Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Thursday, November 09, 2006

2007 ZiPS Projections - Los Angaheim Angels


Name                     P  Age   AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Vladimir Guerrero        rf  31  .307  .370  .528 150 579  94 178 33  1 31 110  54  65 12  3 
Juan Rivera              lf  28  .295  .352  .471 126 427  56 126 27  0 16  72  34  53  2  4 
Dallas McPherson*        3b  26  .263  .323  .503 111 380  58 100 22  3 21  62  32 136  7  4 
Robb Quinlan             1b  30  .295  .332  .452  76 217  27  64 14  1  6  28  11  30  2  1 
Howie Kendrick           2b  23  .285  .317  .458 140 533  70 152 42  4 14  72  19  93 14  4 
Maicer Izturis#          3b  26  .281  .357  .387 112 377  59 106 22  3  4  38  42  41 14  6 
Mike Napoli              c   25  .222  .328  .432 134 405  69  90 21  2 20  64  60 138  4  3 
Casey Kotchman*          1b  24  .268  .329  .409 120 406  53 109 27  0 10  55  34  48  2  1 
Chone Figgins#           cf  29  .272  .345  .389 148 584  94 159 24 10  8  61  63  93 43 14 
Garret Anderson*         lf  35  .274  .315  .420 118 467  54 128 25  2 13  74  28  78  0  1 
Brandon Wood             ss  22  .248  .303  .444 142 520  65 129 41  2 19  66  39 166 10  4 
Nick Gorneault           rf  28  .255  .315  .418 123 440  67 112 25  4 13  61  37 131  4  3 
Darin Erstad*            cf  33  .273  .326  .379 115 443  65 121 28  2  5  56  35  73  9  1 
Adam Kennedy*            2b  31  .277  .335  .370 136 440  52 122 23  3  4  48  33  71 15  7 
Orlando Cabrera          ss  32  .266  .324  .371 140 526  74 140 35  1  6  59  44  54 18  3 
Reggie Willits#          cf  26  .272  .352  .346 125 416  68 113 19  3  2  33  51  77 22 13 
Kendry Morales#          1b  24  .258  .302  .400 118 422  48 109 19  1 13  54  26  65  1  2 
Sean Rodriguez           ss  22  .242  .313  .389 150 525  61 127 28  2 15  49  48 139 12  8 
Mike Eylward             1b  27  .257  .315  .373 125 424  44 109 23  1  8  53  31  76  1  4 
Jeff Mathis              c   24  .238  .293  .384 128 445  65 106 28  2 11  44  34 104  2  1 
Tommy Murphy#            cf  27  .252  .304  .382 123 400  59 101 20  4  8  41  27  97 15 12 
Jose Molina              c   32  .241  .285  .357  72 199  18  48 11  0  4  23  11  45  2  0 
Michael Collins          c   22  .248  .304  .334 134 467  48 116 26  1  4  53  23  70  7  8 
Adam Pavkovich           3b  25  .231  .287  .350 108 320  30  74 16  2  6  32  23  73  5  5 
Erick Aybar#             ss  23  .252  .287  .345 130 449  69 113 20  5  4  35  21  50 26 19 
Drew Toussaint           lf  24  .206  .265  .333 123 402  40  83 19  1 10  33  27 136  4  4 
Ryan Budde               c   27  .204  .262  .330  70 206  20  42 11  0  5  20  13  58  1  1 
Casey Smith              ss  28  .239  .275  .314 110 373  45  89 18  2  2  33  17  58  6  6 

* - Bats Left
# = Switch-Hitter

Player Spotlight (Beta) - Brandon Wood
Name               AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS
Optimistic (15%)  .275  .334  .526 158 593  88 163 54  4 29  90  50 170 15  3
Mean              .248  .306  .444 142 520  65 129 41  2 19  66  39 166 10  4
Pessimistic (15%) .223  .273  .388 108 394  41  88 27  1 12  42  25 137  5  4

ZiPS Heart Angel Pitching

Name                     Age    ERA   W   L   G  GS     INN    H   ER  HR   BB    K 
Francisco Rodriguez       25   2.31   5   1  63   0    74.0   54   19   5   29   96 
Jered Weaver              24   2.91  13   5  27  26   167.0  145   54  20   37  155 
Scot Shields              31   3.23  10   5  71   0    92.0   80   33   8   31   87 
Hector Carrasco           37   3.56   6   3  60   4    91.0   87   36   8   32   69 
Kelvim Escobar            31   3.79  13   8  29  28   178.0  174   75  19   53  141 
Ervin Santana             24   3.91  14  11  33  33   198.0  178   86  22   65  151 
John Lackey               28   3.91  13  10  33  32   207.0  205   90  18   69  165 
Brendan Donnelly          35   3.97   5   3  58   0    59.0   57   26   7   22   50 
J.C. Romero*              31   4.06   4   3  69   1    62.0   56   28   5   33   54 
Kevin Gregg               29   4.10   4   3  41   5    90.0   90   41  10   29   78 
Jason Bulger              28   4.28   3   3  37   0    40.0   38   19   3   20   39 
Joe Saunders*             26   4.45  11  10  30  30   178.0  185   88  20   64  120 
Bartolo Colon             34   4.50  12  12  29  29   180.0  191   90  27   51  128 
Matt Hensley              28   4.58   4   4  31  14   106.0  117   54  14   31   59 
Steven Shell              24   4.83   8   9  27  26   151.0  164   81  22   50   98 
Greg Jones                30   4.92   4   4  44   0    53.0   57   29   9   18   35 
Chris Bootcheck           28   4.96   6   7  33  19   127.0  136   70  19   52   84 
Jeff Heaverlo             29   5.01   3   5  34   3    70.0   71   39   8   41   50 
Dustin Moseley            25   5.48   5   9  20  20   110.0  127   67  18   41   72 
Jose Arredondo            23   5.49   5   6  21  21   123.0  137   75  20   54   92 

* - Throws Left

Player Spotlight (Beta) -  Ervin Santana
                    ERA   W   L   G  GS  INN    H   ER  HR   BB    K 
Optimistic (15%)   3.43  18   9  34  34  211  178   77  19   68  164
Mean               3.91  14  11  33  33  198  178   86  22   65  151
Pessimistic (15%)  4.72   9  12  27  27  162  155   85  22   67  120

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 2007.  
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.

Players are noted with their most recent teams unless Dan has made a mistake.

ZiPS is projecting based on the AL having a 4.51 ERA and the NL having a 4.37 ERA.
Dan Szymborski Posted: November 09, 2006 at 01:19 PM | 49 comment(s)
  Related News: LA AngelsProjectionsZIPS

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. Azteca Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:19 PM (#2234042)
sheesh, this team has on-base problems. Five projected starters--Cabrera, McPherson, Garret, Kendrick & Napoli--are below the .330 mark. The pitching, as one would expect, looks terrific though.
   2. Better Schafer than Sorry Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:21 PM (#2234044)
This team changed its name again?

Someone please give Rivera a full year, full time job
   3. Gold Star for Robothal Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:33 PM (#2234055)
Free Reggie Willits!
   4. Dewey, Local Boy and Hero Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:34 PM (#2234057)
Someone please give Rivera a full year, full time job

Not until he returns Derek Jeter's glove.
   5. Kyle S Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:35 PM (#2234058)
take anderson out back and shoot him, for everyone's sake. what a terrible contract (and one that primer groupthink actually got right - hip hip hooray!).

dan, how well-informed is ZIPS of mcpherson's injury history?
   6. JPWF13 Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:43 PM (#2234072)
That projection for Erstad looks too high, 705 OPS??? He's bettered that mark just once (2004) in the last 6 years.
.691, .702, .642, .746, .696, .605...

Marcel probably brings in Erstad at about... OK Brock2 puts him at .671 (which still looks too high to me for a 33 year old in an apparent freefall..)
   7. AROM wants you off his lawn Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:45 PM (#2234073)
I've got to love any pitching staff projected to have Bartolo Colon as the 6th best starter.

sheesh, this team has on-base problems. Five projected starters--Cabrera, McPherson, Garret, Kendrick & Napoli--are below the .330 mark.

Very true. This team needs another bat, but with the OBP challenged hitters they have, someone like Soriano is not the answer.

Someone please give Rivera a full year, full time job

He has one. Rivera was injured part of last year. When he returned he was an everyday player for the rest of the year.
   8. AROM wants you off his lawn Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:51 PM (#2234078)
That projection for Erstad looks too high, 705 OPS???

1. Beware of trends. They are not predictive.

2. The .605 and .642 come in years where Erstad had very few plate appearances. The other years (which at first glance seem pretty close to a .705 average) are seasons where Erstad played pretty much every day.

3. A .705 OPS isn't good enough to get him a starting job anyway.
   9. Dewey, Local Boy and Hero Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:53 PM (#2234082)
Can Erstad still play an above-average centerfield?
   10. The Mets make Russlan sad Posted: November 09, 2006 at 03:56 PM (#2234085)
Can Izturis play a good SS? Because those numbers would be mighty fine if he could.
   11. JPWF13 Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:06 PM (#2234091)
2. The .605 and .642 come in years where Erstad had very few plate appearances. The other years (which at first glance seem pretty close to a .705 average) are seasons where Erstad played pretty much every day.

3. A .705 OPS isn't good enough to get him a starting job anyway.


2001 711 PA OPS+ of 78
2002 663 PA OPS+ of 88
2004 543 PA OPS+ of 95
2005 663 PA OPS+ of 89 (as a 1B)

What happen dto him anyway?
After his age 24 season Brock 2 had him peaking at a .319 average, 104 rbi and 31 homers
2490 career hits, .290 average
after his age 25 season it downgraded him tremendously: 1607 hits, .276-186-770
after his age 26 season he was back on track, 2573 hits, .297-266-1161
Now? it has him with 150 ab left in his career (I had to lower the "floor" to get it to project him with ANY 2007+ playing time)

was it really just one nagging injury after another?
   12. AROM wants you off his lawn Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:06 PM (#2234093)
Can Erstad still play an above-average centerfield?

Yes, for about 3 games. Then he'll hurt himself and miss 2-3 months.
   13. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:07 PM (#2234094)
dan, how well-informed is ZIPS of mcpherson's injury history?

Yup, he looks good in Dial's numbers (i still have the spreadsheet to finish cleaning up for upload). I have a version of Dial's stuff with Chone's park factors and have Erstad at +4 in 2006 (+25! per 150 defensive games)
   14. AROM wants you off his lawn Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:11 PM (#2234096)
What happened to Erstad?

I wish I knew. I've watched 90% of Angels games since 2002 ( when I first got the baseball cable package). But I don't have the slightest clue. Injuries haven't helped, but a lot of players get banged up. I can't think of any who showed as much early promise as a hitter and produced so little, other than old player skill guys like Ben Grieve or players who didn't work or hustle enough (which certainly does not describe Erstad).
   15. sardonic Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:19 PM (#2234104)
I call over on Weaver's ERA. If gets under 3.30 in a full season I'll buy a Rally Monkey and put it in my car's back window for a year.
   16. battlekow Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:20 PM (#2234105)
Cabrera, McPherson, Garret, Kendrick & Napoli

Napoli is certainly a different sort of low-OBP hitter than the other four; he doesn't lack for on-base skills, he's just projected to hit .222. On second thought, I guess you could say he severely lacks the primary on-base skill.

Vlad is projected to have his worst season since 1997 and he's still by far the best hitter on the team. His walks really took a nosedive when he joined the Angels, and for no apparent gain.
   17. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:29 PM (#2234119)
"His walks really took a nosedive when he joined the Angels, and for no apparent gain."

Hatcherball!
   18. Danny Posted: November 09, 2006 at 04:34 PM (#2234122)
Just eyeballing it, those look like some very low projected BABIPs. No?
   19. Kyle S Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:04 PM (#2234141)
dan, i have a feeling you weren't responding to my comment about mcpherson's injury history there... either that, or i'm a retard.
   20. JPWF13 Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:09 PM (#2234147)
I think Dan is tired of repeating his disclaimer that Zips doesn't predict playing time- and may not have realized that the question had more to do with the potential impact an injury like McPherson's has on rate production
   21. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:11 PM (#2234149)
Just eyeballing it, those look like some very low projected BABIPs. No?

