Now this one is hard. By far the most interesting race in the Majors this year, and I really am not sure who I'm going to pick. It's obvious that it's going to be either the Cardinals or the Astros. The Cardinals seem to be the consensus pick by most sportswriters - even Baseball Prospects (www.baseballprospectus.com), by far the best baseball site on the web. But I'm not sure.
This leads me to an interesting discursion (well, interesting to me, anyways). Decision theory teaches us that one of the major cognitive flaws in human decision making is the overweighting of understood factors. That is, we know that there are a hundred factors that go into determining the outcome of something. And we understand two of them well, and the other 98 poorly. Most people then make their decisions _as if_ the two factors they understand are all-determining when they, in fact, are not. The relevance to my posts is statistical analysis and defense. Until last year there were, quite simply, no really useful statistics regarding defensive ability. Bill James seems to have created one as part of his Win Shares phenomenon. The book hasn't been published yet, so I can't fully assess his methodology, but there are hints of it in The New Historical Baseball Abstract. Also, of course, he's Bill James. The best in the business. And he displays an exceptional confidence in his new statistic, as well as convincingly demonstrating how previous defensive statistics tended to massively undervalue good defensive teams and massively overvalue poor ones. This is most striking in the case of Nap Lajoie, btw, who is the most _statistically_ overrated player in baseball because of the massive flaws in his defensive ratings caused by some factors that Bill James finally discovered. Anyways, the point of all of this is that, like most statistical analysts, I don't understand defense. I know that I don't understand it, and I don't have a way to measure it. I think that this causes a significant cognitive bias in my ratings that causes me to undervalue defense in my analysis. Rob Neyer once stated his belief that winning in baseball is 50% hitting, 45% pitching, and 5% defense. I think he understates the value of defense significantly in this calculation. James's Pythagorean formula clearly demonstrates that baseball is 50% hitting. But the other 50% - there I'm not sure. It seems likely to me, for example, that a significant part of the Yankees long run of success has been a defense that is, quite possibly, better than I give them credit for being. I don't know - that's just my suspicion, at the moment. This tendency to underrate defense is the main reason I picked Seattle over Oakland in the AL West - Seattle's defense is excellent, Oakland's atrocious. It may also make a difference in the NL Central race. The problem, again, is that I'm not sure how to assess the defensive quality of the two principal teams. I'm fairly certain that catcher's defense is vastly less significant than everyone thinks it is. The Cardinals outfield defense is clearly better - Jim Edmonds is a decent centerfielder, and JD Drew is a centerfielder playing right field. I personally think they should put Pujols in LF and Polanco at 3B - more on this in the team comments. Richard Hidalgo, Lance Berkman, and Daryle Ward, by contrast, are not a good defensive outfield. OTOH, the Astros defensive _infield_ is probably better, assuming that Craig Biggio has fully recovered from his knee surgery of a year and a half ago. Finally, the Astros have an excellent strikeout-oriented pitching staff, while the Cardinals are not, meaing that the Astros rely less on their defense. But strikeout staffs tend to rely on their outfields more, so that complicates things as well. All of this goes to my point that, umm, this one is hard. So, on to the picks. Houston - I'm going to have to stick with this one. I think at least in part because _everyone_ is picking the Cardinals, so if I'm right I look really good :-) Also because I won a bet with Dan M. picking Houston last year, so I might as well stick with the hot hand. But for serious analysis...does anyone else here realize that this team has, for career value, the best non-Barry Bonds player in the Majors today? Ken Griffey Jr. is supposed to be a great player - and he is. But Craig Biggio is better. A lot better. As Bill James said in his New Historical Baseball Abstract, "Craig Biggio is the best player in major league baseball today [this written before Bonds's 2001 season and clearly not true anymore - GM]. If you compare Craig Biggio very carefully to Ken Griffey Jr. in almost any season, you will find that Biggio has contributed more to his team than Griffey has." The full analysis (pp. 361-2) is well worth reading, and quite convincing. Biggio's main advantages are in small stats. He gets hit by pitches, he doesn't ground into double plays, things like that. Do enough of that and it adds up - in Biggio's case, into making him an all-time great player, an inner circle Hall of Famer by the time he retires. Jeff Bagwell is also, of course, a phenomenal player - a first ballot Hall of Famer, perhaps the best all-around 1B of all time by the time he retires. Lance Berkman is an astonishingly good hitter, and still young. Daryle Ward has done well in the past, and will be better. Richard Hidalgo has _got_ to be better than he was last year, if not as good as he was in 2000. Roy Oswalt is a superb young pitcher, as is Wade Miller, while I would bet that either Tim Redding or Carlos Hernandez will also produce - although I would be happier if Dierker was still there, as he has a much better history with young pitchers than Jimy Williams. Billy Wagner is an excellent closer, although closers are very overrated, of course, and Octavio Dotel helps them out in the bullpen as well. Jimy Williams does have a history of being able to assemble good bullpens. They are one of the best run teams in baseball but, absolutely inexplicably, they have Brian Hunter on their team. I'm not clear what Gerry Hunsicker was thinking. Every GM should have to repeat 10 times when he gets up in the morning - "Under no circumstances sign Brian Hunter." But I don't think that's enough to overcome the team's other advantages at "Insert Name Here" Field. If this team doesn't win, they will be the Wild Card. Of that I'm confident. 