A dismal April

BigRapidsJackass · 05-01-2007, 12:44 PM

Time to do a little early assessment.

10-16. Last place.

According to BP, the Rockies began the season with a 25% chance of making the playoffs. Right now, they're down to a 10% chance.

The bullpen is in total disarray. Is it too early to say that Hawkins and Affeldt are this season's Mesa and King? I don't think so. In fact, Mesa and King were better, particularly Mesa early in the year. But any way you cut it, they're total busts at a combined $5 million a year. Let's hope Rodrigo Lopez comes back and is reasonably effective. If not, that's $10 million down the drain. And I haven't even gotten to Fogg and Kim (combined $6 million).

Let's all make fun of the Giants signing Barry Zito for $16 million. Hey, they could've had Hawkins-Affeldt-Lopez-Fogg-Kim for that money!

I mentioned the tough schedule before. One interesting point gleaned from BP: their adjusted "third-tier" wins shows the Rockies have actually played better than the D'backs (who have been able to beat up on the Nationals this month). I'm not really buying it, but it's a shred of hope to hang on to.

You know we love to beat up on Hurdle and Monfort. But I say this one's on O'Dowd. He had a little bit of mad money to play with this offseason, and I'm guessing that by September we'll all agree that he completely squandered it. Not to belabor a point, but ...

... he had about $10 million to spend on the open market, plus the $5.5 million saved by dealing Jennings. And so far he has two good starts from Rodrigo Lopez, one good start from Josh Fogg, and some horrible performances from Affeldt, Kim, and (especially) Hawkins to show for it.

I think I've changed my mind. Fire O'Dowd first.

Heltonfan · 05-01-2007, 01:45 PM

Quote:

One interesting point gleaned from BP: their adjusted "third-tier" wins shows the Rockies have actually played better than the D'backs (who have been able to beat up on the Nationals this month). I'm not really buying it...

You should be. The Diamondbacks have been by far the luckiest team in baseball; their component winning percentage is only .461. The Rockies are at .442. With a strength of schedule adjustment, we come out ahead.

I'll take Hawkins-Affeldt-Lopez-Fogg-Kim over Zito every time. And that's without even considering that the Giants are on the hook for another six years after this one. Of course, this should in no way be taken as a defense of O-Dowd.

We're right where I expected us to be at this point in the season, minus a game of Pythag luck. To me, that's the saddest part of this first month: that it hasn't caused me to rethink my assessment of the team in any way.

hiaspire · 05-01-2007, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heltonfan

I'll take Hawkins-Affeldt-Lopez-Fogg-Kim over Zito every time.

That's worrying way too much about an owner's pocketbook than performance on the field. As we saw, Zito is still a very talented pitcher - shifting supply/demand economic markets be damned who will have a larger impact on his team than any of the preferred scrubs mentioned here.

It wasn't a dismal April for me. I'm not wallowing in despair. It would be, perhaps, if there was no reason for hope as we've often experienced seasons ago. They lost a lot of close games in April and most of them because of a flaw or two that is no longer even in place on the team as responsibilities have been shifted in recognition of those issues. As the month went along, we also saw much improvement in youngsters like Tulo and Hirsh and Corpas who appear to be more productive contributors. Despite the overwhelming way-too-early frustration over Taveras, we saw that he can provide what they wanted from him initially with speed on the bases as his average has sharply climbed from the poor start.

It wasn't a dismal April for Holliday or Helton rebounding. I'd be more pessimistic if Helton looked like a tainted shadow of himself as he did last year never coming back fully ready and under-weight. That's not the case. This team looks to have a very healthy and productive Helton back. There is every expectation that the offense will be more productive in the summer months to come.

Fans can look at some of this and drown themselves in sorrow, but there are many reasons for hope for the young and individually-improving Rockies in this division in the many months ahead. IMO anyway, and I think we'll see improvement as the season progresses that will lead to even more reasons for hope.

Roxpert · 05-01-2007, 03:08 PM

A 10-16 April is not at all surprising in light of the schedule and the team's historic tendency to underperform Pythagorus over the years. I wouldn't call it "dismal" as much as I'd call it "typical" or "in-line".

And I don't expect the Rockies to continue at the current sub .400 winning percentage. Naturally, it could happen. The team outperformed expectations (especially mine) in 2006, so could indeed underachieve most projections in 2007. I just wouldn't call for it quite yet.

The bad part of having a losing April is the PERCEPTION that this team is already "done" for the season. There isn't apt to be the same level of anticipation or "intrigue" about the team seeming to be "in the hunt" until mid-July as there was last year. It makes for a longer season, and is a "depressant" for fans.

