tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post404003556087450938..comments2024-03-28T10:50:33.234-07:00Comments on Nationals Baseball: How much better? - Part 2Harperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07738813756060133236noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-33310073220499544372010-01-29T13:47:45.660-08:002010-01-29T13:47:45.660-08:001) Completely possible - I was just eyeballing an ...1) Completely possible - I was just eyeballing an average from the combination of Bill James, CHONE and Marcel projections. I thought they are a little on the brightside too. Then I took a look at the team stats and the total combined ERA for the relievers I thought would be GOOD on tha Nats was 4.14 which is below average compared to other teams entire staffs. So are those stats expecting too much? I had to say no. I guess for every Bruney or Capps that might pitch a run worse - there's going to be someone (Storen? Walker? Batista) to fill in that gap with adequate 4.00+ ERA pitching. <br /><br />2) I agree. But I don't see the difference being as huge as people think. Dunn out of LF is GREAT, but it means he'll be at first where he's not good. Willingham in LF will be bad, Dukes in RF isn't good (easily worse than Kearns), and Morgan in Center is great but the Nats had about 60% of last year covered by him or the talented Willie Harris. (milledge and Kearns barely played there) <br /><br />As for the IF and C. Catcher yes, infield we'll see. Desmond + Guzman is not guaranteed to be THAT much better defensively than Guzman + ? was last year.Harperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07738813756060133236noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-21569959989043282512010-01-29T11:43:43.690-08:002010-01-29T11:43:43.690-08:00I have 2 concerns with your projections: 1) I thin...I have 2 concerns with your projections: 1) I think you're over-rating the "good relievers" the Nats have. I don't see Capps pitching 3.7 ERA, I see him touching 4 or above because of his peripheral stats. Bruney I think will be worse than that. <br /><br />2) I think the Nats will give up fewer un-earned runs defensively than they did last year. I believe our error totals were well above what they can be expected to be, so regression-to-the-mean on returning players will work in the Nats favor. On top of that, we will not be playings Dukes/Kearns/Millege in CF. That's fewer runs given up independent of the pitching. We won't be playing Dunn in LF (and I think he's a better 1B defensively than LF- not a good 1B, but better than he is as a LF). We won't be putting Kearns or Willingham or Desmond in RF. In the infield, we won't have Anderson Hernandez taking grounders off the nuts. We won't have Josh Bard who can't stand up from a crouch behind the plate. Either Alex Gonzalez returns to the solid defensive player he was supposed to be when we acquired him, or he doesn't play (I hope). Maybe we acquire Hudson or other defensive 2B player who can prevent more runs than the garbage we threw out there last year. <br /><br />Those are all changes that will prevent runs defensively not accounted for in your estimates. I don't know enough about statistics to put a number on these changes, but it could have a more-positive effect than you've already spelled out! Hell, it's not even February, we hope still springs eternal...Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06585304213621604104noreply@blogger.com