 917 | 68 | 67 | 66 | |
| West | ||||||||||||||||
| Ari08 | 86.7 | 75.3 | 744 | 694 | 302 | 97 | 40% | 108 | 65 | 80 - 93 | 705 - 782 | 656 - 731 | 86 | 85 | 93 | |
| LAN08 | 86.1 | 75.9 | 763 | 736 | 243 | 118 | 36% | 108 | 69 | 80 - 92 | 724 - 802 | 696 - 776 | 86 | 86 | 88 | |
| SD08 | 85.9 | 76.1 | 762 | 705 | 253 | 93 | 35% | 105 | 66 | 80 - 92 | 724 - 800 | 669 - 741 | 86 | 88 | 84 | |
| Col08 | 84.8 | 77.2 | 832 | 785 | 202 | 86 | 29% | 102 | 64 | 78 - 91 | 790 - 873 | 746 - 823 | 85 | 84 | 79 | |
| SF08 | 68.1 | 93.9 | 691 | 799 | 1 | 1 | 0% | 87 | 50 | 62 - 74 | 655 - 726 | 760 - 838 | 68 | 67 | 68 |
Here's what it looks like if we combine those 6000 iterations into one aggregate set of standings.
| Team | High | Low | StD | StD | StD | Median | Mode | Div W | Wild Card | |||||||
| American League | W | L | RF | RA | DIV | WC | Playoff% | Wins | Wins | W | RF | RA | Wins | Wins | Avg | Avg |
| East | ||||||||||||||||
| NYA08 | 95.1 | 66.9 | 924 | 769 | 3218 | 1353 | 76% | 118 | 70 | 88-102 | 875-973 | 716-822 | 95 | 98 | 98 | 92 |
| BOS08 | 92.2 | 69.8 | 857 | 741 | 2043 | 1651 | 62% | 118 | 71 | 86-99 | 809-904 | 696-785 | 92 | 92 | 92 | |
| TOR08 | 85.0 | 77.0 | 775 | 733 | 461 | 874 | 22% | 110 | 58 | 78-92 | 733-817 | 679-787 | 85 | 86 | 86 | |
| TB08 | 82.1 | 79.9 | 816 | 797 | 279 | 542 | 14% | 109 | 51 | 75-89 | 770-862 | 738-857 | 82 | 84 | 79 | |
| BAL08 | 66.9 | 95.1 | 754 | 917 | 0 | 6 | 0% | 90 | 46 | 60-73 | 713-795 | 868-967 | 67 | 66 | 67 | |
| Central | ||||||||||||||||
| DET08 | 90.7 | 71.3 | 863 | 757 | 3251 | 545 | 63% | 117 | 63 | 84-97 | 818-908 | 715-799 | 91 | 91 | 94 | |
| CLE08 | 89.2 | 72.9 | 836 | 737 | 2521 | 633 | 53% | 114 | 67 | 82-96 | 793-878 | 694-781 | 89 | 90 | 87 | |
| MIN08 | 75.2 | 86.8 | 723 | 783 | 92 | 51 | 2% | 105 | 52 | 69-82 | 679-766 | 738-828 | 75 | 76 | 79 | |
| CHA08 | 73.8 | 88.2 | 788 | 866 | 80 | 33 | 2% | 96 | 49 | 67-81 | 745-830 | 813-919 | 74 | 74 | 74 | |
| KC08 | 73.0 | 89.0 | 756 | 847 | 60 | 25 | 1% | 99 | 51 | 66-80 | 715-797 | 799-896 | 73 | 73 | 68 | |
| West | ||||||||||||||||
| LAA08 | 88.2 | 73.8 | 800 | 732 | 4012 | 104 | 69% | 112 | 65 | 82-95 | 757-842 | 691-773 | 88 | 90 | 90 | |
| OAK08 | 79.9 | 82.1 | 761 | 773 | 1248 | 79 | 22% | 107 | 54 | 72-88 | 716-806 | 714-831 | 80 | 81 | 83 | |
| SEA08 | 76.8 | 85.2 | 717 | 765 | 500 | 91 | 10% | 103 | 53 | 69-84 | 675-759 | 716-814 | 77 | 76 | 76 | |
| TEX08 | 74.0 | 88.0 | 815 | 891 | 241 | 22 | 4% | 97 | 51 | 67-81 | 771-859 | 839-942 | 74 | 73 | 70 | |
| National League | ||||||||||||||||
| East | ||||||||||||||||
| NYN08 | 95.2 | 66.8 | 837 | 702 | 4172 | 908 | 85% | 119 | 68 | 89-102 | 790-885 | 652-753 | 95 | 95 | 97 | 91 |
| ATL08 | 87.1 | 74.9 | 821 | 761 | 1020 | 1351 | 40% | 113 | 61 | 80-94 | 773-869 | 714-808 | 87 | 88 | 89 | |
| PHI08 | 86.0 | 76.0 | 871 | 811 | 794 | 1199 | 33% | 112 | 59 | 79-93 | 821-920 | 768-854 | 86 | 85 | 83 | |
| WAS08 | 70.3 | 91.7 | 763 | 870 | 10 | 21 | 1% | 92 | 48 | 64-77 | 720-805 | 824-915 | 70 | 71 | 72 | |
| FLA08 | 67.8 | 94.2 | 747 | 874 | 6 | 13 | 0% | 93 | 42 | 61-75 | 702-792 | 827-922 | 68 | 66 | 65 | |
| Central | ||||||||||||||||
| CHN08 | 88.2 | 73.8 | 829 | 753 | 3159 | 324 | 58% | 115 | 62 | 81-95 | 786-872 | 707-799 | 88 | 89 | 92 | |
| MIL08 | 85.0 | 77.0 | 821 | 775 | 1774 | 343 | 35% | 110 | 57 | 78-92 | 777-864 | 733-818 | 85 | 84 | 85 | |
| STL08 | 78.3 | 83.7 | 762 | 784 | 503 | 130 | 11% | 101 | 51 | 71-85 | 715-809 | 738-831 | 78 | 78 | 81 | |
| CIN08 | 76.9 | 85.1 | 777 | 825 | 318 | 107 | 7% | 101 | 49 | 70-84 | 732-822 | 780-869 | 77 | 74 | 77 | |
| HOU08 | 74.6 | 87.4 | 760 | 826 | 196 | 66 | 4% | 99 | 47 | 68-81 | 712-809 | 778-873 | 75 | 74 | 72 | |
| PIT08 | 69.8 | 92.2 | 718 | 839 | 53 | 26 | 1% | 96 | 46 | 62-77 | 675-760 | 791-888 | 70 | 67 | 66 | |
| West | ||||||||||||||||
| LAD08 | 85.4 | 76.6 | 764 | 732 | 1705 | 466 | 36% | 108 | 63 | 79-92 | 722-806 | 693-772 | 85 | 86 | 92 | |
| SD08 | 84.3 | 77.7 | 738 | 702 | 1613 | 337 | 33% | 111 | 57 | 77-92 | 691-786 | 660-745 | 84 | 83 | 86 | |
| ARI08 | 83.9 | 78.2 | 760 | 733 | 1396 | 352 | 29% | 108 | 60 | 77-91 | 706-815 | 681-784 | 84 | 83 | 82 | |
| COL08 | 82.5 | 79.5 | 828 | 811 | 1195 | 333 | 25% | 112 | 54 | 75-90 | 776-881 | 748-873 | 82 | 83 | 78 | |
| SF08 | 72.9 | 89.1 | 684 | 756 | 93 | 30 | 2% | 97 | 50 | 66-80 | 641-726 | 702-811 | 73 | 76 | 71 |
It's been far too long between pie charts here on the RLYW, so here are mad pie charts with the division title breakdowns for each division using all 6000 iterations.
