What's a reasonable expectation for the Orioles in 2005?  Too early to tell, of course, but I'm going to take a stab at it anyway.  Drawing conclusions requires some admittedly breezy assumptions to be made, so let's make a few.

1) The Orioles will be somewhat more productive offensively than they were in 2004.  

This conclusion is based on several points.  First, the Orioles have added Sammy Sosa to their lineup.  Speculation as to Sosa's likely production in 2005 has been all over the board, but one conclusion that everyone agrees upon is that Sosa will certainly outperform the very best of the Orioles outfield in 2004.  He may massively outperform the Orioles' top OF mark, he may somewhat modestly outdo it, but he will outdo at some level.  

Further, Jay Gibbons and Luis Matos are almost certainly going to be more productive this year than they were last, if for no other reason than their 2004 level of play was so putrid.  A bounce back to pre-2004 levels of big league production for Gibbons is highly likely; better than that is possible and would be a bonus.  Matos probably won't do much with the stick, but a replacement level performance, at least, would seem reasonable.  Matos was nowhere near replacement level with the bat last year (yes, he was that bad), so there's another boost.  The other players in the lineup all could perform at last year's level (the only one who had a better than previously experienced full season in 2004 was Melvin Mora)--no better, no worse, as an aggregate--and the Orioles should score more runs in 2004.

A third point--the Orioles were an inefficient offensive club in 2004.  The team, as a whole, scored 842 runs...but it created 872 runs, a significant productivity shortfall.

Assuming no increased production from the holdovers and no "career year" offensive performances from anyone (unless one counts Mora pulling a repeat as a "career year"...and I'd argue that if he does this for another full year, based on the partial 2003 campaign, this is going to have to be regarded as "typical" year for Mora), an expectation of 885 runs for the team in 2005, based on the 842 raw run count of last year, seems perfectly reasonable given the addition of Sosa and the presumed "progression" towards the mean for Gibbons and Matos.  If one starts with the 872 RC figure, a 2005 output of better than 900 runs--let's say 915 or so--doesn't seem at all absurd.  

In 2004, 915 runs scored would have ranked the Orioles second in the American League in that category.  885 runs would have ranked third in the league.

The Orioles really should be among the top scoring clubs in baseball in 2005.

2) The Orioles pitching may, as a unit, be better than it was in 2004 but it won't be any worse.  This is a bit of a leap, perhaps, but the personnel on the 2005 pitching staff isn't any worse than it was last season and is arguably better.  Acquiring Steve Kline and Jay Witasick should improve the depth of the bullpen.  Arguably, Erik Bedard, Daniel Cabrera and others should benefit from more experience.  Sidney Ponson should be a little bit less unlucky.  And the staff could well benefit from a full year of Ray Miller.  The Orioles allowed 1.28 runs per game fewer after Miller took over as pitching coach last year than they did before he arrived (4.59 after; 5.87 before).  If the Orioles were to duplicate last year's post-Miller performance for all of 2004, they would allow 744 runs.  Even if they simply match last year's overall performance, they would allow 830 runs.  Split the difference between the two and you have 787 runs allowed. 

3) The Orioles won 78 games last year but "projected" to 82 games based on their run differential.  Give them the extra "efficiency" runs that they "should" have scored and the team projects to 85 wins in 2004.

If you start with the 82 win figure of last year, it's possible to see the Orioles not being that far away from a 90-win season.  Start with 85 wins as a benchmark and 90 wins becomes, arguably, a likelihood.

I, personally, am not so optimistic as to conclude that 90+ wins is likely in 2005--I'd guess something more in the neighborhood of 86-88 victories (still easily the club's best since 1997)--but I would say that by no means does 90 wins (or better) strike me as remotely absurd.        

86 wins is really at the bottom of the expectation game, given the logic laid out above.  885 runs scored, 830 allowed.

A more middle ground, believe it or not (885 scored, 787 allowed) brings us to a projected total of 90 wins on the dot.

A sunnier forecast (915-787) gives us a projected total of 93 victories.

A best case scenario (as laid out above--this actually falls short of a true best case because it doesn't assume any break out offensive or pitching performances) would have a 915-744 run differential.  This would project to 98 wins and a likely playoff berth.

Okay, okay, don't mail that playoff ticket form in just yet.  I'm not quite willing to buy into that final scenario either.  Nevertheless, 90 wins doesn't seem nearly as far away as it did just one opening day ago.

Discuss this article on the Birds in the Belfry Message Board

Back to Birds in the Belfry