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

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

2006 ZiPS Projections - Seattle Mariners


Name           P   AVG   OBP   SPC   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS
Sexson         1b .264 .373 .533 151 550 90 145 32 1 38 114 92 157 1 1
Jacobsen       1b .260 .349 .494 97 342 49 89 18 1 20 65 44 94 1 1
Ichiro!*        rf .319 .366 .429 162 686 104 219 23 8 12 80 50 68 29 10
Snelling*      cf .294 .364 .449 72 245 41 72 15 1 7 36 25 38 1 3
Johjima         c   .273 .342 .480 124 444 59 121 27 1 21 67 44 52 3 3
Ibanez*        lf .277 .346 .440 154 584 80 162 31 2 20 87 62 94 6 3
Beltre         3b .269 .321 .463 158 607 76 163 35 1 27 101 45 102 4 2
Reed*          cf .266 .340 .379 144 504 68 134 31 4 6 55 55 67 21 12
Choo*          cf .256 .334 .382 126 442 71 113 16 5 10 52 51 86 19 11
Everett#        dh .236 .311 .400 127 453 49 107 19 2 17 67 42 85 4 4
Leone         3b .224 .315 .385 99 340 55 76 18 2 11 45 44 96 5 3
Strong         cf .260 .336 .337 102 365 51 95 13 3 3 32 38 62 17 8
Bohn           lf .237 .302 .393 133 456 62 108 22 2 15 54 35 114 15 7
Lopez         ss .257 .291 .402 115 428 59 110 29 0 11 57 18 50 8 5
Morse         ss .247 .298 .376 116 396 44 98 20 2 9 47 27 80 4 1
Dobbs*        3b .261 .296 .373 121 399 40 104 17 2 8 48 19 58 7 4
Brown         3b .229 .311 .359 115 376 53 86 21 2 8 42 36 78 10 7
Bloomquist       3b .254 .299 .329 87 252 31 64 14 1 1 24 16 41 13 2
Hansen*        1b .208 .319 .292 77 96   9 20 2 0 2 11 16 22 0 0
Christianson     c   .219 .285 .339 79 274 34 60 12 0 7 31 24 75 1 1
Balentien       lf .209 .247 .377 113 393 47 82 20 2 14 49 16 132 7 2
Reese         2b .219 .288 .295 96 288 25 63 11 1 3 23 28 66 6 1
Betancourt*      ss .240 .270 .347 161 605 58 145 27 10 6 56 22 51 14 13
Jones         ss .217 .271 .330 131 461 57 100 19 3 9 46 27 111 8 6
Guzman#        3b .215 .280 .324 117 413 53 89 17 5 6 42 33 91 5 8
Bourgeois#      2b .224 .281 .281 132 459 49 103 16 2 2 31 32 69 12 3
Rivera         c   .228 .259 .314 100 334 29 76 15 1 4 31 13 63 1 0

Name           W   L   ERA   G GS   INN   H   ER HR   BB   K
Soriano         5   1   2.45 34   2   55.0   43   15   2   12   57
Guardado*        4   2   3.60 56   0   55.0   48   22   7   15   49
Sherrill*        6   4   3.67 50   0   54.0   47   22   6   17   56
Hernandez       13   7   3.75 29 26   163.0 143   68 12   65 150
Mateo           3   3   3.94 52   0   80.0   76   35 12   16   55
Hasegawa         4   3   3.97 56   0   68.0   67   30   5   22   33
Nelson           2   2   4.17 51   0   41.0   34   19   3   23   42
Livingston*      10   9   4.27 28 28   179.0 193   85 22   35   98
Pineiro         10 10   4.43 29 29   189.0 195   93 21   58 123
Jimenez*        5   5   4.50 47   1   82.0   86   41 10   24   54
Washburn*        9 10   4.55 29 29   176.0 183   89 23   51 102
Heaverlo         4   5   4.71 45   0   84.0   87   44   6   40   52
Bazardo         8   9   4.73 26 26   156.0 181   82 17   41   78
Moyer*          10 12   4.90 33 33   202.0 218 110 29   62 109
Carvajal         1   2   4.91 38   0   66.0   65   36   6   34   54
Green           3   4   4.93 53   0   73.0   73   40   7   38   44
Putz           3   4   4.94 58   0   71.0   72   39   9   31   51
Atchison         4   5   4.97 47   3   87.0   85   48 12   39   72
Kida           3   4   5.01 39   4   79.0   85   44 12   26   48
Franklin         8 14   5.07 32 31   197.0 215 111 31   63   96
Flannery         3   5   5.18 56   0   66.0   68   38   9   30   45
Foppert         3   6   5.22 22 20   88.0   84   51 13   47   75
Buglovsky         4   7   5.24 30 20   127.0 138   74 14   56   61
Meche           7 13   5.25 31 30   168.0 175   98 26   73 114
Baek           5 10   5.32 24 20   115.0 130   68 20   35   66
Cortez           3   5   5.37 41   1   62.0   66   37   9   27   42
Cruceta         6 12   5.55 32 23   146.0 160   90 26   60 107
Nageotte         5   8   5.66 25 12   89.0   91   56 12   54   64
Moss*          5 13   5.79 27 25   140.0 149   90 19   82   76
Fruto           2   5   5.84 47   0   74.0   79   48 12   41   51
Blackley*        5 14   6.34 26 25   142.0 153 100 26   87   97
Thornton*        2   6   6.37 40   8   82.0   77   58 10   74   70
Gonzalez*        1   7   7.48 49   0   65.0   70   54 14   56   45

