What will it take for you to be 'okay' going into the season?

[fatcowxlive]

Steamer thinks we are:

 

http://www.breakingblue.ca/2013/12/04/offseason-power-rankings-dec-4/

 

I don't even know how this is possible! The pre-season rotation looks way worse than it did on opening day this year

[jays4life19]

We're not as far off as some people think. We actually have viable AAA starting pitching depth this year. Add at least 1 SP - 2 or high 3 type. Sign Infante or Ellis and we should be competitive.

[TwistedLogic]

You can also throw in the Dickey Effect, Kratz's framing, and Dickey and Buehrle's elite D and you could raise the projection to 89 wins.

 

Except that almost all of his projections are far too optimistic, which would counteract minor things like the Dickey effect, etc.

[Angrioter]

Except that almost all of his projections are far too optimistic, which would counteract minor things like the Dickey effect, etc.

 

TwistedLogic projections link please?

 

Joke patented by BTS

[GD]

Everyone needs to eliminate last year from their memories and look at the numbers. The numbers aren't biased, opinions are.

 

2B very much does need an upgrade by the numbers. What are the SP projections? Dickey is probably around 4 wins with his effect, Buehrle around 2, and then god knows what. I'd guess SP2 and SP3 along with 2B are what we need according to projections.

[GD]

Look a few posts up. 2B is the most glaring need.

 

Ugh, the board keeps marking posts as read when they aren't, skipped right to the last post of the thread, sorry. So yeah, 2B and then SP2/3. Who are your preferences for each spot?

 

I like Infante at 2B, then I'm thinking a deal with Cincy for a pitcher and maybe a bargain bin guy to fill out the rotation if not a guy like Garza if he's asking a reasonable price (I'd go 4/60).

[Jays]

maybe a bargain bin guy to fill out the rotation.

 

Gavin Floyd has thrown 168 or more innings for 5 straight years until his injury year last year. I like him as a bargain guy. Good upside. Steamer has him at 3.0 WAR and 173 innings.

[fatcowxlive]

Having Bautista, EE, Lawrie, Reyes, and Rasmus all projected above 3.3 WAR helps. The rotation is currently projected as

Dickey (2.8)

Buehrle (2.2)

Morrow (1.9)

Happ (1.5)

Rogers (1.3)

 

Santos is also projected for 0.8 WAR which helps.

 

Wow, 3.3+ WAR for 5 players is good... but our rotation's still crap. Like everyone else is saying - Sign Infante and get a great starter and we're going to be 'ok'. Personally I want Garza and another starter along with Infante and a platoon partner for Lind.

[fatcowxlive]

Ugh, the board keeps marking posts as read when they aren't, skipped right to the last post of the thread, sorry. So yeah, 2B and then SP2/3. Who are your preferences for each spot?

 

I like Infante at 2B, then I'm thinking a deal with Cincy for a pitcher and maybe a bargain bin guy to fill out the rotation if not a guy like Garza if he's asking a reasonable price (I'd go 4/60).

 

lol please no. The window is closing too fast and NYY + Boston are making great moves atm. We need to throw as much money to the problem as possible. As much as I don't like it, it seems to be the best way to go. Time to overpay in the FA department...

[TwistedLogic]

Why would you think that? It's used for the entire league. Is the rest of the league projects too pessimistic?

 

No, they're optimistic across the board. It's predicting almost every guy on the roster to perform as good as, or better than they did last year. That is unrealistic and inaccurate. You truly believe that Happ and Rogers are going to combine for 3-wins? That Bautista, Encarnacion, Rasmus, Reyes, Melky, Lawrie and Lind are all going to post 530 plate appearances or higher? And that five of those seven players are going to post more than 3 wins each? That Buehrle is going to see barely any regression, everyone else in the rotation will bounce back, and that Morrow is going to pitch 144 innings, something he hasn't done since 2011, and only once ever prior to that?

 

Projections mean nothing. They give you an incredibly vague outline of what you might, possibly get. That's all they should be used for. It's getting ridiculous how many people around here are using projections like they're gospel. Now I'm not saying you're one of them, but every time I see a thread about a player, the discussion seems to be based heavily on projections. This is not an 87 win team. Looking at those projections, there's very few players you can look at and say "he's going to do better than that projection" and there's a far more vast number of guys you can say "there's a good chance he's going to fall short of that number".

 

This organization is the same, top to bottom. The major league roster is just like the minors; huge ceilings, plenty of tools, massive talent, massive risk and almost no sure things.

 

Everyone needs to eliminate last year from their memories and look at the numbers. The numbers aren't biased, opinions are.

 

Why would you eliminate the most recent data? You can make numbers biased by picking and choosing which ones, and from what time frames, to use them.

[Jays]

It's getting ridiculous how many people around here are using projections like they're gospel. Now I'm not saying you're one of them

 

hehehe

[GD]

lol please no. The window is closing too fast and NYY + Boston are making great moves atm. We need to throw as much money to the problem as possible. As much as I don't like it, it seems to be the best way to go. Time to overpay in the FA department...

