BBTF's Transaction Oracle Discussion :: 2006 ZiPS Projections

Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Saturday, November 26, 2005

2006 ZiPS Projections - Milwaukee Brewers


Name               P    AVG   OBP   SPC   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Jenkins*           lf  .281  .356  .490 147 563  83 158 39  2 25  93  55 139  1  0 
Overbay*           1b  .284  .375  .448 154 531  74 151 40  1 15  73  78 106  1  0 
Branyan*           3b  .251  .347  .499 117 355  52  89 20  1 22  64  50 128  3  2 
Fielder*           1b  .268  .352  .482 142 452  70 121 20  1 25  78  52 105 11  4 
Lee                lf  .277  .336  .481 160 622  90 172 40  0 29 106  54  88 12  6 
Weeks              2b  .252  .350  .434 148 535  88 135 26  7 19  75  56 142 22  4 
Cruz               lf  .258  .342  .457 123 403  65 104 23  0 19  60  42 124 12  6 
Clark              cf  .291  .364  .414 141 498  69 145 26  1 11  56  44  51 10 11 
Helms              3b  .269  .340  .424 111 335  34  90 17  1 11  45  31  81  0  1 
Hall               ss  .279  .325  .453 144 495  68 138 33  4 15  67  35 112 14  8 
Hart               rf  .261  .324  .450 134 467  80 122 25  6 17  67  42 102 20  9 
Hardy              ss  .253  .329  .403 112 340  45  86 19  1 10  47  39  44  0  0 
Magruder#          lf  .253  .319  .386 111 277  33  70 15  2  6  33  20  57  5  3 
Miller             c   .248  .318  .384 112 375  39  93 22  1  9  45  37  89  0  1 
Gemoll*            1b  .263  .315  .385 123 418  48 110 23  2  8  49  30 107  3  4 
Nelson*            1b  .238  .308  .384 138 487  66 116 22  2 15  63  47 140  8  3 
Dallimore          2b  .264  .322  .358 113 405  56 107 21  1  5  41  28  53  5  5 
Erickson*          2b  .256  .343  .329 103 313  35  80 18  1  1  26  33  56 10  8 
Johnson*           c   .226  .332  .335  76 221  27  50 13  1  3  23  34  35  1  2 
Durrington         2b  .252  .327  .339 121 345  55  87 14  2  4  32  35  71 22 12 
Abernathy          2b  .253  .313  .365 101 348  54  88 19  1  6  39  28  36 11  9 
Cirillo            3b  .233  .318  .342  74 193  23  45 12  0  3  20  21  24  2  2 
Rivera             c   .235  .279  .397  67 234  27  55  9  1  9  32  11  53  1  1 
Rottino            1b  .256  .298  .358 137 497  60 127 19  4  8  55  29  78  2  2 
Cruz               3b  .244  .292  .377 139 472  60 115 23  2 12  51  30 118  5  5 
Scarborough        ss  .226  .290  .353 127 394  42  89 25  2  7  42  32 100  3  4 
Krynzel*           cf  .225  .286  .346 113 408  59  92 17  4  8  42  30 130 14  7 
Sorensen#          2b  .248  .311  .314 106 347  56  86 13  2  2  31  33  69  9  8 
Moeller            c   .217  .274  .345  83 258  24  56 13  1  6  27  19  56  0  1 
Gwynn*             cf  .234  .309  .291 138 512  76 120 17  3  2  38  51  91 31 15 
Knox               cf  .233  .289  .318 114 374  47  87 18  1  4  30  26  83 21 11 
Crabbe#            2b  .220  .289  .284 127 437  52  96 14  4  2  32  39  70 18  7 
Borders            c   .212  .247  .297  72 222  20  47 10  0  3  22   8  56  1  1

