For clarity, I do think this team is good. But I dont think we got much better in the off season. But more importantly, I think most of the other AL west teams underachieved last year. If they move up to the mean, I expect our battle to the post season this coming year to be a tougher road than it was last year. And last year, we got in by one (1) game. So IMO, we needed at least moderate upgrading to hold serve.
We'll have to agree to disagree there. I'm not the slightest bit impressed by the Rangers, Angels and Mariners. I think 87 wins or so will win this division. Texas and Anaheim overachieved last year.
While I agree that the Astros have to be considered as a favorite for next year... I disagree that we simply judge this team's success and where we need improvement based on that one playoff series (game). As it is, the Royals simply did to us what they did to every other team in the playoffs... epic comebacks based on a stacked lineup that puts the ball in play and doesn't strikeout. It also wasn't "Dead to rights"... that implies zero chance of failure. This team did suffer several bad stretches last year... mostly due to lineup issues or bullpen issues. The starting pitching was the most consistent aspect. I do like both the lineup with a full/healthy year of Springer/Gomez/Correa/upgrade to Carter, and the bullpen will be better with Giles. They do have to watch out for a regression in the starting pitching (from Keuchel all the way down), C/DH/1B/3B still has a chance to be a disappointment, guys who have been injury prone have to prove they can stay healthy, people fear Hinch's managerial issues may get worse (not as big of a concern for me), and this team now will get to see what its like to go into every game with the opposition geared to play against a quality opponent (no more sneaking up on anybody... not that this was a big issue after 80 something games last year).
The series with the Royals is actually inconsequential to me personally when projecting this team. It just made for a lot shorter post to elaborate how good I think this squad will be if healthy. I'm not a big believer in "knowing how to win" when it comes to baseball. If you consistently score more runs than you opponents, the water will finds it's level results wise over the long haul. We had a projected 93 win total last year, and we did that with Correa and Springer missing half the year, and Gomez basically being a non factor last year. Pitching wise I see no reason for regression. Keuchel will likely be a little worse, McCullers is a bit of a wild card. McHugh I think will be a little better, and Fiers/Fister will be better than Fausto, Kazmir and Obie were last year.
Sure, but there are usually multiple factors for when a team doesn't win as many games as their run differential suggested, and its hard to account/correct for all of them. My biggest concern is that the Keuchel expected regression + McCullers possibly being worse/sophomore slump outweighs the possible improvement seen with a full season from Fiers/Fister/Feldman. McHugh is the biggest wild card to me... had periods of not just ineffectiveness, but was just bad... strongly related to whether or not he had confidence in the curveball. If that one pitch goes awry, or isn't at its best, McHugh has very little recourse... it is all set up from that. I'm cautiously optimistic that they'll all be fine (and all be better)... but if I had to bet on which aspect will show the greatest decline between last year and this year, I would bet on starting pitching (if not just because it would be downright amazing/awestruck if Keuchel is able to again repeat his dominance both in terms of production and durability).
My biggest concern is a durability issue with Keuchel. He threw a lot of innings last season and he has mentioned in interviews that he's trying to tailor offseason workouts to provide for the best durability so he can maintain that moving forward, but it seems like there just aren't that many workhorse aces anymore, so I'm kind of nervous. Hopefully Gomez stays healthy all season. I honestly don't have any hope that Springer stays healthy all year. Maybe I'm just jaded but it seems everytime I start to really get excited about him he gets hurt. Fortunately with Marisnick and possibly others from the minors we have other options in the outfield. My hope is that any regression we see in starting pitching is made up for in a rock solid, elite bullpen. Then the majority of our improvement comes from additional offensive output from a full season of Correa (plus any improvement from his rookie year) as well as better 1B production (however that comes about). Possibly an uptick in DH production as well.
Frustration understood... but it may be tempered if you actually look at the nature of the injuries. 2014 - Quad strain/tear - which featured a very very (very) abnormally slow recovery process, in part because the team had zero chances of contending and zero impetus to "rush" him back. Its doubtful he misses that much time with a similar injury in a contending year... nothing to suggest he's a slower healer than most 25 year old athletes. 2015 - HBP, broken hand. Those are two pretty isolated injuries that may never happen to him again. If he had a recurrence of the leg/quad issue last year, I'd be a lot more frustrated. If he was constantly getting dinged up and having to miss 2-3 games every other month due to nagging/chronic injuries (or if he simply needed more days off), I'd be a lot more frustrated.
If Springer played 142 instead of 162 games, I would be OK with that. I would be happier with 10 (or no) games off instead of 20, but the baseball season is long and having days off is part of the game.
love this: <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Is your team set to win now? Does your team *have* to win now? Let <a href="https://twitter.com/mccoveychron">@mccoveychron</a> explain. <a href="https://t.co/CHjv1F3xUt">https://t.co/CHjv1F3xUt</a> <a href="https://t.co/ZfnPKYbjxL">pic.twitter.com/ZfnPKYbjxL</a></p>— SB Nation MLB (@SBNationMLB) <a href="https://twitter.com/SBNationMLB/status/694641723117428736">February 2, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Sure. But the point was that his injuries are more flukeish. More days off wouldn't have prevented the other injuries.
Texas was one of the luckiest teams of the last decade. They spent most of the season with a negative run differential, and ended up +18. By contrast, the Astros were +111.
For them (like all teams of course, but especially them) it comes down to health for several of their key guys. You know they'll score runs, a full season of healthy Hamels and Darvish at the top of the rotation would be huge. I do have big questions about their bullpen though.
While some people do, I dont think you can equate a teams "luck" or their achievement quotient based on a single metric.
The metric he cited doesn't cover all luck. Sequencing "luck" of runs is what MadMax is talking about. Minus teams with elite bullpens, this stat regresses a lot. Astros adding Giles should help with the regression. Health luck is huge, as well.
Yep, will also be interesting if Fielder, Hamilton and Beltre all stay healthy and have solid years. Was surprised how well Fielder bounced back from his injury year in 2014 last year. Beltre also had a great year for a guy on the downslope of his career.
good point, but at this point in their careers, all 3 are such high variability guys on both dimensions (except Beltre health has been good). To say "if they all stay healthy and have solid years" feels like you're multiplying *at best* 50/50 probabilities x 3. i.e. very unlikely
