southsider2k5 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 http://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=Standings Proected ALC Indians 85-77 White Sox 81-81 Royals 79-83 Tigers 79-83 Twins 78-84 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSox Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Curious how much further one of the OF'ers would take them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 12, 2016 Author Share Posted January 12, 2016 Dan Hayes @CSNHayes 51s52 seconds ago Early @fangraphs projections has #WhiteSox 81-81. Offense is projected to score 4.42 per gm, up from 3.84 in '15. http://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=Standings … Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Wow they have no faith in the 2015 champs, they have the Royals at 79-83. I can dig that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipps Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Its funny because I see Cleveland as the least threatening of all of the teams in the division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shysocks Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:04 AM) Curious how much further one of the OF'ers would take them. My guess is to about 84-78. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunt Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:04 AM) Curious how much further one of the OF'ers would take them. Assuming they would be replacing Avi and they are using Avi's projected Steamer prediction: Cespedes 2.6 wins Upton 2.5 wins Pearce 1.7 wins Fowler 1.4 wins Parra 0.7 wins CarGo 1.4 wins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSox Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Just curious, where did they have us last year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shysocks Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:11 AM) Just curious, where did they have us last year? Don't remember exactly but I think most systems had us between 76 and 80 wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:11 AM) Just curious, where did they have us last year? I believe it was 78 wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palehose1 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (ChicagoHeel @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:05 AM) Wow they have no faith in the 2015 champs, they have the Royals at 79-83. I can dig that. I cant see the Royals dropping that much, although I do see them falling back some from 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Mets, Pirates, Blue Jays and Cardinals all projected at 84 wins, with the Red Sox at 92. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 They hated the Royals last year too and totally nailed that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saufley Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:04 AM) Curious how much further one of the OF'ers would take them. Now that is an excellent question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 (edited) FWIW KC led baseball in "cluster luck" last year. https://thepowerrank.com/cluster-luck/ Their rotation is still awful, they've lost a couple key bullpen pieces, they have a black hole at 2B, and it's very likely we'll see regression from Cain, Morales, Hosmer, and Moustakas (him in particular because he's never come close to hitting that well before), and Escobar and Dyson can't hit. I do think the projections are harsh on them (I don't think WAR accurately represents relievers' value yet, and the defensive metrics for WAR are not particularly reliable either, especially for projections), but I agree with raBBit and the projections that Cleveland is currently the team to beat in the ALC. Edited January 12, 2016 by OmarComing25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 They were pretty damn lucky in 2013, hence the regression they all foresaw then. Clearly there is something the model is undervaluing, likely with the contact and defense, and relievers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 They were pretty damn lucky in 2013, hence the regression they all foresaw then. Clearly there is something the model is undervaluing, likely with the contact and defense, and relievers. The model was undervaluing those things back in 2005 and still hasn't adjusted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipps Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:37 AM) Cleveland is pretty damn good in my mind. Once Brantley returns... They have the best rotation in the division and a lineup that I think Lindor is totally going to change over a full year. Lindor is going to terrorize us for years. I think he's an MVP candidate and a complete game changer for the Tribe. 1.) Kluber 2.) Carrasco 3.) Salazar 4.) Bauer 5.) Anderson CF Davis SS Lindor 2B Kipnis LF Brantley 1B Santana DH Napoli C Gomes RF Chisenhall 3B Johnson I hear ya but we were saying the same thing last year as well. Maybe it all comes together for them next year and I am sure there will be a lot of people picking them but I personally dont feel as threatened by the Tribe as the other four teams. But all things considered its going to be a damn good division next year I would bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiderman Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:02 AM) http://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=Standings Proected ALC Indians 85-77 White Sox 81-81 Royals 79-83 Tigers 79-83 Twins 78-84 The records of teams in these predictions, even teams they are predicting to win the division, are always awful. Does anyone really think all 5 teams will be separated by 7 games in the standings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 11:13 AM) Don't remember exactly but I think most systems had us between 76 and 80 wins. Steamer had the white sox at 78-84 last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiderman Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 10:13 AM) Don't remember exactly but I think most systems had us between 76 and 80 wins. I feel like 2/3 of the teams are between 75 and 82 wins. Maybe that's how it actually turns our or I'm wrong,. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (spiderman @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 12:11 PM) The records of teams in these predictions, even teams they are predicting to win the division, are always awful. Does anyone really think all 5 teams will be separated by 7 games in the standings? Generally these predictors are conservative; they don't often predict 100 win teams or 60 loss teams. To do that in the predictions, you have to be unbelievably loaded or unbelievably terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (spiderman @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 11:11 AM) The records of teams in these predictions, even teams they are predicting to win the division, are always awful. Does anyone really think all 5 teams will be separated by 7 games in the standings? Projections are always by their nature going to be conservative. They actually do OK in predicting individual player performance, but there's too many factors at play to really accurately project the records of teams. A team could replay the season 5 times, have all their players put up the exact same numbers each time, but have 5 very different records at the end of each season. That's not including extra stuff like random breakouts, injuries, underperformance, and players from the minors stepping in and contributing. Edited January 12, 2016 by OmarComing25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shysocks Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 QUOTE (spiderman @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 11:12 AM) I feel like 2/3 of the teams are between 75 and 82 wins. Maybe that's how it actually turns our or I'm wrong,. You're right, the projections tend to be very moderate. Example: even though you'll usually end up with a 100-win team, it's hard to project anybody doing it as the most likely outcome. They're a good way to gauge where teams are at, but there are enough wild misses every single year that they should not be taken too seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 (edited) With Brantley out until midseason, and huge holes (the equivalent of Saladino, Avi and LaRoche) at 3b and RF, the Indians really shouldn't be the favorite until they prove they can win with Brantley. Rajai Davis isn't that impressive, either...and who knows what Napoli actually has left. Not to mention Kipnis and Santana are so inconsistent. But yeah, Lindor's so overlooked because of the team he plays for and the arrival of Correa and Bryant at roughly the same time. And they should have a healthy Gomes for the full season. If they added Cespedes or Upton, sure. Pen has some question marks, as well as overall defense. Edited January 12, 2016 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.