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

Friday, November 11, 2005

2006 ZiPS Projections - Houston Astros



Name       ERA   W   L   G GS   INN   H   ER HR   BB   K
Lidge     2.74   7   2 75   0   82.0   57   25   6   30 119
Clemens     3.32 14   8 33 33   206.0 171   76 15   71 187
Oswalt     3.39 18 11 34 33   223.0 212   84 18   48 184
Pettitte*  3.40 15   9 30 30   196.0 181   74 17   45 158
Wheeler     3.81   3   2 62   2   78.0   71   33   9   24   71
Qualls     3.99   6   5 69   0   79.0   77   35   8   25   58
Burns     4.22   3   4 54   0   64.0   61   30 10   18   49
Nieve     4.53   7   9 27 27   169.0 173   85 21   57 143
Astacio     4.65   8 11 31 26   155.0 161   80 24   45 122
Cunnane     4.66   2   3 45   0   58.0   60   30   8   20   46
Gallo*    4.71   3   3 71   0   65.0   67   34   7   26   41
Gothreaux   4.72   6   8 21 20   120.0 129   63 18   34   72
Springer   4.78   2   4 53   0   49.0   46   26   8   22   43
Strickland   4.80   2   2 30   0   30.0   30   16   6   9   24
Hirsh     4.91   8 12 28 27   154.0 170   84 21   49   98
Backe     4.96   7 11 37 21   136.0 135   75 19   62 109
Albers     5.23   7 12 26 26   155.0 173   90 23   57 102
Driskill   5.26   4   8 39   7   106.0 119   62 23   27   77
Rodriguez*  5.32   8 14 30 28   154.0 163   91 25   66 106
Martin*    5.63   1   1 57   0   40.0   43   25   7   20   27
McLemore*  5.86   4   9 28 13   86.0   94   56 12   49   57
Hernandez*  6.02   4 11 27 27   127.0 142   85 23   66   82
Buchholz   6.04   3   6 20 15   82.0   94   55 20   31   52
Talbot     6.04   5 14 27 27   155.0 194 104 31   51   71
Kieschnick   6.20   1   3 46   0   61.0   73   42 13   25   36

Name       P   AVG   OBP   SLG   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS
Berkman#    lf .301 .428 .536 148 519 91 156 37 5 25 94 112 88 5 4
Ensberg     3b .284 .377 .509 142 475 72 135 25 2 26 86 67 86 6 6
Kieschnick*  mr .281 .359 .474 63 57   6 16 2 0 3   9   6 14 0 0
Lane       rf .273 .326 .492 132 433 55 118 29 3 20 71 30 81 4 2
Self*      1b .265 .360 .379 128 412 61 109 24 1 7 46 61 98 3 3
Burke     lf .274 .347 .398 139 492 82 135 26 4 9 51 45 75 14 7
Huffman     1b .275 .350 .381 133 451 58 124 28 1 6 49 49 81 5 4
Scott*    lf .244 .315 .447 133 450 65 110 25 3 20 68 42 114 3 3
Coolbaugh   3b .244 .305 .451 114 406 63 99 22 1 20 65 33 103 3 1
Lamb*      3b .250 .315 .426 117 312 40 78 14 4 11 48 30 61 1 1
Pence     lf .259 .308 .443 117 406 63 105 17 2 18 57 29 85 6 4
Bagwell     1b .239 .327 .405 138 486 72 116 22 1 19 73 60 115 5 4
Rivera*    1b .267 .313 .431 129 397 48 106 24 1 13 51 22 66 0 3
Quintero   c   .275 .311 .388 97 335 36 92 20 0 6 39 14 44 0 1
Palmeiro*  lf .253 .327 .357 119 221 23 56 12 1 3 23 22 23 2 2
Conrad#    2b .233 .307 .389 138 489 78 114 25 3 15 59 49 113 11 5
Biggio     2b .243 .304 .388 149 569 79 138 33 1 16 65 35 95 7 3
Taveras     cf .293 .334 .342 148 552 83 162 12 3 3 41 28 96 37 20
Klassen     3b .249 .304 .384 109 393 54 98 20 3 9 44 26 107 6 4
Everett     ss .256 .303 .368 137 484 57 124 23 2 9 52 25 82 16 5
Bruntlett   ss .246 .319 .346 120 338 50 83 12 2 6 35 33 67 10 6
Riggs#    3b .239 .312 .347 121 398 40 95 21 2 6 42 39 72 3 4
Gipson     cf .258 .312 .337 113 329 44 85 16 2 2 25 20 68 11 8
Anderson*  cf .257 .302 .317 134 533 77 137 14 6 2 38 25 81 45 15
Gimenez#    c   .244 .282 .349 116 410 42 100 14 1 9 46 21 85 1 2
Ausmus     c   .229 .311 .295 132 393 33 90 15 1 3 36 44 50 3 3
Wesson     cf .243 .280 .344 118 387 39 94 17 2 6 38 19 82 6 3
Vizcaino#  ss .241 .274 .333 111 249 19 60 13 2 2 25 12 38 1 1
Whiteman   ss .235 .288 .322 121 438 47 103 14 0 8 44 31 102 4 5
Jimerson   cf .225 .270 .371 125 445 63 100 19 2 14 48 23 156 22 15
Tremie     c   .194 .261 .278 74 216 19 42 6 0 4 20 16 40 0 0
Chavez     c   .195 .237 .260 48 123   7 24 5 0 1 11   7 26 0 1

