The 2023 Start of Spring ZiPS Projected Standings: American League

© Jerome Miron-USA TODAY Sports

The 2023 ZiPS projections have all been incorporated into the site, and while there will be some additions (platoon splits), changes (there’s a weird RBI bug affecting a handful of very poor minor league hitters) and updates to come, the player pages now contain the projections for the upcoming season. Our Depth Charts also reflect ZiPS along with Steamer, enabling David Appelman to crank up all the dials and flick all the switches, and you to blame me as well as Steamer when a team’s projection doesn’t look right to you!

Spring doesn’t actually start in the Northern Hemisphere until March 20 this year, but the real spring, baseball’s spring training, kicks off in a week when pitchers and catchers report. While it’s unlikely that these are the precise rosters that will eventually start playing exhibition games, the vast majority of the significant shifts in player talent have already happened.

So where do we stand?

Naturally, I used the ZiPS projection system to get the latest run of team win totals. The methodology I’m using here isn’t identical to the one we use in our Projected Standings, meaning there will naturally be some important differences in the results. So how does ZiPS calculate the season? Stored within ZiPS are the first through 99th-percentile projections for each player. I start by making a generalized depth chart, using our Depth Charts as a jumping off point. Since these are my curated projections, I make changes based on my personal feelings about who will receive playing time as filtered through arbitrary whimsy my logic and reasoning. ZiPS then generates a million versions of each team in Monte Carlo fashion — the computational algorithms, that is (no one is dressing up in a tuxedo and playing baccarat like James Bond).

After that is done, ZiPS applies another set of algorithms with a generalized distribution of injury risk that changes the baseline PAs/IPs for each player. Of note is that higher-percentile projections already have more playing time than lower-percentile projections before this step. ZiPS then automatically “fills in” playing time from the next players on the list (proportionally) to get to a full slate of plate appearances and innings.

The result is a million different rosters for each team and an associated winning percentage for each of those million teams. After applying the new strength of schedule calculations based on the other 29 teams, I end up with the standings for each of the million seasons. This is actually much less complex than it sounds.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

The goal of ZiPS is to be less mind-blowingly awful than any other way of predicting the future. The future is tantalizingly close but beyond our ken, and if anyone figures out how to deflect the astrophysicist Arthur Eddington’s arrow of time, it’s probably not going to be in the form of baseball projections. So we project probabilities, not certainties.

Over the last decade, ZiPS has averaged 19.9 correct teams when looking at Vegas preseason over/under lines. I’m always tinkering with methodology, but most of the low-hanging fruit in predicting how teams will perform has already been harvested. With one major exception, most of the problems now are about accuracy rather than bias. ZiPS’ misses for teams from year-to-year are uncorrelated, with an r-squared of one year’s miss to the next of 0.000575. Now, correlations with fewer than 20 points aren’t ideal, but the individual franchise with the highest year-to-year r-squared is the Mariners, at 0.03, which isn’t terribly meaningful. If you think that certain franchises have a history of predictive over- or underperformance, you thought wrong, and I’d bet it’s the same for the other notable projection systems.

Now, I did say there was one major exception, and that’s in-season roster changes. As you might suspect, ZiPS systematically underestimates teams that add value during the season and overrates teams that subtract value. So it’s not surprising that when you total it up, two of the teams that have made the most in-season additions over the last 17 seasons, the Astros and Yankees, are the two teams that have underperformed most often in ZiPS.

With that explanation out of the way, let’s get to the projected standings. We’ll cover the American League today, starting with the AL East:

ZiPS Projected Standings – AL East
Team W L GB Pct Div% WC% Playoff% WS Win%
New York Yankees 89 73 .549 36.9% 38.8% 75.8% 8.0%
Toronto Blue Jays 88 74 1 .543 32.5% 39.7% 72.2% 7.0%
Tampa Bay Rays 86 76 3 .531 20.0% 39.3% 59.3% 4.2%
Baltimore Orioles 80 82 9 .494 5.7% 23.0% 28.7% 1.1%
Boston Red Sox 79 83 10 .488 4.8% 20.8% 25.7% 0.9%

Like last year’s final four-way preseason tie, the East’s 50th-percentile projections feel low. But when it comes down to it, that feeling is simply a result of being in a strong division. You can’t say “OK, three of these teams feel like 95-wins teams, and also the Orioles can win 90, and the Red Sox can go, like, .500 without some luck replacing Trevor Story’s production.” These good teams have to play each other, after all, and every division is going to have a 130-130 block of games.

The Yankees have basically restored their slim lead at the top of the division with the return of Aaron Judge and the addition of Carlos Rodón. It’s still a team with some serious downside in key areas, however. The bevy of top prospects on the middle infield alleviates most of the major worries, while the Rodón addition makes the back of the rotation a little less crucial to the team’s hopes, but the Yankees are an injury or two away from having some serious offensive problems. Losing Judge would hurt anyone, but the Yankees have a lot invested in Anthony Rizzo, who is no longer an elite bat, and Giancarlo Stanton, who hasn’t really been both healthy and good in some time.

Last year, ZiPS saw Toronto as the safest of the good teams in the East, and it continues to see the situation that way. The Blue Jays have a very well-balanced offense and can survive the loss of practically anyone. ZiPS isn’t excited about the rotation or the bullpen, but it sees both them as robustly filled, with the possible exception of the Jays’ fifth starter. Tampa Bay gets just about their usual forecast, but as I talked about in their preview, the lack of excitement in the outfield holds the projection down to a degree.

Baltimore has a bright future, but it’s hard to see that future being now with the current rotation. Yes, Grayson Rodriguez and DL Hall could be top-of-the-rotation talents, pushing Kyle Gibson and Cole Irvin to the mid-rotation roles that better fit their talents. This projection would look even worse if not for the fact that among ZiPS’ weapons is an almost fanatical devotion to Dean Kremer.

The Red Sox haven’t been silent this winter. I think Masataka Yoshida will end up being one of the better free agent signings of the offseason, and it was nice to see the Sox reverse a disappointing trend and lock up Rafael Devers to a massive extension. Still, those moves don’t make up for the losses the Red Sox have eaten this offseason.

