Diamondbacks 2011 Preview: How Many Wins For Arizona?
by Jim McLennan on Mar 31, 2011 8:30 PM EDT
in Diamondbacks Features
Email
Print2010 Record: 65-97 (5th)
2010 OPS+ 95 (6th)
2010 ERA+ 89 (14th)
Key departures: Adam Laroche (1.2 WAR), Mark Reynolds (0.8), Rodrigo Lopez (-0.7), Chad Qualls (-2.5)
Key arrivals: Russell Branyan (2.5 WAR), J.J. Putz (1.5) Armando Galarraga (0.9), Melvin Mora (0.2), Zach Duke (-0.6), Xavier Nady (-1.1)
2011 Projections: See below
Since leading the league and taking the NL West with 90 victories in 2007, the Arizona Diamondbacks have seen their win totals decline steadily, to 82, 70 and, last year, a hugely disappointing 65 wins. With wholesale changes to many aspects of the team, it's clear that a rebuilding process has begun in the desert. But what effect will it have on this season's performance?
Offense.
This wasn't particularly the problem for the Diamondbacks in 2010, but the departure or Reynolds and LaRoche - while no doubt cutting back on the strikeouts - has also taken 57 HR and 185 RBI. Will replacement Melvin Mora and Juan Miranda be up to replacing that? It would take someone really optimistic to think so. Instead, the team will hope to make up the difference in other areas. Justin Upton reaching his potential, Miguel Montero playing for a full season, and left-field not being a gurgling vortex of suck would probably be top of the list there, though your mileage may vary as to how likely these scenarios are to occur.
We'll also need Kelly Johnson and Chris Young to continue their good production from last season, or something like it, and Stephen Drew to get healthy and remain quietly productive, in a way only Stephen Drew can do. [He's remarkably invisible, given that only Ramirez, Rollins and Troy-Boy have driven in more runs as an NL short-stop since the start of 2007]. I'm inclined to think there'll be a small step back in total offense from the team, but getting a few more hits would help, as our .250 batting average last year was only 11th in the league.
Starting Pitching
With Ian Kennedy the only survivor of the rotation which opened 2010, it's certainly a radically-different look to the Diamondbacks' starters. Kennedy and Daniel Hudson should be solid enough at the front, but the further back you go, the more questions arise. Can Joe Saunders overcome a really horrible spring? Will Barry Enright be able to keep the ball in the park and sustain his early success? Does Armando Galarraga have a perfect game in him? And is Zach Duke capable of living up to his FIP, rather than his ERA?
The good news is that the team has some depth, so if there are issues - be they injury or ineffectiveness - than we hopefully won't need to be scraping the barrel for the likes of Dontrelle Willis. I think most of these pitchers at the back end are "serviceable" rather than spectacular, so we'll generally rely on scoring more runs than the opposition to win games - rather than conceding less. As long as they keep up in games, I;m simply looking to see what our young pitchers can do: the numbers returned by Saunders are probably not of enormous importance, except as far as his trade value is concerned.
Relievers
More wholesale change here, as noted yesterday, and I don't think that's a bad thing. This is a team which, last year, went 6-18 in games which were tied after seven, so simply getting back to even there would be a significant improvement. It largely hangs on J.J.Putz being healthy and pitching effectively in the ninth. That would give us a solid foundation, and I'm fairly optimistic that David Hernandez will be a solid set-up man, and we can then build things from there. But I think I'll be treating the bullpen this season like a Michael Cera movie: I'm going in, expecting the worst, and will be pleasantly surprised if it's only mediocre rather than sucking entirely.
Other projections
- CAIRO: 70-92
- Baseball Prospectus: 76-86
- Sports Illustrated: 71-91
- Accuscore: 75-87
- Yahoo! gurus: 70-92 (average)
Summary
I am not expecting the Diamondbacks to contend this year. Sure, if they do, that'll be great, but my expectations are a lot more subdued. I simply want to see the team heading in the right direction, so would be looking for 70 wins as a bare minimum. Any more than 75 would be an excellent result, and that's a range reflected in the other projections, which almost all have the Diamondbacks in the lower seventies. If forced to pick a number, I think I'd go for 72-90 as Arizona's record at the end of the year.
