|
|
|
Transaction Oracle— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen
Friday, November 18, 2005
2006 ZiPS Projections - Los Angeles Angels
Name P AVG OBP SPC G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS
Guerrero rf .327 .400 .571 142 538 98 176 31 2 32 111 61 57 12 3
Rivera rf .286 .336 .460 125 413 52 118 25 1 15 60 33 50 2 5
Figgins# 3b .297 .355 .404 154 617 98 183 24 12 6 68 58 94 44 16
DaVanon# cf .265 .360 .393 119 298 47 79 13 2 7 36 45 54 15 6
McPherson* 3b .249 .316 .493 119 430 75 107 23 5 24 77 40 138 8 6
Kennedy* 2b .286 .353 .388 138 448 59 128 21 2 7 48 39 74 17 6
Kotchman* 1b .273 .337 .408 138 458 64 125 24 1 12 62 36 56 2 1
Anderson* lf .285 .315 .446 138 551 62 157 33 1 18 89 26 80 2 2
Molina c .284 .322 .430 115 398 39 113 19 0 13 62 22 37 0 2
Quinlan 1b .288 .330 .412 102 330 43 95 19 2 6 41 21 53 4 3
Salmon rf .240 .344 .382 119 400 46 96 23 2 10 53 58 70 2 1
Morales# 1b .270 .307 .429 98 352 54 95 11 0 15 51 15 58 1 0
Izturis# ss .286 .350 .366 125 440 61 126 18 4 3 40 41 45 16 10
Kendrick 2b .265 .304 .423 101 392 75 104 24 4 10 54 11 57 17 6
Erstad* 1b .274 .325 .368 134 532 75 146 28 2 6 60 40 89 11 2
Cabrera ss .264 .317 .379 140 541 66 143 31 2 9 60 42 50 16 3
Merloni 3b .270 .341 .374 67 163 20 44 9 1 2 20 16 36 1 3
Gorneault lf .249 .305 .420 134 481 80 120 26 4 16 68 36 124 6 5
Napoli c .210 .311 .403 135 447 78 94 18 1 22 69 59 158 7 4
Wood ss .244 .288 .418 133 495 75 121 26 3 18 66 27 132 8 3
Aybar# ss .270 .311 .371 137 523 87 141 18 7 7 51 19 57 39 20
Pride* lf .229 .305 .364 77 231 30 53 12 2 5 28 24 57 4 4
Allen* lf .235 .294 .377 129 438 60 103 17 3 13 52 38 84 7 5
Callaspo# ss .262 .300 .352 141 542 71 142 23 1 8 54 30 30 14 9
Prieto* cf .249 .329 .320 112 381 55 95 13 4 2 35 40 48 14 12
Mathis c .223 .281 .378 119 421 61 94 19 2 14 52 32 99 3 1
Sorensen# 2b .254 .318 .320 106 347 55 88 13 2 2 31 34 68 9 8
Molina c .235 .281 .344 72 183 17 43 6 1 4 21 10 42 2 0
Willits# cf .250 .317 .305 132 488 68 122 15 3 2 37 42 95 25 16
Finley* cf .223 .281 .359 134 476 51 106 17 3 14 61 37 79 7 8
Paul c .216 .267 .301 64 153 15 33 4 0 3 15 11 35 1 2
Budde c .195 .244 .296 94 328 37 64 10 1 7 30 18 77 2 2
Name W L ERA G GS INN H ER HR BB K
K-Rod 5 1 2.55 67 0 74.0 46 21 4 32 109
Shields 11 5 3.29 63 4 112.0 96 41 7 38 105
Donnelly 6 3 3.63 59 0 62.0 54 25 6 20 59
Escobar 11 7 3.91 31 25 168.0 153 73 14 65 153
Byrd 12 9 4.02 28 28 177.0 191 79 21 26 91
Lackey 13 10 4.11 33 33 206.0 204 94 19 66 174
Gregg 4 3 4.13 45 5 96.0 93 44 9 34 88
Colon 16 13 4.23 33 33 219.0 218 103 30 59 157
Santana 13 11 4.24 30 30 172.0 171 81 19 56 132
Dunn 7 6 4.40 48 5 86.0 76 42 8 46 87
Washburn* 10 9 4.40 29 29 174.0 181 85 22 49 99
Weaver 6 5 4.56 15 15 75.0 74 38 12 25 75
Jones 3 2 4.58 39 0 53.0 52 27 9 17 51
Hensley 2 3 4.65 41 0 62.0 62 32 11 18 62
Yan 2 3 4.74 57 0 74.0 77 39 9 29 54
Saunders* 9 10 4.98 28 28 159.0 180 88 22 47 95
Shell 8 10 4.99 27 27 164.0 180 91 27 49 124
Moseley 5 5 5.01 18 18 97.0 107 54 13 34 57
Bootcheck 7 8 5.08 28 26 156.0 172 88 23 53 96
Woods* 6 7 5.09 35 19 129.0 136 73 20 50 92
Cyr* 4 5 5.17 29 12 94.0 104 54 14 34 60
Christiansen* 3 3 5.17 62 0 40.0 44 23 4 18 20
James 2 5 6.16 23 13 92.0 115 63 19 31 38
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 18, 2005 at 06:54 PM | 38 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Related News:
|
