54 replies to this topic

[mr guido]

we can surmise four truths to be self-evident.

1. The Toronto Blue Jays have officially become better than the once and former World Series champs.
2. The once and former World Series champs are officially in a rebuilding mode.

- Eric Wilbur

The Red Sox are a third place team next year.

- Glenn Ordway

Still a lot of work to be done, but I think an impartial observer has to like the Jays more than the Sox right now.

- Rudy Pemberton

There are plenty of people in print/radio/web who feel this offseason's turnover is a sign that the Sox are screwed, are taking a huge step backward, and won't be able to compete with the Blue Jays much less the Yankees. I'm not interested in rehashing the merits of Toronto's free spending ways, or analyzing the likelihood that Johnny Damon makes the Yankees a division winning team. I just want to know what to expect out of the Sox. If people are saying the Sox have taken a step backwards, that implies management has taken what was a decent situation and made it worse. Is this really true?

OFFENSE
To that end, the 2005 edition scored 910 runs. The position players posted a total of 379 VORP suggesting that a replacement level team in a neutral park scores 530 runs. Fair enough.

The VORP positional breakdown was as follows:
1B 26.6
2B 20.4
SS 21.5
3B 37.0
LF 68.6
CF 48.4
RF 23.8
C 46.7
DH 85.8

My assumptions for now are that: Manny, Ortiz, Varitek, and Nixon all stay. (Simplistically I am taking the front office at their word that if Manny is traded it is for equal value. Since I am looking at total value, an equal value trade will not change anything. Not too realistic but I don't care.)

The holdovers and their backups accounted for 225 runs of VORP. Perhaps they regress a bit in 2006, perhaps not. I'll peg them for 210 runs.

Now we need to fill in the remaining positions. Loretta plays 2B. For the sake of argument, let's pretend the season starts today and they have to put Youkilis at 1B, Lowell at 3B, and bottom-of-the-barrel chumps at SS and CF. We're talking Alex Cora and other sub-.300 OBP types.

The unit of measurement for the below chart is VORP rate, in other words the amount of VORP each player contributes per game.

          3 2 1    2005    2004    2003   Best   Worst
Youkilis   0.157   0.218   0.143     NA  0.218   0.09
Loretta    0.290   0.154   0.467  0.343  0.467   0.154
Lowell     0.189   0.019   0.340  0.396  0.396   0.019
CF         0.09    0.09    0.09   0.09   0.09    0.09
SS         0.09    0.09    0.09   0.09   0.09    0.09

TOTAL VORP   120      84     165    135    184     66
TEAM VORP    330     294     375    345    394    276
TEAM RUNS    860     824     905    875    924    806

(note: each player's VORP contribution was calculated as 145 games * VORPr plus 17*.09 to account for time off and backups.)

In the 3-2-1 projection where Youks plays better than Kevin Millar but worse than Carlos Pena, Lowell/Loretta rebound modestly, and the Sox are forced to start Alex Cora and George Lombard for a full season... the team still scores ~860 runs (before any corrections for Fenway Park are made). For reference only the Yankees (886) and Rangers (865) scored more in '05. This number would be #3 in the majors in 04 as well.

In the case where Lowell + Loretta exceed our wildest dreams and turn back the clock to their best season while Youks does well and we still field scrubs at SS and CF, expect ~925 runs. (The 04 Sox scored 949)

If Youks plays like a scrub, Lowell plays even worse, and Loretta repeats his 04 then the Sox score ~805 runs. This total last year would have them at #5 in MLB.

The nightmare scenario is if Manny/Ortiz/Tek are hurt and miss significant time, but this hurts the team big-time no matter who else is on it. In other words, any team with these 3 (plus the minimum surrounding cast the Sox currently sport) is pretty likely to be an offensive force no matter what happens.



PITCHING

I'm not going to go so stat heavy here, but the way I see it the Sox currently project to go to war with a group chosen from Schilling, Beckett, Wakefield, Clement, Arroyo, Wells, and Papelbon.

Josh Beckett's 117 ERA+ translates to a 3.75 ERA or so. One figures that Schilling won't post another 5.7 ERA, and either he or someone else on the staff should be able to give us a sub-4 ERA as well. Since Tim Wakefield was the only starter last year with an ERA below 4.5, this is a pretty sizable improvement. The difference in replacing 400 IP of 4.75 ERA with with 400 of 3.75 is ~45 runs of improvement, so let's call it 40.

The bullpen was incredibly bad last year. Combined they posted an ARP (adjusted runs prevented) of -16. For reference the terrible 03 bullpen was worth -12. Throw in a rebound year from Foulke, but some regression from Timlin, and new guys Mota + Seanez, with perhaps some Papelbon/Hansen/Delcarmen/Arroyo. Relief pitching is almost impossible to project but one would hope that they could at least get back to 0 ARP with this infusion of free agents and young talent. That's a very modest goal.

So let's guess (fairly conservatively, I should think) at an improvement of 55 runs over 2005's ugly pitching staff. This brings the Sox down to 750 runs ~allowed. This would put them in the middle of the AL pack.


WINS

Assuming the Sox were to take the field for the 2006 season tomorrow, a simplistic conservative projection tells us that barring disastrous injury they'll score and allow fewer runs than in 2005. Here is a chart with pythagorean win projections:



Feel free to use your own logic to change my numbers and move the Sox around in the chart.

Keep in mind that the Sox were a 89.7 pythagorean win team last year (that overperformed their projection). Right now the median semi-realistic projection of a team with no CF and SS works out to 91.1 wins, which is already an improvement over 2005. Should the pitching staff actually develop into an above average staff, it is not unthinkable to see a pythag. projection of 95+ wins. And who knows what could happen if the team decides to find someone with any talent to fill the current holes. But it doesn't look like the headless front office has taken a step backwards to me.

