What do YOU think will be the Red Sox record in 2012?
We all have different opinions. I think people are being too pessimistic. This is what I think will happen to the Red Sox in 2012: Jacoby Ellsbury does not completely replicate his 2011 season, but he still puts up 5 WAR, he hits 20 homers with a .300/.360/.500 line. Dustin Pedroia is a beast and puts up a 7 WAR season and hits .315. David Ortiz regresses, he had a big season in 2011, and he still might be the best DH in baseball, but he only puts up 3 WAR, still not too shabby, and he also hits 30 homers again, but he hits .270 with a .370 OBP. Adrian Gonzalez's average regresses to a .310 hitter, but he hits 45 homers. I do think this is reasonable as using that cool tool from katron.org Gonzalez's 2010 would have 50 homers at Fenway. Gonzalez is an MVP candidate and puts up 7 WAR. Kevin Youkilis comes back and hits .270, but has a .400 OBP. He ends the season with 4.5 WAR. And here comes the controversey, Carl Crawford rebounds, he puts up 13 UZR and hits .280/.340/.450. He has 4 WAR. Jarrod Saltalamacchia gets inured and only plays for 200 PAs. He puts up 0.5 WAR in those PAs, and people think Kelly Shoppach will start, but no, the youngster Ryan Lavarnway hits 15 homers in only 300 PAs, he puts up 3 WAR, Kelly Shoppach is left without playing time. The shortstop position is a mess. Aviles and Punto hit .260/.300/.330, they only put up 1 WAR together. Cody Ross and Ryan Sweeney platoon to play pretty good defense, and hit much better than the black hole of right field of the 2011 Red Sox. They put up 2.3 WAR together.
Now to the pitching staff: Beckett regresses a lot. He puts up a 3.70 ERA and only has 3.5 WAR. Lester has a very good season. He has a 3.25 ERA, and puts up 4.5 WAR. Clay Buchholz bounces back and pitches 180 innings with a 3.40 ERA. He has 4.2 WAR. Daniel Bard surprises many people and puts up a respectable 3.90 ERA in 160 innings. That's good for 2.0 WAR, Aaron Cook is decent and puts up a 4.35 ERA in 190 innings, he gets 1.7 WAR. Aceves/Padilla pitch 70 innings of 4.40 ERA ball and 0.7 WAR. The bullpen is very good again. They put up 5 WAR. Using Matt Swartz's formula for turning WAR into wins .95*hitterwar+1.36*bullpenwar+1.03*starterwar+42.2, the Red Sox win 100 games, of course they are playing in the AL East, I say that's a five game difference, and they win 95 games and the division. The Rays come in 2nd behind Matt Moore being a stud, but Hellickson significantly regresses because of his lousy SIERA. The Yankees miss out on the playoffs by one game.
So that's mine, what do YOU think will happen to the Sox in 2012?
185 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Fun!
Your hypothetical season sounds reasonable, and does a good job of showing that this team is way better than some people on this site think. Some regression here and there both ways, a little better luck health-wise, and voila! A 95-win team.
Only quibble I’d have is that Crawford’s line looks like it should be more like 5 WAR. Unless he’s not stealing any bags?
I'd probably have Boston at more like 92 or 93 wins.
I’m not as optimistic on Cook or the bullpen, which bumps them down to 92 or 93 wins. But they could hit 95 wins with Roy Oswalt. Or some luck dragons.
I do think that the Yankees will win the division, though. Adding Pineda and Kuroda is huge, although I do think they’ll regret trading A.J. when someone gets injured and Phil Hughes is pressed into the rotation while Burnett puts up a 3.7 ERA in PIT.
Rays on the outside looking in, unless the second WC gets put in. Although… even then, the loser of the West might take it.
About 95 wins, but I'm expecting Ortiz to fall off a cliff
Like prolonged 2010 start bad.
Even the '06 team beat that.
And they had only three pitchers reach 100 innings. One of which was Beckett’s 5.01 ERA.
The offense was full of holes: Trot Nixon couldn’t slug .400, Alex Gonzales couldn’t OBP .300, Youkilis hadn’t found his power yet, Varitek lost his, and Coco Crisp was making us sorely miss Damon.
That team still won 86 games.
I don’t think I disagree with being negative about this team. But I think that some here don’t know what a .500 team looks like. The pitching has to be truly terrible, to bring this offense down to a .500 team. Like, pre-Humidor Rockies pitching terrible.
If you do extremely negative projections for this team, individually, and add them all up, I think you’d be surprised to see that even those extremely pessimistic projections add up to an 85-win team.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 12:14 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Average wins by top 3 teams in the AL East the last 6 years.
93
93
94
94
91
90
The division isn’t that much tougher than was 6 years ago. Unless you think we’re going to have only one guy pitch 150+ innings and end up as a merely above-average offensive team, we’re better than that ’06 roster, and better than 86 games.
