Fangraphs: Here is what you think of our team projections

When I examined last year’s results, the community had its strongest response to the Royals projection. You all thought the Royals were being heavily underrated, which wasn’t too much of a surprise, given what had been the Royals’ recent history. Here, we see the Royals again to the left — collectively, you think their projection is low by about a win and a half. You still don’t see them as being good. And the magnitude of their community response has nothing on the Rockies, who you think are being underrated by about a win more than anyone else.

Our Rockies projection puts them at 78-84. Our community-adjusted Rockies projection would put them at 81-81. That’s still obviously not great, but it hints at the community seeing them as a wild-card contender. On the one hand, we have recently featured some pro-Rockies content. Dave talked about them as a potential contender at the end of January. I’ve discussed their chance at having their best-ever pitch-framing catchers. But then, we’ve also been critical of, say, the Ian Desmond contract. They’ve been fairly inefficient with their resources, which has to some degree held them back. But the Rockies think they can win in 2017. You are at least kind of on board.

Grading the projections: 2016

ZiPS didn’t have a good year. ZiPS was the least accurate of the three systems in each of the five categories, and never by a particularly small margin. You don’t want to conclude too much based on a single season of results, but ZiPS didn’t perform very well in last year’s review, either. (I should also note that this is Steamer’s second straight year of leading the pack in convincing fashion.)

Marcel does its job. Marcel wasn’t great, but it was almost always in the neighborhood of accurate. It beat ZiPS in four of the five categories, and even led OBP. Marcel remains very hard to convincingly beat (or even beat at all), despite its simplicity.

Averaging the projections might be a great idea. The “Average” row in the above table is exactly what you would expect: the accuracy of the average of all four systems. It beats all four systems in four of the five categories, and fell short of only Steamer in the fifth. One would expect that an average would rarely be egregiously wrong; it’s surprising to see that the average also tended to be closer to right than each individual projection. This could be a quirk of a single season of projections, but at the very least, it seems to say that the brute-force method of resolving differences between the projection systems is credible.

River Ave Blues: Jesus Montero and ZiPS

And from the comments…“Cano will hit over .299. I’ll bet my life savings on that.” Way over…like this season’s .302!

You might have seen this earlier, but Dan Szymborski posted his 2012 Yankees ZiPS Projections early Monday afternoon, the first team of the offseason. You can click the link and peruse all of the projections at your leisure, but I’m going to spend some time focusing on everyone’s favorite player, Jesus Montero. We’ll discuss the other guys at some point this offseason … eventually.

Following his big September debut (.328/.406/.590 and a .421 wOBA), the ZiPS system forecasts a .271/.333/.486 batting line with 37 doubles and 27 homers in 579 at-bats for Montero in 2012. At first glance, that might seen a bit disappointing because of the generally low AVG and the OBP, but it most definitely shouldn’t be. I said this on Twitter, but if Montero does that next season, he’ll probably win Rookie of the Year even if the majority of his at-bats come as a DH*. ZiPS isn’t being tricked by that big September either, the system called for almost exactly the same thing for 2011: a .276/.334/.503 line with 34 doubles and 28 homers in 539 at-bats.

...We’ve talked about the whole DH/backup catcher thing, but putting it into practice is much easier said than done. The ZiPS numbers don’t mean anything at the end of the day, but they’re a nice little reminder of just how much Montero can help the Yankees if given the chance.

ESPN: Szymborski: A staff for the ages (INSIDER)

n December, the Philadelphia Phillies were revealed to be the notorious “mystery team” in the hunt for Cliff Lee, eventually signing the 2008 AL Cy Young winner to a five-year, $120 million contract. With Philly’s rotation already containing Roy Halladay, Roy Oswalt and Cole Hamels, the hype surrounding the team’s quartet of starting pitchers reached epic proportions. The hypemakers were wrong—the Phillies’ starters went on to exceed expectations.

After the inking of Lee, we took a look at the Philly front four using the ZiPS projection system. For the Fab Four, we came up with a projection of 19.8 WAR (wins above replacement), which would have given the Phillies the 13th-best top four starters in a rotation since the start of the divisional era in 1969.

BPP: An interview with Dan Szymborski

You can’t spell ZiPS without…Dan!

How long ago did you come up with ZiPS?

Szymborski: The genesis of it was there’s a [person] who contributes to Baseball Think Factory named Chris Dial, and in the late ’90s, they were talking about how someone could make a projection system that’s very basic and get most of the way there, in a way kind of a primordial version of Marcel which is a tabulator.

Before 2002, I was thinking maybe I should try my hand at a projection system. At that time, Voros McCracken’s FIPS research was fairly new, so I wanted to [align my idea.] That’s why I made it rhyme with FIPS, and the Z stands for Szymborski, the second letter of my name. I mean, it’s just a little side thing that started. Then I decided to do hitter projections, because it seemed kind of stupid to do because there were not hitter projections. And then over time, as computers got faster, I could do more things. Over time, it became a pretty complex system… I’m pretty happy with how it’s worked out.

Do you think you have another ZiPS idea in you or do you think that’s going to be your big thing?

Szymborski: I dunno. I always kind of think of myself more as a writer than a statistics developer, but I have more ideas how to use it. I continually refine my aging models and long-term projections and the different things I can do with it. I certainly hope there are other ideas in me, but I don’t have those ideas yet. Hopefully they will develop over the next few years.