3 Up, 3 Down

This post on Fun with Win Shares pointed me towards a Twins' website. In their post Some Sobering Numbers, Three Up Three Down looked at the Twins offseason moves from a Win Shares perspective. Their conclusion: Twins are in trouble.

Well, what about the A's?

The A's won 96 games in 2003, so that means there are 288 Win Shares to distribute. Billy Beane lost/traded players who contributed 105 Win Shares (86 of those WS were Tejada, Foulke, Ramon Hernandez, TLong and Ted Lilly).

That's a lot to replace, but we did get Kotsay, Kielty, Redman, Miller, Hammond and Rhodes. Last year, those six combined for just about 60 Win Shares. So, you might say that we've netted a loss of 45 win shares, and we're headed for an 80-win season. That relatively dire prediction, however, would ignore the potential contributions of our younger players like Rich Harden, Bobby Crosby and Justin Duchscherer. (Clearly the youngsters have limited track records, so projecting out to a full season is terribly risky. But bear with me, I'm being optimistic.)

Here's what I envision for the 2004 A's pitching staff, assuming everyone performs at pretty much the same level. I've highlighted the instances where a pitcher will have to throw more innings. In those cases, I've simply adjusted their win shares accordingly.

Name	2003 Win Shares	2003 IP	2004 IP (Est.)	2004 Win Shares (Est.)
Hudson	23.17	240	240	23.2
Zito	17.66	232	232	17.7
Mulder	16.91	186	200	18.2
Redman	11.15	191	191	11.1
Harden	4.09	75	170	9.3
Duchscherer	1.25	17	80	5.9
Bradford	9.05	77	77	9.1
Hammond	7.04	63	63	7.0
Rincon	6.26	56	56	6.3
Rhodes	4.25	54	54	4.3
Mecir	1.03	37	37	1.0
Harville	0.31	22	22	0.3
Total			1419	113

Considering the 2003 A's pitching staff threw 1440 innings, I feel pretty comfortable about my projections, inning-wise. On to the offense (PA=Plate Appearances, estimated as At Bats + Walks), where I again highlighted differences in playing time.

Name	2003 Win Shares	2003 PA	2004 PA (Est.)	2004 Win Shares (Est.)
Chavez	24.69	650	650	24.7
Ellis	17.82	601	601	17.8
Durazo	16.91	637	637	16.9
Kotsay	13.60	538	600	15.2
Kielty	12.16	498	600	14.7
Hatteberg	14.00	607	607	14.0
Byrnes	15.48	456	350	11.9
Miller	10.11	391	391	10.1
Melhuse	4.07	86	200	9.5
Crosby	0.17	13	600	7.8
McMillon	5.02	172	172	5.0
Dye	1.52	246	400	2.5
Menechino	2.19	102	102	2.2
Total			5910	152

In 2003, the A's had 6,050 plate appearances, so my projection of 5,900 isn't too bad. I should point out, however, that I didn't pay too much attention to getting the right numbr of PA's by position. I'm happy enough that it worked out as it did.

(A couple notes about the playing time adjustments... Kotsay and Kielty, if healthy and given a starting spot all year, should reach 600 PA. Jermaine Dye and Eric Byrnes will end up splitting the remaining OF at-bats. Dye will probably play better than he did in 2003, and Byrnes might play worse. On balanace, their changes will probably cancel each other out in terms of the win shares, so I'm not too concerned about that. --- The one issue of concern is Bobby Crosby. Projecting a full season from only 13 at-bats is ludicrous. But here's why I did it... It works out to only 8 win shares, which would put Crosby as the 15th best shortstop in the AL in 2003. With only fourteen teams in the AL, that would make Crsoby one of the worst every day shortstops in the league. Either he's going to be that good or we'll have to replace him with someone who is, right away.)

So, that's 113 Win Shares for the pitchers, 152 for the offense and a total of 265 Win Shares. After dividing by three, that's 88 wins, but a mere 88 wins isn't going to put anyone into the playoffs. Looking at the last four years, it looks like 91 wins will give you a chance at making the playoffs, and you need 95+ to really feel comfortable about your odds.

