Reddy

I think this is finally an issue we can ALL agree on.

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ Jan 31, 2015 -> 03:35 PM) 85 wins is where I'm at with this team. If we add another starter, according to Bruce Levine, depending on who it is I could see the win total increase. whats this now?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 31, 2015 -> 12:00 PM) Other than Robertson, BP is projecting the rest of the projected Opening Day bullpen to be worse than replacement level. They also don't even have a projection for Noesi saying if life was a meritocracy, the 172 innings he pitched in the major leagues last season would decrease 172 innings in 2015.the good news is John Danks 0.6 projected WAR would make him a projected 2 or 3 starter on the Royals if that were based on WAR. Interesting, because online Danks is projected for a -.5 WAR, and Noesi does have a projection - albeit a terrible one. 5.31 ERA and a -1.1 WAR And this is exactly the point. Our pitching is far from perfect, our bullpen could go either way, and we have a couple offensive holes to go along with shoddy defense. We could win 90 if things go right. We could win 78 if they don't. So a low to mid 80s projection sounds about right to me if we're talking about the most likely scenario.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 04:25 PM) On a sidenote, when I look at the models and what it spits out and go through the list of players, I basically come to the conclusion that on paper, they are wrong about the White Sox. I'd say on paper this is around an 85 win team (+ / 7 or so games). If all goes well, it can win a few more games and if it doesn't go well, they might drop into that 78 win category. I also think if this team makes the playoffs, their odds improve as they are pretty well built for the post-season, with what looks to be a strong back-end of the pen and a strong front-end of the rotation, surrounded by a pretty strong top of the order. Team defense is still the piece that makes you go yuck and may end up hindering the effectiveness of our top 3 in the rotation (as well as the back-end of the pen). And I bet that most people at BP would agree with you. As do I.

the pinning of this thread confuses me

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 12:51 PM) It's whatever. We know how you feel about projections. I think they will beat them too. I hope we're right. I also think they'll beat them, by about 7 games. And if things go RIGHT (read Avi being a 2 war player, our bullpen being lights out, and danks not completely sucking) we could win 90 games.

Wite brought up a great distinction: Predictions are what you think WILL happen Projections are what you think SHOULD happen based on past performance. PECOTA is a projection system.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 12:07 PM) neither do you, when you are proven wrong, you disappear. anywho, this does not involve you. no need to take pot shots. just to try to make you look good. Are you referencing something in particular? A lot of the time I'll admit when I've hyperbolized.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 12:06 PM) I guess I just don't understand why anyone takes these projections very seriously. They were off an average of 6.7 games per team last season. IMO, that's not very accurate, and not something I would use to determine anything. Not that anything really needs to be determined at this point.. But by all means, consider them accurate. If there are Oriole fans that think like you do, they probably planned a long summer vacation last year and missed some great baseball. It's more accurate than any other system that's been created to this point, and again, the point is not exact accuracy. The point is a baseline from which standard deviations and luck affect the outcome. I think I've written that about fourteen times in this thread.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 11:40 AM) Billingsley had 2 seasons like that, and the most recent one is having an upcoming 5-year anniversary party. If he put up a half WAR, he'd be no more valuable than the guys already the bottom of our rotation. You said he'd be insanely valuable if he put up a 4 ERA. For comparison, Dan Haren had a 4.02 ERA and a 4.09 FIP last year in 186 innings. His WAR was 1.0. A full season at a 4 ERA would be worth 2 WAR max. Full season is an optimistic guess for how much Billingsley pitches this year. The most likely scenario is that he sucks. It's a gamble I'd make every single time on a former all-star caliber pitcher for money like that. (barring things in his medical report that I'm not privy to, obviously)

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 11:56 AM) Projections feed discussion. You just don't like opinion that is different than yours. Sorry. If you want to ignore the past and think this is a really accurate "tool" as you like to say which lets you know where every team is at, fine. I think you are wrong. And... you... just don't like opinions that are different than yours... Sorry?

