PDA

View Full Version : The old switcheroo


Lukin13
02-12-2007, 05:54 PM
Don't want to "dark cloud" it... but it is hard to be super pumped about the Sox this year with the state of the AL Central, I mean they won 90 last year and played meaningless games down the stretch... I personally like the Sox's chances as much as any other team in the AL Central, but it sure as hell is gonna be a dog fight.

It is also just as depressing to me that the NL Central is so flat out horrible, I can honestly see the Scrubs winning 90 and the division with their....... Well I won't get into a long Cubbie-bash here.....

But:


WHAT IF the cubs and sox traded leagues for just this year.

How many games would the Sox win in the NL Central?

And how many games would the Cubs with in the AL Central?


I honestly with no exaggeration would say the Sox would win at least 95 games, prolly more but the intensity wouldn't be there when Brewers are in second and no closer than 10 out the entire season.

I think the Cubs wouldn't win 75 facing the Sox schedule. That lineup, even with Soriano is average at best in the AL.

So where do you guys put it?

nysox35
02-12-2007, 06:23 PM
I think you are dead on.

In the NL Central, The Sox would win 95+ games. Actually, I could see us doing that even in the AL Central if we play up to our ability.

As for the Cubs, in the AL Central 75 games is the max I'd say. To be honest, I think their improvement is overblown, even in a weak division. I think they're .500 at best in the NL Central (which could produce a title).

WhiteSox5187
02-12-2007, 06:24 PM
I think you are one hundred percent correct...I also think that if I were a lefty and could throw 90+ I'd be a big league pitcher. But I'm not a left and I can barely break eighty, and the Sox aren't in the NL Central and the Cubs aren't in the AL Central...seems to be a mute point. I'd much rather be an average team that wins a poor division and plays in October than a very good team in a great divison that watches the playoffs at home.

esbrechtel
02-12-2007, 06:53 PM
I think you are one hundred percent correct...I also think that if I were a lefty and could throw 90+ I'd be a big league pitcher. But I'm not a left and I can barely break eighty, and the Sox aren't in the NL Central and the Cubs aren't in the AL Central...seems to be a mute point. I'd much rather be an average team that wins a poor division and plays in October than a very good team in a great divison that watches the playoffs at home.
Amen to that...I sure hope I don't have to experience that...

98navigator
02-12-2007, 07:21 PM
I think you are dead on.

In the NL Central, The Sox would win 95+ games. Actually, I could see us doing that even in the AL Central if we play up to our ability.

As for the Cubs, in the AL Central 75 games is the max I'd say. To be honest, I think their improvement is overblown, even in a weak division. I think they're .500 at best in the NL Central (which could produce a title).


It's still EARLY and the flubs are probably due for some devastating injury to a key player (Zambrano?) but I fear they are much better than a .500 team. I've seen unbiased projections (one on a Brewers' site and the other on a Cardinals' site) that they could win 85 games (low end) to 90 games (high end). I don't claim to know how to calculate the stats but a few models are available online:

Link (http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2007/1/25/11141/0407)
Link (http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/story/2007/1/25/85036/4640)

...jeff sackmann posted his team preview of the cubs today at Beyond the Boxscore and eyeballs the cubs at 86 wins (http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2007/1/25/11141/0407) --- a 20-game improvement over last season. that's right in synch with david pinto's estimate (http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/018943.php) of a couple weeks ago. are these guys high? i decided to run a quick PECOTA aggregation, the same exercise that projected the cardinals to win about 86 games (http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/story/2007/1/18/9213/35255). cutting quickly to the chase: my PECOTA-derived estimate trues right up with sackmann's and pinto's. it's slightly more optimistic, in fact; i've got the cubs at 87 wins.
here's how it breaks down. first, i've got the cubs improving their offense by about 100 runs, or roughly 10 wins:




AB H 2B 3B HR BB | AVG OBP SLG | runs
created base
runs CHI PECOTA

5540 1518 304 32 208 464 | .274 .337 .453 | 846 817 2006

5587 1496 271 46 166 395 | .268 .319 .422 | 745 729

"base runs" is a run-scoring model that's slightly more accurate than runs created; i ran both formulas to see if the respective year-to-year comparisons matched, and they essentially did. if we split the difference between base runs and runs created, we get an estimate of 831 runs scored --- probably a league-leading total. here's how i distributed the at-bats in my projection:
infield: lee 500, derosa 450, cedeno 450, itzuris 350, ramirez 539
outfield: soriano 576, jones 400, floyd 337, murton 300, pagan 250, pie 150
catchers: barrett 450, blanco 151
i then added 337 at-bats' worth of replacement-level bench play, and 300 at-bats for the pitchers. note that PECOTA anticipates a significant improvement in the cubs' plate discipline --- nearly 70 more walks this year than last. if'n your curious, PECOTA's projection for derrek lee isn't particularly rosy; it places his OPS in the high .800s, which neighborhood he inhabited for three consecutive years prior to his big breakout in 2005.
ok, now for the pitching staff:




