Gonelong's 4th annual Season W/L prediction thread ...

[gonelong]

I have been receiving lots of emails and PMs asking me if I was going to post this again this year. So, here it is, back by popular demand (ok, not a single email or PM was sent to me requesting this thread :) ) ...

Gonelong's 4th annual Season W/L prediction thread ...

Note: This is a good chance for all those lurkers out there to get a first post under their belt.

If I may be so bold ... I politely request that everyone hold off on the "If so an so is healthy" or if this/that stuff for this one thread.

Get serious with it this year boys and girls! Lets see the number you'd put out there if you were forced to bet your house on being right. Max range of 5 Ws, and not give or take 5 (a 10 W range).

Gonelong predicts: 78 to 83 Wins
78-82 to 83-79

GL

[Falls City Beer]

79-83

I don't need a range.

[Aronchis]

83-79: People will ask, how the hell did they do that again.

[Edskin]

77-85. To be quite honest, I don't have any more hope this year than I have had the past few years. Happy we spent money, but not happy with who we spent it on.

I'll say our BEST CASE (if everything goes PERFECTLY) would be 86-76-- that would keep us alive in some playoff race most likely. Our worst case is probably 71-91. This looks very much like a slightly below average MLB team to me in 2005.

[kbrake]

86-76

(Edskin-nice quote.....awsome song, dave rocks.)

[RosieRed]

82-80

[Gainesville Red]

82-80. I think this team is just plain better than last year's team. This will be the year that Kearns stays healthy, Griffey will probably go down but Kearns can slide over and Wiley Mo will be inserted. Randa's not great, but he's better than we had. I'm not really optimistic of Ortiz or Claussen, but I think Milton and Wilson will be solid (or solid enough). Most important, (I think) Norton is gone, Riedling is gone, Gabe White is gone. I disagree w/ Edskin that the reds are slightly below average, and will say we are slightly above average. Just above .500.

[Gainesville Red]

sorry rosie, I guess it took me too long to post, so I copied your record.

[RosieRed]

sorry rosie, I guess it took me too long to post, so I copied your record.

Not a problem. I'm happy to share. :)

[CincyRedsFan30]

(89-73)

[macro]

84-78

[macro]

Gonelong predicts: 78 to 83 Wins
79-83 to 84-78

Okay, somethin's not addin' up here...

[M2]

What the heck, I'm feeling optimistic ... 74-88.

[Reds Fanatic]

85-77

[KronoRed]

78-84

[Jaycint]

Mark me down for a nice optimistic 86-76. :)

[marcshoe]

90-72.

The team stays healthy and picks up two frontline starters by June in a trade for Danny Graves and Jason Romano. ;) Also, turns out the star players on the Cards, Cubs and Astros were hyped up on steroids, so the Reds win 80% of their games against them (while having trouble beating the Brewers).

Hey, you people aren't being creative enough with your best case scenarios. If I keep thinking, I can probably get the team up to 100 wins.

[Danny Serafini]

84-78

[DoogMinAmo]

86-76, And I must warn you, I am in fifth place in my NCAA pool, so I have a pretty good chance of almost knowing what I am talking about.

[Cedric]

80-82

[SanDiegoRed]

91-71 You heard it here first

[Unassisted]

81-81

[gonelong]

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonelong
Gonelong predicts: 78 to 83 Wins
79-83 to 84-78

Okay, somethin's not addin' up here...


Ha Ha, nice catch, edited my original post. :)

GL

[DoogMinAmo]

So gl, if the Reds win 78 games and lose 82, do the last two games get cancelled? :p:

[Walkerforpres]

81-81

I like that one. This is the definition of a .500 team. Good enough to contend for a while, not good enough or deep enough to seal the deal.
I think this team is good enough to at least make the annual June swoon last into the middle or late July this time around.

[cincinnati chili]

76-86, and I'd love to be wrong.

[CbusRed]

92-70

[Ron Madden]

I'll try 89-73. :)

[camisadelgolf]

82-80 to 87-75

[Wheelhouse]

93-69

[westofyou]

78-84

[WVRedsFan]

88-74 - Wild Card.

