The 2015 Angels are not a 98 win team.........

[Troll Daddy]

There are a lot of concerns going into next season but that goes for all teams.

Calhoun had a poor second half last season at the lead off spot. I don't think it's a big concern but still a concern.

[Ohtaniland]

You act like Hamilton has been anything but disappointing. If he is a .270 hitter with a .330 OBP and he hits 25 homers, then that is great, but that is what we are "HOPING" for, rather than expecting that. Wilson, I have a lot more faith in that he is better than he was last year.

 

One of the things that Scioscia needs to do is keep his vets fresh. KC had a lot of energy going into the post season so I would love nothing more than to see Pujols, Hamilton and Joyce each get a chance to DH 50+ games. And they need to sit some out.

[AngelsLakersFan]

I was working in Seattle and Portland the last few days so I had a lot of time to listen to Doug Gottlieb and the other local sports radio guys.  They are all 100% convinced that the Mariners will destroy the AL West.  One (not Gottlieb) going as far as saying the separation between them and the Angels will be "the biggest gap between 1st and 2nd place in any division in baseball.."  They'll be good, but the myopia was comical..

 

The Steamer projections have Seattle as markedly better than the Angels right now. 

 

I can't believe that, but it should be cause for some concern.

[Stradling]

One of the things that Scioscia needs to do is keep his vets fresh. KC had a lot of energy going into the post season so I would love nothing more than to see Pujols, Hamilton and Joyce each get a chance to DH 50+ games. And they need to sit some out.

I think this is absolutely going to happen.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

I just read part of an article on ESPN (I couldn't read all of it because I'm not ponying up the cash to be an "Insider", hence no link to the story) that projects the 2015 Angels as an 84-win team.

Edited January 11, 2015 by Vegas Halo Fan

[Ohtaniland]

I just read part of an article on ESPN (I couldn't read all of it because I'm not ponying up the cash to be an "Insider", hence no link to the story) that projects the 2015 Angels as an 84-win team.

 

They also love Derek Jeter.

[Blarg]

I just read part of an article on ESPN (I couldn't read all of it because I'm not ponying up the cash to be an "Insider", hence no link to the story) that projects the 2015 Angels as an 84-win team.

I can say pretty confidently that the Angels are definitely an 84 win team. The only question is how many more wins are the good for in September.

[Oz27]

On that "soft 98 win team" comment, our pythatgorean expectation  based on run differential last year was 96 wins. Teams outperform that by a couple of wins or more all the time (in fact Scioscia-led teams almost always do). So yeah, I find that comment hard to fathom and maintain any argument or implication that we were lucky is just ridiculous.

[Inside Pitch]

We won 27 1-Run games last season so a lot of good things went our way. 

 

It's interesting how early in the season when they struggled in 1 run games people kept yapping about how it was "more of the same", "2013 all over again", etc etc....  Now revisionist history has us having been fortunate to have won 1 run games.  

Just a few items to consider....   The Angels posted the second best run differential in MLB, they didn't just squeak by, they bitch-slapped teams.   They won 27, 1 run games, they also lost 22 of them.  There were 9 MLB teams that had more 1 run wins than the Angels, including three other playoff teams.  The average number of one run wins by the division winners was 27.5 vs, 21.6 losses.  Imagine that....

 

Winning close games is something good teams are often given credit for doing...  If only the Angels could ever catch a break from their own fans...

[Inside Pitch]

Well here's my point....In 2014 we were on the "plus win" side in all Day games, Night games, Grass games, Turf games, 1-Run games and XTRA games. That's a tough act to follow so I'm expecting a few less wins but we will be watching better Angels baseball overall in 2015.

 

 

They were a good team in every possible scenario -- so, that means they were "fortunate"?   If you're just expecting them to not win as many games that's fine, they likely won't given the division stands to be tighter.   But all of the things you've pointed to are signs of their dominance last year and not just a case of them having been "fortunate".

Edited January 11, 2015 by Inside Pitch

[ten ocho recon scout]

One thing about the 1 run games stat, its fun to look at but like any other stat it only tells a partial story. (This goes for any team), how many 1 run games (won or lost) were a blown lead that you barely hold on to, a blown save that you cant make up the run in the bottom of the 9th, blown out on the first inning and fought back and outscored the last 8 innings etc.

All things considered, as much as the playoffs sucked, last year was pretty amazing. Low expectations going in, strad hit the nail on the head with the amount of major things going wrong, etc. For this team to have had the best record, with a shit bullpen the forst half, losing 2 of the starting 5 SPs (when our depth already sucked there) etc and still do that was very impressive.

2 things can happen. We can find out it was all a fluke. Or the bitter taste of october fired these guys up all winter and will come back more hungry because of the scars. Im hoping (and thinking) its the latter.