Name                 W   L    ERA   G  GS     INN    H   ER  HR   BB    K 
Sheets              15   8   3.27  29  29   198.0  180   72  23   32  191 
Wise                 4   3   3.46  44   2    65.0   53   25   6   23   61 
Turnbow              5   3   3.65  59   0    74.0   60   30   7   31   79 
Davis                4   3   4.14  50   0    63.0   54   29   7   31   66 
Phelps*              2   1   4.22  30   5    49.0   49   23   4   18   36 
Davis*              11  12   4.26  34  34   203.0  189   96  21   85  175 
Capellan             5   6   4.32  58   8   102.0   99   49   7   46   84 
Ohka                 9  10   4.45  30  28   168.0  181   83  20   45   95 
Gamble               3   4   4.50  22   8    66.0   70   33   7   22   41 
Eveland*             7   9   4.53  37  19   141.0  152   71  14   46   94 
Capuano*            12  13   4.55  32  31   182.0  176   92  24   73  153 
Adams                3   4   4.57  47   1    67.0   65   34   9   28   65 
Hendrickson          8  11   4.71  28  27   149.0  159   78  19   49  106 
Lehr                 5   7   4.76  52   7   102.0  106   54  12   41   72 
Saenz                5   6   4.87  15  15    85.0   84   46  17   28   80 
Helling              6   9   4.91  32  25   152.0  158   83  22   58  111 
Bennett              2   3   4.94  54   0    62.0   64   34  10   24   48 
Obermueller          6   9   5.07  31  23   158.0  174   89  19   64   89 
de la Rosa*          3   6   5.26  41   2    53.0   54   31   4   35   46 
Wolfe                3   5   5.34  36   3    64.0   71   38   8   27   34 
Woolard              6  10   5.35  30  23   143.0  159   85  19   63   92 
Fernandez            5  12   5.51  31  25   165.0  190  101  28   55   73 
Diggins              1   2   5.63  10   5    32.0   32   20   2   23   20 
Zumwalt              2   5   5.68  41   0    65.0   68   41   9   39   47 
Costello*            6  12   5.86  32  23   132.0  150   86  23   63   85 
Jones                1   4   6.14   6   6    22.0   22   15   1   20   14 
Pratt*               3   7   6.20  34  16   103.0  101   71  17   79  100 
Weibl                2   5   6.35  30   8    78.0   91   55  16   39   50 
Habel*               5  12   6.39  31  20   124.0  146   88  31   53   85 
Sarfate              5  14   6.42  27  25   129.0  143   92  23   83   93 
Housman*             4  12   6.47  28  24   128.0  143   92  29   69  104 

Disclaimer:  ZiPS projections are computer-based projections of performance.  
Performances have not been allocated to predicted playing time in the majors - 
many of the players listed above are unlikely to play in the majors at all in 2006.  
ZiPS is projecting equivalent production - a .240 ZiPS projection may end up 
being .280 in AAA or .300 in AA, for example.  Whether or not a player will play 
is one of many non-statistical factors one has to take into account when predicting 
the future.

Dan Szymborski Posted: November 26, 2005 at 01:27 PM | 34 comment(s)
Related News: Milwaukee, ZIPS

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. Russ Posted: November 26, 2005 at 02:42 PM (#1747096)

Definitely the most interesting team in baseball right now. If you are at or above league average at every position, you will be successful.

This team is one more stud starting pitcher and one stud hitter away from being a very scary contender. Does anyone know if they're going to go after Giles? If they rotated Giles, Jenkins, Lee and Hart among the four outfield positions (with Giles spelling Clark in center every once in a while) they could do a serious amount of damage and would have a lot of depth with a killer bat off the bench.

2. battlekow Posted: November 26, 2005 at 03:13 PM (#1747125)

You're advocating that they rotate those four players in and out of RF and LF, with Clark playing CF? Even throwing Hart out of the mix, which is unreasonable, there's no way that one of Giles, Jenkins, and Lee is sitting every day. I would prefer they package Lee and Overbay together to get something fantabulous. I suppose Giles could play center, but Brady Clark is cheap and effective. Basically, there's no point in signing Giles if they're not going to get rid of Lee or Jenkins, and given that they have several adequate-to-good in-house corner outfielders, like Hart and Nelson Cruz, I would say that the chances of signing Giles are nil.

3. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: November 26, 2005 at 03:33 PM (#1747149)

Brian Giles would be an incredibly dumb investment. Though a fine player, he is clearly on the downside. Milwaukee needs to play their young talent at every opportunity as opposed to inserting some veteran who would consume valuable financial resources without providing anything close the return.

I am going to write this now so I can beat the Xmas rush. Ben Sheets will have his "breakout" season in terms of wins in 2006. Why? Why NOT?!!!

Sheets will stay healthy, pitch like, well, Ben Sheets, and the Brewers will actually score some runs for him.

Book it.

4. Walt Davis Posted: November 26, 2005 at 05:15 PM (#1747264)

I seriously doubt the Brewers are going to do anything big in the FA market, but they should be big players in the trade market. They need to move Overbay now or at midseason. If ZIPS is right, Lee doesn't give them much over Cruz/Hart (especially if either of those guys is better defensively). He's a nice player to have around and they probably wouldn't get very much in return, but Hall is also expendable. (Or Branyan but he'll bring even less in return than Hall)

What they need most is starting pitching. This rotation isn't bad and is reasonably deep, but add a second top starter and this might well be a wild-card team this year. Or an ML-ready prospect with that kind of potential and in two years this could be a really good team. An upgrade at C wouldn't be bad but I don't know if anybody substantially better than Miller is available.

