nitetrain8601 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 77-85. Cubs are expected to finish 89-73. Discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I think if you subtract 4 wins from the Cubs and move them 8 miles south, your a lot closer to accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted February 17, 2008 Author Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 16, 2008 -> 11:29 PM) I think if you subtract 4 wins from the Cubs and move them 8 miles south, your a lot closer to accurate. Well apparently, they were spot on with the White Sox last year. I don't quite remember what their projections for us were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Feb 16, 2008 -> 11:31 PM) Well apparently, they were spot on with the White Sox last year. I don't quite remember what their projections for us were. They had our W/L exactly right, and were within a couple games on the Cubs I believe. I can't see them getting us exactly right again, plus I think we're a few to handful of games better than 77 wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 All I know is as of today we are all tied 0-0 and in first place. It is a long season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 f*** pecota -- they don't take things like heart, chemistry and grind into account! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 This is about right, if everyone performs as projected. If our young pitching steps up, we'll be much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I am sure this is based on Contreras, Danks and Floyd posting around 5.00 ERAs. So one guys steps up and we hit prolly 81 wins, two guys and around 85. I see their prediction being fairly accurate since we have two reliable starters and then three BIG question marks at the back of the rotation. I think we will end up exceeding their prediction because I believe one pitcher will step up. I think we are an 85 win ball club right now taking into account a pitcher stepping up. I love the pen, and the offense, but don't like the rotation. We are a solid team, but nothing great until we see what Count, Danks and Floyd can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Feb 16, 2008 -> 11:25 PM) 77-85. I'm one of the biggest PECOTA, BP haters here, but they hit the nail right on the head last year, so they get the benefit of the doubt... And to be honest, that's where I see us to. We improved a bit, but not a whole lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I can see 83-79, but trading Garland kills them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I could care less about these projections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Didn't PECOTA (and Will Carroll, for that matter) get lucky as s*** last year with their predicted W/L? They picked 72-90, sure, but as I recall, they said the Sox would have a good offense and like one of the 2-3 worst pitching staffs in the league; that wasn't completely the opposite, as the pitching was bad, but the Sox had like the worst offense in the AL last year. I'm not a PECOTA guy, and while I do enjoy their projections and such, I don't buy into their W/L. You obviously have to look around at other projections a bit to see further what the Sox should expect; beyond even that, you have to understand that they are looking at a pitcher like Buehrle - who always, without fail, projects poorly going into the season - in a negative light. There are circumstances where a pitcher will almost always pitch "over" his head, and where a pitcher, such as Havier Vazquez, will almost always pitch "under" his head. Regardless, these predictions don't mean much; if Floyd/Danks/Conteras pitch well, the Sox should be a contender. If they pitch like s***, it's worse than 79-83, and it could be quite a bit worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Preach. Yes, they over shot Buehrle, Garland, and Vazquez. For those three pitchers, the ERA prediction was off by an average of 0.86. So almost a full run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoyozuna Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 All I keep hearing is how PECOTA was dead on last year? Does anybody know what they predicted our record to be in 2005 and 2006? Also what did they predict for team like the Rockies or Brewers last year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(yoyozuna @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 08:44 AM) All I keep hearing is how PECOTA was dead on last year? Does anybody know what they predicted our record to be in 2005 and 2006? Also what did they predict for team like the Rockies or Brewers last year? Im pretty sure they had the Sox struggling in 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wsgdf_2 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 If you click on the Sox link for these projections, Silver has Crede playing 65% of the games at 3B, no Alexei Ramirez (who PECOTA gave a very good projection for) and no Octavio Dotel. Last year, they had DBacks 88, Padres 86, Dodgers 80, Rockies 79 Very close on the DBacks but obviously missed on the Rockies... but without