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I want to inquire
About the controlled substances possessed by anyone saying “81 or more”
Bad doormat! No stock options!
Their called fans, not everyone on this site is cynical and WAR obsessed .
by txzona on Mar 31, 2011 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I've had my optimism beaten out of me
By back-to-back years where we hoped we’d contend, and ended up in last, a long way back. Less cynicism than post-traumatic stress disorder….
"While Mrs. SnakePit watched one of the most highly acclaimed films of the year, I sat through a badly made schlock fest with absolutely no redeeming value. And it was awesome."
by Jim McLennan on Mar 31, 2011 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
What Jim said
There is something to be said about being a fan and being realistic. Buying a lottery ticket and deciding you are going to win the 2.5 kerchillion dollars is fine but trying to put that ticket in the bank will get you nowhere.
When they're good they're very very good, but most of the time they're just awful.
This metaphor worked so much better in my head
I’m tiiiiired.
What I meant was putting in the bank BEFORE the lottery.
When they're good they're very very good, but most of the time they're just awful.
+1
La vida no se ha hecho para comprenderla, sino para vivirla.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Mar 31, 2011 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah,
they need to share.
Days until Aug. 18: 140
by Reynolds rapper on Apr 1, 2011 1:42 AM EDT up reply actions
i have them winning 74
question though. what do the numbers next to our ops+ and era+ mean? is that national league ranking or what? i get the first one as our ranking in the division.
Join the Army, meet interesting people, kill them.
Yep, NL ranking
"While Mrs. SnakePit watched one of the most highly acclaimed films of the year, I sat through a badly made schlock fest with absolutely no redeeming value. And it was awesome."
by Jim McLennan on Mar 31, 2011 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions
64 wins
have tried the overly optimistic approach so might as well go the overly pessimistic route..
La vida no se ha hecho para comprenderla, sino para vivirla.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Mar 31, 2011 9:50 PM EDT reply actions
At least 70 wins
that’s all I ask…good news is after today we won’t be in last place! Albeit it’ll probably only last for a day or two so I’ll be enjoying it while I can lol personally I’d love nothing more than to see “Los Angeles” at the bottom of the NL West
What ? No 90 Win Option ?
You guys are SO negative !!
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
by shoewizard on Mar 31, 2011 10:41 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
keith law
has us at 68-94, if that means anything…
sounds about right to me.
"Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic." Robert S. Wieder
I seem to remember
this very question last year…
Some thought I was hating for saying 70
They went 5 under that.
What’s keeping them from repeating 65?
I hope they get 65 this year
Rebuilding year indeed! God help this blowpen.
i voted 75
i think we got unlucky next year, and natural regression to the mean will improve there
and i think people really underestimate just how much better our bullpen has gotten
er...
i recently became capable of predicting the future…??
“last year”
by blue bulldog on Mar 31, 2011 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought PECOTA
had them at 71 and BP (which I thought used PECOTA) has them at 76. Help?
Vegas has them at 72.
Days until Aug. 18: 140
by Reynolds rapper on Apr 1, 2011 12:14 AM EDT reply actions
I think we're lucky
that MLB isn’t like the EPL so there’s no chance that this team will be sent down to AAA.
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
I'm going for 75-77 Wins
I posted my player projections over at http://dbacksvenom.com, and came up with around 750 Runs Scored for the offense, and about 780 Runs Allowed, which would be around 77 Wins. I was probably a little optimistic about the pitching, but I do think this team is much better than a 100-Loss team.
Interesting tidbit from SI
The NL West is easily the most competitive division in baseball:
1) Over the past 5 years, 4 different teams have finished 1st, and the 5th – the Rockies – went to the World Series as the NL Wild Card entry in 2007. No other division has had more than 3 winners in the past 9 years.
