The Season Has Started
Predicition season, that is. Ah yes, the time when everyone likes to pretend they are smarter than everyone else by showing who will not only win all the divisions, but predict who will win the Fall Classic. Funny, I don't think anyone had the White Sox last year...or the Red Sox the year before or the Marlins...ah, never mind.
I recently went to my local Border's and looked at the Street & Smith's 2006 season preview as well as Lindy's. Both had the Angels winning the division.
Interestingly enough, I wonder how different the Internet predictions will be from the "mainstream" predictions this year. Over at Larry Mahnken's Yankee Replacement Blog, they have the A's winning the West by 11 games over the Angels in their projections. Of course, this is a baseball simulator which is different than someone just scanning a roster and deciding who will win. Or maybe it isn't all that different.
Still, they ran the season through the simulator 100 times and the A's won the division 88 percent of the time and making the playoffs 94 percent of the time. According to this divisional projection, the A's are the biggest sure thing in the American League. Boston is closest to the A's 94 percent rate at 82 percent. If the projections hold true, the AL Central will be the most unpredictable of all American League Divisions, but the Twins and Indians came out ahead overall with the White Sox missing the playoffs altogether 76 percent of the time.
What does all this mean? Well, take it for what it's worth, predictions and projections. It's interesting that even last season, the Internet community seemed to favor the A's even in what was supposed to be a retooling season. Many of the mainstream media publications predicted doom and gloom for the A's. I wonder what the split in choosing the A's for the AL West will be this season. Perhaps we should keep a tally comparing the old school publications versus online publications?
I think publications who need to make predictions long before many of the moves have been made have a tendency of missing out on acquisitions that can be underrated like Bengie Molina signing with the Blue Jays. So, take them for what they're worth (usually somewhere between $4.95 and $12.95).
0 recs |
52 comments
Comments
Most net fans
But I think it mostly stems from fans who follow other divisions, and pick whomever has won the division before.
by Zonis on Feb 7, 2006 12:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm talking about Internet writers
by Tyler Bleszinski on Feb 7, 2006 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rob Neyer
by dpetri2000 on Feb 7, 2006 12:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
damn espn insider...
by Suck My Moneyballs on Feb 7, 2006 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not on this site he can't
Thank you.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Feb 7, 2006 1:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"full transcripts of a pay service"
"Yes, baby. You sound like you've been a naughty baseball player! Have you been a naughty baseball player?"
"Um, uh, y-y-y-yeah, I -- I guess I have."
"Well, do you know what happens to naughty baseball players?"
"N-n-n-n-no ..."
"Naughty baseball players ... get tweezed!"
"Uh, I, uh, gotta go --"
"Oh, no, stay on the line, baby -- you ain't hit your billing time yet!"
<click>
<end transcript>
by monkeyball on Feb 7, 2006 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps he can
by dumbruss on Feb 7, 2006 3:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think 88% is ridiculously high...
by OaktownPower on Feb 7, 2006 12:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I personally think
Actually since a bunch of us did this last year, and i was ultimately somewhat humiliated-- though of course the Harden and Crosby injuries were unanticipated in August when i was so bullish, here's my attempt to set some odds this year.
Odds of making the AL playoffs:
New York: 65
Boston: 45
Toronto: 25
baltimore: 3
Tampa Bay 2
Chicago: 50
Cleveland: 45
Minnesota: 25
Detroit: 4
Kansas City: 1
Oakland: 75
LAA: 40
texas: 15
Seattle: 5
So there you go.
by oaktoon on Feb 7, 2006 9:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Does Kansas City's 1%
Personally, I can't take too much issue with your odds, other than minor subjective tweaks. I'd probably put Texas and Seattle even at 10% each, switch Chicago and Cleveland, give 5% of Oakland's odds to LAA, and maybe give 5% of Boston's odds to Toronto, but those aren't major changes.
by Nico on Feb 7, 2006 9:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't say 0%
Hey-- you had the A's at 75% down below, and now you're already revising?
by oaktoon on Feb 8, 2006 7:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No, below I said
And yes, I think the Royals' chances are less than 1 in 200.
by Nico on Feb 8, 2006 8:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ZIPS and Diamond Mind
Second, DM doesn't really take serious injuries into account.
by Danny on Feb 7, 2006 12:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
At least it's a process rather
by Tyler Bleszinski on Feb 7, 2006 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, definitely
by Danny on Feb 7, 2006 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
to add one more
A much better guestimate will be available when Diamon Mind runs their own regressions in March. They picked last year pretty well, although the Angels outperformed their projection enough to knock us out of first (several career years from your pitchers will do that). For reference:
http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/proj2005.htm
by Tim J on Feb 7, 2006 4:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd believe a computer sim a million times
prediction
A's win 93, west, WS over cards.
by robber23 on Feb 7, 2006 12:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
i realize the irony of my own A's biased punditry
by robber23 on Feb 7, 2006 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
my own
I don't know where the Angels will fall with that, but that's something I'll get to when I have time. I think, based on anecdotal evidence, that they'll win around 90 games.
