How Win shares add up with our 05 team compared to the 04 team

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 7:11 AM PST

Here's an analysis of last years VORP and Win Shares, which are then compared to last years VORP and Win Shares of the players we acquired (major leagues only). For players with no major league totals, and positions with the same player i will try and make educated guesses.

Catcher: Miller=14, Kendall=23. +9

1B: 04 Hatteberg= 18, 05 Hatty= 18. +0
I think Hatty will put up arounjd teh same production. He finally came into his own, and now with the added rest he will get, he will keep it up all year.

2B: Scoot=12, Ginter/Ellis*16 +4
No matter who starts and who subs, i think they will put up around there. Ginter had 12 last year, and Ellis is a pretty good backup. I didn't include Mac into the win shares because most of his time came when Chavez was injured. I cant say exactly, but Mac's win shares at second base was probably 1 or 2 at the most.

3B: 04 Chavez=22, 05 Chavez=31 +9
Last year, if playing the whole year, he was going to have his best year of his career. On pace for 37 home runs and over 100 RBI's, plus league leading walks. I fully expect Chavvy for this finally to be the year where he busts loose.

SS: 04 Crosby 18, 05 Crosby= 16. -2

I personally think he will do better, but i have to be objective. THere is that infamous sophomore slump. If he does slump, it won't be by much. He's just that good.

LF: 04 Byrnes=22, 05 Byrnes=24 +2
He has kept improving, and im confident this year will be pretty much close to his peak.

CF: 04 Kotsay=25, 05 Kotsay=23 -2
Being objective.

RF: Dye=18, Swisher=17 -1
More hyped then crosby. I actually think he will do better than that. He is a special hitter.

DH: Durazo=25, 05 Durazo= 19
OBjectiveness

Bench: 04 Bench=14, 05 Bench=21 +7
This year, instead of McMillon and Mac, we have Thomas and presumably Ellis. Assuming ellis is the backup and he puts four, like i thought before and thomast puts up last years total of 7, then thats how we get the 7 point advantage.

Total for offensive players: +20, or about 7 extra wins.

For the pitching, i will be extremely objective

Rotation:

1. Hudson=16, Meyer=8(that means about BZ's last season) -8
I think he'll do better than that, but for the sake of the argument. I put him compared to hudson because thats who we got in trading Huddy.

2.Mulder=10, Haren=8. -2
Haren is an estimate, not what he put up last year (the site im looking at doesnt list him as having a win share for some reason)

3. 04 Zito=9, 05 Zito=12 (Similar to Hardens season) +3

Again, still staying objective.

4. 04 Harden=12, 05= 16 (hvaing a huddy like year) +4
I don't really have to explain...

5. Redman=6, Blanton=6 (Zito like year) +0

Rotation Totals: -3

Relief Corps:

Long man: Duke=8, 05=6 -2
I think some of his will be taken away by other relievers, because this year we have relievers who are actually better.

Middle relief:

1. Hammond=5, Calero=4 -1
I think Calero will do better than that, but thats last years total.

2. Bradford/Rincon=4
I think they might have the same total, but they didn't have the same type of year they usually do. I expect them to do better, but we'll leave it at 4.

Setup:

Mecir=3, Cruz=6 +3
Rhodes=3, Tyler Johnson=0 -3

Lets just say he puts up 0.

Closer:

1. Dotel=9, 05 Dotel (full year)= 13 +4
I'll bet anyone here he makes the all star team. I think he'll put up more like 16, but objectivity interfered.

Pitchign totals: -2

Team totals: +18 or 6 extra wins.

Well, the win shares tell us we will have 6 extra wins. Or 97 wins. There is the possibility that Meyer and Blanton will stink and a lot of others. But, for now this is what it looks like.

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Devil's Advocate

Stats are Stats, and Reality is Reality...

Personally, I just don't see how our starting pitching is going to be only -3. I mean seriously, we'll have 3 Brand-Spanking-New MLB Starters in the rotation. These guys are going to go through some serious ups and downs, so be prepared. Rookie pitchers just don't do well in the Big leagues. Can you name me a situation where 3 rookie starters have succeeded in this league, all at th same time? If so, it's a very rare thing. IMO, at least one of the "Baby Aces" will be sent down to the minors before Spring Training (or soon thereafter).