This organization outspends its myriad mistakes well enough that 85+ wins is the absolute floor. We’ve only won fewer than 85 games ONCE since 1997. We’ve had many disappointing seasons, but those seasons have been disappointing only because of our sustained excellence. They’ve only been around .500 once since 1997, and there’s no reason to think that last year’s 90-win team is going to be worse enough to be our second merely-average team in the last 14 years.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 11:07 PM EST up reply actions
Ever think that the number of wins trends like that because the good teams all beat up on eachother?
The Jays are going to pull off 85 ish wins as well. They don’t have to win the division to be a factor in the race, they just have to beat us one more time than the next team.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 18, 2012 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
You're reading it backwards.
Those higher numbers are more recent.
I hear people say that better teams beat up on each other, but it’s not true to a significant degree. When the absolute most you play a team is 18 times, the difference between a 90-win team and a 95-win team isn’t even one full win against you on average.
I remember people saying last year that no AL East team would win 90 games, since everyone was so good. It just doesn’t work like that.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 19, 2012 8:01 AM EST up reply actions
People said that last year
But it was stupid. There were clearly going to be 90+ win teams.
Everything Must Go.
93 wins
While I expect some regression from some of our players, I also expect some players to improve. I’m not sure about Bard, but I think that at least one of the Rotationettes will actually pan out. Probably Cook. I actually think Cook will do well at Fenway if he’s healthy. The bullpen actually looks decent and I expect that Ross will be an upgrade in RF.
I’m not saying I’m happy with the team as it’s currently constructed and I’d prefer them to sign another starter and shift Bard back to the pen, but I do think that this team as constructed can actually win more games than last year’s squad did.
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
89 wins, outside looking in regarding the playoffs.
Starting with backup scrubs in the 4th/5th positions of the rotation does not bode well.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
93+W. SP, RF, LF and throwing out baserunners
were last years big issues even as THIS SAME CORE led the league for more than 4 months last year despite the slow start. SP will be better than last year, as will LF and RF, and SaltyShop will shut down the running game. It doesn’t make sense to label Bard at #4 and one of Acevas, Cook, Padilla #5 as “backup scrubs”. These are all proven
major league pitchers, healthy and in new roles.
Why on earth
is it that the Sox playing great for 4 months means the 2 atrocious months didn’t count? Did anyone think that maybe we were just a 90 win team on average?
Everything Must Go.
I think what they were was a
completely random, inconsistent team. I think the skill level of last year’s team could’ve performed anywhere in the range of BZ’s 2012 guess, and it would’ve made sense.
The bad six weeks count.
And so do the four amazing months.
I think a better way of saying what Gerry is trying to say is that the team had so much go wrong and still won 90 games. The four great months are what this team can do when only a moderate amount of things are going wrong.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 5:46 PM EST up reply actions
I'm counting on Oswalt.
So I see them as an easy 95 win team, largely thanks to their lineup. The biggest loss is Scutaro, but I like Lavarnway and Ross.
96 wins
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 18, 2012 4:48 AM EST reply actions
96 Oswalt or not
If Aaron Cook is as healthy as he sounds then he’s gunna be the pitcher we need
by camthomas on Feb 18, 2012 8:34 AM EST via iPhone app reply actions
Between 80 and 100 games
depending on what breaks right
by BobZupcic on Feb 18, 2012 8:45 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
With a roster the way it looks now, 90
A big chunk of the loss will be Ellsbury, who I think will have a good year, but not a great one. Pedey’s slight decrease is offset by Carl’s slight increase, we lose a lot of value at short stop when Youk suffers another injury and the platoon is broken, separately we learn that Aviles and Punto are not capable of holding down jobs.
I think we will see no less than 10 starting pitchers rotate their way onto the mound. After one of the top three get injured, as tends to happen frequently with us, three of the rotationettes at a time just doesn’t work out.
Plus you have to factor in an increase in competition, I don’t see us going 11-3 against the Angels and Tigers again this year.
So about 90 wins, 3rd place in the East, outside the playoffs no matter if there are 1 or 2 WC’s, a team from the West I think will end up being the primary wildcard.
I am Sandy's bitch
We Are Because You Were
@WadePSU
Yes, I believe all of us can read.
No reason to call him out specifically.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 18, 2012 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
I think it's kind of ridiculous
even you and Rogue Nine, who want to assume the worst will happen, still have us around 90 wins
"Want to assume the worst will happen"
Smarten up.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I'm not sure what else...
… you’d require to get all the way there. This post would be more fun if I weren’t 82.7% it wasn’t some kind of “I’m a better fan” dick-measuring contest.
Not. Interested.
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 18, 2012 3:01 PM EST up reply actions
I dunno
Trolls don’t usually reference Matt Swartz’s formula for turning WAR into wins. Bosox13 can be too aggressive sometimes (calling out Sean O in his comment above was needless), but frankly, so can many people here who never get called trolls.