 

We need a high risk high reward player a la Anderson, Hudson or Floyd to pay off most likely. It's worth the risk. If they fail, unleash the f***ing Stroman.

[G-Snarls]

We need a high risk high reward player a la Anderson, Hudson or Floyd to pay off most likely. It's worth the risk. If they fail, unleash the f***ing Stroman.

 

I wish I could thank this post twice

[fatcowxlive]

We need a high risk high reward player a la Anderson, Hudson or Floyd to pay off most likely. It's worth the risk. If they fail, unleash the f***ing Stroman.

 

Yes and f*** yes! We need to unleash the STROMAN

[GD]

I wish I could thank this post twice

 

Yes and f*** yes! We need to unleash the STROMAN

 

*when the time is right

 

Give him some seasoning in Buffalo. When he's ready in June and if the Floyd/Anderson experiment fails hypothetically, unleash him.

 

I didn't include Hudson cause I don't know when he's due back. What are the reports on him?

[G-Snarls]

*when the time is right

 

Give him some seasoning in Buffalo. When he's ready in June and if the Floyd/Anderson experiment fails hypothetically, unleash him.

 

He'll be so #STARVING by then...

[oakville69]

I would be happy if the Jays got a reliable starter. The Al east will be a dogfight in 2014. I expect the winner of the AL east to have around 90 wins with everyone in the division above 80 wins. The key for the Jays is to stay healthy. There are no patsies in our division.

[eastcoastjaysfan]

I don't get why it's so difficult for this team to get behind giving 2/20 to a guy like Burnett. AJ didn't hate Toronto. He seemed to like it here at the end.

 

Like he's just sitting there. Make the offer.

[G-Snarls]

I don't get why it's so difficult for this team to get behind giving 2/20 to a guy like Burnett. AJ didn't hate Toronto. He seemed to like it here at the end.

 

Like he's just sitting there. Make the offer.

 

Agree. Sign any reasonable mid rotation starter who will come here while everyone is fapping over Tanaka

[GD]

I don't get why it's so difficult for this team to get behind giving 2/20 to a guy like Burnett. AJ didn't hate Toronto. He seemed to like it here at the end.

 

Like he's just sitting there. Make the offer.

 

AJ would be much f***ing awesome and I'm very sure most of us agree with you. We just know it's not realistic cause the rumor is it's Pittsburgh or retire.

 

If he's willing to come here, then f***ing great, sign him. He'd be perfect.

[Jays]

AJ would be much f***ing awesome and I'm very sure most of us agree with you. We just know it's not realistic cause the rumor is it's Pittsburgh or retire.

 

If he's willing to come here, then f***ing great, sign him. He'd be perfect.

 

Would AA be willing to even give him a look?..... maybe! I have faith!

[HERPDERP]

ITT: People who want to give up s*** in order to get an ace

 

Or sign a guy like Tanaka for 5 years and $25 million...

[GD]

Would AA be willing to even give him a look?..... maybe! I have faith!

 

Vetrin presents?

[Jays]

Vetrin presents?

 

That's the one thing you can never have too much of on a playoff contender.

[John_Havok]

No, they're optimistic across the board. It's predicting almost every guy on the roster to perform as good as, or better than they did last year. That is unrealistic and inaccurate. You truly believe that Happ and Rogers are going to combine for 3-wins? That Bautista, Encarnacion, Rasmus, Reyes, Melky, Lawrie and Lind are all going to post 530 plate appearances or higher? And that five of those seven players are going to post more than 3 wins each? That Buehrle is going to see barely any regression, everyone else in the rotation will bounce back, and that Morrow is going to pitch 144 innings, something he hasn't done since 2011, and only once ever prior to that?

 

Projections mean nothing. They give you an incredibly vague outline of what you might, possibly get. That's all they should be used for. It's getting ridiculous how many people around here are using projections like they're gospel. Now I'm not saying you're one of them, but every time I see a thread about a player, the discussion seems to be based heavily on projections. This is not an 87 win team. Looking at those projections, there's very few players you can look at and say "he's going to do better than that projection" and there's a far more vast number of guys you can say "there's a good chance he's going to fall short of that number".

 

This organization is the same, top to bottom. The major league roster is just like the minors; huge ceilings, plenty of tools, massive talent, massive risk and almost no sure things.

 

 

 

Why would you eliminate the most recent data? You can make numbers biased by picking and choosing which ones, and from what time frames, to use them.

 

You missed the point of his question. The same projections systems are used to project every other team in the league, so are the projections for all the other teams too optimistic too? Even all the team they have ranked ahead of the jays?

[John_Havok]

And should also mention that since rosters are not yet finalized, the projections are incomplete for many other teams as well

[TwistedLogic]

You missed the point of his question. The same projections systems are used to project every other team in the league, so are the projections for all the other teams too optimistic too? Even all the team they have ranked ahead of the jays?