We're going to be down in a lot of games early this year (1-4 in the 2nd, 0-3 in the 2nd, 0-2 in the 1st, etc.), and our season will be determined on how well the A's can comeback in games, and how well the bullpen can hold the other team down. If the A's lead the league in comeback victories, they will win the division. Otherwise, be prepared for the struggles of a young baseball team.

Realistically, 97 Wins is about 10-15 to many. I'll be happy with an above .500 Season in 2005.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 8:01 AM PST reply actions

.500???

if we have a .500 record, that's going to be a HUGE disappointment. i know we're putting a lot on fresh 3 (haren, meyer, blanton), but keep in mind that huddy, love him as we all do, was NOT that special a pitcher last year, especially down the stretch, let alone mulder. i think we're looking at their reputations rather than their seasons, and in 2004, huddy was "good", mulder was "better-than-average" (4.43 ERA), and zito had probably his worst year. this year, zito is bound to be better (i don't know if he'll by cy barry again, but i'm certain he won't be '04 barry), as will harden. and as much as the young pitchers might struggle, we need one of them to be "good" and one to be "better-than-average" to equal last years pitching. plus, the pen is way stronger, helping the starters, as is the offense. while i don't want to be silly-optomistic, i don't see how we'll have much of a drop-off from last year, mostly because hudson and mulder weren't that good in '04, we had a weak pen, and a mediocre offense, yet still almost won the division. realistically, i think around 90 wins sounds about right. maybe more, depending on how good the young kids play, but not much less than that.

by guy incognito on Feb 4, 2005 8:16 AM PST up reply actions

I agree

this notion that our new pitchers are going to be steady and win two thirds of their starts is naive. And saying the big 3 were not very good last year is laughable. The big 3 are elite pitchers. BB has always maintained that they wld still be here if they cld pay them, but due to their injuries and the economic market of the league this was not a feasible option. Rememeber mulder his 1st year, not good. Rookies struggle, and if our offense can't comeback, having the best bullpen wont mean jack. I'm optimistic, but be prepared to have the bubble burst this year. That's reality. We'll have a better idea after ST. Go A's.

by oakwin2004 on Feb 4, 2005 8:38 AM PST up reply actions

Yea!

This is what i was aiming for. When we think about it, the big three was not especially good for the year as a whole. This win share analysis helps prove that.

Peace up, A-Town Down (A town being Albany California, not Atlanta)

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 8:47 AM PST up reply actions

re: big 3 last year

i wasn't saying they aren't elite pitchers, but look at the numbers...huddy's era was mid 3's, mulder was mid 4's, and zito had issues in the first half of the season. i don't expect the rookies to be elite like mulder or hudson (at least not in 2005), but i don't think they'll be that much of a drop-off from what hudson and mulder gave us in 2004. we should think about what hudson and mulder gave us last year, not what they generally give us (high 2's/low 3's era for huddy, low 3's for mulder, and about 30-35 starts each, all better than what we actually got from them last year).

by guy incognito on Feb 4, 2005 8:47 AM PST up reply actions

I know

but were dealing with alot of "what if's". tHAT'S ALL my point is. With the big 3 we knew we were in a playoff hunt. I'm just trying to stress that pitchers like that don't come around that often, and just b/c we have top prospects doesn't mean they will pan out. But Haren pitched very well in the post season and with zito,harden and hopefully blanton performing well in the rotation, we will be fine. Damn I jst got excited thinking about it, we are so fricken loaded with players.

by oakwin2004 on Feb 4, 2005 9:22 AM PST up reply actions

Now

I don't think we are going to win 97 games. I think it's possible, but i don't think it will happen.

FYI: Haren is not a rookie. He frikkin pitched in the world series and shut the red sox down? Haren is a great pitcher. You'll be surprised at how good he does this year.

Peace up, A-Town Down (A town being Albany California, not Atlanta)

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 8:48 AM PST up reply actions

You see ohad

this is what I'm talking about, you just called Haren, a guy with 6 wins in his career"Great". I think he will do well this year also, but at this point it's pure speculation, the empirical stats do not back up you claiming he's "great".

by oakwin2004 on Feb 4, 2005 9:27 AM PST up reply actions

Haren

I understand he's not a "rookie", but he's never pitched an entire season as the #3 Starter for an MLB Team. And Blanton and Meyer are yet to start an MLB game.