ZiPS Projected Standings – AL Central
Team W L GB Pct Div% WC% Playoff% WS Win%
Cleveland Guardians 83 79 .512 50.2% 7.3% 57.5% 3.2%
Minnesota Twins 80 82 3 .494 30.3% 8.3% 38.6% 1.5%
Chicago White Sox 74 88 9 .457 11.1% 4.4% 15.5% 0.3%
Detroit Tigers 71 91 12 .438 4.7% 2.0% 6.7% 0.1%
Kansas City Royals 70 92 13 .432 3.8% 1.6% 5.3% 0.1%

The Guardians stand at the top of the AL Central simply by having the least flawed team. No one would accuse Cleveland of being too aggressive this offseason, but there really aren’t any situations that could devastate them, and that’s something. If José Ramírez went down with a serious injury, it would obviously be a massively big deal, but the Guardians could likely patch up that spot without it tanking the team too far. What knocked a bit off the projections was the Minnesota Twins getting their surprise big name replacement for Carlos Correa: Carlos Correa. Elsewhere on the Twins’ roster, I’m a fan of Pablo López, but his addition widens the rotation’s foundations rather than adjusting its ceiling upward.

We’ve written so much about the White Sox that I don’t want to belabor the point, but the organization has been treading water, watching baseball swim on by. Andrew Benintendi is fine, but adding him is basically making the minimal effort. The Pale Hose can take the Central, but it’s hard to call them a favorite these days. I’m shocked how far Chicago’s projection has drifted downward, but the team’s depth remains shockingly shallow in a lot of areas. In terms of the “next 26” roster, ZiPS actually ranks the Sox below the Royals or Tigers.

The Royals have basically fire sale’d — a minimal one given the team’s talent level — coming off the 2023 season. There are interesting players such as Vinnie Pasquantino to watch on offense, but I’m still not sure if the Royals really have a solid plan beyond hoping some of these young hitters work out very well and everything else just takes care of itself. The Tigers are going to be no more dangerous in 2023 than they were last season. The holes in the offense are massive and the rotation’s Operation: Veteran Fourth Starter MEGAXPLOSION isn’t going to make up for them.

ZiPS Projected Standings – AL West
Team W L GB Pct Div% WC% Playoff% WS Win%
Houston Astros 90 72 .556 50.2% 28.0% 78.2% 9.1%
Seattle Mariners 85 77 5 .525 21.7% 32.3% 54.0% 3.6%
Los Angeles Angels 85 77 5 .525 21.2% 32.0% 53.2% 3.5%
Texas Rangers 79 83 11 .488 5.8% 17.6% 23.4% 0.8%
Oakland A’s 72 90 18 .444 1.1% 5.0% 6.1% 0.1%

It may seem like ZiPS gives the Astros the same projection every year, but a big part of that is that the computer sees some combination of the Mariners, Angels, and Rangers inching closer each year. With the team’s high-end offensive talent and deep pitching staff, I’d consider the median projection a bit of a disappointment, but it’s just that the hyenas are nipping a bit at the lion’s feet.

Chief among those so-called hyenas are the Seattle Mariners. Instead of misunderstanding what it meant to beat their Pythagorean record by 14 wins in 2021 — a fate that other teams, including some past Mariners squads, have succumbed to — Jerry Dipoto and Co. put in the hard work of actually improving the team so it could win 90 games without the aid of any mathematical good fortune. And that’s precisely what the Mariners did in 2022! But this winter has been a quieter one, with the team seemingly focused more on maintaining its position than meaningfully expanding it.

The Angels are one of the more interesting puzzles in baseball. The team is terribly constructed, indifferently owned, and is likely just a year away from losing Shohei Ohtani. Rather than make a big splash and add a top-tier free agent, the Angels ran around with a container of mortar and a trowel, trying to cover up enough holes for one last good season with Ohtani in tow. Names like Brandon Drury, Carlos Estévez, Hunter Renfroe, Gio Urshela, Tyler Anderson, Jake Lamb, and Justin Garza don’t exactly scream star power, but given the holes the Angels have, this roster might just actually be good enough to work in 2023.

The Rangers keep improving and keep doing so rapidly, but they’re still at the point where they’re closing some of their larger remaining holes, even with the additions of Jacob deGrom, Nathan Eovaldi and Andrew Heaney this winter. The Oakland Athletics will find a whole bunch of useful fourth-starters nobody ever heard of before 2023 and finish comfortably in last place.

Next up: The National League!





Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.

125 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
EonADSMember since 2024
3 years ago

The Guardians really remind me of those Cardinals teams during the 2010’s. Not an insane ceiling, but inarguably a high floor with no real weaknesses. I just hope they can capture their own version of Devil Magic and grab a breakout or two.

Last edited 3 years ago by EonADS
Smiling PolitelyMember since 2018
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

A bit, but those teams had Beltran, Molina, Holliday, Furcal, Carpenter…Cleveland has Ramírez and…this inanimate carbon rod (award winning, but still). It’s a testament to just how lazy the AL Central has been for so very long.

EonADSMember since 2024
3 years ago

I was thinking more mid 2010’s, after Pujols flew the coop, but yeah, fair.

(also, inanimate carbon rod? What am I missing?)

Last edited 3 years ago by EonADS
Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

They had a freakin’ ticker tape parade for it!

Richie
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

You’re missing a couple of decades that Jason and I have on our tires.

(it’s a very early Simpsons joke)

EonADSMember since 2024
3 years ago
Reply to  Richie

Aaaah, yeah. I get it now.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

“Oh I get it! I get jokes!”

— also Homer

cmowMember since 2025
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

In Rod We Trust

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  cmow

Lookin’ good Rod…lookin’ good Todd

MTFMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

Looking on the bright side the Cleveland home opening series against the Mariners, two teams with similar projections (fighting to make the payoffs right from the get-go), should be early season must-watch.

PC1970Member since 2024
3 years ago

Good stuff as always! Couple things:

“every division is going to have a 130-130 block of games”. Shouldn’t that be 65-65?

Can’t believe how far & how fast White Sox have fallen. That was definitely the most surprising prediction to me.

Team I would take the over on- Cleveland. Barring a slew of injuries, I just can’t see them winning less than 85 games in that division…& 2nd choice would be Chicago.

Team I would take the under- Oakland. I just can’t see them winning more than 65-66 games with that offense & am surprised Zips has them ahead of KC & Detroit (I think those 2 have a higher floor & NONE of those 3 has a high ceiling). 2nd would be Boston- Just a hunch that things unravel for them in a stacked division

Last edited 3 years ago by PC1970
PhilMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

In the standings, they will count as 130-130 – as in the standings each game counts twice.