[Rasputin]

Would I be out of line if I suggested that people who are pontificating about where the team will finish when the team isn't even complete yet are, well, not that bright?

[Drocca]

Would I be out of line if I suggested that people who are pontificating about where the team will finish when the team isn't even complete yet are, well, not that bright?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes I believe it would be out of line. The above is a nice beginning to start a substantial discussion of where the Red Sox are truly at and not give in to the overreaction and hysteria that has plagued the radio waves, television and frankly this web site at times. To move the discussion from all of the things the FO has done wrong and opportunities missed and instead trying to see what type of team is being fielded for 06 is far more progressive thinking at this time IMO.

Edited by Drocca, 27 December 2005 - 05:26 PM.

[NYCSox]

I consider myself fully in the camp that says the sky is not falling and that we still have a few months to see who exactly breaks camp and heads north at the end of March. That said, I think it's very premature to speculate as to projected W/L records. Let's see who is playing 1B, SS and CF as well as where our rotation and bullpen winds up first. For that matter, let's see if Manny is still our LF and clean up hitter.

My initial instincts are that the 2006 Red Sox will not be a 900 run team (no real surprise there), but there's a good chance that they may give up 750 or fewer runs. Keep in mind that 850 RS/750 RA leads to a pythag of about 90 wins (using 1.82 as the exponent). But this is all subject to change depending on the composition of the roster. Just look at the A's, Angels and White Sox for examples of teams that can actually win 90+ games without scoring 900 runs.

[irinmike]

I concur and the one thing that is very obvious from free agent signings so far, is that the market is overpriced. I have no problem with NOT overpaying and will wait to see what the FO does to complete this team during the coming months.

[bigdgp]

Great analysis Guido. I agree that the sky is not falling but my concern regarding projecting this year's performance with your analysis is-does it take into effect that two division teams have improved their rosters significantly (Yankees by adding Damon, Toronto with Burnett, Glaus, & healthy Halladay)?

I don't know that I would go along with the assumption that everything is going to average out in the bullpen or for the batting when the opponents for 38 games have added better hitters and pitchers to their teams.

I would expect to be around 90 wins for Pythag and I'm not a big fan of having to count on the overperfomance for a playoff spot this year-so I hope we can acquire some more production at the SS or CF positions.

I'd be interested in seeing the analysis for the rest of the division and see where things currently fallout...

[SoxFanSince57]

Thus far I would characterize the FO moves as "knowing when to play 'em and knowing when to fold 'em".

They have a plan AND they are opportunistic.

They plan to improve their starting pitching--Check.
They plan to improve their bullpen--Check.
They plan to get younger--Check.
They plan to keep their spending below the mlb tax threshold--Check.
They plan to avoid overspending on talent and losing their flexibility--Check.
They plan to build/protect their minor league system--Check.
They plan to bring up their minor league talent slowly and responsibly so as not to rush them before they are ready or before they have demonstrated that they can handle the job--Check.
They plan to improve their defense--Work in progress

Do they have the means to:
acquire a quality CF (J. Reed)--Check
improve their bullpen and add depth--Check
improve their SS defense (A. Gonzalez)--Check
add a RHH platoon-mate in RF (FA)--Check
add a LHH/defensive platoon-mate at 1B (Snow)--Check

Resources Available To Fill Needs: Wells; Shoppach; Graffanino/Cora; Arroyo; Moss/Murphy; Alverez; Petagine and Delcarmen.

The Sox could well have this team on Opening Day

Curt Schilling
Josh Beckett
Tim Wakefield
Matt Clement
Jonathan Papelbon

Keith Foulke
Mike Timlin
Guillermo Mota
Rudy Seanez
Yhency Brazoban or Duaner Sanchez in a trade for David Wells
Lenny DiNardo

1B-Kevin Youkilis
2B-Mark Loretta
DH-David Ortiz
LF-Manny Ramirez
RF-Trot Nixon
C-Jason Varetek
3B-Mike Lowell
CF-Jeremy Reed in trade for Bronson Arroyo
SS-Alex Gonzalez—FA acquisition

Adam Stern/Alejandro Machado
John Flaherty/Kelly Shoppach
J.T. Snow—FA acquisition
Alex Cora/Tony Graffanino
RHH OF—Platoon-mate with Nixon

Would this team have the stuff to win the WS? Health permitting, absolutely yes.

We have 3 months to fill out the squad--It will happen.

[Rudy Pemberton]

While I expect Schilling to be better; he is 38 and there is a chance that he's simply finished. Foulke? Who knows? Wakefield, Clement, Arroyo...I could see all three being worse than they were last year fairly easily. If Wells is dumped for prospects, it will be tough to replace his production. Beckett should be better than Wells, but will he throw as many innings? Have as good a record? I don't know. The pen should certainly be better; although Timlin is due to decline. Papelbon should be a big help...guys like Seanez, etc. I can't imagine anyone can say with any degree of certainty what they'll give.

On the offensive side of the ball, I would expect moderate declines from Ortiz, Tek, and Manny if he's around. If the 1B AB's are given to Snow, and the 3B AB's to Lowell; who the heck knows. CF? Willie Harris? Jeremy Reed? Those could be serious steps down, and while Renteria wasn't great, he was above average defensively.

It's a work in progress, for sure, but I still think it's fair to say that if you were a Jays fan you'd be pretty excited and drooling over that rotation, and loving the potential of a Wells-Glaus-Overbay 3-4-5. And I think that's great; better teams is more exciting.

