Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

It's a simple game - will a team win more than or less than a certain number of games. Rosterites took a look at the lines and chimed in with predictions and comments.

AL East:
New York Yankees 97.5
Boston Red Sox 92
Toronto Blue Jays 87.5
Baltimore Orioles 73.5
Tampa Bay Devil Rays 68

Named for Hank:
Toronto Blue Jays 87.5 -- over. Five new guys plus Halladay with two legs must be worth more than a win each.

New York Yankees 97.5 -- under. They have to implode some time, they just have to. Please. For my sanity.

Mike Green:
Yankees(under) - The addition of Damon doesn't quite offset the effect of aging without a decent bench. The number is too high by about 3.

Rob:
Devil Rays - over 68 (barely). They're better than the Marlins, at least.

Lucas:
NY Yankees UNDER 97.5 -- Why should they improve eight games on 2005's Pythag record of 90-72?

Gerry:
Orioles - OVER - They are a decent team, with Mazzone Cabrera and Bedard should be better and Benson is a good pickup. They have some good hitters too.

Magpie:
New York Yankees (97.5) - UNDER. Another year older and deeper in debt.

Tampa Bay (68) - OVER. A lot of very exciting young talent is going to explode on the AL, and challenge for third place.

Boston (92) - UNDER. Young pitchers will break your heart. This happens after the old picthers break their arms.

Baltimore (73.5) - UNDER. In which the world learns that there were all kinds of reasons besides Leo Mazzone for Atlanta's success.

Gwyn:
Yankees (97.5) Under, the Yankees under is almost always a good bet.

Baltimore (73.5) Over, just not as bad as they looked at the end of last year, young pitching will be better.

Thomas:
New York 97.5 - UNDER - What was stated previously. Damon over Bernie won't rescue them and Chacon/Small won't pitch as well as they did last year, even if the Big Unit pitches better.

---

AL Central:
Chicago White Sox 92
Cleveland Indians 90.5
Minnesota Twins 83
Detroit Tigers 77
Kansas City Royals 63.5

Rob:
Royals - over 63.5. They won't be horribly terrible, just terrible.

White Sox - under 92. Regression to the mean claims another victim.

Leigh:
Minnesota over 83 - Pitching simply too good for such a low number. Santana - Radke - Silva - Liriano... wow. This assumes that Tony Batista does not accumulate 500 at bats (that's 507 plate appearances for Tony).

Gwyn:
Twins (83) Over, still a good team even if they're no longer the class of the division.

Thomas:
Chicago 92.5 - UNDER - As stated, they played over their heads last year. They'll finish in the high-80's in wins, but I don't see them reaching the low 90's.

Mike D:
Cleveland UNDER 90.5. They needed to add good pitching, and they added mediocre pitching instead. They lost some of their best pieces from the 'pen, and kept some of their worst. They also have extraordinarily little outfield depth.

---

AL West:
Los Angeles Angels 89.5
Oakland Athletics 89.5
Texas Rangers 82
Seattle Mariners 75

Pistol:
Oakland Athletics 89.5 (Over) They almost had that many wins in their rebuilding year last season.

Mike Green:
Angels(under)-The past and future are bright, but the present not so much. Like the Yankees, the number is too high by about 3.

Leigh:
Oakland over 89.5 - Should not be too difficult for the best team in baseball to win ninety games.

Los Angeles (AL) under 89.5 - Best system in baseball has a ton of prospects on the brink of productivity, but not quite there yet. Oakland, Texas and, to a lesser extent, Seattle, have improved, so the unbalanced schedule is a bit unkind.

Thomas:
Oakland - 89 - OVER - The additions of Bradley and Loaiza (yes....I never thought I'd say that) will help. Frank Thomas will give them productive at-bats as long as he is healthy and Johnson at first will help.

Mike D:
Seattle UNDER 75. That's a tough division this season, and the M's haven't kept pace.

---

NL East:
New York Mets 90.5
Atlanta Braves 88
Philadelphia Phillies 82.5
Washington Nationals 76.5
Florida Marlins 65.5

Pistol:
Philadelphia Phillies 82.5 (Over) I always overrate the Phillies, but at least a 83-79 record should be a layup with the Nats, Marlins, and perhaps Braves all getting worse.

Washington Nationals 76.5 (Under) They overachieved last year, lost talent, and already have injuries to Ayala and Lawrence.

Named for Hank:
Florida Marlins 65.5 -- under. Wouldn't 66 wins be a crowning achievement for this group?

Washington Nationals 76.5 -- under. They're not that good, are they?

Mike Green:
Phillies(over)- What Pistol said.

Marlins(under)- An easy one. The Marlins of 98 won 54 games with Derrek Lee, Mark Kotsay, Cliff Floyd and Edgar Renteria. This team is of comparable quality despite the presence of Cabrera and Willis.

Gerry:
Mets - UNDER - the pitching isn't that good and the Phillies and Braves are tough competition

Phillies - OVER - Gillick did a better job than he is given credit for.

Nationals - UNDER - I just don't see how they do it, and Bowden is the GM, enough said

Leigh
Philadelphia over 82.5 - Howard, Utley, Rollins, Abreu among the best in the NL at their respective positions. Two of the most underrated starting pitchers in baseball in Lieber and Lidle.

Thomas:
Philadelphia Phillies 82.5 - OVER - They're good and the division (aside from the Mets) got worse. Add in Rowand's defence in centre, which will be a huge boost. They won't notice the departure of Thome, as he was hurt for most of the year and Howard stepped in admirably.

---

NL Central:
St Louis Cardinals 93.5
Chicago Cubs 84.5
Houston Astros 82
Milwaukee Brewers 81
Pittsburgh Pirates 75.5
Cincinnati Reds 73.5

Pistol:
Milwaukee Brewers 81 (Over) They're the bandwagon team this year, but even so they're only behind the Cards in the NL Central right now

Mike Green:
Brewers(over)-Another easy one. The Brew Crew were underrated last year also by the oddsmakers. They've got a shot at the division title if everything breaks right. I am pretty sure that they'll be at 85+.

Rob:
Cubs - under 84.5. I can't see them winning 85 unless Prior and Wood are healthy (and good), so...never mind.

Reds - over 73.5. No particular reason -- just felt like a pick to make.

Lucas:
Cincinnati OVER 73.5 -- The Reds' pitching isn't quite so terrible this season.

St. Louis UNDER 93.5 -- They'll probably still win the division, but they lost Sanders, Walker and much of the bullpen.

Gwyn:
Milwaukee (81) Over, even with a shaky Sheets, this is a team poised for a breakout.

Cubs (84.5) Under. I have a really bad feeling about the Cubs this year.

Thomas:
Milwaukee 81 - OVER - On their way up. If Sheets is out for the whole year then problems may arise, but they have a solid team.

Mike D:
Milwaukee OVER 81. Pittsburgh may be their only division rival to get better this offseason, and the Crew's young hitting should be improved.

St. Louis UNDER 93.5. Even if they stay healthy -- a big if -- they can't field stars at every position the way they used to.

---

NL West:
Los Angeles Dodgers 84.5
San Francisco Giants 83.5
San Diego Padres 78
Arizona Diamondbacks 73
Colorado Rockies 69

Pistol:
Arizona Diamondbacks 73 (Over) This one confused me. It seems to be an overreaction to the Vazquez and Glaus trades and/or not having faith in Jackson, Quentin and Young.

Lucas:
Colorado UNDER 69 -- Ordinarily I'd avoid taking the under on a team slated for only 69 wins, but they just look awful. 100 losses is possible.

Gerry:
Giants - UNDER - Bonds doesn't help that much so they won't be over .500.

Magpie:
Arizona (73) - UNDER. I think last year's team was a legitimate 100 loss contender that got very, very lucky. Not this time.

Mike D:
L.A. Dodgers OVER 84.5. Sure, the NL West is a lousy division. But I think the Dodgers have the goods to win it, and it'll take more than 82 to do so this year.

---

Here's the consensus:

Yankees UNDER 97.5 wins (6-0)
A's OVER 89.5 wins (3-0)
Phillies OVER 82.5 wins (5-0)
Nationals UNDER 76.5 wins (3-0)
Brewers OVER 81 wins (5-0)

Call your ~~bookie~~ 'investment manager' now! (Note - the lines used above were from a couple weeks ago and may have changed slightly since then.)

Posted by Pistol on Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 10:00 AM EST.

Over / Under | 17 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Jim - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 10:23 AM EST (#143138) #

For me:
Cleveland � Under. It�s hard to have a bullpen that good two years in a row. Throw in improvements for Detroit and Minnesota and I think they are in the race, but under 90.

Tampa � Over As bad as the pitching is, I just think the lineup is good enough to get them over 70 wins.

Washington � Under I have no idea how they won as many games as they did last year and they removed talent in Wilkerson, already lost Ayala and have to sell Soriano for pennies on the dollar.

Colorado � Over I just think it�s a tough division to lose more then 93 in. Plus I think they have been so young that there is some growth to be found here.

Geoff - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 11:30 AM EST (#143139) #

Interesting, no call stated by anybody on Houston, Texas, San Diego or Atlanta?

I presume the win numbers are averages of what Roster members predicted for a win total (?) but I believe the general practice for setting over/under targets is to use a fraction number so that there is never a tie. I.e. Milwaukee over/under 80.5 wins, not 81, so that there is never a case where Milwaukee is neither over nor under 81.

Just another tip for you from the tipster (I hate those ads).

Named For Hank - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 11:34 AM EST (#143141) #

We took the lines from a betting website a few weeks ago.

Andrew K - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 12:13 PM EST (#143150) #

Is it wrong to take UNDER on the Jays?

The first of the large-scaled 1000 season sims is now presented by SG at http://yankeefan.blogspot.com/2006/03/2006-diamond-mind-projection-blowout.html

All very rough and ready, but ZiPS, Diamond Mind, and PECOTA all agree that the Jays are barely over .500. I guess a 20% shot at the playoffs is acceptable but I think we are being underrated. Mind you, when so many different systems point in the same direction...

Mike Green - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 12:36 PM EST (#143152) #

The SG Diamond-Mine sim is interesting. They've got the Angels in last place with 79 wins. I had the Angels on the "Under" column, but the sim's number is, to my mind, further off on the low side than the oddsmaker's number is on the high side.

As for taking "Jays-under 87", almost all the Roster did not have a comment on the Jays, unlike last year (when the line's number was ridiculously low). On the other hand, you will stand no chance for salvation if you lay money on the Jays-under. The choice is yours.

Geoff - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 12:42 PM EST (#143153) #

Any numbers on the ability of these systems to predict win totals within three wins, or even the average variance between the predicted win total and the actual result?

Personally, I think every one of these prediction systems are very good .... for me to poop on.

Andrew K - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 12:43 PM EST (#143154) #

On the other hand, you will stand no chance for salvation if you lay money on the Jays-under. The choice is yours.

I'll take the money and eternal damnation, thanks Mephistopheles.

zeppelinkm - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 01:11 PM EST (#143156) #

One thing I noticed about that SG Sim is that it had the yankees as having allowed fewer runs then both the Red Sox and the Blue Jays. I think both the Jays and the Sox have superior pitching, especially in the front 5, and that if the Yankees do win the division it will be because of their hitting, not their pitching. That made me leary of the accuracy of the system.

Lucas - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 01:16 PM EST (#143157) #

My fifth pick is missing from the article:

"LA/Anaheim UNDER 89.5 -- Offense is vanilla, bullpen no longer awe-inspring, opponents improved."

In retrospect, I'm not that fond of my Colorado and Cincinnati picks. If Cincy gives 120+ starts to Hatteberg and Womack, look out below!

Forced to make a choice, I'd take the under for Toronto.

Nigel - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 01:31 PM EST (#143159) #

What's interesting about the sims is the RF and RA numbers. Essentially the sims are saying that the Jays will have a roughly equivalent offense to last year's 775 actual runs scored and that their pitching and defense will decline substantially (anywhere between 50 to 75 runs worse than last year's 705 actual). From a statistical perspective that is supportable. If there are no substantial improvements from the young players (Rios, Hill and Adams) then I think the additions of Overbay, Molina and Glaus will likely only just offset the fact that on a component basis the Jays offense was relatively lucky to score 775 runs last year. The big if lies with the development of Adams, Hill and Rios. I think at least one of those players will do substantially better than last year, so I expect a modest improvement in runs scored. On the other side of things, the stats are reflecting a poorer defensive team in the infield and that a number of key innings eaters (Towers and Chacin in particular) were relatively lucky to give up so few runs based upon their component stats. Again, I expect some regression from both Towers and Chacin but I would think a full year of Halladay and some improvement from Lilly to offset much of that. I think Burnett for a full year (assuming good health) will be only a modest improvement from what Bush and Downs did while in the rotation last year (that's not a knock against Burnett - those two put up better than league average numbers while starting). I would expect, at worst, a modest increase in runs against due to poorer infield defense (and maybe outfield defense - depending on the amount of time Hinske plays ahead of Rios). All of which is to say I understand how the sims get the numbers, but don't really agree with them on the RA side of things. My best guess would be for the RA-RF differential to look very similar to last year's total.

rtcaino - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 04:07 PM EST (#143165) #

""NY Yankees UNDER 97.5 -- Why should they improve eight games on 2005's Pythag record of 90-72?""

Solid point.

Mylegacy - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 05:38 PM EST (#143171) #

Had the Jays had Roy and Ted healthy all last year they coulda' shoulda' woulda' won 87.5 games last year. With THIS team playing LAST year we coulda' shoulda' woulda' won 97. BUT, this isn't last year.

The Spankies have added Damon BUT are older.

Beckett is HUGE for the Sox and an only partly decrepit Schilling is a HUGE improvement and the bull pen is better, but the offense has a new black hole at third and maybe first and SS, BUT is improved in center, so who knows.

Baltimore has improved pitching with another year for the youngsters and the addition of Benson.

TB's position playing kids are to die for... the pitching not so much...

SO, I predict: (drum roll please!)

Yanks, Soxs and Jays ALL tied with 94 wins, Baltimore and TB tied with 73 wins.

I also predict that President Bush will win the 2006 Islamic Scholar of the year award and that Paris Hilton will reject her earthly possessions and join an all male ashram on the Tibetan side of K2, somewhere around the 15,000 foot level.

Michael - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 06:15 PM EST (#143175) #

Over at a gambling/poker website (2+2) sports betting forum there was a lot of discussion of over/under. We took Pinacle's late January line (Jan 24th) and I made the following predictions [note that it isn't straight O/U but you also have to lay differing juice, -108 means lose $108 when you lose and win $100 when you win, +102 means lose $100 when you lose and $win 102 when you win - or any multiple of that]:

Arizona under 76.5 wins -119 Atlanta under 90 wins -125 Baltimore under 75.5 -108 Red Sox over 92 -110 Cubs under 85 -106 White Sox under 92 -108 Reds under 74 -108 Cleveland over 91 -108 Rockies under 68.5 +102 Tigers over 77 -108 Marlins over +123 Houston under 83.5 +103 Royals over 61.5 -121 Angels under 88.5 -108 Dodgers under 85 +114 Brewers over 78.5 -108 Twins over 80 -119 Mets over 91 -108 Yankees under 100.5 -110 As over 87 -119 Phillies over 81.5 -115 Pirates under 75.5 -106 Padres under 77.5 -106 Giants under 81.5 -104 Mariners over 74.5 -108 Cardinals under 94.5 -102 Rays over 67.5 -108 Rangers over 79.5 -104 Jays over 86 -110 Nationals under 80 -132 Although I wouldn't bet on all of those. I think the best values are probably the Yankees U, Rangers O, White Sox U, Indians O, Dodgers U, and Brewers O.

Interesting how most of those lines have moved in the direction I'd pick in the best value predictions, and interesting how people would still take Yankees U, As O, Philies O, Nationals U, Brewers O inspite of each of those lines moving against that bet since late January.

Glevin - Tuesday, March 21 2006 @ 11:34 PM EST (#143185) #

"Royals - over 63.5. They won't be horribly terrible, just terrible. "

I'd take the under on this one. If the Royals were in the NL West, it would be different, but they are easily the worst team in the American League period. The other "bad" teams-Tampa Bay and maybe Seattle have loads more talent than KC does. They have possibly the worst lineup in the league and one of the worst rotations I have ever seen. Their opening day starter has had an ERA of over 5.90 in 3 of the last 4 years.(Elarton). Mark Redmand might be their #1 guy if he's healthy. It's not like they have a lot of young guys who have the ability to breakout either. They are going to get slaughtered this year.

TamRa - Wednesday, March 22 2006 @ 12:23 AM EST (#143187) #

OVER-
Jays: should be obvious
Indians: I make them the favorites in the division
Twins: Not that bad, maybe a contender if the give up the Batista experiment and get serious
Angels: more than 90 seems reasonable
A's: Ditto
Braves: until proven differently.
Phillies: not sure how much over, but some
Brewers: slow and steady improvement takes them over .500

UNDER-
Yanks - maybe wishful thinking but I don't think so
Red Sox - just a tad
White Sox - everything went perfect last year
Rangers - added pitching, still not usre they added good pitching (in that park)
Marlins - legendarily bad in first half
Nats - need Zim to be ROY to really threaten this, especially if Soriano keep it up.
Reds - did nothing to improve abysmal pitching, and offense went backwards

Pistol - Sunday, October 01 2006 @ 09:22 AM EDT (#156297) #

Bumping this to see what we said in March. Some right on, others way off (Marlins, anyone?).

If the Jays wins today they push the Yankees to the Under.

Rob - Sunday, October 01 2006 @ 09:45 AM EDT (#156298) #

Looks like the consensus picks didn't quite work out. Even if the Yankees don't win today, the Brewers are a week's worth of wins away from their OVER 81 prediction.

It's interesting how all five AL East teams could be "under" on the season.

And unless I counted wrong, Leigh needs a LAAoA loss today to be perfect on the season. I'm surprised he didn't take the under on the White Sox -- that would have clinched it.

Over / Under | 17 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.