Tango:  Evaluating the 2009 forecasts - Chone/ZiPS + Fantistics win

[Chone and ZiPS lead the way.  Marcel is where it should be, whil PECOTA once again brings up the rear (just not so obvious this time). 

(...)

It looks to me like we found our secret recipe: Chone/ZiPS forecasts for rate, with Fantistics for playing time.

So, my question is, what did Nate do with PECOTA that hasn’t been done by the rest of the BP guys since Nate became a politometric dork?  This is the second year that PECOTA got trounced and it also was bottom of the barrel in Tango’s Simulated Draft experiment.

McLennan: ZIP it… ZIP it good… - How ZIPS projects the 2010 Diamondbacks

Are we not Primates?

As Zephon mentioned yesterday, Dan Szymborski’s ZIPS system has come out with its 2010 numbers for Arizona. It’s the last of the “big four” public projection systems [Bill James, CHONE, Marcel, ZIPS] to go to press, so that means I can begin work on the Communiry Projections. Those will be starting after I finish the 2010 preview by position series, so likely about when pitchers and catchers report. For the moment, however, let’s just extract the basic numbers and see what ZIPS has to say about our everyday players next year

The good news on first eyeball is, ZIPS projects six everyday players to have an OPS+ of 100 or better in 2010. This would be a marked improvement on last season, when we had 3 1/2 there - Mark Reynolds, Justin Upton, Miguel Montero, with the half being Ryan Roberts. The first three are projected to repeat, though the numbers for the trio all show a slight regression, of between three and ten OPS+ points. This is something njjohn mentioned with particular regard to Upton, in the RF preview piece: all the projections for him see Upton slipping. I think it’s because - and this goes for Montero and Reynolds too - 2009 was his first “good” season, and the ones prior to that still carry enough weight to drag down the numbers, countering the expected aging improvement.

Joining them in the 100+ club, ZIPS says will be our two new arrivals, Adam LaRoche and Kelly Johnson. The former is projected to bounce back almost exactly to the 2008 level, with ZIPS believing last year to have been an aberration. After two consecutive years of 122 OPS+ for LaRoche, Dan hardly sticks his neck out when he predicts a figure for Adam in 2010 of...122. Particularly encouraging, ZIPS also expects Conor Jackson to make a strong recovery from valley fever, and return to the kind of numbers produced from 2006-08. This joins the other systems, which have similar OPS expectations to the .798 from ZIPS [in the range .783 for CHONE to .806 for Bill James].

NYBD: Megdal: Thoughts on Sabermetrics and Money

or...Thar’s Gold in Them Thar Mills Brothers?

What I continually run into among those at the top of the stat innovating field is just that- a push to see this game we love in a newer, more complete way. Just as Bill James, working nights as a silo security guard, wasn’t writing his abstracts to simply make money- what were the chances such an approach would lead to Bill James becoming who he is?- there’s a hunger to see what is an endlessly complicated game in new ways.

This is the reason I write- whatever other professions are out there, the number of moving parts, new wrinkles and fantastic outcomes that baseball has is what keeps me interested in it, year after year. It wouldn’t be possible to continually see something new in games after viewing thousands of them if this were a simple game.

And this is a matter of opinion- but any advance in statistics that allows me a more accurate view of a hitter’s worth, a pitcher’s worth, or best yet (due to the relative lack of advancement in this area) a defensive player’s worth is a hell of a lot more valuable than ranch Doritos or new Coke. I think we are lucky to have writers pushing the edges of understanding in such a complicated field. Ironically enough, it is the writers from Fangraphs, The Hardball Times and other such outlets- which I understand are far less profitable than Baseball Prospectus- who are making the biggest leaps in thinking. Dan Szymborski also deserves to be singled out here- and it is criminal how little he makes from, for instance, ZIPS.

If they can eventually make enough to allow them to make a living writing about such things, all the better. It can’t- and shouldn’t- cast any doubt on the work they are doing.

Also...the MGL/Tango/Mike Fast-fueled wRC+ = Follow the Money Trail bit by Mike Silva.

Marchman: Murphy and Francoeur, pillars of success

“Many will pass through and knowledge will be the greater”

...or so we thought.

