|
|
|
|
Transaction Oracle— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen
Sunday, January 08, 2006
2006 ZiPS Projections - Texas Rangers
Name P AVG OBP SPC G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS
Teixeira# 1b .295 .377 .584 155 606 104 179 37 3 44 130 71 117 4 1
Wilkerson* lf .280 .387 .504 151 554 99 155 44 4 24 102 94 148 9 8
Young ss .322 .374 .487 160 673 110 217 38 5 21 98 53 93 6 3
Dellucci* rf .247 .357 .476 121 393 79 97 15 3 23 65 64 108 5 3
McDougall 3b .276 .352 .454 101 359 56 99 20 1 14 57 42 67 4 2
Hyzdu rf .242 .355 .457 121 363 76 88 28 1 16 71 61 78 4 3
Blalock* 3b .272 .335 .475 160 640 92 174 35 1 31 103 60 127 1 1
Colbrunn 1b .277 .322 .494 34 83 8 23 7 1 3 12 6 12 0 0
Nevin 1b .270 .332 .455 111 415 64 112 21 1 18 80 38 101 2 0
Mench lf .264 .327 .474 139 508 67 134 31 2 24 79 45 65 3 2
Botts# 1b .257 .334 .455 140 499 66 128 27 3 22 79 53 141 4 3
Laird c .265 .333 .448 93 328 57 87 14 2 14 48 30 68 6 3
Hidalgo rf .252 .321 .457 114 409 57 103 22 1 20 66 38 95 3 3
Sarge Lite# rf .260 .327 .432 126 442 67 115 26 4 14 58 46 86 8 3
Jimenez# 2b .262 .358 .378 135 481 76 126 25 2 9 57 73 72 10 5
Eldridge# lf .262 .355 .390 104 328 62 86 26 2 4 34 45 82 9 5
Nix* cf .254 .303 .454 105 370 56 94 20 3 16 55 25 86 3 1
Allen lf .292 .328 .421 96 349 50 102 22 1 7 44 18 63 6 6
Smith* lf .255 .304 .440 86 302 45 77 19 2 11 43 20 56 3 1
Kinsler ss .248 .310 .431 127 476 91 118 28 1 19 69 37 77 7 3
Burke c .256 .330 .390 99 313 46 80 16 1 8 44 28 54 1 2
Barajas c .249 .297 .444 113 378 48 94 23 0 17 57 22 65 0 0
DeRosa 2b .262 .324 .389 90 229 33 60 11 0 6 28 19 41 1 1
Metcalf 3b .234 .286 .406 116 414 55 97 24 4 13 53 26 110 4 2
Conti* cf .245 .296 .385 123 449 68 110 23 2 12 56 29 113 3 3
Meyer* ss .260 .307 .336 110 420 58 109 20 3 2 39 27 80 10 4
Brown# cf .245 .308 .331 132 498 76 122 20 4 5 43 45 75 20 12
Arias ss .270 .293 .350 123 474 61 128 18 4 4 44 15 46 16 9
Yan# 2b .263 .312 .311 126 483 70 127 13 2 2 38 34 53 37 15
Brewer ss .238 .282 .336 105 366 52 87 16 1 6 36 21 59 4 4
McDonald c .211 .277 .322 75 242 26 51 13 1 4 26 21 53 0 0
Name W L ERA G GS INN H ER HR BB K
Cordero 5 2 3.28 69 0 74.0 61 27 4 33 82
Francisco 3 2 3.56 39 0 43.0 33 17 3 24 52
Feldman 2 2 3.87 60 0 79.0 79 34 6 28 46
Ramirez* 4 2 3.97 44 0 59.0 63 26 7 10 31
Otsuka 6 4 4.04 69 0 69.0 63 31 5 30 62
Shouse* 2 1 4.08 61 0 53.0 53 24 5 18 34
Millwood 12 8 4.12 30 30 188.0 197 86 21 54 137
Almanzar 5 3 4.12 56 0 59.0 58 27 7 23 41
Loe 11 8 4.34 42 20 141.0 145 68 17 47 94
Carlson* 3 3 4.42 54 0 59.0 61 29 8 17 50
Riley* 6 5 4.66 24 22 110.0 109 57 11 46 80
Diamond 7 7 4.67 25 25 135.0 131 70 17 63 125
Gryboski 3 2 4.71 57 0 42.0 47 22 2 21 20
Benoit 6 5 4.83 32 15 108.0 106 58 18 46 95
Eaton 10 10 4.87 29 28 170.0 184 92 26 50 119
Dominguez 6 7 4.88 33 18 120.0 130 65 20 40 81
Littleton 5 6 4.92 39 11 119.0 136 65 14 40 62
Padilla 10 11 4.99 27 27 157.0 169 87 21 57 98
Bauer 4 6 5.00 36 11 99.0 105 55 12 41 59
Baker 7 8 5.03 30 23 143.0 165 80 23 39 87
Wasdin 2 3 5.14 25 7 70.0 80 40 12 21 39
Dickey 8 10 5.20 31 19 142.0 165 82 21 44 84
Danks* 8 9 5.36 28 25 151.0 172 90 27 52 105
Pote 1 2 5.40 18 3 40.0 44 24 4 24 27
Castro* 3 6 5.50 50 0 72.0 77 44 9 38 53
Masset 7 10 5.60 26 23 156.0 188 97 26 53 78
Bazzell 5 7 5.66 35 10 105.0 127 66 19 36 57
Regilio 4 7 5.69 22 16 87.0 92 55 11 60 61
Rupe 8 11 5.72 29 26 159.0 188 101 29 62 94
Anderson* 7 11 5.76 30 25 161.0 196 103 33 43 70
Volquez 7 10 5.83 28 24 139.0 165 90 30 44 102
Tejera* 3 5 5.84 40 11 91.0 103 59 19 37 64
Bukvich 2 4 5.87 42 0 46.0 41 30 7 39 50
Sele 6 10 5.93 24 23 123.0 154 81 20 49 50
Walker* 1 3 6.10 55 1 59.0 63 40 13 31 50
Montero 3 4 6.29 51 0 73.0 81 51 13 46 55
Leicester 4 9 6.34 38 14 105.0 115 74 19 59 78
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: January 08, 2006 at 02:00 PM | 31 comment(s)
Related News: Texas, ZIPS
|
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
|
|
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.
But Wilkerson is going to love it there.
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.
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.
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.
If only the Red Sox had a 4th OF like him...
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?
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.
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).
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.
"Sarge Lite" is Matthews, I presume.
He's hidden:
Sarge Lite# rf .260 .327 .432
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!
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main