2056 AL Forecast
Sept 12, 2020 8:32:53 GMT -5
AstrosGM_Shane, Rich - Former GM, and 4 more like this
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Sept 12, 2020 8:32:53 GMT -5
Standard Disclaimers:
1) This is purely produced by my sheet. I just plugged the teams in and it spit out numbers. I had very little subjectively to do with it, save by designing the sheet itself. So if your team is low or high, it isn't because I hate or love you.
2) This is purely ratings. It doesn't care about stats or personality.
3) Within reason, position-assignment of batters is done by the sheet as far as what it thinks is most efficient.
4) This does model injuries (within reason) but it obviously cannot anticipate season-enders.
5) This assumes no changes to rosters as of today.
6) This is adjusted for half of the amount the GM has under/over performed the sheet to date.
7) It's just a spreadsheet. It's guaranteed wrong in spots.
8) This is counting the entire franchise roster, so minor league players may be counted if my sheet thinks that they're an upgrade.
9) And to be clear, when I say a team is better/worse than last year, I'm explicitly comparing them to where they and their players were in spring training of the prior year.
There are several stories of note from the AL overall. The first is that the bottom of the AL has, generally, gotten a lot better. There are still weak teams, but several have improved a fair bit. The second is that the AL's playoff hunt this year is likely to be much more similar to the NL's last year. My forecast has nine teams all forecast at 85+ wins, which means that the playoff hunt is likely to be ugly, especially with seven of those nine teams in two divisions. You can probably guess which.
AL East:
New York Yankees: 88.6 wins
Boston Red Sox: 75.8 wins
Baltimore Orioles: 72.8 wins
Toronto Blue Jays: 56.6 wins
New York seeeeems like they should have gotten better, right? But remember, old teams without prospects coming up lose 2-5 wins a year just by being alive. So they added Ciaravella (my sheet doesn't know that he's juicing) but Cadima, Bauer and Holmes between them regressed by 2-3 WAR or so. So New York did the big market old-team thing - they got better so that they could not get worse. Boston is a little deeper with their bats, but the real improvement is the transformation of their rotation: the acquisitions of Bo Moore, Justin Miller and Stephen Fallon massively upgrades what last year was a real weakness. My sheet thinks that Baltimore is about as good as last year (slightly upgraded lineup with Rodriguez, slightly worse rotation and bullpen), but it thinks they wildly overperformed last year and isn't expecting much. Toronto . . . looks like a weak team that sold off their best pieces last year. They have good things going for them, but not at the major league level.
AL Central:
Cleveland Indians: 88.1 wins
Chicago White Sox: 87.7 wins
Minnesota Twins: 85.7 wins
Detroit Tigers: 74.1 wins
Cleveland benefits from a big GM adjustment (based on last year). Their lineup is notably improved (Silas Ward stepped forward, and their two biggest weak spots (DH and 3rd OF) have been successfully filled. My sheet thinks that their top 3 starters collectively have taken a step back, but that the bottom of their rotation is better and that their bullpen is deeper. In aggregate, a small improvement from last year, plus a hefty GM bump. My sheet actually thinks that Chicago's about average, but Greg gets the biggest GM adjustment of anyone in the PBL (on account of his overperforming my sheet very consistently). Some of this is that my sheet has a hard time appreciating depth. It's built in, but the White Sox basically roll 4-5 strong infielders and 4-5 strong outfielders all the time. They shored up their #4 rotation slot, but lost WAR from turning over Perez and having Zeringue get smashed by some 35-year-old regression. Minnesota is young (which helps) but the loss of Ciaravella clearly hurts. None of their young 'uns got a bump over the year, they lack a DH, their rotation improved but bullpen regressed. The aggregate is that they're expected to take a step back, mostly because of losing Ciaravella. Detroit didn't massively improve or anything, but they have a lot of young players and are generally better than they were the year before (5 wins or so).
