SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2024 Red Sox win projections
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 8, 2024 10:10:16 GMT -5
Unless the Breslow magic kicks in quickly and Houck can get out lefties and make it through a line-up more than twice, and if Whitlock can actually stay healthy and be effective for more than 5 innings and if Giolito first half of last season can be replicated and not the last half, and if Bello can develop another out pitch to become a semi-ace and handle another increase in innings pitched (in the regard he is at really high risk of a major injury this year) and if Crawford can show that he can get major league hitters out on consistent basis, and if Pivetta has one of the better years of his career, and if the 6th, 7th and 8th starters can come in and last more than 2 or 3 innings, and if there aren't a slew of 'closer' games and if the bullpen can come in the fifth inning every other game and hold the lead, yeah maybe this year's starting rotation will be better than last year's. It's a whole lots of ifs. If Breslow and the starters hit on all those ifs they should head to Las Vegas and clean up at the slots. It is also why this team is more likely to win 70-75 games than 90. We'll see. Without a bona fide ace or stopper, once the team hits a rough patch in the summer, it is easy to see things snowballing into an extended 9, 10+ games losing streak One question I haven't really seen address on the forum is maybe all the young Red Sox starting pitchers or prospects aren't really that great. Us fans are viewing them through rose colored prospect glasses looking at their potential instead of their actual talent levels. Theoretically the defense should be better but the offense maybe in slightly better shape but is still really suspect. We are going to see a lot of 15-6, 14-8 games this year with the Sox on the wrong end of the score.I'm not really seeing this. I don't think the pitching is nearly as weak as you are describing and like you say the defense should be better. Not that much has to go right for the pitching to be better than last year. The staff is too shallow for my liking, but as it stands there aren't any arsonists projected for the major league roster - just a lot of solid but unspectacular dudes from top to bottom. I'm imagining a lot of 4-3 losses, if anything.
|
|
|
Post by itinerantherb on Feb 8, 2024 12:59:13 GMT -5
There seems to be a real mismatch between what people mean colloquially when they point to #1’s, #2’s, etc. and the universe of actually existing starting pitchers. When I think of a #1, I imagine a guy who can reliably put up, say, a 3.4 ERA (or xERA, if you like) or better, which in reality describes all of 14 qualified pitchers in 2023. When I think of a #2, I think of an ERA between, say, 3.4 and 3.8, which in reality describes SP’s 15 through 25. Even if we lower the minimum IP to 100 to account for starts missed for injuries, the lingo still doesn’t align with reality, especially when you get to the back half of a rotation. Even the “best” #4 by ERA (min. 100 IP) was Christian Javier at 4.56; the best #5 was Taj Bradley at 5.59. If Houck (who I’m guessing is the Sox presumptive #5) posted a 5.59 ERA over the first 100+ IP, most of us would conclude that he’s better off in the pen. How to explain this? Are our colloquial definitions of #1’s, #2’s, etc. more aspirational than realistic? Has this framing outlived its usefulness (if it was ever useful)? Putting it a different way, if someone said at the beginning of the offseason that our rotation would contain two #2s, two solid 3's, and a borderline 3/4, I think most would have said "sign me up." That's what you get from the projected fWAR of our current rotation (Bello 43 in MLB, Giolito 48, Pivetta 70, Houck 81, Crawford 90), which is widely regarded as a catastrophe. This is my thought, too, though that doesn't mean that they shouldn't add. The problem isn't quality but depth and certainty. Montgomery may project about the same as Bello, Crawford, and Pivetta, but the long track record as a solid SP would give me a lot more confidence in the rotation even if it doesn't raise the ceiling. On the other end, someone like Lorenzen doesn't move the needle in terms of quality, but he would provide a valuable safety net, given the high performance volatility and likelihood of injuries.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Feb 9, 2024 9:14:25 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training.