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: November 11, 2005 at 10:41 PM | 42 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

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.

   1. Hal Chase Headley Lamarr Hoyt Wilhelm (ACE1242) Posted: November 11, 2005 at 11:00 PM (#1728426)
No doubt it will dawn on me the instant I click "Submit" -- Kieschnick, "mr"? Multi-role? Middle relief?
   2. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 11, 2005 at 11:03 PM (#1728436)
Middle reliever.
   3. Passed Ball Posted: November 11, 2005 at 11:08 PM (#1728445)
Mo Ron?

So Zips has no love for Chris Burke. I think that he will surpass the power projections.
   4. Dewey, Crackpot and Soupuss Posted: November 11, 2005 at 11:10 PM (#1728449)
Undoubtedly "middle relief".

Kieschnick had a terrible year pitching in the minors last year, but a pretty good (if limited) one with the bat. I have no idea how park effects play into this, but seeing as how his only chance to make the majors again is as a multi-purpose player like he was a couple of years ago, it doesn't look good for his future.
   5. 1k5v3L Posted: November 11, 2005 at 11:16 PM (#1728465)
If Clemens retires, they'll be in a world of pain.
   6. base ball chick Posted: November 12, 2005 at 12:32 AM (#1728577)
hi dan!!!

i'm really surprised that you think that roy oswalt gonna do so much worse. along with almost every other pitcher. for example, why would qualls get worse? or backe pitch so few innings?

and i am, ASTOUNDED that your computer could find some way that zeke astacio could have such a low ERA and HR/9 IP - in fact, the ONLY pitcher on our team who is better next year.

and am not sure why it would think that ensberg and berkman gonna walk so much less times. or why you'd think that willy taveras would more than double his rbis.

if these predictions turn out to be right, then i'm gonna turn my blog over to you cuz my dozen readers would be a LOT better off with you

- BTW, todd self has not been with the astros organization since august
   7. DCW3 Posted: November 12, 2005 at 12:44 AM (#1728592)
and am not sure why it would think that ensberg and berkman gonna walk so much less times.

That walk rate for Berkman is actually higher than his walk rate last year. As for Ensberg, he walked far mor often in 2005 than he ever had before in his career, so I'm sure ZiPS is expecting him to return to his career norms somewhat.

By the way, "MR" stands for "Mentally Retarded." Has Arrested Development taught us nothing?
   8. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 12, 2005 at 02:09 AM (#1728691)
- BTW, todd self has not been with the astros organization since august

Wow! Totally missed that one - I thought he had passed through waivers when he was DFAed.

and i am, ASTOUNDED that your computer could find some way that zeke astacio could have such a low ERA and HR/9 IP - in fact, the ONLY pitcher on our team who is better next year.

