|
|
|
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 07:19 PM | 49 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Related News:
|
Support BBTF
Thanks to
BDC
for his generous support.
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
2012 ZiPS Projections, Final Edition (23 - 11:21am, May 31)Last: craigsaboe2012 ZiPS/RBI Baseball (20 - 10:58am, May 03)Last: tjans2012 ZiPS Projections Spreadsheets, v. 1 (62 - 4:38pm, Apr 10)Last: nemodomi2012 ZiPS Projections - Oakland A's (69 - 5:57am, Apr 10)Last: Athletic Supporter gangnam style2012 ZiPS Projections - Kansas City Royals (31 - 1:51pm, Mar 23)Last: hokieneerPirates - Acquire Burnett (10 - 12:09am, Feb 21)Last: YR Misses Reggie Bars2012 ZiPS Projections - Pittsburgh Pirates (41 - 11:02am, Feb 20)Last: Dangerous Dean2012 ZiPS Projections - Minnesota Twins (31 - 9:53pm, Feb 17)Last: A Random 8-Year-Old Eskimo2012 ZiPS Projections - Boston Red Sox (46 - 5:41pm, Feb 17)Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit2012 ZiPS Projections - San Diego Padres (29 - 3:33pm, Feb 17)Last: Dan Szymborski2012 ZiPS Projections - Arizona Diamondbacks (31 - 3:03am, Feb 14)Last: Dan Szymborski2012 ZiPS Projections - Texas Rangers (21 - 1:43pm, Feb 10)Last: DEF: NPW (WWRJD)2012 ZiPS Projections - Miami Marlins (31 - 9:16pm, Feb 07)Last: Misirlou is bad, he's nationwide2012 ZiPS Projections - Cleveland Indians (19 - 11:18pm, Feb 02)Last: DevinM2012 ZiPS Projections - Atlanta Braves (28 - 7:25pm, Jan 31)Last: Gern Blanston
|
|
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. Azteca Posted: November 09, 2006 at 08:19 PM (#2234042)Someone please give Rivera a full year, full time job
Not until he returns Derek Jeter's glove.
dan, how well-informed is ZIPS of mcpherson's injury history?
.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..)
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.
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.
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?
Yes, for about 3 games. Then he'll hurt himself and miss 2-3 months.
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)
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).
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.
Hatcherball!
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.
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.
a lot of time has been spent on this. Think the right answer is 42
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Can Izturis play a good SS?
Trader Jim Bowden sure knows his horseflesh.
I really hope Stoneman finds the Angels a bat. That offense looks pathetic.
Wrong Rivera... still funny though.
God, I have a hard time believing Weaver's ERA will be a full run lower than Verlander's over the same workload.
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.
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.)
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main