You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen
Monday, January 16, 2006
2006 ZiPS Projections and Disk for DMB 9.0, Build 1
To load the disk into DMB 9.0, create a new empty database, select “restore” and then choose the zip file. Everything else here is self-explanatory.
2006 ZiPS Projection Spreadsheet for Excel
2006 ZiPS Projections for DMB 9.0
For the disk, as this is the first build, it’s simply a list of all the players and their appropriate teams. The latter is up-to-date to the best of my ability - no doubt that with 2000 players and minor league transactions reported very poorly, there will be some mistakes, so by all means, speak up when you come across them.
Support BBTF
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
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.
I'll review some more of my EX ratings before next build.
They do. And Texas gets hosed most (especially since Teixeira is listed as average). This happened last year too.
Yeah, I wouldn't consider these official. This is just a trial run.
Did you set starting lineups & pitching staffs for each team? If so, would you mind sending me all those MP's?
C - Kendall - AV/FR arm
1B - Swisher - VG
2B - Ellis - EX
3B - Chaves - VG
SS - Crosby - VG
LF - Kielty/Payton - AV/VG
CF - Kotsay - AV
RF - Bradley - EX (I might change this down to a VG)
The difference between Excellent and Very good is negligible in the outfield. The difference between Excellent and Very good is very big in the infield. The difference between Average and Very good is big at almost all positions.
1B - Swisher - VG
I don't want to call you an idiot, but for listing Swisher as a better 1B than Teixeira.... there's no other way to describe it.
Teixeira at least has 1 very good season under his belt - Swisher has none.
Teixeira has great reflexes and athleticism for a 1B, and is incredible at scooping balls. Scouts like Teixeira's defense too, so I just don't really see any basis for having Teixeira lower.
What in particular are you basing your decision for putting Teixeira below Swisher?
As for Teixeira's ZR in 2004... it was worse, but it was worse for a lot of people. His ZR was still the 4th best in the majors for 1B with significant time. And he's the best I've seen in baseball (although I'm biased towards AL over NL) in scooping low throws (and this is something that ZR and UZR don't measure, IIRC). Teixeira's 2003 ZR was also above average - and keep in mind he hadn't been playing 1B for that long.
He deserves to be a very good.
And given how conservative you are at giving out very goods, Swisher does not deserve to be. You considered Teixeira an average with 1 very good season and 2 average ones (although, it's more like 1 excellent season, 1 very good season, and 1 above average season) - Swisher is unproven.
If you're giving Swisher a Vg because of a hunch of because of scouting reports, it's very unfair to many other players you're not giving the same benefit of the doubt (because I think you're very conservative with your ratings, and for good reason).
I don't know if they still make those Greatest of All Time disks, but the '80 Phillies on GOAT 2 were amazing, even with Luzinski.
I don't know if it's "fair" or not (I don't know what other prospects' projections are), but BA raves about Swisher's defense at 1B.
This is from his 2002 pre-draft scouting report: Swisher spent most of this season in the outfield to hone his athletic skills, but first base is his natural position. He has J.T. Snow-caliber skills there.
And from his 2004 Oakland Prospects report: Swisher is sound defensively with good instincts and an average arm. While he has played just six games at first base as a pro, he’s a potential Gold Glove candidate at that position, though Oakland currently has no plans of moving him from the outfield.
Finally, the 2004 PCL Top Prospects: He'd be a Gold Glove candidate if Oakland moved him to first base. He's very competitive, along the lines of a Paul O'Neill, and did a better job channeling his intensity this year.
As for the rest of the team, I'd probably move Crosby a notch down and consider moving Chavez a step up.
I'd probably bump Ellis a notch down, but I would probably be a lot more stingy with the "EX"'s than Dan is (probably the only 2B in MLB I'd give an EX to would be Hudson).
Ellis had a better UZR/150 than Hudson in 2005 (+15 to +12), and he's above Hudson in Tango/MGL's 1999-2003 true talent UZR ratings (+17 to +10). Dial had Ellis ahead in 2005, as well (+11 to +2).
I'd say he's at least on Hudson's level.
Okay, I'll take your word for that - you've seen him a lot more than I have.
I still haven't seen a defensive metric that I have any confidence in.
There are a lot of gold glove candidates in the majors right now you're giving averages. Like Teixeira, who has already won a gold glove. So this explanation isn't really adequate in my opinion.
Incidentally, I just found out why Florida simmed so bad. They had 12 position players and 6 pitchers active.
So did you not set lineups or anything of that sort for these early runs?
