Royals 2009 Zips - Royals Review

ZiPS is actually very slightly more optimistic than CHONE. Eyeballing it now, ZiPS actually projects a higher OPS for all the regulars except for Butler. Pitching, ZiPS and CHONE are practically identical for Greinke and Meche, with ZiPS liking Rosa and Wood better and CHONE liking Bannister and Hochevar better.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 3:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Meh. How am I supposed to take seriously projection that says

JR House would be a better big league hitter this season than Billy Butlr? Come on.

realistically speaking

by slayor on Feb 21, 2009 3:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Why not? Butler’s interesting because of his potential in years to come, not his performance right now. House can hit and this is as good as he’ll get (a below-average 1B).

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 4:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

signed,

House’s career .167/.206/.367 line.

Dude is as proven as they come.

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Feb 21, 2009 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Projections for guys with little or no major league data are always going to be the most speculative. If youre talking about a 30-year-old, 7-year MLB vet, then the projection is quite reliable. But for a guy like House, every system is going to have a pretty unreliable projection. But this doesn’t mean that we should throw all of the projections out. Just recognize what the strengths, weaknesses and limitations of projections are. Don’t just assume that because a projection for a player is lower than you think it should be that this means that the whole system is BS. The track record of PECOTA and ZiPS in particular show that these projections are quite good and quite accurate. They are not, of course, divinely revealed truth, nor are they guarantees of what will happen. They show you what past performance points to as the most likely outcome. Might something different happen? Sure.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i pretty much agree

I was disputing this: “House can hit”

we don’t know that. his AAA stats say he should. but we still don’t know. i would be absolutely FLOORED if he was the 4th best hitter on the team.

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Feb 21, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think its a decent projection based on his minor league numbers

And I also predict he will not get a single at bat in KC, while Buck and Olivo combine for a .300 OBA while being paid $6 million.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 21, 2009 4:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

House can’t really catch, though.

I have to say I’m surprised at the objections to the House projection. ZIPS hardly projected him to contend for the MVP but to be a below-average 1B. That says more of the lack of star-hitting on the Royals than any special ability of House.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Pasted from last year:

Redbird85 wrote:

> Your predictions really suck. you cant possibly tell me that ryan ludwick could have a .800
> OPS in the majors. he’s a minor league and in the minors for a reason and you have him
> hitting like a good player. john moziliak would be laughing at you if he even read your gay
> ass site HAHAHAH

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs

nice

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

that really means nothing

Ludwick got a chance and broke out. He really has nothing to do with House at all.

True or False: We know for a fact that "House can hit"

That is what I am disputing. He has not hit yet and he is 30 years old. He may or may not hit. I am NOT disputing the projection. The projection really doesn’t mean anything in the long run anyways. I could really give a shit what it says. But that’s aside the point, right?

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Feb 21, 2009 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He hit in the minors. We don’t know if he can hit in the majors.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

which is my point

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Feb 21, 2009 5:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

60 at-bats, a quarter of them pinch-hits? Chicken bones would be a more reliable predictor than that.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

heh

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

also, I'm pretty sure you just stumbled on the advanced projections used by Dayton Moore, et. al.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 4:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't buy it

Much too pessimistic. That looks like close to a worst-case scenario.

It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.

by Juancho on Feb 21, 2009 4:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'm okay with the hitter projections

But yea, the pitchers seem way too pessimistic. I’ll eat my hat if Greinke, Banny, Hooch and Davies all suck that badly.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 21, 2009 4:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Have to agree with you there

I fully understand why Greinke’s projections are where they are. Look at his last 3 years of data. But when a player everyone thought would be great turns a corner at his age, I think it’s for real. Meche’s projection is ok. I think it is fair and within the realm of likelihood.

