Programming Note
Wednesday afternoon, around 4:30, I'll be a guest on "The Closers" on KFRU AM in Columbia, talkin' Royals. The station has a listen live feature, if you live outside the area. A wonderful opportunity to hear how horrible my voice sounds. Call your friends!
Links
- Joe McEwing for Hall of Fame!
- Gary Thurman featured on a blog dedicated to the 1988 Topps set. Lots of memories looking at these, since I got a complete set of '88 Topps for Christmas that year.
- USS Mariner simmed the AL West 100 times and ... the A's won the division the most?
- Lastly, has anyone seen the multiple Range Rover ads featuring the Flaming Lips song "Do You Realize"? I was stunned the first time I saw them. Why? Google the lyrics to that song.
77 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
make us all proud
flaming lips
by kcdc on Feb 12, 2008 11:58 PM EST reply actions
are the Mariners your #2 team?
Have to say I see more references to USS Mariner and Lookout Landing here than that team would perhaps warrant unless you have some sort of allegiance to the squad.
The Mariner blogs
Car commercials
Steroids hearings
I still don't get what the point of this is
Open thread?
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:37 PM EST reply actions
I'm Listening
Will's radio appearance
I'm from NEW FRANKLIN!!!
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:42 PM EST reply actions
HERE WE GO...
Is Will on his way?
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:42 PM EST reply actions
Niiiiiice
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:43 PM EST reply actions
After you get to 4th place...
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:44 PM EST reply actions
Will doesn't share the Royals pitching optimism?
Well...
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:48 PM EST reply actions
What's Wrong With
Almost completely negative
- Pitching will be worse
- Guillen is just Reggie Sanders all over again
- Hillman's strategy will hurt the team
- Royals have a chronic lack of power
- 80 to 82 wins
Also, one of the radio hosts appropriately pointed out, how do you make all of those analyses about the team and then say they are going to win 80 to 82 games? The analysis he gave would not logically lead to the conclusion that this team will score more runs than it allows.
Pitching worse?
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:58 PM EST up reply actions
What he said
- I really don't see the optimism about the pitching staff
- Meche will be worse
- Bannister will be worse
- Tomko doesn't improve anything
- I don't see how this pitching staff is any better in 2008
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:02 PM EST up reply actions
And
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:03 PM EST up reply actions
Seal Imagines Himself
by philofthenorth on Feb 13, 2008 6:06 PM EST up reply actions
Conceptualize this
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
so will their kids take Seal's last name
by FireBell on Feb 13, 2008 6:16 PM EST up reply actions
Perhaps
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
I Can't Sing
by philofthenorth on Feb 13, 2008 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
The only way to find out is to ask
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 11:32 PM EST up reply actions
Not quite Debbie Downer
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Feb 13, 2008 5:56 PM EST reply actions
Was that
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:00 PM EST up reply actions
I can't say
I'm glad
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
so apparently RR was negative
by FireBell on Feb 13, 2008 6:17 PM EST reply actions
There were brief flashes
(I'm exercise my imagery and metaphore/simile skills)
;)
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:21 PM EST up reply actions
^exercising
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 6:22 PM EST up reply actions
Just Let
by philofthenorth on Feb 13, 2008 11:32 PM EST up reply actions
Sometimes my mind is a cyberdump
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
That May Be
by philofthenorth on Feb 13, 2008 11:42 PM EST up reply actions
Don't get too down, Will
Player: ZIPS/PECOTA
Meche: 4.55/4.55
Greinke: 4.76/4.27
Bannister: 4.84/5.19
Tomko: 4.34 (as Padre)/ 5.20
[Projections for the 5th starter candidates are too ugly to post]
Personally, I think Meche, Greinke, and Bannister each beat these projections (and Greinke by a lot), and projection systems obviously deal in probabilities, not certainties, but there is a legitimate argument based on objective analyses (which consider more than just last year's performances) that the pitching staff as a whole will perform worse in 2008 than 2007.
Do you think
And do you think that one can at the same time argue that the pitching next year will be worse and that we'll win 80 to 82 games next year?
By the way, how many games do you think the Royals will win next year?
[G, in all honesty, your knowledge of advanced stats and metrics is impressive and the analysis you do with them is very good. Sometimes I agree with it and sometimes I don't. But it seems like your comments are long on "it can be argued that" or "it would be reasonable to say that" and short on actual predictions or otherwise going out on a limb.]