There’s no one so optimistic as a Mets fan presented with a vaguely young player who’s given some sign that he might possibly be capable of playing well, so after seeing ZiPS projections for the 2010 Mets I thought it might be good to present three batting lines in the interest of perspective. The top two are projected lines for Jeff Francoeur and Daniel Murphy and the bottom is what the average National League team got from its shortstops in 2009. (The runs and runs batted in obviously don’t count for much but they’re pretty funny.

Let me gently suggest two things: Even David Wright, Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes can’t make up for this sort of thing, and even the Mets should be able to find a first baseman and right fielder who can hit better than the average shortstop.

Walkoff Walk: Fairservice: The Dirty Projectors

Cannibalized Resources: An overview of projection systems.

If you’re new to the geek game, you may not be familiar with the assorted projection models and their banal acronyms. CHONE, Marcel, ZiPS, PECOTA, and Bill James are the best known, each with their own faults and strong points. Based on past performances, linear weighting, age regression and magic 8 balls; these systems spit out incredible reams of information that can be taken or left at your convenience. Sometimes the results are bang on, sometimes they’re laughably off. Sometimes they make little or no sense, as the playing time they predict simply won’t or can’t happen.

ZiPS - Created by Dave Szymborski of Baseball Think Factory, the ZiPS projections are quite elaborate, including defense and ODDIBE, or Odds of Important Baseball Events. Szymborski is well respected throughout the SABR world, and his system is thought to be pretty sound.

LOLine for 2010: Jeremy Guthrie. According to ZiPS, Jeremy Guthrie will only surrender 29 home runs this year. That’s less than thirty! Jeremy Guthrie is a lot of things; solid pitcher is not among them. Guthrie gave up three home runs pouring milk on his cereal this morning. Waiting in line at the DMZ last week he served up two gopher balls and later allowed a walkoff tot to his massage therapist.

PECOTA - The grandaddy of them all, available on Baseball Prospectus for a small subscription fee. An incredible variety of information is provided, with age curves and future probabilities mapped out as far as 6 years into the future. Why bother even playing the games? Creator Nate Silver bases the projections on career trajectories of similar players and phone poll results conducted by Fox News, CNN, and John Kruk’s autodialer.

LOLine from 2009: Raul Ibanez. The Ibanez signing left many heads scratching last offseason. An aging player moving to a new league had some (not all) wondering aloud if Ruben Amaro was crazy. Ibanez posted on incredible 34 home runs with a steller .899 OPS. What did PECOTA think before the season? 9 home runs. Nine. Though the robot army did nail the potential OPS (.892 predicted), Silver and friends only estimated 198 plate appearances. No word why, though Ken Rosenthal did give PECOTA a public lashing in Visual Basic for insinuating Ibanez’s steroid-addled body would break down. For shame PECOTA, for shame.

Vegas Watch: Evaluating April MLB Predictions (2009)

Where did your fave end up?!

This is, incredibly, the third annual version of this post. The tone of this year’s edition will be a bit different, for two reasons. One is that PECOTA, which had a tremendous track record between ‘05 and ‘08, was actually the worst out of all the projections I collected by a substantial margin in 2009. The other is that, sadly, ESPN didn’t have all of their analysts make projections this year, so we have no way of knowing what Steve Phillips was thinking six months ago.

S.I.: Marchman: All hail the Yankees’ new hit king; so what will Jeter do for an encore?

“Last night I dreamed
I died in my sleep
Only to awake
Laying in a coffin”

This brings us to our third question, which to my mind may be the least interesting in baseball. Jeter is never going to play for any team other than the Yankees. When the time comes they’ll sign him to a new contract for more money than his on-field contributions will be worth, and no one will think twice about it. I’d guess that Jeter will sign for an annual salary near the $22.5 million AAV that Manny Ramirez is making, and that he’ll get an extra year or two atop the two that Ramirez got from the Dodgers. Considering that the Yankees spent around $40 million on Kyle Farnsworth, Jason Giambi and Carl Pavano last year, it’s hard to see how the dollars matter much. They can afford it, and even if Jeter instantly turns into Skeeter Newsome upon signing a new deal it won’t keep the Yankees from doing other things to improve the team. It’s all a non-issue.

What is an issue, more than the hits record he isn’t going to break or the controversies over his inevitable move off of shortstop and his contract that aren’t going to materialize, is Jeter’s legacy. For such a revered winner, Jeter has presided over a lot of failure as captain, from the worst collapse in playoff history to a nearly decade-long run during which absurd payrolls that routinely neared or exceeded $200 million bought not one world championship.

All of this is less his fault than anyone’s, but there are probably college freshmen with no clear memories of the last time Jeter won a ring. It would be nice to think he doesn’t have anything left to prove. But is it really true?

L.A. Times: Bill Shaikin: Will Chone Figgins run right out of Anaheim?

That could be the wild card in free agency. Figgins already is on the wrong side of 30. We can’t imagine the Angels—or any other team—would be thrilled to sign him to a big-money contract for four or five years and then see him lose his speed after two years.

Not to worry, or so says Dan Szymborski, whose ZIPS system is one of the most highly regarded player projection tools in the sabermetric community. Those systems try to forecast performance by evaluating a player’s most recent seasons as well as the development and decline of similar players at similar ages—speedy center fielders in their early 30s, lumbering sluggers in their mid-20s, and so on.

“In Figgins’ case, he has a broad range of skills,” Szymborski said. “Those types of players tend to age well.”

One-dimensional sluggers do not, he said. But, barring injury, he said there would be no reason to expect Figgins to slow down dramatically.

“When you’re talking about a guy who’s already 31 and is still a speed player, you’re not going to see a sudden decline,” Szymborski said. “There’s no real danger he’s going to become Sean Casey on the bases in the next few years.”

Casey never did run off with a World Series championship ring. Figgins has one. He might earn another in October, and then he might run.

NYBD: Silva: Could ZiPS Projections on Straw and Munson Mean HOF?

As with Strawberry you could go to BBTF for the yearly records. Munson’s candidacy is a trickier proposition. First, you have to take into account the fact he was a catcher. ZiPS used the assumption Munson moves away from the dish and plays 1b/DH for the final eight years of his career which, by the way, none stand out as elite performances. To be fair, he is in the ballpark with other catchers of his era, like Gary Carter and Carlton Fisk, but those individuals caught their entire careers and ZiPS is not making the same assumption. Also, using the Silva consistency test, I find stretches of Munson playing at an elite level, but nothing that seems to compare to Gary Carter, Johnny Bench, Carlton Fisk, or future Hall of Famer Mike Piazza. You have to assume his post 1980 projections would have been worse if Munson had to deal with additional wear and tear of catching.

Marty Appel, author of the book “Munson”, appeared on my show and said that, in his opinion, Thurman Munson was not a Hall of Famer. I didn’t see Thurman play, so I can only go by the numbers and compare him to others of his era. Those that saw him play say no and my humble analysis indicates the same. Unfortunately a no go for Thurman Munson.

Thanks to The Final Season of Monk Dubiel.

BDD: Baer: Statistics Are Not Like Bikinis

Does this mean I have to chuck my Jaime Lynn Fox/Paige Hopewell DVD?

I say all of this, of course, in regard to the article that Brian (Joseph) wrote yesterday about Sabermetrics. Some of the criticism was valid, but he didn’t identify the correct target, which should have been us, the fallible humans. His criticisms (such as Sabermetrics being subjectively objective) didn’t put any chinks the armor of Sabermetrics because Sabermetrics — essentially one of baseball’s sciences — is adaptable. If there’s a problem with an aspect of Sabermetrics, go ahead and change it.

Additionally, Sabermetrics — contrary to the claims of many who don’t trust it — is not adhered to religiously. Just because PECOTA says Matt Wieters is going to smoke some American League pitching doesn’t mean that he is, in fact, going to smoke some American League pitching. We can choose to accept what various analyses say, or we can reject them. Just because one prefers DIPS to ERA doesn’t mean one is bound to the conclusions reached via DIPS and cannot utilize ERA in analysis.

I don’t write this as a jab back at Brian, what with me being someone who utilizes Sabermetrics. I welcome and enjoy reading well-written, well-researched criticisms of the sciences because it can only help us improve. It is important, though, to identify who or what is really at fault, and in the case of Brian’s criticisms, it’s the people using the science and not the actual science itself.

BDD: Butterflies & Dr. Statlove (or How They Learned to Stop Watching Baseball and Love the Numbers)

or...Two Hours to of DOOM?

Sometimes I think there are baseball fans of the sabermetric sort that would rather watch FanGraphs’ Live Scoreboard than actually watch a game of baseball. This isn’t a knock on how people choose to enjoy the National Pastime, just an observation. Heck, having seen Adam Eaton pitch more times than I care to remember, there have been times I wish I wasn’t actually watching the game.