But - looking at the current projected active roster:
Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Significant Pitching subtractions - Sale
Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Turner, Duvall, Verdugo
To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,793
|
Post by nomar on Feb 9, 2024 9:30:40 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training. But - looking at the current projected active roster: Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Pitching subtractions - Sale Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Verdugo To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way. Verdugo had a 98 wRC+ and the 4th lowest WPA on the team. I wouldn’t call that a significant subtraction
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Feb 9, 2024 9:40:42 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training. But - looking at the current projected active roster: Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Pitching subtractions - Sale Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Verdugo To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way. Verdugo had a 98 wRC+ and the 4th lowest WPA on the team. I wouldn’t call that a significant subtraction "Significant" in that he was a starter.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 9, 2024 9:42:41 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training. But - looking at the current projected active roster: Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Pitching subtractions - Sale Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Verdugo To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way. Verdugo had a 98 wRC+ and the 4th lowest WPA on the team. I wouldn’t call that a significant subtraction And yet he was still the 4th most valuable player on the team per bWAR (5th per fWAR). Not sure how anyone wouldn't call that a significant subtraction for playing time alone.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Feb 9, 2024 9:44:50 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training. But - looking at the current projected active roster: Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Pitching subtractions - Sale Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Verdugo To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way. Verdugo had a 98 wRC+ and the 4th lowest WPA on the team. I wouldn’t call that a significant subtraction Out of position players Verdugo was 3rd on the team in fWAR with 2.0, I am hopeful that an ONeill/Abreu combo in RF can match if not exceed Verdugo's production but I would still classify losing the 3rd most valuable player in terms of fWAR from a team that only won 78 games in 2023 as a relatively significant subtraction.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,793
|
Post by nomar on Feb 9, 2024 9:51:29 GMT -5
You guys are all using fWAR when the point was that Verdugo was being called an offensive subtraction.
Fangraphs Off was -3.5 and Def was +3.5
Verdugo is a defensive subtraction, yes, but nothing material as an offensive subtraction especially considering his replacements in O’Neill and Abreu.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 9, 2024 10:05:15 GMT -5
You guys are all using fWAR when the point was that Verdugo was being called an offensive subtraction. Fangraphs Off was -3.5 and Def was +3.5 Verdugo is a defensive subtraction, yes, but nothing material as an offensive subtraction especially considering his replacements in O’Neill and Abreu. So if the original post would’ve said “Position Player” instead of “Offense”, which are clearly interchangeable in this context, your thoughts on the statement itself would change? That feels like a semantic misinterpretation on your part, but I won’t belabor the point arguing semantics.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Feb 9, 2024 10:07:46 GMT -5
You guys are all using fWAR when the point was that Verdugo was being called an offensive subtraction. Fangraphs Off was -3.5 and Def was +3.5 Verdugo is a defensive subtraction, yes, but nothing material as an offensive subtraction especially considering his replacements in O’Neill and Abreu. So if the original post would’ve said “Position Player” instead of “Offense”, which are clearly interchangeable in this context, your thoughts on the statement itself would change? That feels like a semantic misinterpretation on your part, but I won’t belabor the point arguing semantics. Exactly. My pre-coffee grammatical misfire!
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,793
|
Post by nomar on Feb 9, 2024 10:12:17 GMT -5
You guys are all using fWAR when the point was that Verdugo was being called an offensive subtraction. Fangraphs Off was -3.5 and Def was +3.5 Verdugo is a defensive subtraction, yes, but nothing material as an offensive subtraction especially considering his replacements in O’Neill and Abreu. So if the original post would’ve said “Position Player” instead of “Offense”, which are clearly interchangeable in this context, your thoughts on the statement itself would change? That feels like a semantic misinterpretation on your part, but I won’t belabor the point arguing semantics. Yes that would have changed it in my eyes at least. And even then we’re talking about a league average starter which I think we have a replacement for anyway. If anything is going to be missed there it’s likely because there isn’t enough depth more so than any major talent dropoff in RF.