90+ wins easily, quite possibly 95+. St. Louis - This is a really phenomenal team, and if I wasn't trying to show off, I'd probably pick them above Houston. It all comes down to one question for them - is Rick Ankiel going to come back all the way? If he does, then they win the division. If not, they still might, but it's less certain. But they will be the Wild Card if not. Pujols will probably regress a little bit from his unreal 2001 season. JD Drew is a budding superstar, but is also very injury prone. Edmonds is starting to get old. They don't seem to have much worth talking about in LF. Tino Martinez last year, in one of his best-ever seasons, was little better than Mark McGwire in one of his worst-ever, and I doubt Tino will be as good this year as he was last year. All of that said, this team is going to be great. They have incredible pitching depth. Matt Morris has become one of the best pitchers in the Majors. Bud Smith is going to be very good. Darryl Kile seems to have bounced back all the way. Mike Matheny can't hit, but Michael Wolverton's ground-breaking work on catcher defense (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020102wolverton.html) shows him to be one of the best defensive catchers in the game. Jason Isringhausen was a waste of money, but they will still have a great bullpen. If Ankiel comes back, they will have _extra_ starting pitching - the only other team in the majors that can even concieve of that possibility is the Yankees. There biggest single weakness might be Tony La Russa who really isn't a very good manager at all, despite George Will's adulation of him. He has an obsession with one-batter relievers that just isn't worth it. He also has another problem, which is very difficult to talk about, but needs to be addresssed - basically, La Russa has a really bad record with black players. _I'm not saying he's a racist_. I have no evidence for that one way or the other. I am saying that a large number of black players who have played under La Russa have been extremely unhappy with him, and some of them have accused him of racism, to the point where this may become a problem for the Cardinals in trying to sign black players. I'm not sure how to think about that issue at all, but it's worth mentioning. Not a whole lot on the farm, though - they're in a bit of a down cycle after producing Pujols, Ankiel, Smith, and Drew. Again, 90+ wins easily, quite possibly 95+. These two teams are on a collision course. It'll be a great race. Or it would have been, if not for the Wild Card. Cubs - Wait till next year, of course. But I mean that seriously. The Cubs have the best farm system in the Majors. Maybe next year, definitely in two years, they are going to be really good in the Central. Sammy Sosa is, of course, superb, and shows no signs of slowing down, although presumably he will eventually. Moises Alou, despite his tendency to get injured, is a great addition. Fred McGriff is slowing down some, but will hold down the fort until Hee Sop Choi is ready. Juan Cruz, despite the sudden two-year increase in his age, is a superb young pitcher. You all know about Kerry Wood, and he should probably be all the way back from Tommy John surgery this year. Losing Tom Gordon for a few months is going to hurt them at least a little. The pitching staff also lacks depth, I think, for the moment. Although not for very long, I expect. Corey Patterson has incredible physical gifts - but he must, must, must learn the strike zone. If he ever does, he will be superb - a multiple all-star. They do have a serious weakness at SS. Hundley will probably bounce back from last year at least a little. They are critically handicapped by Don Baylor, one of the worst managers in the Majors, who is obsessively interested in the bunt, the stolen base, and little ball. Firing him might add 3-5 wins to the Cubbies immediately. It's the farm system, though, where the Cubs shine. Can someone convince Andy MacPhail to stop answering when Billy Beane calls him, though? Beane has skinned him in the last two years of both Eric Hinske _and_ Adam Morrissey, both for practically nothing in return. But Mark Prior is the best college pitcher since Roger Clemens, maybe ever. Hee Sop Choi is one of the better 1B prospects in the Majors, although he's not Nick Johnson. Ben Christensen is the dirtbag who beaned a guy in the _on-deck_ circle for "timing his pitches" but he's really talented, despite that fact. Bobby Hill and Carlos Zambrano will also be very good. There's more there as well. This team has a bright future, assuming that they don't screw it up completely. Reds - This team will soon have the best outfield in the Majors. Ken Griffey you all know. He's still great, btw, even though no one has thought of him for quite a while. Adam Dunn is absolutely mind-blowingly good. Hall of Fame good. He might hit 40 HRs _this year_. A year ago (until he hurt his wrist) most people thought Austin Kearns was _better_. He did just fine in the Arizona Fall League, he'll be up soon. Ruben Mateo used to be the best prospect in the Rangers organization. He's had injury after injury and doesn't control the strike zone, but the talent is still there. Juan Encarnacion has some upside as well. They're still crippled by their failure to palm Pokey Reese off on the Mariners when they had the chance, though, losing Antonio Perez - who will be excellent - instead. And they have no pitching. I mean, just astonishingly bad pitching - I can't name _one_ member of the Reds starting pitching staff. A good bullpen can only carry you so far. Plus they have Bob Boone. This is not a good thing. Bob Boone is another one of those managers who could add 3-5 wins to his team just by quitting. It's possible that only Tony Muser is worse. Fundamentally they have to convert some of these spare outfielders into pitching, but that won't be easy, as Dunn and Kearns are so good that giving them up for anyone would be a crime, while Mateo and Encarnacion have lost most of their value in the eyes of GMs. Pirates - Now we're on to the bottom feeders. There is a little talent here. Cam Bonifay destroyed this team, and the careers of some phenomenally talented baseball players. At least he's finally been fired. Aramis Ramirez will be excellent despite his mishandling. Brian Giles is very good. Jason Kendall is good. But Chad Hermansen was so mishandled he'll probably never stick in the Majors - it's a crying shame. Kris Benson has some potential, but there's neither pitching nor offense here. Nor is there much on the farm. Brewers - I _really want_ the Brewers to go 0-162 because of Beelzebud. Unfortunately, that probably won't happen. This team sucks. Bud Selig is the Devil. He appears to be purposely attempting to destroy baseball - that is the only reasonable explanation for his recent decisions, particularly the 60/40 debt ruling. Umm, Richie Sexson and Ruben Quevedo have some talent. That's it. There's nothing else positive I can think of to say abou this team. But I believe it is the moral obligation of all baseball fans - even the ones from Milwaukee - to root against the Brewers as long as Beelzebud is the Commissioner. Gautam