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 11:12 AM) I think you're too bullish on him - "insanely" valuable is an overstatement. He hasn't pitched in 2 years, I doubt he'll be anything like his old self, and his old self was not terribly special anyway. If he is, good for him, but it's not a big deal we missed out on him. Sometimes guys just disappear. How common do you think pitchers with a 3-5 WAR/season are? And if 1 WAR is worth $8 million, if he only put up HALF a WAR, he'd be way more valuable than 1.5MM. If he were to put up 1 or 1.5 or 2 WAR, that's insanely valuable.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 11:21 AM) I will have them when the season starts. As I stated earlier, it is still January. Yet another reason to take these with a grain of salt. Besides, if I was more accurate, how would my projections be considered a useful "tool"? it would be pure luck.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:51 AM) So they are not really projecting records? If not, why did you post this earlier in the thread? QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 02:11 PM) It's easy to disagree with PECOTA Sox projections - the sox beat them almost every year, sometimes by double digits. On average the sox beat the projection by 7 wins per season, putting us at 85, which is great, but just short of the playoffs unless everything hits our way on the luck front Because we beat their projection by an average of 7 wins per season? Which means that gives you a good baseline to start from before taking into account luck and other unexpected breakouts/collapses? I feel like a broken record.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:49 AM) - Montas just missed his top 100. Said he'll either be a 220 inning beast, Aroldis Chapman or flame out due to lack of control and/or knee issues. - Micah Johnson will be a top 100 next year if he still qualifies. - Rondon is #11 and he rates his defense a true 80 - Adolfo is his sleeper, says he has a 70 arm and 60 raw power right now. 30+ HR potential down the line - Likes what Hahn has done with the system, best he's seen it since he's been rating them. - Still thinks Courtney Hawkins (#10) can turn it around if he stops trying to hit everything 500 feet - Believes Danish is probably going to end up in the bullpen due to his arm slot - Pretty positive article overall KEITH LAW HATES THE WHITE SOX! It's so refreshing to hear analysts actually... like our farm system.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:43 AM) You compared the salaries yourself. I am just comparing them because one of them will be guaranteed a spot in a MLB rotation in 2015 and one might start the year in the minors. You are the one acting like the Phillies are guaranteed 2008-2012 Billingsley for $1.5 million. Never did I say that. I'm simply saying that it's a great risk to take. Even with a 4 era he's insanely valuable at that price. Much better than Danks or Noesi, and if he misses, he misses, and you haven't paid much. Plus we have Herm and Coop, the best in the biz.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:45 AM) GORDON BECKHAM IS TEARIN' THIS FAMILY APART. I don't wanna lose your love....

