2009 Astros Prediction and why signing Ben Sheets could pay for itself
Over at Lookout Landing, they recently looked at some projections, made some gut corrections and assumptions, and then took at look at how the Mariners would fair 2009, as they stood. Having given them credit for a pretty novel idea, I've decided to do the same thing.
Looking at ZIPS, Colin Weyers MARCELS, and Bill James' predictions, I got a rough estimate, made my own assumptions and corrections for a few players, and put it all together on a visually pleasing layout of Minute Maid Park. The image that follows is each player and my projected Wins Above a Replacement Player (WARP) for 2009.
That totals to 32.25 WARP. Operating under the conventional assumption that a team of replacement level players would win about 30% of their games, my projections see the Astros as a 80.85 win team in 2009 ([32.25+(162*0.3)]) or being .500. Assuming that our bench could contribute positively, we're looking at maybe another 1-2 WARP, so I'm now going on record as saying the Astros, if they go with this roster (which hopefully we can substitute Randy Wolf for someone better...Ben Sheets), will win 82-83 games next year. This number of wins is also known as M-E-D-I-O-C-R-I-T-Y.
If Ben Sheets can be a 3.5+ WARP player next year -- and I think he can -- he pushes the projection from 82-83 wins to 84.5-85.5 wins. That would put our ceiling at 86 wins and borderline at contention for the Wild Card -- possibly. Throw in some outperformance of our true talent and maybe we do make a legitimate run at the playoffs.
My point in all of this is not to conjecture as to whether we can make it to the playoffs or not, but to make this point: we need either do what it takes to contend or start rebuilding. Ed Wade's stated plan of attack for this off-season holds us in that awkward middle -- unless he does decide to unload some contracts (in which case, signing Randy Wolf isn't a good idea either). He and Drayton are justifying this by claiming that payroll considerations are handicapping their desire to truly improve the team. I'm going to call bull shit on that; I'll also prove it too.
After the jump.
In Baseball Prospectus' Baseball Between the Numbers, Nate Silver runs some regression analysis to determine both a) the value of a win, and b) the value of wins in terms of their added bonus towards obtaining a post-season berth ("Is Alex Rodriguez Overpaid?"). I adjusted his figures for inflation through June 2008 and applied the percentages to each win leading to a playoff berth. These were the results (sorry, I was to lazy to reconstruct the table, but I'm attaching the spread sheet: winrevenue):
So there you have it, the value of going from the 83rd win (our ceiling without Sheets) to the 86th win is about $15 million dollars. By all indications, that would actually be below the current market price of Sheets. In economic terms: Benefits > Costs.
Of course, there is a qualifier to this method: if the Astros don't obtain a post-season berth, then the value of going from the 83rd win to the 86th win is just: $2,510,459.31 (3*Linear Value). In that instance Costs > Benefits by a pretty large margin.
Thus, the question Drayton McLane and Ed Wade have to ask themselves is: Are they going to risk that cost to make a push for the playoffs while our core group of talent is capable of leading us there? OR Is that risk too great and instead they're going to start trading away talent -- while we still can -- to rebuild? Those are really the only two logical options for this offseason -- it's just up to Ed and Drayton to decide what their risk-seeking preference will be.
Just remember during the rest of the off-season, whenever the payroll consideration for Sheets is brought up, they're basically claiming that they don't think we have a shot at the playoffs. If that's their line, then their only rational alternative is to admit defeat and start rebuilding.
0 recs |
11 comments
|
Comments
BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS
And Richard Justice thinks we should sign Randy Johnson… jesus…
by entropic soul on Nov 17, 2008 12:32 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Those results are fairly consistent with my thoughts.
I don’t know how much room you left for improvement by Bourn and Towles. For example, James’ projections already assume a significant improvement in Towles’ offense. Most of the projections assume some level of improvement for Bourn (he couldn’t get much worse). Depending on the assumptions you have made about those two young guys, they represent a potential area for gaining a bit.
by clack on Nov 17, 2008 8:41 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I tried to be as conservative as possible with those guys
But if they do improve and the organization does, in just increases the incentive to sign Ben Sheets.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Nov 17, 2008 8:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Couple of questions...
How is Bourn equatable to league average at CF? Even with his defense, he is still a negative WARP.
I am curious on how everyone is touting Pence to come roaring back next year. Yes he should improve on last year, but his 1st season really skews most projections. Even with doing just a quick and dirty BABIP based on LD% Pence’s first season is a large aberration. Pences’s first year he had a LD% of 19.4% or a possible BABIP range around .305 to .315 could be expected. His .378 that year skews everything.
For Pence to match the BABIP that Bill James has down without luck his LD% would have to be above 21%, which would be in the top 40 in MLB last year and higher than any of his minor league data.
Not to hate on Pence, it is just a curse of attempting to do any form of projections off of small sample sizes of data with an extreme outlier.
by laxtonto on Nov 17, 2008 10:43 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I put Bourn at a replacement level
All the numbers on the chart are in terms of wins above replacement level. I think his bat will improve enough next year to put him at the level, maybe that’s too optimistic — but lord I hope not…
I don’t think Pence will come roaring back, but a .280/25 HR/.875 OPS isn’t out of the question and he’s a skilled defensive player. And that’s based on me thinking about he did this year. You make a good point about weighting his projections in terms of that fluke 450 ABs though.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Nov 17, 2008 10:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Good stuff. All teams should have a blog doing stuff like this.
It would be interesting to see the breakdown of WAR for each player (offense, pos, field) so that if we disagree with a player’s rating, we can disagree with an individual piece, not just the entire thing.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 17, 2008 11:44 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for you kind words
I’ll get to work on that. To be honest though, I just looked at their defense numbers (PMR and RZR) and their PECOTA Player cards and matched up their projected numbers with my adjustments to a Percentile on the card and corrected defense because BPro’s defense numbers aren’t very good. Not the most scientific process, but I was just trying to put some sort of quantification to start with.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Nov 17, 2008 2:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not saying the numbers have to be all the scientific, or even objective.
But it would be nice to see if a 4 WAR player is 1 WAA on off, .5 for pos, and .5 for fielding, or 3 WAA on off, -1 for pos, and 0 for field.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 18, 2008 7:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Gotcha
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Nov 18, 2008 8:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Someone needs to send this to Ed Wade and Drayton
by entropic soul on Nov 18, 2008 8:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm flattered.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Nov 18, 2008 9:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

























