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

Sunday, October 28, 2007

2008 ZiPS Projections - Oakland A’s

The most notable thing about the A’s disappointing, injury-filled 2007 season is how many blind squirrels it brought out of the woodwork, people that had been declaring the green-and-gold doomed every year for the last 5 or so years, and when the team finally has a real down season, declaring how smart they are.  Beane never should have written that book…

The season wasn’t a complete washout.  Danny Haren had a huge season and Travis Buck gives the A’s a surplus at the hitting positions.  And Jack Cust, who strikes out way too much to ever hit major league pitching and who statheads don’t realize won’t ever hit in the majors, was made mincemeat out of by AL hurlers to the tune of finishing 8th in the AL in OPS+.  There could be a downside to all the 1B/LF/RF/DH types being healthy - Swisher in CF.  Yikes!  On the downside, the A’s starting pitching really doesn’t look all that impressive and the minor league depth just isn’t there.


Name               P Age   AVG   OBP   SLG   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS
Jack Cust*          dh 29 .264 .394 .470 135 428 65 113 22 0 22 70 92 154 0 1
Nick Swisher#        lf 27 .263 .375 .483 146 518 89 136 31 1 27 83 88 127 2 2
Dan Johnson*        1b 28 .267 .369 .462 133 461 66 123 25 1 21 78 74 72 0 1
Travis Buck*        rf 23 .283 .360 .458 92 332 44 94 29 4 7 36 38 68 4 1
Daric Barton*        1b 22 .280 .369 .440 137 504 73 141 42 3 11 62 68 58 3 2
AVERAGE 1B/DH—————1b——.272 .353 .461—————————————————————
Eric Chavez*        3b 30 .259 .341 .453 131 490 71 127 28 2 21 72 61 105 4 1
AVERAGE LF——————- lf——.271 .344 .447—————————————————————
Chris Denorfia       cf 27 .282 .350 .438 132 429 65 121 22 3 13 53 43 84 7 3
AVERAGE RF——————- rf——.270 .341 .448—————————————————————
AVERAGE 3B——————- 3b——.268 .338 .439—————————————————————
Jorge Piedra*        lf 29 .267 .336 .436 81 236 28 63 17 1 7 36 22 40 0 1
Mark Ellis           2b 31 .273 .335 .418 131 488 71 133 25 2 14 58 40 79 3 2
Jack Hannahan*        3b 28 .258 .362 .375 104 349 36 90 17 0 8 43 55 100 3 3
Rob Bowen#          c   27 .255 .349 .397 78 184 29 47 11 0 5 20 26 49 0 1
Jeremy Brown         1b 28 .251 .328 .424 91 311 34 78 18 0 12 44 34 59 0 0
AVERAGE 2B——————- 2b——.270 .332 .405—————————————————————
AVERAGE SS——————- ss——.268 .325 .398—————————————————————
Shannon Stewart       lf 34 .283 .341 .370 106 424 56 120 17 1 6 35 34 47 6 2
Vasili Spanos         1b 27 .263 .324 .398 112 392 46 103 25 2 8 48 26 81 1 1
AVERAGE C———————- c——.253 .316 .393—————————————————————
Marco Scutaro         ss 32 .254 .334 .359 107 343 47 87 16 1 6 36 40 49 3 1
Mike Piazza         dh 39 .251 .304 .405 96 331 31 83 15 0 12 45 24 62 0 0
Donnie Murphy         ss 25 .252 .305 .413 92 322 42 81 23 1 9 37 21 67 3 2
Kurt Suzuki         c   24 .248 .325 .369 117 404 50 100 22 0 9 55 42 67 1 1
J.D. Closser#        c   28 .232 .320 .384 104 323 35 75 17 1 10 40 41 60 2 2
Brant Colamarino*      1b 27 .239 .300 .402 123 443 44 106 27 3 13 59 34 100 1 1
Jeff DaVanon#        cf 34 .249 .343 .341 72 173 28 43 8 1 2 15 25 34 6 4
Mark Kotsay*        cf 32 .260 .317 .369 103 412 47 107 22 1 7 49 34 39 3 2
Kevin Melillo*        2b 26 .239 .318 .364 109 385 49 92 20 2 8 40 42 74 7 5
Bobby Crosby         ss 28 .240 .305 .353 94 354 48 85 17 1 7 34 32 65 7 1
Danny Putnam*        lf 25 .236 .298 .363 90 314 38 74 20 1 6 39 25 59 1 2
Brian Snyder         2b 26 .215 .317 .317 108 344 41 74 18 1 5 33 50 95 0 0
J.J. Furmaniak       ss 28 .236 .297 .341 124 428 47 101 17 2 8 36 32 97 10 5
Javier Herrera       cf 23 .233 .288 .357 86 305 44 71 17 0 7 34 19 84 11 6
Lou Merloni         3b 37 .239 .307 .302 88 301 25 72 13 0 2 22 25 42 0 1
Jason Stokes         1b 26 .208 .281 .339 50 168 18 35 8 1 4 16 17 70 1 1
Antonio Perez         3b 28 .227 .288 .310 77 203 19 46 9 1 2 16 15 51 5 2