2) Since ’06 the NL West division winner has won by an average of 1.5 games, 4 games less than the average of the other five divisions.
I personally don't care one bit
about predictions and Vegas and Baseball Prospectus. The Padres were supposed to be awfully horrific last year, and look what happened. And it’s pretty idiotic to go into a season “rooting” for the team and saying “yeah, they are gonna suck”.
This is why I despise sabermetrics. The so-called “advanced statistics” turn everyone into mindless zombies that keep mumbling “not expected to be a contender, not expected to be a contender, not expected to be a contender”. WAR, wOBA, and ERA+ are only good for fantasy drafts, but people here are turning the stats into absolute truth. Just look at Austin Jackson – all of you who mentioned him (I remember Jim in particular) kept saying that there is no way he can maintain a .375 BABIP throughout the season. Now look at 2010: the kid has a .396 BABIP in 675 ABs. You’re gonna say – “but he will most definitely regress in 2011, absolutely positively so, no doubt about it, end of discussion”. We shall see, just like with all other stats and player performances. Please, for once in your life, throw away your spreadsheets, delete Baseball-Reference and Fangraphs from your bookmarks, and go lose your voice at BankOne Ballpark (or whatever they call it these days) without concerning yourself with predictions and prognoses.
/end rant :-D
Bring back the Baltimore Chop!
by dima1109 on Apr 1, 2011 1:58 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
It's possible to do both you know
Ask anyone that has ever been to a game with me. Nobody drinks more beer or yells louder than I do. (The two can be somewhat connected)
Speaking of Mindless…..I guess I could become a mindless homer that ignores all evidence to the contrary of my hearts desire. Kind of like the guy in the phone commercial….“So you’re saying there IS a chance”…….
And yes, Austin Jackson’s BABIP WILL regress this year. ;)
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
by shoewizard on Apr 1, 2011 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
people who actually read and try to understand sabermetrics are not mindless zombies
they are simply trying to find a way to better understand a game. in that sense, it’s simply another tool, just like looking through a scouting lens.
no true sabermetrician, or anyone in general who believes in rational choice decision making or economics, would ever say something along the lines of “stats are an absolute truth”. including the people on this site. fundamentally, i venture to say that sabermetricians (even though i wouldn’t dare call myself one) believe that the world consists of a set of probabilistic events. for instance, in a serious discussion, they wouldn’t say “the Dbacks aren’t going to win the NL West” but could say “the Dbacks have around a 10% chance at winning the NL West” (note that as there are five teams in the NL West, if all teams were created equal then the Dbacks would have a 20% chance at winning).
i don’t really see where the idiocy lies when it comes to “rooting” for your team and also understanding that they have a low likelihood at winning. some people like to learn more and become educated about topics that interest them. other people prefer to remain in ignorance. there’s nothing wrong with either approach as long as you know what the ramifications are (i personally choose to remain in ignorance about the healthiness of McDonalds fast food, and am willing to accept that my lifestyle will be rather unhealthier than it could be). in this case, if you choose to completely block out sabermetrics, then the way you think about baseball is likely to be more inaccurate than otherwise. if you are okay with that, then you should stay away from sabermetrics, since getting a better understanding of baseball through sabermetrics is probably not going to increase your overall appreciation of the sport. however, some people just aren’t okay with that, and they don’t feel comfortable not spending time and energy exploring more about baseball.
finally, i think either view has little impact on the way fans appreciate their team. at the end of the day, i really despise the fact that Xavier Nady is on our roster. but if he hits a walk-off grand slam i’ll be cheering as loud as any Dbacks fan. unless i’m at work. then i’ll have to wait a bit to cheer.
by blue bulldog on Apr 1, 2011 3:13 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
"Remain in ignorance"?
So you’re saying that if I enter the season overly optimistic, I’m being ignorant? Am I not allowed to hope?
by Skii on Apr 1, 2011 3:33 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
the game has been around over a 100 years
and sabermetrics maybe 40 years. I find it hard to believe that if people did not appreciate the beauty of the sport in the many, many decades before sabermetrics, it would have survived to present day. It is not ignorant to be a fan of any kind. Knowing 30 columns of stats on a particular player does not alter my view of said player one bit (not that I would even want to know that much info). You define yourself as the fan YOU want to be. You do not have to justify that fandom to anyone else.