I completely that projection seems very bullish on the As.

Last edited 3 years ago by Phil
MikeSMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

The White Sox have burned a lot of good will since the end of 2020. If they get off to a slow start I bet they draw less than 1.5 million fans and then they will hit fans with the old “we can’t afford to improve the team because nobody is coming out.”

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

I have a really hard time believing that Oakland projection. As for the White Sox, the only way that makes sense is if it is projecting more injuries to Robert and Jimenez and Moncada and Anderson. I think Robert and Moncada are in bounceback territory, which will help cover the loss of Abreu.

EonADSMember since 2024
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Hard disagree on Moncada, imo. He looked incredibly lost every time he went up to the plate last year. He might get back to league-average production, but I doubt he’ll surpass that. Robert, yeah, I can buy that. He’s just crazy talented, as long as he stays healthy. Anderson is a safe bet to miss time, as he’s missed about a quarter of a season every year. As for Jimenez, he’s going to be injured. That’s basically a given at this point. He can’t stay healthy.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

I think I’ve pretty much always been the contrarian on Moncada. I never thought he was going to be a star back when he was get 70 FV grades, but then I also thought he really turned a corner in 2021, showing that he had some real skill development to counter the inevitable erosion of his tools. If I were a GM and needed a third baseman, I would definitely consider trading for him.

Last edited 3 years ago by sadtrombone
Proph of the SandlotMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

Vaughn will cover a significant chunk of Abreu’s production

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I’m guessing the more unbalanced schedule for 2023 gives the A’s a boost (extra games vs Texas and Anaheim vs tougher non-division rivals). But, that argument would probably dictate dinging the Red Sox down to say 75 wins vs 79, so maybe Dan’s method is just prone to a lot of regression to the mean.

Richie
3 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

It’s a MORE balanced schedule this year, isn’t it??

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  Richie

Lol, my bad, you’re right.

That completely throws out my first guess. Has to be regression to the mean getting the A’s above 70 wins.

Max Power
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

While the White Sox have had a number of position player injuries, they had remarkable pitching health the last two seasons. They missed Lynn for 7 weeks last year, and other than a late season shutdown of Kopech (who wasn’t very good), their starters made all their starts. It’s very common to have teams missing 2-3 starters at a given time.

The White Sox with Clevinger’s situation don’t even have a 5th SP, and their 5-8 options might be among the worst in the league.

Proph of the SandlotMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  Max Power

Lopez is a critical pitching piece for Chisox… with upside and flexibility.

baubo
3 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

On the surface white sox projection seems low, but it makes sense once you realize that the team was always top heavy and lack the depth to withstand injuries and regression.

Oakland I’m also surprised to see them so high, especially that they have a 65 chance to make the playoffs, which you’d think associates with teams with young, up and coming stars of which Oakland seems to really lack after this offseason of selling.

texag
3 years ago
Reply to  baubo

My only counterpoint to that is they got hit hard with injuries and bad performances last year and still managed to be .500. Losing Abreu is gonna hurt but taking Sheets and Vaughn out of the OF is a bigger boost than I think a lot of people realize. I’ll gladly take the over on the ZIPs projection every day and twice on Sundays.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  texag

All the win totals seem low. I broadly agree with the division odds of 50% CLE, 30% MN, 10% CHW though.

Adam SMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

They can’t ALL be low. The league has to roughly 500 overall, possibly just above with a winning record vs the NL.

Projections regress to the mean. When we play the season one time a bunch of those 85-90 win teams will beat that and a bunch will have injuries and underperform. But no projection system knows which team is in which group.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  Adam S

This has the AL as collectively finishing at .498 (1211-1219), so the NL will see a small handful more projected wins in total. Essentially projecting AL teams at 80.7 wins on average, NL at 81.3.

Last edited 3 years ago by Jason B
cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  Adam S

Right, I was specifically referring to CLE, MIN, CHW.

Dmjn53
3 years ago
Reply to  baubo

I’m not even sure how heavy they are now. Their best position player is……….Tim Anderson?

MRDXolMember since 2021
3 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

prolly Robert

Dmjn53
3 years ago
Reply to  MRDXol

if he’s 2021 Robert then yes, but both him and Anderson have highly volatile plate approaches

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago

I think I understand why the Yankees and Blue Jays are projected where they are, but I had to guess I’d take the over on them and the under on the Red Sox. Not by much, but if you took 2 wins off the Red Sox and added one each to the Yankees and Blue Jays, that would align more with my expectations. I’d probably also take a win or two off the Orioles too, since I don’t buy that Dean Kremer projection at all.

The Yankees are doomed if Aaron Judge goes down, and that’s why I can’t realistically project them as a 95 win team, but other than that, this team is way deeper than before.

The Red Sox are weird–I would guess that they have some of the tightest ranges of outcomes of any of the teams that are predicted. It’s very hard to imagine a world where they win fewer than 70 games, and equally hard to imagine a world where they win more than 86. Story being hurt creates huge problems for them, but they have 1-win players with no upside absolutely everywhere.

Last edited 3 years ago by sadtrombone
jgraves
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I disagree about the Red Sox having the tightest range (as does this article: https://theathletic.com/4131947/2023/02/02/red-sox-volatilite-roster/?amp=1).

They have lots of players with injury history (Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Mondesi, Duvall, Kike), as well as some young players with high variance (Casas, Bello, Yoshida, Whitlock) and many players who have been very good during stretches over the last few years.

The projections seem to reflect this, giving them over a 25% chance of making the playoffs despite their low win total. Curious to hear your thoughts!

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  jgraves

My gut is like sadtrombone, but you do bring up a good point. If all the injury/rebound variables hit sevens instead of lemons, the Red Sox could potentially surprise and make a run at one of the bottom WC spots.

And another wild-card is Yoshida. His stats in Japan are so good that’s there’s nothing saying he can’t be a poor man’s Juan Soto, but there’s always a chance he’s a poor man’s Daric Barton as well. Which is yet another source of variance for Boston.

