User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.6751 seconds
38 querie(s) executed
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.
Pirate fans will be hugely unhappy if Duke performs in line with that projection, but I think it's reasonable if he stays healthy. I really don't expect him to be a lot better than that. Ditto Maholm. Perez is the only guy who I think is likely to do better than the projection (if he's healthy).
Dan, got any idea what Nixon or Monroe would project to in Pittsburgh? Or Mueller, for that matter?
-- MWE
Given what he's done his first two years in the majors, it's not unreasonable.
Castillo's BB-Ref comps are an interesting bunch, but they don't really include anyone who has something like his skill set. Tony Bernazard might be the closest (although I think Castillo is better defensively and not quite as skilled offensively) and Bernazard eventually had a couple of decent years.
-- MWE
Mike, there's a link in the PrOPS thread that Mueller signed with LA pending a physical.
Not only is Castillo's projection disappointing, it also seems unreasonable. He hit 11 homers in 370 AB's last year, and this projects one less homer in 67 more AB's? Even the AB's are out of line. Barring another injury, and last year's was kind of fluky, he should get at least 500 in 2006.
RWC -- I think Bay could play CF, but that OF will never happen given what Tracy has said (loves defense, hates strikeouts).
Well, Duke was both a bit hit-lucky and HR-lucky last year in the majors, in that he allowed fewer hits/BIP and fewer HR/OF FBIP than one might have expected given his BIP and distribution. Hardball Times has an experimental version of FIP (xFIP) that accounts for the fact that HR are relatively predictable based on the # of fly balls allowed and the home park characteristics. Duke's xFIP for 2005 was 3.72 (his actual FIP was 2.98). Duke also had an unusually high percentage of line drives in play (25.1%, highest on the team except for Gorzelanny, who only pitched six innings), a lot of which were caught by someone; that's not likely to be repeated. Based on all of that, I see a mid-to-upper 3s ERA as being quite reasonable.
-- MWE
His strikeout rates in both AAA and the majors are less than enthralling and even for a groundball pitcher, it's a lot to ask a 23-year-old pitcher to allow single digit home runs per 200 innings.
It's kind of funny - this is the exact same discussion we had last year when ZiPS projected Oliver Perez to go from his 2004 ERA of 2.98 to 3.84 (and he ended up much worse than that, as everyone here knows). Young pitchers, even tremendously talented ones with great potential and performance, are going to have their growing pains more often than not. Two steps forward, one step backwards is standard practice - guys like Roy Oswalt are the exception.
But Duke is exceptional!
The thing about predicting Perez's 2005 is that the prediction and actual outcome weren't out of line with his record. 2004 was the aberration.
I can't go all old school on you, but Duke is not Perez, and it's a far deeper thing than K rates.
It would be, but I think most Pittsburgh fans have higher expectations based on the splashy debut. Ditto Maholm.
-- MWE
True, and these are the same fans that expect Duffy to "regress" to batting 315-320.
It's surprising to me how similar the projections are for Doumit and Paulino.
I think it might be off on Castillo, but everything else seems reasonable to me. I have read in some print and heard in other media interviews that Littlefield was projecting burnett to contribute to the MLB team this season. That seems highly unlikely, but I'll ask if the ZiPS takes the rehab into consideration, or is that projection for a healthy Burnett?
FREE NATE MCLOUTH!
Prolly Wilbur - weren't me.
-- MWE
If I remember correctly (it's been a while, and I'm a bit archive lazy), I said that when I pictured Chris Duffy, I always pictured a Lenny Dykstra type player. You must have said something like McLouth looks a lot more like Dykstra than Duffy and I took that a little too strongly.
If you look at their minor league stats, it's obvious that Dykstra had more speed and a better batting eye, so maybe McLouth is Dykstra-lite (but that's still better than the whole Redman or whole Mackowiak that the Pirates have been running out in CF the last few years).
The Martinez comparisons are probably a good lower bound on McLouth's ceiling (think about it, it makes sense), although I think Nate has more power than Martinez (who wasn't that bad of a player, when you look at it).
The big question, I guess, is whether McLouth's walks will go up at some point. His rate is acceptable now, but if it were better, it would make him a lot more valuable.
One of the more problematic projections, to me, is Perez. He seems far more likely to repeat either 2004 or 2005 than to fall in between. His problem this year wasn't the standard growing pains, like learning to work hitters and make adjustments. It was a loss of control and a significant drop in velocity. If he's throwing 89 mph in 2006, he's not going to sniff a 4.32 ERA.
The defense is more than rough - using Dial's linear-weighted zone rating method and adjusting for team balls in play, I have Wigginton at -9 in 2004 and -10 in a mere 305 innings in '05 (which comes out as an abysmal -48 per 162 games!)
When we consider the G/F ratio of Duke, Maholm, Perez, Wells, and take your pick for #5, there will be a lot of balls on the ground, to be sure. But few RH MLB hitters are going to get on top and pull any of those guys heat like they would to Fogg and Redman in 2005, or Fogg and Burnett in 2004... especially with all the lefties throwing into the RH batters. The spray charts vs Maholm and Duke and Perez show us that.
Wiggy was comfortable above replacement last year to warrant an additional look at age 28, especially after his more than productive numbers late at Indy. His D tightened up there as well. But that is my opinion..
Guys like Bay (late to the big leagues for a great player) have funny comps:
Age 26 comps:
Marty Cordova, Hack Wilson, Jim Edmonds, Zeke Bonura, Mitchell Page,
Bobby Higginson, Pedro Guerrero, Tim Salmon, Wes Covington, Jason Giambi
FWIW, just eyeballing it, it looks like the better comps for Bay are Tim Salmon with more speed or Jim Edmonds with more power... not too shabby, as long as Bay can stay healthy.
One of the discouraging things about Littlefield is that, once he gets down on a player, even if it's only for oversleeping once, that player is toast no matter what he does on the field afterward.
Does anyone else think Wiggy would be more valuable as a somewhat stiff second baseman rather than a somewhat stiff third baseman who occasionally pegs a fan with a wild throw?
Jesse Barfield was a -5...oh wait, you weren't talking about his SOM arm... never mind...
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main