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Feb 9, 2024 10:32:20 GMT -5
So if the original post would’ve said “Position Player” instead of “Offense”, which are clearly interchangeable in this context, your thoughts on the statement itself would change? That feels like a semantic misinterpretation on your part, but I won’t belabor the point arguing semantics. Yes that would have changed it in my eyes at least. And even then we’re talking about a league average starter which I think we have a replacement for anyway. If anything is going to be missed there it’s likely because there isn’t enough depth more so than any major talent dropoff in RF. Does Fenway's RF give an artificial boost to a player who makes an effort on defense? I do think that Verdugo played pretty hard in the outfield for most of the season, but I do have to wonder whether it's fair to expect the same effort from him on a yearly basis. He was not a good defender in right in 2021 and I do believe the monster negatively impacts all defenders unfairly (to an extent where I believe Yoshida has been maligned a bit too strongly). As far as depth, I would want Rafaela in CF obviously, but if O'Neill or Abreu were to get injured, his speed, instincts, etc would probably play a lot better in RF at Fenway anyway.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan15 on Feb 9, 2024 11:58:41 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training. But - looking at the current projected active roster: Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Significant Pitching subtractions - Sale Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Verdugo To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way. Duvall and Turner not listed as subtractions?
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Feb 9, 2024 12:04:55 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training. But - looking at the current projected active roster: Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Significant Pitching subtractions - Sale Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Verdugo To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way. Duvall and Turner not listed as subtractions? Yes...thx. again - insufficient coffee! Fixed
|
|
|
Post by asm18 on Feb 11, 2024 11:26:09 GMT -5
If the 2024 team needs to “get hot” early in the year to outperform expectations (as well to justify additions during the summer - or just generally avoid a huge ditch that they might not be talented enough to dig themselves out of), the March/April schedule might possibly provide that opportunity:
@seattle (4 games) @oakland @angels
Vs Baltimore Vs Angels Vs Cleveland
@pirates @cleveland
Vs Cubs Vs San Fran
Alex Cora knows well that the poor 2019 West Coast trip to start the year put the team in a rough spot - hopefully they are more prepared this time around. Playing the Angels and A’s doesn’t hurt… The only playoff team from last year they play is Baltimore, which is at Fenway.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Mar 12, 2024 14:52:54 GMT -5
OK, I've seen enough. Without the addition of a #2/3 starter before opening day I'll go high optimism and say 77 wins.
This ownership group has gone from one of the top 3 in baseball to a bunch of Cleveland Guardian fanboys. Unfortunately, they forgot the part that the AL East is not the AL Central.
|
|
|
Post by wamderingdude on Mar 12, 2024 15:00:33 GMT -5
i’m going with 80 wins but they sell at the deadline and have a good september with the young guys trying hard down the stretch. The year end total looks the same but we have a better idea of the core and have fun watching guys establish themselves which leads to a big offseason as they finally feel ready to win again.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 12, 2024 16:14:58 GMT -5
I think the roster is pretty much, what you see is what you get. Maybe they add a Lorenzen or Clevenger, but while that would help that wouldn't move the needle much.
I think the rash of injuries underscores how thin the depth is.
At this point I think they're a 75 - 80 win team, although at this point I think they're on the lower end of that range and I think there's a real possibility that if things break wrong, like key injuries or too many injuries, they could wind up with 90 losses. I don't think they're anywhere near Oakland A's level bad, but I'm not encouraged by what I see, particularly on the pitching side of things.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Mar 12, 2024 18:58:03 GMT -5
I think the roster is pretty much, what you see is what you get. Maybe they add a Lorenzen or Clevenger, but while that would help that wouldn't move the needle much. I think the rash of injuries underscores how thin the depth is. At this point I think they're a 75 - 80 win team, although at this point I think they're on the lower end of that range and I think there's a real possibility that if things break wrong, like key injuries or too many injuries, they could wind up with 90 losses. I don't think they're anywhere near Oakland A's level bad, but I'm not encouraged by what I see, particularly on the pitching side of things. Yeah this is where I'm at as well. Even if the worst case scenario happens and they lose 90 games I doubt it will create urgency with ownership.