 

This doesn't make sense. The same projection system is used for every team. I didn't just project the Jays. I just used the projection for every team, so if it was "high across the board" that wouldn't make a difference in the win total. The projections are currently high across the board (about 4 runs too high per team), but this is accounted for. This team is projected to be a 6th in the league currently and projections are going to be far more accurate than anything you say from your mind. You say this team is not a 87 win team, why? This team is minus (Arencibia and Johnson) about the same team that was projected for 89-90 wins last year. They are a very good team. You can't let last year's bad luck cloud your judgement. Again I was surprised at the projection, but a projection system is going to be far more accurate than anyone's biased opinion. The team is in much better shape than anyone here thinks.

 

No, my point is that projection systems are just absurd in the first place. It doesn't matter how much more accurate it is than some forum poster's opinion, it's still s*** in the end, making it an utterly redundant system. Bush was far more qualified than me to run America (...meh, debatable) but that doesn't make him a good president.

 

FanGraphs projections missed the Astros loss record by 23 wins. They thought the Dodgers would win 14 fewer games than they did. They projected the Twins and Indians to have the same record (84-78) and missed each team by 8 wins. The Twins lost 8 more than projected, while the Indians won 8 more. They projected one single team to have 90 wins in the majors, with the worst record being 71 wins.

 

Just because a wildly inaccurate system is used to judge every team, thus somehow levelling the playing field somehow, does not make it any more accurate. It is seriously so bad that you could assign a random number of wins to each team based on nothing but your own judgement, or hell, even the previous years standings, and you could end up with a far more accurate result than these projection systems. Just because it might get a few numbers close, or even on the dot sometime, it speaks nothing to it's legitimacy. It's just true that if you guessed a result for every player or team in the majors, you are bound to get some correct just by absolute fluke.

 

It boggles my mind that a community that so openly smirks at traditional intangible concepts like "vetrin presents", "team chemistry" and "lineup protection" puts so much stock into a ridiculous system that attempts to predict the future.

 

Looking at the 2013 projections, it's seriously no better or worse than to look at the stupid predictions game that ESPN writers play every season.

 

The Jays are not an 85 win team or an 87 win team or and 89 team. They're as good as they're going to be. It's asinine to attempt to guess what that is going to be without any knowledge of future injuries, under-performances or surprise breakouts.

[GD]

JFaS, what's the R^2 for Steamer's projections to team wins?

[TwistedLogic]

Steamer thinks we are:

 

http://www.breakingblue.ca/2013/12/04/offseason-power-rankings-dec-4/

 

JFaS, what's the R^2 for Steamer's projections to team wins?

Steamer, using large amounts of data, specific formulas and algorithms and an expertise of likely several years in the field, is predicting the Astros to win 70 games next year.

 

I, using my own unique combination of tChemistry, truGrit, and twtw+ have determined that the Astros will win exactly 54 games next year.

 

Let's revisit this next year and see who was closer.

[TwistedLogic]

That's why we say true talent 87 or 85 wins. No ones saying we can predict injuries. Northof49 posted the standard deist ion and variance somewhere. You can take the 87 or 85 as a mean or expected value and apply confidence intervals if it suits your preferences better. If projections are ********, then why do we bother doing it? Because it's the best estimation we have and analyzes the true talent of the team. Every team has injuries and you can't project which ones will, things obviously happen that you can't predict, but projections are the best we have have available other than time travel. And no, if the team wins 60 games but were and are projected for 86 wins, it doesn't mean they're a 60 win team, it means they got unlucky.

 

This is what I find so crazy that someone as knowledgeable as you can stand to defend this argument.

 

So as it stands, if the Astros lose more than 100 games in 2014, it's not because that's their true talent, but it's because they got wildly unlucky for the fourth consecutive year, missing their win total by 70 wins?

 

My point is exactly that "true talent" means nothing! There is no such thing. It's a complete and utter fabrication; a myth. How the hell can we laugh at lineup protection or team chemistry so hard and then support something ridiculous as true talent? How can you say what Rasmus' or Morrow's "true talent" is? Sabermetricians are obsessed with being able to predict the future, so they've invented this completely redundant area of research where they go to waste their time. You're chasing a ghost. No team in any single given year is going to match it's "true talent" because it doesn't exist. Injuries exist, regression exists, intangibles exist, things that can't be quantified, I'm sorry to burst the saber bubble here, exist.

 

You ask why do we bother doing it? That's exactly my question. Why? Why are we trying to follow a system that depends absolutely on the clause "barring any injuries"? This is a far far more absurd concept than "the will to win". I'm not defending that rubbish but at least that has some sort of a basis where you can start (player psychology). Projections systems have no accuracy and no track record for accuracy.

 

Again true talent or expected vs. actual.

 

So you essentially agree that it's myth vs reality? If it doesn't PROVIDE you with the "actual", why do you do it? To gauge the "true talent" of each team? What does that achieve? Let's call it false talent, or perfect-world talent or hypothetical talent. How can you call it "true" if it's never "actual"?