This team IMHO is loads better than last year. We went into last year with Jimmie Haynes as our No. 1 starter for starts. What a difference. This time around we have Milton, Ortiz, Wilson, Harang, and Claussen or Hudson. Much better. We have a full time third baseman who is not a superstar, bu,t consistent. We have an outfield that is the envy of everyone.

It might all blow up (notice no mention of "Gravy" here), but it looks good for opening day.

[CincyRedsFan30]

Good points WV.

I could be wrong, but I think Joe Randa is going to be one player that is going to surprise many. I know he is getting older and he has never been a dominating player, but I think he is going to step things up this year.

[MWM]

72-90

Just a hunch, but I expect the pitching to be not much better than last year and I don't know that we'll get repeat performancesfrom the likes of Freel and Wily Mo. Plus, they've played on the good side of Pythageras for a couple of years now, so the law of averages makes me believe they'll be on the other side of it this year. I expect a slightly better run differential than last year, but a worse record. Excuse me while I get fitted for a flack jacket. I have a feeling I'm going to need it.

[CincyRedsFan30]

You don't need the jacket when it comes to me, although I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the situation.

[BoydsOfSummer]

What the heck, I'm feeling optimistic ... 74-88.

Me too.....80-82

[Cedric]

No need for a flak jacket. I've never seen someone get on another about an estimate on a thread like this.

[SteelSD]

77-85

10 game Pythag Win gain over last season.

[SirFelixCat]

All the SABR guys are hedging towards a sub - .500 team...that should tell me something;)

87-75


And MWM, nothing wrong with what you said there bro. To each their own. Though I would like to point out, that, while you can never expect Jr. to stay healthy, Ears was out most of the season, and at least we have a ML 3B ;)

[pedro]

79-83

[SteelSD]

All the SABR guys are hedging towards a sub - .500 team...that should tell me something;)

And the grand irony is that we're all projecting improvement. ;)

[jhiller21]

83-79

Winning season would be nice...

[Edskin]

What the heck, I'm feeling optimistic ... 74-88.

M2-- I love it :)

You know, the grass is greening, the birds are chirping, hope springs eternal. And yet, Lindner and co. still garner these kinds of quotes. Very funny though!

[Ravenlord]

75-87

[TeamCasey]

84-78

[cumberlandreds]

85-77 Will be wild card contention until the end but fall short.

[RFS62]

84-78

[Peyton's Place]

I will go on record for 84-78. A little more excitement in Cincy through the entire summer as opposed to last year that ended after Jr's pursuit of 500 and the club's fall from first place in June.

[traderumor]

83-79

Pythagorean be damned!

[Red Thunder]

83-79

is my prediction as well.

[smith288]

88-73 (one game will be cancelled for weather or some other reason) Mecca-lekka high, mecca highny ho...

[Strikes Out Looking]

93-69, win the Central. Two reasons 1. Other teams (St. Louis, Chicago, and Houston) are all worse than last year, and the Reds pitching is better than last year. 2. In contention in July, Reds make deals for players to put them over the top.

[Ravenlord]

Pythagorean be damned!
his name is Pythagrius. ;)

[Roy Tucker]

They'll get lucky and go 91-71.

Yes, yes, I know they've been lucky last year to get where they were, but I'm talkin' 1999 kind of lucky.

We're due. You can etch it in stone.

[GAC]

89-73. They would have gotten #90 on the last day of the season and made the post-season via the WC; but....


NOBODY SCORES ON DANNY GRAVES!


:allovrjr: :allovrjr: :allovrjr: :allovrjr: :allovrjr:

[Crosley68]

87-75

[foltza]

84-78

[Spring~Fields]

89-94 wins, Kearns and Dunn takes us to the promise land Brooks And Dunn entertain us along the way in the meantime.

[lollipopcurve]

81-81

As is traditional, the team will catch fire over the last couple of series.

I just don't think the pitching is there to contend.

[NC Reds]

86-76. This lineup will score runs when healthy and blow fewer leads (in part because of the increased run production). Also, the NL Central is comparatively weaker than in the recent past.

[traderumor]

his name is Pythagrius. ;)
I was referring to the formula, not the person :p:

Also, Pythagrius (like nucular, often pronounced Pythaguhrus) would be in high rotation to have his name associated considering the formula is this


What is pythagorean winning percentage?