Not really, no. There are two pitchers below .280 (Santana and Weaver) and 4 above .300 (Gregg, Moseley, Arredondo, Bulger). Everyone else is between. The Angels have had good defenses, but not as good as a few years ago.
   22. Kyle S Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:12 PM (#2234152)
right that was my question - surely a back injury affects more than just playing time.
   23. Danny Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:18 PM (#2234163)
Not really, no. There are two pitchers below .280 (Santana and Weaver) and 4 above .300 (Gregg, Moseley, Arredondo, Bulger). Everyone else is between. The Angels have had good defenses, but not as good as a few years ago.

Huh, guess not. Probably just the strong K rates up and down the staff, though Carrasco still looks low.
   24. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:24 PM (#2234169)
dan, i have a feeling you weren't responding to my comment about mcpherson's injury history there... either that, or i'm a retard.

Kyle, I cut-and-pasted the wrong line.

ZiPS doesn't know anything about McPherson's injury history other than changes in patterns of his at-bats.

I'm trying to keep human input out of ZiPS as much as possible. I'm not so much trying to make the best projection system as I am trying to make the best computer projection system, if this makes any sense.

I feel that when we have human inputs within projection systems, it makes the projections less useful to people even if they are slightly less accurate. This might sound counter-intuitive, but I feel that when certain non-statistical things are included, it makes it harder to analyze players individually.

Take for example, an injured player who's very big and muscular that hit 230/300/320 in some year. If the computer spits out a 260/320/370 projection, I know that it's based on statistics and that the computer is basing none of its judgment of a player's injury or the fact that he's a big guy that should add power.

But now, what if I know that the 260/320/370 projection instead contains something about his injury and the player's physical attributes? I have no idea what part of that projection is stats and what part of that projection is other. No additional knowledge about a player's injury or physical attributes can now be used to enhance the quality of that projection when predicting the future.

I think my goals are a little different than other poeple doing projections. I'm not trying to make the best projections possible, I'm trying to make the best computer projections possible.

Perhaps someone can explain this better than I - I don't think I've ever really been able to express my goals completely accurately.
   25. Better Schafer than Sorry Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:30 PM (#2234174)
I don't think I've ever really been able to express my goals completely accurately.

a lot of time has been spent on this. Think the right answer is 42
   26. sardonic Posted: November 09, 2006 at 05:34 PM (#2234176)
Dan, I completely get what you're going for, and think that it's a very worthwhile goal. Keep up the good work!
   27. dreamydave Posted: November 09, 2006 at 06:26 PM (#2234203)
Agreed Dan. Projections have to be taken with a grain of salt and shouldn't be viewed an an end-all to evaluation of players. Well done.
   28. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: November 09, 2006 at 06:48 PM (#2234212)
I'm trying to keep human input out of ZiPS as much as possible. I'm not so much trying to make the best projection system as I am trying to make the best computer projection system, if this makes any sense.

Actually, it does. It's nice to be able to compare your purely computer-based system with, say, Sickel's purely human approach. Both have their merits.
   29. Kyle S Posted: November 09, 2006 at 06:58 PM (#2234217)
thanks for the response, dan. i didn't mean to be glib or anything; sorry about that.

i think i take your meaning, too. the computer does the computer part, the part that is tedious to do by hand (age adjusting, park adjusting, 3/2/1 weights, etc).

thanks for clarifying.
   30. AROM wants you off his lawn Posted: November 09, 2006 at 07:45 PM (#2234225)
I've done a few projections so far for the CHONE system, no entire teams yet. I'll try and post them sometime before the season starts. This year I'm doing my projections side by side with the Marcel formula, since its easy enough to do.