Those who love the numbers of the game are often refer to sabermetrics and almost treat as a way of life when discussing how they choose to enjoy the game. Wikipedia defines sabermetrics as the analysis of baseball through objective evidence, especially baseball statistics. While this is a simplified definition, I always found the definition ironic. The notion that sabermetrics is truly objective is silly when there are a number of ways to “objectively” look at a situation statistically depending on your subjectiveness toward the game. Take player value, for example. Some prefer VORP, others look at WAR and others consider Win Shares. Each serves a purpose and each way to evaluate players has its following and detractors. So, it is truly not objective.

...I know, I know. I’m hard on those who love sabermetrics. My guess is while I love the numbers of the game, I will never be truly accepted in the sabermetric fraternity. But, at the end of the day, you can’t understand baseball just by looking at the numbers. The statistics of the game are too malleable to make an iron-clad complex argument without someone else manipulating the numbers slightly to fit their hypothesis. And no matter how snarky you are in your commentary or how sure you are in your conclusion, there’s another way to look at it.

It’s chaos theory, at it’s best. Too bad it sometimes brings out the worst.

SNY: Salfino: What about Wang in the bullpen?

It seems ProSolution Gel works for every sabermetrician!

The other half of the equation here is putting Wang in as a starter. I first looked at this question back in 2007. Unbeknownst to me at the time, Dan Szymborski at BaseballThinkFactory.com had a formula of his own. And since then, Tom Tango on his Web site and Harry Pavlidis at the TheHardballTimes.com have looked at the question, too. They have done it from the perspective of converting a reliever (Joakim Soria) into a starter. We all agree that the same pitcher is most likely to pitch significantly better as a reliever than as a starter. The question is how much better?

Tango and Pavlidis deal mostly with Wins Above Replacement, not simple enough for our purposes. I want to convert the stats that we all understand.

My Wang conversion (based on how he’s pitched as a starter for his career) is a 2.89 ERA, 5.71 K/9, and 1.08 WHIP (baserunners per inning). Of course, he’d still be an extreme groundball pitcher. (Note: my conversion formula is based on how a sampling of modern starters turned relievers actually performed through 2006.)

Szymborski says Wang as a reliever would have a 3.09 ERA with 5.4 strikeouts per nine innings and a 1.21 WHIP.

BPro: Prospectus Idol

And it’s no slam dunkle, man!

It is our privilege to present the slate of competitors in the first-ever edition of Prospectus Idol. The objective of this competition is to find a new Baseball Prospectus columnist, but it is also an exercise in learning, from the authors for the benefit of the audience (ideally), as well as by the authors and judges from one another. As Kevin Goldstein initially laid out in his introducing the competition and explaining the basic rules for entry, this also represents a potential gateway to work within the baseball industry itself, given the increasing number of former contributors who have already landed jobs with the various clubs.

Brian Cartwright
Jeff Euston
Ken Funck
Brittany Ghiroli
Jeremy Greenhouse
Tyler Hissey
Matthew Knight
Tim Kniker
Byron Lescroart
Brian Oakchunas
Matt Swartz

WSJ: Bialik: Putting Ibanez’s Hot Start Into Perspective

Anyone catch Ibanez’s laughable dive attempt today?

In his last three seasons with the Mariners, the 36-year-old Ibanez was remarkably consistent as a hitter. Suddenly this year he’s on pace for career highs in home runs, runs scored, runs batted in, slugging percentage and on-base percentage. And he’s gone from a below-average fielder to the best leftfielder in baseball, according to an advanced measure called ultimate zone rating. Overall, he’s one of just seven players in baseball to have been worth two wins or more for their teams.

But Bill Baer was a skeptic of the signing before the season, and he’s not going to let a month and a half change his mind. “We need to wait for a decent sample size before we can draw any legitimate conclusions,” Baer writes on Baseball Daily Digest.

How much should we revise our prior opinion of a player based on a particularly strong or weak start? FanGraphs has attempted to quantify that by providing in-season updates to preseason projections of player stats. The ZiPS projection system expects Ibanez to finish with an on-base percentage of .363 and a slugging percentage of .533 — closer to his recent Mariners history than to his hot start this season.

Fangraphs: Anderson: Willie’s Blooming Power

or...A diatribe called Bloomquist.

