After a winter of trades and signings how do teams stack up 'on paper'? I used the rosters from the MLB Rosters thread and added each batter's 2005 runs scored and each pitcher's runs allowed. I normalized each team using MLB averages for team AB and IP and added them up to estimate the number of runs scored and runs allowed by the current members of the roster. Then I applied the venerated Bill James Pythagorean theory to the results to come up with the chart below.

 

 

 

It says look for a dogfight in the AL Central, the Brewers will surprise, the Cardinals will disappoint and nobody will win in the NL West. Wild cards go the A's and Astros.

 

 

 

AL Central
Team	Runs	Runs Allow	PagPct	W	L	GB
White Sox	755	665	.557	90	72	..
Indians	792	713	.548	88	74	2
Twins	704	645	.540	87	75	3
Tigers	731	765	.479	77	85	13
Royals	688	874	.392	63	99	27
AL East
Team	Runs	Runs Allow	PagPct	W	L	GB
Yankees	893	742	.584	94	68	..
Red Sox	797	713	.551	89	73	5
Blue Jays	745	661	.555	89	73	5
Orioles	716	770	.467	75	87	19
Devil Rays	716	955	.371	60	102	34
AL West
Team	Runs	Runs Allow	PagPct	W	L	GB
Angels	745	632	.574	93	69	..
A's	776	682	.559	90	72	3
Rangers	819	781	.522	84	78	9
Mariners	731	727	.503	81	81	12
NL Central
Team	Runs	Runs Allow	PagPct	W	L	GB
Brewers	752	641	.572	92	70	..
Astros	721	634	.559	90	72	2
Cubs	739	692	.530	85	77	7
Cardinals	746	715	.520	84	78	8
Reds	806	841	.480	77	85	15
Pirates	701	769	.458	74	88	18
NL East
Team	Runs	Runs Allow	PagPct	W	L	GB
Braves	786	694	.556	90	72	..
Phillies	791	728	.538	87	75	3
Mets	728	715	.508	82	80	8
Marlins	746	738	.505	81	81	9
Nationals	691	737	.471	76	86	14
NL West
Team	Runs	Runs Allow	PagPct	W	L	GB
Dodgers	757	771	.492	79	83	..
Rockies	773	855	.454	73	89	6
Padres	711	794	.450	72	90	7
Giants	664	770	.433	70	92	9
Diamondbacks	710	820	.434	70	92	9

This is nice for speculation, but I don't put a lot of weight on statistical speculation.

Baseball has so many intanigbles that I think it's very tough to try to predict anything.

Interesting chart, though - surprised to see the Cardinals speculated to finish 4th.

I certainly don't see the Brew Crew as being better than the Sox. 92 wins is VERY optimistic for Milwaukee. They'll be pretty damn good, but 92 wins? I'd be stunned.

Edited February 19, 200620 yr by The Critic

Actually, those are all of the division winners that I picked with the exception of the Angels in the West. Nice job putting this together

Man, sometimes there's just too much statistical analysis in baseball.

This is nice for speculation, but I don't put a lot of weight on statistical speculation.

Baseball has so many intanigbles that I think it's very tough to try to predict anything.

Interesting chart, though - surprised to see the Cardinals speculated to finish 4th.

I certainly don't see the Brew Crew as being better than the Sox. 92 wins is VERY optimistic for Milwaukee. They'll be pretty damn good, but 92 wins? I'd be stunned.

Agreed. Everyday in baseball is a new day and these are past results pasted on to the future. It did kill a couple hours on a very, very cold morning though.

Statistics are the devil's work!

 

Seriously, though, how did you treat young players? Does a pitcher who was only up for a month at the end only count for those end-of-season runs?

 

It will be pretty damn funny if the Nationals finish below the Marlins. And I wouldn't totally discount that.

Man, sometimes there's just too much statistical analysis in baseball.

^^^

I actually agree with the Brewers finishing 1st

Especailly when it has the Marlins finishing .500.........      

So you're saying a team with an $18M payroll can't finish at .500? That's just asinine.

every team in the NL west finishes under .500......LMAO

Edited February 19, 200620 yr by TheBlackSox8

Seriously, though, how did you treat young players?  Does a pitcher who was only up for a month at the end only count for those end-of-season runs?

 

 

^^^

 

To me, this, and players who were injured last year(Jim Thome is screaming bloody murder) are the majors downsides to this. If you can put in some projected numbers for some of these players, then I think you're on to something.

 

I don't view the Sox as 9 games worse when KW did nothing but improve the overall team.

I actually agree with the Brewers finishing 1st

not me, not quite yet...i still need to see hardy weeks and fielder longer in the bigs, but if they develop this year and all have strong years and their pitching stays healthy they have as good a shot as anyone

Interesting reads. I think BP just did their's with PECOTA's projected WARPS. Pythag is flawed in general, but it's the best correlation we have, so I like it.

Actually, those are all of the division winners that I picked with the exception of the Angels in the West.  Nice job putting this together

 

That's a fact which puts this analysis' credibility in it's proper perspective.

The best and worst teams always defy these predictions by a great deal. Factors such as a good or poor bullpen, 1 run games record, etc. can throw these WAY off. Last year, the White Sox were something like +11 or +12 on their predicted Pythagorean Record (meaning they got 11 or 12 more wins more than that formula predicted). If they were to do that again this year, they'd win over 100 games, but that would mean they'd have to get another great year from the pen and win about 2/3 of their 1 run games again.

Edited February 20, 200620 yr by Dam8610

So under this model no teams in baseball will win more than 94 games? You might as well throw it in the trash then.

TLAK, good analysis, as always.

 

The one thing that makes a huge difference is strength of schedule. If you apply the SoS to your predictions some teams will have about a +/-10 game difference.