What I don't get is, every player on the Phillies is a prime regression candidate while the Mets seemingly have infinite room to grow. You say the Mets don't have to worry in the bullpen, yet JJ Putz had a 1.60 WHIP last year, and Francisco Rodriguez has seen his K rate drop the last three seasons, and his K to BB rate drop the last three seasons, not to mention the drop in velocity. The Mets have relative black holes at 2B, C, and who knows what they will get out of an unproven player in LF and an iffy platoon in RF. Not to mention their starting rotation after Santana. Pelfrey's peripherals suffered in the 2nd half, Maine had a pretty worrying injury that ended his season, and Perez's ERA's fluctuated wildly month to moth, not to mention his horrible spring. And how can any team with Livan Hernandez as the 5th starter be a 92 win team?

I guess I can buy the Mets being ranked right with/1 or 2 spots ahead of the Phillies, just because the system will love Reyes and Wright while downplaying Rollins and Howard, but 7 spots ahead? 6 wins better? The Mets bullpen, after their top 2, isn't any great shakes, and the rotation isn't any better than the Phillies on paper. What I find even more egregious is the Braves ranked 5 spots ahead of the Phillies. I don't even know what to say there.

Opening night and Wrestlemania on the same day. I love America.

I'll bet my BP subscription next year that neither the A's nor the Braves finish with better records than the Phillies. If either of those two do finish higher, I'll pay double. If not, I get free. Interested?

I find it ironic, and maybe not coincidental, that statheads loved the Phillies in 04-06 when they couldn't win when it mattered, and now that they're winning, the statheads love the Mets, who now can't win when it matters.

Joe,

Nick Evans had a .571 SLG in 326 AA at-bats last year as a 22-year-old. Great. But in 2007 he hit .240/.321/.412 in High-A. In '06 he hit .254/.320/.419 in Low-A.

Paying the veteran's minimum to Sheffield on the off chance he can mash lefties better than a 23-year-old rookie with ~450 at-bats above the single-A level is usually the kind of no-risk move that you applaud. I'd rather have Sheffield out there than Marlon Anderson (supposedly the Mets' last cut).

And if the Sheff can't cook, you waive him and bring back Evans. What's not to love here?

I came down here to check out all the people pissed that their team was somehow being disrespected. I was not disappointed.

I will never forget when last year you picked the Rays over the Phillies, and then when the Phillies won, a fan asked you to APOLOGIZE.

Come on Joe, why you be hatin'? Good times.

102 wins for my Red Sox? That is ridiculously awesome. If a team in this year's AL East wins over 100 games, you're talking about probably the best team of the decade. I'd be pretty down w/ that.

I don't buy that Joe has an actual "bias" against the Phillies, or any other team; that makes no sense. And I respect anyone who's willing to risk being egregiously wrong by making W/L predictions for every club in the big leagues.

But a few aspects of his NL East predictions don't make much sense either. That the Phils "don't have much room to grow offensively" is one: exactly none of the team's best three hitters approached their career-best seasons last year, and we know that Rollins and Utley weren't 100 percent. As for Ryan "platoon player" Howard, he was as unlucky last year on BABIP as he was lucky in 2006; his true level probably lies in between those two seasons, even factoring in the shift teams now always employ against him. Carlos Ruiz was similarly unfortunate on balls in play. I think the Phils' runs scored will come closer to 850 than the 819 Joe predicts. My concern as a fan is with Hamels' health, Moyer's continued effectiveness, regression to the mean from the bullpen, and whether Amaro can be as creative and effective patching in-season as Gillick was. Cole can't be replaced, but otherwise they should have some options.

On the Braves, I fail to grasp how Sheehan (correctly) rips their punchless outfield all off-season, then pencils them in for nearly 800 runs. Unless Larry Jones Jr has added bionic parts, it's not going to happen. The Braves should fall within a few games of .500 either way.

The Mets love... well, who knows where that comes from. I guess if one has great faith in Carlos Delgado and Fernando Tatis repeating what they did last year, and Luis Castillo shedding five years, and Oliver Perez finding the strike zone, and Mike Pelfrey and John Maine combining to make 55 starts, and the team not needing to reach into their farm system for injury replacements or trade depth, sure they could roll to the division title. Doesn't seem the way to bet, though.

I'd bet $1000 on the under for the Sox.

Sorry, I don't see how the Red Sox's depth is all that much more amazing than the Yankees or Rays. No way are the Rays at #9 - three best teams in the majors, IMO.

I'd love to see the Daisuke projection used, btw. No way he continues his strand rates.

16 games separate the rays and sox? i think it'll be much closer to that.

ill take the over on smoltz's projections all day. he's 42, and has spent the last few years dominating the little girl league. put him in the AL and see what happens. old pitchers accustomed to dominating the NL rarely find the same success in the other league. (see Johnson, Randy)

LOL at the A's allowing 695 runs. It's not April without a hopelessly (and unrealistically) optimistic projection from BP for the A's.

Good stuff, Joe. Do you seriously believe the A's a better club than the Cubs or the Phillies or the Rays or the Indians?

Joe if we quote your numbers are we required to say

"According to Joe Sheehan, and he usually gets these things right ..."

just like the MLB Network said when using BP projections on just about every 30 teams in 30 days segment

"According to Baseball Prospectus, and they usually get these things right ...".

Made me think there was some quid pro quo just to use the numbers ...

I am a huge A's fan and also think the projection on the A's is a bit on the high side... sure hope you're right tho!

The Phillies are constantly underrated by Pecota, look at their closest comps
Rollins- Ray Durham
Victorino- Billy Hatcher
Utley- Chris Sabo.
Howard- Mike Epstein

But, with that said, the mid to high eighties in wins seems reasonable. But, I don't see how the Mets win 90+ with Delgado, Castillo, Church, Schneider and their Left Field situation accounting for over 2500 plate appearances. I'm sure someone will step up and play well out of that group, but there is still a lot of suck in that lineup.

Gee, the As a top 10 team. What a surprise.
Who was it that said a few years ago that the As AAA pitchers were better than the rotations of 1/2 of the ML teams?

Try some objectivity. Really.

Today I saw the Unfiltered post about Over/Under bets, and it made me think that a good addition to these predictions, Joe, would be something that quantifies the kind of volatility you might expect with each team's predicted record -- something like PECOTA's Beta, but admittedly less scientific. Say you're pretty confident about your Red Sox prediction of 102 wins, but you're less sure about your Angels prediction because you don't really know what to expect from Lackey and Santana. You might rate how confident you are in your prediction. It could be a numerical rating or a red-yellow-green or whatever. However you do it, I think something like this could quantify how much more difficult it is to predict some teams than others, and it would also give you another metric by which to judge your predictive powers at the end of the season.