I've been messing around with my Diamond Mind projection disk for 2010 and ran 100 iterations with CAIRO v0.2 to see what things look like right now. I'll mention that there is still a lot roster churn yet to come and until we have stable rosters we shouldn't take exercises like this too seriously, but it's fun to look at anyway IMO.
...
The Cards look good, and may look better if they add another starting pitcher. Their MLB.com depth chart only shows four starters for now, although CAIRO likes Blake Hawksworth and Kyle McClellan who I used as the combination fifth starters. The Reds are the first real WTF for me. It looks like getting full seasons from Jay Bruce and Joey Votto and more Drew Stubbs and less Willy Taveras means more offense. I haven't included Aroldis Chapman in here, but his projection sucks anyway (ERA around 6.00). The Cubs look like they'll score some more runs but allow more runs as well, which essentially leaves them around where they were in 2009. The Brewers pitching should be a little better, but their offense looks a little worse. As far as the Pirates/Astros, it should be an exciting race for fifth place.
Cardinals are the most talented team in the NL according to CAIRO, edging out the Phillies by half a game.
For the most part, those projections are pretty easy to accept.
The Angels winning only 81 games surprises me. 85-90 seems more likely to me. Pineiro and a full season from Kazmir should make up for losing Lackey, who missed a good chunk of time last year. Matsui replaces Vlad. I guess Brandon Wood will be playing 3B.
I think the Marlins will beat that projection with ease, and the Braves will do worse. The author says the Marlins "rarely do well in these simulations." Why is that?
San Francisco's 75 wins jumped out at me, but the author's explanation (pitching and defense regression) makes some sense. Cain, Zito and Affeldt will probably give up a lot more runs, especially if their defense isn't as strong. And the Giants still have a very weak offense.
BooCubs wrote:the only thing that stinks is that you can't figure in injuries.
generally you can assume all teams will sustain injuries, so that sorta factors out... but yea, it's tough to project what the Cubs and Mets went thru last year.
cards2468 wrote:ha, and I was called crazy for saying the Reds are on the verge of having a young talented ball club
Can't say I disagree with those projections at all.
I still have an "I'll believe it when I see it" approach to the Reds. They traditionally do well in these type of things, then go out and [expletive] the bed with 75 wins or whatever.
On the flip side, the Astros tend to do poorly in these things, and almost always leap over their projections by 5 to 10 wins.
cards2468 wrote:ha, and I was called crazy for saying the Reds are on the verge of having a young talented ball club
Can't say I disagree with those projections at all.
I still have an "I'll believe it when I see it" approach to the Reds. They traditionally do well in these type of things, then go out and [expletive] the bed with 75 wins or whatever.
On the flip side, the Astros tend to do poorly in these things, and almost always leap over their projections by 5 to 10 wins.
I actually am not too sure about the Reds for this coming season, but I can definitely see them being a high-80's win team within a couple years when Bailey figures out how to be a big league pitcher and Aroldis Chapman is also part of the rotation... of course that's assuming Baker doesn't destroy their arms by then.
BooCubs wrote:the only thing that stinks is that you can't figure in injuries.
generally you can assume all teams will sustain injuries, so that sorta factors out... but yea, it's tough to project what the Cubs and Mets went thru last year.
You can do better than that. You can assign a probability of injury based on various factors. Injuries are not random.
The projected standings are exactly the order I would have put them in off the top of my head. I'm excited that the Reds look to be a very competitive club this year.