* - Bats Left
# = Switch-Hitter

Name           CThr 1b 2b 3b ss lf cf rf
Cust*            Pr       Pr   Pr
Swisher#          Fr       Av Pr Av
Johnson*          Av            
Buck*                    Av   Av
Barton*            Av   Pr        
Chavez*                Av        
Denorfia                   Av Fr Av
Piedra*            Av       Av   Av
Ellis               Ex          
Hannahan*          Vg Vg Vg        
Bowen#        Fr                
Brown         Fr   Fr   Pr        
Stewart                   Av Pr  
Spanos             Fr   Fr        
Scutaro             Vg Av Fr      
Piazza         Pr   Pr            
Murphy               Av Av Fr      
Suzuki         Fr                
Closser#        Av   Av            
Colamarino*        Av           Fr
DaVanon#                  Av Fr Av
Kotsay*            Av         Av  
Melillo*            Av Av        
Crosby                   Vg      
Putnam*                    Fr Fr Fr
Snyder               Av Av        
Furmaniak             Fr Av Fr      
Herrera                   Vg Av Vg
Merloni           Vg Fr Fr Fr Fr   Fr
Stokes             Av            
Perez                 Av   Av   Av

Player Spotlight - Daric Barton
Name           AVG   OBP   SLG   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS
Optimistic (15%)  .299 .392 .494 147 539 90 161 49 4 16 80 78 57 4 1  
Mean         .280 .369 .440 137 504 73 141 42 3 11 62 68 58 3 2
Pessimistic (15%) .255 .334 .381 121 443 54 113 31 2 7 41 51 58 2 2

Top Near-Age Offensive Comps:  Ed Bouchee, Ron Fairly

Name               Age   ERA   W   L   G GS   INN   H   ER HR   BB   K
Rich Harden           26   2.74   8   3 18 15   92.0   73   28   6   33   91
Huston Street         24   2.92   6   2 68   0   71.0   61   23   6   12   74
Justin Duchscherer     30   3.05   5   2 54   0   65.0   60   22   6   14   60
Kiko Calero           33   3.74   3   2 58   0   53.0   50   22   4   21   48
Danny Haren           27   3.91 14 11 34 34   221.0 224   96 29   47 174
LEAGUE AVERAGE RELIEVER———4.04———————————————————————-
Santiago Casilla       28   4.17   3   3 61   0   69.0   65   32   8   27   58
Jerry Blevins*        24   4.21   5   5 59   0   77.0   85   36   9   19   55
Joe Blanton           27   4.22 13 12 33 33   211.0 228   99 21   52 121
Ruddy Lugo           28   4.32   4   4 60   0   77.0   78   37   5   41   45
LEAGUE AVERAGE STARTER———- 4.39———————————————————————-
Alan Embree*          38   4.42   2   3 65   0   57.0   60   28   6   17   41
Andrew Brown         27   4.50   5   5 62   0   82.0   81   41 10   33   66
Chad Gaudin           25   4.55 11 11 32 32   190.0 197   96 20   75 137
Ron Flores*          28   4.58   4   4 56   0   59.0   62   30   8   25   39
Lenny Dinardo*        28   4.62   6   7 30 18   111.0 123   57 11   44   59
Brad Halsey*          27   4.64   7   8 38 18   130.0 148   67 14   42   63
Jason Windsor         25   4.96   7   9 23 23   136.0 155   75 19   42   86
Colby Lewis           28   4.97   6   7 34 20   143.0 164   79 20   38   74
Dallas Braden*        24   5.01   6   9 34 27   151.0 167   84 21   42 108
Julio Manon           35   5.37   1   2 53   0   52.0   54   31   9   31   46
Brad Knox           26   5.57   6 10 25 24   147.0 177   91 22   51   58
Jose Garcia           23   5.58   8 10 26 22   129.0 147   80 23   45   88
David Shafer         26   5.61   2   3 54   0   61.0   69   38 10   26   37
Shawn Kohn           28   5.64   2   4 54   1   83.0   94   52 16   27   57
Mike Bumatay*        28   5.82   2   4 58   0   65.0   71   42   9   42   50
Dan Meyer*          26   5.95   3   7 24 21   115.0 134   76 21   46   63
Shane Komine         27   6.06   6 12 25 23   141.0 173   95 29   44   63
Danny Borrell*        29   6.31   2   5 18 13   77.0   91   54 18   29   49

* - Throws Left

Player Spotlight - Danny Haren
              ERA   W   L   G GS INN   H   ER HR   BB   K
Optimistic (15%)  2.93 18   7 34 34 230 207   75 22   42 204
Mean           3.91 14 11 34 34 221 224   96 29   47 174
Pessimistic (15%)  4.73 10 11 28 28 179 199   94 28   45 127

Top Near-Age Comps:  Mike Mussina, Don Newcombe

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 2008. 
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 listed with their most recent teams unless Dan has made a mistake. 
This is very possible as a lot of minor-league signings are generally unreported in
the offseason. 

ZiPS is projecting based on the AL having a 4.49 ERA and the NL having a 4.40 ERA.

Dan Szymborski Posted: October 28, 2007 at 03:43 AM | 53 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. North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan Posted: October 28, 2007 at 04:36 AM (#2596806)
Average CF doesn't apply to the A's, apparently. At least until Szym fixes it and everyone wonders what the hell I'm talking about.
   2.   Posted: October 28, 2007 at 04:52 AM (#2596850)
Daric Barton*   22  .280  .369  .440 137 504  73 141 42  3 11  62  68  58  3  2 
Kiko Calero   33   3.74   3   2  58   0 53.0   50   22   4   21   48 
Danny Haren   27   3.91  14  11  34  34   221.0  224   96  29   47  174 


Mark Mulder
*  30   5.06   7  11  24  24   144.0  162   81  18   59   79 


...ouchies...
   3.   Posted: October 28, 2007 at 04:58 AM (#2596867)
Daric Barton*   22  .280  .369  .440 137 504  73 141 42  3 11  62  68  58  3  2 
Kiko Calero   33   3.74   3   2  58   0 53.0   50   22   4   21   48 
Danny Haren   27   3.91  14  11  34  34   221.0  224   96  29   47  174 


Mark Mulder
*  30   5.06   7  11  24  24   144.0  162   81  18   59   79 


...ouchies...
   4. greenback calls it soccer Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:35 AM (#2596898)
I'd take the under on 144 innings for Mulder.

