A couple of notable omissions are Edison Volquez and Rashad Eldridge...

Looks like Eaton's not gonna like the move to Ameriquest in his walk year.

Looks like Eaton's not gonna like the move to Ameriquest in his walk year.

But Wilkerson is going to love it there.

Looks like Eaton's not gonna like the move to Ameriquest in his walk year.

GM's really should use the threat to trade a pitcher to Texas or Colorado as leverage in signing extensions.

GM's really should use the threat to trade a pitcher to Texas or Colorado as leverage in signing extensions

That's a good idea. You know what we haven't seen, though? Real good hitters seeking out Colorado as a way to make themselves look like superstars. That's probably at least partially a function of Colorado's budget, but I remember there being a time when every free-agent hitter was rumored to be headed for Denver and a shot at 80 homers. But it hasn't really happened. Instead, you get Vinny Castilla and other mediocrities prologing careers on the verge of rigor mortis by showing up and slugging .500 for a season or two. And now you don't hear about the possibility of good hitters going to Colorado to pad their stats anymore.

Being a great slugger in Colorado is a catch 22. If you are great, it is because of Colorado, even if you would have been great otherwise.

Besides, apart from Helton, the only players Colorado will sign are cheap ones. So aging sluggers who look better in Colorado are attractive and attracted. They operated with a $45 million budget in 2005 and are pleased that they were allowed to spend a few more $ in 2006.

I'm going to start praying that Gerald Laird will win the catching job, although Buck will probably opt for The Slowest Not-Molina.

The only projections that look really out of whack to me are McDougall and Benoit. If I were a computer, I'd like .341/.416/.578 in the best pitcher's park in the PCL too, but in reality .250/.320/.410 is probably about where he'll end up if he gets to play south of Oklahoma. Benoit has been sick out of the bullpen the past two years, so if Buck will (for the love of God) leave him in the pen, he'll easily beat that.

The rest of the projections look pretty close to what I expected, although I think that all the new starters to beat their projections.

Yeah. I think MLEs tend to only work for prospects (and in particular prospects who haven't repeated a league). I don't know if that can be confirmed though. McDougall was a 26 year old who was repeating AAA. I think he's got a 750 OPS in him, which is nice for a backup. I think they should let him be the utility infielder. We'll see if they do.

Diamond has a pretty good projection. That basically shows they think he'd be a league average starter there now. I think that is optimistic but I think that he could be a September callup that could help them down the stretch if they need it.

Benoit should probably beat that projection, but his IP was so low last year it's not going to way heavily in ZIPS.

I wonder if they'll let Jimenez compete for the 2B job.

If Nix can post a 750 OPS (even if it is SLG heavy), it will be a great asset to their offense.

Finally, as everyone knows, it'd be nice if Laird started. But naturally, he's not going to.

So I guess this won't be the year that Hank Blalock turns into George Brett.

I think Blalock will beat that projection, but he might not if Rudy doesn't take him out back and tell him to stop trying to hit home runs and just hit. And shave. And stop getting tattoos. It'd also help if Buck gave him a day off or 15 during the year so he doesn't have his spectacular summer slump. The days off don't have to be against LHPs, but preferably they would be since Hank seems to really struggle versus them and DeRosa has a nice platoon split versus them and McDougall won't be any worse against southpaws.

Hyzdu looks good.

If only the Red Sox had a 4th OF like him...

Well, the Rangers project to 92-70. ####.

Well, the Rangers project to 92-70. ####.

I presume you're starting the guys with the best ZIPS, which aren't necessarily going to be the guys starting.

How does ZIPS account for defense? Using past DERs or ZRs, or what?

I'm not sure how ZIPS account for defense, but I've been assuming it's in there. I started what seems to be the most likely line-up: Barajas, Blalock, Young, Kinsler, Texeira, Mench, Wilkerson, Matthews, and Delluci. Nix is the main backup OF, Nevin gets 150 ab as a fill-in DH, and Jimmenez, MacDougal, and DeRosa see 150 ab each as backup infielders. I've got the team as a whole for 5510 AB, the AL average last year. Using OBP*SLG*AB, they project to score 908 runs.

The pitching staff projects to allow 768 runs, using RA=ER*1.07, with the ERAs seen here except for Millwood adjusted up to 4.60, Padilla down to 4.70, and the innings totals changed to reflect a five-man rotation of Millwood, Padilla, Eaton, Loe, and Dominguez, all pitching 180 innings. Bullpen innings were assigned on the basis of a 7-man bullpen, 50-70 IP per man, and a total team innings figure of 1440, last year's AL team average.

All this comes out to an 88-74 straight pythagorean, 95-67 with W=81 + [XR-XRA/10], and a leveraged projection therefore of 92-70. That's the same leveraged projection as Boston and LA of A, for a wild card race that will be decided by injuries.

I regress DER to the mean, wrote an algorithm to estimate infield and outfield defense and make an estimate based the GB/FB tendencies of the pitcher (thank you BA!). Essentially, I'm attempting to make a reasonable projection for $H, which ain't easy.

Dan - Thanks. BTW, you need to give Teixeira an Excellent in fielding. Trust me, he's better than Pujols.

BTW, I've seen work down based off thousands of simulations for DMB for their fielding ratings (which I don't agree with, BTW):

1B PR -16
1B FR -10
1B AV 0
1B VG 7
1B EX 20

2B PR -21
2B FR -8
2B AV 0
2B VG 4
2B EX 20

3B PR -25
3B FR -10
3B AV 0
3B VG 10
3B EX 20

SS PR -14
SS FR -12
SS AV 0
SS VG 8
SS EX 15

LF PR -17
LF FR -11
LF AV 0
LF VG 11
LF EX 12

CF PR -13
CF FR -8
CF AV 0
CF VG 12
CF EX 13

RF PR -24
RF FR -10
RF AV 0
RF VG 4
RF EX 16

These Range ratings should be unbiased by errors. Rauseo did some work in our DMB league, based off this original work. Each position is based off of 100 season sims (they used 1980) for each level of quality fielder. Some positions might have some interrelatedness (2b and SS, mainly). You can read the original thread to see if you find any. I haven't completely read it, but have read some of it.

Naturally, there is going to be some error even with that many sims, but it shows how they consider a top 1B to take away as many balls as a 2B (and more than a SS, but that is possibly error). This isn't to the putouts aren't generally pretty accurate to real life - just that those 'tweener balls that some players get to and some don't - they seem to be just about the same at every position for every position in the IF, and for every position in the OF.

Furthermore, catcher range makes basically no difference, however catcher arm and hold rating can lower your runs scored significantly (this can be viewed in the linked thread).

You're free to copy that anywhere you want Dan, if you want to post it somewhere for people to see (I know a ton of people around here use DMB). Keep these range ratings in mind if you're one of the ones that runs ZIPS to see how MLB teams are going to do.

One problem could be Nix could be the starting CF. I haven't seen any reports yet and I think their OF alignment is still up in the air.

MLB.com has the starting OF with Dellucci listed as both the LF and the DH. Clearly, that's wrong. He'll be the DH against LHP and Nevin will DH against RHP. The question is if they go with Matthews, Wilkerson, and Mench or if they go with Nix, Wilkerson, and Mench. Either way, all 4 will get quite a bit of PT (the backup will get more than 150 PA).

If ZIPS is using a lot of Nix in CF and he ends up not getting too much PT, that could throw off the defensive calculations by a win or perhaps even two(he's good at defense, Wilkerson isn't good in CF, Matthews isn't good period).

And lastly, Dan, Gary Matthews Jr. isn't listed on this ZIPS.

Nix and Matthews project to the same RC per AB, so that switch doesn't matter. The difference between Nevin and Dellucci is also fa less than a whole win.

"Sarge Lite" is Matthews, I presume.

Ah, OK.

I think the Nevin projection is too high, FWIW. But I can't really imagine a situation where he'll play that much.

Gary Matthews Jr. isn't listed on this ZIPS.

He's hidden:
Sarge Lite# rf .260 .327 .432

I gave Nevin only 150 AB in my projection. Honestly, this team looks more solid than the Angels. It's going to be ugly, but it's going to slug its way to lots of victories.

They should move the fences in

Stupid, stupid me... I was doing pythag wrong! It's ^1.83, not *1.83! D'oh. Anyway, no need for that leverage ####, the Rangers projection is 93-69.

Blalock may never turn into George Brett, but .272 31 103 is roughly Eric Chavez, and that's all they need from him. The problem is that it's hard to tell whether he'll get back to that level, or turn into Fernando Tatis instead. And that's probably the key non-battery problem that the team faces.

SP Chris Young is a man without a team. No ZIPS for him either with the Rangers or the Padres. Or did I just miss it?

These Range ratings should be unbiased by errors.

Yep. I set all the error rates to 100 for all players on the teams for all the sims. Once I got into it, I thought maybe it would be better to set them all to zeroes so we only saw the effects of range, not errors, but by that point I wasn't turning back!


Naturally, there is going to be some error even with that many sims, ...

I think the next step would be to run some sort of linear weights analysis on the hit rates to try to remove, for example, the effects of variations in home run and walk rates on overall scoring. But I think the run numbers as they are make a good starting point for discussion and evaluation. I never thought about linking to the DMB forum from here even though I know there are a bunch of DMB players here too. Thanks!

I presume you're Gary? If so, great job. This work is invaluable IMO.

I've just noticed C. J. Wilson hasn't got a ZiPS projection, unless he's in the 2d build.