AL West:
Colorado Rockies: 88.6 wins
Oakland Athletics: 77.3 wins
Los Angeles Angels: 76.2 wins
Seattle Mariners: 68.5 wins
Colorado basically pulled a Yankees, moving pieces around and adding talent to stay equally good. They lost Boucher but added Byford and Marshall, adding high-end rotation support by acquiring Carlos Gutierrez. My sheet thinks that Oakland wildly underperformed last year. They're young and a lot of their pieces have quietly improved. The acquisition of Vincent Owens and stepping forward of Zg Odhiambo (I don't like "Old Sleep" for him, I prefer "Can I Buy a Vowel" or "Release Him For Great Justice") have moved their lineup forward, and their rotation is improved across the board from last year. The Angels' pitching is similar to last year (save that Vasquez really improved) but their lineup is weirdly gutted - Om, MacLean and Martines are all gone and the players to fill their place are fairly worse. They're still a threat, but not as much as you'd think given their best three players. Seattle's lineup is better across the board almost (some acquisition, some improvement), but their pitching looks exactly as bad as last year.
AL South:
Texas Rangers: 96.6 wins
Houston Astros: 95.0 wins
Tampa Bay Rays: 89.1 wins
Kansas City Royals: 88.1 wins
And you thought the AL South was nasty last year? Texas' lineup is slightly worse (Valenzuela's improvement is offset by tiny steps back from Korra, de Kok, Miller and Henderson) and their pitching is slightly worse too (Santos and Boer took nice steps forward, but their #5 seems weaker and their bullpen is thinner than last year). Texas is still probably the best team in the AL, but my sheet doesn't think they are quite as good as last year. Houston . . . yeah. This may look nuts, but bear with me. Their lineup is considerably improved: last year they had some gaping holes, and this year their holes are filled. MacLean has come on, Bill Smith and Alejandro Garcia have both substantially improved and Ruben Martines is a solid improvement on John Toney. But their rotation change is insane. Burke, Vargas and Sims all took big leaps, and did I mention they got Walt Perez? Look at this roster - this can compete. Tampa Bay overperformed last year, but they had a strong roster and they still do. They're very similar to last year: better rotation, worse bullpen, better outfield, worse catcher and infield. They're still very good. And Kansas City . . . can they catch a freaking break? They're pegged at 88 wins, but the weakest team in their division. Contreras' regression is balanced by Lopez' improvement. Their rotation has evolved, from a top-heavy but shallow squad into a rotation with no weakness but little strength, a net loss (according to my sheet) but their bullpen is a ton better from last year (c/o Cincinnati).
The Yankees and Rockies likely have an easy path to the playoffs, though the Rockies don't have it too easy given that they have two teams within 10 forecast wins of them. But the AL Central (with Cleveland, Chicago, Minnesota and maybe Detroit) and the AL South (with freaking everybody) should provide an absolutely brutal wild-card race.
Positional Breakdown:
This is the entire league sorted by the following: Outfield, Infield (2B / SS / 3B), Power C (1B, DH, C), Rotation (1-5), Bullpen and PSR (Playoff Staff Rating, which tries to weight pitching positions based on unusual utility in the playoffs, like a #1 starter). Obviously these are not meant to be perfect - they make a lot of assumptions. It's meant mostly to be interesting and generate conversation.
Outfield:
1. Kansas City Royals
2. Tampa Bay Rays
3. Texas Rangers
4. Los Angeles Angels
5. Houston Astros
6. Minnesota Twins
7. Chicago White Sox
8. New York Yankees
9. Colorado Rockies
10. Cleveland Indians
11. Oakland Athletics
12. Seattle Mariners
13. Detroit Tigers
14. Baltimore Orioles
15. Boston Red Sox
16. Toronto Blue Jays
Infield:
1. Texas Rangers
2. New York Yankees
3. Chicago White Sox
4. Minnesota Twins
5. Colorado Rockies
6. Cleveland Indians
7. Kansas City Royals
8. Detroit Tigers
9. Houston Astros
10. Seattle Mariners
11. Baltimore Orioles
12. Boston Red Sox
13. Tampa Bay Rays
14. Oakland Athletics
15. Toronto Blue Jays
16. Los Angeles Angels
Power C:
1. New York Yankees
2. Colorado Rockies
3. Los Angeles Angels
4. Kansas City Royals
5. Texas Rangers
6. Cleveland Indians
7. Seattle Mariners
8. Houston Astros
9. Detroit Tigers
10. Boston Red Sox
11. Minnesota Twins
12. Chicago White So
13. Baltimore Orioles
14. Tampa Bay Rays
15. Oakland Athletics
16. Toronto Blue Jays
Rotation:
1. Houston Astros
2. Oakland Athletics
3. Texas Rangers
4. Tampa Bay Rays
5. Colorado Rockies
6. Cleveland Indians
7. Minnesota Twins
8. Los Angeles Angels
9. Boston Red Sox
10. Chicago White Sox
11. New York Yankees
12. Kansas City Royals
13. Baltimore Orioles
14. Detroit Tigers
15. Toronto Blue Jays
16. Seattle Mariners
Bullpen:
1. Colorado Rockies
2. Tampa Bay Rays
3. Kansas City Royals
4. New York Yankees
5. Cleveland Indians
6. Chicago White Sox
7. Minnesota Twins
8. Boston Red Sox
9. Houston Astros
10. Texas Rangers
11. Oakland Athletics
12. Seattle Mariners
13. Detroit Tigers
14. Toronto Blue Jays
15. Los Angeles Angels
16. Baltimore Orioles
Playoff Staff Rating:
1. Houston Astros
2. Tampa Bay Rays
3. Oakland Athletics
4. Colorado Rockies
5. Cleveland Indians
6. Texas Rangers
7. New York Yankees
8. Minnesota Twins
9. Boston Red Sox
10. Chicago White Sox
11. Kansas City Royals
12. Los Angeles Angels
13. Baltimore Orioles
14. Detroit Tigers
15. Seattle Mariners
16. Toronto Blue Jays
1) This is purely produced by my sheet. I just plugged the teams in and it spit out numbers. I had very little subjectively to do with it, save by designing the sheet itself. So if your team is low or high, it isn't because I hate or love you.
2) This is purely ratings. It doesn't care about stats or personality.
3) Within reason, position-assignment of batters is done by the sheet as far as what it thinks is most efficient.
4) This does model injuries (within reason) but it obviously cannot anticipate season-enders.
5) This assumes no changes to rosters as of today.
6) This is adjusted for half of the amount the GM has under/over performed the sheet to date.
7) It's just a spreadsheet. It's guaranteed wrong in spots.
8) This is counting the entire franchise roster, so minor league players may be counted if my sheet thinks that they're an upgrade.
9) And to be clear, when I say a team is better/worse than last year, I'm explicitly comparing them to where they and their players were in spring training of the prior year.
There are several stories of note from the AL overall. The first is that the bottom of the AL has, generally, gotten a lot better. There are still weak teams, but several have improved a fair bit. The second is that the AL's playoff hunt this year is likely to be much more similar to the NL's last year. My forecast has nine teams all forecast at 85+ wins, which means that the playoff hunt is likely to be ugly, especially with seven of those nine teams in two divisions. You can probably guess which.
AL East:
New York Yankees: 88.6 wins
Boston Red Sox: 75.8 wins
Baltimore Orioles: 72.8 wins
Toronto Blue Jays: 56.6 wins
New York seeeeems like they should have gotten better, right? But remember, old teams without prospects coming up lose 2-5 wins a year just by being alive. So they added Ciaravella (my sheet doesn't know that he's juicing) but Cadima, Bauer and Holmes between them regressed by 2-3 WAR or so. So New York did the big market old-team thing - they got better so that they could not get worse. Boston is a little deeper with their bats, but the real improvement is the transformation of their rotation: the acquisitions of Bo Moore, Justin Miller and Stephen Fallon massively upgrades what last year was a real weakness. My sheet thinks that Baltimore is about as good as last year (slightly upgraded lineup with Rodriguez, slightly worse rotation and bullpen), but it thinks they wildly overperformed last year and isn't expecting much. Toronto . . . looks like a weak team that sold off their best pieces last year. They have good things going for them, but not at the major league level.