I'll leave the remaining 3-10 wins (9-30 Win Shares) in the hands of Billy Beane, and I won't lose any sleep. The A's will be in the playoff hunt all year - well, at least until they clinch a spot...

Red Sox Aren't So Smart After All

The Red Sox re-acquired Brian Daubach today. Without looking at the numbers, let me just say that Brian Daubach stinks! This move (along with the signing of Pokey Reese) probably undoes all of the good work Theo Epstein has done in getting Schilling and Foulke.

Well... maybe not. But the only categories "Dauber" is likely to contribute in are "Ugly Strike-outs" and "Ugly Faces."

Win Shares and a Terrible Trade

Before I get into the mis-management of the Phillies in the early- to mid-eighties, let me point you towards BaseballGraphs.com's explanation of Bill James' Win Shares. In short, a team's winning percentage is tied to the number of runs scored and runs allowed. And from there, it's only a "short" leap to tie individual performance to wins. Each hit or (hit prevented) is like a fraction of a run, which is a fraction of a win... Anyway, three win shares is equivalent to one win.

Onto the trade...

Between the 1981 and 1982 seasons the Phillies traded Ryne Sandberg (a prospect at the time) and an over the hill Larry Bowa to the Cubs for for Ivan DeJesus, and it was an unadulterated failure from the Phillies perspective.

After 1982, Ryno went on to put up 346 career Win Shares (according to Bill James) for the Cubbies, while Larry Bowa contributed 28. On the Phillies side, Ivan DeJesus was worth only 34 win shares to the Phillies before being traded again.

This time, the Phillies gave up DeJesus and Bill Campbell for the Cardinals' Dave Rucker. DeJesus and Campbell combined for 5 Win Shares for the Cardinals before being released, while Rucker gave the Phillies only 3.

So, the Phillies gave up 379 Win Shares and got only 37 in exchange. That's bad business.

More Curling

From the Canadian Rules of Curling:

Curlers' Code of Ethics
I will play the game with a spirit of good sportsmanship.
I will conduct myself in an honourable manner both on and off the ice.
I will never knowingly break a rule, but if I do, I will divulge the breach.
I will take no action that could be interpreted as an attempt to intimidate or demean my opponents, teammates or officials.
I will interpret the rules in an impartial manner, always keeping in mind that the purpose of the rules is to ensure that the game is played in an orderly and fair manner.
I will humbly accept any penalty that the governing body at any level of curling deems appropriate, if I am found in violation of the Code of Ethics or rules of the game.

and

Fair Play
Fair Play begins with the strict observance of the written rule; however, in most cases, Fair Play involves something more than even unfailing observance of the written rule.
The observance of the spirit of the rules, whether written or unwritten, is important.
Fair Play results from measuring up to one's own moral standards while engaged in competition.
Fair Play is consistent demonstration of respect for teammates and opponents, whether they are winning or losing.
Fair Play is consistent demonstration of respect for officials, an acceptance of their decisions and a steadfast spirit of collaboration with them.
Sportsmanlike behaviour should be demonstrated both on and off the ice. This includes modesty in victory and composure in defeat.

It's too bad American sports don't have anything like this. I'd love to see Terrell Owens or Joe Horn show modesty in victory and composure in defeat. Fresh Angles had a good little article a while back about the Era of the Ego in the NFL.

Curling

Watched curling yesterday during the tail end of the Colts' victory over the hapless Broncos. I'm afraid to admit that it was damn entertaining. The riveting action on Fox Sports World kept my roommate around for the highlights of the World Dart Championship, which were also entertaining.

Great Website

Best website I've seen all year. (thanks to Yahoo! Picks)

Jackpot

Two winners in the latest Powerball drawing will each get lump sums of $60M. Imagine spending $10M right away and investing the remaining $50M in tax-free bonds that pay 3% a year (just to make up a number). That's an income of $1.5M a year.

It's amazing that anyone can go broke after winning the lottery, but people do.