BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Tiger Tales: Panas: PrOPS to the Tigers in 2007

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, November 26, 2007

Tiger Tales: Panas: PrOPS to the Tigers in 2007

Tiger PrOPS?...No, no, it’s not something Roy Horn shoulda used…it’s the latest findings from Lee Panas.

The table shows us the following:

-Gary Sheffield had the highest PrOPS (.916) on the team in 2007. His .839 OPS was -.077higher than his PrOPS which suggests that he might have hit into some bad luck in 2007 and that we can expect an improvement next year.

-Magglio Ordonez (OPS=1.029, PrOPS=.885) and Curtis Granderson (.913, .785) exceeded their PrOPS by .144 and .128 respectively. These were the top 2 differentials in the league. This indicates that they might be expected to have lower much OPS next year. I think most people expect Ordonez to regress next year and a very large drop in OPS would not surprise me. Granderson might fall back a bit but I do not expect a .128 decrease in OPS.

-Others who would be expected to improve next year according to the PrOPS theory include Brandon Inge (-.058 differential) and Marcus Thames (-.045).

-Others who would be expected to regress next year according to the PrOPS theory include Edgar Renteria (.072), Placido Polanco (.053), and Carlos Guillen (.047)

Repoz Posted: November 26, 2007 at 10:16 PM | 12 comment(s) | Login to Bookmark
Related News: General, Sabermetrics, Detroit

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. Walt Davis Posted: November 26, 2007 at 10:51 PM (#2625598)

I think it's fair to expect a pretty big drop from Granderson. Those triple numbers are quite freakish -- sure you expect a power boost around his age, but his 2B and HR didn't jump dramatically while he went from 9 to 23 triples. Oddly enough, if you take away 14 triples from 2007, he ends up almost exactly at his career numbers. Those strike me as a reasonable projection (280/340/490) and that would be about an 80 point drop in OPS.

I'm not arguing that there's any logic to taking away the triples -- I just thought "hmmm, that looks a little freaky, wonder what it looks like without those" and it produced those kinda freakish results ... that also seemed like a reasonable projection. For a more conventional argument for arriving at a similar projection, just figure "hmmm, don't think he's gonna hit 302 again" and that puts him around 280/340/520, even if he does hit triples at a similar but lower rate.

I've had this perception of Granderson as a young phenom, but he'll be 27 next year. Very nice player with the (reported) good defense but I won't be at all surprised if last year was his best as a hitter.

2. Dan Posted: November 26, 2007 at 11:12 PM (#2625611)

What Granderson really needs is to be platooned. His stats vs. LHP:
Career: .202 .265 .366 .631
2007: .160 .225 .269 .494

3. Chrysler Town & Country Slaughter (Walewander) Posted: November 26, 2007 at 11:48 PM (#2625649)

Very nice player with the (reported) good defense but I won't be at all surprised if last year was his best as a hitter.

The good defence is very much factual. Curtis has a history of improving dramatically in the second full year at a level. I think 07 was a bit over his head, but closer to a benchmark than a fluke. I think he will be a force in the league for at least the next 5-6 years.

4. AROM Posted: November 27, 2007 at 01:50 AM (#2625731)

sure you expect a power boost around his age, but his 2B and HR didn't jump dramatically while he went from 9 to 23 triples.

I'm shocked that his doubles increased at all. After all, a triple is just a double where you keep running, so I would have thought his doubles would fall. His hits in the gap, 2b+3b, increased from 40 to 71 in almost the exact same number of PA.

5. thetailor Posted: November 27, 2007 at 01:57 AM (#2625738)

This might be a little selfish, but does anyone know how Granderson does on the 'eye test'? He's my starting fantasy centerfielder and this season really smells like outlier to me too.

6. tiger337 Posted: November 27, 2007 at 02:29 AM (#2625754)

Based on a lot of observation and also the range metrics, I'll say that he is an excellent defender. I think 2007 might be his best year offensively but I don't think it's a fluke. He should approach those numbers again. He's a fast learner who has exceeded expectations at every level. As you can tell from his splits, his big weakness is hitting LHP. He'll probably never hit them really well but I think he'll figure them out enough to avoid platoonong.

Lee

7. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 27, 2007 at 02:33 AM (#2625755)

Does anyone know if PrOPS means anything? I mean, it's an interesting concept, but every year, you get a bunch of guys "outperforming" their PrOPS like Ichiro! and Carl Crawford and Chone Figgins and Derek Jeter, so you know it's missing stuff. Vlad consistently beats his PrOPS. Carlos Guillen has beat it the last two years.

2006's top 10 PrOPS over- and underachievers that were around in 2007:

Player 2006 OPS   2006 PrOPS   2007 OPS
Cano   890   780   841
RJohnson  869   781   625
FSanchez  851   764   784
CGuillen  920   838   859
Sizemore  907   833   852
Matthews  866   792   742
HRamirez  833   759   948
MCabrera  998   925   965
Holliday  973   902  1012
DWright   912   843   963
Correlation
 to '07 OPS  .57   .62
-----------------------------------------
Dunn   855  1001   940
FThomas   926  1049   857
Giambi 971  1074   789
AJones 894   980   724
Biggio 727   809   666
EricChavez   786   865   752
Burrell   890   968   902
Swisher   864   940   836
Glaus  868   932   839
Loretta   706   767   724
Correlation
 to '07 OPS  .55   .61 

But wait! Let's add another column:

Player 2006 OPS   2006 PrOPS   Pre-07 Car  2007 OPS
Cano   890   780   831   841
RJohnson  869   781   772   625
FSanchez  851   764   780   784
CGuillen  920   838   799   859
Sizemore  907   833   859   852
Matthews  866   792   755   742
HRamirez  833   759   830   948
MCabrera  998   925   920   966
Holliday  973   902   903  1012  
DWright   912   843   903   963
Correlation
 to '07 OPS  .57   .62   .85
----------------------------------------------------
Dunn   855  1001   893   940
FThomas   926  1049   991   857
Giambi 971  1074   954   789
AJones 894   980   850   724
Biggio 727   809   802   666
EricChavez   786   865   839   752
Burrell   890   968   841   902
Swisher   864   940   819   836
Glaus  868   932   860   839
Loretta   706   767   764   724
Correlation
 to '07 OPS  .55   .61   .46 

Well, there were enough old guys in the bottom to throw career OPS off its game.

I don't have the means to really do this for everyone, but I don't really know that PrOPS in its current state is adding anything to our knowledge base. I mean, we already knew Curtis Granderson isn't really that good, didn't we?

8. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 27, 2007 at 02:35 AM (#2625758)

Oh, for heaven's sake. I don't have time to fix that now. I don't understand the point of a preview function that doesn't show you what the post actually looks like.

9. GotowarMissAgnes Posted: November 27, 2007 at 02:45 AM (#2625764)

I looked at PrOPS numbers last year and they were basically no better than a coin flip in predicting performance, as far as I could tell.

10. Harold Posted: November 27, 2007 at 04:45 AM (#2625820)

I mean, we already knew Curtis Granderson isn't really that good, didn't we?

Maybe, but now we know he's special.

11. Walt Davis Posted: November 27, 2007 at 08:19 AM (#2625889)

Well, let's not forget that his career numbers translate to a 116 OPS+ ... so it's not like I'm predicting he'll turn into Juan Pierre or anything. With the plus defense, that's basically Carlos Beltran. Not saying I expect him to be Beltran either -- Beltran was well-established at a much younger age -- but he's probably not a bad comp.

12. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 27, 2007 at 08:46 PM (#2626418)

- I mean, we already knew Curtis Granderson isn't really that good, didn't we?

Maybe, but now we know he's special.

No, we don't.

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Monday, November 26, 2007

Tiger Tales: Panas: PrOPS to the Tigers in 2007

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics