Being from STL, I was going to write a longish comment, but these are just real good predictions, IMO. I do think that Ludwick, hitting behind Pujols and Holliday, may overperform on RBI, but that's about it. And he's a pain to predict anyway because of the injury history. I mean, you can, in theory, treat 2009 as a Sophomore Slump, although the player was 30 years old. Anyway, nice job. - Brock

No ODDIBE for Rich Hill? I'm curious as to what kind of upside he has left.

Suffice it to say, Pujols has by far the best projection of any hitter I've done so far (Astros, A's, Angels, Jays, Brewers, Braves to go). By my count, Pujols has a 33-point lead in OPS+, 19 points in OBP, 63 points in SLG and 2.41 runs created/27 outs.

The metronome like quality of his excellence will do that.

PujolsAlbert .324 .424 .600 2776 10110 2011 3278 701 21 681 2312 1706 1186 96 49 168

So, is this a Hall of Fame career? :-)

Manny still 2nd in terms of hitters?

"Suffice it to say, Pujols has by far the best projection of any hitter I've done so far (Astros, A's, Angels, Jays, Brewers, Braves to go)."

Oh, that explains it. Vernon Wells yet to come- some long-term contracts work out better than others.

Yeah, these look largely spot-on to me. I might take the under on Ludwick in terms of OPS+, and I think Penny will be a bit better than projected. The bullpen and bench are my primary concerns.

"So, is this a Hall of Fame career? :-)"

Well, Albert has to pile some up so he can lend about a quarter of it to Yadier Molina and get both of them in.

701 career doubles would be 5th-most ever.

Anyone have any idea why Rasmus' second half sucked? I'll still take the over though.

I would bet a large sum of money that Dave Duncan will fix Rich Hill.

Pujols is the king.

That Pujols projection is insane. It boggles the mind, in fact, you could say it was mind boggling!!

185 OPS+ is the highest I have seen in the period I have been following ZiPS projections. Is this a historical record , Dan? Or did one of the Bonds seasons creep over? What about in terms of raw OPS?

Rasmus had a deep heel bruise that hampered him most of the second half. He took 4 cortisone shots in the heel to keep playing. I'll take the over also.

Holliday's 3 comps are a troika of cliff divers

Projected OPSs over 1 since 2004 (2002 and 2003 were lost due to a computer crash):

1.231 - Bonds, 2005
1.162 - Bonds, 2006
1.141 - Bonds, 2004
1.115 - Pujols, 2004
1.094 - Pujols, 2005
1.085 - Pujols, 2006
1.077 - Pujols, 2010
1.076 - Helton, 2004
1.065 - Helton, 2005
1.066 - Pujols, 2007
1.038 - Pujols, 2009
1.028 - Helton, 2006
1.028 - Howard, 2008
1.024 - Howard, 2007
1.025 - Pujols, 2008
1.022 - Hafner, 2007
1.019 - Ramirez, 2004
1.016 - Ortiz, 2007
1.008 - Ramirez, 2007
1.005 - Giambi, 2004
1.002 - Bonds, 2007

How many ways are there to say Pujols is great? He has a 98% chance of having an OPS+ of 140? 98%? Holy crap.

1.231 - Bonds, 2005
1.162 - Bonds, 2006
1.141 - Bonds, 2004
1.115 - Pujols, 2004
1.094 - Pujols, 2005
1.085 - Pujols, 2006
1.077 - Pujols, 2010
1.076 - Helton, 2004
1.065 - Helton, 2005
1.066 - Pujols, 2007
1.038 - Pujols, 2009
1.028 - Helton, 2006
1.028 - Howard, 2008
1.024 - Howard, 2007
1.025 - Pujols, 2008
1.022 - Hafner, 2007
1.019 - Ramirez, 2004
1.016 - Ortiz, 2007
1.008 - Ramirez, 2007
1.005 - Giambi, 2004
1.002 - Bonds, 2007


Whats the PF for old Busch compared to new Busch? Or were those projected as higher scoring leagues?

Bonds 2005 is nutters.