Even if they improve their winning percentage in May, June, July, etc., the hole they've dug themselves is pretty significant. I'd venture to guess it's less than 50/50 that the Rockies can even touch the .500 mark again this season. Right now, it would take a 6-game winning streak to do so. Fat chance of that happening with this team. Will we be able to play 6 games over .500 from this point forward for any stretch of the season? Unclear, but that's what it will take to return to .500.

DieHardRoxFan · 05-01-2007, 07:53 PM

One thing I've learned with this regime is to not expect much and so far they haven't exceeded my expectations. The O'Dowd philosophy of quantity over quality seems to keep his job. At this point I haven't seen anything that would change my mind about the 72 wins I expected.

Roxpert · 05-01-2007, 08:29 PM

It's good to post the preseason picks once again....

wolf213 - 82
Heltonfan - 78
Roxpert - 75
PECOTA - 80
TheIncredibleRox - 75
DieHardRoxFan - 72
hiaspire - 80
RockieRooter - 83
BigRapidsJackass - 84
GerryInCS - 68
HoyaRoxFan - 83
indianadrew - 85
rockieprogress - 79
Newman - 78
RMF - 86
Dante Bichette - 78

So far, GerryInCS has the best prediction since the Rox are on pace to win 62 games after the month of April. Let's try to take a look again on June 1st, and at the beginning of each month until the season's done.

PurnGoldy · 05-01-2007, 09:18 PM

As an example of how foolish early season "on pace" projections can be, last year the Padres started 9-15 and the Dodgers started with a 12-17 record.

Both finished 88-74.

indianadrew · 05-01-2007, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PurnGoldy

As an example of how foolish early season "on pace" projections can be, last year the Padres started 9-15 and the Dodgers started with a 12-17 record.

Both finished 88-74.

the same projection can be used for the 2006 rockies this far into last season. it would have had us at 93 wins.

PurnGoldy · 05-01-2007, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by indianadrew

the same projection can be used for the 2006 rockies this far into last season. it would have had us at 93 wins.

That's true, in fact the Rockies peak record last year, 20-13, projected to 98 wins which was equally unfounded at the time.

John Cocktoston · 05-02-2007, 12:47 AM

All true. Then again, these figures on the Yankees thrown out by Verducci don't exactly support the proposition that the Rockies are in good shape for the playoffs.

Firstly, good teams tend to be apparent one month into the season. Of the 88 playoff teams since 1996 (the first season with a full April schedule since the wild card format began) only 17 (or 19 percent) played losing baseball in April.

But wait. The Yankees were not just a little off their game in April, or a game or two below .500. They were .391 baseball awful. How many teams recover from that kind of terrible start to get into the postseason? Would you believe 4.8 percent? That's right. From 1996 to 2006, 62 teams played worse than .400 baseball in April. Only three of those 62 teams made the playoffs. If there is good news for New York it is that it was done twice just last year, bringing the odds up all the way from 1.3 percent.

RockieRooter · 05-02-2007, 09:35 AM

That's when you look at your talent level. I remember some great Pirates teams with Willie Stargell who always seemed to start out slowly. By mid-June they'd be way behind, but would start chipping back at that point. By the end of the season they'd be either in competition or out front. From mid-June onwards it seemed like they'd pick up about a win a week, every week. It'd be fun to see some charts from back then - but the experience of observing this happen over several different years distinctly colored my ideas of what it meant to be in a race or out of a race.

It's not mid-June yet and six games back is a drop in the bucket. The question is about what kind of talent the Rox have looking forwards. If you think the the Rox intrinsic level is about a .500 team (or below), you might start thinking that this just isn't "their year". If you think that there's enough talent to play above .500, I think it's too soon. After all, if they play .540 ball for the next several months, they'll be over .500 for the season in late July and in position where a hot finish could put them back in contention (I've done the math in my head, but I think that's about right).

I think the Rox have enough talent that they could play .540 ball from now 'til the beginning of August (not that they necessarily will - it requires some assumptions which may not happen), but I think it's wrong to say that they've dug such a hole this early that they can't climb out. A win streak would be really nice, but consistent solid play over a period of time would be much better.