I'm kind of interested in where there are significant differences between CHONE and ZIPS. So far, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference.
   31. Gaelan Posted: November 09, 2006 at 07:57 PM (#2234227)
Dan, thanks for the explanation. Your argument is compelling. It allows us to make individual assessments without having to crunch any numbers and without having to what mysteries are included in the formula. Since I don't know how to crunch the numbers but I do like making individual assessments I love ZIPS.
   32. Walt Davis Posted: November 09, 2006 at 08:48 PM (#2234246)
Dallas McPherson* 263/323/503 with 136 K in 380 AB

No
Freakin'
Way

Not as a mean projection anyway. To do this, McPherson has to hit 410/783 on contact. That's certainly not impossible, but that can't be his expected performance. For his career in the majors he's 372/695. To his credit, his MLB K-rate is much lower than his AAA K-rate.
   33. Ignatius J. Reilly Posted: November 09, 2006 at 09:18 PM (#2234249)
I'm surprised no one has weighed in on Brandon Wood yet. He could be interesting data point for what excessive strikeouts in the minors means for MLB performance...
   34. AROM wants you off his lawn Posted: November 10, 2006 at 01:47 AM (#2234426)
Brandon Wood is not going to be in the majors in 2007, at least not until late in the year.
   35. DSG Posted: November 10, 2006 at 03:46 AM (#2234451)
Dan, I don't get it. I think that all projections should be 100% computer-based, but that doesn't mean you cannot use more refined inputs, i.e. varying aging patterns or accounting for player size.
   36. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 10, 2006 at 05:26 AM (#2234461)
McPherson is not a projected starter.

And though we'll never find out, I don't think there's any way in hell Brandon Wood would hit that mean projection in 2007.

FACT: I will be beyond myself with joy if the starting pitching can match these projections.
   37. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 10, 2006 at 08:46 AM (#2234472)
I think that all projections should be 100% computer-based, but that doesn't mean you cannot use more refined inputs, i.e. varying aging patterns or accounting for player size.

Oh, I use varying aging patterns as well. I don't agree with the latter, though - I think that creates a bunch of noise due to the fact that specific accurate data is hard to come by and that height and weight have so many different configurations and even if we could get that for the past, we probably wouldn't then have enough in baseball history for it to help us much.

After all, I'm a little bit taller and a little bit heavier than LaDainian Tomlinson. I'm guessing he's a bit harder to tackle.
   38. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 10, 2006 at 12:51 PM (#2234591)
To elaborate on Wood, his MLE last year was 216/284/396, so hitting 248/303/444 would be a pretty big jump. I'd be stoked with an MLE of 230/300/420, actually, as that would show some progress. I guess that's not too from off from the projection.

Basically, I want to see him hit at least 300/370/520 at AAA.

***

Erstad:

My view on The Punter is that he can only hit a straight pitch right at the knees (either fast or change) and has no plate discipline. His swing is also top-hand dominant, which leads to 50 groundballs to second every year, some of which become PRODUCTIVE OUTS!. He just doesn't seem to hit the ball as hard as he did back when he was good, which may be an artifact of his throwing his body around like Paris Hilton at a sailors' convention.
   39. fra paolo Posted: November 10, 2006 at 01:06 PM (#2234606)
Someone please give Rivera a full year, full time job
Can Izturis play a good SS?


Trader Jim Bowden sure knows his horseflesh.
   40. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 10, 2006 at 02:00 PM (#2234644)
I'm skeptical about Ztu's defense. He hasn't looked very good at third. Haven't really seen a lot of him at short due to The OC. I doubt he's a disaster, but I'd be surprised if he were very good.
   41. Softball-Playing Human Refuses to Be Walked Posted: November 10, 2006 at 02:43 PM (#2234671)
I suspect Izturis' defense at short would be notably better than it is at third. He's said before he'd never taken more than a few grounders at third before being called up. From my personal experiences in high school and in fast pitch rec leagues, the adjustments from short to third base are surprisingly demanding. That said, I agree that Izturis' glove at short would probably be average at best.

I really hope Stoneman finds the Angels a bat. That offense looks pathetic.
   42. Matt Welch Posted: November 10, 2006 at 06:40 PM (#2234959)
Erstad hurt his legs and lost his power.
   43. AROM wants you off his lawn Posted: November 11, 2006 at 12:21 AM (#2235126)
There's got to be more to it than that. Erstad last hit for power in 2000. In 2002 he played almost every and had one of the greatest defensive season in the history of play by play metrics, while stealing bases at a high percentage. His legs couldn't have been that bad.
   44. jonbaker Posted: November 11, 2006 at 01:09 AM (#2235137)
Not until he returns Derek Jeter's glove.

Wrong Rivera... still funny though.
   45. a wider scope of derision Posted: November 12, 2006 at 11:25 PM (#2236174)
Hmmm... OBP challenged team with a glaring need at CF and a revolving DH spot... anyone else think Stoneman needs to get Boras on the phone about J.D. Drew right now?

God, I have a hard time believing Weaver's ERA will be a full run lower than Verlander's over the same workload.
   46. Vaux, A.B.D. Posted: November 13, 2006 at 12:52 AM (#2236202)
I don't. Think about it... which one plays for the Tigers, and which one doesn't?
   47. Russ Posted: November 13, 2006 at 01:16 AM (#2236211)
I think my goals are a little different than other poeple doing projections. I'm not trying to make the best projections possible, I'm trying to make the best computer projections possible.

What you're trying to do is come up with a reasonable set of "objective" projections. If you included more "subjective" information, it would be very difficult to know what the system was doing and what you were doing. By providing us (thanks, BTW) with the purely "objective" numbers, we can actually be as subjective when we interpret them as we want.

Granted, any system has elements of subjectivity as to what you include and what you don't include, but it sounds like the ZiPS system is as objective as one could reasonably expect. So people can take the ZiPS projection as your baseline and bias them from there with as much subjective information as you want to/are able to use.
   48. a wider scope of derision Posted: November 13, 2006 at 01:30 AM (#2236218)
I don't. Think about it... which one plays for the Tigers, and which one doesn't?

Really? You're taking the flyball pitcher on a team with a pretty abysmal outfield? Over the younger guy on the best defensive team in the AL?

Um.

OK.

Besides, I just think Verlander's the better pitcher:

Weaver's xFIP 4.66 (over 123 innings)

Verlander's xFIP 4.67 (over 186 innings)

And that includes Verlander's second half swoon.

Verlander's ZiPS seems about right. Weaver's looks insane. (CAN'T WAIT to see Liriano's... woulda, coulda, shoulda.)
   49. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 13, 2006 at 05:23 PM (#2236797)
Has anyone put forward any evidence that xFIP is any more reliable than FIP, DIPS, or plain ol' ERA? This is a serious inquiry.
Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

My Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Pirates - Acquired Milledge
(28 - 1:52am, Jul 05)

Cardinals - Acquired DeRosa
(25 - 1:36pm, Jul 04)

White Sox - Acquired Castro
(3 - 1:52pm, Jul 01)

Yankees - Acquired Hinske
(8 - 1:22pm, Jul 01)

Mariners - Acquired Langerhans
(6 - 12:49am, Jun 30)

Transaction Oracle - 3/1/01
(6 - 4:51am, Jun 25)

Orioles - Released Walker
(8 - 2:20am, Jun 23)

Braves - Acquired McLouth
(191 - 5:50pm, Jun 11)

Royals - DFAed Ramirez
(24 - 5:09pm, Jun 07)

Mets - Acquired Putz
(19 - 5:22pm, Jun 05)

Orioles - Promoted Wieters
(15 - 3:26pm, May 30)

Vivid Seats is a sports ticket broker, concert ticket broker and theater ticket broker offering the best baseball tickets like Yankees tickets, Cubs tickets, and Red Sox tickets, as well as Police reunion tour tickets and Jersey Boys tickets.

We have baseball tickets, the NFL schedule, college football tickets and Cowboys tickets. We have NBA tickets like Celtics tickets and Lakers tickets. Plus, buy concert tickets, Patriots tickets and Colts tickets. Also check out our MLB baseball schedule

Baseball Bats

Concerts Theatre NFL Angels Dodgers MLB Celtics Theater NBA Tickets Venues NHL Lakers Tickets NFL Yankees NHL Phillies NBA Wicked Marlins MLB Concerts Cubs Mets Red Sox Wicked WWE Red Sox Mets Yankees Dodgers

Major League Baseball: All Star Game, New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, LA Angels, Washington Nationals, Chicago White Sox, and the Chicago Cubs.

Find terrific deals on Yankees tickets for the new home, Cubs tickets for classic Wrigley, or Red Sox tickets for Fenway with OnlineSeats. We have seats for every baseball game, including Dodgers tickets.

Page rendered in 0.6555 seconds
62 querie(s) executed