Funny, there are at least 3 guys on that list from each year, 2004-2007, 2 from 2008, yet only one (Pujols) from 2009 and 2010.

So Smoltz would still be a good idea for this team...or anyone really.

The funny thing is that ZiPS still missed low on 2 of those 4 Bonds years!

I was expecting the Pujols (note the deft avoidance of the Pujols' Pujols's question) comps to be:

God, Buddha, Babe Ruth

instead of Frank Thomas, Eddie Murray and Boog. Kind of a letdown. I love the Holliday Larry Hisle reference, however.

Jimenez the Great asks, "Anyone have any idea why Rasmus' second half sucked? I'll still take the over though."

He was hurt in the second half. That being said, the over is dangerous, because he's due for Sophomore Slump.

Holliday strikes me as a hard guy to comp. His homers are in an odd range, especially coupled with his batting averages, and his defense is weird - not bad, just weird. The famous fly ball error in the postseason was on one of the hardest plays to make - a line drive headed right towards the family jewels. There's no good way to get the glove vertical. Try what your wrist will, it's going to end up horizontaI, either right side up or wrong. It doesn't give you much coverage if the ball moves even a little. I still (oversharing alert) have one testicle twice the size of the other from having one of those hit an air pocket and slide under the glove. It took me 45 minutes to begin to crawl out of the fetal position, and I've never played or practiced a sport since without wearing a cup. The way, I found out, to catch those things is to move a step to the side and avoid keeping your body right in front of it. That way, you can hold the glove out to the side and get it vertical. But outfielders are taught to stay in front of the ball if possible, because if you miss, it goes to the wall.

The new Busch seems to be about neutral, although I don't know if we have enough years yet to be sure. Dan, what does your system say? - Brock

Feckin' Pujols. Guy could miss his zips projection by 20% and still win an MVP.

Hill's with the Cardinals? #### me.

If it isn't too much to ask... what are Albert's chances for a 200 OPS+

It's absolutely mind blowing that Pujols is projected to slug .635, when it seems other major sluggers are projected <.550. The man is incredible.

(I don't buy Manny as the second best hitter in MLB, but so it goes, right?)

Duncan may be able to fix Hill, but there's no guarantee the fix will stick even if he stays with the Cards for multiple years--see Todd Wellemeyer.

As pathetic as it is bound to be, I was hoping to see a projection for Khalil Greene. I know he isn't with the team anymore, but he signed after the Ranger projections were posted. I he somewhere else that I missed, will there be a catch-all posted at the end or am S.O.L. on a projection for him?

Kyle McClellan will be 26 rather than 31 next year.

I still (oversharing alert) have one testicle twice the size of the other from having one of those hit an air pocket and slide under the glove.

Looks like it's time to link this thread again.

Tyler Greene's odds really got worse after his relatively decent 2009?

One thing I don't like about these projections is how low the walks are. I don't mean that I think the projections are off; I think the Cardinals have a weakness in their lineup. As a rule of thumb, you can take a batter's AB, drop the last digit (the easy way to divide by ten with no rounding), and get just about what the league will generate in walks for that many AB. For example, courtesy of BB-Ref, the NL had 33.93 AB per game in 2009, and 3.45 walks, which is rule of thumb close to a tenth of 33.93. In these projections, Albert Pujols projects to 531 AB and 102 walks. The league should do about 53 walks against 531 AB, so Albert projects to spend a lot of the summer strolling to first. It's not perfect, but it's a rule of thumb that has held up at the rule of thumb level since 1934. No, I have no idea why NL walk rates changed (they went up) in the exact year 1934 and then stayed up, but they did.

Anyway, eyeballing the list of players here, there are only three who project to take more than the league average number of walks: Pujols, Holliday, and Ruben Gotay, who is unlikely to play much. That's not a good thing for any lineup, and Tony has tended to build his lineups around power and walks. Somewhere along the line the last few years, the walks have gone missing. I don't know why a team with a bunch of brand new sabermetricians in house has allowed this to happen, but it has. Good thing I think Tony La Russa's teams have always won or lost with their veteran starting pitching.... - Brock

Duncan may be able to fix Hill, but there's no guarantee the fix will stick even if he stays with the Cards for multiple years--see Todd Wellemeyer.

Rich Hill has a lot more talent and had a lot more success prior to the Cards. I think a lot of his problems are mental more than physical, so it's not like Duncan has to create something out of nothing.

What, no McGwire projection?

Also, Dan, is it too much trouble to run a career projection for Pujols? If not I'd love to see it.

ray, there's one in there. its easy to miss, albert is the only position player they did.

funny thing about the projection. if albert's career follows the projection, no way he doesn't get to hang around to get to 700 HR.

Heh.

Without some more starting pitching depth and a solid 3rd starter behind the two studs, the Cardinals may struggle to repeat as winners in the NL Central. Opening the door for a team like the Cubs.
vr, Xei

solid 3rd starter

I dunno, they have both Penny and Smoltz in these projections (note: Smoltz is still an FA). That's legendary depth, or so the writers forecasting the 2009 Red Sox would have me believe.

I share Brock's concern about the walks, but I disagree with his characterization of TLR as being aware of the utility of walks. TLR liked McGwire, and clearly McGwire was a big 3-true-outcomes guy. But consider the very solid Ray Lankford, who was very much a walks and power kind of player, who TLR pushed out in favor of much less productive, non-walking hitters like Shawon Dunston and Craig Paquette. TLR seems willing to give a lot of PA to unproductive hitters (check out McGee's '99 season) as long as their batting average stays over .250. When Lankford's dropped below .250, he was dropped.

The point of my comment being: this team is low on walking potential BECAUSE of TLR, not in spite of him.

daniel descalso has a 10% chance of hitting .300 in the majors, 2% chance of hitting 45 doubles??? who the heck is he, never heard of him, and as a cardinal fan, for a guy to have that level percentage just points out to flaws of the system probabaly.

I'd say Descalso's line looks pretty reasonable. He was a 3rd round pick just a few years ago and hit well over .300 in AA last season before moving to AAA. He's had decent walk rates and ok K rates...a 10% chance of it doesn't seem too far fetched at all. Wouldn't be surprised at all if he saw some time in the majors this year.

I don't have a clue what his potential is or anything, my point is that he is an unheralded prospect that if I listed 20 Cardinal prospects a year ago, wouldn't have touched a radar, heck I think I could have gone 40 deep and not hit him...... don't get me wrong I'll root for anyone we get, it's funny that in the 1990's, the Cardinals were second to the Braves in the number of players who have made the majors even though they were constantly called one of the worse minor leagues in baseball. (producing prospects is not the same as producing major league talent)

Descalso made the Cardinals top 10 for both BA and BP this year. That you haven't heard of him has more to do with you than ZiPS.

post 46, wow, nice unwarranted attack. I'm not complaining about zips or anything, just saying that a year ago(noticed what I typed in 45) Descalso was an unheralded prospect that wasn't on many radars.

Descalso played for the U.S. in the World Cup last September and then in the AFL (though not particularly well). He got put on a fast track after the blistering start at Double-A last year. One asset he has over other Cardinal infield prospects like Greene, Solano, Kozma and the departed guys like Hoffpauir and Barden is that he hits lefty. For the Bay Area folk, he's also a St. Francis Lancer and UC Davis Aggie.

- 3/26 - ???
- 3/27 - PROFIT!

Dan....for those of us using your sims in Diamond mind leagues, are you going to clear out projections of players who retired after you posted your projections? (not sure there are any there, but just want to check as my league is still doing free agents and it would suck if I lost a player that had a projection then retired)


also, in case it hasn't been said enough....great job.

I'm talking about guys you have already projected in your earlier write ups, say Brian GIles announces his retirement tomorrow, do you remove him from your final projections or keep him on the list?

I'd just like to chime in here that the percentiles (such as referenced upthread, that someone like Daniel Descalso has a 10% chance to hit .300 in the majors) are one of the things that makes ZiPS really cool. I think everyone here has seen enough MLEs at some point to know that someone hitting well below AAA is generally projected to hit something like .250/.300/.400 in MLB, so it's nice to get a handle, however small, on potential breakouts.