Heltonfan · 05-02-2007, 11:34 AM

Our early deficit is by no means a "drop in the bucket." It might look like it in the context of the 162-game season (5 games down with 135 to go doesn't seem that bad), but realistically, we know that a) it's going to take at least 88 wins to make the playoffs, and b) going forward, no team (not even the Red Sox) projects at above .570. If we play .570 ball from here on out, we end up at 88 wins. Which basically means that the hole we've dug ourselves into is substantial enough that our only hope is to get a visit from the Pythag fairy... and that's without making any judgments about the likelihood of that .570 actually happening.

If we were in the NL Central, where 85 wins might very well be enough, it'd be a different story. But as is, we're just the West's answer to the Marlins: a talented young team with some glaring weaknesses and three clearly superior teams to overcome. It's not impossible, but it's awfully far-fetched.

hiaspire · 05-02-2007, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heltonfan

we know that a) it's going to take at least 88 wins to make the playoffs

That's a little strong, as you know no such thing. I think many have been over-estimating some of the off-season improvements in the division this year. The division isn't all that tough IMO, and we just need to stay close and not allow the top teams to separate from us. That's more important than a magic number to hit 5 months from now. Just hang in there.

Who says they need to make the playoffs or bust anyway? Even being in a competitive race and playing meaningful games in the last month of the season would be more excitement than we've seen in a decade. That would be a nice step in its own right to build upon with a young core that is improving. There is a process to becoming a winning organization, and it doesn't just happen in one step usually.

If this team didn't reach that magical 88 wins, but still managed to break the franchise record for victories in a season there will be much more optimism than doom & gloom. That would be quite a turnaround and success story within this franchise's history with a huge influx of interest and hope for a much brighter future than we've seen in years. That would be actually turning "potential" and constant rebuilding into some actual results that rival the very best of times in franchise history. That would be a legitimate step forward that would be the furthest thing from yet another predictable disappointment. If we get too hung up on needing to reach some mathematical number the real story can be missed in terms of what that improvement could mean for the franchise in many respects. Follow that renewed excitement up with additional crowd revenues and a big acquisition as they've hinted at for next year, and the atmosphere surrounding this team will be drastically changed - and that can't be diminished even if they don't hit the magic number this year. They can make magic happen anyway, and go a long way toward the miracle that people think will be required to turn things around on Blake Street.

RockieRooter · 05-02-2007, 02:21 PM

I'd rather look at games back instead of a pre-season estmate of what'll be needed. As the season progresses, this'll give a better indication of what kind of a hole you have to climb out of. It's perfectly reasonable to pick up a game a month - even over a fairly protracted amount of time. Many teams have done this. Over short periods, it's possible to do significantly better.
Your approach is to use season-long projections and apply them over ever shorter periods of time. The shorter the time period, the more expected spread you'll find and the less unreasonable it is to exceed any projections.
The projection of .570 for the Red Sox means that there's approximately a 50% chance that they'll do better. I forget the expected spread for a season, but even after just one month the spread would go up by about 10%. After two months, it'd go up 22%. Etc.

That's why a team that's four games back the first of September is distinctly "in competition". It's not unheard of for teams to pick up four games in a week. One of the Pirates teams I mentioned earlier was something like 14 games out in mid-June. They won the division by a large margin. They averaged a pickup of something over 5 games a month for the entire rest of the season.

While I'd consider that a pretty historic comeback and the Pirates team had more talent (I think) than the Rox, IMHO it's far too early to rule out a more modest performance. I think I'd be pretty jazzed if the Rox were still 6 games back at 1 September. That'd mean that they'd held their own over the heart of the season. It'd also mean that they'd be close enough that the unthinkable could happen!

John Cocktoston · 05-05-2007, 11:32 AM

You know, in looking at it, April really could have been a whole lot worse, particularly considering how poorly the team played and the number of winnable games they gave away.

On nights when the bats were there, they got no pitching...

A handful of excellent pitching efforts went for naught because they got no run support...

The bullpen was shaky almost throughout, with the notable exception of the tail end of the month (more on this in a minute)...

They got bit a little by the injury bug as well, most notably Kaz, Lopez, Ramirez and BK...

Still, despite all that, they're 5 games out this morning. Now, that's not a good start by any means and it's not an insignificant number of games to make up, but it's by no means insurmountable either.

Most importantly, it doesn't feel insurmountable when you consider some of the recent developments on this team:

1. Tulo settling into the #2 hole in the lineup. He just looks more comfortable and confident there, doesn't he?

And for those of you who don't like to talk about looks, feels or gut instincts, he's hitting .345/.444/.621 there in 29 at bats. Not a huge sample size, but neither is his career, since those 29 AB's represent better than 30% of his season. You can see his confidence growing day by day, which is not something to be ignored in a young player. I think he could be really special.

