Could the Phillies finish in 4th place?

Sam Page's provocative post from this morning caused quite a stir, but most people weren't buying into his prediction (on a METS fan site, no less). Personally, I was skeptical as well. But the post kind of lingered, probably because I desperately hope he's right.

This year's Phillies, while seemingly formidable, are rather one dimensional: they have exceptional starting pitching. The rest of the team is merely pedestrian, particularly if Utley misses a lot of time. If the starting pitching lives up to expectations, it will paper over the team's weaknesses. But what if it doesn't?

I am extremely doubtful that the pitchers will not pitch up to their expected performance level; all four seem to be in their prime. Injuries, however, are a possibility.

So I figured, why not run some numbers?

First off, this is NOT a sophisticated analytical study, or anything like that. Run prevention isn't that smooth, or linear, but I feel like for the purposes of a back-of-the-envelope calculation, it's useful. Our underlying assumption is that Baseball Prospectus' PECOTA simulator of the Phillies is a plausible starting point for projecting where they finish; everything else stems from that.

According to BP's depth charts, PECOTA tells us that the Phillies will score 742 runs. That will be a constant in the study. We'll be tinkering with the runs allowed, though. PECOTA tells us that the Phillies will allow only 664 runs. Using Pythagenpat with those numbers, the Phillies would finish at 89-73, which would probably be good enough for the playoffs.

BP also provides Value Over Replacement Level (VORP) projections for every player based on their projected playing time. VORP is measured in runs, so 1 VORP = 1 run. I made a chart of the projected innings pitched and projected VORP for each pitcher, as per PECOTA. At the same time, I took their totals from 2010 and added those to the chart as well. PECOTA seemed rather pessimistic on the Phillies, so I felt like making an optimistic estimate for the sake of comparison.

pIP pVORP 2010IP 2010VORP
Halladay 229 49.9 250.7 77
Lee 219 45.9 212.3 40.6
Oswalt 200 34.7 221.7 44.7
Hamels 184 30 208.7 50.4
TOTALS 832 160.5 893.3 212.7

So we have two versions of the future here. In PECOTA world, the Phillies allow 664 runs. In the more optimistic world of 2010, the Phillies allow only 612 runs. (That's 664 + PECOTA VORP - 2010 VORP).

The more interesting question, though, is about injuries. How many innings will the Big 4 pitch? Because we're assuming that run scoring is linear for the sake of the calculation, all we need to do, then, is divide VORP by IP and get a value of every inning pitched by the Big 4. (We'll take the Big 4 in aggregate, again for simplification. Obviously, losing Halladay would be much worse than losing Oswalt.)

PECOTA: 160.5/832 = .193 VORP/IP (call this VORPrate)

2010: 212.7/893.3 = .238 VORP/IP

Those numbers are, essentially, how many runs per inning the Phillies' Big 4 prevent in comparison to a replacement-level player (in other words, the type of player who would get those innings if one of them got hurt.) Now, we project out, based on innings pitched. The formula here is projRA + projVORP - (proj. IP * VORPrate). So, we have two different sets of inputs:

PECOTA: 664 + 160.5 - (proj. IP*.193)

2010: 612 + 212.7 - (proj. IP * .238)

And here's how it plays out:

Proj. IP Proj. RA (PECOTA) Proj. Record (PECOTA) Proj. RA (2010) Proj. Record (2010)
0 825 73-89 825 73-89
50 815 74-88 813 74-88
100 805 75-87 801 75-87
150 796 76-86 789 76-86
200 786 77-85 777 77-85
250 776 78-84 765 79-85
300 767 78-84 753 80-82
350 757 79-83 741 81-81
400 747 80-82 729 82-80
450 738 81-81 718 84-78
500 728 82-80 706 85-77
550 718 83-79 694 86-76
600 709 84-78 682 87-75
650 699 86-76 670 89-73
700 689 87-75 658 90-72
750 680 88-74 646 91-71
800 670 89-73 634 93-69
850 661 90-72 622 94-68
900 651 91-71 610 95-67
950 641 92-70 598 97-65

So, for PECOTA, we have an easy rule of thumb: start the Phillies from 73 wins (which feels about right intuitively for a Phillies team without the Big 4, right?). For every 50 innings the Big 4 pitches, add 1 win to that.

For 2010, the rule of thumb is a tad more generous: it's more like "add 1 win for every 40 innings the Big 4 pitches."

So from there, all we're left to do is to guess how many innings they'll end up with. You think they'll get 750? They're mean expectation is probably somewhere between 88 and 92 games. Only 600? Then they're probably between 84 and 87 wins. From the looks of this, if they don't get at least 700, they're in trouble. (Disclaimer: random variation may propel them to an outlying season, where they significantly outperformed their run differential or their batting components. Here, all we are doing is looking for an expectation.)

Now, you could take issue with some of the other constants. You could object that even my optimistic model undersells the Big 4, or that the offense will be better than 742 runs, or that the bullpen would be better than the BP estimate, or that the replacement pitchers would be better than replacement-level. But this is simply a model to show how critical those 4 pitchers are, and how fragile the Phillies' are; it's very much a stars and scrubs model of teambuilding (much along the lines of the Minaya-era Mets). But the Phillies' stars are pitchers, who are (generally) more injury prone.

So, what about fourth place? In a fairly competitive NL East, 82-83 wins might still be 4th place, particularly if you're bullish about the Mets. BP pegs the Braves at 87, the Marlins at 84, and the Mets at 81. If the Mets exceed expectation and the Braves and Marlins merely meet theirs, the division may well have 4 teams over .500. If the Big 4 is in the 400 to 500 innings range, Sam may well be right. For the Phillies to only get 500 innings out of the Big 4 would require that at least two miss a LOT of time, or three spend significant time on the DL. Is that unlikely? I think so. Is it impossible? Hardly.

In short, I don't think Sam's prediction is crazy. I do not think it is the most likely outcome this year, but I certainly can respect him for going out on a limb.

This FanPost was contributed by a member of the community and was not subject to any vetting or approval process. It does not necessarily reflect the opinions, reasoning skills, or attention to grammar and usage rules held by the editors of this site.

Log In Sign Up

Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Amazin' Avenue

You must be a member of Amazin' Avenue to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Amazin' Avenue. You should read them.

Join Amazin' Avenue

You must be a member of Amazin' Avenue to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Amazin' Avenue. You should read them.




Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.