Identifying the worst teams

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

I am reviewing one of SSI's systems and I am interested in thoughts on the 6-8 worst teams. As I see it, they are Fla, Pitts, TB, Sea, KC and perhaps LAD, Balt, Col, Cincy. Let me know what you guys think. Explanations are welcomed.

edpit · Apr 13, 2006

My 7 WORSE teams are:

PIRATES
MARLINS
NATIONALS
DEVIL RAYS
ROYALS
BLUE JAYS
MARINERS

I still think the DODGERS, REDS, and ORIOLES are mediocre, but I can not class them in the above grouping. This, as all things in life, are subject to change. But since the question was posed today, that would be my answer.

EP

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

I think Toronto is pretty good, they upgraded significantly from last year with their FA signings. Wash is an interesting call, could very well be that bad, they certainly have looked it to this point.

HPark1 · Apr 13, 2006

Worst from each division;

Tampa Bay
Kansas City
Texas
Florida
Cincinnati
Arizona

Toronto is waaaaaaaay off base. Pittsburgh and Seattle don't deserve to be in the bottom 5-8 either imo. Cincy in the Central and Texas in the West will have more difficult years.

edpit · Apr 13, 2006

Only thing going to REDS and RANGERS are those bats. Can they get some pitching? I understand the REDS have Arroyo now, but he cant pitch everyday. And the RANGERS have Millwood and Padilla. Both are promising, but if they both lose in one week, a two game slide turns into a four or five game slide. Just my opinion of course.

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

edpit,

I think you are on to something with Washington, they look absolutely horrible. Although NYM is good and they have played them 6 times now.

SSI · Apr 13, 2006

would not count out cincy, texas, toronto.. those are high scoring teams and what you look for -- when laying the (-1.5) runs.

what you need to identify are the lowest scoring BAD teams..

Dr.Pepper · Apr 13, 2006

Dodgers lead baseball in offense in almost every category except homeruns...which changed after 3 more today, but regardless 10 games into the season averaging 7 runs a game? hardly mediocre. their pitching will shape up and the bats will cool off. then we'll see the real LA

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

SSI said:
would not count out cincy, texas, toronto.. those are high scoring teams and what you look for -- when laying the (-1.5) runs.

what you need to identify are the lowest scoring BAD teams..

Agree on Texas and Toronto, especially Tor, they are a good team. Last season the 6 worst results using this system were in the bottom 7 in winning %. Pitts, who was the third worst run scoring team and also in the bottom 7 of winning %, was somehow the second MOST SUCCESSFUL team under this system. Complete anomaly if you ask me. While runs scored is a decent indicator of success, winning % is better.

SSI · Apr 13, 2006

i definately think: KC, Fla, TB, pitt.. should be the first 4 to go......... i would hold off on anything else..... ive got a feeling, you will be able to add a few more teams in a week or so......... at the moment, its a tough call on the others... i see no reason for cincy being on this list yet.. ive got a feeling wash will make the list... also possibly colorado before too much longer, they are historically terrible on the road and we cant count them at home, since we are discussing road teams..

Sekrah · Apr 13, 2006

edpit said:
My 7 WORSE teams are:

PIRATES
MARLINS
NATIONALS
DEVIL RAYS
ROYALS
BLUE JAYS
MARINERS

I still think the DODGERS, REDS, and ORIOLES are mediocre, but I can not class them in the above grouping. This, as all things in life, are subject to change. But since the question was posed today, that would be my answer.

EP

I respect you edpit.. but throwing the Mariners in this list is absolutely unreal. They are 4-5 and haven't had an easy game yet (Angels, Athletics, Indians) They will be a playoff contender!

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

Jays on that list is worse than the M's. The M's were one of the 7 worst last year and did nothing to improve.

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

SSI said:
i definately think: KC, Fla, TB, pitt.. should be the first 4 to go......... i would hold off on anything else..... ive got a feeling, you will be able to add a few more teams in a week or so......... at the moment, its a tough call on the others... i see no reason for cincy being on this list yet.. ive got a feeling wash will make the list... also possibly colorado before too much longer, they are historically terrible on the road and we cant count them at home, since we are discussing road teams..

Tend to agree. I have only those 4 on the avoid list right now, I have reconsidered Seattle and will keep them off, for now. Wash is off this weekend b/c they are at FL. They may be on soon too.

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

SSI said:
would not count out cincy, texas, toronto.. those are high scoring teams and what you look for -- when laying the (-1.5) runs.

what you need to identify are the lowest scoring BAD teams..

Ok, last year

top half of run scoring teams were only +40 units, compared with +.500 teams at +220. Runs ALLOWED and run differential is actually more indicative of success:

<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 161pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="214"> <col style="width: 65pt;" width="86"> <col span="2" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 10.5pt;" height="14"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 10.5pt; width: 65pt;" x:num="18435" height="14" width="86"> $ 18,435.00 </td> <td class="xl24" style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" width="64">Top Half</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 10.5pt;" height="14"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 10.5pt;" x:num="-17964" height="14"> $(17,964.00)</td> <td class="xl24">
</td> <td>Bottom Half</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 10.5pt;" height="14"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 10.5pt;" x:num="-10389" height="14"> $(10,389.00)</td> <td class="xl24">
</td> <td>Worst 7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 10.5pt;" height="14"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 10.5pt;" x:num="-22404" height="14"> $(22,404.00)</td> <td class="xl24">
</td> <td>Negative Differential</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 10.5pt;" height="14"> <td class="xl25" style="height: 10.5pt;" x:num="22875" height="14"> $ 22,875.00 </td> <td>
</td> <td>Postive Differential</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 10.5pt;" height="14"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 10.5pt;" x:num="-8434" height="14"> $ (8,434.00)</td> <td>
</td> <td>Worst 7</td> </tr></tbody> </table>

I still like winning % better b/c the worst 7 in winning percentage accounted for 201 of the 218 lost units of the under .500 teams. I also think it is easier to identify those 6-8 teams by likely winning percentage than it is run differential.

FairWarning · Apr 13, 2006

Diamondbacks could be a bottom-7 team team with that pitching.

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

Yeah, I meant to include them in the maybes as well.

edpit · Apr 13, 2006

I could be wrong, I wish I was never wrong, but I could be wrong with the Mariners. I do agree Sekrah... bad judment on my end.

I have officially moved Mariners off the list.

:toast:

fhmesq44 · Apr 13, 2006

M's are off the list and on thin ice with me. RIght now I have a list of 4 to avoid (TB, KC, Fla and Pitts) with Sea, Wash, Cincy, Col, LAD, Ariz and Balt on the watch list. Wash likely being the first to move to the "avoid" list. I am a Dodger fan, and I think they have no power, no speed, no starters and no bullpen. And they have many injury prone starters.

HPark1 · Apr 13, 2006

fhmesq44 said:
The M's were one of the 7 worst last year and did nothing to improve.

Remember both Beltre and Ichiro had bad years. Plus they did add Carl Everett, Matt Lawton and Japanese catcher Johjima. Pitching wise they'll have phenom Felix Hernandez for the whole season and they added a quality starter like Jarrod Washburn.

I'm thinking 80 wins, give or take a few, should be expected.