Bottom line is that any outcome between 60 and 90 wins for the Red Sox would not shock me.

rounders
3 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

I follow the Red Sox closely. They were awful last year and still won 78 games. This year they will be playing 24 fewer games against their kryptonite–26-50 vs AL East. That’s 52-34 against the rest. Just playing 500 ball in those 24 gains them six games.

Even granting the middle infield downgrade they are a better team now. They had no 1B, no OF, and no DH. The pen is much improved. Sale will not fall off his bicycle, Bello demonstrated that he turned the corner in his last starts and totaled 157 innings, Pivetta will be a servicable #5, and Whitlock and Paxton-Houck innings shortcomings will be supported with AAA call fill-ins or an acquisition.

Whatever else can be said of Cora he has a very positive effect on his teams. They never should have been within two games of a WS in ’21, or won 108 in ’18. Or 78 last year.

.

Proph of the SandlotMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  rounders

Red Sox…so many one-year “pillow” contracts (Turner, Duvall, Mondesi) to motivate players….or crumble under the pressure They brought in some decent leadership (Turner), and Cora is a chemist. We’ll see. I could easily see an impactful Mondesi run in a contract year and Kiki bouncing between 2nd and CF. If Arroyo can play “lighter” at 2b, Kiki can man CF, and Duvall shifts to RF…Biggest issue?…can they protect Devers Turner.Duvall/Casas in the middle of the lineup and can they protect Kluber, Paxton, Sale, Bello, and Pivetta from too many high pitch counts with quality power relief innings from Houk and Whitlock to get to a better-constructed bullpen. Last thought, if Chaim flips one-year contract players, even Sale, at the deadline as he attempts to build a sustainable foundation for the organization before they spend significantly on free agents….this could head south quickly. Chaim and management are probably too afraid of the market at this point to risk any more damage to their base of support.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  jgraves

I think that’s an interesting take, but it seems inconceivable to me that Mondesi or Paxton are going to play enough to make a difference, and if Duvall or Hernandez are playing at CF and SS respectively they’ve got little chance of punching above their weight. I think I have an idea in my head that Yoshida and Kluber are good now, so I was counting on that, but if they get hurt or fail there are more 1-win guys around to replace them.

Bello, Whitlock, and Casas do provide some legitimate upside beyond the 1-win guys who would step in for them if they’re hurt, and Sale’s a pretty big wild card. I think the world where they break 86 games is the one where Sale puts up 5 wins, all of Bello, Whitlock, and Casas break out, and Yoshida, Devers, and Kluber are as advertised and don’t spend a big chunk of the year on the injured list. That’s a lot of things that have to go right! But on the damage-mitigation side, they have so much depth. Even beyond the 1-win players they are actually counting on (Arroyo, Verdugo, Duvall, McGuire, Arroyo, Hernandez if he’s playing SS and not CF) they have a ton of interesting depth in the upper minors with David Hamilton, Duran, Kavadas, Valdez, Wong, Duran, Wilyer Abreu). I would add Rafaela too but I suspect they’re going to not rush him for various reasons.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The chance that Mondesi both plays enough and is a good enough hitter to make a significant contribution seems quite slim, which of course is why he was available in trade for so little.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Not by much, but if you took 2 wins off the Red Sox and added one each to the Yankees and Blue Jays, that would align more with my expectations.”

If you’re parsing these projections by a single win, then you can just say you agree with the predictions as written 😀

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Probably? I would actually add 3 or so to the Yankees and Blue Jays each but I have a really hard time figuring out where those wins would come from, because I don’t think the Red Sox or Orioles are that far off.

My gut instinct is that I could keep robbing the A’s of wins until they’re down to 50 wins, but I’m not sure that makes sense for a projection. It’s really hard for a team to win fewer than one third of their games. Really, really hard. But maybe the A’s can do it.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Broadly I agree – A’s projection seems high. These projection systems don’t often project teams to win or lose 100, but I think teams winning or losing 100 has been happening with a little more frequency over the last decade or so (as the haves have really been “going for it” while the have nots…well, really have not).

Last edited 3 years ago by Jason B
LaBellaVitaMember since 2018🏆 MVP
3 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

With a standard deviation of 6 wins in a 162 game season, ALE is a big toss-up.

steveo
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Doomed is a little much, I think. Aaron Judge is still a 4-5 win player even if he misses 2 months. Which is 2-3 wins below projections. Now if he misses the entire season, obviously it would hurt but that’s basically the case for every team’s best player. Also I think Stanton/Bader/Cabrera/Hicks is a decent OF group even though people think Hicks is awful when really he’s a plus defender in the corners and isn’t a zero at the plate.

Brock244
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Interesting. I actually think they are one of the highest variance teams in baseball.

Young players with upside but no track record: Bello, Whitlock, Casas, Yoshida

Older players w/ bounce back upside/age concerns: Sale, Story (?), Turner, Paxton

With the exception of Paxton, I can imagine a would were any of those guys is a 3.5 WAR or 1 WAR player. That’s massive variance!

They only really have a few guys who you know what your going to get, the rest is all variance.

Even a guys like Herandez or Duval have massice ZIPS/steamer variance. Could easily be 3 WAR or 1 WAR guys

Last edited 3 years ago by Brock244
Pepper Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I feel like there’s some upside with the Yankees’ offense. Everything except Judge and Rizzo went wrong last year. If even a couple of these individually unlikely things happen — which is collectively possible — the Yankees could have a much stronger offense this year than last year:

1) Either Paraza or Volpe has a big breakout rookie season
2) Stanton hits like he did as recently as 2021
3) LeMahieu stays healthy (he hit .344/.462/.490 last July before getting hurt)
4) Donaldson hits like he did in 2021
5) Bader hits like he did in 2021
6) Oswaldo Cabrera puts up 140 games as good as the 44 games he had last year
7) Rizzo keeps his walk and ISO rates from last year, but gets a BABIP better than .216

Like I said, individually none of those things are particularly likely, but collectively it doesn’t seem like a stretch to think that maybe 2 of them are possible. And 2 of them would make this Yankees’ offense pretty fantastic.

MikeD
3 years ago
Reply to  Pepper Martin

A focus area for those predicting a Yankee regression goes beyond Judge, but is based on their overall mediocrity in the second half, although that was heavily driven by a complete collapse in August. They finished the regular season 20-10 once September rolled around. The loss of LeMahieu was significant. He entered August with a near 140 wRC+ and was on pace for a six win season. He was their plug-and-play guy who could fill in at multiple positions, so when Rizzo’s back acted up, LeMahieu wasn’t there to help; when Gleyber went into a funk in August, LeMahieu wasn’t there to help; and when Donaldon’s season-long funk accelerated, he played even more games because LeMahieu wasn’t there to help. Worse, when they tried to play LeMahieu, he was less than zero at the plate. He was hurting them. Add in Stanton’s foot issues the second half, and large sections of their offense wasn’t there, not to mention significant bullpen injuries contributing. So, yes, it’s fair to expect regression from Judge, but it’s equally not fair to expect the range of injuries they had in the second half to happen again across the entirely of 2023.

They were incredibly healthy the first half, but they weren’t a 120-win team the media tried to proclaim. They were very unhealthy the second half, but they weren’t a 120-loss team team they appeared to be in August. A more even distribution of injuries and wins/losses probably still has them in the 96-100 win range. BTW They significantly underplayed their Pythagorean W-L record of 106-56. Yes, they should have been even better than their record.

Last edited 3 years ago by MikeD
soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
3 years ago

Dan,
Did you run the AL under the scenario where Correa stayed in SanFran (or NY, I suppose)?
Curious by how many games it shifted the AL central balance of power.
Thanks

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago

If I had to take a guess, I’d also say that this seems a couple of wins too low on the Guardians, Twins, White Sox, and Mariners, but about 5 games too high on both the Angels and 10 games too high for the A’s.

Mike Trout is awesome and it’s tempting to say “well, if he stays healthy…” but he had about 500 PAs last year, and 600 PAs is about normal. I don’t know how many games ZiPS is projecting for Rendon, Rengifo is primed for regression, and counting on Hunter Renfroe is for suckers. The bullpen looks awful; I still can’t believe they dumped Iglesias last year. I like them adding Brandon Drury and Gio Urshela, but I think that’s where a lot of the improvement will come.

The A’s…what more is there to say? It’s nearly impossible to imagine them winning more games than the Royals, and I would pick the Tigers over them too. Half of the lineup and pitching staff looks like it’s replacement level, and if Laureano or Kemp are any good they’re goners for sure. Jace Peterson and Aledmys Diaz are at least steady hands but I think pretty much every other position player aside from Langeliers looks like a present or future bust. I’m a believer in Freddy Tarnok but he might need some time, and aside from him most of that projected rotation looks like relievers to me.

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I think Dan may have actually convinced me that 85 wins for the Angels isn’t so crazy. That list of middle-of-the road additions this offseason seems to actually be the answer to the universal stars-and-scrubs criticism for this team. It’s simply impossible to have a .500 team even with Trout and Ohtani if you have to use guys like David McKinnon as your cleanup hitter. The Angels had 19 different position players contributing negative WAR last year – against that backdrop even a down year from guys like Renfroe, Drury and Urshela would be an improvement.

(Also, disagree on Rengifo – I think 2022 represents a new baseline for his offensive expectations, as a classic mid-20’s guy finally playing up to the offensive level he set in the minors. I’ll buy that even more than a Jared Walsh bounceback.)

3cardmontyMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

Every year the Angels look decent on paper and every year they find new ways to be bad. One of these years they will actually meet their projections. Maybe this is all some Scioscia Devil Magic debt from all those years earlier in the century when they were projected to be bad but inexplicably won 95 games. Whatever it is it’s hilarious.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
3 years ago
Reply to  3cardmonty

I thought about making an old-school-saber-nerd joke here, something about the Curse of Darin Erstad, but I think I’ll punt

shortstop
3 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

This is the best depth the Angels have had at the Major League level in years – certainly since they’ve had Ohtani. Last year, Monte Harrison was in their top 10 in WAR for batters, and he only had 4 batted balls all year.

Their negative WAR batters contributed –7 WAR in nearly 2,000 PA’s. Giving those PA’s to Drury, Renfroe, Urshela, etc. instead could easily net them 10 wins. Even just replacement level would be a huge upgrade. This isn’t the same as past years when they would cross their fingers for perfect health. Say what you want about Brett Phillips, but he’s a better contingency plan than “somebody find that sticky note that has Juan Lagares’s phone number written on it!”

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  shortstop

Fun fact – the bottom four spots in the Angels lineup last year “boasted” a .193/.249/.300 combined slash line in just under 2,500 PAs. If that isn’t the definition of rock bottom….

FrancoeursteinMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

The Angels are one of the few teams I check the box score daily for. There was a stretch where Matt Duffy was batting cleanup every night….

airforce21oneMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  shortstop

While I agree with you, I would also point out that an Ohtani injury would quickly wipe out a lot of gains elsewhere on the roster.

shortstop
3 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

True, but I think the same could be said for any number of players/teams across the league.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  shortstop

I’m not so sure. The Angels, deliberately or not, are much more top-heavy (stars & scrubs?) than most teams, and therefore much more susceptible to a star injury – and even here I would argue Ohtani is almost a unicorn.

JustinPBGMember since 2018
3 years ago

Imagine if the actual season ended up like Zips and every team was fighting for 90 wins in the AL. Woof, that would be a very stressful September.

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  JustinPBG

Lol, it could look like the NBA Western Conference right now (at the trade deadline)… the 12th place Lakers are just six games out of 3rd place 🙂

Last edited 3 years ago by Mahoney
Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago

Sports bettors remember – always take the under on the Angels. With that annual truism you can buy houses and solid gold rocket cars and Picassos and Rance Mulliniks rookies…

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

How do you sleep at night?

nickelfldnMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

Probably on a bed funded by betting against the Angels.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

Hey, I’m just pointing out they haven’t been good since Reggie Jackson tried to off the queen until Enrico Palazzo intervened….

baubo
3 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Angels underperformed ZIPs by 8 games, 7 games, 4 games (60 game season), and 9 games the past 4 years. I don’t know if that’s the worst in the majors, but you’d have to think it’s up there in terms of futility relative to expectations.

Maybe Dan should do a piece on which teams have most over/underperformed ZIPs and perhaps see underlying reason why ZIPs are unusually high or low on certain teams.

Travis LMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  baubo

This was pretty much addressed in the intro to the article.

Richie
3 years ago

Dan, Dan!

