2011 Projected National League Standings

In honor of Opening Day, here are the projected standings from Baseball Prospectus and Las Vegas.  The Vegas over/under lines are as of March 1st; BP projected standings were pulled on March 29th.

The two takeaways for me is that Vegas loves pitching (Phillies and Astros), while nobody has yet created an algorithm that can detect the stench emanating from the Pirates and Mets.  Computers always underestimate the 'crushed soul' factor.  It's very real.

BP and Vegas are in agreement over the Nationals and I see no reason why anyone should expect anything drastically different than 72 wins.  Hopefully I'm missing something - an Espinosa 30/30 season?  Zimmermann for NL Cy Young? - I guess we'll see starting tomorrow.  Go Nats.

Comments and Batting Lineups

Ladson's crazy understanding of what constitutes proof and this blog's first ever comment got me thinking about the importance of batting lineups.

How much does it matter how you fill this out?

One way to try to quantify the impact of lineup order is with baseballmusings.com's lineup analysis tool.  The tool projects runs scored per game based on each player's on-base and slugging percentage.  I put in the expected Nationals Opening Day roster here (using Baseball Prospectus' 2011 projections for OBP and SLG).

The (Dis)Burden of Proof

In the spring training dispatch 'Riggleman juggles batting order' we are treated to the following:

"Werth proved in a 5-2 victory against the Tigers on Thursday that hitting second is a good idea. He went 2-for-3 with a home run and two RBIs."

I don't have a fully formed opinion on Werth hitting second, but it distresses me that Ladson believes that a single spring training game constitutes proof.  On the scales of justice, the closest equivalent to 'one spring training game' is shown below:

Identical weight.

Although the passage is minor, I think it provides insight into how Ladson is capable of churning out such intricately flawed conclusions on the regular.

Whoops: A Continuing Series (Manufactured Runs)

Bill Ladson wants everyone to get this through their thick skulls once and for all:

"I've said this many times. This team is still not good enough to rely just on the long ball. I would like to see it do the little things -- hit and run, sacrifice bunt and steal bases, for example -- to win games."

Although their failings were manifold, I strongly doubt that the inability to manufacture runs was a fatal flaw for the 2010 Nationals.  Let's consult the numbers.

Fatal flaws: MacBeth was ambitious; were the Nats overly reliant on HRs?

When is Predicting a Breakout Season Meaningless?

When your prediction is Collin Balester.

Two questions immediately spring to mind:
1.  What does a breakout season for Collin Balester mean?
2.  Why would you pick a failed-starter-turned-middle-reliever as a 'breakout' candidate?

I assume the safe answer to Question 1 is that he'll provide consistently above-average middle relief.  A more generous answer would be Balester pitching his way up the bullpen hierarchy to become a critical setup man (i.e. the 2010 Burnett).  Even if this implausible scenario materialized - would it significantly affect the course of the Nats' season?  Is it something that Nats fans can get excited about for the future?  Why would someone make a prediction that is both incredibly unlikely and of such limited impact?

A breakout candidate whose potential impact on the team is roughly on par with Collin Balester's

Dialing Back the Crazy Meter on Defense

The entirety of a brief spring training dispatch:

PORT ST. LUCIE, Fla. -- One of the reasons the Nationals haven't been able to win many games the last three seasons is because of their below-average defense. So far, little has changed this spring. The Nationals have made 13 errors in eight games. 

Manager Jim Riggleman said that he and the coaching staff address the need to improve the defense on a daily basis. The team often has fielding drills before Spring Training games.

The above stands in stark contrast to the 'defense is the reason the Nationals have lost so much' rants that have been the principle theme of Ladson's off-season coverage.  'One of the reasons.' 'Below-average defense.'  This is what progress looks like.

This calls for a round at the Progress Bar