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:31 AM) Bro, I was simply letting you know what he was trying to tell you. Right. But it was irrelevant to the discussion.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:36 AM) Quit talking down to me, or anyone else that doesn't take these things seriously so we obviously miss "important things." This isn't an important thing. It is a projection that has proven to be way off in the past. Lliterally this is because you don't understand what they're meant to do. But that's ok, because you also aren't trying to. I guess we're the ones talking to the chair in this scenario.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:28 AM) I cannot fathom why you're still hung up on this record-for-record stuff. I'm trying to tell you that isn't the point. The record is a frame of reference that is based on projected player performance. It's a ROUGH total of what you'd expect to happen if every player acted exactly like they were a typical guy of their age and ability. It will NEVER work out exactly this way and no one has EVER said it will. They are still useful because they stack teams up against one another on a mean-performance basis, which is a reasonable proxy for "true talent." This can be eye-opening for a lot of people, primarily because it provides an objective method for factoring playing time somewhat accurately (whereas fans only seem to look at the starting 9, assuming they'll all be healthy not doing a good job of factoring in how important bench and depth are), and because fans have a tendency to assume that players that have had good seasons will repeat those seasons, whereas players with bad seasons can improve, despite the fact the the good players regress downward just as much as the bad players regress upward. For the 2015 White Sox, it illustrates that our talent drops off sharply from our stars, it illustrates just how bad John Danks and Hector Noesi really are despite the fact that we seem to feel comfortable with the former because his name still carries value and we can hang "innings eater" on him, and the latter because he appeared to improve when he came to us last year, even though he faded BIG time down the stretch. It also reminds us that we likely saw Chris Sale and Jose Quintana's ceilings last year, and that while those guys are still good, it isn't likely for them to perform at the same level again. Once again, the actual number of win ISN'T the point -- the point is how the teams stack up against each other, and the utility is to encourage further analysis of the completeness of each team. Teams can project shockingly HIGH too -- like the 2015 Mariners. Why? Well when you look closely at them, you start to see how quickly having a decent player EVERYWHERE can add up. You also see how much of their success is pinned on the further development of James Paxton and Taijuan Walker, and so you can easily see what could go wrong with that team. The way fans are wired misses some important things. It's not different than how our brains perceive everyday life. Our brains filter input that they haven't evolved to retain, but we KNOW some things are happening because we can measure them with instruments. Fans tend to overvalue stars versus solid players, for example. Fans tend to ignore depth, underestimate the risk of injury, and irrationally favor positive regression more than negative regression. Tools like these are like sensors that measure radiation -- they tell us about things that are happening that are bodies aren't able to reliably sense on our own. I was just typing this, got exasperated, and stopped. Thanks for doing it.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:24 AM) Shields has pitched, Chad has not. Shields costs the same as 40 minimum-salaried players. Billingsley costs the same as 3. There's literally no reason to compare the two, and definitely no reason to draw any meaningful conclusion from doing so. Oh, and Chad is three years younger.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:22 AM) A point of reference. That's it. Based on the information we have on hand, those are the projected win totals. It's January and we want to talk about something and using prior statistics to look at the strengths and weaknesses of a team or multiple teams is fun and interesting to do. It's not a secret that Avisail Garcia has yet to produce a full, good season yet and arguing otherwise is silly. I personally feel that he's going to have a nice year, but I'm an optimist and a homer, but I understand why projections don't figure him to breakout. It's not a secret that the Sox aren't great defensively either, and it's likely that will cost them a few games too. It's also damn near impossible to project relievers to have big years based on the volatility of the position. You know as well as anyone that a pitcher's overall numbers can be skewed by 5-6 games, which is incredibly hard to account for in a projection system as well. The Sox also shouldn't be losing sleep over their projection. They've done a great job this offseason. I've said that you could see this team winning the division, especially when it appears the division will be weaker overall this year, but there are also a lot of scenarios where you can see them falling short. You also continue to use the most egregious error between the Red Sox and Orioles, but the Red Sox projection was based on them having Lester, Lackey, and Peavy all year with Buchholz not pitching like dogs***. None of those things happened, and Peavy didn't pitch particularly well when he was with the Red Sox last year either. Meanwhile, the Orioles got really nice production out of Nelson Cruz (I'm not sure those projection systems figured him in at that point) and production from Steven Pearce out of nowhere. They had unexpected surprises that the projection system couldn't calculate. These things happen. If Chris Sale pitches like a Cy Young candidate, Samardzija and Quintana both pitch really well, Garcia has a good year, Flowers and Gillaspie show, to some extent, that last year wasn't a fluke, and the rest of the guys do their jobs, you are talking about 8 wins of improvement off of their projections right there. They aren't designed to be accurate down to a T. They are designed to take in depth looks at teams in a sort of philosophical manner. This really isn't necessary. *Slow clap*

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:17 AM) Great comment. Can you tell me the purpose of the PECOTA projections? Do you think when they came out Rick Hahn was tossing and turning thinking he spent a lot of JR's money and he has a team that isn't very good? The good news is if these things show the true talent level like some claim, Robin Ventura is a far better manager than Joe Maddon. So the Cubs should really suck this year. I think at least three of us have already answered this question.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 10:14 AM) And also a 443 innings pitched difference over the last two seasons I don't understand the relevance.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 02:34 AM) Well I asked because James Shields' career ERA is 3.72 and you said he is a bad pitcher. There's an $18.5 million dollar difference.