And I didn’t read his fanpost as a dick-measuring thing at all. We’ve all been throwing around predictions this whole off-season; I think it’s been interesting to see what people actually expect in terms of records…
Yeah...the post itself is fine.
Actually, I really like it as a “here’s a scenario I have in my head” type of thing.
This whole “land on the scene and decide Sean O is your arch-nemesis” thing is for the birds.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Dude... You're not my nemesis
My nemesis… Is Captain Hammer.

"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 18, 2012 7:20 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I thought the ending was the best part *spoilers*
After Penny dies and Dr Horrible is finally accepted to the League, he realizes that’s not really what he wanted, Penny was what was most important to him, and now she’s gone.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 18, 2012 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, yeah
When I first saw how short it was I was disappointed.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 1:10 AM EST up reply actions
sorry sean, you've been outvoted
The majority have said at least 90 wins, so your opinion is invalid.
damn!
And yet I wonder, what about my opinion in July when I was worried about the Rays…
Everything Must Go.
TOO NEGATIVE
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
You going to have to give me your definition of "worried".
I looked at your comments from July, and couldn’t find one that fit my definition of the word.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 19, 2012 6:57 AM EST up reply actions
I was rooting for them
Wanting the Yankees to lose against the Rays was rooting against the Sox in my opinion.
by The Name is Dalton on Feb 24, 2012 1:55 PM EST up reply actions
Well.
Even if they do assume the worst will happen, you’re better off assigning them assumptions you disagree with rather than motives.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 7:33 PM EST up reply actions
We are talking about baseball
here.
Lighten up.
I'd say around 90-93 wins
But not in the playoffs
Check out my blog at http://conor-soxrox.blogspot.com
Did you just predict that Salty would get injured?
That’s…baseless…
Anywho…as currently put together, I predict 87 wins. With uncertainty in my mind for Beckett and Buchholz, no faith in the Great Bard Experiment, I just don’t see it. I realize the potential upsides…but I can’t in my right mind predict more.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
by Bloggy on Feb 18, 2012 2:40 PM EST via Android app reply actions
How can you be uncertain of Beckett?
And Buchholz is healthy.
is this a serious question?
Everything Must Go.
by Sean O on Feb 18, 2012 3:54 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Why so serious?
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Well, because he's been inconsistent from year-to-year (Beckett)
And Buchholz seems healthy, but the proof is on the mound. Last year he was going to miss a start…until he missed the rest of the season.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I don't agree, i think he's consistent.
put him down for 180 innings of 3.80 ball, 8.5 k/9, 2.5 BB/9. am i right?
Very possible
And…I hope so. I’m a big Beckett fan.
We’ll see.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
You don't mean that. :(
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
And the fact is, Buchholz is healthy right now.
Whether he gets hurt again during the year is irrelevant
Buchholz is healthy?
Says who? The PR machine. The same one who said he was only going to miss a start or two? He starts pitching true to form, that’s what erases all my question marks. Until then, I hope he’s healthy, he seems healthy, I’m glad to be hearing reports he’s healthy.
That’s all.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Well he was supposedly ready to go last year
had they made the playoffs, so unless he was just plain stupid over the off season then I’d imagine he still should be ready to go
I'm in no way saying he's NOT healthy.
Merely that he is a question mark. He is a question mark in that he is coming back from an injury and he is a question mark regarding whether or not he can maintain his recent results.
Again, like Beckett, I love the Stickbug. Watching his no-hitter was one of my favourite baseball memories. When his name was on the trading block awhile back, my voice was one of the loudest screaming, “Don’t trade him!”
But until I see performance, I remain in wait-and-see mode.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I don't think he's predicting injury.
Just throwing around some good luck here and some bad luck there. It’s fun, and it makes for a good story-of-a-season.
(If a bit wall-of-text-y.)
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 5:48 PM EST up reply actions
Well, if it's just a "here's a scenario"
then I think it’s cool. But he’s been tossing out WARs and so forth, which makes me think he’s actually predicting the season. He did say, “Here’s what I think will happen.”
So, predicting that Lavarnway becomes the day-to-day catcher at some point during the season is much different than saying “Salty gets hurt within 200 at-bats.”
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Yeah, on second reading,
it does seem a little weird the way it’s in the middle of some other more prediction-based scenario elements. But I was just like, “Okay, that’s a fun out-there prediction. That shit you’re putting down? I’m going to pick it up.”
YMMV.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
Dude...
Lavarnway’s better than Salty, if Salty gets injured it doesn’t matter.