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's aunt's sorry like Aziz2012 ZiPS Projections - Kansas City Royals (31 - 1:51pm, Mar 23)Last: hokieneerPirates - Acquire Burnett (10 - 11:09pm, Feb 20)Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)2012 ZiPS Projections - Pittsburgh Pirates (41 - 10:02am, Feb 20)Last: Dangerous Dean2012 ZiPS Projections - Minnesota Twins (31 - 8:53pm, Feb 17)Last: A Random 8-Year-Old Eskimo2012 ZiPS Projections - Boston Red Sox (46 - 4:41pm, Feb 17)Last: Jose is an Absurd Sultan2012 ZiPS Projections - San Diego Padres (29 - 2:33pm, Feb 17)Last: Dan Szymborski2012 ZiPS Projections - Arizona Diamondbacks (31 - 2:03am, Feb 14)Last: Dan Szymborski2012 ZiPS Projections - Texas Rangers (21 - 12:43pm, Feb 10)Last: DEF: selfish min-maxer2012 ZiPS Projections - Miami Marlins (31 - 8:16pm, Feb 07)Last: Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome2012 ZiPS Projections - Cleveland Indians (19 - 10:18pm, Feb 02)Last: DevinM2012 ZiPS Projections - Atlanta Braves (28 - 6:25pm, Jan 31)Last: Spahn Insane
|
|
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. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: November 18, 2005 at 07:27 PM (#1737449)1. Hopefully the Jeff Mathis fans realize how much he would flat out suck starting full time. We're talking about a guy who might not break a 650 OPS.
2. Orlando Cabrera is worthless.
3. This is the sorriest group of hitters I've ever seen. LAA is going nowhere next year. In fact, they shouldn't have gone anywhere this year.
4. Shields isn't going to start OMG ZIPS is stupid!
his career mark is .283/.331/.452 so why do the Zips projections seem high?
Juan Rivera, for whatever reason, is a player who always seems to be perceived as being worse than he actually is. I'm not saying he's great or anything- but my guess is that if you asked 20 people to give his avg/obp/slg (without looking it up) the average response would look like .260/.315/.400.
Part of teh reason could be the reverse LoDuca thing he has going on:
Career pre ASB: .246 .291 .401 .692
Career post ASB: .313 .363 .493 .856
He's always hit well enough to be a regular when he starts- when he sits a lot, gets platooned or PHs his bat turns off. He's had this pattern every single year- yet people keep insisting he can't start he has to be a sub/4th OF.
2. Yes he is. Hopefully he's traded after 2006 to make room for Wood or Aybar.
Its not like the Angels don't think he can start, they just have too little space. They don't think he's a CF. If Anderson went down I don't think they'd have any objections to him playing every day in left.
The numbers don't tell you everything. As I'm sure you know, he's got a history of causing real problems in the clubhouse.
I meant that it seemed like the high end of his projection, not that it seemed wrong; I can see him doing it, but I think that's about as good as he gets.
I actually like Rivera quite a bit, and I wish he were our starting LF this year.
This is the sorriest group of hitters I've ever seen. LAA is going nowhere next year. In fact, they shouldn't have gone anywhere this year.
Well, there is that dirt hill in the middle of the infield, and the things that happen there are usually pretty important.
Does refusing to accept Mr. K's "apology" count as such an incident?
Or maybe the Angels just have really predictable hitters.
I don't know ... even if they scored the same amount of runs in 2006, they would only drop about 8 games in their Pythagorean projection (from 93 wins to 85).
A lot will depend on what they do with the offense.
Izturis projects to be better at the plate than Cabrera.
Yes, Rivera can play. He only played 4 games in CF in 2005, so they don't seem to believe (probably correctly) that he can cover the position even when they didn't have very good alternatives.
Finley, Kennedy, Donnelly, Hensley and Moseley for Manny.
