Posted by Neil Paine on March 19, 2010
NOTE: This is my attempt to predict the standings for the 2010 MLB season using Tom Tango's Marcel projection system. For NL East projections and more background info on how these projections work, go here. Other division projections: NL Central, NL West, AL East, AL Central.
| Rk |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Plyff |
wLDS |
wLCS |
wWS |
| 1 |
TEX |
AL-W |
82.3 |
79.7 |
38.0% |
15.5% |
6.6% |
3.2% |
| 2 |
ANA |
AL-W |
80.7 |
81.3 |
26.9% |
10.6% |
4.4% |
1.9% |
| 3 |
SEA |
AL-W |
80.3 |
81.7 |
24.0% |
9.0% |
3.7% |
1.7% |
| 4 |
OAK |
AL-W |
78.9 |
83.1 |
16.7% |
6.1% |
2.3% |
0.8% |
1. Texas Rangers
| Win Scan |
Prob |
| <=65 |
0.4% |
| 66-70 |
2.4% |
| 71-75 |
10.7% |
| 76-80 |
25.2% |
| 81-85 |
30.6% |
| 86-90 |
21.0% |
| 91-95 |
7.9% |
| 96-100 |
1.6% |
| 101-105 |
0.2% |
| >=106 |
0.0% |
What a typical Texas World Championship season looks like:
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| MIN |
AL-C |
85 |
77 |
NYA |
AL-E |
94 |
68 |
TEX |
AL-W |
88 |
74 |
| DET |
AL-C |
81 |
81 |
BOS |
AL-E |
91 |
71 |
ANA |
AL-W |
79 |
83 |
| CHA |
AL-C |
79 |
83 |
TBA |
AL-E |
87 |
75 |
SEA |
AL-W |
79 |
83 |
| CLE |
AL-C |
77 |
85 |
BAL |
AL-E |
76 |
86 |
OAK |
AL-W |
78 |
84 |
| KCA |
AL-C |
71 |
91 |
TOR |
AL-E |
73 |
89 |
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| SLN |
NL-C |
90 |
72 |
ATL |
NL-E |
88 |
74 |
LAN |
NL-W |
86 |
76 |
| CHN |
NL-C |
87 |
75 |
PHI |
NL-E |
87 |
75 |
COL |
NL-W |
83 |
79 |
| MIL |
NL-C |
83 |
79 |
NYN |
NL-E |
81 |
81 |
ARI |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| CIN |
NL-C |
75 |
87 |
FLO |
NL-E |
80 |
82 |
SFN |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| HOU |
NL-C |
73 |
89 |
WAS |
NL-E |
73 |
89 |
SDN |
NL-W |
76 |
86 |
| PIT |
NL-C |
70 |
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Los Angeles Angels de Anaheim
| Win Scan |
Prob |
| <=65 |
0.6% |
| 66-70 |
4.4% |
| 71-75 |
15.6% |
| 76-80 |
27.9% |
| 81-85 |
29.1% |
| 86-90 |
16.2% |
| 91-95 |
5.2% |
| 96-100 |
1.0% |
| 101-105 |
0.0% |
| >=106 |
0.0% |
What a typical Angels World Championship season looks like:
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| MIN |
AL-C |
85 |
77 |
NYA |
AL-E |
94 |
68 |
ANA |
AL-W |
87 |
75 |
| DET |
AL-C |
81 |
81 |
BOS |
AL-E |
91 |
71 |
TEX |
AL-W |
79 |
83 |
| CHA |
AL-C |
80 |
82 |
TBA |
AL-E |
86 |
76 |
SEA |
AL-W |
78 |
84 |
| CLE |
AL-C |
77 |
85 |
BAL |
AL-E |
76 |
86 |
OAK |
AL-W |
78 |
84 |
| KCA |
AL-C |
70 |
92 |
TOR |
AL-E |
73 |
89 |
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| SLN |
NL-C |
90 |
72 |
ATL |
NL-E |
88 |
74 |
LAN |
NL-W |
85 |
77 |
| CHN |
NL-C |
87 |
75 |
PHI |
NL-E |
88 |
74 |
COL |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| MIL |
NL-C |
82 |
80 |
FLO |
NL-E |
80 |
82 |
ARI |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| CIN |
NL-C |
75 |
87 |
NYN |
NL-E |
80 |
82 |
SFN |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| HOU |
NL-C |
74 |
88 |
WAS |
NL-E |
74 |
88 |
SDN |
NL-W |
76 |
86 |
| PIT |
NL-C |
69 |
93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Seattle Mariners
| Win Scan |
Prob |
| <=65 |
0.9% |
| 66-70 |
5.1% |
| 71-75 |
16.1% |
| 76-80 |
29.0% |
| 81-85 |
28.3% |
| 86-90 |
15.3% |
| 91-95 |
4.6% |
| 96-100 |
0.7% |
| 101-105 |
0.0% |
| >=106 |
0.0% |
What a typical Seattle World Championship season looks like:
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| MIN |
AL-C |
84 |
78 |
NYA |
AL-E |
94 |
68 |
SEA |
AL-W |
88 |
74 |
| DET |
AL-C |
81 |
81 |
BOS |
AL-E |
90 |
72 |
ANA |
AL-W |
80 |
82 |
| CHA |
AL-C |
79 |
83 |
TBA |
AL-E |
85 |
77 |
TEX |
AL-W |
79 |
83 |
| CLE |
AL-C |
76 |
86 |
BAL |
AL-E |
76 |
86 |
OAK |
AL-W |
78 |
84 |
| KCA |
AL-C |
71 |
91 |
TOR |
AL-E |
73 |
89 |
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| SLN |
NL-C |
90 |
72 |
ATL |
NL-E |
89 |
73 |
LAN |
NL-W |
86 |
76 |
| CHN |
NL-C |
86 |
76 |
PHI |
NL-E |
87 |
75 |
COL |
NL-W |
83 |
79 |
| MIL |
NL-C |
82 |
80 |
NYN |
NL-E |
81 |
81 |
ARI |
NL-W |
83 |
79 |
| CIN |
NL-C |
75 |
87 |
FLO |
NL-E |
80 |
82 |
SFN |
NL-W |
81 |
81 |
| HOU |
NL-C |
74 |
88 |
WAS |
NL-E |
73 |
89 |
SDN |
NL-W |
76 |
86 |
| PIT |
NL-C |
70 |
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Oakland Athletics
| Win Scan |
Prob |
| <=65 |
1.7% |
| 66-70 |
7.5% |
| 71-75 |
20.4% |
| 76-80 |
30.4% |
| 81-85 |
25.0% |
| 86-90 |
12.1% |
| 91-95 |
2.7% |
| 96-100 |
0.3% |
| 101-105 |
0.0% |
| >=106 |
0.0% |
What a typical Oakland World Championship season looks like:
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| MIN |
AL-C |
85 |
77 |
NYA |
AL-E |
94 |
68 |
OAK |
AL-W |
88 |
74 |
| DET |
AL-C |
80 |
82 |
BOS |
AL-E |
89 |
73 |
TEX |
AL-W |
80 |
82 |
| CHA |
AL-C |
79 |
83 |
TBA |
AL-E |
86 |
76 |
ANA |
AL-W |
79 |
83 |
| CLE |
AL-C |
76 |
86 |
BAL |
AL-E |
76 |
86 |
SEA |
AL-W |
79 |
83 |
| KCA |
AL-C |
71 |
91 |
TOR |
AL-E |
74 |
88 |
|
|
|
|
| Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| SLN |
NL-C |
89 |
73 |
ATL |
NL-E |
88 |
74 |
LAN |
NL-W |
85 |
77 |
| CHN |
NL-C |
88 |
74 |
PHI |
NL-E |
88 |
74 |
SFN |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| MIL |
NL-C |
82 |
80 |
FLO |
NL-E |
82 |
80 |
COL |
NL-W |
81 |
81 |
| CIN |
NL-C |
75 |
87 |
NYN |
NL-E |
80 |
82 |
ARI |
NL-W |
81 |
81 |
| HOU |
NL-C |
74 |
88 |
WAS |
NL-E |
73 |
89 |
SDN |
NL-W |
75 |
87 |
| PIT |
NL-C |
70 |
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Playoff Projections
Standings:
| Rk |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Rk |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Rk |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| 1 |
MIN-x |
AL-C |
85 |
77 |
1 |
NYA-x |
AL-E |
94 |
68 |
1 |
TEX-x |
AL-W |
82 |
80 |
| 2 |
DET |
AL-C |
81 |
81 |
2 |
BOS-y |
AL-E |
91 |
71 |
2 |
ANA |
AL-W |
81 |
81 |
| 3 |
CHA |
AL-C |
80 |
82 |
3 |
TBA |
AL-E |
87 |
75 |
3 |
SEA |
AL-W |
80 |
82 |
| 4 |
CLE |
AL-C |
76 |
86 |
4 |
BAL |
AL-E |
76 |
86 |
4 |
OAK |
AL-W |
79 |
83 |
| 5 |
KCA |
AL-C |
70 |
92 |
5 |
TOR |
AL-E |
73 |
89 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rk |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Rk |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
Rk |
Team |
Div |
W |
L |
| 1 |
SLN-x |
NL-C |
90 |
72 |
1 |
ATL-x |
NL-E |
88 |
74 |
1 |
LAN-x |
NL-W |
86 |
76 |
| 2 |
CHN |
NL-C |
87 |
75 |
2 |
PHI-y |
NL-E |
87 |
75 |
2 |
COL |
NL-W |
83 |
79 |
| 3 |
MIL |
NL-C |
82 |
80 |
3 |
NYN |
NL-E |
81 |
81 |
3 |
SFN |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| 4 |
CIN |
NL-C |
75 |
87 |
4 |
FLO |
NL-E |
80 |
82 |
4 |
ARI |
NL-W |
82 |
80 |
| 5 |
HOU |
NL-C |
74 |
88 |
5 |
WAS |
NL-E |
74 |
88 |
5 |
SDN |
NL-W |
76 |
86 |
| 6 |
PIT |
NL-C |
70 |
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ALDS:
Yankees over Rangers
Red Sox over Twins
NLDS:
Cardinals over Phillies
Braves over Dodgers
ALCS:
Yankees over Red Sox
NLCS:
Cardinals over Braves
World Series:
Yankees over Cardinals
This entry was posted on Friday, March 19th, 2010 at 5:00 am and is filed under Season Preview.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
March 19th, 2010 at 7:55 am
If those playoff matchups held through the World Series, man the ratings would be huge.
March 19th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Quick. Tell Selig, and he'll fix it.
March 19th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
The Phils and Cubs both finish 87-75. Why do the Phils get the wild card?
March 24th, 2010 at 9:02 am
They had fractionally more wins per season, on average, in the 10,000-season sim than Philly, even though both clubs rounded to 87 wins.
March 30th, 2010 at 9:56 pm
[...] time to reveal our fearless predictions for the 2010 season. As for the standings, we consulted Neil Paine’s Marcel-projected standings, BaseballProjection’s Depth-chart standings and their starting-lineup standings and the [...]
April 1st, 2010 at 3:01 pm
[...] time to reveal our fearless predictions for the 2010 season. As for the standings, we consulted Neil Paine’s Marcel-projected standings, BaseballProjection’s Depth-chart standings and their starting-lineup standings and the [...]