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: December 20, 2005 at 06:11 AM | 23 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. Walt Davis Posted: December 20, 2005 at 07:38 AM (#1785921)
Out of curiosity Dan, what was Beltre's ZIPS coming into last season?

That Jacobsen projection looks pretty nice as does the Snelling (will he ever be healthy?). Anyway, overall that doesn't look like a bad offense.

And that looks like a rational projection for King Felix -- what's wrong with ZIPS??!!
   2. jsandman32 Posted: December 20, 2005 at 08:53 AM (#1785965)
Bucky is no longer a Mariner, so if he does that projection it will be for another team. On top of that he was let go due to poor rehab habits and getting larger than he previously was.

The M's offense should be better than last year due to not wasting at bats on Miguel Olivo, Pat Borders, or the other 12 starters they used at Catcher last year. On top of that hopefully Reed, Lopez, and Betancourt take steps forward. Now if Bavasi would stop trying to be last years D'backs and throwing money at players such as Washburn (This years Russ Ortiz) or Carl "I don't believe in dinosaurs" Everett (Troy Glaus I'd guess if you are going for the D'backs comp).

Hey maybe we can get a smarter GM next year like the Diamondbacks did too...
   3. DetroitMichael Posted: December 20, 2005 at 08:26 PM (#1786691)
Johjima is projected for more HR per AB than Beltre. Interesting.

Only a .266 average for Reed. I was hoping that last year was an aberation given that he's posted some high batting averages in the minors, but ZIPS thinks otherwise.
   4. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: December 20, 2005 at 09:30 PM (#1786850)
Wow, that is a great projection for Johjima.
   5. Russ Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:09 PM (#1787986)
Soriano projects for just 2 HR in 55 innings? Thas' sum good reliefin'.
   6. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:07 PM (#1788514)
When he's healthy, Soriano is teh awesome.
   7. The District Attorney Posted: December 22, 2005 at 01:09 AM (#1789265)
Snelling - I really, really wish someone makes this guy their DH, gives him zero (0) games in the field, and he responds with a healthy season. Would love to see what would happen.
Beltre - Ick.
Reed - Better, but I think he'll have to improve more than that to avoid the onset of early career crisis.
J. Lopez - Ick.
Betancourt - ICK!!! Return of St. Rey???
R. Soriano - I hope they do put him in the pen, for his own health.
Putz, Meche, Foppert, Meche, Washburn - Ick, ick, ick, ick and a fully expected ick.

