RICH: Is there a traceable standard used to calibrate radar guns?

When it comes to the "fanboy" picks of the "professionals," the sad fact is that there is no punishment for making a bad pick. Baseball Projections would be so much more fun if they adopted the old pro wrestling maxim "Loser Leaves Town."

Rich, did you read Neyer's own comment on his prediction?

***I know, I know … It's probably a little bit crazy to pick the A's, considering that their current pitching rotation includes five pitchers who have combined for the grandly splendiferous total of 18 major league wins. Actually, that might make me certifiable. But if two or three of them pitch well and Justin Duchscherer comes back strong and the Angels continue to miss three of their starters … Hey, it could happen!***

He's either not writing a serious prediction, simply playing a hunch, or coming very close to simply admitting that he's a Beane fanboy who just doesn't like the Angels organizational philosophy. Either way, not particularly professional from a professional analyst. Certainly, everything he says is true. If this, and if that, and if the other thing happens, then yes, the A's can win the division. That sort of stuff came together for the Angels in 2002. Still, it's not much of a prediction. It's kind of a joke, really.

Rev, I'm not sure how much the various radar guns differ from around the majors, be it the ones used to report the speeds on the scoreboards, on TV, or pitch f/x. My experience is that there are almost always a few outliers per game (or pitcher) but that the readings are reasonably consistent.

Seitz, yes, I read Rob's comments and believe he is playing a hunch more than anything else. Like I wrote, I think the Athletics could end up in last as easily as first, whereas I can't foresee the Angels finishing last under any (reasonable) circumstances. If the A's win the AL West, good for them. But, if the season were played 1000 times, I feel strongly that the Angels would win the division more often (and probably much more often) than any other team -- and that is how I approach these predictions.

Thanks for putting on your blog what a lot of Angels fans have been...curious about, to say the least.

RICH:

You got your picture in the LA TIMES blog today:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/angels_blog/2009/04/kendrick-puts-a-little-distance-between-himself-and-october-struggles.html

Thanks, Rev. I just added the link to that photo in the article above.

I'd have more respect for Neyer's prediction if he had said "I know, it's crazy to pick the A's, but I think they're going to win, and here's why..." Take a position, at least. Instead it reads like "Boy, I really hope the A's win".

Rich, BP picked the A's because because PECOTA shows them beating out the Angels: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/fantasy/dc/

As for me, I admit I have a bias against the Angels and towards the A's, but I still think the A's are the better team. The A's only below-average position is probably at third. They don't have any good starters, but they have a good bullpen.

The Angels have questions at designated hitter, shortstop, and first base. They have a decent rotation which is good when healthy, and an excellent bullpen.

I think the biggest difference between the teams is on defense (ad A's) and then starters (ad Angels) then hitting (ad A's) then bullpen (ad Angels).

PECOTA shows the Yankees beating out the Red Sox, yet the consensus among the staffers was that Boston would win the AL East. Generally speaking, I believe there is systematic bias in the sabermetric community, which I find ironic, in favor of the A's and Red Sox and against teams like the Angels. Maybe time would be better spent figuring out why the Angels consistently outperform and the Red Sox, on average, play to their Pythag records. (FWIW, the A's have slightly outperformed their Pythag record this decade.)

In any event, using Pythag records, I have a difficult time concluding that the Angels will drop by more than six games *and* the A's will rise by more than six games or, put another way, that Oakland is going to win more than 82 games and the Angels are going to win fewer than 82 games. It could happen, but I would be surprised if both took place more often than not should this season play out a thousand times.

Oakland won the second and third games and now lead the series 2-1 with Brett Anderson and Jered Weaver facing off in the fourth and final game on Thursday night. The Angels bullpen and defense looked good in the opener but struggled mightily in games two and three.

I still like the Angels over the Athletics, but I will admit that the Halos cannot afford to give too many games away like they did tonight and hold off the A's this season.

I think it'll be close too. I could see the A's falling out of contention and trading Holliday as well. It's possible. They had a chance to be .500 last year, but they were underperforming their pythag by a bunch, so they gave up and sold Harden and Blanton. But I think the more likely case is that they find themselves right around .500 with the Angels at midseason, and the A's package some prospects from their top-2 farm system to make a push into the playoffs. I'm already thinking they acquire Beltre.