(Runs Scored)^1.83
---------------------------------------------------------
(Runs Scored)^1.83 + (Runs Allowed)^1.83

The traditional formula uses an exponent of two, but this has proven to be a little more accurate.

[chris Napier]

102-60

[LvJ]

86-76

[Puffy]

80-82

[zombie-a-go-go]

83-79

[Joseph]

85-90 wins.

85-77 to 90-72

[seven and chang]

77-85

10 game Pythag Win gain over last season.


Oh Pyth, it's just a theory. Reds grab Tim Redding on waivers at the end of spring training. The light finally goes on in his head. Cincinnati laughs all the way to the bank depositing a 92-70 season and collecting a receipt for one brand spanking new 2005 Central division title.

[reds1869]

85-77

[redsfan30]

85-77

[creek14]

83 - 79, even though I am less optimistic after watching the pitching at ST.

[M2]

M2-- I love it :)

You know, the grass is greening, the birds are chirping, hope springs eternal. And yet, Lindner and co. still garner these kinds of quotes. Very funny though!

I was thinking 68-94 for most of the winter, but I got all spring fevery the past few days and went with 74-88. Honestly, I'm feeling a little light-headed from the experience.

[westofyou]

I was thinking 68-94 for most of the winter, but I got all spring fevery the past few days and went with 74-88. Honestly, I'm feeling a little light-headed from the experience.

Big offense this spring and questions from other NL Central teams swing a few W's our way IMO.

[DoogMinAmo]

I was referring to the formula, not the person :p:

Also, Pythagrius (like nucular, often pronounced Pythaguhrus) would be in high rotation to have his name associated considering the formula is this

And to think I always thought it was spelled Pythagoras. ;)

[wheels]

161-1

[DoogMinAmo]

Out of sincere curiosity, are those determining their record prediction on Pythag expecting the Reds to perform at, below or above like they did last year. It is one thing to say Pythag predicts about a 76-86 record, another thing to say that Pythag is not precise, there IS a margin of error, and the Reds have outperformed it in the past... precedents out the wazoo!

[Puffy]

161-1

I got $50 that says the one loss is to Oswalt ;)

[KronoRed]

Are you kidding?

It'll be to Jimmy Anderson

[CincyRedsFan30]

Are you kidding?

It'll be to Jimmy Anderson


Well, we know it will be to a soft-tossing LHP. ;)

[paintmered]

Opposing teams will figure out that having lefties pitch underhand is the key to success against the reds.

I really wish I could see the rose color. I really do. But....

76-86

The reds will be leading the central at the end of May, 12 games over .500........but will tank as soon as the humidity hits in June.

[SteelSD]

Out of sincere curiosity, are those determining their record prediction on Pythag expecting the Reds to perform at, below or above like they did last year. It is one thing to say Pythag predicts about a 76-86 record, another thing to say that Pythag is not precise, there IS a margin of error, and the Reds have outperformed it in the past... precedents out the wazoo!

At.

Beating the house as many times as the Reds have the past three years (3, 6, 9 games above) is great. But the house ain't gonna lose every hand.

[Cedric]

Steel- Serious question because I'm not fully aware of the Pythag theory. Is it possible that the structure of the Reds ballclub makes us better suited to beat the prediction? Like do offensive clubs that score more runs have a bigger error size? I'm trying to make this question sound clear, I hope it is.

[bleedsred]

85-77...8 games over .500 and no playoffs.

[Johnny Footstool]

Steel- Serious question because I'm not fully aware of the Pythag theory. Is it possible that the structure of the Reds ballclub makes us better suited to beat the prediction? Like do offensive clubs that score more runs have a bigger error size? I'm trying to make this question sound clear, I hope it is.

I've heard that a strong back-end of the bullpen can help a team beat Pythagorian projections. Logically, it seems to make sense -- your SPs and swingmen can get bombed in blowout losses that decimate your run differential, but your setup men and closers can earn close wins.

Unfortunately, I've never seen any evidence to prove or disprove that theory.