So the ZIPs win projections know about the new balanced schedule? Do your ZIPs individual player projections know about that too? (my impression was ‘no’ there)

Richie
3 years ago

Dan, Dan!

So you’ve made your own adjusted playing time/depth charts? Are they available somewhere on this site? Are they? Are they!?

(I would really like a depth chart that doesn’t predict 658 at bats for Mike Trout, and I don’t care what kind of philosophical pretzel Ben and the guys have cooked up for themselves to justify such an asinine projection)

Glevin
3 years ago

Every year I look at standings and projections I think of how bad the 3 divisions per league is for baseball. The central functions as sort of a welfare division where you don’t have to really spend or try very hard and still get to go to the playoffs. Guardians are a decent team and will likely beat projections here but where would they be in the East? Around Baltimore/Boston I think.

Teams are almost never as bad as you think they’ll be but still don’t see how Oakland wins 70 games. They are just filled with AAA players and anybody any good will probably be traded in July for more AAA players. I’m also still shocked the Yankees didn’t add to their offense. Pitching looks great and D should be much improved but who is their second best player on the offensive side? DJLM? Badar? Not great! A lot of pretty good players but the team is extremely reliant on Judge which is always risky.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Glevin

I mean, where are the thriving metro areas where there’s a lot of money that fans can spend on major league baseball? They’re not in the middle of the country. The exceptions are Chicago and teams in Texas. The Texas teams aren’t even in the central division and the Chicago teams behave strangely. In fact, one of the teams that makes the most money in the central division is the Cardinals, and that has almost nothing to do with the St. Louis metro area (which is in a lot of trouble).

Sure, there are teams that can succeed without big money in the East or West division but they’re also the quintessential underdogs, and the A’s are just bad right now, the Orioles have been bad for a while, etc. Unless you want to contract some teams or redistribute some more money, this is just how it’s going to be for them.

Now, if you ask me, I think we need 6 more teams. You can add another team to each division, and if you really wanted to you could put the Texas teams back in central divisions after filling out the west with Vancouver or Portland or Las Vegas or Calgary or Salt Lake City. Heck, you wanted to you could shift some set of the Guardians and Tigers and Pirates to the east if you wanted, since they’re already in the eastern time zone, and add an extra team or two in Texas into the mix (Austin, San Antonio).

JohnThackerMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

“Metro area” is always an interesting question, because with baseball you have 81 home games, so you need people in a smaller radius than, say, 8 NFL games on Sunday. So Metropolitan Statistical Area is probably a better fit than Combined Statistical Area.

Notably, that means that Salt Lake City would be by far the lowest population MSA in MLB. There’s no way it supports a team without a significant amount of travel from Ogden and Provo, and even with that, the CSA population is between Pittsburgh and St. Louis. (The counterargument is, I suppose, that the Ogden or Provo to Salt Lake City drive really isn’t that much worse than getting from the south side of Atlanta to Truist Park.)

“Thriving” city or not, Detroit is much more easily able to support a team than Salt Lake City.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  JohnThacker

I agree with this, but I’m not sure how much difference ticket sales make in the big picture. It’s all about the TV rights. Adding teams means carving out spaces from existing TV coverage areas, and that’s bound to be an almost impossible negotiation.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  JohnThacker

Yeah, okay, Salt Lake maybe not. 200K people in the city itself might not be enough, but it is a pretty wealthy city that is really far away from other teams. That said, given the difficulties of Milwaukee, maybe having a metro area that is 40% smaller than Milwaukee is not a wise move.

You also might not be able to get away with teams in both Vancouver and Portland, since I bet the Mariners would be really ticked off if you expanded in both those places. But I’m convinced there’s a spot for both 2 teams in the Bay Area and a team in Las Vegas, so that no matter where the A’s go there should be a slot open. And Calgary is seriously underrated; it’s about the same size as Milwaukee but it’s got way more money and is growing rapidly. So that’s a minimum of 3 teams.

MRDXolMember since 2021
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Mariners don’t have an especially valid complaint about either Vancouver or Portland, imo. Vancouverites are presently mostly Blue Jays fans anyways— all of Canada is, really, regardless of geography. Portland and Seattle are natural rivals, it’s just only expressed in MLS & NWSL for now bc the Sonics got stolen away to goddamn OKC.

They’re also not that physically close; Portland and Vancouver are both about 140-150 miles from Seattle, more than, say, Chicago to Milwaukee, any of the East Coast cities to each other, or LA to San Diego.

radivel
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

As a person who lives in Calgary, putting an MLB team here would be a lot like putting a hockey team in Arizona.

The average temperature here yearround is 4C. Americans can figure out what that is to them.

It would be an absolute disaster and is geographically and economically impossible until the city is like, twice this population.

Glevin
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The problem here is that actually every single team makes enough revenue to compete. Sure, you’re not going to get a Steve Cohen everywhere but every single MLB team gets $100 million+ in TV deals before even selling a single ticket. Most teams make way way more than that. Being in the central just allows teams to pocket the extra money and still compete. Revenue is difficult to find, but for example, it looks like Cleveland makes around $250-$300M a year. Their payroll is $90M a year. How would the team look if it were willing to spend to say, $150M? San Diego isn’t a big market and they have decided they are going to spend and in doing so can compete with any other team. The issue is not lack of revenue, it’s a lack of willingness to treat the team as anything other than a cash cow. The Reds winning 83 games and then selling off players isn’t because they can’t afford it. It’s embarrassing for baseball how little the owners seem to care about winning and how much they care about squeezing an extra million or 2 here or there.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Glevin

I do agree that there are at least 25 teams that could be spending more, and I would like them to do so. But while I think it’s fair to note that almost every team should be spending more than they do, it’s worth noting that if we had every team spend more it would make things just as unequal and maybe even more so. The Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Braves, Cubs, and (probably) Blue Jays make comically large amounts of money compared to the Twins, Royals, Brewers, and basically every other midwestern team. No matter what level of profits we think are acceptable, these teams at the top are justified in running payrolls $150M-$200M above these teams in the smaller markets.

Sure, it would be nice if every owner was willing to spend more, and even nicer if they would run the team close to a breakeven point or at a loss (which I kind of suspect the Padres and Mets will be doing this year). But this is not a competitive balance solution. It is a solution for directing more revenues towards players! If everyone increases spending–and there’s no easy way to argue that the lower spending teams should be increasing spending while the richer teams don’t, given the massive revenue disparity–then it winds up in the same place.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  Glevin

The problem here is that actually every single team makes enough revenue to compete

Logically, that doesn’t make sense, as revenue levels are relative.

