Baseball Prospectus has Sox down for 74 wins

[RME JICO]

A 15 win drop is huge. I don't see the Sox scoring 50 less runs and allowing over 110 more runs in 2009. Those are pretty big swings considering the minor changes they've made to the roster. A mid-80's prediction seems to be where they are at right now.

 

How in line are these with the WS odds? I can't check from work.

[ThunderBolt]

The system seems very concerned with injuries to Konerko, Dye, and Thome. Also, it has never been able to get an accurate prediction on Buehrle. I love PECOTA, but there are too many factors for this team that are up in the air.

[witesoxfan]

They did say the Sox would lose 90 in 2007, but they have also been wrong before. The problem with depending on young players asking them to perform at a level they have not performed, is some, if not most, are bound to fail. 2008 was an exception. Hopefully, those guys can continue to grow or at least maintain their performance levels. One thing I do know, is the White Sox should have better team than they have had the last few years if they ever get back to a $120 million payroll.

 

And Will Carroll gloated about it, even though he basically threw a dart and it ended up being correctly. He said the pitching staff would be absolutely horrendous and the offense would put up it's same usual numbers. The pitching staff was mediocre, but the offense was the reason the 2007 White Sox failed. I find it hard to take someone seriously when he says "I was right" when it was really dumb luck that he was right, because all of his other projections for that season pretty much failed.

 

Anyways, I see 70-74 wins as about the absolute worst the Sox could do, barring injuries. I still see them right around .500 with the possibility of winning more.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'll take the over, and probably by a fair amount.

 

[MO2005]

I don't know about 74, I think more like 78-80. I do know one thing though if that happens, we are going to have a lot more Ozzie fun filled speeches about his team on t.v.! Maybe he'll go on the radio and cuss out more chicago radio people. Something to look forward to in 2009!

[longshot7]

A 15 win drop is huge. I don't see the Sox scoring 50 less runs and allowing over 110 more runs in 2009. Those are pretty big swings considering the minor changes they've made to the roster. A mid-80's prediction seems to be where they are at right now.

 

How in line are these with the WS odds? I can't check from work.

 

On betus.com, they're +300 to win the Division, +1200 to win the pennant, and +2000 to win the Series. To compare, the Yankees are at +400 to win it all. Indians are the favorite to win the division (they're at +200, while the Tigers, Twins, & us are all at +300.)

[CWSOX45]

somebody post the projected individual performances so we can all get a laugh.

 

I don't think I can post the material since it is premium material, but what I will do is talk about the VORP of the players on the depth chart.

 

To be honest, I hate when people read Baseball Prospectus as if they were reading the Baseball Bible. I have read numerous articles where most of there so called "experts" didn't take the time to do necessary research on all 30 MLB teams. I took a look at the Sox depth chart....and compared it to other team's depth charts in the AL central. Some of the comparisons and VORP differentials are laughable, I also think that a majority of "plate appearances" for our players are way off track. I'll do my best to break down for you what I read.

 

Starting Line-up: I found a couple of question marks in our projected starting line-up. Silver has Dewayne Wise as our everyday centerfielder, who has a VORP of -.5. Personally I think Brian Anderson will be our starting centerfielder, who has a VORP of 3.8. If Wise is our starter...I might vomit in my mouth. He is a good option to have off the bench, but in no way do I think he'll get the 439 plate appearances that BP projects him to get.

 

Third Base: They have Josh Fields as our starting 3B. Granted there is a high possibility of that happening, but there are no estimations on what Dayan Viciedo's VORP numbers may be. I understand he has yet to see a pitch at the Major League level, but if you're going to make a VORP estimation for Tyler Flowers and Brandon Allen, you most certainly must do one for Dayan Viciedo.

 

Second Base: Silver has Jayson Nix being our everyday second baseman. Followed by Chris Getz and Lillibridge. Nix has a -2.5 VORP, Get has a -.5 VORP. Again there is no mention of the impact that Gordon Beckham could have if he is called up for the last couple months of the season. In my opinion there is a reason the Sox haven't signed Orlando Hudson to play second base, because they firmly believe Beckham will continue to hit the cover off the ball and could make an impact in Chicago come July.

 

Starting Rotation: Again laughable. Unlike the other 4 teams in the AL Central, the White Sox are the only team that only has 4 tabbed starters. Silver forgot to list who our 4th starter will be. He has Buehrle, Danks, Floyd, and Contreras, and Colon as a spot starter. No mention of Jeff Marquez throughout the article, but we do have a VORP rating for Aaron Poreda and Kelvin Jimenez.

 

Other Thoughts: I took a look at other player's VORP ratings. Particularly the Kansas City Royals. Silver has given Alex Gordon (21.0) and Billy Butler (23.0) a higher VORP than Carlos Quentin, who was rated at 17.0. When I noticed this, the article lost all credibility. To say that Gordon and Butler will have higher VORP's than an MVP candidate, who missed the last month of the season is a joke.

 

It just goes to show you that you have to take everything you read with a grain of salt. Quite frankly I think the 2009 White Sox will be a 83-84 win team.

Edited February 10, 2009 by CWSOX45

[Soxfest]

Hard to argue with the current roster.

 

I Concur

 

[Disco72]

I don't think I can post the material since it is premium material, but what I will do is talk about the VORP of the players on the depth chart.

 

....

 

It just goes to show you that you have to take everything you read with a grain of salt. Quite frankly I think the 2009 White Sox will be a 83-84 win team.

 

Thanks CWSOX45. When looking at that, it is pretty much a "worst case" scenario if that's how they have the Sox starting lineup and rotation constructed for 2009. In some cases, it legitimately appears that he picked the players with the worst VORP to put into the simulation.

[whitesoxfan101]

I think the win total and placement in the division are a big exaggerated in terms of how poor they are, but I would be stunned if this team wins the division. Minnesota is better on paper and we are worse on paper, and this coming off a season where in 162 game regulation, the teams tied. I expect a rebound from Cleveland as well, and Detroit and Kansas City won't be terrible. We had a very bad offseason in terms of immediate future. The trades and moves we made might help in the future, but not so much in 2009. Not sure how you can predict this team to win the AL Central. I had us as a .500 ish 3rd place type team last year, and that's probably about right this year as well. Hope I am wrong though. Baseball Prospectus' prediction has nothing to do with my thoughts either, they obviously have a bias against us because of how dumb we made them look in 2005 and that's their problem.

Edited February 10, 2009 by whitesoxfan101

[scenario]

Over the last 5 years, Baseball Prospectus has predicted the Sox to win 11 less games per year than actually happened.

 

So, if that trend stays the same, we should win 85 games this year.

 

[Balta1701]

Over the last 5 years, Baseball Prospectus has predicted the Sox to win 11 less games per year than actually happened.

 

So, if that trend stays the same, we should win 85 games this year.

What happens to that # if you exclude 2007?

[longshot7]

Other Thoughts: I took a look at other player's VORP ratings. Particularly the Kansas City Royals. Silver has given Alex Gordon (21.0) and Billy Butler (23.0) a higher VORP than Carlos Quentin, who was rated at 17.0. When I noticed that this article lost all credibility. To say that Gordon and Butler will have higher VORP's than an MVP candidate, who missed the last month of the season is a joke.

 

Thanks for pointing this out. That's ridiculous.

[daa84]

this is a projection...and I don't agree with it...74 wins basically assumes that we have an equal probability of winning 68 as we do 80...something I just can't buy...however, as always on any teams message board, I think some posters are a bit too high on the team as constructed....im gonna steal fathoms role briefly and become mr. pessimism, but here are my overly pessimistic concerns and reasons why i dont think we will win the division (for the record I think we will win 80-82)

 

Rotation: Its certainly possible Floyd and Danks continue to take another step forward, but I think its more likely that they take a step back. Not necessarily huge, but ERAs in the mid 4s, which is something buerhle is always capable of as well. Also, I always always always worry about the innings buehrle has accumulated. Clayton Richard pitched well down the stretch, but it seems alot of sox fans have forgotten the 4.1 IP 9 Run vs KC type games that he gave up his first month and a half. This also says nothign about the health of Colon who hasnt started 10 games at league average ERA since we won the WS in 2005.

 

Bullpen: Bullpens are fickle and could always go bad, but this is a fairly solid area IMO. However a serious injury to Jenks (decreased velo, declining K rates, history of injury all red flags concerning his health) and the pen could be in rough shape, especially with Linebrink and Dotel having injury issues themselves.

 

Lineup: Huge hole in CF. We are going to go with either, Wise (who is the very definition of Replacement player in the term VORP), Owens (could post the worst slg % among mlb regulars while not being very adept at reaching base) or Anderson (hasn't shown 1 bit he can hit in the majors). PK, Thome, and Dye all are in years where they have red flags due to health, specifically Dye who will be playing the field. Add in Quentins likely regression a bit and his injury concerns, and we are counting heavily on guys who could be injured half way through the year. I may be the only one not wanting to anoint Alexei yet, but I worry about hitters who only draw 18 walks in 480 AB...same goes for AJ. While those guys look to be solid, their obp detracts from their overall effectiveness. Fields i believe will be actually decent. another big hole at 2b...lillibridge 2008 minor league stats suggest he shouldn't come near this roster, i think Getz and Nix will have alot of growing pains

 

Defense: potentially horrible. Dye and AJ are brutal. Alexei made some flashy plays and is moving to his "natural position" but defensive metrics suggest he was bad at 2b, and moving to SS likely won't help. If Wise is our everyday CF for any extended length of time we will be the worst up the middle defensive team in the bigs (though 2b has a chance to be good with Getz, Nix and lillibridge, the last two are supposed to be excellent defenders). Lets assume Fields has improved, but that puts him to what...average at best? Quentin and Konerko are average defenders. Hopefully Anderson hits and wins out CF, because he is stellar out there.

 

Now i know this entire post takes a "if everything goes to hell" approach, and I could go back and post reasons why I am optimistic on each one of those guys as well (ie Konerko will likely be better), but IMO these concerns are somewhat realistic and must factor into the projection of our team. I wanted KW to rebuild last year, and it looks like he is slowly beginning to rebuild this year, something our team has desperately needed. And i understand that our best chance of actually competing for a title may not come til 2011 or so, so I am ok taking a few lumps this year

Edited February 10, 2009 by daa84

[witesoxfan]

What happens to that # if you exclude 2007?

 

I imagine that means they've missed by 55 games over 5 years, so we are looking at a 14 game difference, which means the Sox would win 87-88 games. Not a good enough reason to conclude that they'll be contenders, but it's something to chew on all the same.

[The Ginger Kid]

even with both danks and floyd winning 20 games each? and carlos winning the mvp? and PK raking over .300 all season?

 

clearly BP is ignoring my projections.

[longshot7]

I don't have a problem with anyone picking the Sox to finish 2nd, 3rd, or 4th, but FIFTH????????? That's just crazy.

[elrockinMT]

I guess we better give up then before the season even starts

[caulfield12]

I imagine that means they've missed by 55 games over 5 years, so we are looking at a 14 game difference, which means the Sox would win 87-88 games. Not a good enough reason to conclude that they'll be contenders, but it's something to chew on all the same.

 

 

Considering they were EXACTLY right (or close) only once, in 2007....this number would mean they've been incorrect by an average of 13.5 games per season. That's simply ridiculous as a predictive model.

 

I wonder where they had the Rays coming into last season?

 

BTW, what were their projections for 2004 and 2006 again? I can't imagine how they were so far off with those years.

 

As the earlier post pointed out:

 

1) There's no consideration for what Viciedo, Marquez, Colon, etc., will contribute

2) Predicting Nix and Wise to be actual starters not only serves their model to give the lowest VORP numbers, it's also the most unlikely scenario

3) Beckham hasn't been considered at all as a factor

4) Contreras might not even pitch this year if he has another relapse...but I think he's like to be either really good or really terrible, but quite unpredictable

 

Also, thinking the Alex Gordon or Billy Butler are anywhere near the class of Carlos Quentin based on their MLB results in 2008 is just grasping for straws...are they going by what the scouts projected when they were drafted or in the minors, or actual results? Yes, Butler's a good hitter....but he has yet to evolve into another more than a gap hitter with an occasional homer (long gone) and he has ZERO positions on the field, he's the definition of a DH. He's like a cross between Ross Gload and Shawn Abner/Matt Merullo.

Edited February 11, 2009 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Considering they were EXACTLY right (or close) only once, in 2007....this number would mean they've been incorrect by an average of 13.5 games per season. That's simply ridiculous as a predictive model.

 

I wonder where they had the Rays coming into last season?

They had the Rays taking a gigantic leap last season. They had them predicted as going from a 66 win team to an 88 win team, near or at the top of the AL.

[caulfield12]

Well, then at least you have to give them credit for that...at least.

 

I mean, everyone can predict year after year after year the Royals are going to be an 80-85 win team, but it hasn't happened yet. Maybe this will be the year and they will actually get it right...I guess I look at it like trading programs meant to beat indexed mutual funds. 85% of the time, the computer programs are wrong, but when they're correct, they're spectacularly correct and everyone tends to defer TOO much to these predictive validity models. The problem is that these models overrate the Javier Vazquezes and Nick Swishers to the point where there is a disconnect from the reality of constructing a REAL baseball team.

[Disco72]

Well, then at least you have to give them credit for that...at least.

 

I mean, everyone can predict year after year after year the Royals are going to be an 80-85 win team, but it hasn't happened yet. Maybe this will be the year and they will actually get it right...I guess I look at it like trading programs meant to beat indexed mutual funds. 85% of the time, the computer programs are wrong, but when they're correct, they're spectacularly correct and everyone tends to defer TOO much to these predictive validity models. The problem is that these models overrate the Javier Vazquezes and Nick Swishers to the point where there is a disconnect from the reality of constructing a REAL baseball team.

 

It seems that one problem with these programs is that they do not correct for past errors. If a player has a certain set of peripherals yet consistenty performs well (e.g., Buehrle) and another is consistenly medicore (e.g., Vazquez), past history should allow the model to update itself over time when previous preditions are consistently proven incorrect. It isn't that hard to program that into the model.

[4 points]

Call me crazy...but I think we're going to win this division...F em all.

 

OK your crazy.

 

[Kyyle23]

OK your crazy.

 

your crazy what?

[CWSOX45]

After reading way too many blogs, message boards, and websites about the proclaimed “geniuses” at Baseball Prospectus. I decided to go back and do some research in the BP archives. What I found was somewhat interesting regarding BP’s PETCOTA forecast.

 

I took a look at the projected records for all 30 teams, dating back to 2005. Below I have posted how many games off BP was on their projected win total. Basically if BP underestimated the win total, the number will be positive. (Ex. 2005 White Sox: BP projected the Sox to have 80 wins, they won 99. So the number would be 19 indicating they vastly underestimated the Sox win total, and were off by 19 wins.)

 

If BP overestimated the win total of a specific team, the number will be negative. (Ex. 2005 Cubs: BP Projected the Cubs to finish with a 89-73 record. At the end of the 2005 season the Cubs finished with a 69-93 record. Meaning their number would be -19, indicating they lost 19 more than BP indicated)

 

(Hope that makes sense.)

 

Below are the projected BP standings from 2005-2008. The teams are listed by PETCOTA’s prediction as to where they would finish in their division at the conclusion of the regular season. I have bolded the 8 play-off teams from each season.

 

Here are the last 4 seasons, from 2005-2008:

 

 

2005:

 

AL NL

Red Sox: -4(WC) Phillies: -2

Yankees: 0 Braves: 8

Orioles: -4 Marlins: 2

Blue Jays: 7 Mets: 2

Rays: -1 Nationals: 7

 

Twins: -3 Cardinals: 8

Indians: 8 Cubs: -20

White Sox: 19 Astros: 9

Tigers: -5 Reds: -3

Royals: -13 Brewers: 8

Pirates: -5

 

A’s: 0 Giants: -10

Angels: 12 Padres: -2

Rangers: 0 Dodgers: -12

Mariners: -8 D’Backs: -2

Rockies: -6

 

2006:

 

AL NL

Yankees: 3 Mets: 9

Red Sox: -7 Phillies: -1

Blue Jays 8 Braves: -6

Orioles: -7 Marlins: 7

Rays: -8 Nationals: 1

 

Indians: -10 Cardinals: 3

Twins: 12 Cubs: -19

Tigers: 12 Brewers: -9

White Sox: 8 Astros: 1

Royals: 1 Pirates: -12

Reds: 2

 

A’s: 0 Dodgers: 1 (WC)

Angels: 8 Giants: -4

Rangers: 0 Padres: 10

Mariners: -1 D’Backs: -1

Rockies: 2

 

2007

 

AL NL

Yankees: 1 (WC) Phillies: 2

Red Sox: 4 Mets: 2

Blue Jays 3 Braves: 2

Rays: -9 Marlins: -8

Orioles: -6 Nationals: 7

 

Twins: -12 Cubs: 0

Indians: 6 Brewers: -2

Tigers: 3 Cardinals: -3

White Sox: -1 Astros: -7

Royals: 3 Pirates: -8

Reds: 0

 

Angels: 8 D’Backs: 2

A’s:4 Padres: 3

Rangers: -5 Dodgers: 2

Mariners: 15 Rockies: 14

Giants: -8

 

2008

 

AL NL

Yankees: -8 Mets: -4

Red Sox: 4 (WC) Braves: -14

Rays: 9 Phillies: 6

Blue Jays: 8 Nationals: -14

Orioles: 2 Marlins: 13

 

Indians: -10 Cubs: 6

Tigers: -17 Brewers: 2

White Sox: 12 Reds: -6

Twins: 14 Cards: 9

Royals: 2 Astros: 14

Pirates: -5

 

Angels: 15 D’Backs: -5

A’s:-5 Dodgers: -3

Mariners: -14 Rockies: -8

Rangers: 6 Padres: -15

Giants: 4

 

 

So there you have it. To give them the benefit of the doubt, personally in my opinion if BP was within +/- 5 games I consider it a fairly accurate projection. With that in mind, here is how the numbers broke down from 2005-2008:

 

2005: 16/30=53.3%

2006: 13/30=43.3%

2007: 18/30=60.0%

2008: 10/30=30%

 

4 Year Total: 57/120=47.5% Accurate. (Teams W/L +/- 5)

 

Next let’s take a look at how accurate BP has been at predicting the division winners in the last four seasons:

 

AL East: 25%

AL Central: 0%

AL West: 75%

 

NL East: 50%

NL Central: 100%

NL West: 25%

 

In total, over the past four seasons BP has predicted the correct division winner 45.8% of the time, but has yet to predict the AL Central winner correctly from 2005-2009.

 

(Sorry for the format of the standings.)