Zonis- I'm getting to the PECOTA projs. really... ;)
by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 7, 2006 12:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
A's
As for the A's I think they have improved the team in about all phases of the game. I am really impressed with what Beane and more importantly the ownership (increasing payroll)has done. To me the big question is wether their stars can stay healthy.
The Angels seem to always out perform the computer simulations. Wether that is due to having a great bullpen, a vetern team or the ability late in games to move runners is tough to tell. This year in my opinion they have a lot of players who maybe on the downside of their careers (Anderson, Erstad, Kennedy ...) and their best lineup might include a number of young players (kotchman, kendrick and Wood) But they are also an organization which does not make those moves to easily. But I would be suprised if they have as good a year as they did last year.
by ogallalabob on Feb 7, 2006 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Where do we fall on the payroll scale now?
by NovA'sFan on Feb 8, 2006 6:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
AL West
That being said, all rosters staying basically the same, the A's win around 95 games and win the division, and then it's a roll of the dice.
by Chavez4Prez on Feb 7, 2006 1:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Shooty Babbitt was big on WS
by A s Eh on Feb 7, 2006 10:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What about the people who make money doin this?
Dominican Republic is the favorite? Looks close for the AL West
by niallmack on Feb 7, 2006 1:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
They're based on profitability
They know that they don't need to offer fair odds to get folks to bet on the Angels.
by devo on Feb 7, 2006 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They're pretty good, though...
http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/tmpred05.htm
I went and checked it out... all of the predictors have their up years and their down years, but apparently Vegas has been the most consistent over recent history.
by booya on Feb 7, 2006 2:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
maximizing profit not accuracy
by green star oakland on Feb 7, 2006 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Simulator......
by AlwaysSweatin on Feb 7, 2006 2:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
sorry Blez, for going off-topic, but...
by Poppy on Feb 7, 2006 2:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
15- 1 odds
My annual bet!
My new idea is to play lottery with sets of favorite A's numbers..a pitchers set, outfield, infield, alltime favorites..etc. Wish me luck!
by LongTimeFan on Feb 7, 2006 2:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm really tempted to go to Vegas to put some
by alamedaman on Feb 7, 2006 6:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Go no further than your laptop...
by capper3 on Feb 7, 2006 9:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I should try,,,I'm just hung up on the
by alamedaman on Feb 7, 2006 11:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
mlb.com has a's winning
don't think it's based on computer simulation though.
by mendelbob on Feb 7, 2006 3:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
That guy also has Seattle finishing
by Tyler Bleszinski on Feb 7, 2006 5:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Last year, MLB.com
by salb918 on Feb 7, 2006 5:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here it is
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article_perspectives.jsp?ymd=20050202&content_id=938609&v key=perspectives&fext=.jsp
by salb918 on Feb 7, 2006 5:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yes, but...
- The A's might have made some money-hacking moves, but this is not a fire-sale team by any stretch
- Projected regular-season finish: Fourth place in a tight race, top to bottom
- Wild card: They've got a lot of stellar arms, even though some are young and untested. But if it clicks right away for a couple of youngsters and the pitching staff comes together better than people think, there's no reason the A's couldn't get right back in the mix.
by mendelbob on Feb 8, 2006 2:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Last year's prediction.
A's v. Angles: 59 to 30% making playoff and the Twins winning Central 70%
So there is still a lot of room for random chance. The only thing certain is that we don't have to worry about the Royals.
by hedgehog on Feb 7, 2006 3:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Screw the rest, here's mine.
Oh ya, the HUGE caveat? Health. If this team stays healthy they will be in the WS in '06. This team is stacked and stout (much like how I like my women and beer)in all areas.
Cheers
by bigelephant on Feb 7, 2006 4:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Athlon Magazine
So take that for what it's worth.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Feb 7, 2006 5:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
MLB.com has the worst fluff
by niallmack on Feb 7, 2006 5:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well,
Seriously, I think the A's chances are somewhere between the computer sims and the mainstream writers (probably a 55% chance of wining the division which is very good for non-defending champ). But, I believe baseball is played on a field only once so this math is impossible to prove.
by vignette17 on Feb 7, 2006 7:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think 55% is reasonable
But I don't know where you get the idea that baseball is played on a field. It's played on steroids, yee hah!!!
by Nico on Feb 7, 2006 8:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nico
by oaktoon on Feb 7, 2006 9:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
Great minds don't think alike, but they do think at the same time.
by Nico on Feb 7, 2006 9:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My great mind
by salb918 on Feb 7, 2006 9:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought baseball...
AN Census
by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Feb 8, 2006 8:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope the A's prediction is correct
West
Los Angeles(N) 87 75 748 701 59
San Francisco 83 79 732 716 28
Arizona 77 85 729 771 7
Colorado 76 86 787 842 2
San Diego 75 88 675 718 5
by Norcalvb on Feb 7, 2006 11:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Pfft...
AN Census
by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Feb 8, 2006 8:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Exhibits #1-14
but what i am worried about that not a lot of people are talking about is how huston will perform this year. i'm not saying that he can't repeat his .535 opsa, but isn't that asking a lot? i'm not saying that he can't, but to repeat that isn't so simple... to me i guess.
by bjk15 on Feb 9, 2006 7:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 


