This team sure is feast or famine, huh.
   8. Spivey Posted: December 23, 2005 at 05:41 AM (#1791335)
I bet Felix Hernandez doesn't walk that many guys. Granted, that's not many guys. But I'd imagine it's strongly based on his AAA pitching. His control looked impeccable in the 2 games I saw him in the majors. And I'm not just talking BB/IP (although his BB/IP last year was very good in the majors). He was hitting his spots on basically every pitch.
   9. The George Sherrill Selection Posted: December 23, 2005 at 10:14 AM (#1791570)
Down with Bourgeois! Up with Proletariat!
   10. bookbook Posted: December 23, 2005 at 11:49 PM (#1792344)
Don't tell the USSMariner guys. They hold high hopes for the young player improvement factors on Lopez, Reed, and Betancourt.
   11. Rob Base Posted: December 24, 2005 at 12:53 AM (#1792447)
That is one bad ballclub.
   12. 1k5v3L Posted: December 24, 2005 at 12:54 AM (#1792449)
Supposedly the M's signed Lawton so they could trade Jeremy Reed to the Sox. Talk about a fked up organization...
   13. strong silence Posted: December 24, 2005 at 12:58 AM (#1792455)
Bavasi is really the only one missing good baseball sense. He'll be gone a year from now.

I don't think the Reed trade will happen.
   14. strong silence Posted: December 24, 2005 at 01:05 AM (#1792465)
I like the young guys. Lopez, Reed and YuBet have potential. But, as you know, it's all they have. And if there are no adequate substitutes the M's will be in long, dark world of hurt.

David Cameron, an expert on the M's, says Jeff Clement and Adam Jones are potential regulars. That will be 2007. Take a look at the Future Forty over at USS Mariner.

I don't see more than 75 wins for 2006.
   15. Morph Posted: December 24, 2005 at 08:20 PM (#1793068)
What's up with Chris Snelling? He [finally] sniffing the Majors in '06? Hopefully he can avoid those injuries.

Matt Lawton's hitting style is nightmarishly similar to Ruben Sierra's [from the left side]. Can't touch an outside fastball. Can't touch a high fastball. Make a mistake down and in... that's where he makes his money, but other than that, yuck. Lots of slow rollers to second.
   16. Sakata Posted: December 28, 2005 at 12:56 AM (#1796361)
Are Washburn's career road numbers taken into account for his projection? He just never seemed to pitch well at all, in Anaheim.

Wow, that is a great projection for Johjima.

The guy was putting 1.000 OPSes like they were nothing in Japan's most extreme pitcher's park. Even some of the lowest (reasonable, as some people still consider Japan like A-ball level with the projections they throw out) projections I've seen have him as a Top-10 Catcher in the Majors.

Only a .266 average for Reed. I was hoping that last year was an aberation given that he's posted some high batting averages in the minors, but ZIPS thinks otherwise.

The impression I got is that it looks like a learning curve projection for Reed. It predicts him with an 75 IsoD, but his IsoP does still seem low.

I take it there's little-to-no factoring for his wrist (injured for much of the season and believed generally to have been June-on)? That's considered the main reason why his swing flattened out and slowed down after May. If you guys do try to take played-through injuries into account but maybe didn't realize Reed's, I felt it should be pointed out.

J. Lopez - Ick.

Tejada Curve; plain and simple. In fact, it's a little above his Tejada curve...

Betancourt - ICK!!! Return of St. Rey???

There's next-to-nothing to go by on Betancourt stat-wise (1 total Pro season split between AA, AAA, and MLB, and you have to remember that he hadn't played at all for over a year after defecting from Cuba), so it's one of those situations where you have to have go by Scouting Reports as being 20 billion times (I know, it's an exaggeration) more reliable than statistical projections. But 43 of his 145 hits are XH, if you look at the projection, more closely.

Supposedly the M's signed Lawton so they could trade Jeremy Reed to the Sox. Talk about a fked up organization...

Complete Bull. Lawton's a bench signing, no more. The only way we trade Reed is if we're getting Papelbon or Lester plus a vet starter from the Red Sox, and even then, it's unlikely unless we get another solid CF to replace him (like Patterson).

I don't see more than 75 wins for 2006.

Reasonably speaking, a .500 record has been considered worst-case. Felix and Johjima, alone, get us just over .500 in Pythag projections.
   17. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: December 28, 2005 at 01:03 AM (#1796366)
So fans of all 4 AL West teams believe their teams are at least .500 clubs. Should be interesting.
   18. Darren Posted: December 28, 2005 at 01:22 AM (#1796373)
The only way we trade Reed is if we're getting Papelbon or Lester plus a vet starter from the Red Sox, and even then, it's unlikely unless we get another solid CF to replace him (like Patterson).

