Thursday, December 23, 2004
Getting worse?
A guy from my company just said, "The Red Sox are going to be cellar-dwellers next year. They are terrible." He was being serious.
Well I thought based on the stuff with Win Shares that I had already done, that maybe they were shaping up about the same as last year's team, but I wasn't sure, so I thought I'd take another look at it.
The best way I can think to evaluate it, is to look at the pitching staff and the hitters and see if the team is likely to give up more or less runs, and score more or less runs.
Using runs created, I found that Pokey Reese, Orlando Cabrera, Nomar Garicaparra, and Cesar Crespo created less runs than Edgar Renteria and Ramon Vazquez did last year, in 12 less at bats. It is likely that for the most part, the production of those 4 players will be replaced by Renteria and Vazquez, and after standardizing their plate appearances, the Red Sox picked up 7 runs from last year, if 2004 numbers can be repeated.
Meanwhile, Jay Payton, if you standardize his plate appearances to match the combined total of Ellis Burks, Gabe Kapler, and Dave Roberts, gives the Red Sox an additional 10 runs.
So with all of the major contributors accounted for from last year, outside of Varitek, the Red Sox are 17 runs better on paper than they were in 2004. The only problem is that we are talking about 3 players to replace what is essentially 4, but as long as they don't bring in players who actually give a negative contribution, the Red Sox should score about .1 more runs per game.
I then did pretty much the same thing with runs saved against average, comparing the contribution of Pedro Martinez, Derek Lowe, Scott Williamson, Ramiro Mendoza, Curtis Leskanic, and Terry Adams to David Wells, Wade Miller, Matt Clement, Matt Mantei, and John Halama. There are question marks as to what performance can and cannot be repeated, but in 513 2/3 innings last year, the departing crew allowed 5 fewer runs than you would expect from average players. The incoming crew, in 594 2/3 innings, saved 29 runs above average.
OK. We assume a relatively small input from Miller (90 innings) to fill in the Wells and Clement gaps. John Halama as a middle man and Mantei as a set-up man can replace Adams, Leskanic, Mendoza, and Williamson. Once you standardize for innings, the new group actually comes in 20 runs ahead of last year's group.
If the Sox players can repeat their 2004 performances (or at least have the declines cancelled out by improvements), and can fill in the remaining holes with "average" players, they are:
+17 in runs scored
-20 in runs given up.
Based on their runs scored and runs scored against, the new-look Red Sox would be expected to win 101 games. Last year they won 98, right in line with their expected wins based on run differential.
In the end, the "cellar dweller" commenter didn't really stick by his guns, besides the fact that he thought Varitek had signed with Colorado, that Millar was already gone, and that some unknown outfielder who he called Mecklenberg had also left. But I think I'm prepared to win this argument should it come up with any Yankee fans.
Well I thought based on the stuff with Win Shares that I had already done, that maybe they were shaping up about the same as last year's team, but I wasn't sure, so I thought I'd take another look at it.
The best way I can think to evaluate it, is to look at the pitching staff and the hitters and see if the team is likely to give up more or less runs, and score more or less runs.
Using runs created, I found that Pokey Reese, Orlando Cabrera, Nomar Garicaparra, and Cesar Crespo created less runs than Edgar Renteria and Ramon Vazquez did last year, in 12 less at bats. It is likely that for the most part, the production of those 4 players will be replaced by Renteria and Vazquez, and after standardizing their plate appearances, the Red Sox picked up 7 runs from last year, if 2004 numbers can be repeated.
Meanwhile, Jay Payton, if you standardize his plate appearances to match the combined total of Ellis Burks, Gabe Kapler, and Dave Roberts, gives the Red Sox an additional 10 runs.
So with all of the major contributors accounted for from last year, outside of Varitek, the Red Sox are 17 runs better on paper than they were in 2004. The only problem is that we are talking about 3 players to replace what is essentially 4, but as long as they don't bring in players who actually give a negative contribution, the Red Sox should score about .1 more runs per game.
I then did pretty much the same thing with runs saved against average, comparing the contribution of Pedro Martinez, Derek Lowe, Scott Williamson, Ramiro Mendoza, Curtis Leskanic, and Terry Adams to David Wells, Wade Miller, Matt Clement, Matt Mantei, and John Halama. There are question marks as to what performance can and cannot be repeated, but in 513 2/3 innings last year, the departing crew allowed 5 fewer runs than you would expect from average players. The incoming crew, in 594 2/3 innings, saved 29 runs above average.
OK. We assume a relatively small input from Miller (90 innings) to fill in the Wells and Clement gaps. John Halama as a middle man and Mantei as a set-up man can replace Adams, Leskanic, Mendoza, and Williamson. Once you standardize for innings, the new group actually comes in 20 runs ahead of last year's group.
If the Sox players can repeat their 2004 performances (or at least have the declines cancelled out by improvements), and can fill in the remaining holes with "average" players, they are:
+17 in runs scored
-20 in runs given up.
Based on their runs scored and runs scored against, the new-look Red Sox would be expected to win 101 games. Last year they won 98, right in line with their expected wins based on run differential.
In the end, the "cellar dweller" commenter didn't really stick by his guns, besides the fact that he thought Varitek had signed with Colorado, that Millar was already gone, and that some unknown outfielder who he called Mecklenberg had also left. But I think I'm prepared to win this argument should it come up with any Yankee fans.
# posted by Darlucky @ 1:07 PM 
