2016 Starting Rotation

[Kimmi]

I don't understand a700's insistence on taking the fun out of everything. I like to look at projections because I like to see/analyze probably scenarios of how the season may play out. I do it when I have some free time, because it's fun. It's not an integral part of my existence, just something to check out and say "Yeah, I agree with that" or "How does that make sense? How did they reach that conclusion?". Nothing more.

 

Some people just don't like fun, I suppose.

 

As I said, everyone looks at projections. They aren't foolproof by any means, but nor are they useless. At the very least, they give you an objective view of how the team looks on paper.

[Kimmi]

I am very skeptical of the value of preseason baseball projections. I don't think they have a great track record. Red Sox projections for the last 5 years have been wildly inaccurate. That has certainly been a factor in souring me on them.

 

Here's the thing about MLB projections, whether they are made by computers or by the most knowledgeable baseball analyst/scout, because of the randomness of the game and the unknowns of the human element, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any system or person to consistently predict a team's record within 6.4 wins. Here is how one stat geek describes it:

 

"Basically, it's like a law of nature that it is impossible to regularly forecast team records with a margin of error of fewer than around 6.4 wins. Not difficult, but *impossible*. It's impossible in the same sense as constructing a perpetual motion machine is impossible, or turning lead into gold on your kitchen stove is impossible, or accurately determining the temperature 100 years from today at 4:33 pm is impossible. No matter how much you know about the team, and the players, and the second baseman's diet, and the third baseman's mental state, and whether the right fielder is on PEDs ... the best you can do, in the long run, is a standard error of around 6.4 wins.

 

When forecasters have a contest, and after the season, one of them has "won" with, a standard error of, say, 4.9 wins ... well, you may be impressed. But he was certainly at least partly lucky. He beat the natural limit of 6.4. He was better than perfect. You may think you're praising his forecasting acumen, but, really, you're implicitly praising his ability to influence coin tosses."

 

 

So, if you're expecting any forecaster to be within 2-3 games of most predictions, you are going to be gravely disappointed. It statistically cannot happen.

 

That does not make projections useless, however. They still are a very good gauge of how teams look on paper in terms of talent, and how things should end up if everything went according to plan, even though we all know that they won't.

 

As of now, the Sox are the second best team in baseball on paper. In terms of the offseason, that's about the best a GM can do.

[Kimmi]

The FanGraphs projections like all other projections are useless except for entertainment value. Knowledgeable GMs could come up with the same projections by just perusing team rosters. The computer models that come up with this stuff is a waste of technology.

 

In terms of telling you what will actually happen on the field, no one can predict that with any accuracy for the reasons I've just stated above. In terms of telling you how the team looks on paper, they do a very good job. I know that you have no use for how a team looks on paper, but you can bet that GMs do. You are fooling yourself if you think that the analytics people in the FOs are not looking at Fangraphs, PECOTA, or other projections.

[a700hitter]

Some people just don't like fun, I suppose.

 

As I said, everyone looks at projections. They aren't foolproof by any means, but nor are they useless. At the very least, they give you an objective view of how the team looks on paper.

 

I acknowledged the entertainment aspect of the projections. Other than that, I see no use in them. That doesn't take the fun out of it. It recognizes that they are purely fun and not serious.

[Bellhorn04]

Here's the thing about MLB projections, whether they are made by computers or by the most knowledgeable baseball analyst/scout, because of the randomness of the game and the unknowns of the human element, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any system or person to consistently predict a team's record within 6.4 wins. Here is how one stat geek describes it:

 

"Basically, it's like a law of nature that it is impossible to regularly forecast team records with a margin of error of fewer than around 6.4 wins. Not difficult, but *impossible*. It's impossible in the same sense as constructing a perpetual motion machine is impossible, or turning lead into gold on your kitchen stove is impossible, or accurately determining the temperature 100 years from today at 4:33 pm is impossible. No matter how much you know about the team, and the players, and the second baseman's diet, and the third baseman's mental state, and whether the right fielder is on PEDs ... the best you can do, in the long run, is a standard error of around 6.4 wins.

 

When forecasters have a contest, and after the season, one of them has "won" with, a standard error of, say, 4.9 wins ... well, you may be impressed. But he was certainly at least partly lucky. He beat the natural limit of 6.4. He was better than perfect. You may think you're praising his forecasting acumen, but, really, you're implicitly praising his ability to influence coin tosses."

 

 

So, if you're expecting any forecaster to be within 2-3 games of most predictions, you are going to be gravely disappointed. It statistically cannot happen.

 

Which brings me back to the question of how much better the projections can do than a decently-informed fan.

 

It might be fun for some web site to try this - enlist a few fans to try their luck against the projections.

[SoxnCycles]

Which brings me back to the question of how much better the projections can do than a decently-informed fan.

 

It might be fun for some web site to try this - enlist a few fans to try their luck against the projections.

 

Jesus, there aren't enough "fan opinions" on the web as it is?

[Bellhorn04]

Jesus, there aren't enough "fan opinions" on the web as it is?

 

This would be more of a contest - man against machine - like Kasparov playing chess against the computer.

[Kimmi]

I acknowledged the entertainment aspect of the projections. Other than that, I see no use in them. That doesn't take the fun out of it. It recognizes that they are purely fun and not serious.

 

They serve as an objective reality check. As I said, you are fooling yourself if you think that FOs are not looking at these projections.

[Kimmi]

Which brings me back to the question of how much better the projections can do than a decently-informed fan.

 

It might be fun for some web site to try this - enlist a few fans to try their luck against the projections.

 

Well informed fans would likely do as well with standings projections.

 

To be fair, though, I'm guessing most well informed fans probably look at player projections to help form their opinions, which are based off the same data that standing projections are based off of.

 

At any rate, there is a lot of luck involved.

 

I know that if I want to see if my opinion is realistic, I'm going to look at projections from all the major sites, including a site like SI, whose projections are not computer based. In other words, I'm going to compare my projections against the "experts", not a decently informed fan.

 

I think it's like that in any area where predictions are involved.

[User Name]

Which brings me back to the question of how much better the projections can do than a decently-informed fan.

 

It might be fun for some web site to try this - enlist a few fans to try their luck against the projections.

 

Fangraphs does that. They are called fan projections. They do so for both players and teams.

[Dojji]

Of course one of the big problems with preseason win loss projections is there's no real way to factor in the need for, and plethora of, midseason roster moves. That's a huge issue with trying to see the season from before April, because the team that makes it to September can be different by up to 5-6 players, sometimes more, between rookie promotion, injury replacement, midseason trades, flops being RO'd and what have you

[a700hitter]

They serve as an objective reality check. As I said, you are fooling yourself if you think that FOs are not looking at these projections.

 

I have no doubt that FOs look at FanGraph's projections. I also have no doubt that they have no need for them and that the FG projections for standings do not influence their player moves.

[Kimmi]

I have no doubt that FOs look at FanGraph's projections. I also have no doubt that they have no need for them and that the FG projections for standings do not influence their player moves.

 

Why would FOs look at the projections if they have no need for them? Clearly, the projections fulfill some purpose. I agree that their Fangraphs' standings projections likely do not influence their player moves, at least not significantly.

[Kimmi]

Of course one of the big problems with preseason win loss projections is there's no real way to factor in the need for, and plethora of, midseason roster moves. That's a huge issue with trying to see the season from before April, because the team that makes it to September can be different by up to 5-6 players, sometimes more, between rookie promotion, injury replacement, midseason trades, flops being RO'd and what have you

 

Of course. And this is why it is statistically impossible for any person or system to have a sustained level of accuracy of less than 6.4 games.

[a700hitter]

Why would FOs look at the projections if they have no need for them? Clearly, the projections fulfill some purpose. I agree that their Fangraphs' standings projections likely do not influence their player moves, at least not significantly.

 

Why do they look at them? Shits and giggles, curiosity, because they are there, or just for purposes of conversation. A lot of them probably also do the crossword puzzle.

[Kimmi]

Why do they look at them? Shits and giggles, curiosity, because they are there, or just for purposes of conversation. A lot of them probably also do the crossword puzzle.

 

I bet the FOs look at them as a check against their own projections and opinions.

[Kimmi]

I was reading today that Vegas odds have the Sox as the 2nd favorite team to win the WS, behind only the Cubs.

 

Go Fangraphs and Vegas!

[jung]

I had been for the most ignoring this thread. Should have continued. It takes real trollishness to look at a team bringing in the best pitcher in the division and finding some level of negativity to bring to the table. Good grief...I don't mind trolls as much as I mind their steadfast pursuit of the goal of having people feel badly about their team...what a bogus rational...sad really.

 

As for our rotation this year.....It looks like what we have at this point is what we going to have. So for me that means hanging my hat on Eddie as the most likely guy to be an effective rotation guy behind Price. Surely the Eddie of last year will not be enough but hopefully he takes a big step forward. Don't have much faith in Porcello and it is hard for me to take seriously a guy that keeps getting tossed back and forth...should he start....should he go to the pen....should he start....etc etc. If Kelly were so hot we would not be tossing him back and forth so often.