5. Ziggy Posted: November 26, 2005 at 05:37 PM (#1747286)

I could see them signing Morris. Rumor has it they're increasing payroll this year, and he'd be a good fit.

6. -3E8 Posted: November 26, 2005 at 05:41 PM (#1747292)

This team is one more stud starting pitcher and one stud hitter away from being a very scary contender.

You could probably say this about half the teams in the league.

7. Walewander Has CD Tower Power Posted: November 26, 2005 at 05:46 PM (#1747297)

This team is one more stud starting pitcher and one stud hitter away from being a very scary contender.

So would a lot of teams. Nothing against the Brewers, but its true.

8. Craig K Posted: November 26, 2005 at 06:00 PM (#1747314)

As a Cardinals fan, that team scares the #### out of me.

If someone besides Sheets comes up with a breakout season, they're in the playoffs, at least as a wild card.

And 25 HRs from Fielder? Whoa.

9. Vaux, A.B.D. Posted: November 26, 2005 at 06:58 PM (#1747375)

Those Ks and BBs from Capuano look like a better ERA to me than that, even with the HR; it's not so many.

10. Russ Posted: November 26, 2005 at 09:09 PM (#1747525)

You could probably say this about half the teams in the league.

1. But for the longest time, the Brewers were in the other half.
2. The Brewers are one of the few teams that if you could do that, their sucess would be sustainable over a long period of time.

11. too fat and ugly to play third Posted: November 26, 2005 at 10:51 PM (#1747686)

Borders c

How cute.

12. Craig K Posted: November 26, 2005 at 11:46 PM (#1747777)

Looking at it again, it's a bit scary that the top 7 hitters up there are projected for 832 K's.

13. Walt Davis Posted: November 27, 2005 at 01:23 AM (#1747934)

Looking at it again, it's a bit scary that the top 7 hitters up there are projected for 832 K's.

You can't spell Milwaukee without a K.

Of course, of those top 7, you won't have Overbay and Fielder both in the lineup nor both Lee (who doesn't K much) and Cruz. And Branyan hasn't had anywhere near that many PA since 2002 (Zips is not a playing time projector. :-) But yeah, their top 4 sluggers may get 550 Ks.

14. Harold Reynolds: An Erotic Life (AG#1F) Posted: November 27, 2005 at 01:49 AM (#1747952)

Rotoworld reports the Blue Jays turned down an offer of Lyle Overbay for P Dustin McGowan.

15. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: November 27, 2005 at 02:11 AM (#1747976)

Is Dustin McGowan much better than his numbers would imply? His 2003 was good, but since his apparent injury in 2004 he hasn't been the same guy, at least by the numbers.

16. Vaux, A.B.D. Posted: November 27, 2005 at 02:56 AM (#1748010)

You're sure it was the Blue Jays who turned that down?

17. The Hop-Clop Goes On (psa1) Posted: November 27, 2005 at 03:58 AM (#1748045)

You're sure it was the Blue Jays who turned that down?

That's the report I've seen, multiple places (though I would imagine it all originates from the same source). I was surprised too -- though with rumors at this stage you never know if the Crew was also asking for JP's first-born.

18. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 27, 2005 at 05:22 AM (#1748096)

J.P. realized that he could get a comparable 1B/DH type for only 5/$75mil and figured it was better to not give up the "prospect".

19. Dolf Lucky Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:29 AM (#1749530)

No Victor Santos?

20. Rob Base Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:32 AM (#1749532)

Still looks like a pretty $hitty team to me.

21. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 28, 2005 at 10:02 AM (#1749567)

Victor Santos signed with the Royals. His projection with the Royals is a 5.21 ERA in 145 IP, 16 HR, 59 BB, 85 K.

22. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 28, 2005 at 11:22 AM (#1749635)

I think the Brewers are going to need a consolidation year, as players like Fielder, Weeks, Hart, Cruz, et. al. begin (or continue) making their adjustments to the majors. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Brewers backslid to 75 wins or so, then took another leap forward in 2007.

-- MWE

23. Dolf Lucky Posted: November 28, 2005 at 01:18 PM (#1749855)

Thanks Dan.

24. HSF Posted: November 28, 2005 at 08:23 PM (#1750443)

I agree with MWE. This team has several players - Hall, Clark, Turnbow, Ohka, Capuano - who can't be expected to do again next year what they did this year. I think people expecting Chris Capuano to win 18 games again are going to be very disappointed. Sure, he'll be a solid innings eater if he stays healthy, but if you believe in DIPS, or FIP, or anything like that, you can see he's headed for a correction.