It's hard for me to see this as a 91-95 win team with average replacements at 1b, cf, and ss but maybe I'm being too pessimistic. Would LOVE to be wrong...but would LOVE even more to see better than average replacements at those positions!

[fox13weather]

While I expect Schilling to be better; he is 38 and there is a chance that he's simply finished. Foulke? Who knows? Wakefield, Clement, Arroyo...I could see all three being worse than they were last year fairly easily. If Wells is dumped for prospects, it will be tough to replace his production. Beckett should be better than Wells, but will he throw as many innings? Have as good a record? I don't know. The pen should certainly be better; although Timlin is due to decline. Papelbon should be a big help...guys like Seanez, etc. I can't imagine anyone can say with any degree of certainty what they'll give.

On the offensive side of the ball, I would expect moderate declines from Ortiz, Tek, and Manny if he's around. If the 1B AB's are given to Snow, and the 3B AB's to Lowell; who the heck knows. CF? Willie Harris? Jeremy Reed? Those could be serious steps down, and while Renteria wasn't great, he was above average defensively.

It's a work in progress, for sure, but I still think it's fair to say that if you were a Jays fan you'd be pretty excited and drooling over that rotation, and loving the potential of a Wells-Glaus-Overbay 3-4-5. And I think that's great; better teams is more exciting.

It's hard for me to see this as a 91-95 win team with average replacements at 1b, cf, and ss but maybe I'm being too pessimistic. Would LOVE to be wrong...but would LOVE even more to see better than average replacements at those positions!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Renteria was "above average defensively". Excuse me?? How does a guy lead the league in errors (and always looked miserable) and be considered above average defensively?? He may have been above average by reputation, but he certainly was not on the field. He basically stunk, and for $10 mill a year he was one of the worst free agent signings in recent memory.

Edited by fox13weather, 27 December 2005 - 09:37 PM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Dammit, I keep doing that....Renteria was above average offensively, for a SS. His defense, IMO, wasn't very good although I'm not totally sold on the metrics...and how much of that was the field (last SS to have a good defensive season in Boston?)

[Lucen]

Would I be out of line if I suggested that people who are pontificating about where the team will finish when the team isn't even complete yet are, well, not that bright?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Considering that his projections were putting our worst case scenario SS and CFer in there for the numbers, yes... you'd be out of line and you'd be the one appearing 'not that bright.' Most likely, we'll only improve at those possitions if any changes are made, which would improve the projections.

And Guido, great post. This supports what I've been saying for weeks. We're a better team now than we were at the end of the 2005 season. Nicely done.

[fox13weather]

Dammit, I keep doing that....Renteria was above average offensively, for a SS. His defense, IMO, wasn't very good although I'm not totally sold on the metrics...and how much of that was the field (last SS to have a good defensive season in Boston?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Honest mistake Rudy, no biggie. I was not really sold on his offense. He did have a couple of key hits. One homer out west and a great bunt come to mind. All in all, he was stuck in a great lineup and he must have seen his fair share of good pitches to hit. He had a miserable September. LaRussa took a lot of heat, but I think he was correct. He just did not have the personality to make it happen in Boston. He will be fine in (10,000 empty seats for the playoffs) Atlanta.

Edited by fox13weather, 27 December 2005 - 09:56 PM.

[satyadaimoku]

All three of those quotes are either absurd or not saying very much. That is:

Option 1: Not saying very much:: The Blue Jays would be better than the Red Sox in 2006 if the Red Sox make no moves between now and April, and start both Adam Stern and Cora/Pedroia next year and for some reason start 2006 with eight starting pitchers. This is probably true, but since it is an absolute certainty that this won't happen, who cares?

Option 2: Absurd: The Blue Jays will be better in 2006 than the Red Sox. Absolutely crazy. The Red Sox will almost certainly acquire either Crisp or Reed or some other center fielder and will probably make other moves with the money marked for Damon. The only real question is how much harm we will have to do to our future to get one of those guys. At that point, the 2006 Red Sox will be better than the 2005 Red Sox, both of whom are probably better than the 2006 Blue Jays. And, I might add, the 2006 Yankees.

The sky isn't falling. It's not even a cloudy day. Our franchise is getting better, not worse. Losing Johnny Damon is a painful step for the progress of our organization, but at 4 years $52 million it was an important and necessary step.

EDIT: and, btw, Rudy's first post on this thread is entirely accurate. But all it shows is a fundamental baseball truism: that there is no such thing as a sure thing, and that until the season starts every position is a question mark. You cannot run an organization intelligently without taking risks. And you can pick apart most teams the way Rudy did to ours.

Edited by satyadaimoku, 28 December 2005 - 12:26 AM.

[Butch Hobsons elbo chips]

I was referring to the overreaction and hysteria, not the original post.

Don't go switching sides now, you..you ..you chicken little!!
----------------------

There are obviously a couple of ways to look at the talent they have and the talent they need to bring in over the next 12 weeks. And there are obviously numerous ways they can continue to tweak or upgrade different aspects of the Team before it takes the field on Opening Day.
IMO, Sitting around filling out a line-up with the least talented Sox players presently under contract isn't a very productive way to look at an upcoming season that is 3 months away from beginning.

[behindthepen]

I'm not going to attempt to duplicate mrg's Sox analysis, but Baseball Prospectus did a quick look at the changes that the Jays have made this offseason. The article (subscription only I believe) points out that many of the new Jays are slated to replace players that were already pretty effective in 2004 ... for example, bringing in Burnett helps, but the worst Jays starter (Lilly) still had a positive VORP (2.8)last year. Same for Overbay (replacing Hinske or Hillenbrand). Overall, his analysis says that the Jays only picked up 4-5 wins so far this offseason.