These guys are going to struggle, especially coming down the stretch when they're tired and maxed out w/ career high in innings pitched.

The future is bright, but 2005 is a re-tooling/rebuilding year, and 97 Wins is absolutely out of the question. 90 Wins is very optimistic as well...do-able, but optimistic nonetheless.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 9:48 AM PST up reply actions

3 rookie starters

You don't have to look far to find a team that used at least 3 heralded rookie starters in it's rotation:
just take a look at last year's Baltimore Orioles. The "Baby Aces" of the O's were Erik Bedard (rookie) 26 starts, 6-10 4.59, Matt Riley (rookie) 13 starts, 3-4 5.62, Eric DuBose (soph) 14 starts 4-6 6.39, and Daniel Cabrera (the least lauded) 27 starts, 12-8 5.00.

by Steve in Napa on Feb 4, 2005 9:48 AM PST up reply actions

thats right, and they won 78

My wife says i'm "obsessed" with AN and colleagues worry i'm "fixated". I say "ya, OK.....so?" Wish me luck, therapy starts Monday.

by bigelephant on Feb 4, 2005 9:52 AM PST up reply actions

Erik Bedard

Those numbesr are not that bad for a rookie. He is still considered as a highly talented young pitcher. But i think it is safe to say the A's are better at evaluating talent than the orioles. Haren has proven himself at the major league level. Blanton and Meyer haven't. I admit. But if they have ERA's over 4.8 i will be surprised. These are premier prospects (Blanton not as much, but he is still as solid as they get.)

Peace up, A-Town Down (A town being Albany California, not Atlanta)

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 10:38 AM PST up reply actions

Our Little Three

Our rookie pitchers are all much better than the O's rookies from last year. And having Zito and Harden at the top of the rotation also beats whatever the O's had last year.

by OaktownTribesman on Feb 4, 2005 11:11 AM PST up reply actions

Reality vs. Stats

Agreed.
Stats are important but I am going with what I see.
We lose Mulder. A rookie will probably have a full year like Mulder's second half.
Hudson was pretty consistent...when he played. We lose there too.
That said, we gain a little with hitting and bullpen.
Gut feel is we lose 3-5 from '04. Make it back up in '06.
That is my realistic side. We may do better - I definitely hope so anyway.

by easyraider on Feb 4, 2005 4:44 PM PST up reply actions

please:

provide the name of the MLB team who won over 90 games with:1# starter-72 CWs, 2#-starter 16 CWs,
3# starter-6 CWs, 4# starter- 0 CW, 5# starter- 0 CWs. (even if you include yabu as a starter i think of him as a rookie). so, altogether, the a's starting pitching staff has a grand total of 94 career MLB wins. yikes! 92-94 wins ?

My wife says i'm "obsessed" with AN and colleagues worry i'm "fixated". I say "ya, OK.....so?" Wish me luck, therapy starts Monday.

by bigelephant on Feb 4, 2005 9:48 AM PST reply actions

cld it be 2000..lol

well appier as u mentioned was legit..huddy went off after his 11 win previous year...so the rotations are similiar..but the 2000 team cld mash..239 jacks....the 2005 team? we'll see...

by oakwin2004 on Feb 4, 2005 10:21 AM PST up reply actions

Mulder, Hudson, Redman

If Mulder, Hudson, and Redman were asked to pitch 5-6 innings every outing last year, they would collectively have an ERA of under 3.00(assumption). The reason their ERA's were higher was because they were asked to go longer into games, and getting tagged for uneven numbers in innings 6,7, and 8.

Haren, Blanton, and Meyer are going to get hit early and often in a lot of games this year, so if the A's are going to have a chance a winning the division, every other aspect of their game (offense, defense, bench players, bullpen, etc.) better be "lights out".

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 9:56 AM PST reply actions

agreed Col Fan

and by july 4th, the media will be writing about how the bullpen is ragged.

listen, i'm TRYING to get into the "90 win season" mood here, but i'm just not seeing it.
:-(

My wife says i'm "obsessed" with AN and colleagues worry i'm "fixated". I say "ya, OK.....so?" Wish me luck, therapy starts Monday.

by bigelephant on Feb 4, 2005 10:30 AM PST up reply actions

i like your spunk oaktoon...