No, I didn't do any of that. I ran the automatically generated pitching and lineup things for most of the AL teams, but the NL is always an afterthought to me.
I'd give Rolen an excellent, although coming back from injury and getting older I'm not even convinced that's a slam dunk. Ellis would probably be the only other non-SS infielder I'd consider giving an excellent, but might not since he's on the border and ZIPS already accounts for defense. I know that Dan said he's conservative on the DER he uses, and is conservative on the defensive ratings here, but I don't think he's been conservative for Oakland that that can lead to them get a significant boost.
For SS I'd probably give Adam Everett an Excellent, and that's about it. Maybe Uribe.
Based on the numbers I posted in this thread, Oakland is +61 runs above average on defense. That's over 6 wins above average, on top of the fact DER has already been included. If I run sims, I plan on adjusting a few of these guys. Now Chavez, Crosby, Ellis, and Bradley all *could* be considered what they're rated at here - but they're definitely not conservative and it's rounding up for all of them, in my opinion. With DER already factored in, I wouldn't expect any team's fielding to be above +40, maybe even closer to +30-35.
Well it's worth mentioning that for the Rangers, 2 of their starters, Loe and Dominguez, are being farmed in the current file. Of course, with the ZIPS projections of Diamond and Riley, that probably doesn't hurt them. Also, Kinsler is likely going to be their starting 2B.
Yay.
Scouting reports are fun.
I just picked up the Sporting News Baseball Register, which has subjective scouting reports:
Michael Young - Young is one of the league's best shortstops. Is very fluid with quick footwork and agility to either side. Can adjust his stride very well when going after the ball. Hands are quick and soft. Has a quick release and with very good carry. Has good arm strength from the hole.
Steve Finley - Finley still gets good jumps on the ball and takes consistent routes. Has good closing speed to the gaps and comes in on the ball well. Rarely makes a defensive mistake. Has a quick release and is accurate.
To be fair, they don't praise everyone. The book is down on Soriano, for instance, as well as Sosa and Giambi.
So he has a skill that will make him perennially overrated as a first baseman?
What do you mean by 'stripping'? You mean it's removing DER's influence?
Ellis: Ex
Hudson: Vg
Swisher: Pr
Teixeira: Vg
Everett: Ex
Uribe: Vg
Crosby: Vg
Still, those early runs must have a lot of playing-time problems, mostly in the area of players being used who their teams should use but won't.
I simmed 3 seasons worth. They were simming .500. I set their lineup, pitching staff, and everything (did this, to the best of my knowledge, for all the AL West teams, but no other teams). I would still wager there are some defense issues, although I made some adjustments on Oakland's defensive ratings. Oakland was simming as the best team in baseball (though to be fair to STL, NYY, etc. I wasn't setting up their teams) - around a .590-.600, and was giving up a comically low number of runs.
Also, since ZIPS already adjusts for park, and then you put them in their park, it might double count park effects - not sure how much this would change things, if it indeed does happen.
No, the event table generates the input stats as being for that park.
Assuming Maddon is smarter than Piniella, yes. I highly doubt Young will begin the season with the Rays so Gomes should play in RF until the call-up, then he'll slide to DH.
I'd say Oakland should project about 90 wins, Seattle should project worse (they're another team that's got a very well rated defense), and Texas should project better.
My 3 sims were jiving pretty well with what SG in ATL projected. Basically, Oakland was winning around 95 games a year, and were giving up more than 50 fewer runs than the #2 team in runs allowed.
I can't figure out how to post this with any clarity, so I'll give the highlights, and wait for someone to tell me how to actually post things in a way that makes some sense.
Red Sox: 95.2 wins
Yankees: 85.3
Blue Jays: 82.8
White Sox: 79.5
Cleveland: 86.9
Twins: 86.3
Oakland: 99.5
Seattle: 82.7
Angels: 80.3
Mets: 91.3
Braves: 78.8
Phillies: 88.1
Marlins: 72.9
Cubs: 84.8
Cardinals: 93.0
San Francisco: 85.1
No other teams above .500. Only 24 runs compared to SG's 100, but I think the 25 man rosters should help the accuracy. I'll leave this to run for a hundred times overnight, maybe tweak the rosters a bit more.
bibigon, I don't like to run with just the 25 man roster because you have to assume that there will be injuries and missed time and teams will have innings and AB going to lesser players. I usually run with at least 30.
Hmm. Good point, I hadn't considered this.
This also makes things much more difficult however, as I don't know enough about each team's depth charts to get 30 man rosters which have much relationship to reality.
SG: I sim with no injuries and set rosters at 25. It assumes the best case scenario for each team. Perhaps this is the wrong approach.
Did you use Erstad in CF?
MLB.com's depth charts only seem to cover the 25 man rosters. Those I'm familiar enough with already. The question is about the extra 5 guys to deal with injuries/etc...
Nope. Forgot to. I'll do that for my next batch tonight.
Thanks for the heads up.
Actually, if you're trying to assess the true talent of the team, this may be a better approach. I don't think there's any "best" way to do these.
Red Sox: 94.5 wins
Yankees: 86.2
Blue Jays: 83.9
White Sox: 84.3
Cleveland: 86.6
Twins: 84.2
Oakland: 98.0
Seattle: 81.2
Angels: 84.7
Mets: 89.0
Braves: 82.0
Phillies: 85.7
Marlins: 71.1
Cubs: 86.8
Cardinals: 96.9
San Francisco: 85.1
LA: 82.2
No other teams were above .500
Shane Victorino (PHI) is a switch-hitter (Baseball Cube has this wrong - he started switch-hitting a few years ago)
Ryan Madson (PHI) needs a starter rating
Ricky Nolasco (FLA) should have a relief rating (I believe he's rumored as a closer possibility)
Adam Dunn (CIN), Lance Berkman (HOU) - primary position 1B
Ryan Speier (COL) - needs relief rtg
Jeremy Bonderman (DET) - switch relief rating to starter rating
Also, I'm doing 29-man rosters and depth charts for each team now - let me know if you'd like them for your next build. Thanks Dan!
I picked up a Sporting News guide that actually listed manager tendencies for the 2005 season (defensive changes, stolen base tendencies, how long pitchers were left in, etc.)
If I have time tonight, I'll put up some details.
-Chris
If someone (Jerry Royster Experience?) can point me to a good resource, I'll give it the ol' college try!
Stolen Base Information
Name Games Attempts Success % Pitchout Percentage -
rnr mv 2nd sb-cs 3rd sb-cs Hm sb-cs Dbl Stl 0 out 1 out 2 out
Bell, Buddy 112 48 70.8 1 32-12 2-2 0-0 0 10.4 29.2 60.4
Francona, Terry 162 57 78.9 1 42-12 3-0 0-0 0 22.8 24.6 52.6
Gardenhire, Ron 162 146 69.9 4 85-39 17-4 0-1 4 30.1 35.6 34.2
Gibbons, John 162 107 67.3 1 58-32 13-2 1-1 3 14.0 41.1 44.9
Guillen, Ozzie 162 204 67.2 7 115-61 21-5 1-1 3 22.1 36.3 41.7
Hargrove, Mike 162 149 68.5 3 87-42 13-4 2-1 7 15.4 38.3 46.3
Macha, Ken 162 53 58.5 1 29-20 2-1 0-1 0 15.1 34.0 50.9
Pena, Tony 33 27 48.1 1 13-12 0-1 0-1 0 25.9 33.3 40.7
Perlozzo, Sam 55 41 58.5 1 20-15 4-2 0-0 1 14.6 43.9 41.5
Piniella, Lou 162 200 75.5 13 129-43 22-5 0-1 6 21.0 36.5 42.5
Schaefer, Bob 17 11 54.5 0 5-5 1-0 0-0 1 18.2 54.5 27.3
Scioscia, Mike 162 218 73.9 9 149-47 12-8 0-2 5 22.0 33.5 44.5
Showalter, Buck 162 82 81.7 2 61-14 6-1 0-0 1 19.5 35.4 45.1
Torre, Joe 162 111 75.7 0 67-20 17-7 0-0 9 25.2 42.3 32.4
Trammell, Alan 162 94 70.2 6 61-24 5-3 0-1 2 23.4 34.0 42.6
Wedge, Eric 162 98 63.3 5 55-30 6-5 1-1 0 18.4 41.8 39.8
More information than is strictly necessary, I know, but I thought it was neat.
I don't know if it's cool to post too much of the stuff in this book (copyrights and all), but this is the sort of information that's in there.
On paper, probable NL keeper team looking pretty competitive in 2006.
Let McLouth Outh!
Thanks,
BreakOut(h)
Are you willing to make available the spreadsheet that you made to compile these runs, like you did last year? Unfortunately, the system I had that sheet on blowed up real good, and I don't have it anymore.
Brian McCann will be 22 this season (B-day: 02/20/1984), not 26 as you have him listed. I suspect that this might change his projection in a very favorable way since a 25 year-old hitting 278/345/400 in his first stint in the bigs is like a rich man's Johnny Estrada while a 21 y.o. doing the same is, um, more interesting.
P.S. You have Kelly Johnson's projection completely wrong. He's going to hit approx. 399/650/1002 this year.
Brian McCann is updated in my spreadsheet and disk, I just haven't uploaded it (which will be updated in my 2nd build). I'm totally confused as to who's biographical info I ended up using for McCann on the disk. I double-checked and he is projected for his correct age year, however.
Sure - they're at home, though. I'll see what I can put up this weekend.
High Low
Team W L RF RA DIV WC DIV% WC% Made% Missed% Wins Wins
American League
East
Boston 92 70 879 740 76 6 76% 6% 82% 18% 105 77
New York(A) 85 77 821 786 14 16 14% 16% 30% 70% 99 70
Toronto 83 79 748 740 9 14 9% 14% 23% 77% 99 65
Baltimore 73 89 733 809 1 1 1% 1% 2% 98% 89 54
Tampa Bay 70 92 711 827 1 0 1% 0% 1% 99% 85 59
Central
Minnesota 86 76 719 674 38 9 38% 9% 47% 53% 100 70
Cleveland 84 79 775 732 23 7 23% 7% 30% 70% 102 70
Chicago(A) 82 80 746 727 20 4 20% 4% 24% 76% 103 68
Detroit 82 80 764 760 19 5 19% 5% 24% 76% 95 68
Kansas City 65 97 680 829 0 0 0% 0% 0% 100% 86 44
West
Oakland 96 66 767 617 88 6 88% 6% 94% 6% 109 79
Los Angeles(A) 85 77 722 691 7 23 7% 23% 30% 70% 100 68
Texas 80 82 800 812 3 7 3% 7% 10% 90% 94 65
Seattle 79 83 710 750 2 5 2% 5% 7% 93% 94 60
National League
East
New York(N) 90 72 782 702 53 14 53% 14% 67% 33% 105 72
Philadelphia 89 73 751 676 38 22 38% 22% 60% 40% 105 75
Atlanta 81 81 736 734 8 8 8% 8% 16% 84% 94 68
Washington 75 87 683 735 2 0 2% 0% 2% 98% 89 59
Florida 70 92 645 737 0 1 0% 1% 1% 99% 86 57
Central
St. Louis 96 66 768 628 79 10 79% 10% 89% 11% 109 82
Chicago(N) 85 77 735 696 8 15 8% 15% 23% 77% 100 72
Pittsburgh 82 80 711 707 8 9 8% 9% 17% 83% 96 65
Milwaukee 80 82 704 716 5 4 5% 4% 9% 91% 97 63
Houston 74 88 682 757 0 3 0% 3% 3% 97% 89 59
Cincinnati 69 93 760 870 0 1 0% 1% 1% 99% 85 53
West
Los Angeles(N) 87 75 748 701 59 5 59% 5% 64% 36% 106 71
San Francisco 83 79 732 716 28 6 28% 6% 34% 66% 98 68
Arizona 77 85 729 771 7 1 7% 1% 8% 92% 95 63
Colorado 76 86 787 842 2 3 2% 3% 5% 95% 90 65
San Diego 75 88 675 718 5 1 5% 1% 6% 94% 94 61
I'm pretty sure someone goes over this every year, but how are you doing all the sims? Are you running each one-by-one, and manually pasting the stats into Excel? Or is there some way to get it to run automatically?
I wrote a program that automates running Diamond Mind and can output the reports automatically. Then I wrote a macro in an Excel spreadsheet that rolls it all up when you're done. It's all pretty much automated at this point.
He's on there with his nickname, "Sea Bass".
The link to your 30 man rosters.
Thanks.
bibigon, I got the link to work by going to yousendit.com and pasting the link into their thing. Then they give you a new link that you can paste into your browser, which lets you d/l the file.
Sure, why not. Here's the link, which will be good for a week. I included the updated 30 man rosters in here through the Piazza and Gonzalez signings.
If someone wants just the rosters, the link is here.
ZiPS 30 man rosters. Updated through the Davanon and Heredia coups, and now with the 2006 schedule. This link is permanent and I'll try to update it when anything newsworthy happens.
Macro for batch running Diamond Mind. Instructions are in the zip. This link will expire in 7 days.
I've also gone back and fixed some misplaced minor leaguers, and a couple major leaguers.
You can grab a copy here
btw, the minor league profiles are auto generated
base and import, basically?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main