Could the Braves win 90 games this season?

thethe said:
I could understand that. Both are interesting guys. I just think Andersons upside is the highest. Braves are taking it really slow with him. He won't sniff the majors until mid 2020
Click to expand...

Yeah... he's got upside and he has time to fix the control problem. I want to see Wentz and Wilson in AA by the end of the year if they keep it up though.
 
clvclv said:
If projection systems are "conservative" with young players and Allard sucks since his fastball is in the 89-91 MPH range, why on earth shouldn't he be traded for ANY upgrade you can get?

The day the new metrics project Glavine as a HOFer will be the first time it's happened.

I'm in no way touting Allard as "the next Glavine", but apparently the only thing keeping him from getting MLB hitters out right now is that he's in Gwinnett.

Weight the projection systems evenly with the scouts that watch the games in person and continue to rate Allard as a Top 50-60 prospect (and ahead of a lot of names that get bandied about around here), and it's a bit funny to read the comments about how he can't possibly succeed at the next level. Teheran can't possibly succeed because of this metric or that one, tell that to the Mutts. At the same age, Tommy was 12-11, 3.88, 1.435, etc. at Greenville and Richmond.

I completely get being excited about the "stuff" guys and physical studs, but some guys can just pitch/play.
Click to expand...

your hatred for analytics is fun but it has proven to be right far more than not... that's why the game has changed and thats why the braves are in much better hands with AA
 
sturg33 said:
your hatred for analytics is fun but it has proven to be right far more than not... that's why the game has changed and thats why the braves are in much better hands with AA
Click to expand...

It has absolutely nothing to do with a "hatred for analytics", and the thing that bothers most who try to use that is you know it.

I've NEVER said (or intimated) that the new math is "wrong", simply that there are exceptions to the numbers.

I have no clue whether Allard can be exceptional when moving to another level - or whether he can turn into one of those exceptions, but I do know that the "can't-miss", "slam-dunk", TOR "Ace" guy that's his age (Forrest Whitley) is currently serving a suspension for juicing and isn't getting many people out right now.
 
Maybe?:

According to research by myself and others, it takes about 70 games before observed results from a season in progress reach even a 50-50 balance with preseason expectations, in terms of how much weight each deserves when assessing a team. The Braves have played less than half that many games so far this year, which probably goes a long way toward explaining why the statistical projections haven’t budged much off of Atlanta’s relatively bearish spring-training predictions. The past data says you can’t read too much into a month’s worth of results.

However, that premise was designed to hold true for all teams as a group. What happens when we look at a smaller group of teams, especially just the ones that have as much breakout potential as the Braves? Atlanta went into the season with Baseball America’s top-ranked farm system and currently has the eighth-youngest roster in baseball (if we weight each player’s age by their wins contributed this season.)

To get a sense for whether this matters, I looked at all teams since 1984 who were coming off a sub-.500 season but had a better-than-.500 record in April. Over the rest of the season, teams in that group who were both among MLB’s 10 youngest and went into the year with a top-10 farm system (again, according to Baseball America) ended up winning 2.7 more games over the rest of the season than Elo would predict. By comparison, all other teams won roughly as many games as Elo thought they would.

That difference is just on the border of statistical significance, but if it holds true for the Braves, it would imply that they’re due to win more than expected based on their pessimistic win projections at FanGraphs and in our Elo interactive — and those extra wins could be enough to elevate them from a mid-80s win tally (sketchy territory, playoffs-wise) to a number closer to 90 wins (a much safer bet for making the postseason).
Click to expand...
 
thank god we actually have pitching now. amazing how devoid we were of it, and now we have a bunch of guys on the cusp of the majors plus a lot more coming thru.

i said all offseason that if the pitching performed well, this team had a chance to surprise people. hopefully it holds up. i think it will.
 
Super said:
thank god we actually have pitching now. amazing how devoid we were of it, and now we have a bunch of guys on the cusp of the majors plus a lot more coming thru.

i said all offseason that if the pitching performed well, this team had a chance to surprise people. hopefully it holds up. i think it will.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt that a main reason, and maybe the reason for our success, has to do with Albies/Acuna/Freeman but in general you win a lot of games based on starting pitching and we have that in droves now.

The plan was implemented over 3 years ago with the knowledge of Albies/Acuna and we are starting to see the fruits of that plan. Its going to be a real fun time to be a Braves fan moving forward.
 
Last edited:
If Fredi were managing we'd win 100 games.

Snitker may prevent us from winning 90 even with the talent we have.
 
DaneHill said:
Ah yes, I see it now. Apologies, jpx! Old news, People, move along! Move along!
Click to expand...

No apologies necessary—definitely an article worth posting. And I never know how (in)visible embedded links are on these boards.
 
jpx7 said:
Maybe Snitker won’t blow it in the first-round with colossal mismanagement, though.
Click to expand...

I'd be happy just to get to a first round again.

In fairness to Fred he didnt mismanage the wild card game. Chipper choking on defense + Sam Holbrooke.
 
Forever Fredi said:
I'd be happy just to get to a first round again.

In fairness to Fred he didnt mismanage the wild card game. Chipper choking on defense + Sam Holbrooke.
Click to expand...

That isn’t the mismanagement that jpx was referring to. I believe he was referring to the boneheaded decision by Fredi to leave Kimbrel in the bullpen standing next to Eddie rather than going two innings in a must win game.
 
clvclv said:
If projection systems are "conservative" with young players and Allard sucks since his fastball is in the 89-91 MPH range, why on earth shouldn't he be traded for ANY upgrade you can get?

The day the new metrics project Glavine as a HOFer will be the first time it's happened.

I'm in no way touting Allard as "the next Glavine", but apparently the only thing keeping him from getting MLB hitters out right now is that he's in Gwinnett.

Weight the projection systems evenly with the scouts that watch the games in person and continue to rate Allard as a Top 50-60 prospect (and ahead of a lot of names that get bandied about around here), and it's a bit funny to read the comments about how he can't possibly succeed at the next level. Teheran can't possibly succeed because of this metric or that one, tell that to the Mutts. At the same age, Tommy was 12-11, 3.88, 1.435, etc. at Greenville and Richmond.

I completely get being excited about the "stuff" guys and physical studs, but some guys can just pitch/play.
Click to expand...

:facepalm:

Glavine was not throwing 89-91 at that age. Also, Glavine broke in 30 years ago, when the average fastball was 88 mph...it's 92 now.

Facts. They are not your strong suit. Neither is logic. Or competence. Or being right.
 
Enscheff said:
:facepalm:

Glavine was not throwing 89-91 at that age. Also, Glavine broke in 30 years ago, when the average fastball was 88 mph...it's 92 now.

Facts. They are not your strong suit. Neither is logic. Or competence. Or being right.
Click to expand...

This is basic. Do hitters do more with 88 mph fastballs than they used to? It seems logical that they would?

I suppose the alternative would be that hitters do roughly the same with an 88 mph as they ever did, but front offices prefer the outcomes with higher velocity fastballs.
 
Southcack77 said:
This is basic. Do hitters do more with 88 mph fastballs than they used to? It seems logical that they would?

I suppose the alternative would be that hitters do roughly the same with an 88 mph as they ever did, but front offices prefer the outcomes with higher velocity fastballs.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are even asking...

Are you seriously asking if hitters do worse against higher velocity? Or better against lower velocity?

Or are you somehow suggesting that 88 mph today is the same as 88 mph 30 years ago, as if athletes overall haven't improved by leaps and bounds in the last 3 decades?
 
Further, this whole "statheads wouldn't like Glavine or Maddux today" is pure stupidity.

We only have pitchfx data for Maddux from 2007 and 2008, but here is what it reveals:

SI: 9.6" HMov, 5.8" VMov

That was an old man Maddux with above average movement on his SI going by today's grades...not the movement grades 10 years ago.

Maddux easily had plus movement on his SI back in 2007 when he was washed up. In his prime he almost certainly combined average or better velocity, plus or plus-plus movement, and elite command.

We would have known Maddux was amazing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top