Hardy and Weeks are the only two on the entire team from whom I'd expect better seasons. Maybe Sheets. A lot depends on what they get for Overbay, and whether they're able to move Lee or Jenkins, but it's unlikely even that those deals will pay off this season.

What Russ points out in post 1 is exactly why they aren't as good as people think, and exactly why they're in a difficult position right now in terms of making deals. They're fairly solid at every position, with no glaring weaknesses, but also with no franchise players. When you have a bunch of average-above average players, that's exactly what kind of team you'll have. You need superstars to win. This team really has only one, and he's coming off a serious injury. Then again, if the White Sox could do it. . .

25. battlekow Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:05 PM (#1750472)

he's coming off a serious injury

I think that's a mischaracterization of a muscle tear.

26. HSF Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:14 PM (#1750478)

Well, it's not a minor injury. It's not a given that he's going to come back the same pitcher, or that the peculiarities of his motion won't re-injure it.

27. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:28 PM (#1750487)

No franchise players? Maybe at THIS PARTICULAR POINT OF TIME.

I see Ben Sheets, Rickie Weeks, and Prince Fielder as guys who could make the leap.

Mike and I have disagreed on Bill Hall for several years now. If he continues to edge forward on his plate discipline I believe he will solidify the gains from 2005.

Brady Clark is only considered a fluke because nobody was intelligent enough to play him five years ago when he deserved a job. Go look at his minor league numbers where he twice led leagues in OBP and explain to me again why he can't post a .370 OBP in the majors.

Why was Capuano a prospect in Arizona but in Milwaukee he's a fluke? Yes the wins total is a reflection of support, yada, yada, yada. But the PERFORMANCE is there to be a solid rotation starter. And if you keep your team in the game SOMEBODY will get the wins.

Derrick Turnbow has a 98 mph fastball. That cannot be either manufactured or created. It just IS. Maybe he loses the control in 2006. Maybe Mike Maddux continues to help the lad master his stuff.

But hey, you go ahead and insist they stink, they were a fluke, and why bother taking a bunch of hayseeds seriously.

28. NTNgod Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:45 PM (#1750502)

Bill Hall made strides in pitch recognition last year, which, of course, isn't easy to do at the major league level.
Hall was actually pretty amusing to watch last season, in that you could occasionally see him straining himself not to swing at certain pitches he use to chase with regularity. He did succeed in cutting his strikeouts down by quite a bit (from 119 in 390 ABs in 2004, to 103 in 501), while increasing the number of pitches he saw per AB (3.80 to 4.16).

He's got good power for a middle infielder (especially to RF) - in a non-Hardy world where Hall played everyday at SS, his .837 OPS would have ranked second to Felipe Lopez' .838 amongst NL SS.
Hall was probably among the least-known players who had a VORP above 40 last year (42.7)...

29. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:56 PM (#1750513)

NTNgod:

And don't forget the defense. And the baserunning.

I love all these folks wanting to find reasons for the Brewers to stink in 2006.

If they regress it's a consolidation year. If they move forward I get to gloat about being right.

I'm diggin' 2006. :)

30. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: November 28, 2005 at 09:58 PM (#1750518)

By the way, I cannot access the Newsblog link. Just repeatedly craps out.

Other parts of the site are accessible. Just an FYI......

31. Frank Rook Posted: November 28, 2005 at 10:16 PM (#1750532)

The newsblog interface seems to be having issues, but there's a workaround. If you go the home page and click on one of the new articles linked at the top, that will allow you to then see the current newsblog hot topics. You can also bookmark a newsblog thread once you get there, and that lets you in. At least that's how I figured it out.

Regarding the Brew Crew, they will be an exciting team to watch. I'm hoping for a second place finish, hopefully an 85ish win team.

32. HSF Posted: November 29, 2005 at 02:06 AM (#1750808)

Jesus, don't be so defensive. I'm one of the hayseeds, OK? I believe "solid" is exactly the word I used to describe Capuano. Forget the wins; he's not going to have an ERA under 4.40. I never said anyone stinks; I said they won't be as good as they were in 2005. If you think they're going to do in 2006 what the Cleveland Indians did in 2005, look at the rosters and tell me this team has as much talent as Cleveland. They're not there yet. When they are, I'll be the first in line.

33. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 29, 2005 at 10:33 AM (#1751109)

The Brewers are set for a long, long time, as long as they can hang onto Melvin. Most under-rated GM in the game.

34. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: December 05, 2005 at 05:40 PM (#1762373)

Dan, what's the ZiPS for Victor Santos? He fell in between the KC and Milwaukee releases and didn't get a write-up for changing teams...

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Saturday, November 26, 2005

2006 ZiPS Projections - Milwaukee Brewers

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

My Bookmarks

Hot Topics