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 8:58 PM EST up reply actions
my thinking is that the pitching will be
last year the strength of the staff was the bully:
we've added mahay, but lost riske
i don't think Gobble will be as good (3.02 ERA) or Soria (2.48)
one more thing to chew on
the ERA of the 'pen was 3.85, 6th in the AL
Pitching improvements in 2008 over 2007
- Greinke's increased innings (Greinke >>> O. Perez)
- Back end of the rotation
I would suggest anyone wanting to see what effect improvements in some pitchers and regression in others will have on the overall ERA (or other measure) of the 2008 Royals actually crunch the numbers with their indvidual predictions including innings pitched, weight them appropriately and see what kind of stats kick out. Before I crunched the numbers with my predictions, I thought the pitching staff wouldn't improve overall. But after I crunched, the numbers, I see clear overall improvement.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 11:00 PM EST up reply actions
The bullpen will be improved slightly
I agree with your prediction about the offense. The repressed optimist in me might say 70ish runs better.
That translates to
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2008 10:42 PM EST up reply actions
I Have No Problem
by philofthenorth on Feb 13, 2008 11:38 PM EST up reply actions
Don't really care about actual predictions
As for going out on a limb, this is not sports talk radio. I do not see the point in arguing something that I really do not believe just to stir things up and debate for the hell of it. In any event, I have certainly been in the minority on many offseason issues, especially on everything Guillen (his poor defense, his underrated offense, his contract), Bannister, and DeJesus.
On how the team will perform overall, I have not run any numbers (and I usually don't -- again, not my thing), but just by eyeballing the roster, I am probably pretty close to Will. I think the offense improves primarily due to the Guillen, improvement from Gordon and Butler, and a rebound from DeJesus, but with out machines currently occupying three lineup spots (Pena, Buck/Olivo, and Shealy/Gload), the improvement is more in the range of 35-45 runs. If Hillman minimizes those players' plate appearances, the number should go up.
I also think the defense will be good, but a step down from last year with Guillen playing everyday (he really needs to DH when Greinke starts), Grudz aging, Butler likely playing more 1B, and Pena likely losing playing time to Callaspo (or a SS to be acquired).
While the relatively worse defense should negatively affect the pitchers' performances, whether the staff ultimately improves or not frankly depends on how Hillman picks and uses the staff. In comparison to his 2007 numbers, Greinke is hurt by swapping out the relief innings for starter innings (his strikeout rate should go down and his HR rate should go up, as he loses 2-3 MPH off his fastball as a starter). And considering his young age and the reduced number of innings the last two years (120 IP and 112 IP), Hillman might limit him to 160-180 IP (183 IP is his career high). But I think his natural development makes him improve overall, even though his FIP might slide into the higher 3.00s. I think Meche's walk rate should slip by 0.5 and his problem of throwing too many pitches did not go away (4.0 P/PA), but he keeps the strikeouts and groundballs and still posts a FIP in the low 4.00s. Bannister and his extremely low BABIP regress to a FIP near 4.50, and Tomko pitches somewhere around 4.75-5.00. Of the fifth starter candidates, I think Bale or Nunez could stay under 5.00 until Hochevar is ready, but the rest are strictly replacement level and no real improvement over last year. As for the bullpen, Greinke and Riske to Mahay and Yabuta is a downgrade (although Yabuta is a question mark), but Tsao could make a large impact if healthy, so it should be strong even if not quite as good as last year. Overall, I would expect a marginal improvement of 5-10 runs, but if de la Rosa, Davies, and the other replacement level starters get 30+ starts, the runs allowed will go up.
So if you need a number to play with, I'll go with 77-79 wins.
Going out on a limb
As for going out on a limb, this is not sports talk radio. I do not see the point in arguing something that I really do not believe just to stir things up and debate for the hell of it.
What does making predictions have to do with "arguing something that I really do not believe"? As well as critiquing the comments/observations/predictions of others, you could also provide affirmative statements of belief/opinion/predictions of your own and then defend them or not. No one is saying that you should argue something that you reall do not believe. I don't think anyone does that. Certainly not here.
So if you need a number to play with, I'll go with 77-79 wins.
So basically a minimal overall improvement. I disagree. We'll see what happens. See, isn't it nice to actually go out on a limb and state a concrete prediction?
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2008 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
In what alternative baseball universe
If you are really interested, you can go back and read my comments on my expectations for Greinke, Meche, Bannister, Tomko, Guillen, Teahen, TPJ, etc.
As for being critical, if I read something with which I generally agree (like your comments the other day on ranking the order of what is more important to a pitcher), I tend not to add "ditto" comments, as they really do not add anything to the conversation.
And, no, predictions for the sake of predictions are still a waste of time.
Win prediction baseline
is adding 8 to 10 wins considered only "minimal improvement overall"?