So it looks like the media may be overestimating the Jays improvements just as they are underestimating the Sox. Which is fine, I don't mind going into a year with low media expectations.

[possumbait]

I think we are definitely overestimating the BJ's improvements.

On the other hand, Prospectus said for years that Toronto was a dark horse team ready to break through. If they say the opposite now, with these trades, does that mean they will do it this time?

[Todd Benzinger]

Maybe I'm missing something, but if the Jays were a second division team with Delgado, how does Glaus put them over the top?

Thanks to Mr G for the analysis... I think (as Mr G hints, despite optimistic spin) that the real cause for anxiety is any plan that counts on G38 for anything whatsoever. Various people in other threads keep saying "but we have too many SPs..." Not really!

If Dinardo is our swingman, and Pap is already in the roto, then we NEED 200 innings from both Schilling and Beckett--which isn't going to happen. I mean, I'm psyched to have DiNardo as a swingman, but to me that means he gets 5-10 spot starts, not 150+ IPs as a starter.

[mr guido]

The reason I didn't compare the Sox' projection to one of the Blue Jays is because clearly the Red Sox offseason isn't over yet. Since Damon signed, the media has been wailing and gnashing teeth over the Sox' loss of 'proven' talent for guys they've never heard of, making the team a declining property and rendering this offseason a failure.

To date, pointing out that the offseason isn't over and that Marte is a great bet and that Damon is overrated has done nothing to quiet the fears of those stirring the pot. So I wanted to do an analysis using Ordway & Co's assumptions and see what the implications were.

It's admittedly back-of-the-envelope and there is no such thing as a sure thing. But as the numbers shake out, it appears to me that even Ordway's nightmare team taking the field is a better thing than we saw in 2004. That's all I was trying to investigate.

Oh and Ras, I knew what you meant.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Maybe I'm missing something, but if the Jays were a second division team with Delgado, how does Glaus put them over the top?

The pitching.

Halladay, Burnett, Lily, Chacin, and Towers and a bullpen fronted by Ryan.

Halladay should pitch more than he did last year (142 IP). Lily should be better (80 ERA+ in 126 IP). Towers (120 ERA+) and Chacin (119 ERA+) both threw over 200 IP, and Burnett is a pretty good bet for at least a 115 ERA+ in 175 IP or so.

The pen is always a question mark, but the Jays have 6 guys returning who each had at least 57 IP with ERA+ over 100 (Schoenweis, Frasor, Chulk, Speier, Downs, Walker)....and they are adding Ryan who SOSH had a hard-on for.

A lot of folks here are missing a huge piece of the picture, though. The Blue Jays really underachieved last year, by Pythag they were an 88 win team. If you believe in that as a baseline going forward, then gaining 4-5 games makes them a 92-93 win team. If they dump Hinske and add Molina (as rumored), they get even better.

[Todd Benzinger]

OK, Rudy, you are right... to a degree... But I still find the "sky is falling" reaction to the Glaus deal amusing, because Glaus is not the key piece here. And he is in the Nomar/JD Drew category to me: when he plays, he's a plus.

I say "to a degree" because your Jays SP projections are all purely on the upside. I hadn't realized that their pythag was 1 win from the Sox... That's scary.

Anyway, I like Chacin, but will his 2nd year go as smoothly as his 1st? Will Lilly get over whatever was plaguing him so easily? Will Halladay stay healthy for a year? Will AJB avoid plunging into mediocrity for a long stretch as he seems to always do? Will the AL Beast get to him? Has Towers really turned the corner, or will he backslide?

I think some of the answers will be positive for the Jays, and some will be negative.

Edited by Todd Benzinger, 28 December 2005 - 09:31 AM.

[PedroKsBambino]

The Jays also have two of their starters who are very much GB pitchers and a much weakened infield defense, with Hill replacing Hudson and Glaus replacing Koskie (at least reportedly).

Far too early to tell.

[mr guido]

The pitching.

Halladay, Burnett, Lily, Chacin, and Towers and a bullpen fronted by Ryan.

Halladay should pitch more than he did last year (142 IP). Lily should be better (80 ERA+ in 126 IP). Towers (120 ERA+) and Chacin (119 ERA+) both threw over 200 IP, and Burnett is a pretty good bet for at least a 115 ERA+ in 175 IP or so.

The pen is always a question mark, but the Jays have 6 guys returning who each had at least 57 IP with ERA+ over 100 (Schoenweis, Frasor, Chulk, Speier, Downs, Walker)....and they are adding Ryan who SOSH had a hard-on for.

A lot of folks here are missing a huge piece of the picture, though. The Blue Jays really underachieved last year, by Pythag they were an 88 win team. If you believe in that as a baseline going forward, then gaining 4-5 games makes them a 92-93 win team. If they dump Hinske and add Molina (as rumored), they get even better.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While the Jays were an 88 win pythag team on the basis of their 775-705 RS/RA, they were a 80 win team based on 2nd or 3rd order pythagorean. In other words, based on their components they had no business scoring so many runs and allowing so few, as the numbers pointed to 722 RS 738 RA (2nd order) or 713 RS, 717 RA (3rd order). So be careful when you look at those numbers. (The Sox on the other hand were close to spot on comparing 1st vs 2nd & 3rd order)

And I don't really want to get into a discussion about departed individual players, but Edgar Renteria was not an average SS offensively. AL average for SS was 276/331/412 and ER was 276/335/385. (With terrible defense and a well above average contract.)

[possumbait]

Halladay, Burnett, Lily, Chacin, and Towers and a bullpen fronted by Ryan.

Any fan would love that pitching.

But let's play a game here, and consider Rudy's Toronto Doppleganger, and what such a Toronto fan would say...