The really bizarre thing is this projection likes Blake Wood more than Kyle Davies for 2009. Wow. I like Wood as a prospect, but didn’t do so well in his first taste of AA this year. And yet he’d pitch better than Davies? Bizarre. I understand the low reliability for projections of minor leaguers, but how on earth could it project Wood to have an ERA under 5.50 at this point in his career? And, given that Cortes pitched better than Wood in AA this year (both in their first season), and with Cortes being younger, how does Cortes project to be worse than Wood this year? Clearly I’m missing something.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cortes didn’t pitch better than Wood. Cortes allowed homers at 40% higher rate than Wood. He walked batters at about a 40% higher rate than Wood. Wood struck out slightly more batters.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Though the House projection is….uh. The rest make sense, but the pitching is too pessimistic.

It’d be cool to see House get a shot….but it’s hard to see how that’d happen without major injuries.

Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.

by NHZ on Feb 22, 2009 2:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It kind of sounds like House is a 1B/DH

I guess he can play catcher about the same way I could. I could wear the gear and catch some of the pitched balls, but that’s about it.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 22, 2009 2:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course,

that’s how BamBam plays first and he never really hurt us last year.

I just got back from your mom's basement.

by Warden11 on Feb 22, 2009 3:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

He’s an Earl Weaver back-up catcher….a guy you put into the line-up to get some offense.

Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.

by NHZ on Feb 23, 2009 1:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The problem is that a backup catcher usually ends up catching 30-50 games

And that’s even when you’ve got a clear #1 catcher and there aren’t injury problems. So a #2 catcher needs to be able to actually handle the position. All I know about House is what I’ve read and everything I’ve seen says that he can hit, but he’s genuinely horrible defensively at catcher.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 23, 2009 2:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, I definitely agree.

House’s defensive reputation precedes him.

Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.

by NHZ on Feb 23, 2009 4:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I have a feeling

…that he is going to be in Omaha in case Olivo or Buck goes on the 15-day DL. If that happens, the remaining major league catcher can start nearly all of the games, with House around just as an emergency back up, to come into games in garbage time and perhaps to pinch hit. But if there is a longer DL stint, they’d probably go with Pena, who Moore/Hillman would be more comfortable sending out there to make 20-25% of the starts, which is about what a normal backup catcher would do.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 23, 2009 4:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

House > Huber?

House .291/.346/.436
Huber .244/.303/.386

Boo, I say.

by marbotty on Feb 22, 2009 8:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Zips was pretty bullish on a few Royals

Mark Teahen .272 .341 .432
Kala Kaaihue .258 .345 .432
Shane Costa .279 .326 .420
Carlos Rosa 4.34 ERA in 103 Inngs

All those projections were higher than I would have expected.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Feb 22, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

When did the Royals get Kila's brother?

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Feb 22, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Is This Another

Relative?

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Feb 22, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, Dan

I really like the new way of doing “matrices.”

Not to harp, but is there any way we can talk you into switching from OPS+ in favor of (or in addition to) something like wOBA or linear weights (which is basically what wOBA is, as you probably know). For example, you have Jacobs with an OPS+ of 106, and Gordon with 104. However, setting the lgwOBA at .332 and your projections, I have Gordon with a .344 wOBA and Jacobs at .342. Over a full season, that’s less than a run difference, but still, you do have Gordon projected as the better hitter, but not according to OPS due to its well-known undervaluation of walks and overvaluation of homers.

Just a suggestion. Great stuff as always…. now to convert it all to RAR….

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 5:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I’ll probably take a longer look at what stats I do in the reports for next offseason, but I’m in a huge rush at the moment to get the first complete build out on March 1st. Don’t forget, I also will release these in a spreadsheet so that one can use whatever statistic you like in the meantime. I’ve been using OPS+ mainly because it’s the most prominent summary stat that Sean has on BR, which enables people to instantly reference what’s good and what’s not.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

good to know

again, just a suggestion. Appreciate the suggestions. Wish I could say I “liked” them, but that’s not your problem, but the Royals’.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

"appreciate the projections"

sigh

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm a member of the ZiPS Facebook "Group," too. DO we get the spreadsheet early?

Don’t check FB much… may I’d already have these.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Projections get put up there early (Royals were up yesterday), but the spreadsheet will probably go up same time as BTF since there’s no additional step I don’t have to take the time to make a pretty formatted report.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

are they going up on FanGraphs once the big spreadsheet is done?

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tony Pena comp

Mario Mendoza

That is awesome.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 21, 2009 5:04 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Gordon

had a 110 OPS+ last year. Is this projection saying he is going to get worse or am I not reading it properly?

by steady d on Feb 21, 2009 6:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The projection is basically flat

ZiPS projects him to be about the same as he was in 2008

2008 actual.351/.432
2009 ZiPS .343/.442

So, a little less OBP and a little more SLG. Of course OPS+ depends on the hitting environment which has been going down in recent years and some project to continue to go down. I would say that about the same OPS in 2009 would likely have a higher OPS+. But these are little things. The big thing is that even though we’re talking about a very talented player who is going from his age 24 season to his age 25 season, ZiPS projects no improvement. That seems more than a little counterintuitive to me. Dan?

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 6:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

thanks for clarifying

I was certainly hoping to see an improvement… perhaps significant. I think it’s not unreasonable to see his OBP improve… he seems to not get a lot of borderline calls… that might just be my own biased perception though.

by steady d on Feb 21, 2009 6:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dan already discussed this earlier re: Gordon and Teahen

click here

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wouldn't you think that a typical development curve would have Gordon improving in his age 25 season?

I don’t mean breaking out, or even a significant improvement necessarily. But, empirically speaking, is it usually the case that players hit their peak at 24 and then plateau after that? This is a rhetorical question because I know that the answer is no. Of course there are flame-outs who don’t follow the typical development curve, but is there any reason to believe Gordon would be one of those? I don’t think his statistical record, tools or his pedigree (for top prospect) would lead one to that conclusion. So I stand a bit confused about Gordon’s projection.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 7:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I would think so

but each system deals with those curves and player-specific regression differently.

I’ll just sketch out some info so we can get thoughts down. This is just impressionistic stuff. I’ve been thinking about projections lately (for defense, but that’s another story), so maybe my meandering will be of help to others. I certainly cede to others baseball and statistical knowledge. And, of course, Dan, Sean, etc. are masters of all this. I don’ t know the details of their systems.

I don’t have wOBA numbers for all projection systems yet (the ZiPS one is weird for me… I"ll have to see if I screwed something up, that spreadsheet is pretty old.) I won’t put in Gordon’s minor-league stuff. Keep in mind that wOBA numbers for projections will be scaled differently for projections than for historical stats (which use custom linear weights).

According to FanGraphs:

2007 age 23 .247/.314/.411, .317 wOBA
2008 age 24 .260/.351/.342, .344 wOBA

Let’s start with a very basic baseline projection for his age 25 year in 2009 that doesn’t use park factors, minor league stats, batted ball info, no player-specific stuff besides the raw stats, with weighted averags and minimal adjustment for aging.

Marcel .261/.341/.432 .337 wOBA

While this seems like “regression” on Gordon’s part, in the projection sense, it isn’t. For one thing, while it gives greater weight to 2008 (“5,” in a 5-4-3), the only other year it considers is 2007 which is weighted “4” Average those, and Gordon’s closer to 2008, but since he’s above average, and no other record is there, Marcel’s regression to he mean takes him down yet further. So taking that all into account, there is still some progress for age (considering regression to the mean and the neare-averaging of 2007 and 2008 rates) — increases in contact (AVG), patience (OBP-BA), and ISO (yes, it’s about the same as 2008, but relative to the average…).

