FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Without actually looking into it, I’m guessing that the fans are more optimistic about Jurrjens and Hanson than other systems and less optimistic about Rollins, Happ, Moyer, Blanton, and Hamels.

    Comment by The A Team — March 16, 2010 @ 10:33 am

  2. They also seem to be forgetting they lost Vasquez and replaced him with… uhm…

    Comment by Tom B — March 16, 2010 @ 10:50 am

  3. Assuming you’re right, I think the fans would be wrong on Jurrjens, Rollins, and Hamels, bringing the Phillies a little closer to the Braves.

    Neat to see another perspective that the Phillies aren’t runaway favorites at all.

    Comment by Sky Kalkman — March 16, 2010 @ 11:13 am

  4. Could be subjective bias creeping in, belief being that it is difficult for any team to win a division 4 years in a row.

    Comment by neuter_your_dogma — March 16, 2010 @ 11:17 am

  5. Vasquez for the sake of these probabilities isn’t on the Braves, even if he’s still on the Braves projection page.

    Comment by David Appelman — March 16, 2010 @ 11:21 am

  6. The Phillies won’t run out a starter (like Moyer) with a 5.00 ERA for over 120 innings. They have enough resources to have other options (via trade or an available free agent like Pedro Martinez). This would explain the pessimistic FANS projection, which is only the sum of the opening day parts.

    Comment by Werthless — March 16, 2010 @ 11:24 am

  7. …Tim Hudson.

    Comment by Cooper S — March 16, 2010 @ 11:31 am

  8. I’m not sure I understand how the true team winning percentages were derived for the pupose of the simulations, i looked back at the prior posts but with all the adjustments I wasn’t sure I’d be able to reproduce the data. I looked at the FAN projected WAR for most of the Braves and Phils starting position players and starting pitching, I ignored the relief pitchers because I got tired of looking at individual pages. It looked like there weren’t any projections for Heyward. The other projections all seemed skewed too high as has been mentioned in the prior threads.

    I was surprised the D’backs were projected to win their division that many times, I think those are some pretty optimistic fans out there. I would have placed them 4th in that division.

    Comment by bobo — March 16, 2010 @ 11:48 am

  9. bobo,

    For the purposes of the sim, I just used the FANS standings as produced by David Appelman to derive the true talent win %. He’d have to weigh in with how he derived those, as I took them at face value.

    Comment by Steve Sommer — March 16, 2010 @ 11:54 am

  10. The Braves showed how difficult that was for eleven consecutive years.

    Comment by Jason B — March 16, 2010 @ 1:00 pm

  11. The Dodgers are just so underrated, and I’m not sure why. Is it because Padilla is the 4th starter? Because his value level is reflected in many staffs at the 4th starter spot. Is it because the 5th starter isnt known yet? Because there are a few people fighting for that spot that would make many team’s back end of the rotation.

    I just don’t know.

    Comment by Ivdown — March 16, 2010 @ 1:26 pm

  12. Its this brand new thing called having 5 good starters already.

    Comment by Jon — March 16, 2010 @ 3:46 pm

  13. Your site and all of the sims are new to me, but I’d have to question any system that gives the Phils only a 34% of making the playoffs and the Braves a 65% (virtual lock) on a spot. As a longtime Braves fan, I’m just hoping that they can make the divisional race interesting. While their pitching is solid, I wonder where their runs are going to come from. I also think they’ve picked up some injury prone players when their best hitter (Jones) can only be expected to be in the lineup (and healthy) about 70% of the time (at most).
    Obviously, I hope these projections prove to be true, but they seem to defy basic baseball knowledge/common sense.

    Comment by Paul — March 17, 2010 @ 1:10 am

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Close this window.

0.202 Powered by WordPress