The Astros had very, very few pitchers underperform in 2005 - they were quite fortunate in that respect. In addition, ZiPS expects two things - league offense to go up a little bit and Minute Maid to be a bit more
offense-friendly, so even someone ZiPS is projecting the same would have an ERA of 0.15 or so higher.

9.2
8.0
7.6
7.8
6.8

Those are Oswalt's career K rates. He's putting more balls in play than he used to and is lucky his ERA wasn't higher this year - his BABIP was .301 against a career mark of .257 and his DIPS ERA was 3.52. He doesn't have a great defense behind him either.

for example, why would qualls get worse? or backe pitch so few innings?

Backe's never pitched many innings and he's not that good. Qualls periphs aren't good enough to believe that he's a great pitcher.


and am not sure why it would think that ensberg and berkman gonna walk so much less times. or why you'd think that willy taveras would more than double his rbis


Well, Ensberg hasn't typically walked at his 2005 rate. I'm projecting Berkman to walk *more* than 2005. 41 isn't more than double 29, either - Taveras hit even more poorly than typical for him with runners on base and there's little reason to expect him that is a repeatable skill.
   9. Repoz Posted: November 12, 2005 at 02:36 AM (#1728711)
Wow! Clemens' ERA will nearly double...yet win one more game!

Cleazeick rules!
   10. Dr. Vaux Posted: November 12, 2005 at 02:47 AM (#1728719)
Is it too early to declare this the best signing of the off-season?
   11. base ball chick Posted: November 12, 2005 at 02:56 AM (#1728727)
Dan Szymborski Posted: November 11, 2005 at 09:09 PM (#1728691)
- BTW, todd self has not been with the astros organization since august

Wow! Totally missed that one - I thought he had passed through waivers when he was DFAed.


- no, drat it (DO YOU SEE THAT CLEAN LANGUAGE JIM FURTADO?????) the mets got him. and we got zips
hehhehheh

The Astros had very, very few pitchers underperform in 2005 - they were quite fortunate in that respect. In addition, ZiPS expects two things - league offense to go up a little bit and Minute Maid to be a bit more
offense-friendly, so even someone ZiPS is projecting the same would have an ERA of 0.15 or so higher.


- why would league offense go up?
-why would minute maid be any more hitter friendly? unless it's because astacio SO much worse than clemens?

Those are Oswalt's career K rates. He's putting more balls in play than he used to and is lucky his ERA wasn't higher this year - his BABIP was .301 against a career mark of .257 and his DIPS ERA was 3.52. He doesn't have a great defense behind him either.

- you talkin to someone who watched every single one of roy's starts this year. first, he often pitched deeper into games when he had more balls in play. second, the defense was better than you think AFTER phil stopped dumba** stuff like (shudder) lamb is left and after the first few months when the fielders learned to play better together. he had some games where the fielders looked like 7 year olds out there and gave up too many runs (THERE, K woulda been bout the only thing that woulda helped...) his high K games didn't go along with wins as much this year. and he did better after he switched from chavez to ausmus, too. he might could go back to striking out more guys depending on who the catcher and fielders are too...

- as for backe, he only came up as a starter last year in july and this year, he was hurt for like 6 weeks. he's only been a starting pitcher 2 years in his whole life. so he should go up, not stay the same. and he's no ace (unless he on national TV) but he's a decent #4 guy
- and you projecting qualls to get WORSE, not even stay the same. he may not be billy wagner all over again, but why worse?

- and about taveras - my bad - i looked at biggio's 65 RBIs instead. sorry. i don't think he's gonna start walking, neither. sigh.
   12. Dr. Vaux Posted: November 12, 2005 at 03:07 AM (#1728732)
* Pitchers are always better bets to get worse (as in, return to their "established" level, or a bit below it because of being a year older) than to stay the same, because usually if they did particularly well, it was because of BABIP luck.