Lastly, here's a simple table that just looks at the average projected wins for each team by projection system.
| Team | cairo | chone | dmb | hbt | pecota | zips | avg |
| ARI08 | 86.7 | 85.4 | 78.4 | 81.7 | 86.5 | 84.4 | 83.9 |
| ATL08 | 88.4 | 84.3 | 85.2 | 85.3 | 85.5 | 93.9 | 87.1 |
| BAL08 | 66.6 | 64.3 | 68.3 | 67.0 | 66.3 | 68.9 | 66.9 |
| BOS08 | 94.2 | 91.9 | 91.9 | 93.4 | 91.0 | 91.0 | 92.2 |
| CHA08 | 73.5 | 74.9 | 71.7 | 75.2 | 77.8 | 69.5 | 73.8 |
| CHN08 | 88.7 | 86.9 | 85.3 | 86.3 | 89.1 | 93.0 | 88.2 |
| CIN08 | 77.8 | 80.1 | 73.0 | 77.6 | 79.3 | 73.5 | 76.9 |
| CLE08 | 87.9 | 91.7 | 90.4 | 86.1 | 90.5 | 88.3 | 89.2 |
| COL08 | 84.8 | 76.5 | 90.4 | 81.2 | 83.4 | 78.5 | 82.5 |
| DET08 | 88.5 | 90.8 | 94.7 | 89.2 | 90.2 | 90.9 | 90.7 |
| FLA08 | 68.5 | 69.2 | 68.8 | 63.0 | 74.0 | 63.4 | 67.8 |
| HOU08 | 75.7 | 74.4 | 79.0 | 73.6 | 74.2 | 70.5 | 74.6 |
| KC08 | 76.6 | 69.3 | 72.3 | 73.4 | 72.5 | 73.8 | 73.0 |
| LAA08 | 87.2 | 91.6 | 86.9 | 90.4 | 87.8 | 85.4 | 88.2 |
| LAD08 | 86.1 | 84.9 | 84.8 | 83.8 | 88.7 | 84.3 | 85.4 |
| MIL08 | 84.0 | 85.5 | 83.4 | 87.9 | 86.4 | 82.6 | 85.0 |
| MIN08 | 75.5 | 76.7 | 77.3 | 75.4 | 70.8 | 75.5 | 75.2 |
| NYA08 | 93.0 | 92.5 | 96.7 | 92.9 | 97.0 | 98.5 | 95.1 |
| NYN08 | 94.6 | 92.6 | 92.2 | 98.1 | 94.4 | 99.3 | 95.2 |
| OAK08 | 75.2 | 74.5 | 83.8 | 79.0 | 78.2 | 88.7 | 79.9 |
| PHI08 | 81.8 | 87.8 | 83.7 | 89.9 | 85.5 | 87.1 | 86.0 |
| PIT08 | 68.2 | 75.7 | 68.2 | 68.4 | 73.6 | 64.6 | 69.8 |
| SD08 | 85.9 | 84.0 | 81.6 | 88.9 | 78.2 | 87.4 | 84.3 |
| SEA08 | 80.0 | 82.6 | 75.9 | 77.3 | 73.5 | 71.7 | 76.8 |
| SF08 | 68.1 | 72.9 | 73.8 | 74.4 | 69.4 | 78.6 | 72.9 |
| STL08 | 79.7 | 76.0 | 82.5 | 80.4 | 73.0 | 78.0 | 78.3 |
| TB08 | 81.4 | 87.1 | 80.1 | 80.6 | 86.3 | 77.3 | 82.1 |
| TEX08 | 75.9 | 72.2 | 72.2 | 76.0 | 74.8 | 72.7 | 74.0 |
| TOR08 | 86.4 | 82.9 | 87.3 | 84.9 | 78.5 | 89.8 | 85.0 |
| WAS08 | 69.2 | 70.7 | 70.3 | 68.9 | 73.7 | 68.8 | 70.3 |
I'll go through each team briefly.
AL East
Yankees
Projected W-L: 95-67
Playoff %: 76%
Best Average Projection: ZiPS (98-64)
Worst Average Projection: Chone (93-69)
The consensus is the Yankees are the best team in the American League. This doesn't seem unrealistic if their young pitchers perform as projected, but that's a really big if. Any projections of young pitchers based primarily on MLEs are probably g