How the West Will Be Won ← FREE KRAUT!

How the West Will Be Won 98

13 Dec 2012  |  elcroata  |f(k) · FK-All · Rosterbating

I envision this as a community project that helps test my hypothesis that you can project team wins based on last year’s TTL (True Talent Level) Wins and accounting for roster changes (be it different players on the roster or different performances that are expected from the same players, because of the expected talent level change or playing time).

I want to properly set expectancies, so I’ll go right ahead and say it. This is a futile exercise. Most players will miss their projections. Somebody will get hurt. Somebody will be bought or sold at the trade deadline. But even if we were to project every single player to his last single, the runs and wins we would predict as an outcome are likely to be wrong. The perfectly guessed wOBA for and wOBA against the Athletics in 2013 will give us only roughly 60% chance that the actual wins will be in the 10-win window centered around our most likely projection.

In other words, if we come to conclusion that the A’s are most likely to be a 91 win team there is a one-in-a-three chance that they will win fewer than 86 games or more than 96.

So, why do it?

One, because I think it’s fun, although my ideas of fun are not always universally accepted. Second, we might learn something in the process. At the end of the season, we will be able to analyze both where our presumptions were off and where my approach was wrong and perhaps learn something for the future. Also, this will perhaps enable us to better understand the impact of roster changes. And last but not the least, it could be a nice community project where everyone can participate. You don’t need to know what WAR is nor what wOBA is. I can do the math. What I would like is the wisdom of the crowd when it comes to the questions like how many innings will Anderson pitch or who will get most at bats in the outfield.

How will it work?

We have a starting point for each of the five teams in the AL West. That’s the TTL W-L from this post.

[EDIT 01/07/13 – TTL wins are now regressed to the mean, something that I originally neglected to do. It makes A’s baseline lower, however – closer to the two leading teams in AL West]

Next, we will list any changes to the rosters and evaluate them. I will keep this post updated throughout the pre-season, so it reflects the changes when we sign Drew, Marcum and Swisher, but there will always be a running estimate of 2013 wins for each team.

I’ll start with some basic information and hope to build on it. You are asked to write down in comments what changes you know of (either roster, performance or playing time) and then we can look for a common ground (such as, again, what number of innings we should expect from BA)

Hope you jump in!

 

1. Oakland Athletics

2012 True Wins: 86
2012 True Runs Scored: 697
2012 True Runs Allowed: 630
No longer with the club – hitters and their replacements (presumed wOBA courtesy of ZiPS)

  • 333 PA from Jonny Gomes (wOBA .376) lost and replaced through Chris Young (presumed wOBA.330*) .. Effect: -13 runs scored
  • 462 PA from Clif Pennington (wOBA .263) lost and replaced through Hiroyuki Nakajima (presumed wOBA.298) .. Effect: +14 runs scored
  • 278 PA from Kurt Suzuki (wOBA .237) lost and replaced through Derek Norris (presumed wOBA.290) .. Effect: +13 runs scored

* ZiPS projects .320 for Chris Young, but I think he will be heavily platooned, much like Gomes. Check the comments for detailed explanation how I came up with .330 wOBA

Overall, giving Gomes, Pennington’s and Suzuki’s PA to Young

No longer with the club – pitchers

  • 111 innings from Brandon McCarthy lost (xFIP 4.23) and replaced through Brett Anderson (presumed xFIP 3.55) .. Effect: -8 runs allowed, +0.8 Wins

 

2013 Estimated Runs Scored: 698
2013 Estimated Runs Allowed: 622
2013 Estimated Wins:

 

2. Texas Rangers

2012 True Wins: 90
2012 True Runs Scored: 811
2012 True Runs Allowed: 679
2013 Presumed Changes:

  • none yet accounted for

2013 Estimated Runs Scored: 811
2013 Estimated Runs Allowed: 679
2013 Estimated Wins:

 