La vida no se ha hecho para comprenderla, sino para vivirla.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Apr 1, 2011 4:18 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I dont even think it has been around 40 yrs.
I have no idea what fip or some other stats are.
but +1
Per Mare, Per Terras
I was going by the formation
of the society that gave it its name:
The Society for American Baseball Research was established in Cooperstown, New York, in August 1971 by Bob Davids of Washington, D.C. The Society’s mission is to foster the research and dissemination of the history and record of baseball, while generating interest in the game.from wiki . I was giving benefit of doubt. I really didn’t start hearing about sabermetrics until early to mid 2000’s.
La vida no se ha hecho para comprenderla, sino para vivirla.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Apr 1, 2011 5:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Branch Rickey invented "sabermetrics"
They just didn’t call it that then. Bill James coined the term 30 years late I believe.
This was published by Mr. Rickey in Life Magazine in 1954. Damn him for ruining the sport.
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/btf/pages/essays/rickey/goodby_to_old_idea.htm
This was published over at The Good Phight just the other day
http://www.thegoodphight.com/2011/3/27/2074529/statistical-analysis-in-baseball-isnt-new-at-all
And here is one more good read
http://captnsblog.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/was-branch-rickey-the-father-of-sabermetrics/
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
thanks for the links.
La vida no se ha hecho para comprenderla, sino para vivirla.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Apr 1, 2011 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
um....
i’m not quite sure why the length of time matters….assuming humanity progresses, advances in understanding should inherently be around for a shorter time than the field they are advanced in. astronomy has been around since the dawn of time, but it’s only been 600 years or so since we’ve realized that the Earth isn’t the center of the universe.
if knowing stats doesn’t alter your view of a player then that just means sabermetrics isn’t for you. i agree with you that you define yourself as the fan you want to be. people should have the right to choose whether they want to learn more about a subject or not. and no one wants to go around exploring every subject there is to learn out there.
i just wanted to explain 1) that sabermetricians aren’t mindless zombies, or at least, not anymore than people who follow or schools of thought; and 2) there is no reason why a sabermetrician can’t be equally a fan of a baseball team as a non-sabermetrician
by blue bulldog on Apr 1, 2011 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
i said
choosing to not learn more is being ignorant
for example – i choose to not learn more about the ingredients and process that McDonald’s uses for its Big Mac, and so i remain ignorant of its healthy/unhealthiness
again, like i said, earlier, there’s nothing wrong with that. people choose to remain ignorant all the time. no one goes around learning as much as they can about everything. the point is though, that some people want to learn more about baseball, and so they explore different ways of analyzing baseball, sabermetrics being one of those ways. that doesn’t make them any less of a fan.
by blue bulldog on Apr 1, 2011 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions
I personally think
That the D’Backs would be better if everyone used Showaddywaddy as walk-up music. That doesn’t make me less of a fan. It DOES make me totally insane.
In all seriousness: one doesn’t have to delve into deep statistical analysis to temper their expectations for the season (We weren’t good last year, and we got rid of guys who were decent on a bad team ergo…), I’m not a SABR person in the least (I often gloss over the long drawn out conversions on the subject here. YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE), but I think it’s a staple of the Joe Morgan flat-earth society that people who analyze advanced statistic and projections somehow suck the joy out of baseball, which I don’t think it does. If anything it adds a new layer for enjoyment, and a new way to look at the game we all love.
Bad doormat! No stock options!
They don't suck the joy out of baseball for everyone
Just for people that take it too seriously. The culmination of this is ESPN showing a running projection of a player’s BA and OPS depending on the pitch count while he is at bat (I don’t think they do that anymore, but they used to, and it drove everyone nuts). Or TBS showing a strike zone continuously on the side of the screen. Not to say pitch location is related to sabermetrics, but we need to take a step back a little. It’s true with every continuous multivariate correlated data set: every time you’re given a large enough sample, you can run a thousand statistical tests and correlation analyses between the variables and give probabilities of all kinds of events.
