ESPN Insider: Dis-Astros in for rough 2011 campaign

Problem with projections is that all it takes to turn it into crap is Mat Latos becoming a Cy-Young candidate, Joey Votto turning into an MVP or have of your starting lineup go on the DL for long periods of time.

He is using data collected assuming semi-regular conditions, problem is, how often is anything regular in baseball. What if Wallace explodes and turns into a bonafide middle of the order guy? His one breakout year effects EVERYONE in the lineup, CJ gets more pitches to hit, CLee has protection and Bourn scores more runs. What if Wandy is good for two halves instead of just one and Myers turns into Curt Schilling, we go from having no #1s to have two. Is it that far fetched to think Wallace and Wandy can do that? If they do, then this projection won't be worth the paper it was written on.

 

That's why they are called projections.

 

Sure - we can all go find PECOTA stats. However, given the responses here, I suspect not a single person actually did that. ESPN reports for a wide audience - not just stats geeks. I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't know where to find all that stuff and appreciate a simple summary.

 

To be clear, I'm not defending the content of the article. All I'm saying is that it's a statistical projection. It's not meant to be anything more than that. People seem to be taking it as a definitive expectation of what the Astros will be, and therefore somehow taking offense at it. People are setting up a strawman just to tear it down.

 

A simple summary, sure. A poorly-written, drivel-laden "summary" in which I can't tell whether the writer has completed puberty, not so much.

 

Believe...

 

How do they come up with those estimates for Bourn? Everything else is at the very least believable. To think Bourn would become substantially worse in his prime seems very off.

 

I feel like Major's the only person here talking with his brain. Look, as fans we can be as optimistic as we want. But no reason why to discredit someone who has a pessimistic point of view. IMO, there's more of a chance that everything goes wrong than there is than half the things go right. I realize we have some potential, but the likelihood of them succeeding even individually isn't really that high.

Our minor league system at the upper levels is absolute crap, and really has no chance to offer surprise help. So our offense will most likely suck even if some guy(like Johnson last year) will likely impress. But overall, we will be the team opposing pitchers look to to make their ERAs look better.

 

Predictions are what they are......which is just pure speculation/guessing. Thus consequently why pre-season predictions are almost always wrong when reflecting at seasons end.

I honestly didn't even read this article more than once and I hardly even paid much attention the first time I did read it.

Sports are unpredictable. I don't need some ESPN "analyst" trying to rag down my team before the season even starts.

This guy just picked a team that shipped its stars off and has a lame farm system and decided to "predict" that we would be bad. Wow what a surprise prediction..........

Now this guy looks good if we do suck. Which unfortunately is probably true because there is a better chance we win 70 games than 100.

Oh and every year the Astros are picked to lose a specific number of games. And in recent years we have gone over that number by a large margin at times.

Just check out this.............

http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2010/1...os-record-is-it-overperformance-and-if-so-why

Go Astros!