 

As for Buch I would take one of those super half seasons from Buch and be happy with that. Just not sure if he is actually capable of turning that trick. However that would be way better than seeing him grind out a full season of mediocrity at best. He struggles as the innings pile up and I just don't think we get much out of Buch pitching a full season. Give me one of those super half seasons and find a way to cover the rest once he hits the DL.

[SoxHop]

I had been for the most ignoring this thread. Should have continued. It takes real trollishness to look at a team bringing in the best pitcher in the division and finding some level of negativity to bring to the table. Good grief...I don't mind trolls as much as I mind their steadfast pursuit of the goal of having people feel badly about their team...what a bogus rational...sad really.

 

As for our rotation this year.....It looks like what we have at this point is what we going to have. So for me that means hanging my hat on Eddie as the most likely guy to be an effective rotation guy behind Price. Surely the Eddie of last year will not be enough but hopefully he takes a big step forward. Don't have much faith in Porcello and it is hard for me to take seriously a guy that keeps getting tossed back and forth...should he start....should he go to the pen....should he start....etc etc. If Kelly were so hot we would not be tossing him back and forth so often.

 

As for Buch I would take one of those super half seasons from Buch and be happy with that. Just not sure if he is actually capable of turning that trick. However that would be way better than seeing him grind out a full season of mediocrity at best. He struggles as the innings pile up and I just don't think we get much out of Buch pitching a full season. Give me one of those super half seasons and find a way to cover the rest once he hits the DL.

 

Did you just complain about people crapping on the team? And then proceed to crap on the rotation? Am I missing something here?

[SoxHop]

I was reading today that Vegas odds have the Sox as the 2nd favorite team to win the WS, behind only the Cubs.

 

Go Fangraphs and Vegas!

 

That's pretty crazy. I never would have thought that with the questions marks we have. I guess other teams have even more question marks.

 

For me it just seems like this team as it is has many more question marks than some Sox teams in the past that did or didn't go anywhere. I'm usually fairly optimistic on the team. Maybe last years disaster has changed me.

 

We also won the off season with acquisitions just like the year before. I don't think that ever bodes well for whatever voodoo makes that not work.......

 

Maybe I'm just turning into one of those old guys in the balcony watching the Muppets.....

[mvp 78]

Did you just complain about people crapping on the team? And then proceed to crap on the rotation? Am I missing something here?

 

Classic jung!

[mvp 78]

I was reading today that Vegas odds have the Sox as the 2nd favorite team to win the WS, behind only the Cubs.

 

Go Fangraphs and Vegas!

Betting odds are less about potential outcomes and more about where people are putting their money. My guess is that the Cubs and Sox have rabid fanbases that are more likely to bet on their teams...

[SoxHop]

Betting odds are less about potential outcomes and more about where people are putting their money. My guess is that the Cubs and Sox have rabid fanbases that are more likely to bet on their teams...

 

Isn't that true when the match\game is a long time off? Doesn't the odds get closer to what should really be considered just before the bout?

[jung]

No I complained about the basis for trolling commenting that I can't really take seriously somebody that finds some hole or some negative aspect in our having brought in the best starting pitcher in the division. I then went on to identify the guy I think has the best shot at sliding in behind Price but also suggested that he will have to take "a big step forward" for that to mean anything. Eddie exactly as he was last year would be fine with you? OK for you I guess.

 

As for my comments on Buch...What???...do you want to argue that he DOES not struggle as the innings pile up. Or maybe you want to argue that our best memories of Buch are not those super half seasons he has given us.

 

I think Porcello is a rotation 3 at best and I have seen NOBODY here claim that they see him as better than that and most consider him a 4!

 

Who does that leave? Kelly. Kelly has been tossed back and forth between the rotation and the pen here at this forum so often that he must feel like a rag doll by now. All of the aforementioned comments have been made by posters I know are Red Sox fans. Seen too many of their posts over the 12.000 odd posts I have made to think otherwise.

 

Maybe take some remedial reading before trying to offer a comment on my comments.

 

And.....

 

if you think that was me complaining about the rotation or anything else for that matter...you have not read nearly enough of my posts. If I am about some component of this team or anything else for that matter, I won't leave anything to doubt. Then again there have always been some members here that want to change the name of the forum from Talk Sox Forum to Genuflect to Sox Forum....the sort of fans that immediately glorify somebody just because he is wearing our laundry and then dump him for the next guy that happens to be wearing our laundry. I have no use for them what so ever. Its a discussion forum...not Sunday school or a cheering section.

 

I won't use the term you used because "crapping on" suggests baseless comments and as I have pointed out, you can easily find what I have posted here in the same or in so many words posted by other Sox fans that are simply observing and then commenting.