BTW - my prediction is 81-81. 10 games over .500 through May, then the June Swoon hits as teams start seeing Wilson, Ortiz, and Harang for the second or third time.

[MWM]

What do win for predeicing the worst record? :)

[paintmered]

What do win for predeicing the worst record? :)


Pessimist of the year

:clap: :jump: :clap:

[traderumor]

What do win for predeicing the worst record? :)
The Courage Award? :)

The Bravest Realist Award? :)

[westofyou]

What do win for predeicing the worst record? :)

A dictionary. ;)

[traderumor]

Don't worry, MWM, just like the Olympics, we throw out the highest and lowest score...

which brings me to another potential award...The Russian Judge Award ;)

[traderumor]

102-60

While we're handing out awards for the predictions, I give this one the "When Harry met Sally" Award, as in "I'll have some of what she's having..." :)

[traderumor]

Oh Pyth, it's just a theory. Reds grab Tim Redding on waivers at the end of spring training. The light finally goes on in his head. Cincinnati laughs all the way to the bank depositing a 92-70 season and collecting a receipt for one brand spanking new 2005 Central division title.

And the "Shattered Dreams on my Honeymoon" Award for the first prediction to go down ;)
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32862

[SteelSD]

Steel- Serious question because I'm not fully aware of the Pythag theory. Is it possible that the structure of the Reds ballclub makes us better suited to beat the prediction? Like do offensive clubs that score more runs have a bigger error size? I'm trying to make this question sound clear, I hope it is.

Wish I could give you a real clear answer on that, Ced. But I can't. As Johnny mentioned, there's only theory. When you take a look at the top RS teams from last season, you get this:

Team (RS): +/- Wins v Pythag

Boston (949 RS): +2 Wins
NY Yankees (897 RS): +12 Wins
Chicago White Sox (865 RS): -1 Win
Texas Rangers (860 RS): +2 Wins
Cleveland Indians (858 RS): -1 Win
St. Louis Cardinals (855 RS): +5 Wins
San Francisco Giants (850 RS): +3 Wins
Baltimore Orioles (842 RS): -4 Wins
Philadelphia Phillies (840 RS): +/- 0 Wins
Anaheim Angels (836 RS): +1 Win

The only thing that sticks out there like a truly sore thumb is the +12 Wins posted by the Yankees. The Cards won 5 more than Pythag says they should have, but that's not an extreme scenario.

So why did the Yankees win so many more games than they "should have"? Was it because of a great offense? Doesn't seem to be. Was the pen that good in "locking down" victories? Other that Rivera, not at all. The pen was a huge issue all season long (and if it were purely a "closer" thing, then no way the Reds get +9 Wins via Danny Graves).

Balanced power throughout the lineup? Cubs had a very balanced power lineup as well but finished five games UNDER their projection.

So what happened? Dunno. Can't put a finger on it...except...maybe...

One Run Games:

NY Yankees: 24-16 (.600 Win %)
Cincinnati Reds: 25-20 (.556 Win %)
St. Louis Cardinals: 29-20 (.592 Win %)

Maybe? Eh, but then you find the White Sox playing 28-18 (.609 Win %) ball in one-Run games and it blows that theory to smithereens as well. And even if it held, we'd still need to find an attributable consistent cause for those high close-game Win percentages.

Without any attributable cause that's consistent from team-to-team, simple chance is about all we have left.

[Chip R]

I'll go with 81-81.

[Red Leader]

I'm going with 82-80. :randa:

[Ravenlord]

Is it possible that the structure of the Reds ballclub makes us better suited to beat the prediction?that's where i think team chemistry comes into play. i think if you take the difference between actual and Pythag records, you get an approximate of how well the team meshes togehter...i think it has to be 3 or better in either direction to apply thought.

[redsfanmia]

90-72 and Joe Randa makes the all-star team.

[MWM]

that's where i think team chemistry comes into play. i think if you take the difference between actual and Pythag records, you get an approximate of how well the team meshes togehter...i think it has to be 3 or better in either direction to apply thought.

I think it would have to more than 3, IMO. Unless a team consistently outperforms it's pythag, or significantly outperforms it in one season (i.e. 2004 Yanks), I think you can pretty much attribute it to a random occurrence over 162 games.