Last season, in 192 plate appearances Willie Bloomquist recorded 46 hits, 45 of which were singles. That’s good for a batting line of .279/.377/.285, or an ISO of 0.006, one of the lowest in major league history. Naturally, Bloomquist has followed his powerless exhibition with 70 plate appearances and a .509 slugging percentage this season.

Ignore the .408 BABIP, the fact that Bloomuqist only has four extra base hits, and that his HR/FB% is well above career norms, and just focus on the sample sizes at play. Which is more likely to tell us of Willie Bloomquist’s true talent level:

A) ~70 plate appearances with a .500+ slugging
B) ~1,400 plate appearances with a .324 slugging

...Even if you park adjust and somehow attempt and objectively credit his improved power to coaching and an improved atmosphere, you still won’t be able to add nearly 0.200 points of slugging – and if you did, you probably did it wrong. At the end of the day this is still Willie Bloomquist. The hot start is certainly going to help his end of season numbers, but the reason ZiPS projects Bloomquist to finish with a .385 slugging is not because it hates him, but because there’s an entire body of evidence suggesting against Bloomquist’s new found power stroke.

FanGraphs: In Season ZiPS Projections

In case anyone missed it…

Daily updated in season projections of the ZiPS variety are now available in all the player pages!

There are two lines, the RoS line which is what a player is projected to do in only the remaining part of the season and then the Total line which is what a player’s total season stats are projected to be at the end of the season.

All the credit goes to Dan Szymborski of Baseball Think Factory for letting me implement his projection system! And a hat-tip to Dave Cameron for pointing me in the direction of his in-season projection tool! If you want to mess around with in season projections yourself, you should download his spreadsheet here: 2009 ZiPS In-Season Projection Tool

RotoGraphs: Joura: Projecting Kevin Youkilis’ Average

Youk, will never be average!

I think we may have reached that point with Youkilis and his average.

I took all of the players in 2008 who qualified for the batting title and who batted plus or minus five points from the .286 average that CHONE predicted. I came up with a group of 26 players. Then I took all of the players from this group and counted how many hits they had through 75 at-bats last season.

Our 26 players ranged from 16 to 27 hits in their first 75 at-bats last season. It is not a perfect bell curve but the right side of it does display a standard downward-sloping tail as you can see by the crude chart below:

        x
	x				x
	x				x		x
	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25	26	27

I came up with an average of 20.7 hits and a standard deviation of 3.1 for this group. So, two standard deviations gives us a high and low of 15 and 27 hits. So, for this definition of a .286 hitter, 95 percent of the time he should have between 15 and 27 hits in 75 ABs.

Youkilis ended play last night with 74 at-bats and 30 hits, meaning he falls outside of our 95 percent range. Our most likely conclusion is that he is a better hitter than the CHONE projection prior to the start of the season.

This is just a first step and I have no projection on what Youkilis will end up hitting in 2009. ZiPS projected Youkilis to bat .288 this season. Dan Szymborski just came out with an update to ZiPS based on 2009 stats. He now projects Youkilis to bat .298 for the rest of the season and finish with a .313 average.

Sickels: Not a Rookie: Pablo Sandoval

“Bring your own lampshade, somewhere there’s a party”

As you know, Sandoval had a remarkable ‘08 season, hitting .359/.412/.597 in 68 games for San Jose, then .337/.364/.549 in 44 games for Double-A Connecticut, followed by a .345/.357/.490 mark in 41 games for the Giants, just edging past the rookie eligibility limit. The defense issue is still kind of strange; he’ll likely end up fantasy-qualifying at third base, first base, and catcher this year. Is the bat for real? Although I don’t think he’s going to hit .345 over a full season, yes I think his bat is legitimate. He will never be a walk machine, but he seems like a .real 280-.300 hitter to me. He’s one of those players who makes “hard contact” even on pitches most hitters shouldn’t swing at. Such hitters can win batting titles when things go well, and Sandoval does have that kind of potential. He really snuck up on both statheads and scouts last year.

PECOTA comps are all over the map and show how odd of a player Sandoval is: Arquimidez Pozo, Benito Santiago, Ruben Sierra, Leo Hernandez, Pedro Munoz, Jose Desa, Jose Guillen, Ron Jones, Ivan Rodriguez, Victor Diaz, Darryl Motley, Rafael Palmeiro, Carlos Baerga, and Richard Hidalgo all show up. Talk about a huge range of possible outcomes.