GS IP H ER BB SO HR | ERA WHIP | total
runs CHI PECOTA

162 1440 1403 704 612 11759 193 | 4.40 1.399 | 764 2006

162 1439 1396 758 687 1250 210 | 4.74 1.448 | 834 here the cubs pick up 70 runs, or about 7 games. in this telling, the distribution of starts goes: zambrano 32, marquis 30, lilly 27, hill 26, marshall 18, prior 10, and wade miller 8, with the last 11 going to a generic replacement-level pitcher with a 5.75 era. the bullpenners are dempster, howry, eyre, cotts, kerry wood, ryu, mateo, novoa, ohman, and wuertz, plus a catch-all replacement-level category (35 innings) with a 5.00 era. i estimated 60 unearned runs to derive the overall runs-allowed figure; the cubs coughed up an abysmally high figure last year, 76, but they were below 50 in each of the prior three seasons.
putting these numbers into the pythagorean won-loss calculator, we end up with:


runs
scored runs
allowed
w l pct cubs 831 764
87 75 .537 cards 781 735
86 76 .531 look, it's only january; they're only made-up numbers. but from here, it looks like it might be an interesting summer . . .

DarkHorse35
02-12-2007, 07:26 PM
My buddy whose from Minnesota and I had the same conversation last fall. When you look at the depth in pitching that teh AL central had and have it's kind of hard not to think that either the Sox, Indians, Twins, or Tigers could have dominated in taht division.

munchman33
02-12-2007, 07:44 PM
i estimated 60 unearned runs to derive the overall runs-allowed figure; the cubs coughed up an abysmally high figure last year, 76, but they were below 50 in each of the prior three seasons.

Sorry to burst that bubble of his, but that outfield could very well alone produce 60 unearned runs. In fact, they'd be extremely lucky if that were the case.

TheOldRoman
02-12-2007, 08:09 PM
95? The Sox would win at least 110 in the NL Central, and that is not an exaggeration. It is horrible.
As for the Cubs, they are will going to lose 85+ in that crappy division, and they would finish behind the Royals in the AL Central.

PaulDrake
02-12-2007, 09:52 PM
The NL Central is weak and pathetic but a team from the NL Central won the World Series.

IndianWhiteSox
02-13-2007, 05:51 AM
Because the Tigers forgot how to throw to first base.:redneck

spiffie
02-13-2007, 01:00 PM
Lots of random numbers
Since you're new I'll just let you know, we here in the White Sox Army don't really care for made-up stats or the propellerheads who spout them. That stuff may fly with other fanbases who don't really know baseball, but we here have eyes and learn from watching baseball, not reading spreadsheets. Just a friendly tip before West or Daver get set loose on you and tear you apart for being a stat geek or a FOBB. Keep the stats simple and real like batting average, Home runs, and ERA, and you'll be fine. Welcome aboard!

Jurr
02-13-2007, 01:22 PM
Since you're new I'll just let you know, we here in the White Sox Army don't really care for made-up stats or the propellerheads who spout them. That stuff may fly with other fanbases who don't really know baseball, but we here have eyes and learn from watching baseball, not reading spreadsheets. Just a friendly tip before West or Daver get set loose on you and tear you apart for being a stat geek or a FOBB. Keep the stats simple and real like batting average, Home runs, and ERA, and you'll be fine. Welcome aboard!
I am becoming a big fan of the VORP. It tells all there is to know about a player's ability. Period. They're even going to include the player's clubhouse abilities through a thorough mathematical evaluation, based on the amount of shenanigans they produce per road trip. Clubhouse music tastes will also play a huge role.

soxfan13
02-13-2007, 01:41 PM
Don't want to "dark cloud" it... but it is hard to be super pumped about the Sox this year with the state of the AL Central, I mean they won 90 last year and played meaningless games down the stretch... I personally like the Sox's chances as much as any other team in the AL Central, but it sure as hell is gonna be a dog fight.

It is also just as depressing to me that the NL Central is so flat out horrible, I can honestly see the Scrubs winning 90 and the division with their....... Well I won't get into a long Cubbie-bash here.....

But:


WHAT IF the cubs and sox traded leagues for just this year.

How many games would the Sox win in the NL Central?

And how many games would the Cubs with in the AL Central?


I honestly with no exaggeration would say the Sox would win at least 95 games, prolly more but the intensity wouldn't be there when Brewers are in second and no closer than 10 out the entire season.

I think the Cubs wouldn't win 75 facing the Sox schedule. That lineup, even with Soriano is average at best in the AL.

So where do you guys put it?

Sorry but I would say Soriano was a little bit better then average in the AL.

White Sox Randy
02-13-2007, 01:52 PM
Just imagine the Sox lineup without Thome. I still say that the Sox would win 105 in the NL central. The flubs would have Cliff Floyd as their DH and they would win about 75-80.

As things are, the Sox should win 90-95 while the flubs will win 85-90.