Their pitching is good, no doubt, but they overperformed. Their EQR allowed last year was 680. They gave up 640 runs. As far as I can tell, they're worse than Oakland and not appreciably better than Texas. We'll see what happens.
I do suspect they are likely to regress, but a lot of that can likley be abated by playing an optimal lineup (i.e. Erstad in CF or on the bench), not that optimal is likely to happen ...
The Angels left Napoli available a year ago and no one took him. Now that he's another year closer to helping as a reserve, it was smart to keep him. Rafael Rodriguez wasn't protected and could be stashed away by another team, even though he's probably a couple of years away. Reliever Bob Zimmermann is another candidate to be taken in the Rule 5 draft. Nov. 18 - 6:15 pm et
Angels sent RHP Dustin Moseley outright to Triple-A Salt Lake.
Moseley, acquired from the Reds for Ramon Ortiz a year ago, battled arm problems and went 4-6 with a 5.03 ERA in 17 starts for Salt Lake. It still might have been a good idea for some club to claim him off waivers. He's a potential fourth or fifth starter, and if he's healthy, he's not far away from being ready. Nov. 18 - 6:08 pm et
Angels waived RHP Matt Hensley.
Hensley got to collect a major league salary while spending the entire year on the DL rehabbing from surgery to repair a torn labrum. He'll probably compete for a job in another team's bullpen next spring. Nov. 18 - 6:06 pm et
He's no Derrick Turnbow. Sorensen, who turns 29 in January, hit .303/.372/.383 in 287 AB for Triple-A Salt Lake last season. He'd be a pretty weak option as a utilityman. Nov. 18 - 6:59 pm et
The Angels's hitting should be better next year with full(er) seasons from Rivera, McPherson and Kotchman, perhaps Morales stepping in (who should also out-hit that prediction). Figgins, Kennedy, and Vlad should be about the same. Garret Anderson and Orlando Cabrera might hit a bit better, at the least shouldn't be any worse than last year. Erstad and Finley...well, let's hope they're shipped. Only Molina for Mathis should be a downgrade offensively, and maybe not as bad as people think.
p.s. Molina for Mathis is the classic "step back next year, then step forward the year after," sorta like the Athletics did with their pitching staff, and barely at that. Despite getting bagged on for not being as good a prospect as he was a couple years ago, Mathis should still be a good player over the next 10+ years. Let's not forget that he's pretty young, and I think has a good chance to fill out as a hitter over the next five years.
Well, my analysis didn't have Washburn for 2006. It did for The Wyrd, who I believe the Angels will re-sign.
I agree with the second part; while the rotation should still be good, it is unreasonable to expect them to be as good as last year.
I think he'll turn out to be something like Mike Leiberthal or Ramon Hernandez, which once he hits his prime is a step up from Molina.
I don't think my system tells me anything that I can't get from downloading ZIPS. So why do I bother doing it? Because its fun.
grich, it's always a good idea to expect any pitcher to regress, especially if he's only had one season of a particular quality, regarless of his age. While Lackey has the "stuff" to sustain it, so have many, many who didn't, from Rick Ankiel to Bobby Witt.
Well, considering what he did in AAA this year, I'd disagree. Also, why do you capitalize boring and dumb?
In other words, reading into the statistical record a bit deeper than yearly totals AND knowing something about the PERSON and their history allows us to get a better idea of how a player is LIKELY to perform. I think 2005 represents what we'll see from Lackey over the next 5-8 years, with some fluctuation. But it certainly looks like he has "arrived." In fact, he'll probably be the Angels's best starter next year, unless Kelvim Escobar somehow manages to start 30 games...and that's even if Bart "Mr Overrated" Colon's injury heals.
And Spivey, I was capitalizing Dumb and Boring because I was invoking the deeper archetypal meanings of the words ala Plato's Ideals. Computer-only statistical predictions are Dumb mainly because they doesn't take into account Personhood, which is almost as bad as trying to figure out the meaning of existence solely from its physical components (iow, it is not only enormously reductive but is a category error).
All that said, there is nothing wrong with having a bit of harmless fun, and that is what stat predictions are.
and this shows five better next year?
Those numbers for OC look better than I expected. Izturis did better at the plate this year.
and this shows five better next year?
Washburn's k/9 trend: 5.86; 6.07; 5.12; 5.18; 4.77
Washburn's k/bb trend: 2.33; 2.35; 2.19; 2.15; 1.84
I think he's reaching the point where a significant dropoff is very likely, and almost certain within the next few years.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main