3. LA Angels

2012 True Wins: 89
2012 True Runs Scored: 805
2012 True Runs Allowed: 688
2013 Presumed Changes:

  • none yet accounted for

2013 Estimated Runs Scored: 805
2013 Estimated Runs Allowed: 688
2013 Estimated Wins:

 

4. Seattle Mariners

2012 True Wins: 77
2012 True Runs Scored: 581
2012 True Runs Allowed: 620
2013 Presumed Changes:

  • none yet accounted for

2013 Estimated Runs Scored: 581
2013 Estimated Runs Allowed: 620
2013 Estimated Wins: 76

 

5. Houston Astros

2012 True Wins: 66
2012 True Runs Scored: 593
2012 True Runs Allowed: 788
2013 Presumed Changes:

  • none yet accounted for

2013 Estimated Runs Scored: 593
2013 Estimated Runs Allowed: 788
2013 Estimated Wins:

 2013 Athletics Projections ZIPS

98 thoughts on “How the West Will Be Won”

  1. elcroata Dec 13,2012 7:33 am

    Questions:

    1. xFIP or FIP?
    2. Who do you see playing second?
    3. What line do you predict from Colon?

    Because survival is insufficient
    • MikeV Dec 13,2012 8:11 am || Up

      1. xFIP
      2. I think it’s Sizemore’s job to lose, assuming his bionic knee functions properly.
      3. I bit of a decline from last year, maybe, but he’s had two straight seasons with an xFIP of about 4.15.

      And I have to say: mikev is one of my favorite people on here -slusser.

      Thanks, and go As.

    • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 8:53 am || Up

      1. xFIP (although if you could use FIP and adjust HR rate for 81 games at O.co…)
      2. Weeks will be the starter, but whether Sizemore or Weeks is the starter, they will fail/get injured and the other will get a shot. They will also fail/get injured and the A’s will be looking for a new SS next year.
      3. About the same as last year with 50 fewer innings.

      • elcroata Dec 13,2012 8:57 am || Up

        See, this is another advantage of this approach. Unless I bring in new pitchers (well, unless A’s do) I don’t have to care about adjusting, because all the calculations are in relative term. So, if Anderson picks up McCarthy’s innings, I don’t have to care about park factors, because they both have the same ones. And I have the baseline translation how the combination of FIP/xFIP/UZR translates into opponent wOBA under real life circumstances.

        Because survival is insufficient
        • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 10:29 am || Up

          You would have to adjust xFIP if you were replacing McCarthy with someone outside the organization. Say, Shaun Marcum. But I think given error bars, doing so wouldn’t add enough significant information.

          Upon rereading you mentioned this.

    • Nikk Dec 13,2012 8:58 am || Up

      Fantastic posts elcroata, thanks!

      I pretty much agree with MikeV on all 3 points. However, I have a feeling that if Weeks isn’t traded then he may see a good deal of time at 2B platooning with Sizemore.

      Question: Is there a reason we are assuming that Norris will have the same wOBA in 2013 as he had in 2012? Given his age and how little we know about him (how few PA’s he had), shouldn’t we assume at least some regression to the MLB mean?

      • elcroata Dec 13,2012 9:07 am || Up

        Thanks!

        The presumed wOBA / UZR / xFIP values were not a product of much thought yet. I just wanted to put some examples, so that my principle idea is clear and to, hopefully, get some people interested in participating in our first ever community projection system.

        I am not sure yet whether to blindly use what ZIPS / Steamer spills out, or try to come up with our own.

        As for Norris, yes, he should be regressed, although probably not to the MLB mean, but to MLB catchers mean

        Because survival is insufficient
        • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 10:30 am || Up

          I would love to see how you would go about creating a projection system. But obviously, it would take a bunch of time.

    • Einstein on the Beach Dec 13,2012 9:12 am || Up

      1. FIP — Over the last 10 years, the A’s have shown the biggest discrepancy between ERA and FIP (towards a lower ERA) of any team in baseball, and the xFIP has been even higher. I tend to think there’s some underrated park factor going on, or perhaps that bigger ballparks allow for more demonstration of the low HR/FB skill, thus keeping ERA below xFIP. In any case, I feel more comfortable with FIP in projections because of that uncertainty.