the insanity of their million game winning streak to end the season it would have been a lot closer. They had Cubs 85, Brewers 85, Cardinals 81, Astros 80 Actually OVERshot the Brewers by 2. In 2006 - PECOTA had Indians 88, Twins 84, Tigers 83, Sox 82 In 2005 - Twins 86, Indians 85, Sox 80 Obviously no system or person is going to nail WL records on a consistent basis. There's just way too much stuff that can happen. I think these are a real good way though to take an objective look at the team. They basically jive with what we all think. If Danks and Floyd can do way better than they ever have and if Contreras can pitch well again, then they could be right there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Feb 16, 2008 -> 11:25 PM) 77-85. Cubs are expected to finish 89-73. Discuss. I'd be really surprised if the cubs got that close to 90 wins. Their rotation is going to struggle this year with Dempster starting and one of the worst pens theyve had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gosox41 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 12:01 AM) f*** pecota -- they don't take things like heart, chemistry and grind into account! Would you be saying the same thing if they had the Sox winning 95 games? Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 last year their projection was for... wait for it... 72-90 what was our record? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg The Bull Luzinski Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Sorry, but I suspect this is spot on. Thanks for spending the money KW, but this is not a good team. It is particularly bad compared to about 1/2 of the rest of the AL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 11:38 AM) Sorry, but I suspect this is spot on. Thanks for spending the money KW, but this is not a good team. It is particularly bad compared to about 1/2 of the rest of the AL. Personally, I think the Sox are going to be somewhere closer to .500. Maybe around 83-79 because I think ego and pride are going to get them there. JMHO. But the talent isn't going to get them farther. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 77-85 seems like the low end. The median is probably about 83 wins +/- 5. They have the Rays in 4th in the East at 82-80. We are 9th in the AL. They say we'll have a .261 BA, .332 OBP, .433 SLG, 780 Runs Scored, 822 Runs Allowed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(RME JICO @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 02:44 PM) 77-85 seems like the low end. The median is probably about 83 wins +/- 5. They have the Rays in 4th in the East at 82-80. We are 9th in the AL. They say we'll have a .261 BA, .332 OBP, .433 SLG, 780 Runs Scored, 822 Runs Allowed For reference...last year we scored 693 runs, put up a .318 OBP, ,246 BA, and .404 Slug. 780 runs scored would have been 8th in the AL last year, right behind Seattle. We gave up 839 runs last year, 4th most in the AL. 822 would still have us giving up the 4th most runs in the AL last year. So they have us improving marginally on both the pitching and the hitting, but not nearly enough to be competitive. Which means that we're going to have to outperform on either one or both of those estimated numbers if we really want to have a shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 03:56 PM) For reference...last year we scored 693 runs, put up a .318 OBP, ,246 BA, and .404 Slug. 780 runs scored would have been 8th in the AL last year, right behind Seattle. We gave up 839 runs last year, 4th most in the AL. 822 would still have us giving up the 4th most runs in the AL last year. So they have us improving marginally on both the pitching and the hitting, but not nearly enough to be competitive. Which means that we're going to have to outperform on either one or both of those estimated numbers if we really want to have a shot. So our run margin is going to increase by 104 runs, yet we are only going to win 5 more games? The disappointing part is that we will probably have to win somewhere in the mid-90's to have a shot at the playoffs, and that would be a 20 win improvement. Key the Jim Mora press conference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 QUOTE(RME JICO @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 03:04 PM) So our run margin is going to increase by 104 runs, yet we are only going to win 5 more games? The disappointing part is that we will probably have to win somewhere in the mid-90's to have a shot at the playoffs, and that would be a 20 win improvement. Key the Jim Mora press conference. Just getting rid of the chaff like Andy Gonzalez, Erstad, Pods, and hopefully Juan Uribe and the injured version of Joe Crede that we suffered through last year could well be enough to bring this team back to .500, if you toss in the fact that the guys we brought up to replace them (Owens, Fields, etc.) took a while to actually learn the game at all. It's really hard for me to fathom how bad some of these guys were last year, and just a marginal player at those positions would have been worth several games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.