|
|
|
Post by bishop on Mar 14, 2024 18:01:13 GMT -5
If the 2024 team needs to “get hot” early in the year to outperform expectations (as well to justify additions during the summer - or just generally avoid a huge ditch that they might not be talented enough to dig themselves out of), the March/April schedule might possibly provide that opportunity: @seattle (4 games) @oakland @angels Vs Baltimore Vs Angels Vs Cleveland @pirates @cleveland Vs Cubs Vs San Fran Alex Cora knows well that the poor 2019 West Coast trip to start the year put the team in a rough spot - hopefully they are more prepared this time around. Playing the Angels and A’s doesn’t hurt… The only playoff team from last year they play is Baltimore, which is at Fenway. I'm usually not the pessimist and I love getting it out of the way/avoiding as many 40 degree games at Fenway as possible, but a 10 game West Coast trip to start before coming to host the AL East favorites definitely has some downside with all the guys we're asking/hoping step up in to roles. Hopefully the Angels and A's as 60% of the opponents helps get us off to a good start. Gonna lock in 83 wins (and above our Pythag unlike last year) as my guess.
|
|
|
Post by chrisfromnc on Mar 15, 2024 6:46:38 GMT -5
If ever there was a season this century to focus on the minor league talent, it’s this one. It’s a roster completely without any compelling star players (Raffy is great but not my definition of compelling and Jansen has a historic career but likely won’t finish the season wearing Red Sox). I’ll pull hard for a win 162 times but I’m inclined to think I’ll get much more satisfaction from individual performances than from team success. I’m most interested to watch Duran, Casas, Bello, Houck, Whitlock and Vaughn Grissom when he returns. It would be exciting to see good things from Rafaela and Abreu too. I hope Trevor Story is healthy but I worry about his durability. A sell-off seems certain at the deadline this year further impacting win totals. I’m not likely to attend a game this year since that always involves a road trip for me.
I hate it that I’m entering a baseball season this pessimistic and with almost no hope of playoff baseball. I was only a game off in predicting last season’s wins. I hope I eat these words.
Seventy-six wins. 😕
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Mar 22, 2024 16:29:50 GMT -5
So we are a week away. I just took a look at the 2024 projected roster on this site.
What is different from last year? I am just focusing on new faces - not those who are no longer.
Pitching-wise, it is Slaten, Weissert and Campbell. Position player-wise, it is O'Neill (with Grissom injured, I am not including him).
Of course, some pen arms are now starters. A few position players are now solidified, with a few position changes.
But..."full throttle" this ain't (stating at the risk of being piled on).
How many wins? It all depends on continued improvement of our young players.
I am saying it is a .500 team - 81 wins - but will be delighted if it works out better.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 23, 2024 6:44:40 GMT -5
The heuristic of every single season preview article is "how good was the team last year, and did they sign any famous guys in free agency." Hence this mlb.com article has the Red Sox in the next-to-last tier, tied for 25th in the majors, and two full tiers below the Royals, Tigers, Reds, and Pirates.
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Mar 23, 2024 8:51:54 GMT -5
The heuristic of every single season preview article is "how good was the team last year, and did they sign any famous guys in free agency." Hence this mlb.com article has the Red Sox in the next-to-last tier, tied for 25th in the majors, and two full tiers below the Royals, Tigers, Reds, and Pirates. The Red Sox have come in last in back to back years, did almost nothing this offseason and will be running a payroll ~$25 million under the first CBT threshold. They deserve to be raked over the coals like this by every major media outlet.
|
|
|
Post by cheers on Mar 23, 2024 11:02:57 GMT -5
Ugh. 74* wins. Lineup will be respectable. Rotation will likely be a bullpen killer like last year. We've pulled up good multi-inning bullpen pieces to fill the rotation holes, so the bullpen is likely easily killed.
* Assuming the Sox are going to be sellers at the deadline, 74 drops to 70 if/when the dump happens.
Gross.
|
|
|