I need to go now, but here are the other system’s three slashes. Without doing the calculations right now again, they are all around

CHONE .265/.349/.440 (.350 wOBA)
ZiPS .259/.342/.442 (.344 wOBA)
PECOTA .258/.342/.457 (.350 wOBA last time I did it — all these includes steals)

They all regress differently, and who knows how. In all cases, we see about the same batting average (CHONE’s a bit higher). The walk rate doesn’t increases as much as we’d think — although that’s the sort of thing that generally is considered to continuing increasingly even after age 27, so maybe it’s more gradual. Same for isolated power (although PECOTA is much more.. bullish? Sorry guys….). Another thing about the walk rate/OBP — they might vary in how the consider HBPs, and also, good systems should leaves out IBBs.

My uneducated guess is that PECOTA is more “power positive” because of how it regresses to specific players — on Gordon’s case, his top four PECOTA comps are Pat Burrell, Eric Chavez, Troy Glaus, and Darrell Evans. All but Chavez were/are high-power, low-contact guys. Chavez, who knows. That’s probably a handedness things.

CHONE, at least, also takes player size into account when dealing with power projection, but not those specific.

Gotta go eat. I hope this is a discussion others get into. Dan, feel free to come show me how stupid I am.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 7:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I can explain a little better, mainly because I have the program right in front of me! Let me walk through Gordon’s projection, step-by-step (I’m condensing and simplifying in places)

ZiPS first asks the question to itself “What is the best estimation of Gordon’s ability at this moment?” It weights most recent years more heavily and decides that Gordon right now is most likely “truly” a 251/335/427 hitter.

Then it asks what Gordon would do next year and what it does is model likely results based on historical players. Instead of simply finding how all 25-year-olds fared relative to their weighted 22-24-year-old seasons, it tries to find how players with similar attributes fared. So ZiPS searches for players as close to Gordon as possible – left-handed third basemen that are going to be 25, solid power, walks, a lot of strikeouts, average speed, below-average BA, etc.

As we don’t have an infinite amount of players, we don’t get perfect matches. ZiPS weighs more similar players more than less similar players. It then creates a model for Gordon’s 2009 improvement/decline and has the most likely scenario as the one given, in which Gordon improves by 23 points of OPS from weighted age 22-24 to age 25.

Going forward, ZiPS sees Gordon improving to 267/348/462, 269/350/463, and eventually peaking in the 280/365/480 range for a few years.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 8:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting

I’m not saying your methodology is wrong. But don’t you find it odd that your projection sees Gordon improving over the longer term (apparently at ages 26, 27, 28 or so) but sees no improvement in his age 25 season? So basically he improves at age 24, pauses and has a very similar age 25 season and then improves again over the next three years. Do you really think that is likely, or just a quirk of your system which gives rise to a somewhat odd result?

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 9:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

probably 25 hasn't been a big jump year for guys historically

these things are not always perfectly linear

by royalsreview on Feb 21, 2009 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Non-linear development is common

Everybody has ups and downs and the curves aren’t necessarily smooth. But if his development curve is being projected based on so few players that you get this kind of very odd curve, then I don’t think enough comps are being used. Over a statistically significant sample, the age 25 season shows more improvement than the age 26, 27, etc. seasons. The development curve is more steep the younger the player is. As players age, the slope of the development curve decreases (becomes less steep) before peaking/plateauing and then declining.

In short, historically, there isn’t a plateau around 25, followed by improvement starting again. I don’t think there’s a good reason to ever expect this to happen (unless the player’s development is hampered by injury in that season).

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 9:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The thing is, ZiPS does have him improving – it’s just not having him improving from a single recent season but from a wider established level of play. You’re making the assumption that only his 2008 season is relevant and represents his base level of ability and thus any improvement should be from that.

Young players regress as well, it’s just that the point that they regress towards slowly increases..

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 22, 2009 8:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nerd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111111111111

I want simplistic answers: .300/.375/.550, 35/125.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Feb 22, 2009 4:20 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

cool

Thanks Dan, for your participation. I hope you know that above my comments were not supposed to be “speaking” for you, just giving some general comments on projection.

