2023 White Sox projections

[Balta1701]

This deserves a thread. ZiPS projections first round are here.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-zips-projections-chicago-white-sox/
 

Some fun quotes:
 

Quote

Imagine you’ve just built your dream home. You had an architect come up with a custom design that you absolutely loved. You hand selected the building materials, from the hardwood floors to the Spanish tiles in the roof. You’re ready to move into your endgame house! But wait, almost forgot, you have to furnish the house too, huh? OK, let’s head down to Crazy Joe’s Discount Furniture and find four dining room chairs without cigarette burns. The maroon couch behind the abandoned Caldor next to the bowling alley that still uses a sign from 1973 looks nice. I’m sure the smell will come out of that Craigslist mattress, and it’s not like you need all of the springs.

...

Just like last year, the Sox need to address second base, DH, and an outfield position at a bare minimum. This time around, it’s even more urgent; the projections of most of the principals anticipate worse performance in less playing time than before the 2022 season. Also of import is that because of changes in scheduling, the Sox will almost certainly face tougher opposition in the aggregate in 2023.

...

The Sox have given little indication that they plan to be aggressive this offseason, which means they may have already passed the high-water mark for this core. 

...

As with the offense, there is a lot to like on the pitching staff, but a frightening fragility once you get past the big names. If Dylan Cease, Lance Lynn, Lucas Giolito, Michael Kopech, and Mike Clevinger all start 30 games, everything in the rotation ought to look hunky-dory. But if there’s an injury or two, things get dark — and I mean in the Darren Aronofsky sense — very quickly. 

...

The one thing the White Sox have done well is build an excellent bullpen, even with the Craig Kimbrel acquisition in 2021 not meeting their expectations. The final projections aren’t in, but it looks like they’ll be projected to have at least a top-three relief corps per ZiPS, if not the best in baseball.

 

[MiddleCoastBias]

Does that graphic list the second base depth chart as "No Garcia, please?" 

Incredible and I love it

 

[Chisoxfn]

So that is 36 WAR (if my quick mental math was accurate).  How do I translate that across the board in terms of how that stands, noting that it currently contemplates / assumes zero positional upgrades (whether OF or 2B).  

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Chisoxfn said:

So that is 36 WAR (if my quick mental math was accurate).  How do I translate that across the board in terms of how that stands, noting that it currently contemplates / assumes zero positional upgrades (whether OF or 2B).  

Theoretically an all replacement level team would be worth 48 wins

[Tnetennba]

18 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Theoretically an all replacement level team would be worth 48 wins

So 36 would be really bad.  Like, really really bad.  Awesome.

[Chisoxfn]

20 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Theoretically an all replacement level team would be worth 48 wins

So this implies as of now we are an 84 win team.  

[Chisoxfn]

5 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

So this implies as of now we are an 84 win team.  

And 36 WAR would put them tied for 14th in actual WAR in '22 (with the Twins).  Twins ranked 14th (for perspective).  

[Chicago White Sox]

3 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

This deserves a thread. ZiPS projections first round are here.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-zips-projections-chicago-white-sox/
 

Some fun quotes:
 

 

Interesting comments on the bullpen Balta ?

[Jack Parkman]

 

 

[Balta1701]

14 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Interesting comments on the bullpen Balta ?

I fully disagree, but I highlighted it for exactly that reason. Do you have confidence in Aaron Bummer and Jimmy Lambert in the 8th inning of a game with the season on the line? 

[Chicago White Sox]

Just now, Balta1701 said:

I fully disagree, but I highlighted it for exactly that reason. Do you have confidence in Aaron Bummer and Jimmy Lambert in the 8th inning of a game with the season on the line? 

We also have Hendriks, Gravemanx, Lopez, & Kelly.  At some point we’ll also have Crochet.  I gues I’m not following your logic here.  Bullpen are volatile and we have multiple guys with high ceilings which gives us a better chance of having enough high leverage relievers.

[Balta1701]

2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

We also have Hendriks, Gravemanx, Lopez, & Kelly.  At some point we’ll also have Crochet.  I gues I’m not following your logic here.  Bullpen are volatile and we have multiple guys with high ceilings which gives us a better chance of having enough high leverage relievers.

All right, so if its the 8th inning, do you have confidence in Joe Kelly? Do you love Joe Kelly, as was promised last year?

And Graveman - yeah bullpens are volatile, but for him, in the 2nd half last year he had an ERA over 5 and we still haven't figured out why he was seemingly never available and definitely could not pitch in back to back games. So at the very least, Graveman's kind of half a reliever I believe in for now. 

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

I would take the over on many of the offensive players.. seems ultra conservative.

[Dick Allen]

4 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

All right, so if its the 8th inning, do you have confidence in Joe Kelly? Do you love Joe Kelly, as was promised last year?

And Graveman - yeah bullpens are volatile, but for him, in the 2nd half last year he had an ERA over 5 and we still haven't figured out why he was seemingly never available and definitely could not pitch in back to back games. So at the very least, Graveman's kind of half a reliever I believe in for now. 

I bet in November of 2004 if you were asked you wouldn't have believed in Dustin Hermanson, Bobby Jenks, Cliff Politte, or Neal Cotts. There is reason to believe a couple of these guys are going to suck, especially if they have arm injuries. But with bullpens, you really never know.

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I bet in November of 2004 if you were asked you wouldn't have believed in Dustin Hermanson, Bobby Jenks, Cliff Politte, or Neal Cotts. There is reason to believe a couple of these guys are going to suck, especially if they have arm injuries. But with bullpens, you really never know.

The bullpen last year was above average but not great. This projection actually has it as better than last year.

While that is possible, a belief that it is already better than last year has led many people including the one replying to me, to suggest that Hendriks could be tradeable for salary savings.

I think that basically removes one of the only 2 arms there I actually believe in. That would take a 6 WAR bullpen down to a 4 WAR bullpen unless someone stepped up - and we get suggestions about how Crochet is going to be back and 100% after only 14 months post TJS or other nearly impossible things like that to explain how the hole will be filled. 

[ShoeLessRob]

We’re doomed. 

[Dick Allen]

Has there been any study done on how projected WAR in November before teams even have their final roster, correlate with actual WAR the following season? Or is there really no reason to even play the games, especially these days when so many get hurt?

[MiddleCoastBias]

27 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Has there been any study done on how projected WAR in November before teams even have their final roster, correlate with actual WAR the following season? Or is there really no reason to even play the games, especially these days when so many get hurt?

This right here. I take it as a fun thought experiment and a way for seasonal authors and publications to stay relevant in the off-season, keep a conversation going. Purely entertainment.

Why else is Vegas posting World Series odds on teams when they don't even know who will be on the roster? People are basically betting on favorite logos at this time of year and they're happy to take that money.

[bmags]

i

38 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Has there been any study done on how projected WAR in November before teams even have their final roster, correlate with actual WAR the following season? Or is there really no reason to even play the games, especially these days when so many get hurt?

I bet the correlation is pretty damn good but where the sox are is probably where there is the most variation.

[bmags]

damn mark payton killin it

[Chisoxfn]

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

Has there been any study done on how projected WAR in November before teams even have their final roster, correlate with actual WAR the following season? Or is there really no reason to even play the games, especially these days when so many get hurt?

Plus it is projected WAR which I think typically undershoots actual WAR.  All that said - its hot stove season so not bad to see the hypothetical's, but that is what they are. A year ago I think all of the projected WAR's had the Sox as a top 3 team and we know what happened there.  

[Balta1701]

8 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

Plus it is projected WAR which I think typically undershoots actual WAR.  All that said - its hot stove season so not bad to see the hypothetical's, but that is what they are. A year ago I think all of the projected WAR's had the Sox as a top 3 team and we know what happened there.  

Here's last year's ZiPS projections page. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2022-zips-projections-chicago-white-sox/

Guys that ZiPS Overshot based on fWAR: 
Robert, Moncada, Giolito, Grandal, Anderson, the RF mix (Sheets/Vaughn/Engel), the 2b mix (Garcia, Gonzalez, Mendick), Keuchel, Lynn, Kopech (narrowly)

Guys that ZiPS Undershot: Cease, Abreu. 

Guys that ZiPS had disturbing accuracy about: the bullpen, Eloy.

I think ZiPS typically undershoots young guys (see its projections on Cleveland), misses guys who have true breakouts like Cease, and has a high variance on guys late in their careers (note the big misses on Grandal and Abreu but in opposite directions, one guy didn't fall off at all, one guy collapsed, ZiPS was sort of inbetween on both). However, it definitely did not undershoot actual WAR for the White Sox, rather it almost entirely did the opposite. 

[bmags]

54 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

Plus it is projected WAR which I think typically undershoots actual WAR.  All that said - its hot stove season so not bad to see the hypothetical's, but that is what they are. A year ago I think all of the projected WAR's had the Sox as a top 3 team and we know what happened there.  

It undershoots it for everyone though.

[Chisoxfn]

14 minutes ago, bmags said:

It undershoots it for everyone though.

Yeah - meaning projected WAR may not be a good thing to than compare to actual WAR contributions and say - well actual teams that made playoffs had 50 WAR but projected WAR is 40; might be apple to apples due to inherent bias or conservatism (no idea as I haven't done a study on it and no clue if someone did).  

[Balta1701]

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/looking-back-at-the-2022-zips-projections/

Overview of how big the misses/hits were last year.