* The offensive level in MLB this year was quite low for the modern era; it will almost certainly regress to the mean by a quarter-run or more.

* Minute Maid Park had a lower park-factor this year than it usually does, hence regression to the mean again.

* Declining K-rates, whatever personal/annecdotal observation indicates, almost always correlate with declining performance. As in 98% of the time.
   13. base ball chick Posted: November 12, 2005 at 03:19 AM (#1728737)
dan

oh yeah, i forgot

PLEASE explain how you think astacio can get SO much better. while qualls gonna be so much worse.


vaux,

and i am not understanding why you think that because offense was lower last year it MUST get higher this year. what's the difference what it did some other time? where are these great hitters coming from who gonna make a difference? it's not like the pitcher parks moving the fences in and philly moving the fences out.

yall talk about this "regression to the mean" like it means things HAFTA be some other way, like gravity gonna happen when you drop something. things change. or everything would always be exactly the same.

and how can you talk about an "established level" with someone who only been pitching for 2 years total? or in the majors for 1 year total? isn't it odd that you would think someone's FIRST year pitching in the majors MUST be his best year cuz he gonna be older the next year?
   14. Dr. Vaux Posted: November 12, 2005 at 03:36 AM (#1728746)
When I said "established level," I was talking about Oswalt.

Anyhow, the idea of regression to the mean obviously isn't something like gravity, which is certain; it's merely something that's quite likely. That's why it's important to planning for the next season as a franchise, so as not to fall into the trap of thinking a player has established a new, higher level. Basically, it's not the case that no player ever does do that, but you're always safer if you assume he hasn't.

As for offense level, that almost always fluctuates somewhat from year to year, but last year was significantly lower than the previous two, hence the likelihood of increase. Now, there might be observable reasons for its low level, also, which are unlikely to remain the same. For example, it seems to me that in large parts of the country it was a cooler April and May than usual, and indeed, offensive levels were much higher in June, July, and August than they were the first two months (as they almost always are). If we have more normal temperatures at the beginning of 2006, then offense will be at its more normal, higher level.

Astacio and Qualls is about peripherals. Statistics like BB, K, and HR-rate fluctuate less from season-to-season than BAA and, by extension, ERA. Plugging the league-average BABIP (batting average [against] on balls in play) into the pitcher's stats, instead of his actual one, produces an ERA figure that the pitcher is more likely to match in the next season than his actual one, because a pitcher is likely to have closer to average results the next time around--that's why they're the average results, after all. So, Astacio's 2005 stats with an average BABIP would have seen him with a lower ERA, and Qualls's 2005 stats with an average BABIP would have produced a higher one. I assume most of the projection is based on that, in their cases, since they're both around the same age, an age at which progress plateaus and decline hasn't yet set in.
   15. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 12, 2005 at 04:00 AM (#1728759)
- why would league offense go up?
-why would minute maid be any more hitter friendly? unless it's because astacio SO much worse than clemens?


3-year weighted park factors are a better predictor of future park factors than the park factor for the most recent year.

3-year weighted league factors are a better predictor of future league facts than the league factor for the most recent year.

you talkin to someone who watched every single one of roy's starts this year. first, he often pitched deeper into games

That doesn't change the fact that when you turn strikeouts into hit balls, you're going to allow more runs.

second, the defense was better than you think AFTER phil stopped dumba** stuff like (shudder) lamb is left and after the first few months when the fielders learned to play better together.

Burke wasn't good in left. Biggio was awful. Berkman was awful. Lane was awful.

his high K games didn't go along with wins as much this year. and he did better

This is demonstrably untrue.

Oswalt had 19 games with a strikeout rate above his average and 16 games with a strikeout rate below his average.

HIGH STRIKEOUT GAMES: 2.54 ERA, 6.9 IP/start, 79% quality starts
LOW STRIKEOUT GAMES: 3.22 ERA, 6.9 IP/start, 63% quality starts

yall talk about this "regression to the mean" like it means things HAFTA be some other way, like gravity gonna happen when you drop something. things change. or everything would always be exactly the same.

