Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 4  Next >

PECOTA

Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 1:42 PM

PECOTA 


"Maybe it's time to make some moves."  - Sandy Alderson
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 1:56 PM

RE: PECOTA 


This shows how short sighted Met fans are, and probably our front office as well.

Michael Bourn is a steal at 48M . . . add those 5 wins to the 80 PECOTA has us down for, and we're at 85. Maybe 86 since the OF he'd replace might be -1 WAR, our OF is that horrible.

Swisher + Bourn and we get a Wild Card in 2013. I believe in rebuilding, but rebuilding is never as far away as people think.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/12/2013 1:57 PM

Re: PECOTA 


Can't wait to see the Brave fan reactions biggrin

Amazing how the Yankees are always projected to be on top.  Orioles only projected to win 74 games.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:00 PM

Re: PECOTA 



MetsBeast wrote: Can't wait to see the Brave fan reactions biggrin

Amazing how the Yankees are always projected to be on top.  Orioles only projected to win 74 games.
yeah I don't see how the Yankees win 92 again.  I think the ALE will be crowded all around 85 or 86 wins except for the Sox whose rotation just isn't good enough.

aside from that, the only other thing that sticks out to me is the Cubs, M's and Mets all look pretty generous at 77, 79 and 80.  I think that's an overshoot by maybe 12 - 14 wins combined which I'd spread among the Nats, Braves, Phils and Cards...
"Maybe it's time to make some moves."  - Sandy Alderson

Last edited 2/12/2013 2:04 PM by DuffyDyer

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:08 PM

Re: PECOTA 



MetsBeast wrote: Can't wait to see the Brave fan reactions biggrin

Amazing how the Yankees are always projected to be on top.  Orioles only projected to win 74 games.

Thats because the projections are horrid. They did terrible iwth the NL east last year and are doing a terrible job this year. Nats are a min 97 win team IMO. Braves should break 94 if you ask me.
_______________________________________________________________________________

"No more questions for you bro!.....TROLL" - Russell Westbrook

"I don't want to be categorized." - Colin Kaepernick
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:12 PM

RE: PECOTA 


AL East standings are ridiculous. Yankees and Red Sox finishing 1-2? Wow!

 


R.A. Dickey!

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:14 PM

RE: PECOTA 


Definitely looks a little over regressed to the mean.

Not sure how much of an impact shifting a lousy team from the NL to AL should make, but the AL has had a huge edge over the last 10 years and these standings have the leagues even. Either they are projecting that the Astros moving balances the leagues or they didn't figure in a league adjustment. Lets just assume the former.

The range is 63-93 wins with a standard deviation of 7.8 wins

Here are the max-min team wins and standard deviations for the last couple of years:
2013* 30 / 7.8
2012 46 / 11.4
2011 40 / 11.0
2010 44 / 11.4

Take their RS/RA projections and calc pythagorean win%. Take the top 10 and adjust up their offense by 2.3% and their defense down 2.3%. Do the reverse for the bottom 10; leave the middle alone.

That bumps up the range to match 2011 and SD to match 2010/2012. Granted, being in the middle this has no impact on the Mets projected records, but now they are 12 back of the Nationals for the division lead; 1 game further back on the first Wild Card and the same distance from the second.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:15 PM

RE: PECOTA 


“Just wait’ll you see Bill Pecota,” Torborg proclaimed.

"Use your head.....that's that lump 3 feet above your arse." - Jimmy Dugan

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:19 PM

Re: PECOTA 



thethe wrote:
MetsBeast wrote: Can't wait to see the Brave fan reactions biggrin

Amazing how the Yankees are always projected to be on top.  Orioles only projected to win 74 games.

Thats because the projections are horrid. They did terrible iwth the NL east last year and are doing a terrible job this year. Nats are a min 97 win team IMO. Braves should break 94 if you ask me.
biggrin

What did they project last year?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:27 PM

Re: PECOTA 



MetsBeast wrote:
thethe wrote:
MetsBeast wrote: Can't wait to see the Brave fan reactions biggrin

Amazing how the Yankees are always projected to be on top.  Orioles only projected to win 74 games.

Thats because the projections are horrid. They did terrible iwth the NL east last year and are doing a terrible job this year. Nats are a min 97 win team IMO. Braves should break 94 if you ask me.
biggrin

What did they project last year?
TeamPecotaActual
BOS9269
BAL7193
PHI8881
ATL8594
WAS8598
MIA8569



They were egregiously wrong with these teams last year. I think thye wil lbe better with Phi/Mia but they will be bad with the rest.
_______________________________________________________________________________

"No more questions for you bro!.....TROLL" - Russell Westbrook

"I don't want to be categorized." - Colin Kaepernick

Last edited 2/12/2013 2:28 PM by thethe

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:30 PM

RE: PECOTA 


We should just simulate the 2013 season, and let the teams with the 2 best records play for the World Series.  cool

"Use your head.....that's that lump 3 feet above your arse." - Jimmy Dugan

Last edited 2/12/2013 2:31 PM by Walnutz15

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:32 PM

Re: PECOTA 


Only 99 losses is really optimistic for the Astros.  They could lose 115 games if everything falls into place.

80 wins is about right for the Mets.  I would argue that they had 80 win talent last year despite winning only 74.  I refer to this as the "there is no such thing as a .500 team" phenomenon.  Teams with .500 talent often tail off at the end of the year when they are out of it and they've traded off pieces and they start getting a look at guys they called up September 1st.  It doesn't mean they didnt have .500 talent- it just means they stopped caring all that much whether they lost late in the season since they were out of the playoff hunt anyway.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:38 PM

RE: PECOTA 



Walnutz15 wrote: We should just simulate the 2013 season, and let the teams with the 2 best records play for the World Series.  cool

I like it!  It reminds me of my plan for the NFL pro bowl (aka "the most useless of all games"). 

My plan: They should still pick the best players from both conferences for pro bowl honors but rather than actually playing the game they should pick two random teenage boys to play the game on X box.  All the chosen guys can get together in Hawaii and watch the X Box version but there is no reason for them to actually suit up and risk injury.  That way you'd have the actual guys chosen for the bowl compete in a competitive (albeit simulated) game rather than having a real half-hearted game played by the 4th alternates at every position.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 6:24 PM

Re: PECOTA 



MookieLJL wrote: Only 99 losses is really optimistic for the Astros.  They could lose 115 games if everything falls into place.

80 wins is about right for the Mets.  I would argue that they had 80 win talent last year despite winning only 74.  I refer to this as the "there is no such thing as a .500 team" phenomenon.  Teams with .500 talent often tail off at the end of the year when they are out of it and they've traded off pieces and they start getting a look at guys they called up September 1st.  It doesn't mean they didnt have .500 talent- it just means they stopped caring all that much whether they lost late in the season since they were out of the playoff hunt anyway.
Obviously we could all argue this forever but I totally disagree. Only the Mets playing way over their heads in the first half and Dickey's historic year kept them from being a 70 win team, IMO. Awful 25 man roster, just awful.

Last edited 2/12/2013 7:10 PM by danfran

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/12/2013 6:45 PM

Re: PECOTA 



danfran wrote:
MookieLJL wrote: Only 99 losses is really optimistic for the Astros.  They could lose 115 games if everything falls into place.

80 wins is about right for the Mets.  I would argue that they had 80 win talent last year despite winning only 74.  I refer to this as the "there is no such thing as a .500 team" phenomenon.  Teams with .500 talent often tail off at the end of the year when they are out of it and they've traded off pieces and they start getting a look at guys they called up September 1st.  It doesn't mean they didnt have .500 talent- it just means they stopped caring all that much whether they lost late in the season since they were out of the playoff hunt anyway.
Obviously we could all argue this forever but I totally disagree. Only the Mets playing way over their heads and Dickey's historic year kept them from being a 70 win team, IMO. Awful 25 man roster, just awful.
I agree, the Mets definitely did not have 80 win talent last year.  They played out of their minds to be  6 games over in July, which included ace type pitching from Dickey & Santana, and Wright as one of the favorites for MVP.  I actually think their win total correctly should what talent level they had. 

I also think their talent level decreased since last year.  They've somehow made the outfield worse, and they lost their CY Young winner.  I don't think a combination of Marcum (health risk) & Harvey will make up for Dickey.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 6:55 PM

Re: PECOTA 



danfran wrote:
MookieLJL wrote: Only 99 losses is really optimistic for the Astros.  They could lose 115 games if everything falls into place.

80 wins is about right for the Mets.  I would argue that they had 80 win talent last year despite winning only 74.  I refer to this as the "there is no such thing as a .500 team" phenomenon.  Teams with .500 talent often tail off at the end of the year when they are out of it and they've traded off pieces and they start getting a look at guys they called up September 1st.  It doesn't mean they didnt have .500 talent- it just means they stopped caring all that much whether they lost late in the season since they were out of the playoff hunt anyway.
Obviously we could all argue this forever but I totally disagree. Only the Mets playing way over their heads and Dickey's historic year kept them from being a 70 win team, IMO. Awful 25 man roster, just awful.

I agree.  I think many are forgetting how God awful that team was last summer.  IIRC, we went on a late hot streak to get to 74 wins.

There is still no depth so an injury to Wright or Ike etc could push the team to 65 wins.  IMO.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/12/2013 7:11 PM

RE: PECOTA 


80 wins for the Mets is extremely optimistic, they won't crack 70 wins.... you can bank on that IMO.  I see somewhere between 64-68 wins here in 2013, then taking a big jump forward in 2014.


Last edited 2/12/2013 7:37 PM by xmulderx

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/12/2013 8:17 PM

RE: PECOTA 


So, when we were god awful, that was the real Mets, and when we played well to get to 74 wins, that was what, exactly? :) We could definitely be an 80 win team this season, IMO.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/12/2013 8:31 PM

RE: PECOTA 



xmulderx wrote: 80 wins for the Mets is extremely optimistic, they won't crack 70 wins.... you can bank on that IMO.  I see somewhere between 64-68 wins here in 2013, then taking a big jump forward in 2014.
The Mets, with a starting 5 of Santana, Niese, Harvey, Gee and Marcum, with Wheeler in the wings, are going to flirt with losing 100 games?

I'll "bank" against that...how much?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 8:39 PM

RE: PECOTA 


The main factors working in the Mets' favor this season is that they have more upside than they've had in a number of years due to the sheer amount of young players on the roster, plus there are certain parts of the team that stand to improve simply due to factors like addition by subtraction and "they couldn't have been worse". 

For example, as bad as the OF looks to be this season, the only thing they'd need to do to blow last year's OF out of the water would be to produce at just a bit below a league average rate. It's appalling to consider, but a collective OF WAR of 3.0 would be a 3 win improvement for the club.

Same principle mostly applies to the bullpen, but I actually think the pen has some potential to be flat-out decent this season.

Factor those in with younger players who still have room to improve, and 80 wins isn't a sheer impossibility. I agree that it's unlikely and I'm certainly not banking on it, but I also think the front office is likely to continue searching for OF trades and things of that nature that could be a decent boost.

John Adams: At a stage in life when other men prosper, I'm reduced to living in Philadelphia!
Mike "Doc" Emrick: THEY SCORE! HENRIQUE!! IT'S OVER!!!

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 4  Next >