      2. I’d be shocked if it wasn’t Sizemore until he breaks or shows that he is no longer good.

      3. Honestly, I would guess he’ll put up that 3.83 FIP every year for the next 50 years. I think his role will be more of a question mark, and if he falters at all, I think he’ll be replaced.

    • andeux Dec 13,2012 10:25 am || Up

      1. FIP or xFIP for what exactly? Since you say below that you don’t want to try to split run prevention between pitchers and fielders, why use a fielding-independent stat at all? Why not RA9?

      TINSTAAFK
      • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 10:33 am || Up

        FIP correlates better with future ERA, so a FIP based WAR makes more sense for a projection. But is there a study about correlations with RA/9?

      • elcroata Dec 13,2012 10:51 am || Up

        Perhaps I wasn’t clear about it.

        Whenever I can help it, I don’t want to split run prevention, hence starting with the big bulk of wOBA allowed from 2012. I want that to be the biggest part of my run prevention projection.
        When accounting for the deltas between 2012 and 2013 team, I am forced to do separate it, because I can obviously not pin wOBA allowed neither on the fielder nor on the pitcher alone. Hence UZR delta and FIP/xFIP delta.

        Because survival is insufficient
  2. vignette17 Dec 13,2012 8:45 am

    Is there a particular reason you think adjusting from the past is more useful than looking at each projected player and adding the sum of the parts? Or is it just to save time?

    They should come out the same, and neither will be that accurate, so I’m just curious.

    • elcroata Dec 13,2012 8:48 am || Up

      Most of all the run prevention part. I feel that wOBA allowed is the best measure of defensive efficiency and you will not find it in individual metrics, because they have to try to split it between the pitcher and the fielders, adding unnecessary noise and imprecision.

      Because survival is insufficient
    • elcroata Dec 13,2012 8:49 am || Up

      Also, I find this way more illustrating in terms of what roster moves mean to the bottom line.

      Because survival is insufficient
  3. Einstein on the Beach Dec 13,2012 9:14 am

    Is there a place for projecting changes in the players who are returning?

  4. lenscrafters Dec 13,2012 9:39 am

    I think your second paragraph is key for me. Any exercise that compares the A’s and Rangers (and Angels) on paper is probably not going to be in our favor. The difference is that we dealt with attrition a lot better than either of those teams last year and thus far, it looks like we’re better suited this year as well. It helps to keep churning out average guys to replace injured average guys instead of Martin Perez or Replacement Level Roy for instance.

    • elcroata Dec 13,2012 9:54 am || Up

      As we a re basing this on last year’s, we should account for that. We can look at who got PA or IP in situations like that and make reasonable assumptions if it will be the same people and by which amount. Still, it is not as much about getting to the point of a perfect projection, because nobody and certainly not we will get there. It’s about the journey and creating something of our own that might not be all that bad.

      Because survival is insufficient
    • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 10:37 am || Up

      I’m too lazy to look it up right now, but I’d love to see totals from all the players who posted negative or barely replacement level players from each of the teams. How many PA/IP did the teams give to people who didn’t deserve it?

      • elcroata Dec 13,2012 10:52 am || Up

        The answer to all the questions in universe is Michael Young

        Because survival is insufficient
        • Glorious Mundy Dec 13,2012 10:55 am || Up

          OK, I finally looked up MY’s numbers for last year. WTF.

      • PDXAthleticsfan Dec 13,2012 11:05 am || Up

        Depends on your definition of barely replacement level, but starting out with A’s position players and cutting it off at <0.5 fWAR/600 PA, excluding PAs by pitchers:

        Kurt Suzuki 278 0.2
        Kila Ka'aihue 139 0.1
        Adam Rosales 111 0.1
        Eric Sogard 108 0
        Jemile Weeks 511 0
        Brandon Hicks 70 0
        Brandon Allen 7 -0.1
        Anthony Recker 37 -0.1
        Michael Taylor 21 -0.2
        Luke Hughes 13 -0.4
        Total 1295 -0.4

        That works out to 21% of PAs (6162 total, excluding pitcher PAs) by negative or barely replacement level players. If you up the cutoff to 0.7 fWAR/600 PA, you could include Drew's PAs and increase it up to about 26% of PAs.

        I might have time to do the rest tomorrow, but would be more than happy if others took over.

        A soliloquy of fresh-sounding ideas which would probably be disastrous.
        • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 1:44 pm || Up

          Beautiful, that’s very interesting. So thanks for that, even if you don’t get to the others.

          • PDXAthleticsfan Dec 13,2012 2:34 pm || Up

            Hmmm…not sure how to evaluate the replacement level cutoff for pitchers. 0.5 fWAR/200 IP? Differences in starters vs. relievers? For example, Blevins had only 0.1 fWAR in 65 1/3 IP. His success seems predicated on a low .224 BABIP against (Balfour, Cook, and Neshek were even lower). I have a really hard time thinking of Blevins as replacement level, though. Whereas Ross has the equivalent of 1.0 fWAR/200 IP. Really.

            A soliloquy of fresh-sounding ideas which would probably be disastrous.
            • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 2:52 pm || Up

              Maybe distinguishing between starting and relieving? This is getting more complicated…

              • PDXAthleticsfan Dec 14,2012 8:53 am || Up

                I’m going to go with BB-Ref’s version of WAR. I don’t understand the ins and outs of the calculation there, but I have a hard time agreeing with Fangraphs exclusive reliance on FIP to calculate WAR, especially for those pitchers who by any other measure are replacement or worse (Ross), but because they give up lots of non-HR hits, get positive WAR.

                A soliloquy of fresh-sounding ideas which would probably be disastrous.
                • PDXAthleticsfan Dec 14,2012 9:52 am || Up

                  Results:

                  Team TotalIP IPRepl Percent
                  Oakland 1470 138 9.39%
                  Houston 1423.333 548 38.50%
                  LAA 1433.333 960.667 67.02%
                  Seattle 1456.667 414 28.42%
                  Texas 1442 254.667 17.66%

                  In-depth analysis: Decent hitting/defense and great pitching trumps Great hitting and awful pitching. Mind very much not blown.

                  A soliloquy of fresh-sounding ideas which would probably be disastrous.
                • ptbnl Dec 14,2012 12:25 pm || Up

                  Wow – 2/3 of the LAA-LAA’s innings were replacement level or below. That’s astonishing.

                  If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
                • Dial C for Concupiscence Dec 14,2012 1:51 pm || Up

                  Good thing they addressed that by spending their money on Josh Hamilton!

          • PDXAthleticsfan Dec 13,2012 4:01 pm || Up

            Decided to go ahead and do position players since I’m not getting much done today as it is. Without providing the breakdowns:

            Team PARL PAs %
            Oak 1295 6162 21
            Tex 1189 6196 19
            Ana 79(!) 6094 1
            Sea 2403 6033 40
            Hou 2372 5689 42

            I used the 0.5 WAR/600 PAs cutoff, although I probably could up it to 1 WAR – I don’t think it would have much effect. I removed all PAs by pitchers. That Anaheim had so few PAs by non RL players is astounding, but they really have some incredible depth among position players.

            A soliloquy of fresh-sounding ideas which would probably be disastrous.
  5. Glorious Mundy Dec 13,2012 9:46 am

    Do the A’s, Angels and Mariners (and to a lesser extent the Rangers) get a win bonus from having such a historically bad team suddenly in their division?

    • dmoas Dec 13,2012 9:52 am || Up

      Probably, but I’d imagine that bonus would be useless for the division since we’d all more or less get it equally.

      • Glorious Mundy Dec 13,2012 9:53 am || Up

        Sure, but since the wild cards exist, raw win numbers do matter a lot.

        • dmoas Dec 13,2012 9:56 am || Up

          Well, sure. But wasn’t the discussion about winning the West?

          • elcroata Dec 13,2012 9:58 am || Up

            We should try to project wins as accurately as possible. I only plan to project AL West teams, true, but I see no harm in having the most accurate number possible.

            Because survival is insufficient
    • elcroata Dec 13,2012 9:52 am || Up

      I think they will. As I said, going fully into third order wins (strength of schedule) is too big of a project, but I think we can make a rather simple adjustment for adding the Astros to our league on top of what we project based on second order.

      Because survival is insufficient
  6. nevermoor Dec 13,2012 10:14 am

    This approach requires a whole lot more entries that may not be obvious. Jettisoning Tyson Ross, for example, will have a positive effect on wins unless we don’t think those innings could be better pitched in 2013.

    "There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want"
    • elcroata Dec 13,2012 10:17 am || Up

      Well, that’s why it is a community project and, as a group, we can at least identify all possible areas of change. Finding the common ground might be more difficult

      Because survival is insufficient
  7. 5Aces Dec 13,2012 10:58 am

    I think it’s fun, although my ideas of fun are not always universally accepted. Second, we might learn something in the process.

    So it’s music and fun, and if we’re not careful we might learn something before it’s done?

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=6WT-fxBNKs8” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

    Camelot sure fell apart, didn't it? -Steve McCatty
  8. MikeV Dec 13,2012 11:24 am

    And I have to say: mikev is one of my favorite people on here -slusser.

    Thanks, and go As.

    • MikeV Dec 13,2012 11:42 am || Up

      5/125 apparently.

      Holy shit.

      And I have to say: mikev is one of my favorite people on here -slusser.

      Thanks, and go As.

      • elcroata Dec 13,2012 11:46 am || Up

        Oh, well…

        Because survival is insufficient
        • grover Dec 13,2012 12:13 pm || Up

          I’d say this counts towards the Angels replacing Torii Hunter…

          • Glorious Mundy Dec 13,2012 12:26 pm || Up

            Hamilton’s a downgrade based on last year.

            • grover Dec 13,2012 12:32 pm || Up

              I didn’t mean fully replacing Hunter, just going a long ways towards replacing Hunter.

              • Glorious Mundy Dec 13,2012 12:34 pm || Up

                I know. I was just taking a cheap shot at Hamilton.

                • grover Dec 13,2012 12:39 pm || Up

                  Pardon the interruption… please, continue.

          • Dial C for Concupiscence Dec 13,2012 12:57 pm || Up

            Heh

      • dmoas Dec 13,2012 11:47 am || Up

        They’re going to be royally fkd in a few years when all these guys collapse from age.

        • brian.only Dec 13,2012 11:52 am || Up

          Especially Hamilton, considering his bodies been pretty ravaged.

        • beebo Dec 13,2012 11:59 am || Up

          My feelings exactly…although maybe not with Trout, but that remains to be seen.

      • Glorious Mundy Dec 13,2012 11:52 am || Up

        Crazy

    • brian.only Dec 13,2012 11:50 am || Up

      I was really hoping he’d leave the division…

    • grover Dec 13,2012 12:11 pm || Up

      The Angels are still paying Wells, right?

    • Dial C for Concupiscence Dec 13,2012 12:27 pm || Up

      Yikes. That is not what I was hoping to see. It did seem like the only teams I was seeing rumors about were in the AL West, but I wasn’t expecting the Angels. I’d like to think that the Angels will eventually hamstring themselves with all these contracts, but I haven’t seen a sign of it yet.

      • Future Ed Dec 13,2012 12:45 pm || Up

        Its better than them signing Greinke, I think. Greinke is more likely to be productive for the balance of the contract.

        I have $5. No I don\'t.
        • vignette17 Dec 13,2012 1:48 pm || Up

          I’m pretty much at this point. Rather see them get Hamilton than Greinke. I am glad the Rangers got worse as well. Justin Upton needs to stay unavailable (although maybe if Andrus+ is involved it becomes a net negative…) But Trout-anyone-Pujols-Hamilton won’t be easy to face for the next 3 years at least.

    • nevermoor Dec 13,2012 6:02 pm || Up

      Great news.

      They’ll be a complete disaster in a couple years

      "There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want"
      • Future Ed Dec 13,2012 6:42 pm || Up

        assuming they can’t buy themselves out of a AJ Burnett sized hole

        I have $5. No I don\'t.
    • doctorK Dec 14,2012 10:26 am || Up

      Obligatory:

      • Glorious Mundy Dec 14,2012 10:32 am || Up

        I suspect his days of centerfielding are over, sadly.

      • ptbnl Dec 14,2012 12:25 pm || Up

        Happy happy joy joy.

        If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
  9. brian.only Dec 13,2012 11:56 am

    I’d like to hereby nominate elcroata for player of the month.

    • Kay Dec 13,2012 4:49 pm || Up

      seconded

      \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
    • ozzman99 Dec 13,2012 7:31 pm || Up

      Does this mean he gets the good parking spot?

      • Tutu-late Dec 14,2012 7:31 am || Up

        Since EC is the most interesting man in the world, he already has that spot.

        • aardvark Dec 14,2012 11:43 am || Up

          Yeah, but he never parks in it. Driving is for people who don’t know how to use a wingsuit.

      • FreeSeatUpgrade Dec 14,2012 8:16 am || Up

        His efforts have been quite Nobel.

        "Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
  10. Dial C for Concupiscence Dec 13,2012 12:30 pm

    This is a great project ec. Are you looking for help with changes/playing time expectations/etc. with just the A’s or with all AL West teams?

    • elcroata Dec 13,2012 12:58 pm || Up

      All AL West teams, please

      Because survival is insufficient
  11. vignette17 Dec 13,2012 1:52 pm

    Looking back at your numbers, is Chris Young replacing Seth Smith/Michael Taylor/Colin Cowgill ABs as well? If it’s just Jonny Gomes, do the numbers have a platoon jump? Gomes’ numbers surely were helped by facing lots of lefties.

    • elcroata Dec 13,2012 9:38 pm || Up

      These were more of an example pieces, so that I can explain the concept. Finding out who gets how many at bats / starts / platoon splits is what I envision as a community project. And your point is a very valid one, and one that needs to be factored in.

      Because survival is insufficient
  12. Future Ed Dec 13,2012 2:10 pm

    BTW, when you go to the MLB website, the astros are listed in the west. Its startling.

    I have $5. No I don\'t.
  13. nobody in particular Dec 13,2012 4:30 pm

    Great posts B, I love the caveats that you preface this with, that it all will go out the window when someone gets dealt or hurt etc etc.

    As for Josh the Hambone Hamilton, go read Halos Heaven everyone. Most of them no no no likey. Many think they shoulda kept Hunter and went hard for Greinke… I agree and I’d rather have Josh D. than Josh H., as crazy as that sounds. At least Josh D. can function like a grown man and can be trusted for more than ten minutes with 20 bucks. The Angels and the A’s will war for the division and that’s how it should be… at least Texas is taken even further down by this.

    My worry: Angels wheel around and trade Bourjos and Trumbo for a pitcher, perhaps the knuckleballer Dickey.

    Never suck on a Blow Pop with the microphone open.
    • colin Dec 14,2012 4:15 am || Up

      You just suggested that we go read Halos Heaven.

      • nobody in particular Dec 14,2012 4:31 am || Up

        Well, that was 1000+ comments from the Angels fans, it gives a good idea of what the Hamilton trade is all about in their eyes. It also had really funny gifs, like the one where Tracy Morgan goes “No!” over and over.

        Never suck on a Blow Pop with the microphone open.
        • Kay Dec 14,2012 10:20 am || Up

          You read the thread so we don’t have to.

          Thanks for taking one for the team.

          \"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
  14. Einstein on the Beach Dec 13,2012 10:33 pm

    I’m so stoked for this community project. Thanks, EC!

  15. nevermoor Dec 14,2012 12:45 pm

    Question, not accusation:

    Are we regressing these numbers properly? We might well be, but I’m not sure I’m seeing it. Either way, that’s a great article.

    "There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want"
    • elcroata Dec 14,2012 1:47 pm || Up

      I haven’t regressed them at all, which I probably should. Not that it will make any notable difference in where the A’s stand relative to the Rangers and Angels, but this is, as we said, more about the journey, than about the destination.

      I will explain this in more detail later, but for those who read this and wonder how studes came up with his numbers (use 25% of month’s record and so on).

      Although we work in wOBA differential first, than run differential second and wins differential third, the easiest is to regress at wins level, because we can use normal binomial distribution. What we need to do is find the variance of the observed group (standard deviation of 30 observed MLB teams in 2012) and assume that the luck distribution is normal binomial distribution (binomial because a team can either lose or win). That standard deviation is 0.039 per 162 games. Than we look at standard deviation of performance (in our case it’s 0.068) and we get that standard deviation of talent equals to 0.056. Then we look at the number of games where the sd of luck would be the same as the one of the talent and then regress with that number of games. That number is in our case around 80. That means we need to add 80 games of .500 ball to each record, and end up with A’s at 86 wins, Angels and rangers at around 90. If anyone cares about more detailed math let me know.

      Because survival is insufficient
      • nevermoor Dec 14,2012 2:52 pm || Up

        I’d be interested.

        Also, doesn’t it matter because it reduces the number of games separating us from the other teams, thus suggesting that a new acquisition is more likely to change our relative position?

        "There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want"
        • elcroata Dec 14,2012 11:28 pm || Up

          Sure. It matters. The only thing is that I think it doesn’t matter all that much. It puts us now about one win closer to the Angels/Rangers, which is certainly within the imprecision of the projection. But, you are right. It is better projection this way.

          Because survival is insufficient
  16. elcroata Dec 14,2012 12:58 pm

    Just some food for thought:

    1. LAA 2012 Budget was $151MM. They now stand at $156MM for 2013 (assuming linear contracts for Hamilton, Blanton and Burnett and following arbitration figures – Hanson $4MM, Morales $4.8MM, Callaspo $4.2MM, Jepsen $1.1MM, Williams $1.9MM)

    2. TEX 2012 Budget was $120MM. They now stand at $104MM (assuming linear contract for Soria and following arbitration figures – Feliz $3.1MM, Murphy $5.6MM, Harrison $6.1MM)

    Some crowdsourcing AAV (Average Annual Value) estimates for remaining FA on the market:
    Swisher $14MM
    Marcum $9.6MM
    Bourn $14.3MM
    Lohse $12.7MM

    Because survival is insufficient
    • Future Ed Dec 14,2012 2:29 pm || Up

      so, welcome back to the AL west Nick Swisher?

      I have $5. No I don\'t.
    • ptbnl Dec 14,2012 2:42 pm || Up

      Manchester City just announced loses of $155M last season – though that is down from the previous year’s $315M.

      If this is His will, He's a son of a bitch.
  17. elcroata Dec 15,2012 10:55 am

    Hopefully, this goes through and Dickey is in AL East, not AL West next year

    Because survival is insufficient
    • Future Ed Dec 15,2012 11:17 am || Up

      doesn’t that seem like a pretty high price?

      I have $5. No I don\'t.
      • dmoas Dec 15,2012 11:56 am || Up

        It seems they’re going all-in this season. Not that I can blame them, they’re smelling blood in the water. The Yankees are old, the Red Sox are rebuilding, the O’s are the O’s.

Leave a Reply