| Hitting | PA | Pitching | IP | Total | |
| Andrew | 23.5 | 6522 | 30 | 1116 | 53.5 |
| Spencer | 28 | 6326 | 23.5 | 1149 | 51.5 |
| Bill | 25 | 6521 | 26 | 1059 | 51 |
| Caleb | 31 | 6180 | 18.5 | 1074 | 49.5 |
| Kate | 15.5 | 6250 | 34 | 1145 | 49.5 |
| Luke | 26 | 6116 | 13 | 951 | 39 |
| Taylor | 17 | 6310 | 21.5 | 1087 | 38.5 |
| Mark | 14 | 5686 | 13.5 | 1084 | 27.5 |
I've included playing time estimates (plate appearances and IP) to provide some background. It looks like a mess at the top.
Updated the standings to fix some issues with ties with pitching stats. Almost everyone benefited a little bit, so the overall standings look the same.
13 comments:
No, this can't be right. Bill's not on top.
Ha. Well, considering I'm using my valuations from Steamer, I ought to be on top when all is said and done. However, that didn't really happen - don't think I managed my money particularly well, especially with letting so many top players go, when I wanted to land a top bat or two and a top arm. Hopefully I can cobble together enough starts from my deep staff with good matchups and/or two starts to survive not having a #1.
How is Spencer's pitching staff not in last place? That's the real question.
The short answer is 500+ IP of 3.15 ERA, 1.16 WHIP, 9.8 K/9 pitching from Darvish, Price, Holland, and McGee covers up a lot of ills. That is a pretty spectacular line from Steamer, which is rather conservative with ERAs (Darvish proj. to have the best ERA for a starter, Price tied for 3rd). It might even underestimate their impact - both Price and Darvish are slated for 192 IP, which is the highest Steamer ever forecasts.
Also, my staff only has 4 starting pitchers (all of whom Steamer hates, ZIPS is much more kind to Wilson and Buchholz in particular) right now, which kills my IP. Makes it pretty easy for Spencer to be better than somebody.
Yeah, playing time definitely makes a big difference, which is why I included PA and IP. Mark, for example, takes a huge hit having Grady Sizemore in his lineup, as he's only projected for 1 HR, 18 R, and 19 RBI. I tried to plug the best players according to Steamer into the lineup whenever possible, but sometimes there wasn't any alternative, like with Sizemore.
Yeah, ouch.
I noticed that Steamer isn't too fond of Derek Jeter. Probably 2 weeks into the season Bogaerts will have SS eligibility and Castellanos will have 3B eligibility. Subbing in Castellanos for Jeter adds 6 HRs, 10 runs, 24 RBIs, and subtracts 1 SB and 1 point in AVG (dropping me from .2752 to .2743). Any idea what that would do for me in the overall standings?
It'd certainly help (1 SB and 1 pt in avg isn't really much of anything), but given that you're 10 points behind Kate, I don't think you'll be able to move up.
Steamer projects Sizemore for FOUR homeruns. FOUR. Clearly, this miscalculation moves me to approximately first place.
I really only need Sizemore to stay healthy until Cabrera gains first base eligibility. Steamer is also very down on Kelly Johnson's playing time, who I ranked pretty highly given no A-Rod, his 2B/OF (and soon) 3B eligibility, and lefty friendly Yankee Stadium.
Absolutely. The projections I have don't take into account late breaking news, for obvious reasons, so for guys whose roles change at the last minute, they're not very accurate.
The positional shifts will also make a big difference. When Cabrera gets 1B eligibility, Bogaerts SS, Santana 3B, VMart catcher (maybe later in the season), it will totally reshape these standings. Likewise with injuries or demotions - if Saunders doesn't hold down an OF spot, that hurts Andrew a lot and the 2-3 month injury to Profar is really going to sting for Taylor.
Also, none of the projections takes into account Derek Jeter winning the batting title. Baffling.
Caleb! You'll be happy to know that I fixed the standings! If I plug in Scott Kazmir instead of Ivan Nova, I end up in my rightful place at the top.
First time in history McDowell projections don't have me dead last.
Post a Comment