It’s interesting — while Gordon’s 2009 is projected to be a bit disappointing in the immediate, sense, there’s an “upside” in that if he does something like what ZiPs projects, we shouldn’t take it as “well, this is who he is,” because if ZiPS is right, the bigger improvements are yet to come. 365/480 is a very good line from a 3B, although people won’t recognize it as such as visions of A-Rod and David Wright dance through their heads.

I’ve got to get you to visit my posts on Driveline, now, since I “work” there.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 11:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

so many more questions abou the program... trying not to take advantage...

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 11:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Physical attributes

I’m not big on using them, at least with the data that we have. The problem we run into is that height and weight information tends to be very inconsistent and poorly collected, even today, and a player’s physical attributes are hard to describe in such a manner.

I mean, before I cut back on the beer, I was the exact same height and weight as Jerome Bettis. Anyone care to guess how similar we really were physically?

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 8:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

did you get a lot shorter or taller after you stopped drinking so much?

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 11:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i like my comment

“Gordon will be way better”

yep.

.275/.360/.500

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Feb 21, 2009 7:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

WRONG

.273/.375/.490

Don’t be so pessimietic, B-TCH

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Feb 21, 2009 7:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't know

that Tug Hulett was 6 years old. That’s a kid with some potential

by dn_311 on Feb 21, 2009 7:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yea

But we only have his rights til he hits puberty.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 21, 2009 8:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Looks like I never fixed Hulett after doing the Mariners report! I accidentally entered his birthdate into DMB as 2003. It’s a really unfortunate error, too, as Hulett’s little brother was killed at age 6.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com

by D.Szymborski on Feb 21, 2009 8:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Mitch Maier > Coco Crisp

That was my thinking the minute I read about the trade.

I am still working on learning to love the new guys.

BTW, a nice quick summary of the state of the franchise by Dan at the top of the article. I pretty well agree with everything found there.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Feb 21, 2009 8:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yea, I thought he was going to be much harsher

But his take was pretty much my opinion.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 21, 2009 9:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You know there's one thing that bothers me about all these projection systems

They all pretty much say the same thing. Here’s my new projection system. It’s called SIMPLE.

Use last year’s stats.

Or SIMPLE2.

Use a weighted average of the last 3 years, and take age into account.

Or SIMPLE3:

If player is 28, take last year’s stats.
If player is over 28, reduce last year’s stats by 10%
If player is under 28, increase last year’s stats by 10.
For minor league projections, predict a midseason callup, 75 games, and reduce last year’s stat line by half for games played, and then reduce by 20 for the MLB conversion. Add 7.5% to the reduction figure for every level the player jumps.
If a prospect is expected to make the leap to MLB for a full season, just reduce last year’s stat line by 20%.
Don’t forget to take age into account for prospects as well.

I wonder how well those would work. And they would seem to be just as legitimate as the other projections.

As a sample, SIMPLE3 projects Albert Pujols to be:

.321/.416/.588 w/ 33 HRs, 90 Runs and 104 RBIs.

by AxDxMx on Feb 21, 2009 9:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

10% increase or 10% decrease?

That would be projecting big improvements and big regressions from over 90% of major league players.

That would be as legitimate as the other projections? I guess it depends on what you mean by “legitimate.” If you mean “accurate” then no, not at all. Not even close. How common are 10% stat declines across the board for 29-32 year olds? How common are 10% stat improvements across the board for 23-37 year olds? It’s too simple

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Feb 21, 2009 9:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

any of us can do projections for guys in the middle of their career

just like most of us could competently write for sports illustrated

the money is made on the guys outside the middle of the spectrum

by royalsreview on Feb 21, 2009 9:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Anyone can do projections

And maybe yours are accurate as well. However, people do evaluate these projections models. ZIPS does quite well, according to this 2007 study by Nate Silver

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 21, 2009 9:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs