|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 16, 2023 10:23:46 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Feb 16, 2023 11:04:15 GMT -8
It's great to see projections like this, but one only has to go back to 2021 to see just how wrong they can be. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 16, 2023 11:19:32 GMT -8
It's great to see projections like this, but one only has to go back to 2021 to see just how wrong they can be. I don't agree. Computer simulations and median projections don't capture everything, outliers will always exist with the inability to incorporate things that can't be quantified. The Giants won 107 games, a complete anomaly that absolutely nobody on the planet would have predicted, based on a unique coaching approach that they couldn't duplicate in the following season. They captured peak efficiency with the platoon strategy, but their true talent level was/is much closer to what projections had. Not saying the Padres are infallible; injuries and underperformance are always factors. But to see the Dodgers decline so steeply thanks to a dearth in pitching and the loss of some key free agents is eye-opening. The Padres are clearly the better team on paper (all else being equal with health) but to see it so succinctly is interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Feb 16, 2023 11:29:58 GMT -8
It's great to see projections like this, but one only has to go back to 2021 to see just how wrong they can be. I don't agree. Computer simulations and median projections don't capture everything, outliers will always exist with the inability to incorporate things that can't be quantified. The Giants won 107 games, a complete anomaly that absolutely nobody on the planet would have predicted, based on a unique coaching approach that they couldn't duplicate in the following season. They captured peak efficiency with the platoon strategy, but their true talent level was/is much closer to what projections had. Not saying the Padres are infallible; injuries and underperformance are always factors. But to see the Dodgers decline so steeply thanks to a dearth in pitching and the loss of some key free agents is eye-opening. The Padres are clearly the better team on paper (all else being equal with health) but to see it so succinctly is interesting. You don't agree, yet you spell out another example of just how wrong projections can be. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 16, 2023 11:49:15 GMT -8
I don't agree. Computer simulations and median projections don't capture everything, outliers will always exist with the inability to incorporate things that can't be quantified. The Giants won 107 games, a complete anomaly that absolutely nobody on the planet would have predicted, based on a unique coaching approach that they couldn't duplicate in the following season. They captured peak efficiency with the platoon strategy, but their true talent level was/is much closer to what projections had. Not saying the Padres are infallible; injuries and underperformance are always factors. But to see the Dodgers decline so steeply thanks to a dearth in pitching and the loss of some key free agents is eye-opening. The Padres are clearly the better team on paper (all else being equal with health) but to see it so succinctly is interesting. You don't agree, yet you spell out another example of just how wrong projections can be. Not the same thing. Projections control what they can control and capture what they can. If Manny gets hurt in the first game of the year, if Fernando doesn't make it back from the suspension....those things aren't captured in models. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Feb 16, 2023 16:09:44 GMT -8
You don't agree, yet you spell out another example of just how wrong projections can be. Not the same thing. Projections control what they can control and capture what they can. If Manny gets hurt in the first game of the year, if Fernando doesn't make it back from the suspension....those things aren't captured in models. It actually is the same thing, indicating that preseason projections can be wrong--sometimes very wrong--for pretty much any reason. Don't get me wrong, as I think it's great that the prognosticators feel so highly about the chances for the Padres this upcoming season. I personally think the Padres will actually go over the projected win total this season, but I usually don't have much faith in these annual projections. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Feb 16, 2023 16:25:35 GMT -8
Not the same thing. Projections control what they can control and capture what they can. If Manny gets hurt in the first game of the year, if Fernando doesn't make it back from the suspension....those things aren't captured in models. It actually is the same thing, indicating that preseason projections can be wrong--sometimes very wrong--for pretty much any reason. Don't get me wrong, as I think it's great that the prognosticators feel so highly about the chances for the Padres this upcoming season. I personally think the Padres will actually go over the projected win total this season, but I usually don't have much faith in these annual projections. Same here. They're good to get the fan hyped up and to let you know what your team has on paper, but there's too many variables to rely on it, and eventually be let down. Been down that road too many times. When I read those projections I'll think, oh that's great, and at the same time I'll be thinking blah, blah, blah. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 16, 2023 16:48:10 GMT -8
Not the same thing. Projections control what they can control and capture what they can. If Manny gets hurt in the first game of the year, if Fernando doesn't make it back from the suspension....those things aren't captured in models. It actually is the same thing, indicating that preseason projections can be wrong--sometimes very wrong--for pretty much any reason. Don't get me wrong, as I think it's great that the prognosticators feel so highly about the chances for the Padres this upcoming season. I personally think the Padres will actually go over the projected win total this season, but I usually don't have much faith in these annual projections. There's a difference between "projections being wrong" and plucking extreme outliers to enforce that narrative, like in 2021. The Giants winning 107 games was an outright statistical anomaly. These aren't absolute projections, either, just the average of 10,000 simulations of one season, for what it's worth. It's good to have a range of them, because more often than not, the consensus will be fairly accurate. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 16, 2023 17:03:28 GMT -8
It actually is the same thing, indicating that preseason projections can be wrong--sometimes very wrong--for pretty much any reason. Don't get me wrong, as I think it's great that the prognosticators feel so highly about the chances for the Padres this upcoming season. I personally think the Padres will actually go over the projected win total this season, but I usually don't have much faith in these annual projections. There's a difference between "projections being wrong" and plucking extreme outliers to enforce that narrative, like in 2021. The Giants winning 107 games was an outright statistical anomaly. These aren't absolute projections, either, just the average of 10,000 simulations of one season, for what it's worth. It's good to have a range of them, because more often than not, the consensus will be fairly accurate. Looking at last year's from April, FanGraps had top ten playoff odds of LA, Toronto, Atlanta, New York (Yankees), Houston, Milwaukee, San Diego, Chicago (White Sox), New York (Mets) and Boston. The Red Sox were a massive whiff (thanks to a myriad of factors, none of which involved actually winning games) and the White Sox were wrecked by injuries and a geriatic manager. Philly was right behind Boston. The projections didn't capture St. Louis or Seattle, either. Perils of an absolute grind of a season. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Feb 16, 2023 17:35:34 GMT -8
It actually is the same thing, indicating that preseason projections can be wrong--sometimes very wrong--for pretty much any reason. Don't get me wrong, as I think it's great that the prognosticators feel so highly about the chances for the Padres this upcoming season. I personally think the Padres will actually go over the projected win total this season, but I usually don't have much faith in these annual projections. There's a difference between "projections being wrong" and plucking extreme outliers to enforce that narrative, like in 2021. The Giants winning 107 games was an outright statistical anomaly. These aren't absolute projections, either, just the average of 10,000 simulations of one season, for what it's worth. It's good to have a range of them, because more often than not, the consensus will be fairly accurate. I understand they aren't absolute projections, but they have been wrong before, and they will be wrong again. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 16, 2023 17:48:15 GMT -8
There's a difference between "projections being wrong" and plucking extreme outliers to enforce that narrative, like in 2021. The Giants winning 107 games was an outright statistical anomaly. These aren't absolute projections, either, just the average of 10,000 simulations of one season, for what it's worth. It's good to have a range of them, because more often than not, the consensus will be fairly accurate. I understand they aren't absolute projections, but they have been wrong before, and they will be wrong again. That's kinda baked into it, you'd think. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Feb 16, 2023 20:10:53 GMT -8
Cool story, but nothing to get hyped about. Too many variables. The Padres fan has been let down too many times to get excited about projections.
|
|
|
|
Post by junior on Feb 17, 2023 15:28:14 GMT -8
It's February. Every team is a WS threat.  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 17, 2023 16:30:18 GMT -8
It's February. Every team is a WS threat. Yeah, somehow I don't think the Reds, Royals, Pirates, Tigers, Nationals, Marlins, Rockies, A's, Diamondbacks, Angels or Rangers are printing t-shirts. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Feb 17, 2023 23:52:56 GMT -8
I understand they aren't absolute projections, but they have been wrong before, and they will be wrong again. That's kinda baked into it, you'd think. Yeah but there is no way really to 'bake in' outliers. They will just occur. They are accounted for, but they don't really move the needle that much. Variance could play a big role in the AL Central in particular. When all the teams are that mediocre, one or two teams in that division who has a good first half of the season record will end up being a buyer at the deadline. The variance in first half record from mediocre norm for the teams in that division may play a big role in who wins that division. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 18, 2023 7:59:41 GMT -8
That's kinda baked into it, you'd think. Yeah but there is no way really to 'bake in' outliers. They will just occur. They are accounted for, but they don't really move the needle that much. Variance could play a big role in the AL Central in particular. When all the teams are that mediocre, one or two teams in that division who has a good first half of the season record will end up being a buyer at the deadline. The variance in first half record from mediocre norm for the teams in that division may play a big role in who wins that division. That's why they are outliers. No model is going to be able to predict every scenario involving 30 teams. But that doesn't mean they are worthless and the science behind them is fascinating. The individual player projections is something I look forward to every year. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 13:31:05 GMT -8
It's February. Every team is a WS threat. Yeah, somehow I don't think the Reds, Royals, Pirates, Tigers, Nationals, Marlins, Rockies, A's, Diamondbacks, Angels or Rangers are printing t-shirts. Angels could be a WC team, if they stay healthy and their pitching holds up. They don’t have a true ace besides Shohei but they have some decent depth in the rotation. What they really could use is a healthy and productive Rendon. He has been a major disappointment there. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Feb 19, 2023 19:50:11 GMT -8
Yeah but there is no way really to 'bake in' outliers. They will just occur. They are accounted for, but they don't really move the needle that much. Variance could play a big role in the AL Central in particular. When all the teams are that mediocre, one or two teams in that division who has a good first half of the season record will end up being a buyer at the deadline. The variance in first half record from mediocre norm for the teams in that division may play a big role in who wins that division. That's why they are outliers. No model is going to be able to predict every scenario involving 30 teams. But that doesn't mean they are worthless and the science behind them is fascinating. The individual player projections is something I look forward to every year. Agreed. |
|