Why is Jeremy Brown listed as a 1b? Seems like a perfect backup c for a team with a good defensive starting catcher, not that any such teams come to mind readily. If you have to pay $50K to the A's in the Rule 5 draft, then so be it, because Brown's still making league minimum.
   5. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:44 AM (#2596900)
Spanos pounded the ball in College (Indiana IIRC) but never really has gotten things going to the same degree in the pros. In particular his walk rate has been all over the place.
   6. Dan Szymborski Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:53 AM (#2596906)
Accidentally listed Brown at 1B (the projections are still right, though).
   7. DCW3 Posted: October 28, 2007 at 06:36 AM (#2596926)
And Jack Cust, who strikes out way too much to ever hit major league pitching and who statheads don't realize won't ever hit in the majors, was made mincemeat out of by AL hurlers to the tune of finishing 8th in the AL in OPS+.

That might even underrate him--he was fifth in OPS+ if you use one-year park factors.
   8. rfloh Posted: October 28, 2007 at 12:21 PM (#2596954)
Dan Johnson* 1b 28 .267 .369 .462
Travis Buck* rf 23 .283 .360 .458

That's a pretty optimistic looking projection for Johnson. It would require him to set career highs in OBP and SLG. His career high OBP was 355 in 2005, career high in SLG was 451, also in 2005.

The projection for Buck OTOH, looks somewhat pessimistic.
   9. Computers are smart Posted: October 28, 2007 at 02:16 PM (#2597000)
people that had been declaring the green-and-gold doomed every year for the last 5 or so years

are different than people who have been declaring 15+ starts for Harden (over roughly the same time period) how?
   10. Champions Table Posted: October 28, 2007 at 03:01 PM (#2597031)
are different than people who have been declaring 15+ starts for Harden (over roughly the same time period) how?


I would really rather this be constructed as: "How are they different than people ...?" Also, no more starting posts with "Um ..." And "Really?" has worn very thin, too.

Other than that, I love you guys.
   11. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: October 28, 2007 at 03:25 PM (#2597052)
Spanos pounded the ball in College (Indiana IIRC)
You do. On the other hand, he was brutal with the glove there - I'm surprised he's gotten as good as he has over at third (not even faint praise).
As for his walk rate as a pro, it's been pretty consistent, apart from this season's collapse.
   12. Darren Posted: October 28, 2007 at 04:33 PM (#2597111)
I would really rather this be constructed as: "How are they different than people ...?" Also, no more starting posts with "Um ..." And "Really?" has worn very thin, too.


Posts that start with "So-and-so says hi" say hi.
   13. Darren Posted: October 28, 2007 at 04:34 PM (#2597112)
I don't know what's more impressive about Barton, that he's a 22-year-old with a projected OBP of .369 or how absolutely frightening his swing looked when I saw him. He gets his money's worth.
   14. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 28, 2007 at 04:45 PM (#2597122)
I would really rather this be constructed as: "How are they different than people ...?" Also, no more starting posts with "Um ..." And "Really?" has worn very thin, too.

Also people saying "I don't know if you're joking, but..." -- that's sometimes the most condescending thing you can possibly say.
   15. Klutts! Posted: October 28, 2007 at 04:56 PM (#2597131)
What about this lineup asgainst RHPs:

Buck RF
Barton 1B
Bonds DH
Cust LF
Swisher CF
Chavez 3B
Ellis 2B
Crosby SS
Suzuki C

In late innnings, after Cust gets his 1 HR, 1 BB and 2 SOs, Denorfia goes to CF with Swish going to left. Denorfia would start against lefties. If Crosby and Chavez both could hit Chavez' ZIPS and assuming reasonable contributions from Buck and Suzuki, I wonder if this team doesn't make the playoffs. That Barton projection looks low.
   16. Champions Table Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:11 PM (#2597137)
I recently re-read the bulk of Moneyball, just for fun. It got me thinking about OBP/walks/number of pitches seen, and how that affects the length of games.

My main question: Even if it's accepted that that particular approach optimizes offensive performance, is it possible/likely that fans would grow tired of it since it's not aesthetically pleasing? Granted, Jack Cust's main job isn't to entertain the fans. It's to help win ballgames. But if somehow you had nine Jack Custs, you'd be looking at games that lasted longer than Bonzo's live versions of "Moby Dick."

Granted, one way for pitchers to control this is to throw more strikes. And to take less time between pitches. And it wouldn't hurt if the commercial breaks were a little shorter.

And, obviously, I'd rather watch a 4:19 baseball game than a crisply played NBA or NHL game. Baseball's the doo-doo.

Just typing out loud ...

(Fun fact: Reggie Willits led the majors in P/PA in 2007.)
   17. Darren Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:16 PM (#2597139)
My main question: Even if it's accepted that that particular approach optimizes offensive performance, is it possible/likely that fans would grow tired of it since it's not aesthetically pleasing? Granted, Jack Cust's main job isn't to entertain the fans. It's to help win ballgames. But if somehow you had nine Jack Custs, you'd be looking at games that lasted longer than Bonzo's live versions of "Moby Dick."


I would guess that fans would grow tired of this approach, but the facts don't back that up. Both the Red Sox and Yankees have had offenses built around this sort of approach and in both cases their games drag on forever. But both have ridiculously good attendance and TV ratings. Fans never get tired of winning, even "boring" winning.
   18. Champions Table Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:51 PM (#2597156)
Well put, Darren.
   19. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:55 PM (#2597159)

...ouchies...


But then there's

Dan Meyer* 26 5.95 3 7 24 21 115.0 134 76 21 46 63
   20. A triple short of the cycle Posted: October 28, 2007 at 05:57 PM (#2597162)
And conversely, the classic A's game is a low-scoring affair that's over in two and a half hours. Especially when the opponent is the Angels or when Blanton is starting. It's like baseball from an earlier era.
   21. TheUFactor Posted: October 28, 2007 at 06:10 PM (#2597172)
You have Cust projected for a .361 BABIP, I don't think there's any hitter in baseball that can be projected to do much over .330. Are you not regressing BABIP enough?
   22. TheUFactor Posted: October 28, 2007 at 06:45 PM (#2597184)
If you knock his BABIP down to .333 (106 hits), his line becomes .247/.381/.453
   23. dr. bleachers Posted: October 28, 2007 at 06:56 PM (#2597189)
If you knock his BABIP down to .333 (106 hits), his line becomes .247/.381/.453

He doesn't have that many non-HR hits to begin with.

He's projected to hit about .410 on-contact here, which is lower than his rate so far in limited MLB action (.420). In the minors it was slightly higher at .424, but I have no idea how that should translate. I'm still more skeptical of the Howard projection in this regard.
   24. andrewberg Posted: October 28, 2007 at 06:56 PM (#2597190)
read the discussion about year to year babip in the Howard part of the phils report. His projection is even more eye-popping.
   25. Iwakuma Chameleon (jonathan) Posted: October 28, 2007 at 08:10 PM (#2597215)
I still feel like Gaudin will eventually improve his control and settle in as a consistently 4.00 ERA-ish pitcher. I'd be surprised if it's really that high next year.
   26. The importance of being Ernest Riles Posted: October 28, 2007 at 08:17 PM (#2597218)
20: You're making me nostalgic for the Mulder/Buehrle matchups of yesteryear.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA200308080.shtml (1:53)
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/OAK/OAK200305060.shtml (1:49)
   27. Dan Szymborski Posted: October 28, 2007 at 10:35 PM (#2597267)
I'm confused by the Ryan Howard references - his projected BABIP is .344, which is nearly 10 points below his career BABIP. His BABIP is only eyepopping if you calculate his BABIP with HRs in the numerator and denominator and compare it to BABIPs calculated without HRs in the numerator or dominator, as was done in that thread.

Cust has an extreme type of approach that results in a very high BABIP but sacrifices BIP - it's as simple as that. Hell, his big season actually brought his line drive percentage in the majors from his 150 PA cups of coffee down!
   28. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: October 28, 2007 at 11:06 PM (#2597277)
Posts that start with "So-and-so says hi" "Fixed" say hi.

Fixed.
   29. Joey B. "disrespects the A" Posted: October 28, 2007 at 11:21 PM (#2597283)
The most notable thing about the A's disappointing, injury-filled 2007 season is how many blind squirrels it brought out of the woodwork, people that had been declaring the green-and-gold doomed every year for the last 5 or so years, and when the team finally has a real down season, declaring how smart they are.

Yeah, those people are about as annoying as the lemming-like rats who jump off the ship when it's going down and swim away, to not be heard from again for a while.

In any event, I'll go and make the declaration now (months ahead of time) that if they can't get a full season of a healthy Harden, this team won't be that great next year either. They weren't really as bad as their record this season, but by now I would think that it would be pretty obvious to just about everyone that there's nothing particularly special about this group.
   30.   Posted: October 28, 2007 at 11:32 PM (#2597289)

are different than people who have been declaring 15+ starts for Harden (over roughly the same time period) how?


So how many times are you going to make posts like this before you plan on R'ing TFD?
   31. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: October 29, 2007 at 12:43 AM (#2597365)
Dan, shouldn't Brown be projected as a catcher? Also, could we get a Snelling in TB (or Oak, whatever) projection?
   32. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: October 29, 2007 at 01:59 AM (#2597497)
Derek Jeter has a career BABIP of over .360. Jim Thome (a much better benchmark for Cust) is near .360, so it certainly is plenty possible to have Cust's at around .340.

It does have some randomness to it, but not nearly as much as pitchers.
   33. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: October 29, 2007 at 02:06 AM (#2597519)
"So how many times are you going to make posts like this before you plan on R'ing TFD?"

I know, it's so tiresome. When I did projections, no matter how much I stressed that predicting playing time accurately was so far beyond the realm of what you could do statistically, people would still complain about assigning all those at bats to Greg LaRocca or something.

Dan should put that disclaimer on every one of these posts. Oh that's right, he does.
   34. TheUFactor Posted: October 29, 2007 at 02:40 AM (#2597623)
From his BB-Ref page, I come up with .330 for Thome. Of course I knew there's a BABIP skill for batters, but I was under the impression that the skill ranged between figures of around .270 to .330. I hadn't seen a career figure over 5000+ AB anywhere near .360 until I checked Jeter just now (hadn't realized he strikes out quite that much, either).
   35. dr. bleachers Posted: October 29, 2007 at 10:02 AM (#2598467)
His BABIP is only eyepopping if you calculate his BABIP with HRs in the numerator and denominator and compare it to BABIPs calculated without HRs in the numerator or dominator, as was done in that thread.

Maybe someone did that, but the list in #36 of that thread is apples to apples. I just happen to think on-contact BA for all or nothing hitters is kind of interesting, and I haven't seen much on it. I didn't mean to make some big thing out of Howard's projection.
   36. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: October 29, 2007 at 12:38 PM (#2598499)
The offense looks decent to me and has the chance to be pretty good. I think Barton and Buck will outdo those projections and Beane hasn't begun to work on CF and SS yet. This team will score some runs. The pitching makes me nervous and I'm counting on nothing from Rich Harden and neither should the A's. Dan Johnson's line is way optimisic but I doubt he'll even be on the team next year so no worries there.

The big questions: Who are the 4th and 5th starters?
What happens at short?
Is Chris Denorfia going to be healthy and ready for CF? If not, then who?
Who will the A's bring in? My vote is for Fukudome, but the chances of that are approaching zero.

I'm optimistic about the team. Chavvy finally got the surgery he obviously needed. The offense finally bottomed out and looks ready for a resurgence. The Angels should still be heavy favorites next year, but Oakland should be strong enough to challenge.

Also, I like how Bowen and Brown are projected to just kill Suzuki. That'll also be interesting to watch play out.
   37. Computers are smart Posted: October 29, 2007 at 03:42 PM (#2598737)
Sorry to ruffle feathers with my wording. My point, however, remains unchanged.
   38. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: October 29, 2007 at 11:39 PM (#2599404)
CAS,

Dan's not claiming that he can predict how much Haren's going to pitch. In fact he's explicitly said he can't (or at least won't).