1) Halladay has been injured two of the last three years. You can't really count on him to anchor a rotation, can you?
2) Burnett is also an injury risk, and won't have such an easy time against the AL East and the DH. Couldn't the money on his contract been better spent elsewhere than a guy who may post only a 4.20 ERA?
3) Has Lily ever shown the consistency to be a reliable 3 starter?
4) Do Chacin and Towers really have what it takes to help a team toward the playoffs? They haven't really accomplished anything like that before, have they?
5) Aren't Ryan's mechanics suspect? Is this the guy you want anchoring the bullpen if his arm might fall off in June?

[Rudy Pemberton]

1) I'd say he's a much better bet than Schilling.
2) Perhaps, but how would you spend it better, in this market? A guy who can give you a 4.20 ERA or so over 175 IP is pretty good. He's similar to Matt Clement, with a bit more upside. It's better to overspend than not spend at all- at least in the immediate future.
3) Yes. 120, 98, 120, 80 ERA+ the past four years.
4) I don't know. They haven't for sure, and it's a legit question I guess.
5) I don't know, didn't hear that when SOSH was drooling over him. Sure, Ryan is a risk (all players are) but money aside, you'd rather have him than not have him.

By Pythag, Sox were a 90 win team last year and the Jays were 88. Given the moves each has made, so far, I certainly think one could make a case that the Jays are as good or perhaps better, it certainly isn't something that should be laughed at anymore.

Your exercise does prove my point though, we are all biased towards our team and aren't always looking at the entire picture. The Jays have a darn good team, and a really good pitching staff and were the shoe on the other foot, I think we'd agree.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 28 December 2005 - 09:42 AM.

[Clears Cleaver]

Not sure it means anything, but I bet the holdover toronto players are a lot more excited to get this season going than are the holdover Red Sox players.

[possumbait]

A good-natured reply to my snarkiness. My only remaining comment at this juncture is that you don't win in the off-season. If the Jays have improved, and the Sox haven't answered, then good for the Jays, and good that the Sox will play some meaningful games against them, if only in 2006 before suckitude overwhelms an organization that has mismanged its financial resources. Play ball!

[Rudy Pemberton]

I think that's a worthwhile point, and is one of the things that worries me about the Sox moves. The Sox players who aren't asking out, and who have gone on record, have acted as if the sky is falling. Arroyo thinks the team is being dismantled, for example, and wonders what is going on. Does that kind of thing matter? Well, I don't know....but it surely doesn't help!

[PedroKsBambino]

Your exercise does prove my point though, we are all biased towards our team and aren't always looking at the entire picture. The Jays have a darn good team, and a really good pitching staff and were the shoe on the other foot, I think we'd agree.

I think what it proves is that if someone is trying to find something negative to say about a team they can always do so.

It's certainly not the case that everyone is biased towards their own team, either...a quick runthrough of this board shows quite clearly that many are just as far in the opposite direction.

[Butch Hobsons elbo chips]

Not sure it means anything, but I bet the holdover toronto players are a lot more excited to get this season going than are the holdover Red Sox players.

They'd better be excited to start now. It's December, they're done spending and they can play winter games in the Skydome. They better be believe they are presently above the Sox at this point, or they are fu@#ed once again when Spring comes!

[Rudy Pemberton]

It's certainly not the case that everyone is biased towards their own team, either...a quick runthrough of this board shows quite clearly that many are just as far in the opposite direction.

That's certainly true as well. But I think it's pretty clear that the Jays should be a pretty good team, and one could make a case that they might be better than the Sox and it's not a huge leap. Ultimately, though, it doesn't really matter....it's a prediction based on projections and none of those are worth a damn on Opening Day. I still like our chances, and the best moves in December are not always the best ones in April-October! I think we can all agree on that!

[yecul]

You can't make moves based on your opponents, you simply have to make the best moves for you club that you can. Boston needs to find some OF help and try to upgrade 1B and fill SS. Not because Toronto made moves, but because Boston has holes in those spots.

The gap has narrowed, but Boston is still a very strong team. They are a playoff contender. I don't think you can pencil then in for the playoffs, but you can pencil them in for the hunt. Things go their way and they're right in there. They don't (Schilling, Foulke suck again, etc) and they miss the playoffs.

Boston shouldn't feel pressure to make a "big" move. They should simply make a good one. Well... good ones... there are multiple needs.

[Archer1979]

You know when you're cleaning out the garage. You take everything out, sweep up, put everything away, and the place is nice and neat. There's always a point in the process before you sweep up, you look around, and see that the only thing that you've really managed to do to that point is create a total mess.

That's the point that the Red Sox roster is right now. The FO had to clean up the roster. As much as I'm sorry, from a sentimental standpoint, to see Mueller and Millar go, it was time to part ways. So far, this off-season, they've managed to lose ONE player that they were making a serious effort to retain.

On the flip side of the ledger, they received a front-line starting pitcher and a starting second baseman for three prospects and a backup catcher. They also willingly traded a bad signing for a Grade-A prospect.

For about two weeks, I've been hoping for a resolution to the Damon negotiations for one reason... do they have to find a center-fielder/lead-off guy or not? At least now, the Red Sox Triumvirate knows what the shopping list looks like:

Centerfielder
Shortstop
Left-fielder?

(one of whom should also be a lead-off hitter)

Another starting pitcher would also be nice.


They also have, at present time, two starting pitchers to trade to help fill the list.

I'm not worried. They've swept out the garage. They have three months to put everything away.

Let the men work.

[mr guido]

By Pythag, Sox were a 90 win team last year and the Jays were 88.

