Projections? We're talking about projections??
Why should anyone care what the computer says in February?
Hey, we’re understandably excited right now. About the Reds, I mean. If you’re a Georgetown Hoyas basketball fan — as I am — you are decidedly not excited at the moment. As I write this, they’re losing to Seton Hall and on the precipice of dropping to 1-10 in the Big East. What happened to this once-proud program? The answer to that, of course, is that Patrick Ewing both brought Hoyas to prominence, and drove them into the ditch.
Related: this is why I never want to see Barry Larkin managing the Reds. It can only end badly, and you don’t want to see your club legends tarnished. Remember Tony Perez’s managerial tenure?
Anyway, I’m pretty sure I was going somewhere with this… Oh yes! We’re excited about the Reds. Young team with a winning record, should be a lot better next year, right? Well, the computers are bringing a wet blanket to this particular picnic, as the various projection systems are starting to drop their algorithmic goodies.
When Baseball Prospectus revealed their projections yesterday, I cautioned Reds fans on Twitter/X that they probably didn’t want to look at them. Here’s why:
Cardinals: 85.5 projected wins
Cubs: 80.2
Brewers: 78.8
Redlegs: 78.3
Pirates: 73.0
Like it or dislike it, these aren’t far from what Fangraphs projects:
Cardinals: 83.4
Cubs: 80.5
Brewers: 80.2
Redlegs: 78.7
Pirates: 77.0
I had intended to write about these projections this week and, well, I guess I am writing about them. But I don’t think I can do any better than some of my friends. For example, here’s what Wick Terrell had to say over at Red Reporter:
What gives?
Perhaps they saw that the Reds gave up a whopping 821 runs last year, that their starters’ ERA of 5.43 was the third worst among all teams, and that the only guy they added to that mix missed basically all of last year with a major shoulder injury (and surgery). They certainly saw that despite the Reds burgeoning talent on the position-player side, the club still finished having scored 38 fewer runs than they allowed - a margin similar to that of the Cleveland Guardians (-35) and their 10-games-under-.500 finish last year.
They’re banking on the idea that just because the Reds played an amalgamation of rookies last season, they aren’t all just going to be better this year because they existed last year. They’re also likely leaning into the idea that none of Hunter Greene, Nick Lodolo, Graham Ashcraft, or Matt McLain has shown they can stay healthy for a full MLB season, while the veterans around them - Jake Fraley, Jonathan India, Montas, and Tyler Stephenson - have been about as routinely injured as players can get.
Go read the entire piece. And while you’re at it, you need to check out Wick’s writing about backpacking and the outdoors, if that’s something that interests you. He consistently feeds into my never-ending wanderlust.
Over at my old home Redleg Nation, Doug Gray said this:
Projections tend to find the middle ground between “if everything goes right” and “if everything goes wrong”. And that makes sense because in most cases, those situations represent the rarity, the unlikely, etc. But some of the projections just seem off. Like they are missing some data points. Alexis Diaz is a big example there. If you could put the over/under on his ERA at 4.52 and take bets on it, the chances you’d get bets on the over could be counted on one hand.
At the end of the day they play the games out on the field. Projections are fun, and there’s some value in them. But for this specific team, it’s real tough to look at the projection and say the pitching will be worse than last season and the offense is only going to score two more runs per month than they did last year.
And Steve at Reds Content Plus added this:
So, once again, these projection systems don’t see the Reds being a worse team. Their run differential is expected to be about the same. But projections assume neutral luck, which would put the Reds a handful of games lower in terms of W/L.
I’d encourage you to read each of those pieces in their entirety. As for me, I really do believe the Reds will be better than these projections. The computers often have difficulty projecting young players, and the Reds have more than their fair share of kids on the roster.
But we also can’t deny that there are absolutely some glaring flaws with the roster as currently constructed. The outfield has some questions, the rotation has real injury concerns, and the bullpen really needs more help. I worry that Reds management didn’t do enough to improve the club.
The good news is this: BP and Fangraphs both believe that 86 wins will be enough to win the National League Central. And there’s no question in my mind that this year’s version of the Redlegs is capable of winning 86 games.
Today in Reds History
I think you can blame the fact that the Reds have been mostly awful for the last three decades, but I find myself more and more interested in researching and chronicling the history of this franchise. Occasionally, I decide to randomly see what has happened on this date in Reds history. And, in related news, I really need to find a hobby.
Anyway, here’s what I found for today, February 7:
1926: Reds purchased Val Picinich from the Boston Red Sox. If you’ve never heard of Picinich, join the club. He was a catcher who hit .278/.343/.381 over three seasons in Cincinnati. In total, he played 18 years in the big leagues, for six different clubs. Not a bad career, right? I dunno, I had never heard of him before today.
Three years later, he was dealt to the Brooklyn Robins in exchange for two guys with exquisite names: Rube Ehrhardt and Johnny Gooch.
1936: The Reds boarded the SS Borinquen in New York and set sail for San Juan, Puerto Rico for spring training. They stayed there for a month before finishing out spring camp in Tampa.
I’ve only been to San Juan once; it was last spring, when my brother was married elsewhere in Puerto Rico. We spent just a couple of days in Puerto Rico. I want to go back.
1942: The Reds sold future Hall of Famer Ernie Lombardi to the Braves. I wrote a little about Lombardi last week in the discussion on which number the Reds should retire next. Here’s what Redleg Journal had to say about this transaction:
Warren Giles thought he had a better catcher on the roster in recently acquired Rollie Hemsley. Giles couldn’t have been more wrong. Lombardi won the National League batting title in 1942 with a .330 average, and played in the majors until 1947. He was not inducted into the Hall of Fame until 1986, nine years after his death. Giles, as an influential member of the Hall of Fame Veterans Committee, had much to do with keeping Lombardi out of Cooperstown.
How dare he!!!
1987: Joe Price left the Reds to sign a free agent contract with San Francisco. Remember Joe Price? As a kid, I thought he was pretty darn good. And he actually was kinda sorta good over seven seasons in Cincinnati, posting an ERA+ of 105. For the next three years, he bounced around from the Giants to the Red Sox to the Orioles before his career was over.
What’s Chad Watching?
Argylle was pretty entertaining until the final 30 minutes, when it went completely off the rails. I’m a pretty big fan of director Matthew Vaughn but I just can’t recommend this one.
The other three movies this week were part of my annual rush to watch all of the Oscar-nominated films before the awards are handed out. 20 Days in Mariupol was noinated in the documentary category, and Nimona is in the animated feature category. As you can see in the image above, one was good while the other was not.
The Zone of Interest…I dunno. I think it was good? Maybe I need to rewatch it. At any rate, it was the only Best Picture nominee I hadn’t seen yet. I’ll have my rankings out soon. (Here are last year’s rankings, if you missed them.)
Update
Georgetown lost by 6 points. This makes me sad.