In the end, all you end up with is a percentage likelihood of something happening (or some variation of it). Problem with that is, it’s not possible for humans to truly perceive statistical odds. Yes, if a player with a batting average of .100 gets a hit, we are more surprised than when a player hitting .350 gets one. But in the end, it really is a basically 50/50 chance – he either gets a hit or he doesn’t. Call me a hopeless idealist, but I really do truly believe any player can get a hit in every situation. That’s where I don’t allow sabermetrics. I have a friend that’s a math/physics dual major and a huge Padres fan, and he is obsessed with knowing and analyzing every little aspect of a player’s performance, so he actually makes Monte Carlo models of individual games and gets upset when the games don’t follow his predictions. I think that’s going WAY too crazy over stats. I personally just treat is as “well, even if this guy has a 15% chance of getting a hit off this pitcher, there is no reason to think this at-bat can’t be one of those 15%”.
Fantasy on the other hand …
Bring back the Baltimore Chop!
That's a fair point
But, if your friend the Padre fan derives enjoyment of baseball from that (and being a Padre fan, he’ll need all the happiness he can get), then more power to him I say. Different strokes and all that
Bad doormat! No stock options!
There's room for both approaches
And, indeed, both are probably necessary. I going for the ‘Star Trek’ metaphor here. Sabermetric people are like the Vulcans, all logical and scientific. While the “fan” side are like Kirk – and we know who gets the exotic alien women. But it’s the mesh of the two that make them unstoppable. Or, more generally, heart vs. head. If you let one rule you absolutely, you’re a less well-rounded person than if you balance the two.
Same with fandom. Purely on the numbers, we should all be a bunch of Eeyores, destined for another season in the basement. But on the other hand, baseball is littered with teams that over-performed – most recently the Padres last year, so it is perfectly legit to say, “Why not us?” The team needs optimistic fans. I’ve been there (90-win projections and all!), only to be disappointed, and personally, just can’t go there again this year. If I’m wrong, I’ll be quite delighted, and every hit, run and win will still be cheered to the rafters regardless.
My interest in and enthusiasm for the team is largely separate from and untempered by logic – that’s what being a fan (as in, short for “fanatic”) is all about, isn’t it?
"While Mrs. SnakePit watched one of the most highly acclaimed films of the year, I sat through a badly made schlock fest with absolutely no redeeming value. And it was awesome."
by Jim McLennan on Apr 1, 2011 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
You said it perfectly.
Thanks
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
Maybe true
Call it wishful thinking or something, i know what I have in my team so a real convo about us and I am guessing70-75 wins but the fan in me has us winning more than 81…. Have some fun with it I mean we are only 1/2 a game out 1st as of tonight right lol
I love the Diamondbacks more than ANYTHING
D-Rock
by northam06 on Apr 1, 2011 5:44 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
This is true
And even if we don’t really reach any heights, having the opportunity to make the odd Rockies fan cry on a given night is worth it’s weight in gold.
Bad doormat! No stock options!
Tipping point
If Kennedy and Hudson pitch as we expect, and the bullpen actually pitches with a degree of proficiency, then the season will hinge on how well the #3 starter performs. If Saunders or whoever winds up as the #3 puts in a strong season, then the D’Backs finish above .500. It may be too much to ask though for #4 to perform at a high level all season long though, thus its really unlikely that they compete for the Pennant, but that’s the joy of the season opener…one can dream.
Barry Enright
might kill everything. Or he might implode come July. Or both.
Bring back the Baltimore Chop!
Tempered expectations
If the D’Backs finish within 8-10 games of .500, I would call it a successful season, especially considering last year’s debacle. All I know is that the bullpen can’t possibly be worse than last year…right? Right?
Vote Quimby!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on AZ Snake Pit
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
