The following are relative offensive values for each team. The numbers have been normalized, so the average team’s rating is 1.
The numbers represent expected runs scored in an inning. Thus, the program expects the Dodgers to score 25% more runs each inning than the average team. It expects my Mets to score 9% more than average. This warms my heart as a Mets fan, and reminds us that ‘inability to hit with runners in scoring position’ is (at least mostly) not a skill that actually exists at the professional level. It would be nice if we had a rotation of starting pitchers.
The program thinks the worst offense is the Rangers, which will score 14% less runs than average.
For any given game, this is then multiplied by the defensive rating of the opposing pitcher, which takes into account the team’s bullpen, and is modified for other considerations including the park factor.
I’ve never seen a team with an offense as over-the-top strong as the Dodgers when running the program in previous years. That number is scary.
This is an open call for comments, disagreements, objections and so forth, with respect to this list. Do these numbers look reasonable? Which of these doesn’t, and is instead obviously wrong, and why? What projection systems would you use as the right sanity checks?
Red Sox 0.98
White Sox 0.97
Blue Jays 0.95