2. The bullpen. I think they're onto something with Alberto Arias and I'll be damned if Denny Bautista hasn't looked pretty good recently. When Ramirez comes back, that back-end of the bullpen looks a whole lot better when it contains Arias, Bautista, Ramirez and Corpas before you get to Fuentes.

[The lefty situation is still a bit of a mess. The numbers tell you that Martin is simply not a LOOGY, which means he really has no place on the roster. Affedlt is still their best bet, but he'll never be effective in that role with his walk rate. None of the righties have serviceable splits against lefties (read: change-ups) so the answer to this problem is not on the roster right now, I'm afraid.]

3. Taveras. The discussion of his SLG entirely misses the point. He is a burner, plain and simple. He will cover a TON of ground in CF and beat out a lot of infield hits over the course of a season. He is what he is and what he is aint Rickey Henderson.

But when he's consistently getting on base, he's an extremely valuable player because of the pressure he puts on the pitcher and the defense. I don't think it's a coincidence that Tulo is starting to rake at the same time Willy is getting on in front of him, because when Willy is on base, Tulo gets a lot more opportunities to turn around a fastball. This lineup looks a whole lot different when the two of them are hitting well up top.

Bottom line on Taveras, he's at .302/.375/.326 for the season. And if you wouldn't take those rate numbers for a full season because you think he should have more doubles or triples...I don't know what to tell you. The guys is on pace to steal 50 bases and score 134 runs, so if you want to beat the drum for Cory Sullivan, I would suggest that you might not be getting the big picture here.

4. Hirsh has looked fantastic any way you slice it. You don't hear much in the way of criticism about that trade anymore...

Some other things to look forward to: the MLB debut of Greg Reynolds later this summer, Atkins finding his groove, the continued growth of Chris Iannetta (I think he's going to be just fine) and a lineup that features a #1, #2 and #8 of Taveras, Tulo and Kaz.

A year ago today, the Rockies were 17-13 and in 1st place, the Cardinals were 18-12 and 3rd in the division and Oakland was 15-14.

It's early yet.

05-01-2007, 12:44 PM	#1 (permalink)
BigRapidsJackass Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,118	A dismal April Time to do a little early assessment. 10-16. Last place. According to BP, the Rockies began the season with a 25% chance of making the playoffs. Right now, they're down to a 10% chance. The bullpen is in total disarray. Is it too early to say that Hawkins and Affeldt are this season's Mesa and King? I don't think so. In fact, Mesa and King were better, particularly Mesa early in the year. But any way you cut it, they're total busts at a combined $5 million a year. Let's hope Rodrigo Lopez comes back and is reasonably effective. If not, that's $10 million down the drain. And I haven't even gotten to Fogg and Kim (combined $6 million). Let's all make fun of the Giants signing Barry Zito for $16 million. Hey, they could've had Hawkins-Affeldt-Lopez-Fogg-Kim for that money! I mentioned the tough schedule before. One interesting point gleaned from BP: their adjusted "third-tier" wins shows the Rockies have actually played better than the D'backs (who have been able to beat up on the Nationals this month). I'm not really buying it, but it's a shred of hope to hang on to. You know we love to beat up on Hurdle and Monfort. But I say this one's on O'Dowd. He had a little bit of mad money to play with this offseason, and I'm guessing that by September we'll all agree that he completely squandered it. Not to belabor a point, but ... ... he had about $10 million to spend on the open market, plus the $5.5 million saved by dealing Jennings. And so far he has two good starts from Rodrigo Lopez, one good start from Josh Fogg, and some horrible performances from Affeldt, Kim, and (especially) Hawkins to show for it. I think I've changed my mind. Fire O'Dowd first.