[SoxHop]

No I complained about the basis for trolling commenting that I can't really take seriously somebody that finds some hole or some negative aspect in our having brought in the best starting pitcher in the division. I then went on to identify the guy I think has the best shot at sliding in behind Price but also suggested that he will have to take "a big step forward" for that to mean anything. Eddie exactly as he was last year would be fine with you? OK for you I guess.

 

As for my comments on Buch...What???...do you want to argue that he DOES not struggle as the innings pile up. Or maybe you want to argue that our best memories of Buch are not those super half seasons he has given us.

 

I think Porcello is a rotation 3 at best and I have seen NOBODY here claim that they see him as better than that and most consider him a 4!

 

Who does that leave? Kelly. Kelly has been tossed back and forth between the rotation and the pen here at this forum so often that he must feel like a rag doll by now. All of the aforementioned comments have been made by posters I know are Red Sox fans. Seen too many of their posts over the 12.000 odd posts I have made to think otherwise.

 

Maybe take some remedial reading before trying to offer a comment on my comments.

 

And.....

 

if you think that was me complaining about the rotation or anything else for that matter...you have not read nearly enough of my posts. If I am about some component of this team or anything else for that matter, I won't leave anything to doubt. Then again there have always been some members here that want to change the name of the forum from Talk Sox Forum to Genuflect to Sox Forum....the sort of fans that immediately glorify somebody just because he is wearing our laundry and then dump him for the next guy that happens to be wearing our laundry. I have no use for them what so ever. Its a discussion forum...not Sunday school or a cheering section.

 

I won't use the term you used because "crapping on" suggests baseless comments and as I have pointed out, you can easily find what I have posted here in the same or in so many words posted by other Sox fans that are simply observing and then commenting.

 

Hey.... I like reading your posts. I seriously do. You are a poster that makes me think. Maybe it was a bit from the norm is why I commented. Sorry, I'm into watching and not posting during the offseason.

 

I also like people calling it as they see it. I don't think people just post here to sound negative or positive...... I don't.

 

Sorry...... I shouldn't have just interjected on your post while not being part of the group......

 

but, by all means.......... let s*** fly if you see an issue, or let s*** fly if you see a good thing......

Edited January 20, 2016 by SoxHop

[cp176]

All of the projections are great to see. I enjoy them. A little too much like the stock market for me to place much real faith in any specific projections. It is usually the people who claim to have all of the data compiled just the right way that I tend to shy away from. We all probably want to believe that the Red sox are one of the top 2 teams potentially in all of baseball. Sounds great but once again the games have to be played before I am going to get to excited. I think that we wil be better for sure but a 90 + win season will depend on just about everything going right for us. Starting pitching - Hanley Ramirez- third base - catching - outfield hitting - will Pedroia stay healthy? If things don't go well early, I really will be curious to see how long it will take for them to make the necessary adjustments. If they don't wait long, maybe even eat some contract $, I think that they yard a better team out onto the field later in the season than they do in the spring.

[Bellhorn04]

No I complained about the basis for trolling commenting that I can't really take seriously somebody that finds some hole or some negative aspect in our having brought in the best starting pitcher in the division.

 

But I can't see where anyone has been negative about us acquiring Price.

[Dojji]

I wouldn't write Stephen Wright off entirely. In a starter role he was moderately effective last year, even if it was over a relatively narrow sample size. I think in a starter's stance Wright's ERA was (barely) less than 4 and he averaged about 6 innings a game over about 9 starts (actually 1/4 of a season), this while he was mostly used in a relief role. That's NTFB. I think he gets a chance if a hole opens in our rotation, and I think we'll be glad we gave him that chance.

 

In fact I'd hold out at least a slender chance that Wright could beat Kelly out for the #5 spot in the rotation depending on how things go. We have to have a catcher that can deal with the knuckleball, but if we do, I think he could earn a big role for himself if he can sustain his level over a larger sample.

Edited January 20, 2016 by Dojji

[cp176]

I think that Wright will definitely figure into the season plan. I also think that a healthy Brian Johnson becomes a full time starting as in the rotation pitcher for the Sox if not someone else this year.

[SoxHop]

What slot is Johnson projected to become? After reading about him recently I was surprised how well he had been doing until injured.

 

I see Wright used for long relief during the season. With him, if our starters falter early in a game, he can be brought in.

 

He's a strange piece. I would be hard pressed to go to him in a relief situation with people on being concerned with a past ball. He's much better than last years first half Kelly, and worse than second half Kelly.

 

I forget, what did they chalk up Kelly's turn around to? Was it arm slot or something?