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  Glevin

If I were the benevolent dictator commissioner of baseball, I’d increase revenue sharing substantially, but then have it divided among teams based upon actual attendance (fannies in the seats) for each team (with a cap of say 30,000 per game so teams couldn’t just play their home games at the nearest Power 5 college football stadium with a slew of $1.95 seats to game the system).

g4Member since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

As a Brewers fan I would love this. Milwaukee has punched well above its weight in attendance over the last 15 years and ownership has supported payrolls at a far-from-embarrassing level (this ain’t a Nutting situation), but the unavoidably bottom-of-the-barrel TV market/contract powerfully limits leeway to engage in any “all-in” strategy without risking a 5-year tank to follow. MLB’s paltry revenue sharing is nothing more than a veil of competitive balance. Big market teams shoot to win 100 games and the World Series. Small market teams shoot to win 90 and get super super super super super lucky in the playoffs.

As benevolent dictator, how would you protect against attendance gamesmanship — seat fillers, free tickets, etc. If the shared revenue per attendee was so hefty as to actually outstrip the cost of a small market ticket, these teams would make out by literally giving tickets away. Awesome for some fans, I suppose, but not terribly fair to fans/owners of big TV teams.

steveo
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I’m not sure why everyone forgets Charlotte. It’s the most populous city left that doesn’t have a baseball team or a team (or two) in the same state.

Mahoney
3 years ago
Reply to  steveo

Braves are pretty big there, but not dominant. They moved the AAA ballpark downtown to allow for a possible MLB team, so they’re definitely in play. Certainly a better option than say a third NY metro team.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I think the Cardinals are a bit of an economic outlier. Looking at a map of the geography of baseball fans, St Louis essentially dominates the Midwest, scooping up Nashville and Louisville along with even encroaching on Kansas City and Memphis. That’s a decent amount of economic output.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/23/upshot/24-upshot-baseball.html

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

If that map shows St Louis scooping up Nashville, it’s incorrect. Nashville is a decidedly Braves market with a secondary helping of Cards and Reds fans. It has been an Atlanta market for at least a generation. Memphis is likely much more of a Cards market than Nashville is.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Do you have a source? The NYT article I linked actually compiled the data based on Facebook information.

Anecdotally, whenever I’m in Nashville I see just as much, if not more, St Louis apparel vs Braves regalia. Keep in mind that the recent run of success by Atlanta brings out a lot of fair-weather fans too. Back home in Wisconsin, in 2016 when the Cubs won the world series the number of people wearing Cubs attire was like 3-4x the normal amount.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

Mine is strictly anecdotal too, but have lived in the Nashville market most of my life and have seen and heard more “Braves Braves Braves” for all of my adult life much more than “Cards Cards Cards”. Maybe I’ve somehow just managed to surround myself with more Braves fans, or they’re louder and more boorish about their fandom 😀

keefer
3 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

83-79 and three games from a playoff spot hardly qualifies as “bad.”

Uncle SpikeMember since 2020
3 years ago

It would be cool to see how teams would perform if they hit different percentiles, similar to what you do when projecting hitters. For example, even though the Yankees are projected to win 3 more games than the Rays, I have a feeling they also have a greater probability of losing 90 games than they Rays do.

Tel
3 years ago
Reply to  Uncle Spike

I think Dan posted something like 80th and 20th percentile outcomes for teams at some point (maybe just before the start of the season?) I suspect that neither of these teams would be losing 90 games if they hit their 20th percentile outcome though. It might be the 2nd percentile outcome for one of them.

steveo
3 years ago
Reply to  Uncle Spike

The Yankees haven’t lost 90 games since 1991. 32 years ago lol. They haven’t lose more than 78 games since 1992. 78 games. Do you know how insane that is? And that’s in the AL East, by far the toughest division in the sport. Their floor is so high because their bullpen is elite, they have a bunch of starting pitching depth, and their lineup is filled with average hitters at worst. I don’t think the Rays or the Yankees are likely to lose 90.

Uncle SpikeMember since 2020
3 years ago
Reply to  steveo

Lol, I think you guys are missing the point. Call it 85 games if you like. I’m just thinking it would be helpful to see the floors and ceilings of each team. Even though a team like the Yankees clearly has a higher ceiling and median outcome, as they have a star studded lineup, it seems like a team like the Rays may have a higher floor, as they’re less star dependent and extremely deep.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  steveo

Their floor is so high because they can spend more than 95% of the other teams.

Trevor May Care Attitude
3 years ago

Seeing the Royals with the worst projection in the AL — even worse than the A’s by Playoff% — is somewhat surprising. The projection of five more wins than last year is reasonable enough for KC, but Oakland doesn’t seem poised for a 10-win improvement as their 50th percentile outcome. But, hey, the computer is smarter than me, so maybe there’s some method to the recent A’s maneuvering. If they truly are just regular-bad at this point, then there’s a glimmer of hope that their rebuild might not take the better part of a decade, like the Royals’ has.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago

I think what’s depressing about the As is that they’re definitely going to be bad. There’s nowhere on their roster (other than Langeliers) you can squint and see a 4 win season.

That said, they have a lot of 1.5 WAR types, and no zero or subzero holes. They might be able to get to 70.

Ivan_GrushenkoMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

Clearly you underestimate my squinting ability. Waldichuk, Laureano, Ruiz, Muller will all easily eclipse 4 wins

carterMember since 2020
3 years ago

I am no Yankee fan, but to say Rizzo is no longer an elite bat coming off a 133wRC+ and projected for around 125-127 seems a bit harsh. Was he ever then? His career wRC+ is 129. Also Stanton last 4 years wRC+ 139, 143, 137, 115. The 115 looks to be nearly all babip as there is no real discernible difference in his batted ball profile. Struck out a bit more, and lost like 1mph off max EV so there is likely a decline, but everything else (EV, hard hit percent, barrel etc) is in line with career norms, and some were actually better. There is no reason to think it isn’t business as usual, with a slight age related decline.

South DetroitMember since 2020
3 years ago

83 wins being the top end projection for the AL Central seemed pretty low to me but then I was wondering if the 2023 change to scheduling balance impacted this?