Which is crazier: the value you've put on Reed or the belief that Patterson is a solid CF. It's a toss up.
   19. Sakata Posted: December 29, 2005 at 04:39 PM (#1798482)
So fans of all 4 AL West teams believe their teams are at least .500 clubs. Should be interesting.

Wouldn't be the first time all 4 were above .500

Which is crazier: the value you've put on Reed or the belief that Patterson is a solid CF. It's a toss up.

It's where Bavasi drew the line; not the value I've personally put on him. Just Bronson Arroyo or Clement is considered by just about every reasonable fan as seriously selling low. Considering Boston's relative desperation for CF, though, asking for Papelbon or Lester is a good position to stand. It's not like they have a lot of viable options (that they are seeking).

And defensively, Patterson's in the same class as Reed, as both are among the best defensive CF in baseball. From what I've seen of Cubs' fans feelings on his 2005, they think that Baker simply screwed him up trying to make him a leadoff hitter. If you want to go by their ZiPS projections, Reed and Patterson are practically equal in value. Both have very high upside as early as next year, given age and potential. I see little reason not to consider Patterson a solid CF, at least in comparison to Reed.

And of course, none of that is relevant if the rumors don't materialize.
   20. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: December 29, 2005 at 04:45 PM (#1798493)
What would Reed's Fenway-fied numbers look like?
   21. peter21 Posted: January 01, 2006 at 08:23 PM (#1801948)
Reasonably speaking, a .500 record has been considered worst-case. Felix and Johjima, alone, get us just over .500 in Pythag projections.

While I certainly understand where you are coming from, here is my counter-argument.

Nearly every single team in the American League improved for 2006. Some might've improved more than others, and some might've still made stupid decisions, but I would argue that Chicago, Minnesota, Detroit, Kansas City, Toronto, New York, Oakland, and Texas have all made moves to improve themselves, while Cleveland and Anaheim (er, Los Angeles) have remained relatively stable---and, considering how good they were last year, that's not a good sign for the rest of the AL. Tampa Bay will improve simply based on adding Upton and Young, as well as improvement from young pitchers. Boston and Baltimore are arguable (I personally think the Red Sox's offseason hasn't been the disaster that others believe it has been, while Baltimore perhaps added the best free-agent acquisition of them all: Leo Mazzone).

Did Seattle improve themselves? Yes, they will be better in 2006 than they were in 2005, in terms of raw ability. However, there are only so many wins to go around---someone has to lose some games. And Seattle is still worse than the other three teams in their division, and still worse than Chicago, Cleveland, Minnesota, Boston, New York, and Toronto at least. Unfortunately for them, that makes .500 an unreasonable proposition.

But there are only so many wins to go around
   22. peter21 Posted: January 01, 2006 at 08:23 PM (#1801951)
Reasonably speaking, a .500 record has been considered worst-case. Felix and Johjima, alone, get us just over .500 in Pythag projections.

While I certainly understand where you are coming from, here is my counter-argument.

Nearly every single team in the American League improved for 2006. Some might've improved more than others, and some might've still made stupid decisions, but I would argue that Chicago, Minnesota, Detroit, Kansas City, Toronto, New York, Oakland, and Texas have all made moves to improve themselves, while Cleveland and Anaheim (er, Los Angeles) have remained relatively stable---and, considering how good they were last year, that's not a good sign for the rest of the AL. Tampa Bay will improve simply based on adding Upton and Young, as well as improvement from young pitchers. Boston and Baltimore are arguable (I personally think the Red Sox's offseason hasn't been the disaster that others believe it has been, while Baltimore perhaps added the best free-agent acquisition of them all: Leo Mazzone).

Did Seattle improve themselves? Yes, they will be better in 2006 than they were in 2005, in terms of raw ability. However, there are only so many wins to go around---someone has to lose some games. And Seattle is still worse than the other three teams in their division, and still worse than Chicago, Cleveland, Minnesota, Boston, New York, and Toronto at least. Unfortunately for them, that makes .500 an unreasonable proposition.

But there are only so many wins to go around
   23. peter21 Posted: January 01, 2006 at 08:26 PM (#1801956)
Sorry about the double-post...and the strange floating fragment at the end...

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

Page rendered in 0.2131 seconds
47 querie(s) executed