I said this above but you blew right past it and repeated your claim, so I'll point out again that calling the Jays an 88 pythag. win team is misleading and shouldn't be accepted at face value.

I don't think you can justify using the 88 win pythag figure when they were a 79 win pythag team using EQA runs.

[Rudy Pemberton]

I think the difficult part about what the Sox are trying to do is that, while they are looking to fill the holes that exist, they are also dabbling in making moves (Manny, Wells) that open up more holes....now presumably those players acquired would fill other others, but then there's the pursuit of players (Milwood, Wagner / Ryan) who wouldn't fill any holes. Of course, maybe there's a chain reaction waiting to happen if those signings occurred....really hard to see the whole plan here as it is so complex and constantly moving.

It's not a normal offseason where you have a few holes and you go about solving them, is it?

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 28 December 2005 - 10:05 AM.

[smastroyin]

Obviously the offseason isn't close to done yet so making a bunch of projections is premature. However, I am pretty confident that if Schilling, Foulke, and Lowell have seasons like they did in 2004, this is still a strong enough team to make a solid run. And if they don't and the year ends up being not all that great, but the return is that they can build a solid core for the next 5-7 years, then I am all for it.

[Rudy Pemberton]

I said this above but you blew right past it and repeated your claim, so I'll point out again that calling the Jays an 88 pythag. win team is misleading and shouldn't be accepted at face value.

I woudn't say it's misleading; based on the RS and RA, they were an 88 win team. Now, I see your point though about them scoring more runs / allowing fewer, etc. than they should have based on their components. I did miss that point the first time around, my apologies.

And I don't really want to get into a discussion about departed individual players, but Edgar Renteria was not an average SS offensively. AL average for SS was 276/331/412 and ER was 276/335/385. (With terrible defense and a well above average contract.)

I think this is another case of: it depends on what stats you use. EQA for a SS last year was .254, Renteria was at .259.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 28 December 2005 - 10:09 AM.

[mr guido]

I think this is another case of: it depends on what stats you use. EQA for a SS last year was .254, Renteria was at .259.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Where do you find EQA league averages? All I have is this page here: http://www.baseballp...verages2005.php

Looking closer I bet the difference between our claims about ER is that I used AL average and yours is probably a MLB average. There was a surprisingly big gulf between AL & NL shorstops last year.

[PedroKsBambino]

The other thing to consider there is that amongst SS median could be well different than mean. I haven't looked (and thus I may look silly for saying so) but there's a case for using either to make the point, I think.

I don't think mixing AL and NL makes great sense, primarily because the NL 8 slot is a very different slot than anything in an AL lineup and there's a disproportionate amount of NL SS who hit there.

[Rudy Pemberton]

I got the positional EQA averages from here

EQA

You could certainly seperate leagues, but saying that Edgar Renteria was an above average offensive major league SS is still a true statement.

He may have been below average for an AL SS, primarily because Miguel Tejada, Derek Jeter and Michael Young (and Peralta) are in the AL.

Weird that, by EQA, the top 6 SS's were in the AL.

EQA by SS

Peralta .310
Young .309
Jeter .303
Tejada .303
Guillen .289
Lugo .288
Lopez .286
B.Hall .283
Crosby .283
Furcal .275
Rollins .268
Eckstein .268
Greene .260
Renteria .259
Adams .257
Cabrera .253
Barmes .251
Vizquel .249
Uribe .249
Reyes .248
A-Gon .248
Berroa .246
Clayton .237

Etc, etc.

[redsoxjamie]

Anyway, I like Chacin, but will his 2nd year go as smoothly as his 1st? Will Lilly get over whatever was plaguing him so easily? Will Halladay stay healthy for a year? Will AJB avoid plunging into mediocrity for a long stretch as he seems to always do? Will the AL Beast get to him? Has Towers really turned the corner, or will he backslide?

I think some of the answers will be positive for the Jays, and some will be negative.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

-Will Lowell rebound?
-How will Loretta do?
-Will Beckett be able to make over 20 starts?
-Who's playing centerfield?
-Who's playing shortstop?
-Who's playing first base?
-Will we get anything from Schilling?
-Will we get anything from Foulke?


Every team has questions. It's silly to look at the Blue Jays and pretend that they haven't gotten significantly better, as Rudy points out.

Guido, your study makes me feel slightly better, but I take issue with the following assumptions:

(1) That if Manny is traded, he will be traded for equal value. You said yourself that that wasn't realistic, so I won't harp on it, but I just wanted to emphasize the point that if Manny is traded, this team does not look good in 2006 at all.

(2) Youkilis playing 1B. Everybody seems to assume that this is a possibility--even a PROBABILITY for next year, but has Tito and/or the front office even HINTED at this? I see no evidence that (a) the front office thinks that Youkilis is competent enough defensively at 1st base to make him an everyday player there, and (b) the front office thinks that Youkilis can replicate his offensive production as a part-time player on an everyday basis.

(3) The idea that Schilling or "someone else on the staff", plus Beckett, will be able to give us 400 IP of 3.75 ERA ball. We have no idea what Schilling will be able to give us next year--I suspect he will be better than last year, but 200 IP of 3.75 ERA ball is awfully ambitious. It's also awfully ambitious to assume that Beckett will be able to give us 200 IP considering that he has yet to have a season where he made 30 starts(or pitched 200 innings) in his career.

(4) The bullpen in general. Frankly, I have no idea what to expect from Foulke, Timlin, Mota, or Seanez. I could see each of them having a very good year. I could see each of them being practically worthless. The kiddos give me some hope that the 2006 bullpen will be an improvement over the 2005 one, but this still seems to me like the "throw a bunch of s**t up on the wall and see what sticks" philosophy of bullpen pitchers that seemed to characterize 2003 and 2005.