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  South Detroit

It’s all compressed. I believe that probably gives the lowest average error by team, but someone is definitely going to win more than 90 games and lose more than 70.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

I think you meant someone is going to win more than 90 and someone else is going to lose more than 90. There will be many, many that lose more than 70 (quite possibly all five)

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

I did mean that, but it was too late to edit. Ah well.

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

No worries, I understood the intent. I could see a scenario where a central team doesn’t make it to 90 though…last year the Indians reached 92 but no one else was close, and they were 54-52 in early August

goatMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  South Detroit

Seriously, the AL Central is an abomination that shouldn’t exist.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  goat

Agreed. Get rid of all the poor people since they can’t compete.

computersBaseball
3 years ago

To me this always feels like an exercise in “regress everything to the mean as much as possible”, meaning every team is pretty close to .500.

Yes, not being able to factor in in-season additions are probably part of it, but still. Has there ever been a 162 game season where the 3 division winners of a league won only 89 + 83 + 90 games = 262 wins total?

2022 AL division winners: 297 combined wins
2021 AL division winners: 288 combined wins
2019 AL division winners: 311 (!) combined wins

2010 AL division winners: 280 combined wins
2000 AL division winners: 273 combined wins (I vaguely remembered this year being mediocre)

I would check more but it’s boring. I know the point of ZiPS is not this, but I still find it amusing that its median scenario is statistically extremely unlikely.

Mahoney
3 years ago

It would be cool to see what the average division winner’s win totals are across the zillion projection scenarios Dan has for ZiPS. I’m willing to be it’s well into the 90s, even though the average for each team across all the scenarios gets blunted down much closer to 81 for these published projected standings.

Adam SMember since 2016
3 years ago

But these aren’t predictions of standings. ZiPS says the Guardians are the best team in the AL Central and will win 83 on average. But if they play to their projection, they generally won’t win the division.

But I bet if Dan averages the seasons, the AL Central winner has closer to 88 wins while 89 wins basically never wins the AL East.

computersBaseball
3 years ago
Reply to  Adam S

I understand what you mean, but this is why I find it funny – the title of the article is “Projected Standings”

idliaminMember since 2024
3 years ago

2007 NL came very close. Phillies won 89, Cubs won 85, D’Backs won 90 (264 total wins for the division winners).

computersBaseball
3 years ago
Reply to  idliamin

Interesting, good find. There are only like 27 seasons (thus 54 total league outcomes) since they expanded to 3 divisions, so not so many to check, maybe this is the lowest.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
3 years ago
Reply to  Dan Szymborski

Am I the only one who can’t see whatever image this is supposed to be?

Ukranian to Vietnamese to French is back
3 years ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

I know I can’t make heads or tails out of it

miltonfriedman
3 years ago

Every single Detroit Tiger will do better in 2023 than 2022. Dreamy SP also:
Turnbull
Skubal
Rodriguez
Boyd
Manning
Lorenzen
Mize
Wentz

OH MY GOD

Jason BMember since 2017
3 years ago
Reply to  miltonfriedman

That’s why they’re only projected to lose 91! 😀

Brock244
3 years ago

Can someone explain how depth charts has Boston at +44 WAR and Baltimore at +38, yet Baltimore is projected to win more games?

miltonfriedman
3 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

Baltimore has better coaching,more willing to buy at the trade deadline and a better owner

MikeD
3 years ago
Reply to  miltonfriedman

Milton, I would like to welcome you here from your bizarro universe. Here, Baltimore is none of those things.

goatMember since 2026
3 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

Crabs, clams and other assorted harbour scuzz.

Rex Manning DayMember since 2022
3 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

I mean, among other things, Depth Charts projections and ZIPS projections aren’t the same thing.

Also, the playing time projections are different.

Brock244
3 years ago

Isn’t depth charts steamer + zips?

I was curious bc Zips seems higher on the redsox than steamer so was curious how their depth charts is so high but zips projection low

goatMember since 2026
3 years ago

Dan’s Computer’s Oriole bias painfully obvious in this article.

Ivan_GrushenkoMember since 2016
3 years ago

72 Wins Baby! Let’s Go Oak-Land!

Joe Joe
3 years ago

I pay attention mostly to the AL West. Regression to mean in this preseason projection are more than I expected. I was expecting the gap between Astros and Mariners to be slightly larger (Astros 91, Mariners 84..so a nit pick). I thought Rangers would be slightly higher than the Angels with both in the low 80s. A’s look bad.

Last edited 3 years ago by Joe Joe
Proph of the SandlotMember since 2016
3 years ago

Generous wins for Oak?…interested to see how the A.L. East pitching benefits from fewer division games. Playing 38 total games against the Yankees and Blue Jays is a grind for Balt, Bost, and TB…it should help them be more competitive against the Central and West

AzizalMember since 2017
3 years ago

Loved reading this.

Adding my voice to the “no chance the A’s win 72 games” crowd. It’s hard to argue with Zips 99.99% of the time but this is one of those .01% times, and it seems really straightforward to say so.

Cecil Rhea
3 years ago

I have the Astros once again blowing away their projections. Something about zips just can’t figure out how good they are. I have the Astros floor at 94 wins & their ceiling around 110 wins so I would feel very comfortable betting large quantities of money that the Astros blow away 90 wins at seasons end & are probably approaching 90 wins in early September. I also have the Mariners winning in the low to mid 90s. The Angels projection looks spot on to me though, and the Rangers looks pretty good too. I think the A’s will struggle to hit mid 50’s with their win totals, as they lost 100 games last year then traded away their best- BY FAR -player, adding those wins to HOU & SEA instead. I have the Yankees & Bluejays in a dog fight for the AL East, with both actually winning a few more than projected. (I do my own amateur projections based on only 101 seasons) I hqve the AL over .500 opposite of these which has the NL a tad over .500. I have the Jays at 95 wins & the Yanks at 93. I also have the Guardians & Twins higher & the Royals & Tigers a little lower. I have the Mets winning the NL East by 2 games, the Phillies winning 91 for a WC. The SDP beating the LAD by ONE Game(actually came out to less than 1 as the avg wins were SDP- 97.7, LAD- 97.1) I have the Rockies only winning 62 games though & Arizona not taking a step forward but a slight step back from last year