Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Fun for a bitterly cold afternoon ...

This simulation reflects free agent signings and trades through Tuesday, January 13th (up to and including Jay Payton to the Padres). In his recent file release, Dan Szymborski created starting lineups and assigned some of the pitching roles for each team, which I have tweaked and updated. As in the first edition, I created manager profiles for all the (NL) teams, including playing time for backups and utility players. The number of simulated seasons was increased to 25 and the "no injuries" setting was used. The following results are based on average (not median) performance.




NL EastWinsRunsRAPythRangeplayoffs
Philadelphia947916849299.7 - 87.678%
Atlanta847847478589.2 - 79.116%
Montreal827887708387.5 - 76.516%
Florida776406687883.9 - 70.48%
NY Mets767087487783.6 - 69.14%

Notes: (1) Pyth is the pythagorean winning percentage, a predictor of wins and loses based on runs scored and allowed; (2) Range is based on expected wins plus/minus one standard deviation (actual wins will fall within that range two-thirds of the time given a normal distribution)


The Phillies have a 10-game talent lead over the field in the N.L. East. However, the Phillies' manager is Larry Bowa and the Braves counter with Cox/Mazzone, so that advantage will likely shrink when it comes time to play the games for real. There isn't a lot to choose from among the other three clubs: Florida will regress, the Mets are still old, and the Expos won't have the resources to deal with problems that arise during the season. On paper, the Phillies ought to be considered clear, but not prohibitive, favourites to break the incredible run of division titles by the Braves.


NL CentralWinsRunsRAPythRangeplayoffs
Saint Louis9777964795103.7 - 90.184%
Houston907216458994.9 - 84.350%
Chicago866926458692.7 - 79.030%
Milwaukee726847647377.3 - 66.44%
Cincinnati707097977276.0 - 64.20%
Pittsburgh696807867075.3 - 63.20%

The divison is split down the middle into strong and weak teams. The Cardinals were a surprise to me, as I expected them to trail the Astros and Cubs. The Cubs appear to be closing in on Greg Maddux, and may yet land Pudge Rodriguez, which would likely push them past Houston. The manager factor (Baker/Jimy/La Russa) favours Chicago significantly. There should be a tight battle for the Central crown, with the wildcard very likely coming from this division as well.


NL WestWinsRunsRAPythRangeplayoffs
Arizona877387148393.0 - 80.350%
Colorado818238298087.4 - 74.430%
San Diego807217168187.8 - 72.626%
San Francisco777047347884.7 - 70.38%
Los Angeles726106857377.9 - 66.90%

Easily the most unpredictable of all the divisions in baseball. Pythagoras says there is only a 10-game talent difference between first and last. The San Diego Padres were touted as darkhorses for the 2002 NL West pennant by many in the online community; this is the year they become serious contenders in a division without a dominant club. The Giants have lost Ponson, Aurilia, Cruz Jr, Grissom, Santiago and Worrell and are paper-thin beyond Bonds and Schmidt. A major injury to either and we could see San Fran fall to the basement. In Arizona, the addition of Sexson brightens the outlook for their offence (Alomar will help too, if he bounces back). Los Angeles has done nothing to improve their offence, and now there is talk of Shawn Green moving to first base (reducing his positional value).

The Szymborski-Dudek Diamond Mind Simulation, 2nd edition | 31 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
_Andrew Edwards - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:03 PM EST (#34558) #
San Diego 80 721 716 81 87.8 - 72.6 26%

Should make Gleeman feel good. Are you planning on posting the AL too?
robertdudek - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:05 PM EST (#34559) #
I accidently destroyed my AL manager profiles. I'll run a third edition - for AL teams - in about 2 weeks.
_Andrew Edwards - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:13 PM EST (#34560) #
Out of curiosity, if you didn't have AL manager details, did you jsut set managers to neutral for interleague games in this simulation?
robertdudek - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:15 PM EST (#34561) #
AL manager tendencies were unchanged from the ones that Dan Symborski set in his build.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:17 PM EST (#34562) #
http://economics.about.com
Interesting stuff. The Cards really surprised me as well. I thought they'd be more of a 85 win team.

In your simulation they score 97 less runs than last year, but they give up 149 less. The first part I can understand, but I wonder why they're giving up so many less runs.

Cheers,

Mike
robertdudek - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:25 PM EST (#34563) #
The Cardinal defenders were given high ratings (by Dan Symborski) - and I had Kerry Robinson and So Taguchi as reserve outfielders. The NL scored an average of 4.47 runs per game. This seems to be a pattern in sims using ZiPS: scoring is deflated.
_Spicol - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:35 PM EST (#34564) #
In addition to what Robert has said, with the "No Injuries" setting on, St. Louis would get full seasons from Matt Morris and Izzy (and maybe Kiko Calero...Robert?). Other than that, the Cards have upgraded several pitchers. Suppan is better than Tomko. And as crappy as Julian Tavrez is, he and Ray King are better than Esteban Yan and Jeff Fassero.

149 runs is a lot. But I can see how the Cards have improved drastically.
_Kyle S - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:37 PM EST (#34565) #
Obviously this simulation really hates Florida's offense as currently constructed. One thing I noticed about the ZiPS projections from around last week was that Beckett was figured at making only about 25 starts or so. Is that realistic?

I also remember noticing that many rookies had very generous projections, especially guys who had seen nothing above AA. The MLE equivalence is something like .84 or thereabouts for AA, based on a lot of data on players called up and sent down. Obviously, you can only work with data that you have, but it seems pretty natural to me that there will be a selection bias: the number might be .84 for players good enough to stick, but what about players who never get the call, for one reason or another? Any projection system won't be able to identify them. So I guess ZiPS is as good as any.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 01:40 PM EST (#34566) #
http://economics.about.com
The Cardinal defenders were given high ratings (by Dan Symborski) - and I had Kerry Robinson and So Taguchi as reserve outfielders. The NL scored an average of 4.47 runs per game. This seems to be a pattern in sims using ZiPS: scoring is deflated.

This may have to do with injuries being taken out.

If pitchers get injured more than position players (I have no idea if that's true, but I'd guess that it is), we'd expect to see the general level of scoring rise with injuries, as more pitchers than hitters are being replaced with minor leaguers.

Or maybe scoring will go down next year and Dan is onto something.

Cheers,

Mike
_Mick - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 02:28 PM EST (#34567) #
I was going to contest the "Suppan is better than Tomko" statement, but I guess he is. Suppan's ERA+ is slightly better (though both are below average, career 99 & 92), Tomko's K/BB is slightly better, but ... and I never would have guessed this in a billion years ... Suppan is younger by two years.

Tomko just seems like one of those perpetual 24-year-old prospects, I guess. But he's been around since Nixon was U.S. president.
_Andrew Edwards - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 02:31 PM EST (#34568) #
Tomko is 30?!? I always thought of him as a 'prospect-who-hasn't-panned-out-yet'. Guess he actually just sucks.
Lucas - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 02:36 PM EST (#34569) #
Tomko will be 31 by the time he makes his second start. The bloom is off the rose.

Even in pitcher-friendly SF, he'll struggle to post a 4.50 ERA. But as Robert mentioned, the Giants are paper-thin and he'll give them innings.
_Spicol - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 03:07 PM EST (#34570) #
Suppan's ERA+ is slightly better (though both are below average, career 99 & 92)

You do Suppan a disservice by including career numbers. His shaky early years bring his career ERA+ down. Since turning 24 in 1999, Suppan has put up scores of 109, 103, 112, 97 and 105.

Tomko over the same period put up 92, 98, 81, 85, 79. Ew. Stinky. He's going backwards.

Suppan is by no means an ace but he has been above average for a few years now. And he only has to best Tomko's 2003 to be an upgrade for the Cards and save them some runs year over year.
Lucas - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 04:29 PM EST (#34571) #
http://www.aarongleeman.com
San Diego 80 721 716 81 87.8 - 72.6 26%

Seriously, 50-to-1. You heard it here (or at least on my blog) first.

Last night I was thinking about how cool it would be if every one of my readers put like $10 or $20 on the Padres at 50-1 and they won the World Series.

I think we'd end up winning like a million bucks or so. Of course, when San Diego goes 82-80 and misses the playoffs, we're out like $20,000.
robertdudek - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 04:37 PM EST (#34572) #
Assuming the Padres would be a slightly below average playoff team, they've got a 3% chance of winning the Series according to this sim. 50 to 1 is a good gamble.
_Jabonoso - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 04:37 PM EST (#34573) #
when the Rockies became better than the Giants, Dodgers and San Diego? Is it just that everybody got worst?
The Cardinals projection is after Drew and Marrero left?
Lucas - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 04:53 PM EST (#34574) #
when the Rockies became better than the Giants, Dodgers and San Diego? Is it just that everybody got worst?

More or less. I think the Pads improved, the Rockies treaded water, and the rest got worse. With a rotation that might consist of Jason Jennings, Scott Elarton, Denny Stark, Joe Kennedy and (gulp!) Jeff Fassero, Colorado will be hard-pressed to reach .500.
robertdudek - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 04:59 PM EST (#34575) #
The Cardinals seriously underperformed last year (in my view). How many teams in the NL have a group of 4 regulars as good as Pujols, Edmonds, Renteria and Rolen? Maybe the Braves and Phillies, but I'd still choose the Cardinals 4.

The rotation looks pretty good too (if healthy): Morris, Williams, Suppan, Hitchcock and Maquis or Wainwright.
Mike Green - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 05:01 PM EST (#34576) #
Robert, you mentioned that in the sims using ZiPs projections, scoring was deflated. Both Jonny and I felt that ZiPs offensive projections for Anaheim and Toronto (OBP of the starting nine .360) were quite high. Was your comment specific to the NL, or did you notice this in the AL simulation that you ran? I guess we'll find out anyway when you run the next set.
robertdudek - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 05:22 PM EST (#34577) #
When I ran the AL sim (1st edition) the scores were deflated too.
_Jonny German - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 06:23 PM EST (#34578) #
The rotation looks pretty good too (if healthy): Morris, Williams, Suppan, Hitchcock and Maquis or Wainwright.

Hitchcock is in San Diego... not that he's a big difference-maker, but did you include him as a Cardinal?

Were the Blue Jay and Angel offences particularly good in your sim?
_Jeff - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 06:32 PM EST (#34579) #
Robert:

Pretty cool sim. Hitchcock actually signed with San Diego. One year $800,000. Our friend Chris Carpenter is the favourite to be #4 in their rotation. Cards did improve their bullpen nicely. Tavarez, Lincoln, Kline, Eldred, Simontacchi, Calero and Isringhausen makes a much stronger pen than last years. Cubs and 'Stros are way overrated anyway.
Pistol - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 06:40 PM EST (#34580) #
San Diego 80 721 716 81 87.8 - 72.6 26%

Seriously, 50-to-1. You heard it here (or at least on my blog) first.


Your Toronto Blue Jays are 50:1. They probably have less of a shot to make the playoffs, but if they made it to the playoffs they'd probably be the best team to take a shot on (among longshots).

WS odds:
Anaheim Angels 15-1
Arizona Diamondbacks 30-1
Atlanta Braves 15-1
Baltimore Orioles 60-1
Boston Red Sox 9-2
Chicago Cubs 10-1
Chicago White Sox 30-1
Cincinnati Reds 100-1
Cleveland Indians 100-1
Colorado Rockies 100-1
Detroit Tigers 400-1
Florida Marlins 20-1
Houston Astros 15-1
Kansas City Royals 60-1
Los Angeles Dodgers 25-1
Milwaukee Brewers 300-1
Minnesota Twins 30-1
Montreal Expos 100-1
New York Mets 30-1
New York Yankees 5-1
Oakland Athletics 15-1
Philadelphia Phillies 15-1
Pittsburgh Pirates 100-1
San Diego Padres 35-1
San Francisco Giants 15-1
Seattle Mariners 15-1
St Louis Cardinals 25-1
Tampa Bay Devil Rays 200-1
Texas Rangers 100-1
Toronto Blue Jays 50-1
robertdudek - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 08:06 PM EST (#34581) #
Sorry, my mistake. I have Hitchcok as the #5 starter in San Diego in the sim. Haren and Wainwright split #5 in Saint Louis, with Carpenter and Simontacci getting a few starts over the course of the year.
Mike Green - Thursday, January 15 2004 @ 09:53 PM EST (#34582) #
From Pistol's chart, my take on the best longshot is KC at 60-1. I figure that they have a pretty fair shot at winning the weak AL central. Once in, they could win. I'd also say the Cardinals at 25-1 are a very good semi-longshot bet. My guess is that their chance of making the playoffs is about 50%, and if they do, their chance of winning it all is about 15-20%.

Not that I'd want to encourage anyone to bet.
Craig B - Friday, January 16 2004 @ 12:00 AM EST (#34583) #
At 200-1 (seriously?) I think the Devil Rays are a terrific super-longshot choice. The Braves and Phillies at 15-1 are a steal, and the Cards at 25-1 are a monster buy. The Jays at 50-1 likewise. 15-1 on the Angels? 30-1 on the Twins? 100-1 on the Expos and Rockies? No one is actually offering these odds, are they? I see about twelve bets on that board that I will take.

Seriously, are the Cubs really the betting favorites to win the NL? That's... wacky.
_Oggman - Friday, January 16 2004 @ 04:56 PM EST (#34584) #
15-1 for the Mariners? Wow, I can easily see them finishing 4th in that division if Texas gets any pitching.
_Rob Rolek - Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 09:38 AM EST (#34585) #
http://www.baseballprimer.com/to/archives/00001049.shtml#185
Cubs 10-1 probably represents all the money being bet or expected to be bet on the Cubs more than Vegas' opinion of their chances. They don't try to win, they try not to lose.
Craig B - Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 09:55 AM EST (#34586) #
Rob, the lines always represent the action (at least, once they're in play they represent the action). I just think it's nuts that so many would be betting on the Cubs.
_KJOK - Wednesday, February 04 2004 @ 01:34 AM EST (#34587) #
There are 30 teams, right? So, an "average" team should be 30-1, correct? The Cardinals just simmed at the BEST team in the NL, and they're at 25-1! Even factoring in they're an older team that could have more injuries, that sure seems like a steal to me....
_snellville jone - Tuesday, September 21 2004 @ 01:35 AM EDT (#34588) #
Always interesting to come back to these things. Right on with the Cards, a complete reversal in the West.
The Szymborski-Dudek Diamond Mind Simulation, 2nd edition | 31 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.