05-05-2007, 11:32 AM	#15 (permalink)
John Cocktoston Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 375	April You know, in looking at it, April really could have been a whole lot worse, particularly considering how poorly the team played and the number of winnable games they gave away. On nights when the bats were there, they got no pitching... A handful of excellent pitching efforts went for naught because they got no run support... The bullpen was shaky almost throughout, with the notable exception of the tail end of the month (more on this in a minute)... They got bit a little by the injury bug as well, most notably Kaz, Lopez, Ramirez and BK... Still, despite all that, they're 5 games out this morning. Now, that's not a good start by any means and it's not an insignificant number of games to make up, but it's by no means insurmountable either. Most importantly, it doesn't feel insurmountable when you consider some of the recent developments on this team: 1. Tulo settling into the #2 hole in the lineup. He just looks more comfortable and confident there, doesn't he? And for those of you who don't like to talk about looks, feels or gut instincts, he's hitting .345/.444/.621 there in 29 at bats. Not a huge sample size, but neither is his career, since those 29 AB's represent better than 30% of his season. You can see his confidence growing day by day, which is not something to be ignored in a young player. I think he could be really special. 2. The bullpen. I think they're onto something with Alberto Arias and I'll be damned if Denny Bautista hasn't looked pretty good recently. When Ramirez comes back, that back-end of the bullpen looks a whole lot better when it contains Arias, Bautista, Ramirez and Corpas before you get to Fuentes. [The lefty situation is still a bit of a mess. The numbers tell you that Martin is simply not a LOOGY, which means he really has no place on the roster. Affedlt is still their best bet, but he'll never be effective in that role with his walk rate. None of the righties have serviceable splits against lefties (read: change-ups) so the answer to this problem is not on the roster right now, I'm afraid.] 3. Taveras. The discussion of his SLG entirely misses the point. He is a burner, plain and simple. He will cover a TON of ground in CF and beat out a lot of infield hits over the course of a season. He is what he is and what he is aint Rickey Henderson. But when he's consistently getting on base, he's an extremely valuable player because of the pressure he puts on the pitcher and the defense. I don't think it's a coincidence that Tulo is starting to rake at the same time Willy is getting on in front of him, because when Willy is on base, Tulo gets a lot more opportunities to turn around a fastball. This lineup looks a whole lot different when the two of them are hitting well up top. Bottom line on Taveras, he's at .302/.375/.326 for the season. And if you wouldn't take those rate numbers for a full season because you think he should have more doubles or triples...I don't know what to tell you. The guys is on pace to steal 50 bases and score 134 runs, so if you want to beat the drum for Cory Sullivan, I would suggest that you might not be getting the big picture here. 4. Hirsh has looked fantastic any way you slice it. You don't hear much in the way of criticism about that trade anymore... Some other things to look forward to: the MLB debut of Greg Reynolds later this summer, Atkins finding his groove, the continued growth of Chris Iannetta (I think he's going to be just fine) and a lineup that features a #1, #2 and #8 of Taveras, Tulo and Kaz. A year ago today, the Rockies were 17-13 and in 1st place, the Cardinals were 18-12 and 3rd in the division and Oakland was 15-14. It's early yet.

05-01-2007, 03:08 PM	#4 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,015	A 10-16 April is not at all surprising in light of the schedule and the team's historic tendency to underperform Pythagorus over the years. I wouldn't call it "dismal" as much as I'd call it "typical" or "in-line". And I don't expect the Rockies to continue at the current sub .400 winning percentage. Naturally, it could happen. The team outperformed expectations (especially mine) in 2006, so could indeed underachieve most projections in 2007. I just wouldn't call for it quite yet. The bad part of having a losing April is the PERCEPTION that this team is already "done" for the season. There isn't apt to be the same level of anticipation or "intrigue" about the team seeming to be "in the hunt" until mid-July as there was last year. It makes for a longer season, and is a "depressant" for fans. Even if they improve their winning percentage in May, June, July, etc., the hole they've dug themselves is pretty significant. I'd venture to guess it's less than 50/50 that the Rockies can even touch the .500 mark again this season. Right now, it would take a 6-game winning streak to do so. Fat chance of that happening with this team. Will we be able to play 6 games over .500 from this point forward for any stretch of the season? Unclear, but that's what it will take to return to .500.

05-01-2007, 07:53 PM	#5 (permalink)
DieHardRoxFan Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 153	One thing I've learned with this regime is to not expect much and so far they haven't exceeded my expectations. The O'Dowd philosophy of quantity over quality seems to keep his job. At this point I haven't seen anything that would change my mind about the 72 wins I expected.

05-01-2007, 08:29 PM	#6 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,015	It's good to post the preseason picks once again.... wolf213 - 82 Heltonfan - 78 Roxpert - 75 PECOTA - 80 TheIncredibleRox - 75 DieHardRoxFan - 72 hiaspire - 80 RockieRooter - 83 BigRapidsJackass - 84 GerryInCS - 68 HoyaRoxFan - 83 indianadrew - 85 rockieprogress - 79 Newman - 78 RMF - 86 Dante Bichette - 78 So far, GerryInCS has the best prediction since the Rox are on pace to win 62 games after the month of April. Let's try to take a look again on June 1st, and at the beginning of each month until the season's done.

05-01-2007, 09:18 PM	#7 (permalink)
PurnGoldy Rookie Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 13	As an example of how foolish early season "on pace" projections can be, last year the Padres started 9-15 and the Dodgers started with a 12-17 record. Both finished 88-74.

05-02-2007, 12:47 AM	#10 (permalink)
John Cocktoston Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 375	All true. Then again, these figures on the Yankees thrown out by Verducci don't exactly support the proposition that the Rockies are in good shape for the playoffs. Firstly, good teams tend to be apparent one month into the season. Of the 88 playoff teams since 1996 (the first season with a full April schedule since the wild card format began) only 17 (or 19 percent) played losing baseball in April. But wait. The Yankees were not just a little off their game in April, or a game or two below .500. They were .391 baseball awful. How many teams recover from that kind of terrible start to get into the postseason? Would you believe 4.8 percent? That's right. From 1996 to 2006, 62 teams played worse than .400 baseball in April. Only three of those 62 teams made the playoffs. If there is good news for New York it is that it was done twice just last year, bringing the odds up all the way from 1.3 percent.

05-02-2007, 09:35 AM	#11 (permalink)
RockieRooter Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 62	That's when you look at your talent level. I remember some great Pirates teams with Willie Stargell who always seemed to start out slowly. By mid-June they'd be way behind, but would start chipping back at that point. By the end of the season they'd be either in competition or out front. From mid-June onwards it seemed like they'd pick up about a win a week, every week. It'd be fun to see some charts from back then - but the experience of observing this happen over several different years distinctly colored my ideas of what it meant to be in a race or out of a race. It's not mid-June yet and six games back is a drop in the bucket. The question is about what kind of talent the Rox have looking forwards. If you think the the Rox intrinsic level is about a .500 team (or below), you might start thinking that this just isn't "their year". If you think that there's enough talent to play above .500, I think it's too soon. After all, if they play .540 ball for the next several months, they'll be over .500 for the season in late July and in position where a hot finish could put them back in contention (I've done the math in my head, but I think that's about right). I think the Rox have enough talent that they could play .540 ball from now 'til the beginning of August (not that they necessarily will - it requires some assumptions which may not happen), but I think it's wrong to say that they've dug such a hole this early that they can't climb out. A win streak would be really nice, but consistent solid play over a period of time would be much better.

05-02-2007, 11:34 AM	#12 (permalink)
Heltonfan Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Yerevan, Armenia Posts: 847	Our early deficit is by no means a "drop in the bucket." It might look like it in the context of the 162-game season (5 games down with 135 to go doesn't seem that bad), but realistically, we know that a) it's going to take at least 88 wins to make the playoffs, and b) going forward, no team (not even the Red Sox) projects at above .570. If we play .570 ball from here on out, we end up at 88 wins. Which basically means that the hole we've dug ourselves into is substantial enough that our only hope is to get a visit from the Pythag fairy... and that's without making any judgments about the likelihood of that .570 actually happening. If we were in the NL Central, where 85 wins might very well be enough, it'd be a different story. But as is, we're just the West's answer to the Marlins: a talented young team with some glaring weaknesses and three clearly superior teams to overcome. It's not impossible, but it's awfully far-fetched.

05-02-2007, 02:21 PM	#14 (permalink)
RockieRooter Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 62	I'd rather look at games back instead of a pre-season estmate of what'll be needed. As the season progresses, this'll give a better indication of what kind of a hole you have to climb out of. It's perfectly reasonable to pick up a game a month - even over a fairly protracted amount of time. Many teams have done this. Over short periods, it's possible to do significantly better. Your approach is to use season-long projections and apply them over ever shorter periods of time. The shorter the time period, the more expected spread you'll find and the less unreasonable it is to exceed any projections. The projection of .570 for the Red Sox means that there's approximately a 50% chance that they'll do better. I forget the expected spread for a season, but even after just one month the spread would go up by about 10%. After two months, it'd go up 22%. Etc. That's why a team that's four games back the first of September is distinctly "in competition". It's not unheard of for teams to pick up four games in a week. One of the Pirates teams I mentioned earlier was something like 14 games out in mid-June. They won the division by a large margin. They averaged a pickup of something over 5 games a month for the entire rest of the season. While I'd consider that a pretty historic comeback and the Pirates team had more talent (I think) than the Rox, IMHO it's far too early to rule out a more modest performance. I think I'd be pretty jazzed if the Rox were still 6 games back at 1 September. That'd mean that they'd held their own over the heart of the season. It'd also mean that they'd be close enough that the unthinkable could happen!