The baseline for any win total prediction should be the prior year's Pythagorean win total, which was 74. So, 77 to 79 wins would be 3-5. Yes, that is minimal. Quite frankly, since you were talking about how many more runs the royals would score and how many fewer runs the Royals would allow, I assumed you were looking at they're Pythagorean win expectancy. I think one should be.
As for being critical, if I read something with which I generally agree (like your comments the other day on ranking the order of what is more important to a pitcher), I tend not to add "ditto" comments, as they really do not add anything to the conversation.
I have no problem with being critical. I am frequently critical. And, like you, I comment more where I have disagreement than where I agree. But what I said above was that it is nice to put something out there in the way of one's own opinions about how good or bad a player is and how well he'll do (going out on a limb) as opposed to merely intellectual deconstruction. I'm all for the latter, but I think one should supply the former as well.
And, no, predictions for the sake of predictions are still a waste of time.
Predictions for predictions sake? I'm saying that if you can criticize the opinions, analysis and predictions of others, you should at least provide some of your own. Go out on a limb, put your ass on the line and then by season's end you'll either be right or wrong for all to see. I think it is good to add accountability to rhetoric.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2008 5:12 PM EST up reply actions
Therein lies your mistake
For runs scored, my eyeball estimate came up with 740 (assuming full season from Pena) and 750 (assuming half season). For runs allowed, I got 770. That lead to pythags of 77 and 79 wins. For writing up the post, I compared them to last year's RS and RA, which is what Will had done above.
As for supporting my opinions, again, you can go back and read my comments explaining why I think Bannister should regress a lot (but should not fall off a cliff), Meche should regress a little, Greinke should improve even if his ERA doesn't, Guillen should come close to repeating his 2007 line, Teahen should improve modestly, and TPJ should post the same line that he has the last five years.
I really do not care if that means I went out on a limb or not.
Hillman simply CANNOT fall in love with the
neither can dayton
Not a mistake at all
Last year's Pythagorean winning percentage is, by definition based strictly on performance. It is calculated using only runs scored and runs allowed. The team's actual winning percentage is determined by performance and luck.
The better way is to start with player projections for the upcoming season, figure out runs scored and runs allowed based on those projections, and then run the pythag formula.
That is precisely what I did. I made predictions for each of the Royals players with allowance made for the fact that players outside of the top 30 will get some playing time. Then I calculated how these individual predictions affect overall hitting and pitching stats for the team. I used this to estimate the RS and RA for the 2008 team, which led to my prediction of 765 RS and 755 RA which means 82 wins.
I really do not care if that means I went out on a limb or not.
It's a lot easier to be vague than specific.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2008 6:32 PM EST up reply actions
Pythag record
Which is, as I stated above, a minimal improvement over last year's pythagorean recrod.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2008 6:34 PM EST up reply actions
Actually,
Simply using last year's pythag as the basis for projections is considered lazy analysis by most statheads.
by rfloh @ Royals Review on Feb 15, 2008 7:18 AM EST up reply actions
Please
But, if you are comparing this year's Pythagorean expected win total to last year, you should be comparing it to last year's Pythagorean win total, not the actual team record. One should compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. Of course individual performances include luck. But the actual record includes both that kind of luck, and the luck that causes a differences in RS/RA and a team's actual record.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 15, 2008 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
Please read my post properly
I did not say individually projecting players is lazy.
"But, if you are comparing this year's Pythagorean expected win total to last year, you should be comparing it to last year's Pythagorean win total, not the actual team record. One should compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. Of course individual performances include luck. But the actual record includes both that kind of luck, and the luck that causes a differences in RS/RA and a team's actual record"
That's why you just forget last year's pythag. Once you have done the projection based on individual players, there is no need to look at last year's pythag.
by rfloh @ Royals Review on Feb 15, 2008 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
Comparing
In creating a projection/prediction for the 2008 team, you do not need to take into account the 2007 Pythagorean record. But, if one wants to see if we are expect the team overall to improve or not, or how much they have improved, then one must compare the projected 2008 Pythagorean record to the 2007 Pythagorean record.
For instance, if one is predicting a Pythagorean record of 77 wins, that might seem like a significant increase over last year's 69 wins. But, in reality it is a minimal 3 win improvement over last year's Pythag of 74 wins.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 16, 2008 12:15 AM EST up reply actions
Okay, so the Iowa winter has finally gotten
All in all, you did a great job Chief. Keep up the good work. I have email ready to seen to you tommorrow about my time at Spring Training last season.
by grudz69 on Feb 14, 2008 12:47 AM EST reply actions