[Inside Pitch]

The Steamer projections have Seattle as markedly better than the Angels right now. 

 

I can't believe that, but it should be cause for some concern.

 

I can -- Steamer projections like Zips and pretty much every projection system out there sees a lot of volatility when dealing with younger players, the M's have a lot of younger players, they also have a few guys deriving a lot of value from defense which we know can fluctuate rather severely.

 

Mostly, Steamer doesn't have a lot of faith in the Angels pitching staff.   When you look at all the 4.00 ERA's they are predicting, I think the problem is more in the model's lack of information when it comes to recent league wide trends.  Like all projection systems Steamer is based on historical trends...  So it's likely looking at the typical aging curves and performances and some of the outcomes last year likely seem like flukes...   Problem is there has never been a period in MLB history were defensive shifts and pitch information has impacted the game as quickly/severely as we have seen the last 18 months.

 

The Angels made some rather radical changes to how they defended last year and it ultimately showed up in the stats...  Not sure those changes will be taken into account when projecting Steamer.

[ten ocho recon scout]

In terms of defense IP, whats your take on losing howie and conger on how it should effect this season?

[Inside Pitch]

In terms of defense IP, whats your take on losing howie and conger on how it should effect this season?

 

The Conger situation depends on who the ultimate replacement for him is and how he is used...   Could be huge, could be nil.  As far as second base goes, unless Featherston ends up winning the job (who we don't have any real record of defensively), all of the in house options are a pretty significant defensive drop-off from Howie.   I'm a bit concerned about the defense, but there is also reason to believe they may go even deeper with their shifting and saber analysis and be able to offset losing Kendrick's instincts and ability at 2B.  

[Angelsjunky]

I always find it somewhat interesting that most of you have more confidence in unproven prospects with no success at the ML level .,. than you do with proven vets with great past success at the ML level. It's not like thest guys are in their late thirties.

I can't wait to see how next season pans out. My money is on the vets. I'm also excited to see how the prospects develop into ML players.

 

What the hell are you talking about and who the hell are you talking to? Sorry TD, but this just seems like straw man thrashings. It isn't a matter of having "more confidence in unproven prospects" as it is giving young guys with potential that can help the club a chance to do so.

[AngelsLakersFan]

I can -- Steamer projections like Zips and pretty much every projection system out there sees a lot of volatility when dealing with younger players, the M's have a lot of younger players, they also have a few guys deriving a lot of value from defense which we know can fluctuate rather severely.

 

Mostly, Steamer doesn't have a lot of faith in the Angels pitching staff.   When you look at all the 4.00 ERA's they are predicting, I think the problem is more in the model's lack of information when it comes to recent league wide trends.  Like all projection systems Steamer is based on historical trends...  So it's likely looking at the typical aging curves and performances and some of the outcomes last year likely seem like flukes...   Problem is there has never been a period in MLB history were defensive shifts and pitch information has impacted the game as quickly/severely as we have seen the last 18 months.

 

The Angels made some rather radical changes to how they defended last year and it ultimately showed up in the stats...  Not sure those changes will be taken into account when projecting Steamer.

 

I can't really disagree with this, except that every team is operating under similar conditions. I'm not sure it really explains why the Angels are significantly underrated while the M's are significantly overrated. 

[Ohtaniland]

They were a good team in every possible scenario -- so, that means they were "fortunate"?   If you're just expecting them to not win as many games that's fine, they likely won't given the division stands to be tighter.   But all of the things you've pointed to are signs of their dominance last year and not just a case of them having been "fortunate".

 

I never said they were fortunate. I said a lot of good things have to happen to win 98 games in any MLB season. My point was that they're a better team going into this season than they were last season but they don't need to win 98 games to prove it. 

Edited January 11, 2015 by CALZONE

[Inside Pitch]

I never said they were fortunate. I said a lot of good things have to happen to win 98 games in any MLB season. My point was that they're a better team going into this season than they were last season but they don't need to win 98 games to prove it. 

 

No offense, but that's not the vibe your posts gave off given the talk of things having "gone their way".    I've never seen that phrased used in any way other than to imply a team was "fortunate".

[Ohtaniland]

No offense, but that's not the vibe your posts gave off given the talk of things having "gone their way".    I've never seen that phrased used in any way other than to imply a team was "fortunate".

 

It's all good IP. 

I think this thread has produced some good discussion. One thing is sure, we have a very good baseball team.

[Inside Pitch]

I can't really disagree with this, except that every team is operating under similar conditions. I'm not sure it really explains why the Angels are significantly underrated while the M's are significantly overrated. 