[deltachi8]

72-90. Not enough pitching, not nearly enough pitching.

[Redsfaithful]

83-79

[Blimpie]

88-74 :lindner:

[butlerbulldogs]

90 Wins
72 Losses

Dunn 52 HRs
Griffey 34 HRs
Kearns 26 HR, .310
Wily Mo 30 HR

Casey .304
Jimenez .270
Freel 32 SBS

Milton 16W
Wilson 10W
Ortiz 12w

Graves 48 SV

[Red Leader]

Graves 48 SV

If Graves gets 48 saves this year, I'll get a portrait of him tattoed on my back that says "dANNy rAwKs, gO rEDS" under it, mullett and all. :MandJ:

[Candy Cummings]

78-84.

[PickOff]

88 wins

milton 14
ortiz 13
harang 12
wilson 12
claussen/hancock/hudson 15
webber 3
weathers 4
merker 5
graves 2
wagner 4
coffey 1
(others) 3

[membengal]

84-78. A step in the right direction again.

[DoogMinAmo]

Perhaps Steel it has more to do with blowout wins/losses in addition to one run wins to distort the run differential. (Or even better, one run wins with extra emphasis on those won in last at bat. Walk off wins are the sign of a team who has to scrap to win, but doesn't really "deserve" the win. I know statistically it can not directly affect Pecota, it still might be an interesting corollary.)

[SteelSD]

Perhaps Steel it has more to do with blowout wins/losses in addition to one run wins to distort the run differential. (Or even better, one run wins with extra emphasis on those won in last at bat. Walk off wins are the sign of a team who has to scrap to win, but doesn't really "deserve" the win. I know statistically it can not directly affect Pecota, it still might be an interesting corollary.)

Dunno, man. If we think it has anything to do with a combination of one-run and blowout Win %, we might be wrong as well...

2004 Reds: 25-20 W/L One-Run, 11-35 W/L "Blowout"
2004 Yankees: 24-16 W/L One-Run, 27-28 W/L "Blowout"

BTW, I still refuse to believe that losing by five Runs is a true "Blowout" scenario, but that's what baseballreference.com uses to define it so that's what we get.

The "Blowout" record is significantly different. The Reds were horrid in games decided by 5 or more Runs but the Yankees were a virtual 50/50 proposition. That's not enough to "tilt" the Run Differential against the Yanks unless they were losing by incredible amounts (15+ Runs) when they were on the losing end of those "Blowout" losses. But they lost only two games by more than 9 Runs (11 and 22 <ouchie>). And they were just as likely to knock the crud out of the opponent as they were to lose by 9 or less.

So...dunno.

[Raisor]

I haven't looked at anyone else's predictions so as to not be influeneced.

75-87

Pitching just isn't there.

[jmcclain19]

I'll say 77-85, and it will be a monster mountain of bad pitching and injuries to climb over to reach that plateau.

[Reds Nd2]

76 to 80 Wins

[RedFanAlways1966]

72-90

Hope I'm wrong!

[WebScorpion]

I guess this is the post Spring Training predicition, because we already did one of these in February. First 2005 prediciton thread (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31674&page=1&pp=30&highlight=prediction)
Anyway, I got the seer out to the park again and this time she tossed some bones down on home plate and read them. She's sticking with the 92-70 prediction with a Wild Card playoff spot.
REDZ RAWK!!
http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/constrector/rock.gif

[Tommyjohn25]

86-76.

[gonelong]

I guess this is the post Spring Training predicition, because we already did one of these in February. First 2005 prediciton thread (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31674&page=1&pp=30&highlight=prediction)


Bah! There can be only one!

I plan to aggregate the predictions in this thread with the predictions from the last 3 years and run a few calculations on them and post the results. IIRC, alloverjr has been spot on all three seasons.

GL

[StillFunkyB]

90 wins if everyone stays relatively healthy.

76 wins if players are spending time with Doc Hollywood.

[tbball10]

91-71

[IslandRed]

I'm less optimistic than I was in the earlier thread, not sure why... 79-83.

[alloverjr]

75 - 87

And this is only Milton's first year.