I used to just give all hitters (non-catchers) 640 PAs and all starting pitchers 800 BFP. That made everything really clear, but Dan is doing more by least acknowledging Haren's injury problems in the projection.
   39. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: October 29, 2007 at 11:49 PM (#2599413)
TUF,

You're right on Thome, I miscalculated. Manny Ramirez's is .342. Michael Young is at .341. It's obviously still early and this will probably come down, but Miguel Cabrera's is .358.

So yeah they're out there and so it isn't totally crazy to have Cust's up in that range.
   40. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: October 29, 2007 at 11:59 PM (#2599428)
I remember one of the worst trades I ever made in my Diamond Mind League was based on overplaying the hitters HBIP hand: I traded Bobby's, Abreu for Higginson following the 1998 season. Abreu had a HBIP rate in 1998 of .398 and Higginson had a .307 and had posted three very solid seasons in a row. I figured that alone made up for the age gap.

OOPS! Higginson went in the tank the next year with a .261 HBIP and Abreu cut his strikeout rate and still posted a HBIP rate of .395. For their careers, Higginson was .293 and Abreu's is .356. Well at least I didn't trade him for Kevin Stocker.
   41. sardonic Posted: October 30, 2007 at 12:03 AM (#2599434)
In any event, I'll go and make the declaration now (months ahead of time) that if they can't get a full season of a healthy Harden, this team won't be that great next year either. They weren't really as bad as their record this season, but by now I would think that it would be pretty obvious to just about everyone that there's nothing particularly special about this group.


I agree with this. That was basically the situation with this season's A's team as well.
   42. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: October 30, 2007 at 12:04 AM (#2599435)
Ichiro is .359 career as well.
   43. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: October 30, 2007 at 01:03 AM (#2599506)
Any way to tell how Duchscherer would do as a starter?
   44. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: October 30, 2007 at 01:20 AM (#2599517)
Also, I like how Bowen and Brown are projected to just kill Suzuki. That'll also be interesting to watch play out.
I wouldn't say that Bowen or Brown (projected here as a 1B, not as a C - downgrade the numbers slightly accordingly) are killing Suzuki - his offensive projections aren't that much worse than theirs. Add to that Suzuki's better arm (I'd grade it as Average, with the potential to be a Vg over time), youth, and already having the job - and I'd guess he'd keep it.
   45. greenback calls it soccer Posted: October 30, 2007 at 02:45 AM (#2599602)
Brown (projected here as a 1B, not as a C - downgrade the numbers slightly accordingly)


Post #6 in this thread contradicts this.
   46. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: October 30, 2007 at 03:16 AM (#2599631)
So it does, thank you.
   47. a wider scope of derision Posted: October 30, 2007 at 04:35 AM (#2599718)
I second the Doyle request.
   48. xbhaskarx Posted: October 30, 2007 at 05:12 AM (#2599778)
I third the Doyle request and second the Duke as SP request.
   49. a wider scope of derision Posted: October 30, 2007 at 07:15 PM (#2600483)
I'm guessing Dan is holding off on the Doyle projection to wait and see where he gets traded to in the next 5 minutes.
   50. AROM Posted: October 30, 2007 at 07:22 PM (#2600488)
Dan made his starter/reliever toy available for download, just look around the archives and I'm sure you can find it.
   51. Dan Szymborski Posted: October 30, 2007 at 09:28 PM (#2600648)
I want to finish the Yankees before I move on to the leftover projection requests.
   52. Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein Posted: October 31, 2007 at 12:06 AM (#2600757)
How did Jeremy Brown ever make it through waivers when he was dropped from the 40-man roster in May? He was never a stud, but looked like he could put up okay numbers for a catcher?
   53. Dan Szymborski Posted: October 31, 2007 at 05:25 PM (#2601542)
Well, he's a rather bleh defensive catcher and he hurts any possible synergy between his team and Jordache/Levi/Wrangler.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dock Ellis on Acid
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.5552 seconds
47 querie(s) executed