 

Right -- every team is playing under the same rules but where the Angels have guys at ages where dropoffs are more common and there is less chance of break-out, the Mariners have guys on the other end of the age spectrum -- those two factors have to be considered together IMO... I should have stressed that fact a little more to make my position a bit more clear . Couple the differences in ages with the changes in how defense is impacting pitching performances and IMO there's some potential for larger variance than in years passed.   

 

To be fair, the Angels have several players at the age where an implosion could happen and it's not likely changes to defensive shifts and the sort can help mask or slow that down.

Edited January 11, 2015 by Inside Pitch

[Inside Pitch]

It's all good IP. 

I think this thread has produced some good discussion. One thing is sure, we have a very good baseball team.

 

Yep, you got the ball rolling and there have been some interesting tangents.

[Docwaukee]

I can -- Steamer projections like Zips and pretty much every projection system out there sees a lot of volatility when dealing with younger players, the M's have a lot of younger players, they also have a few guys deriving a lot of value from defense which we know can fluctuate rather severely.

 

Mostly, Steamer doesn't have a lot of faith in the Angels pitching staff.   When you look at all the 4.00 ERA's they are predicting, I think the problem is more in the model's lack of information when it comes to recent league wide trends.  Like all projection systems Steamer is based on historical trends...  So it's likely looking at the typical aging curves and performances and some of the outcomes last year likely seem like flukes...   Problem is there has never been a period in MLB history were defensive shifts and pitch information has impacted the game as quickly/severely as we have seen the last 18 months.

 

The Angels made some rather radical changes to how they defended last year and it ultimately showed up in the stats...  Not sure those changes will be taken into account when projecting Steamer.

the other thing it doesn't take into account is the phenomena of 'natural selection'.  

 

the projections allocate an average performance over an average amount of innings.   But depth gives you opportunities to do much better than that.  

 

as an example, with our pen depth, a couple of guys will emerge as performing better than their projections, and while a couple guys might perform worse, they won't cancel out equally because the player that is performing better will get the bulk of the playing time.  

 

I think this is very true for the halos pitching staff and at 2b because of the depth that they have created.  

Not every one of the options we have will perform in the middle of the bell curve.  

 

84 wins happens if none of the depth options perform all that well.  

[Ohtaniland]

the other thing it doesn't take into account is the phenomena of 'natural selection'.  

 

the projections allocate an average performance over an average amount of innings.   But depth gives you opportunities to do much better than that.  

 

as an example, with our pen depth, a couple of guys will emerge as performing better than their projections, and while a couple guys might perform worse, they won't cancel out equally because the player that is performing better will get the bulk of the playing time.  

 

I think this is very true for the halos pitching staff and at 2b because of the depth that they have created.  

Not every one of the options we have will perform in the middle of the bell curve.  

 

84 wins happens if none of the depth options perform all that well.  

 

Sometimes no matter what happens you just push the right buttons and everything works. When we were rolling last July and August I think even Scioscia was surprised.

[AngelsLakersFan]

Right -- every team is playing under the same rules but where the Angels have guys at ages where dropoffs are more common and there is less chance of break-out, the Mariners have guys on the other end of the age spectrum -- those two factors have to be considered together IMO... I should have stressed that fact a little more to make my position a bit more clear . Couple the differences in ages with the changes in how defense is impacting pitching performances and IMO there's some potential for larger variance than in years passed.   

 

To be fair, the Angels have several players at the age where an implosion could happen and it's not likely changes to defensive shifts and the sort can help mask or slow that down.

 

I'm simply saying that, yes, the projections see a lot of upside in Seattle's youth, and a lot of potential downside in our teams older veterans - to the point of a several game advantage in their projected standings for 2015 in favor of the M's. I do think the Angels are a significantly better team, but the projections do make me pause for a moment. I don't think the inclusion of defense and upside vs down side in the projections is a flaw, I just disagree with their conclusions. I'm not sure where the flaw is specifically, so I'm hesitant to say the Angels are definitely the better team.

 

It's one thing to say that the projections are wrong because of a flaw, and another to say that the projections are simply including a part of baseball that we fans tend to sweep under the rug. If the later is the real reason the Mariners are projected better then I am concerned.

[AngelsLakersFan]

I should say that I don't think this team will be as strong as last years team. DiPoto is counting on a weaker division IMO. Not to mention that the new wild card system is showing that being the best team in baseball doesn't really payoff.

 

I'm concerned with the defense. Freese is bad, Aybar is past his prime, Green was a butcher, Pujols is old and his replacement Cron is terrible, Iannetta is definitely below average. The outfield is fine though Hamilton didn't look too hot out there last year, and Trout rated out as poor. I do like Calhoun's defense though.