Check out my blog at http://conor-soxrox.blogspot.com
That's rather callous.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I mean, it matters
He handles the pitching staff ok, but he batted .235 and I think Lavarnway could bat .275 with good power at the major league level right now. Not to mention in a few years… (I’m really high on Lavarnway)
Check out my blog at http://conor-soxrox.blogspot.com
I think what he's saying
is that it matters to Jared. And his family. And his friends.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 19, 2012 8:03 AM EST up reply actions
Pretty much this.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Pitching is the key - I think if things go extremely well 93 wins (the stars align), if the bottom falls out 85 wins
We are all spit-balling which is alot of fun. I think so far what I am seeing – with the Sox currently holding their money (for the most part in the off season) and floating near the cap that they want some wiggle room at the trade deadline if they are in contention. At this point both the low predictions and the high predictions have merit….I think Sean’s point is that with only 3 legit starters if one or more struggles the Sox could be disappointing. I think Bosox’s point looks at the starters as being productive and having some decent bounce back seasons from some position players. For me, the scare factor is the lack of depth with the starting pitching – both in the bigs and AAA.
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
Virtually anything can happen with this team
Anything. To wit:
Beckett regresses, Lester has a typical year, Buchholz regresses as predicted from 2010, the Bard experiment doesn’t make it to May and the garbage heap starters are awful. On top of this Oritz starts to fade, Ellsbury regresses and Youk misses 60 games.
That is a mid to high 80 win team which might get to 90 wins.
Or.
Beckett repeats last year, Lester is awesome, Buchholz doesn’t regress and Bard is a very capable fourth starter. CC is the player he is in Tampa and the rest of the team repeats last year except there is now better production in right. The bullpen is lights out.
That is a mid to high 90’s win team and maybe even a 100 win team.
I belong in the OMFG sign starters camp and I think the rotation will be exposed badly. I am also not sold on the pen. I do think this is an offense, though, that is capable of taking the team to the low 90’s if the pitching doesn’t completely collapse.
If I had to guess I would say 91 wins and third place.
I agree with this almost word for word.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I think a lot is going to ride on where the Sox
are around the trade deadline. If they are close they could use some of the flexibility and go out and get a difference maker. If not they may go the other way and start dumping folks to make a run at 2013. Either way, I doubt the team they field in April will be the same one we see in August.
I've got my firesale post bookmarked to bring back in July.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 18, 2012 11:22 PM EST up reply actions
After reading this, one might think you can't wait for your scenario to be true.
But that can’t be, because you’ll be rooting for the Red Sox to win.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 19, 2012 7:06 AM EST up reply actions
Expecting it to happen and wanting it to happen are two different things.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
Thing is
even the disappointing teams like ’06, ’10, and ’11 never sold off.
When WAS the last time Boston sold at the deadline? Anyone?
by abbreviatedman on Feb 19, 2012 8:04 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe 1997?
Slocumb for Lowe and Varitek.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 19, 2012 8:26 AM EST up reply actions
Best trade ever
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 19, 2012 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
He wasn't "sold off"
He was moved.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
True.
But it wasn’t selling off. The idea was that a very good shortstop who could play every day was better than a once-great shortstop with nagging injuries.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 19, 2012 3:52 PM EST up reply actions
Huh, that sounds familiar.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 4:14 PM EST up reply actions
I've got that bookmarked too
so I can show people how ridiculous it was in July.
by Bososx13 on Feb 19, 2012 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 19, 2012 4:14 PM EST up reply actions
In what way is it "ridiculous" to say that?
IF the team is more than 5 games out in July, we should consider moving big contracts in order to prepare for the next wave of prospects?
It’s not ridiculous it’s a valid idea you little twit, one that fans of ANY TEAM in the ENTIRE LEAGUE could discuss without anyone crapping on the idea. I cannot believe the repeated acts of stupidity and cluelessness that filled that thread by people like you who chose not to read what he wrote in it but rather what you wanted to read in it because of who wrote it.
I am Sandy's bitch
We Are Because You Were
@WadePSU
by Rogue Nine on Feb 19, 2012 6:37 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
i feel like that post shouldve ended with a
“good day sir”
First of all.
TLD’s scenario was for 5 or more games out, not the more than 5 you suggest. Secondly, yes there are fans of teams that would/should have this discussion, just not ones with teams expected to win 90+ games. The only way you consider selling at the trade deadline is if you are 10+ games back, and/or are decimated with serious injuries. Since neither of those scenario’s were brought up in TLD’s fanpost, I’d say Bososx13 is right to call it out as ridiculous. The Red Sox, even as currently constructed are a 90 win team. Teams with the Red Sox talent don’t give up when they are 5 games back with more than two months left in the season.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 6:53 AM EST up reply actions
You know, the pessimists often get called out for being absolute and presenting their opinions as fact:
The Red Sox, even as currently constructed are a 90 win team
Or even nitpicky:
5 or more games out, not the more than 5 you suggest
So I said 6-82 games behind by July and he meant 5-82 games behind in July, big whoopdie-freakin-do the point is still the same. And the optimists, aren’t actually as different as they may like to think they are. And yes, being 10 games back IS covered in TLD’s 5+ scenario, because, my turn to be nitpicky, 10 > 5 and fits nicely into the range he was discussing. Injuries may very well play into how many games we are behind or ahead in July. In my opinion, we’re either going to be ahead in July or the wheels will fall off completely and we won’t be close and it may very well be selling time.
The people who had negative reactions to that post, spent WAY WAY WAY too much time ignoring his preface to begin with and 5+ or 10+ games back, that’s all an opinion of what counts as “out of contention” and is arguable sure, but the number of people who didn’t even bring that up and just said things to the equivalent of “Why would we sell in January?” it was astounding really, because they directed their brains to jump completely over the part where they he explicitly stated that this scenario plays out in JULY and jumped immediately to attacking.
I am Sandy's bitch
We Are Because You Were
@WadePSU
Rays fans should count themselves lucky.
You or TLD weren’t calling the shots for them at last years trade deadline. And yes, you are accurate, 5, 10, or even 50 games falls into TLD’s parameter. It really does come down to what you believe is “out of contention”. If you believe 5 games out in late July is out of contention, as TLD clearly does, we have nothing further to discuss.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:34 AM EST up reply actions
It's Rays FAN, sir.
And unless you predicted the biggest collapse in baseball history, you’d be just as unqualified, so be quiet with that crap.
I’d put my threshold closer to 7 or 8 games back, but even if he left out the definition in his post, people still would have attacked it because, hey, it’s what we do best here at OTM, argue semantics instead of content.
I am Sandy's bitch
We Are Because You Were
@WadePSU
I agree it will matter
but the Red Sox entire business model is based on sell-outs and high TV ratings. Going into sellers mode might have an impact on that model. One reason season tickets sales are low in a lot of small markets is that people are worried that come the trade deadline the team will be dismantled and you will get stuck with a bunch of useless tickets.
I worried about that with the Rays in last year, and that definitely happened in 2009 (though they didn’t dismantle the team).
Well "sell-off" is a bit of an overstatement
I doubt the Sox would do a huge firesale, but I could see a few well placed trades and the like to re-tool
Yup, totally agree & we have been saying that for a few weeks now
The FO needs to see if any of their dumpster diving pays off… I cannot help but wondering if a dump at the deadline would make a big difference for 2013? (Even if they are within 5 games). My best guess would be that if the big 3 were healthy they are buyers…even if they are within 5 and the big 3 are not healthy then maybe they dump for 2013? What do you think?
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
I agree with this in general.
Except I think that best-case scenario nets you 100 wins, and the average outcome (the baseline) is more like 93 wins than 91. But otherwise, right on, man. There’s a wide range of outcomes, but the mid-point is higher than last year’s result, and we’re going in with everyone having written us off already thanks to last year. So I’m ready to be pretty entertained, instead of going in expecting a WS win like last year. If you go in with those expectations, you’re not going to be happy very often. (Witness Yankee fans, most of whom don’t enjoy a season if it doesn’t end in a championship.)
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 10:06 PM EST up reply actions
Pretty much, yeah.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 18, 2012 11:21 PM EST up reply actions
My prediction:
The offense basically matches its production from last year; probably some regression to the mean for some players, but by and large they go through several stretches of truly epic run-scoring, interspersed with two or three dry spells when they either get complacent or worn out or whatever. The offense last year was worth 39.2 WAR (according to Fangraphs), and I expect they will likely fall in the 38 to 41 range again, assuming they are at least no less healthy than the last few years.
Oddly enough, the Red Sox pitching last year accounted for 20.3 WAR, putting them at 7th in the majors,despite the cavalcade of crap it seemed to be at times, and despite a FIP of 4.05 and xFIP of 4.13, both among the worst in the league. There should be a good chance to improve on that performance with just a run of good health this year, so since I lean optimistic, I’m going to say the pitching staff manages to improve maybe to about 24 or 24.5 WAR, between a healthy trio of good pitchers and some effective, if pedestrian, performances from Bard and whomever.
Of course, realistically, that probably means that 96 wins is the ceiling for this team right now, and 93 or 94 is probably more likely. (Really, that’s about what the total from last year would have looked like if they had just sucked instead of totally crapping the bed at the two ends of the season). The chances of that being enough to win the division is pretty slim, but I would say they have a solid shot at the wild card.
93 or 94 would be good enough for the WC.
Since the Rays got good and made it a bit harder, the minimum number of wins to get the WC have been 90, 88, 90, and 91. (Of course, we were one game below that minimum the last two years. Ugh.)
by abbreviatedman on Feb 18, 2012 11:14 PM EST up reply actions
It should be, yeah.
Just gotta see if they can manage to be about 3% or 4% better on the whole than last year.
x - 1
where x = the number of wins needed for a Wild Card spot. Sorry if that’s too pessimistic for some of you, but the Red Sox have long taught me to temper my preseason expectations.
"If your happiness depends on Boston winning or losing, you have to get a life." Manny Somebody-or-other
Clay Davenport has us with
a 44% chance to win the division, highest in the division, and a 64% chance at playoffs. He has us with 93 wins, and the Yankees at 92 and the Rays at 84. Here
RLYW's Projections
Granted, they’re a Yankee blog, but quite sabermetric. Their projection system is called CAIRO, and while he jokes that it’s designed to make the Yankees look better, it’s been a pretty solid projection system for a few years.
It’s got the Yankees at 97 wins (which is probably a bit high, he admits), but Boston at 92 wins and a 49% shot at the division/WC1, with an extra 15% chance at the second WC, should it be implemented.
I agree with it more in general than with Clay’s (which are based on Pecota?). Clay’s projection REALLY likes the Rangers, huh? And hates the Rays and Angels. Interesting.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 19, 2012 4:30 PM EST up reply actions
Well then it must be true.
But before I commit to Clay Davenport zombie-ism, how close was Davenport last year?
I am Sandy's bitch
We Are Because You Were
@WadePSU
He didn't have a site last year
but he has before I think he projected for 2010 for BP. Because Wyers projected for 2011
Because these projections
were so accurate last year…..
The Yankees are going to win 92 games???
Uh, I highly, highly doubt that.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
why?
their average hitter age weighted by 2011 plate appearances(so some one PA guy doesn’t count for as much as Jeter) is 31 for 2012. Their pitcher age weighted by 2011 TBF will also be 31 for 2012. Yes, this included Pineda and Kuroda, I used active roster checkbox on Fangraphs, Fangraphs is awesome
Because they won 97 games last year by getting lucky with unknown pitchers
now they have good, consistent pitchers. It doesn’t take a stretch of the imagination to know they’ll be better this year.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
yes, but the unkown pitchers
pitched very well and the consistent pitchers might not be that big of an upgrade. Their team is very old
They will be similar
I don’t think better, but around the same— winning the division.
Check out my blog at http://conor-soxrox.blogspot.com
"good consistent pitchers"
I mean, their rotation is essentially the same thing as last year, minus Burnett (which is a good thing) and plus Pineda (who is probably quite good but is not what I’d call consistent- especially as a pretty extreme flyball pitcher moving from Safeco to YS).
Not that I’m saying he’ll be bad, just it’s not like they’ve added a proven ace on the end there.
I didn't say ace
and I was thinking of Pineda as good and Kuroda as consistent.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 7:48 PM EST up reply actions
I've done plenty of the same
no worries.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 8:45 PM EST up reply actions
In fact
according the Pythagorean theory, the 2011 Yankess should have won 101 games.
The starting pitching looks better to me, perhaps significantly so depending on Pineda. Soriano is unlikely to repeat last year. It is true that Mo may regress – but there was no sign of it last year and we have been waiting forever for that to happen. More importantly, I really don’t see anything close to the downside risk with the Yankees that I see with the Red Sox.
The Yankees last year were less reliant on Arod and Jeter than they have been You can argue over the money they are paid, but Jeter simply isn’t integral to the team’s success. Arod isn’t the player that he was 3 years ago, although he is still pretty good. He might have trouble staying on the field, but you can say the same think about Youk. Teixerira’s OPS last year was nearly identical to 2010 (the decline in his war is entirely attributable to defense, which I have my doubts about). There is little reason to expect decline from Cano, Swisher, Martin or Gardner. There Yankees are likely to get MORE production out of DH.
So essentially the argument that their offense will decline comes down to Granderson. Granderson matched last year’s OPS once before, and last year’s war twice before, but let’s stipulate that he is unlikely to match last years numbers. But of course, you same almost the same thing about Ellsbury. In fact, Ellsbury last year more than doubled his highest war. Ellsbury is younger, but you can argue Ellsbury is more likely to regress than Granderson. Tyring to predict which one will regress more is interesting, but mostly a complete guess.
In any event the Yankees look to me like they will pitch better, and score roughly the same number of runs as last year (though there is some downside risk).
Bottom line, the downside risk in the Red Sox pitching is much bigger than the downside risk to the Yankees offense.
The starting pitching looks better to me, perhaps significantly so depending on Pineda. Soriano is unlikely to repeat last year. It is true that Mo may regress – but there was no sign of it last year and we have been waiting forever for that to happen.
The starting pitching looks better on paper, but as has been said at least once in this thread, last year’s starters well outperformed their paper expectations.
2011 Colon & Burnett = 4.1 fWAR
2011 Pineda & Kuroda = 5.8 fWAR
It wouldn’t be a surprise if both Pineda & Kuroda took a step back in the AL East. Counting on Garcia and Nova to make 2011 might be a stretch as well. The staff might be better, but not by that much.
More importantly, I really don’t see anything close to the downside risk with the Yankees that I see with the Red Sox.
More importantly, I really don’t see anything close to the downside risk with the Yankees that I see with the Red Sox.
Fair statement. Why I don’t think many would/will pick the Red Sox over the Yankees in the regular season.
The Yankees last year were less reliant on Arod and Jeter than they have been You can argue over the money they are paid, but Jeter simply isn’t integral to the team’s success. Arod isn’t the player that he was 3 years ago, although he is still pretty good. He might have trouble staying on the field, but you can say the same think about Youk.
Less reliant, certainly, but less playing time, or worse production from either still hurts the team.
Teixerira’s OPS last year was nearly identical to 2010 (the decline in his war is entirely attributable to defense, which I have my doubts about).
Tex’s OPS was consistent with 2010, but more concerning it dropped for the 4th straight year, falling from .963 to .835. That’s a concern. And that’s what’s behind his drop in fWAR.
There is little reason to expect decline from Cano, Swisher, Martin or Gardner.
Swisher’s OPS is falling, Martin basically had a hot month, much of Gardner’s WAR value comes from those defense stats, which you have your doubts about.
Twitter: @Greenlineoutfit
Responses
1. How is the fact that last year’s junk starters outperformed relevent in evaluating their current starting staff? Of course they are “better on paper”. Nobody has played a game yet.
2. The drop in Teixera’s performance from 2010 to 2011 is insignificant.
3. The drop in the WAR from 2010 to 2011 is entirely due to the defensive caluculation. Defensive stats can be unreliable on one year’s data – as been posted here many times.
4. The comment regarding Cano, Swisher, Martin and Gardner clearly was refering to their offensive production. It is well known that defensive stats over one year are unreliable. Gardner’s went way up, his offensive war was down, though his OPS was pretty close to the same. His war went from 5.2 to 4.4. If you want to argue that this one year decline for a 27 year old is a sign of things, go ahead. I doubt it.
5. “Martin had a hot month”. He had two months wth an OPS over .900, August and April. It would be surprising if he regressed substantially.
...
1. How is the fact that last year’s junk starters outperformed relevent in evaluating their current starting staff? Of course they are "better on paper". Nobody has played a game yet.
It’s relevant because you said:
The starting pitching looks better to me
Which implies that this years paper starting pitching looks better than last year’s actual pitching. An easy trap when forgetting how much last year’s rotation outperformed.
2. The drop in Teixera’s performance from 2010 to 2011 is insignificant.
This is why you should reference which WAR you’re citing. fWAR his him going the other way.
I never said it was significant. Instead I pointed out the greater troubling trend.
3. The drop in the WAR from 2010 to 2011 is entirely due to the defensive caluculation. Defensive stats can be unreliable on one year’s data – as been posted here many times.
No shit.
4. The comment regarding Cano, Swisher, Martin and Gardner clearly was refering to their offensive production. It is well known that defensive stats over one year are unreliable. Gardner’s went way up, his offensive war was down, though his OPS was pretty close to the same. His war went from 5.2 to 4.4. If you want to argue that this one year decline for a 27 year old is a sign of things, go ahead. I doubt it.
A 49 point drop in OPS is not “close to the same.”
5. "Martin had a hot month". He had two months wth an OPS over .900, August and April. It would be surprising if he regressed substantially.
A career .131 ISO, hadn’t topped .116 in since 2007, he hit .170 last year. It would not be surprising if he regressed substantially.
Twitter: @Greenlineoutfit
I agree with your comment
but there are a lot of wholes in it.
Of course there are hole in it: its just a fricken opinion based on supposition. Do you actually think there is a right answer here for any of this stuff.
A sill comment.
Why is it called the Pythagorean Theory, it's got nothing to do with triangles.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 20, 2012 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
I put no faith at all in those projection systems
But I think it’s incredibly possible that the Yanks will be a worse team and will win fewer than 97 games this year. The new pitchers they brought in are unlikely to be much better, if any, than the performances they got out of scrap heap projects last year. And they have a bunch of aging guys that could fall of a cliff at any moment.
Jeter, A-Rod, and Mo are old
CC, and Tex still have productive years ahead of them, and Cano, Granderson, Gardner, Pineda and Nova are all in their primes or very close to it.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 3:31 PM EST up reply actions
The Red Sox were in a similar situation last year
with Wake, Tek and Drew all falling into the “old” category.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 5:03 PM EST up reply actions
Granderson will likely regress. Texeira's OPS has dropped three years in a row.
There are plenty of reason to think the Yanks could be worse than last year, and very few reasons to think they’ll be better. But I don’t think I’m going to convince you.
In any event, without another starting pitcher, I don’t think the Sox will beat them in the division regardless.
I don't think they're going to drop 7 games based on Granderson regressing
when they’ve fixed their rotation and gotten rid of Burnett. They might drop to 95 wins, but they’re not going to go all the way to 90-92
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 19, 2012 7:51 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe we aren't, either.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
That was not random variation
as I wrote here last September, that was a misuse of statistics.
86 wins as currently constructed
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
I would honestly be shocked if we make it to 94 wins and don't make the playoffs.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 20, 2012 1:08 PM EST up reply actions
Only one team has failed to make the playoffs with 94 wins since the WC Era began.
The poor 1999 Cincinnati Reds.
I doubt we’ll be the second team to manage that feat. 94 wins should be enough for the WC.
Of course, the division has only been won by that few wins once since the WC Era began as well.
by abbreviatedman on Feb 20, 2012 6:00 PM EST up reply actions
I'm assuming we have the second wildcard
AL East to the Yankees, AL West to the Tigers, wildcards to Angels and Red Sox. I’d put the Angels as more likely to win a one-game playoff because we don’t really have an ace, with Lester somehow losing his control every once in a while.
by Mimi Caraghas on Feb 21, 2012 7:40 AM EST up reply actions
I mean, the Tigers do have a hell of an offense
but I just can’t see them winning the AL West. I dunno, just have a gut feeling. Since they’re in the AL Central.
The offense..IS THAT GOOD.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
What about the Rays????
Check out my blog at http://conor-soxrox.blogspot.com
The win the Central
Duh.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 22, 2012 8:51 AM EST up reply actions
Maddon...IS THAT GOOD.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Don't make the playoffs
On paper, the Red Sox are better than the Rays any way I look at it. I don’t care if Moore wins the Cy Young.
Then again, world series aren’t won on paper (to be overly cliché).
by Mimi Caraghas on Feb 23, 2012 2:24 PM EST up reply actions
They can't all win the Cy Young
Though they’d like to try
by Mimi Caraghas on Feb 24, 2012 8:04 AM EST up reply actions
I meant Rangers
I cannot believe I just wrote that. Wow.
As a side note, I don’t believe 787 runs counts as ‘a hell of an offense’ even when you add Prince.
by Mimi Caraghas on Feb 23, 2012 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
I'm aware that was the 4th highest run total
but it’s not high enough to make up for regression. If Avila can keep up a .366 BABIP, Cabrera can keep up a .365 BABIP (which seems possible), Jhonny Peralta doesn’t fall back down to 2009 and 2010 levels, and V-Mart spontaneously can play, then yes, they would have a hell of an offense.
by Mimi Caraghas on Feb 24, 2012 8:13 AM EST up reply actions
All teams are likely to have regressions, including the ones in front of Detroit last year. Prince Fielder likely will come in and more than make up for V-Mart and any Peralta drops. Austin Jackson regressed last year, who is to say he doesn’t bounce back.
If you take question marks and possible regressions into it, no team “has” a hell of an offense but plenty “could” have a hell of an offense. Which sure, we can talk without absolutes but this thread is full of them.
I don’t believe 787 runs counts as ‘a hell of an offense’ even when you add Prince.
by The Name is Dalton on Feb 24, 2012 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
Lookit you gettin' all bold and stuff!!
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
A few questions:
They are 4+ games out & the starting pitching is floundering but staying on the mound because the offense keeps the team in the game….do you even bother being a buyer?
What if you could move a few pieces and strenghten the team for 2013 & 2014? (but, most likely out of contention in 2012)
I know that the idea is get to the post season and anything can happen..but, if you bow out in the first round and are buyers is that smart?
I hope the decision is made based upon overall strengthening of the team…I dunno but I know right now that the Sox need more SP. I suppose, that if the big 3 are healthy and the bullpen is tight then we are buyers regardless…
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
This is what I've been trying to argue
if the team is failing, it would be better to build for consistent success and punt this year than to seel off pieces that could net us more than one trophy only to bow out in the ALDS.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 20, 2012 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
162-0, ALEC, ALDC, WSC
then after 100 years the Redsox close up shop, but all seriousness folks. I see it as being a 90-95 win team.I see Youk being healthy and playing in 145-150 games. You know what I wont see? JD drew taking another 3rd strike. As much as I am going to miss Tek and Wake. Is the same amount I won’t miss seeing all that effort and emotion from JD. You know that fire he always used to roll grounders to the infield. Please reassign number 7 soon so the healing can start. Can we Sign Trot Nixon for a day so he could retire a sox and we can all have a good feeling with #7 involved
Jeffrey M Melhorn
yawn. ive seen this episode before
someone makes an argument using projections
other people make arguments why the projections cant be trusted
sean o has lower expectations than everyone
someone calls out sean
5 people come to defend sean
160 comments later… here we are
move along. nothing to see here
by rm81 on Feb 20, 2012 10:13 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Actually, while Sean was on the lower end of the projections, I think Sandy was right around his number.
"I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it."
-JD Salinger.
by TheLoneDavid on Feb 20, 2012 10:33 PM EST up reply actions
for the same reason i assume most people visit here
because i like following the red sox and this is a good blog
OKTHX
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
*hands rm81 ribbon for participating*
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven

by 


