For 2009, projections

PECOTA      .289/.329/.455
Shandler:   .294/.319/.482
James:      .320/.346/.500
ZIPS        .284/.313/.455
CHONE       .283/.315/.426

RLYW: The 2009 Diamond Mind Projection Blowout - American League Edition

Opening Day is almost here, so it’s time to present my annual Diamond Mind Projection blowout.  The idea behind this is to take several projection systems and run the 2008 season through Diamond Mind Baseball, which I consider to be the most statistically accurate baseball simulator out there.

Thanks to The Los Factor.

Crawfish Boxes: Optimizing the Astros line up by THE BOOK

I know that there has already been some discussion about Beyond the Box Score’s article on how to best fit the Astros line up to Tango, Litchman, and Dolphin’s seminal sabermetric inquiry to “The Book,” but I figured I’d try my hand it.  I used PECOTA’s weighted mean forecast because:

1. I needed to use a standardized source for player forecasts.
2. PECOTA is my go to projection for hitters, which is just personal preference.

After the jump, I’ll delve more into the reasons for placing each hitter where they were per THE BOOK and BtB’s analysis of its suggestions for optimizing a line-up.  However, I’ll offer you a teaser to entice you to read more:

1. Pence
2. Berkman
3. Tejada
4. Lee
5. Matsui
6. Bourn
7. Blum
8. Pitcher
9. Pudge

Cecil: I’m comin’, Beane-y boy!

SNY: Salfino: Crystal ball: Mets pitching staff edition

Salfino with a look at the Mets palantíer of pitchers…

Thanks first to the fine work referenced below in Ron Shandler’s Baseball Forecaster, The Bill James Handbook and Dan Szymborski’s ZiPS projections courtesy of BaseballThinkFactory.com.

We’ll first work our way down the projected Mets rotation before looking at key relievers. For fun, we’ll address the starters in the order of innings pitched projected by Szymborski. (Warning: Keep the air-sickness bags handy.)

Johan Santana: Shandler: 218 innings, 202 strikeouts, 3.19 ERA; James: 230/234/3.01 ERA; ZiPS: 220/232/3.23.

This is why Santana gets the big bucks: his ceiling is high and not much higher than his floor. Of course, there is the ever-present injury risk. Perhaps the Pitching Mechanic (Chris O’Leary) is right and it’s elevated in Santana’s case. But note that Stanford researchers say the idea that pitchers (or any athletes) can repeat motion to the degree suggested in this analysis defies evolution and runs contrary to very persuasive movement studies of other primates.

Jonathan Niese: Shandler: No projection; James: No projection; ZiPS: 165/101/4.85.

Did Pedro Martinez help with these ZiPS projections? No way can all these non-Santana guys get 165 innings unless the forecast is for the Mets to win 70 games. I like Niese. A National League scout I trust says he’s worth developing. The Mets schedule doesn’t feature many early days off. Let’s see what Niese can do with a quick hook at the ready every fifth or sixth day.

Swartz: Does PECOTA overestimate the batting averages for fast players?

Yeah...that 1975 BPro prediction of “Herb Washington: Batting Champion” was waaaaaay off base.

Moving on to 2009, I decided to compare how the top 26 base-stealers as projected by PECOTA (speed score is not listed for 2009 PECOTA projections) looked compared to CHONE and ZiPS projections.  I dropped the players who did not have any significant amount of major league experience.  Then I did the same thing for the top 26 homerun hitters as projected by PECOTA, again comparing those to the CHONE, ZiPS, and Marcel projections.  Sure enough, PECOTA projected the batting averages for the speedy players higher than CHONE, ZiPS and Marcel, but not for the homerun hitters.

I would paste in the table here, but again, since PECOTA’s projections are proprietary, I will only summarize the results.

For the 26 speedsters, PECOTA was the highest of the four systems for 14 of them.  It was the second highest for 2 of them, third highest for 2 of them, and the lowest for 8 of them.  For the 26 sluggers, PECOTA was the highest for 7, tied for the highest for 4 of them, second highest for 1 of them, third highest for 5 of them, and the lowest for 9 of them.  It estimated a batting average ten points higher than the average of CHONE, ZiPS, and Marcel for 8 speedsters, but for only 5 sluggers (2 of whom were Beltran and Hanley Ramirez, also speedsters).

The 8 speedsters that it was the highest for were: Jose Reyes, Jimmy Rollins, Hanley Ramirez, Michael Bourn, Carlos Gomez, Brandon Phillips, Rickie Weeks, and Nate McLouth.  It was also pretty high on Willy Taveras, Shane Victorino, Juan Pierre, and Corey Hart.

I would be cautious about trusting PECOTA on these guys.  It does seem that PECOTA does indeed overestimate these hitters by a bit.  By the regression estimate, it looks like fast players may get an exaggerated batting average boost of about 4 points.  I would guess that each of the projection systems has their weaknesses on certain players.  If it were possible to determine which types of hitters were better projected by different systems, I think that would be extremely useful to know.

PECOTA Discussed on the MLB Network (Video)

“Stats are ridiculous.” - Harold Reynolds.

Thanks to Vegas Watch for the headsplosion.

Driveline Mechanics: A Stupid Position Battle: Yankees Right Field

“or, How Much Better Would the Yankees Be With Manny Instead of The Swish?”

Of the players currently on the Yankees, Swisher isn’t just the projected to be best hitter among them, but CHONE’s projection sees him as practically equal to Johnny Damon defensively, as well (and we’re being generous to Damon by assuming he would be as good in right as he is in left).

There’s no contest between Swisher and Nady. As for the man the Yankees are trying to replace, while Abreu is about as good as Swisher on offense, Swisher projects as 16 runs better (about 1.5 wins) on defense over a full season.

But is he “good enough” for the Yankees? 34 runs above replacement is almost 3.5 wins above replacement, or 1.5 above average. There are many teams who don’t have a single outfielder that good. But we’ve only looked at the internal options.

While the Manny boat has probably sailed by now, it’s worth discussing him because if the Yankees had signed him, all the pundits would call the Yankees therunaway favorites. But assuming that dumping Swisher (or putting him on the bench) would be part of that (and leaving aside the issue of who would play in right field), would it make the Yankees that much better. Manny, even at his age, is still projected to be an incredible hitter by all three systems. But his defense gives almost his entire advantage against Swisher away. He only projects as 2.3 runs better—for all practical purposes, they are equal. And keep in mind that playing time hasn’t been considered. Swisher hasn’t had major injury problems that I know of, and is still a bit of a way from 30. Manny barely played 130 games in 2006 and 2007 and will be 37 in May. And Swisher clearly has positional versatility Manny doesn’t.

The Nady issue is clear, as my Driveline colleague David Golebiewski points out elsewhere (although in much less wordy fashion). My point here, however, is that not only is he better than Nady, but that he’s projected to be at least as good Manny Ramirez, player whose acquisition by the Bronx Bombers would make every talking head call them a lock for the division title in 2009.

Thanks to Wims.

Shysterball: Beanster: The Alyssa Milano Effect

BAH! The Maimed Van Doren Effect busted up a lot more pitchers!! Why...why..Gene Brabender was never the same again!

I don’t believe the Alyssa Effect has received sufficient attention by the statistical community. I took a closer look at the data based on dating information provided by this site.

While only 3 of her 26 documented relationships are major league starting pitchers, I think the results are interesting and reasonably predictive in the event she reneges on her 2008 pledge to swear off dating baseball players.

Exhibit A: Carl Pavano (2003)
During their 2003 relationship, Pavano made 33 starts and posting 12 wins with a 4.30 ERA (33/12/4.30). In 2004 after their breakup he improved dramatically to (31/18/3.00). However this euphoria proved short lived, as Yankee fans can attest, and he regressed in 2005 to (17/4/4.77).

Exhibit B: Barry Zito (2004-05)
Zito’s dating numbers averaged (34.5/12.5/4.53), remarkably similar to Pavano’s. After the breakup he also improved in 2006 to (34/16/3.83), nearly as big an improvement as Pavano’s. What happened the year after? You guessed it, regression to (33/11/4.53).

Exhibit C: Brad Penny (2006)
Penny’s dating year of 2006 was also an unspectacular (29/7/3.90). He then experienced what I am now terming the Milano Bounce with a nice (33/16/4.33) and continued this into 2008 with a (33/16/3.03). Because we are not using precise dates on the relationship, the numbers are only estimates but it appears Brad remained mentally strong for a longer period before succumbing to the inevitable Milano Meltdown with a 2009 line of (19/6/6.27).

Thanks to Rob Neyer.

Judge Delivers KO Punch to Clemens

This hurt more than the Icy Hot to the gonads.

FOX Sports: Perry: Despite injury concerns, Sheets is worth the risk

Don’cha think there’s a place for him
In between, for Sheets?

Mets

The Mets are focused on bringing back Oliver Perez, but even if they do Sheets would remain a great fit. The recent signings of Freddy Garcia and Tim Redding? Half-measures at best. The addition of Sheets (and Perez) would allow the Mets to slide Mike Pelfrey down to the fifth spot and perhaps use the lefty Jon Niese out of the bullpen. More to the point, the NL East figures to be another close race between the Mets and Phillies, and adding Sheets and Perez would be enough to make New York the favorite. It’s the Mets who provide Sheets with the best union of need, payroll flexibility, and contender status.

Cardinals

Cards ownership seems disinclined to make any major investments this winter, but the depressed market means Sheets might be in their price range. With Chris Carpenter’s status — and even his role — uncertain, St. Louis may be forced to open the season with Joel Pineiro and Kyle McLellan in the rotation. Not an optimal state of affairs, that. The front office can’t afford to squander Albert Pujols’ prime seasons by failing to surround him with a pennant-worthy supporting cast, but that’s precisely what they’re doing. Inking Sheets would be anifty corrective measure.

Postcards from Elysian Fields: Sullivan: Somebody Explain This

Here is the link:

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2009_zips_projections_texas_rangers/

Go there and you will find out how every Ranger is going to perform in 2009.

Now somebody explain this to me. Somebody explain what this means and why somebody would go to all this trouble. There’s no doubt this is impressive work. There is no doubt that this is the product of a beautiful mind. Euclid couldn’t be more brilliant.

Basically, if you read this, David Murphy and Matt Harrison are going to regress. Why?

Looks like Josh Hamilton is going to regress. Apparently Elvis Andrus is going to hit .242 with a .298 on-base percentage and steal 42 bases. Nelson Cruz - if the Rangers are going to give him a chance - will hit .282 with 31 home runs and drive in 92 runs. Take that right now?

Kevin Millwood is 11-11 but with a 4.20 ERA in 29 starts. Guess here is a 4.20 ERA for the Rangers would produce a record better than just .500. Vicente Padilla is 10-11 with a 5.04 ERA. Guess Millwood won’t get adequate run support.

Love to see what was said about the Rays a year ago.

And if that isn’t enough...go to the comments section for real postcentral gyrustoleum action!

Baseball America’s Top 10 Prospects: New York Mets

Right on time for Dan’s ZiPS Projections for the Mets.

1. Fernando Martinez, of
2. Wilmer Flores, ss
3. Jonathon Niese, lhp
4. Brad Holt, rhp
5. Bobby Parnell, rhp
6. Jefry Marte, 3b
7. Jenrry Mejia, rhp
8. Reese Havens, ss
9. Nick Evans, 1b/of
10. Eddie Kunz, rhp

Interestingly, the third of those three choices made the biggest impression. Righthander Brad Holt has the best fastball in the system and has jumped on the fast track to the majors. The Mets expect fiirst baseman Ike Davis and shortstop Reese Havens to fare better in 2009 after uninspiring pro debuts.

Because many of the top players in system are still teenagers, there won’t be many new faces making their debuts when New York unveils Citi Field this season. The lone player not already exposed to the majors who may have an impact is Martinez.

Royals Review: Projecting the Royals’ 2009 Offense with Bill James (Not Really, Though)

Yeah...but it sells the article!

Let me say from the get-go that, in my utterly amateur opinion, the James projections aren’t that good. I don’t know why. They tend to be overly optimistic regarding power hitters. In post-season discussions about the relative success of different projection systems, I don’t recall the Bill James projections ever coming into a serious conversation among the “winners” (generally ZiPS, CHONE, and PECOTA are at the top.). But this was the first full set of “free” projections that came out, and they aren’t totally uninformed. Yeah, I could use a Marcels (I’m going to start doing them myself one of these days, and Colin Wyers has already done some for 2009 to tide you over until Tango does his “official” set), which do surprisingly well. However, they don’t work as well for young players with less than three years of experience in the majors, and the Royals best players fit that description.

In short, I am not endorsing the James projections. I’m not saying they’re worthless, either. I just wanted an excuse to work with converting stuff to wOBA and bRAA and to get an idea of what sort of offense Royals fans might expect, as these projections, while probably not the greatest, aren’t completely unrealistic.