AL Central:
Cleveland Indians: 88.1 wins
Chicago White Sox: 87.7 wins
Minnesota Twins: 85.7 wins
Detroit Tigers: 74.1 wins
Cleveland benefits from a big GM adjustment (based on last year). Their lineup is notably improved (Silas Ward stepped forward, and their two biggest weak spots (DH and 3rd OF) have been successfully filled. My sheet thinks that their top 3 starters collectively have taken a step back, but that the bottom of their rotation is better and that their bullpen is deeper. In aggregate, a small improvement from last year, plus a hefty GM bump. My sheet actually thinks that Chicago's about average, but Greg gets the biggest GM adjustment of anyone in the PBL (on account of his overperforming my sheet very consistently). Some of this is that my sheet has a hard time appreciating depth. It's built in, but the White Sox basically roll 4-5 strong infielders and 4-5 strong outfielders all the time. They shored up their #4 rotation slot, but lost WAR from turning over Perez and having Zeringue get smashed by some 35-year-old regression. Minnesota is young (which helps) but the loss of Ciaravella clearly hurts. None of their young 'uns got a bump over the year, they lack a DH, their rotation improved but bullpen regressed. The aggregate is that they're expected to take a step back, mostly because of losing Ciaravella. Detroit didn't massively improve or anything, but they have a lot of young players and are generally better than they were the year before (5 wins or so).
AL West:
Colorado Rockies: 88.6 wins
Oakland Athletics: 77.3 wins
Los Angeles Angels: 76.2 wins
Seattle Mariners: 68.5 wins
Colorado basically pulled a Yankees, moving pieces around and adding talent to stay equally good. They lost Boucher but added Byford and Marshall, adding high-end rotation support by acquiring Carlos Gutierrez. My sheet thinks that Oakland wildly underperformed last year. They're young and a lot of their pieces have quietly improved. The acquisition of Vincent Owens and stepping forward of Zg Odhiambo (I don't like "Old Sleep" for him, I prefer "Can I Buy a Vowel" or "Release Him For Great Justice") have moved their lineup forward, and their rotation is improved across the board from last year. The Angels' pitching is similar to last year (save that Vasquez really improved) but their lineup is weirdly gutted - Om, MacLean and Martines are all gone and the players to fill their place are fairly worse. They're still a threat, but not as much as you'd think given their best three players. Seattle's lineup is better across the board almost (some acquisition, some improvement), but their pitching looks exactly as bad as last year.
AL South:
Texas Rangers: 96.6 wins
Houston Astros: 95.0 wins
Tampa Bay Rays: 89.1 wins
Kansas City Royals: 88.1 wins
And you thought the AL South was nasty last year? Texas' lineup is slightly worse (Valenzuela's improvement is offset by tiny steps back from Korra, de Kok, Miller and Henderson) and their pitching is slightly worse too (Santos and Boer took nice steps forward, but their #5 seems weaker and their bullpen is thinner than last year). Texas is still probably the best team in the AL, but my sheet doesn't think they are quite as good as last year. Houston . . . yeah. This may look nuts, but bear with me. Their lineup is considerably improved: last year they had some gaping holes, and this year their holes are filled. MacLean has come on, Bill Smith and Alejandro Garcia have both substantially improved and Ruben Martines is a solid improvement on John Toney. But their rotation change is insane. Burke, Vargas and Sims all took big leaps, and did I mention they got Walt Perez? Look at this roster - this can compete. Tampa Bay overperformed last year, but they had a strong roster and they still do. They're very similar to last year: better rotation, worse bullpen, better outfield, worse catcher and infield. They're still very good. And Kansas City . . . can they catch a freaking break? They're pegged at 88 wins, but the weakest team in their division. Contreras' regression is balanced by Lopez' improvement. Their rotation has evolved, from a top-heavy but shallow squad into a rotation with no weakness but little strength, a net loss (according to my sheet) but their bullpen is a ton better from last year (c/o Cincinnati).
The Yankees and Rockies likely have an easy path to the playoffs, though the Rockies don't have it too easy given that they have two teams within 10 forecast wins of them. But the AL Central (with Cleveland, Chicago, Minnesota and maybe Detroit) and the AL South (with freaking everybody) should provide an absolutely brutal wild-card race.
Positional Breakdown:
This is the entire league sorted by the following: Outfield, Infield (2B / SS / 3B), Power C (1B, DH, C), Rotation (1-5), Bullpen and PSR (Playoff Staff Rating, which tries to weight pitching positions based on unusual utility in the playoffs, like a #1 starter). Obviously these are not meant to be perfect - they make a lot of assumptions. It's meant mostly to be interesting and generate conversation.
Outfield:
1. Kansas City Royals
2. Tampa Bay Rays
3. Texas Rangers
4. Los Angeles Angels
5. Houston Astros
6. Minnesota Twins
7. Chicago White Sox
8. New York Yankees
9. Colorado Rockies
10. Cleveland Indians
11. Oakland Athletics
12. Seattle Mariners
13. Detroit Tigers
14. Baltimore Orioles
15. Boston Red Sox
16. Toronto Blue Jays
Infield:
1. Texas Rangers
2. New York Yankees
3. Chicago White Sox
4. Minnesota Twins
5. Colorado Rockies
6. Cleveland Indians
7. Kansas City Royals
8. Detroit Tigers
9. Houston Astros
10. Seattle Mariners
11. Baltimore Orioles
12. Boston Red Sox
13. Tampa Bay Rays
14. Oakland Athletics
15. Toronto Blue Jays
16. Los Angeles Angels
Power C:
1. New York Yankees
2. Colorado Rockies
3. Los Angeles Angels
4. Kansas City Royals
5. Texas Rangers
6. Cleveland Indians
7. Seattle Mariners
8. Houston Astros
9. Detroit Tigers
10. Boston Red Sox
11. Minnesota Twins
12. Chicago White So
13. Baltimore Orioles
14. Tampa Bay Rays
15. Oakland Athletics
16. Toronto Blue Jays
Rotation:
1. Houston Astros
2. Oakland Athletics
3. Texas Rangers
4. Tampa Bay Rays
5. Colorado Rockies
6. Cleveland Indians
7. Minnesota Twins
8. Los Angeles Angels
9. Boston Red Sox
10. Chicago White Sox
11. New York Yankees
12. Kansas City Royals
13. Baltimore Orioles
14. Detroit Tigers
15. Toronto Blue Jays
16. Seattle Mariners
Bullpen:
1. Colorado Rockies
2. Tampa Bay Rays
3. Kansas City Royals
4. New York Yankees
5. Cleveland Indians
6. Chicago White Sox
7. Minnesota Twins
8. Boston Red Sox
9. Houston Astros
10. Texas Rangers
11. Oakland Athletics
12. Seattle Mariners
13. Detroit Tigers
14. Toronto Blue Jays
15. Los Angeles Angels
16. Baltimore Orioles
Playoff Staff Rating:
1. Houston Astros
2. Tampa Bay Rays
3. Oakland Athletics
4. Colorado Rockies
5. Cleveland Indians
6. Texas Rangers
7. New York Yankees
8. Minnesota Twins
9. Boston Red Sox
10. Chicago White Sox
11. Kansas City Royals
12. Los Angeles Angels
13. Baltimore Orioles
14. Detroit Tigers
15. Seattle Mariners
16. Toronto Blue Jays