They don't have to, but that's they way to bet. We have to go by what is likely to happen, not what we wish to happen.
   16. mommy Posted: November 12, 2005 at 05:57 AM (#1728828)
"his high K games didn't go along with wins as much this year. and he did better"

"This is demonstrably untrue.

HIGH STRIKEOUT GAMES: 2.54 ERA, 6.9 IP/start, 79% quality starts
LOW STRIKEOUT GAMES: 3.22 ERA, 6.9 IP/start, 63% quality starts"

Dan, maybe you missed something....she watched EVERY ONE of his starts this year!!!!!
   17. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 12, 2005 at 06:30 AM (#1728855)
Now, now, we don't have to be rude!
   18. stubbyc Posted: November 12, 2005 at 06:43 AM (#1728861)
Interesting stuff. Even though Clemens, Oswalt, and Pettitte should be expected to dropoff, the 4th and 5th starters will have a hard time being nearly as bad as they were last year.

Astacio's control was not good in the majors. He left way too many pitches in hittable regions. However, that HR rate still seemed fluky to me. He gave up a ton of cheap HRs and HRs off of seemingly good pitches. I'd say the ZIPS projection is a good mean projection, but I can see him pitching much better than that.

If Backe could improve his fastball control he could post a much better ERA than the near 5 one he has. He's the most dangerous pitcher on our staff when he gets to 0-2 with his excellent slider and good curveball.

I'm not too optimistic about Lane meeting that projection. I know many have been crying for years that he should be playing, but when you see him over the course of the season you can see why the organization had its doubts.

No way Biggio doesn't beat that projection. No ####### way. I remember having a pretty terrible projection last year and he still had a solid ~.800 OPS year. I can see regression, but I'd be absolutely shocked if he fell that far.

I don't really know what to expect of Scott, but that projection still seems semi-low. I'd expect him to at least put up better isolated power numbers.

Oswalt's K-rate dropped last year mainly because the velocity was mostly in the 92-93 range rather than the typical 94-96 range. I'm not sure if he was trying to pace himself more or not, but the electric fastball reappeared in the playoffs. Projection seems a little on the low side, but it wouldn't surprise me.

I'd be shocked if Nieve put up those kind of numbers. Visually, he had good stuff but he had lots of trouble locating anything and he had a pretty rough go round in AAA last year.
   19. stubbyc Posted: November 12, 2005 at 07:11 AM (#1728864)
Also, any projection for Troy Patton?
   20. base ball chick Posted: November 12, 2005 at 07:41 AM (#1728875)
stubbyc Posted: November 11, 2005 at 09:43 PM (#1728861)
Interesting stuff. Even though Clemens, Oswalt, and Pettitte should be expected to dropoff, the 4th and 5th starters will have a hard time being nearly as bad as they were last year.

- not astacio

Astacio's control was not good in the majors. He left way too many pitches in hittable regions. However, that HR rate still seemed fluky to me. He gave up a ton of cheap HRs and HRs off of seemingly good pitches. I'd say the ZIPS projection is a good mean projection, but I can see him pitching much better than that.

- well he gave up a ton of HRs in the minors too. i don't believe he gonna be better than wandy rodriguez, let alone backe. astacio too into strikeouts and it's a LOT harder to strike out major leaguers, especially on a FB down the middle, which he did a LOT. look at where the pitches were - mostly all fat ones
   21. Ienpw Posted: November 12, 2005 at 09:01 AM (#1728893)
Also, any projection for Troy Patton?

I'll take minor league DL for $300.
   22. stubbyc Posted: November 12, 2005 at 07:11 PM (#1729158)
- well he gave up a ton of HRs in the minors too.

No he didn't. He gave up 6 in 65IP in AAA and 12 in 176IP in AA. His HR rate in the majors was way way above what was expected.

astacio too into strikeouts and it's a LOT harder to strike out major leaguers, especially on a FB down the middle, which he did a LOT.

I don't see how he's too into strikeouts. He has good stuff and he's going to strike people out even when he's not specifically looking for a strikeout. He beat that 2006 projection in the 2nd half of the season. IIRC, he had an ERA under 4 when he was called up for good.
   23. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 12, 2005 at 07:36 PM (#1729173)
Yup, his ERA after being called up in July was 3.96.

Frankly, I want the guy who's "too into strikeouts." There are good reasons that strikeout rate is one of the most important indicators of long-term success. If I'm going to aggressively promote a player, I want him to be one of the guys that goes after batters, wants nothing more to punch them out and make their defense irrelevant.

Can a pitcher theoretically get too in love with the strikeout? Certainly - but I'll take this failing over the guy who's too cutesy with the strikezone nibbling in the minors and pitching to contact every day of the week and twice on sundays. Very few of the latter become Jamie Moyer - most become Don Wengert.
   24. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: November 12, 2005 at 07:45 PM (#1729181)
Dan,

What's Self's projection at Shea?
   25. StroMan Posted: November 12, 2005 at 09:26 PM (#1729243)
so, league offense will go up, and Minute Maid will be more hitter-friendly...but the Astro hitters will be collectively much worse.

If that happens, we could probably reverse the W-L records for Oswalt, Clemens and Pettitte and be closer to actual outcomes.
   26. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 13, 2005 at 12:43 AM (#1729339)
so, league offense will go up, and Minute Maid will be more hitter-friendly...but the Astro hitters will be collectively much worse.

They aren't collectively much worse, but they are certainly a bit worse - the Astros are not a young team.
   27. caspian88 Posted: November 13, 2005 at 09:33 AM (#1729689)
That Bagwell almost seems a bit high, as sad as it is to say that. The Astros need him to retire - with the raises to Berkman, Pettite, and Biggio, his salary is almost all eaten up if he were to go.
   28. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: November 13, 2005 at 04:59 PM (#1729786)
Brad Lidge: A man's man.
   29. cangrejero51 Posted: November 13, 2005 at 05:53 PM (#1729808)
I believe Astacio will have a good year in 2006.
   30. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 13, 2005 at 07:01 PM (#1729855)
"Taveras hit even more poorly than typical for him with runners on base and there's little reason to expect him that is a repeatable skill."

Is that the worst possible repeatable skill to have? Like the ability to repeatedly fail to pick up girls at a bar?
   31. Brickman Posted: November 13, 2005 at 07:31 PM (#1729868)
<blockquote>If Clemens retires, they'll be in a world of pain


They will also have a lot more money to play with to upgrade that offense.
   32. Dr. Vaux Posted: November 13, 2005 at 11:20 PM (#1730092)
It's my understanding that Clemens's salary is "special" money that isn't actually considered part of the payroll budget by the Astros' ownership. If he retires, they're not going to spend it.
   33. 1k5v3L Posted: November 13, 2005 at 11:22 PM (#1730095)
It's my understanding that Clemens's salary is "special" money

they pay him with food stamps?
   34. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: November 14, 2005 at 01:36 AM (#1730211)
Dan, is there somewhere where you have the projected park factors/league factors for all the teams? It seems like many of the same questions get asked every time you post one of these, and the answers often have to do with park. Why not include that information in the original post? It seems pretty important.
   35. Passed Ball Posted: November 14, 2005 at 11:33 PM (#1731808)
Free Humberto Quintero!
Good defensive rep. Better projected hitter than the other catchers combined.
   36. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 15, 2005 at 01:33 AM (#1731971)
No way Biggio doesn't beat that projection. No #### way. I remember having a pretty terrible projection last year and he still had a solid ~.800 OPS year. I can see regression, but I'd be absolutely shocked if he fell that far.

There are negative indicators in Biggio's numbers. He took a huge drop after the All-Star break (from .288/.351/.497 to .236/.295/.431), plus he had a huge home/road split (almost the same as his pre/post ASB splits). That's enough to be concerned.