[paintmered]

If Graves gets 48 saves this year, I'll get a portrait of him tattoed on my back that says "dANNy rAwKs, gO rEDS" under it, mullett and all. :MandJ:


You wrote it. We can make you live up to it :mhcky21:

SERPs Unite!!


;)

[westofyou]

Hey, can we get a sticky on this until OD?

PECOTA on the Reds

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=3877

Reds 76 86 .472 789 836

[Puffy]

90-72 and Joe Randa makes the all-star team.

If the Reds win 90 games AND Joe Randa makes the all-star team I will get a giant tattoo on my back with Danny Graves picture that says "Nobody Scores on Danny Graves" - - mullet and all.

[D-Man]

82-79 (one of the games with the Phillies will be called off, hence the 161 game season).

In response to Cedric's question, I believe there is something to a wider standard deviation in runs scored/runs allowed that drives teams to under- or over-perform their Pythagorean runs in unusual ways. As for the characteristics that we can ascribe to a high standard deviation team, I offer: a team that hits (or gives up) an unusual number of home runs. I haven't tested the hypothesis, but the 2004 Yanks/Reds both fit the model: both had unusually high HR rates (Yanks hit 242 HRs, Reds surrendered 236). HRs lead to a higher standard deviation of runs scored per inning, and hence, lumpy scoring patterns from one game to the next. Lumpy scoring patterns of course lead to wider-than-normal run differentials throughout a 162-game season.

I recall that Bill James has studied the 1-run ballgame phenomenon, and he suggests the bullpen is the #1 factor in a team's success in 1-run games. As for the bullpen issue, I propose that a given team's spread in bullpen quality (from the #1 to #6 slot in the bullpen) may also affect the Pythagorean run differential. In other words, you can materially affect your team's chances of winning by having your best pitcher pitch in the closest games. This is the Scott Williamson/Josias Manzanillo bullpen quagmire, circa 2003. Or the story of the Reds 2004 bullpen, where the tail end of the bullpen was awful.

Over the long haul, the Pythagorean Formula shows that there is an incredibly strong relationship between runs scored and the events that create runs (hits, SBs, walks, HRs). Nevertheless, runs and Pythagorean runs don't always even out every season for every club, and I believe there are structural reasons why this occurs.

[OnBaseMachine]

80-82, and I hope I'm wrong.

[westofyou]

Can a Mod sticky this until OD?

[OSURedLeg]

84 - 78; we'll fall short of the wildcard by 4 or 5 games

[pedro]

Baseball Prospectus predicts the Reds will be 81-81

848 runs scored 854 run given up.

[paintmered]

Can a Mod sticky this until OD?


As you wish...

[TRF]

119-43

hey a guy can dream right?

[Boss-Hog]

76-86

[Red Hot Reds]

88 up, 74 down

[Smallball]

Virgin post...82-80.

[VI_RedsFan]

88-74

[creek14]

Virgin post...82-80.
Welcome to the board. And your user name totally rawks. :thumbup: No matter what your co-workers might say. ;)

[top6]

78-84

[paintmered]

Welcome to the board. And your user name totally rawks. :thumbup: No matter what your co-workers might say. ;)


Greetings to a fellow warrior :)

This co-worker thinks your name is pretty cool :beerme:

[reds44]

84-78

[4256 Hits]

It pains me to say but I see a 69 and 93 season.

[NDReds]

82-80

[oregonred]

81-81

[RedsBaron]

90-72. Where's the fun in predicting a losing season?

[alex trevino]

everyone stays healthy for the most part = 85-77 a very good year


same ol same ol injuries = 77-85

My guess is somewhere in between... I'll go with 82-80

[Appalachian Red]

85 - 77

Better pitching and hopefully better health for our everyday players. I expect to stay in the postseason chase much longer this year but don't think we'll make it. At least we're tied for first today!

[Petitt33]

81-81

[red-in-la]

102-60

[RFS62]

102-60

Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.

Mayor: What do you mean, "biblical?"

Dr. Raymond Stantz: What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor, real wrath-of-God type stuff. Fire and brimstone coming down from the sky. Rivers and seas boiling.

Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness. Earthquakes, volcanoes...

Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave.

Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria.