Replacement Level Yankees Weblog

Disclaimer: If you think this is the official website of the New York Yankees, you're an idiot. Go away.

Lucky or Good?
by Larry Mahnken

Not being very knowledgeable about amateur baseball, I can't say exactly what the quality of the Yankees' draft was, but I do know it wasn't that good, especially considering that they had 4 of the first 40 picks.

It's not like they drafted a bunch of talentless crap, these players could turn into something worth having, but it's not going to offer much help in the next couple of years; not for the major league team, and not for trades. The team seems happy with the guys they got--well, that's no surprise--but I feel a bit disappointed by this draft, like it was a lost opportunity.

But the thing with drafts is that while you can criticize the decisions that were made in drafting a player right away, it's tough to say how good the draft itself was in terms of talent acquired, at least for a few years. If a draft brings you a major league regular, then it was a good draft, regardless of the decisions made.

* * *

The Yankees come into today's games 2½ games ahead of the Red Sox, but the Sox have a slight edge in run differential--4 runs--and ½ a game behind Boston in Pythagorean Record. They're currently four games better than their Pythagorean Record, while Boston is only one game ahead of theirs, largely because New York is 10-6 in one run games, while Boston is 3-6.

And it doesn't really mean that much.

Pythagorean Record isn't some magical indicator of a team's true quality, the most important thing about James' Pythagorean Theorem is that it shows the relation between run scoring and winning, but there's a lot of things that can, and will throw it off. Record in one-run games is one of those, but a large number of blowout wins can skew things, too.

That a team is outplaying it's Pythagorean Record doesn't mean that they're lucky. Winning a lot of one run games doesn't mean that a team is lucky, either, because not all one-run games are equal. For instance, a team could win a one-run game that they should have won by four or five runs, but didn't because the breaks didn't go their way. If luck evened out, they wouldn't lose that game, they'd win by more.

In general, teams will finish .500 in 1-run games, but that doesn't mean the Yankees are likely to play 4 games under .500 in 1-run games the rest of the way. They're likely to play .500 in 1-run games the rest of the way--just like Boston.

That being said--and excuse me if this seems contradictory--Pythagorean Record is a useful tool when evaluating a team. It tells you how well they've done outside of their record, but it doesn'supersede their record.

Another important tool when evaluating a team is the strength of their schedule. The Yankees have the best record in baseball, but only Tampa Bay, Seattle, Houston and Pittsburgh have played a tougher schedule so far (opponents' record minus games played against team), while only eight teams have had a weaker schedule than Boston.

Going the rest of the way, the Yankees have the fourth easiest schedule, while Boston has a tougher schedule than everyone but the Rangers and the Cubs. Ooooh, that makes me happy.

Anyway, I used that information to make a projection of the final standings:



AL East         W     L    Pct.    NL East         W     L    Pct.

Yankees        106.7  55.3 .659    Florida         93.0  69.0 .574

Boston          93.0  69.0 .574    Philadelphia    85.3  76.7 .526

Baltimore       77.2  84.8 .476    Atlanta         81.9  80.1 .506

Toronto         71.8  90.2 .443    NY Mets         79.3  82.7 .489

Tampa Bay       68.5  93.5 .423    Montreal        54.1 107.9 .334



AL Central      W     L    Pct.    NL Central      W     L    Pct.

White Sox       90.8  71.2 .560    Cincinnati      95.3  66.7 .588

Minnesota       81.7  80.3 .504    St. Louis       92.1  69.9 .569

Cleveland       74.0  88.0 .457    Houston         89.7  72.3 .553

Detroit         70.9  91.1 .438    Chicago Cubs    81.7  80.3 .504

Kansas City     62.4  99.6 .385    Milwaukee       80.3  81.7 .496

                                   Pittsburgh      73.3  88.7 .453

AL West         W     L    Pct.    

Anaheim         96.4  65.6 .595    NL West         W     L    Pct.

Oakland         91.4  70.6 .564    San Diego       89.9  72.1 .555

Texas           89.2  72.8 .550    Los Angeles     88.5  73.5 .546

Seattle         65.7  96.3 .406    San Francisco   82.5  79.5 .510

                                   Arizona         62.5  99.5 .386

                                   Colorado        60.8 101.2 .375

Now, as awesome as that would be, we know it's highly unlikely to go down that way. It assumes that every team is going to play the rest of the way like they've played so far. It doesn't account for teams playing over their head, playing below their talent, or injuries. Like Pythagorean Record, it's highly flawed. But it's awful nice to think about--107 wins, and a runaway victory in the division. Now, if Oakland could be two games better...

Now, the injury factor is likely to give Boston a boost and drag the Yankees down, since Trot Nixon and Nomar Garciaparra are coming back, and the Yankees haven't had any devastating front line injuries yet, which a lot of people expect to be somewhat inevitable.

But the other question has to be, are the Yankees playing over their head? Forget about what Boston's doing, the Yankees have the best record vs. one of the toughest schedules, is it because they're playing better than they should?

I took a look at this using Bill James' most recent incarnation of Runs Created (which accounts for homers with runners on, and hits with runners in scoring position, to give a more accurate estimation of runs scored), and projected how many runs each player would have created in the same number of plate appearances in 2003, in his last three seasons, and his career. The results:



                        2001-

Name          2004 2003 2003  Career

Derek Jeter     24   39   39     39

A. Rodriguez    43   47   51     47

G. Sheffield    39   50   47     43

Hideki Matsui   41   31   31     31

B. Williams     23   27   34     34

Jorge Posada    32   32   30     29

Jason Giambi    30   28   32     29

E. Wilson       15   12    8     11

Ruben Sierra    19   14   15     17

Tony Clark      17   12   13     16

Kenny Lofton    12   11   11     13

Miguel Cairo    10    7    8      9

John Flaherty   -1    5    4      4

Bubba Crosby     7    0    0      0

Travis Lee      -1    3    3      2

Homer Bush      -1    0    1      0

Total          309  318  327    327

I also projected the number of earned runs given up by the pitchers in each situation (The numbers in parantheses on the bottom is the 2004 total for players who have data for the listed season):



                         2001-

Name           2004 2003 2003  Career

Bret Prinz       0    9    4       4

M. Rivera        4    6    8       9

Tom Gordon       8   11   11      14

J. Vazquez      31   27   29      34

Kevin Brown     34   21   25      28

P. Quantrill    15    7   10      14

Mike Mussina    41   31   32      32

T. Sturtze       5    6    5       5

Jorge DePaula    5    1    1       1

Jon Lieber      26    -   20      22

Gabe White      14    9   10       9

J. Contreras    25   12   12      12

D. Osborne      14    -   12       8

Scott Proctor    6    -    -       -

Felix Heredia    8    2    3       4

Alex Graman      6    -    -       -

Total          242  141  181     195

                   (190)(230)   (230)

What this data shows is that the Yankees have in fact underperformed their track record on the whole, despite surprisingly good seasons by some players. However, being an older team, that can't be too much of a surprise, a decline should be expected.

I compared the 2004 numbers to PECOTA to get an idea of how they're doing compared to a reasonable projection, which accounts for decline:





Name           2004 PECOTA     Name          2004 PECOTA

Derek Jeter     24    36       Bret Prinz      0     4

A. Rodriguez    43    48       M. Rivera       4    11

G. Sheffield    39    43       Tom Gordon      8    11

Hideki Matsui   41    34       J. Vazquez     31    27

B. Williams     23    32       Kevin Brown    34    31

Jorge Posada    32    28       P. Quantrill   15    16

Jason Giambi    30    30       Mike Mussina   41    30

E. Wilson       15    12       T. Sturtze      5     5

Ruben Sierra    19    15       Jorge DePaula   5     5

Tony Clark      17    15       Jon Lieber     26    27

Kenny Lofton    12    11       Gabe White     14     9

Miguel Cairo    10     9       J. Contreras   25    13

John Flaherty   -1     4       D. Osborne     14     -

Bubba Crosby     7     3       Scott Proctor   6     4

Travis Lee      -1     3       Felix Heredia   8     5

Homer Bush      -1     -       Alex Graman     6     3

Total          309   320       Total         242   200

                                                  (228)

So, even using PECOTA, the Yankees are at least 29 runs worse than their PECOTA projection, and yet they still have the best record in baseball.

Some of the slumping guys--Mussina and Jeter, primarily--seem likely to play closer to their projections the rest of the way, and Hideki Matsui might sustain his improvement. But Bernie might really be done, and there are several players who have improved who are unlikely to sustain it.

But, on the whole, I'd say these numbers are encouraging. If I had the time, I would have done the same thing for Boston, but I think these numbers pretty clearly show that the Yankees are going to be able to hold their own against Boston the rest of teh season. Unless, of course, they get hurt--which was the number one variable all along.

--posted at 12:49 AM by Larry Mahnken / |

Larry Mahnken and SG's
	Replacement Level Yankees Weblog
"Hey, it's free!"