...i think there is a "nico" opening here somewhere!

My wife says i'm "obsessed" with AN and colleagues worry i'm "fixated". I say "ya, OK.....so?" Wish me luck, therapy starts Monday.

by bigelephant on Feb 4, 2005 10:35 AM PST up reply actions

But..

2 or 3 of those guys won't be on the opening day roster. Also, you can't just keep bringing people up and down from Oakland to Sacramento, and back again. Players run out of options, and will need to be put on waivers before they can be sent down.

And, T. Johnson won't make the opening day roster unless he has an unbelievable Spring. Remember now, he hasn't pitched above AA ball up to this point.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 10:50 AM PST up reply actions

Inconsistency from Baby Aces

That's why I'm saying that the 5-6 innings Haren, Blanton, and Meyer give us will look like this on a great day (10 Starts):

IP H R ER BB SO ERA
6 6 1 1 2 5 3.00

and like this on a good day (10 Starts):

IP H R ER BB SO ERA
6 6 3 3 2 5 4.50

and this on a bad day (10 Starts):

IP H R ER BB SO ERA
3 6 5 5 3 2 15.00

Inconsistency is what we can expect. Huddy and Mulder were never inconsistent. Even Mulder wasn't inconsistent in the 2nd Half. He was just consistently bad.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 10:39 AM PST up reply actions

Great Day ERA =

1.50

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 10:42 AM PST up reply actions

Average of all 3 =

5.40 ERA

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 11:01 AM PST up reply actions

Your "Bad Day"

Is more like a horrible day. I would be surprised if we saw that 10 times.

Peace up, A-Town Down (A town being Albany California, not Atlanta)

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 11:05 AM PST up reply actions

But...

You woulndn't be surprised by 20 Quality Starts? You're killing me with your blind optimism.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Feb 4, 2005 1:03 PM PST up reply actions

Those 20 quality starts would mean

A 3 ERA. I would be surprised, yes. I don't think they will have 10 i run six inning starts, and likewise with the 3 inning 5 run or whatever those are. Somewhere in the middle, like a low 4 ERA.

Peace up, A-Town Down (A town being Albany California, not Atlanta)

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 1:37 PM PST up reply actions

Spring Training

Is anyone going to attend the Mar 5 and Mar 6 games in Arizona. I am going "han solo" and I was hoping to meet up with some fellow AN MEMBERS and have a beer or two or three. It wld be another opportunity to put a face with the name. So if your going to ST, post which games your going to attend, so other members can possibly meet up. I didn't know where else to ask this.

by oakwin2004 on Feb 4, 2005 9:59 AM PST reply actions

New Diary

Don't be shy about starting a new diary for this. It's worth it.

by OaktownTribesman on Feb 4, 2005 11:23 AM PST up reply actions

That reply was to Oakwin2004

About ST.

by OaktownTribesman on Feb 4, 2005 11:24 AM PST up reply actions

byrnes = kotsay?!

I like both those guys as much as the next, but are they really even in VORP? I'd think their offense would be a wash at best and Kotsay is a way better defender.

by Apricot on Feb 4, 2005 10:49 AM PST reply actions

Byrnes

Brings power, thats what he's got on Kotsay.

Peace up, A-Town Down (A town being Albany California, not Atlanta)

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 10:52 AM PST up reply actions

Even if our young starters

All put up a total win share number of 0, our total team win shares would be minus 14, or about 5 games worse than last year. Translates to 86 wins. Not bad for a team with no number 2,3,4 starters.

Peace up, A-Town Down (A town being Albany California, not Atlanta)

by ohad on Feb 4, 2005 10:59 AM PST reply actions

but thats the point

col. fan made from the first. of course, WS and VORP might point to 90+ win season. and i think there is a time/place for WS and VORP. its at the very heart of moneyball theory! but, jeeesh, don't forget the other variables.

i don't even like to "predict" wins. all i've said was i'd be happy with 85-87 wins. more-great. less-oh well. i wonder if BB "predicts" wins for his teams?

My wife says i'm "obsessed" with AN and colleagues worry i'm "fixated". I say "ya, OK.....so?" Wish me luck, therapy starts Monday.

by bigelephant on Feb 4, 2005 11:06 AM PST reply actions