-- MWE
   37. base ball chick Posted: November 15, 2005 at 02:52 AM (#1732072)
dan,

first of all, striking out guys in the minors and striking out guys in the majors 2 different things. and astacio DOES make defense irrelevant - by throwing balls down the middle that go over fences. and he DID give up a lot of hrs in AAA. and please remember our park is the park where jack wilson hit TWO game winning HRs. Jack (forget)ing Wilson - sorry furtado - jack wilson he EARNED that
(forget)


- guys, bagwell is NOT gonna retire and kiss 25 mill goodbye - get real here. the best we can do is put him on the DL whether he like it or not. but he ain't gonna wanna go on it and mclane don't wanna make him unhappy, so he gonna play.

it WOULD help if biggio didn't play full time, but mclane wants him to so he gonna. mike emeigh is dead right about biggio's numbers - he was playing to that wall in left. he hardly hit ANY balls to right or up the middle

and as for quintero - here we go with another defense no offense guy. he didn't exactly measure up to projections here in the bigs, now, did he. and remember the rules - he's year older so it is not possible for him to get better - if he does, it's just luck or fluke or something. if he gets better every year, must be that the system is fluked up....
   38. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 15, 2005 at 03:24 AM (#1732118)
first of all, striking out guys in the minors and striking out guys in the majors 2 different things. and astacio DOES make defense irrelevant - by throwing balls down the middle that go over fences. and he DID give up a lot of hrs in AAA. and please remember our park is the park where jack wilson hit TWO game winning HRs. Jack (forget)ing Wilson - sorry furtado - jack wilson he EARNED that
(forget)


Guys that strike out a lot in the minors tend to strike out a lot in the majors. Guys that don't, don't. They're not playing ice hockey on Mars - AAA is just a slightly lower level of the top athletes playing baseball.

and as for quintero - here we go with another defense no offense guy. he didn't exactly measure up to projections here in the bigs, now, did he.

Umm, in *54* at-bats. He could hit the projection perfectly in the 54 at-bats and it wouldn't be a point in the system's favor. Anyone can hit anything in 54 at-bats.

and remember the rules - he's year older so it is not possible for him to get better - if he does, it's just luck or fluke or something. if he gets better every year, must be that the system is fluked up....

This is absurd. Any system that works to any consistent extent recognizes concepts such as sample size and regression to the mean. Any system that doesn't is going to do a significantly worse job. Look, I know the Astros are your team, but people of every team can make the same ultra-sunshine look at their team and while some of you will be right, most of you will be wrong.
   39. Shiny Beast Posted: November 15, 2005 at 04:27 PM (#1732462)
What were the projections for Oswalt 2005? I'm probably remembering wrong, but it seems like he usually does poorly in these type projections, for whatever reason.

Biggio will decline, but I doubt that drastically, especially if his playing time is eased back.

Bagwell will retire before putting up numbers like that.

I'd be very happy with the Taveras projection, but don't expect it. I wouldn't be surprised if he isn't there in 2006 (or '07). The Houston front office doesn't seem to be in love with him. Just a hunch.

A lot of Backe's (and Taveras') value to Astros fans in tied up in the fact they both came so cheaply. This tends to obscure the fact that neither is a very good player.

I like the Lane projection, except he'll hit for more power.

I'm nitpicking.
   40. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: November 15, 2005 at 04:37 PM (#1732477)
Is that the worst possible repeatable skill to have? Like the ability to repeatedly fail to pick up girls at a bar?
Whoo! You're making me feel like a pro; autograph line forms on the left, fellas.
   41. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 15, 2005 at 06:42 PM (#1732682)
I had Oswalt at 17-9, 3.35 coming into this year.
   42. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 15, 2005 at 06:47 PM (#1732691)
More detailed:

Roy Oswalt
-------------------------------------------------------------
Player         W   L   G  GS   IP    H   ER  HR  BB  SO   ERA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Oswalt, proj. 17   9  32  32  215  199   80  16  55 189  3.35
Oswalt, act.  20  12  35  35  241  243   79  18  48 184  2.94

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Adam M
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.4416 seconds
66 querie(s) executed