Using your nifty chart, I think that the most realistic projections at this point put the Sox somewhere between an 86 and 91 win team. I know that the Sox outperformed their pythagorean projection last year, but I really don't see those projections as anything to be "optimistic" about. Add in to the mix the fact that our division just got significantly harder with the improvement of the Jays and the Yankees. The sky may not be falling, but there are some pretty ominous clouds up there. Sure, you see the sun if you look really hard for it, but you have to squint, and you have to ignore a lot of gray stuff up there too. </end cheesy metaphor>

Edited by redsoxjamie, 28 December 2005 - 12:02 PM.

[ctsoxfan5]

(2)  Youkilis playing 1B.  Everybody seems to assume that this is a possibility--even a PROBABILITY for next year, but has Tito and/or the front office even HINTED at this?  I see no evidence that (a) the front office thinks that Youkilis is competent enough defensively at 1st base to make him an everyday player there, and (B) the front office thinks that Youkilis can replicate his offensive production as a part-time player on an everyday basis. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From the Herald, 12/15:

Francona, meanwhile, sounded quite content to have the Red Sox make just a minor splash in obtaining a new first baseman. He likes Kevin Youkilis in that role.

“I would hope we get a complementary first baseman because I’m a big Kevin Youkilis fan,” Francona said. “I have no problem with Youk getting a bunch of at-bats next year. At some point, you have to let these guys play.”

http://redsox.boston...&format=&page=2

[Lose Remerswaal]

From Lurker: Monster Dick Radatz

This is probably unnecessary, but I liked Mr. Guido's analysis in the "The Sky Ain't Fallin'" thread and thought I would elaborate with an evaluation of the Yankees and Blue Jays Feel free to post for discussion or not. Either way, I would be interested in your thoughts.

[edit: just saw BP's analysis of the Jays off-season moves. I will defer to their expertise and limit this to the MFY, although I will echo other poster's sentiments that the Jays significantly underperformed last year. Their record in one-run games was 16-31. Even a .500 record in those games gives them the division].

2005 MFY
(Offense)
Last year, the Yanks scored 886 runs. The position players for the Yanks totaled a VORP of approximately 400, with the following positional breakdown. (note: this rough approximation ignores Tino Martinez' 348 PA [VORP 10.4] and Tony Womack's 351 PA [VORP <8.9>] in favor of Bubba Crosby's 103 PA because I wanted to compare Crosby to Damon for 2006 projections).

2005 VORP 
1B    58.4  Giambi 
2B    27.5  Cano 
SS    66.3  Jeter 
3B    99.7  A-Rod 
RF    56.5  Sheffield 
CF   <0.7> Crosby 
LF    53.0  Matsui 
C     32.6  Posada 
DH    7.3   Williams 
Total  400.6    

This brings up two points: first, it is clear that the addition of Johnny Damon's 2005 VORP of 49.2 significantly upgrades an already potent offense. Fine. Nothing new here. Assuming JD maintains his '05 value, the Yanks would be on pace to score an impressive 936 runs. Second, the power of the starting nine is only matched by the worthlessness of the Yankee bench. Are they MFY a lethal juggernaut from 1-9? Yes, but after that the number drop off sharply. One injury could make a huge difference in production.

(Pitching)
As discussed in detail during last year's pennant race, the 2005 Yankee staff was an aberration. Together with Gordon and Rivera, the Yanks limited their opponents to 789 runs. Given that the 2005 ERA+ numbers of Chacon, Wang, & Small were 156, 111 & 139, respectively, even the return of a healthy Pavano & Wright means this number is likely to go up.

2005                    Career 
Chacon 2.86 ERA         Pavano 4.27 ERA 
Wang 4.02 ERA           Wright 5.17 ERA 
Small 3.20 ERA    

Stealing a line from Mr. Guido, the difference in replacing 400 IP of 3.75 ERA with 4.75 ERA is about 40 runs.

The 2005 bullpen was equally good, although this was largely due to Rivera [ARP = 30.1], Gordon [ARP = 11.3], and Sturtze [ARP = 10.5].

For 2006, the Yanks have moved Small to the BP [ARP = 1.2], kept Proctor [ARP = <3.2>], added Villone [ARP = 12.5 w/ Seattle, <3.8> w/ Florida] and Myers [ARP = 5.6], and tried to replace Gordon with Farnsworth [ARP = 10.6]. Since I can't imagine Captain Tightpants repeating his Detroit success in the pressure of NY, let's assume the bullpen remains the same in '06.

(Wins)
This simplistic analysis suggests the 2006 MFY will likely score more runs, but also allow more. Here are the Pythagorean win projections for a 936 RS / 830 RA season. Feel free to adjust according to your pleasure

  RS 886   911   936   961   986 
RA             
730   96.5 98.7 100.7 102.7 104.6 
780   91.3 93.5  95.6  97.7  99.6 
830   86.3 88.5  90.7  92.8  94.8 
880   81.6 83.8  86.0  88.1  90.2 
930   77.1 79.3  81.5  83.7  85.7

Mr. Guido's "median semi-realistic projection of a team with no CF and SS working out to 91.1 wins" can compete with the 2006 Yanks of today. What concerns me is that the Yanks have outperformed their Pythag for the past two seasons, putting together an impressive run down the stretch last year seemingly against all odds.

Who knows if this will happen again, but the Sox pitching staff clearly needs to return to form to be competitive in the AL East. I don't believe the sky isn't falling, but it is being supported by G38's ankle, Foulke's knees, and Clement's head. That should be cause for concern.

Edit: Paragraph above RS/RA data for accuracy and RS/RA chart and conclusion

Edited by Lose Remerswaal, 28 December 2005 - 02:22 PM.

[Doza]

opps wrong thread.

Edited by Doza, 28 December 2005 - 02:39 PM.

[Walt Droopo]

BP injecting a little sanity our way!

http://www.baseballp...?articleid=4683

[example1]

BP injecting a little sanity our way!

http://www.baseballp...?articleid=4683

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Holy Cow! Look at Pedroia's PECOTA forecast (That is what that link is to, yes?).

Can anyone with a little more saber-skill than I have explain what much of that means and why it is valuable? For instance, which of those charts is most useful to look at? I was particularly struck by the projected VORP and EqA projections, but don't know if I'm missing something.

Sorry if I'm a relative dumbass, but I pick this stuff up quickly when someone describes it to me... thanks

Edited by example1, 30 December 2005 - 11:33 AM.

[behindthepen]

BP injecting a little sanity our way!

http://www.baseballp...?articleid=4683

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know it's extremely unpopular to say anthing nice about Matt Clement, but that article opens that can of worms. Realistically, you have to believe that he will have a significantly better 06 than 05. Despite the conventional wisdom to the contrary, he was not consistently bad in the 2nd half. On top of that, I believe that he had very bad bullpen support, but I'll leave that analysis to the experts.

MONTH - ERA - WHIP - BAA
 April 3.90 1.67 0.309
 May 2.43 1.06 0.199
 June 3.94 1.09 0.242
 July 8.88 1.66 0.299
 August 3.6 1.2 0.239
 September 6 1.64 0.286

Lets just assume that July was worse than normal because he took a line drive off of his ear ... and perhaps the bullpen support gets a little better ... and we're probably looking at a guy that gives us ~200 ip and a 4.00 ERA

And before you say he's a head case, this is a guy that 9 days after we thought he might be brain-damaged, he was back on the mound at Fenway. And about that playoff start ... I'm pretty sure the likes of Clemens, Mussina, Glavine, Randy Johnson, etc etc have all had very bad playoff starts.

[Lucen]

I know it's extremely unpopular to say anthing nice about Matt Clement, but that article opens that can of worms.  Realistically, you have to believe that he will have a significantly better 06 than 05.  Despite the conventional wisdom to the contrary, he was not consistently bad in the 2nd half.  On top of that, I believe that he had very bad bullpen support, but I'll leave that analysis to the experts.

MONTH - ERA - WHIP - BAA
April 3.90 1.67 0.309
May 2.43 1.06 0.199
June 3.94 1.09 0.242
July 8.88 1.66 0.299
August 3.6 1.2 0.239
September 6 1.64 0.286

Lets just assume that July was worse than normal because he took a line drive off of his ear ... and perhaps the bullpen support gets a little better ... and we're probably looking at a guy that gives us ~200 ip and a 4.00 ERA

And before you say he's a head case, this is a guy that 9 days after we thought he might be brain-damaged, he was back on the mound at Fenway.  And about that playoff start ... I'm pretty sure the likes of Clemens, Mussina, Glavine, Randy Johnson, etc etc have all had very bad playoff starts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I remember a horrible start in Fenway for Clemens as a Yankee... a game Pedro came out of the bullpen, if I recall correctly. I still wouldn't mind seeing Clement go. He had several really awful starts down the stretch and didn't get it done in the playoffs. He's had poor starts down the stretch before getting here too. It's not an anomally... it's resembling a pattern at this point.

I think he could be a productive 4 or 5 pitcher. I don't think anyone here would argue against that. But last year he was thrust into a possition where he had to be our ace and it wasn't working. Behind Beckett, a healthy Schilling, Wells (if he stays), Wakefield, and maybe even Papelbon... he's not a bad option, if he wasn't getting 10 million a year.

[thisyearisthe]

I remember some of Matt Clement's starts early in the season, when he was THE man. For a stretch, he was the Sox best starter last season (May). The thing I recall was his focus coming off the mound every inning. Just completely dialed-in. He seemed to lose this as the season wore on. The beaning didn't help.

Anyway, I'm still hopefull that with Beckett and Schilling in front of him, he'll find his way to consistency for a full season.

[Lucen]

I remember some of Matt Clement's starts early in the season, when he was THE man.  For a stretch, he was the Sox best starter last season (May).  The thing I recall was his focus coming off the mound every inning.  Just completely dialed-in.  He seemed to lose this as the season wore on.  The beaning didn't help.

Anyway, I'm still hopefull that with Beckett and Schilling in front of him, he'll find his way to consistency for a full season.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If Schilling is healthy, I think Clement *may* be able to feel comfortable as a #3 starter. That is what he was brought in to be, isn't it? But if we can move him and get something of value back in return, I don't hesitate. This rumored Manny and Clement for Tejada deal, for example, I think I'd pull the trigger on if the O's agree to it. We have a surpluss of pitching at the moment, and if we can get a bat and glove like Tejada's to replace Manny, we need to jump on it, as it's the best deal we're gonna see for him, and it will fill one of the perceived 'big holes'.

[hescores21]

I remember some of Matt Clement's starts early in the season, when he was THE man.  For a stretch, he was the Sox best starter last season (May).  The thing I recall was his focus coming off the mound every inning.  Just completely dialed-in.  He seemed to lose this as the season wore on.  The beaning didn't help.

Anyway, I'm still hopefull that with Beckett and Schilling in front of him, he'll find his way to consistency for a full season.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He WAS basically our #1 starter for a good part of the first half so maybe being a #4 or 5 will benefit him. There absolutely has to be a reason that he loses it completely like he has done in the 2nd half.

I am not smart enough to figure it out but I think Mazzone may!