PECOTA, the 2012 Royals and a Mega-Projection
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2012 4:13 PM EST
Email
PrintI've already done a team win projection for the 2012 Royals based on the individual player projections from the CAIRO and ZiPS systems. I have now done it with the recently released PECOTA projections. You can look at the ZiPS version for details on my methodology. I also put together the projections from the three systems for a mega-projection. All results after the jump.
Team projection based on PECOTA
Runs Scored (plus defensive runs saved) - 698.8
Runs allowed (based on ERA) - 782.6
Runs allowed (based on FIP) - 735.4
Win Total (based on ERA) - 72.4
Win Total (based on FIP) - 77.1
Much like CAIRO, PECOTA doesn't love the Royals offense. And it likes the Royals pitching even less.
Mega-Projection
I used a weighted average of the three system's projections (CAIRO = 1, ZiPS = 2, PECOTA = 2) to come up with a combined projection. (The CAIRO projections are re-worked for some more recent roster additions (Mijares and Yuni) and to utilize the same methodology for each system).
ZiPS sees some almost-.500 potential. CAIRO and PECOTA really don't. I think the overall picture here is of a team that isn't particularly close to contention. But if they make some strides this year, I think they could overperform their projections and get considerably closer, and maybe ready to take the next step in 2013.
65 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Critical spirit
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Feb 13, 2012 4:21 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
But what does Bill James say?
Seriously, thanks for the hard work. I think the way I would put it is the Royals are on the verge of becoming a competitive team, but still need to develop and/or acquire additional talent to become an actual contending team.
Given this, kudos to Dayton Moore for apparently seeing where the team is and acting accordingly
And by that, I mean NOT going for it. I don’t like some of the things he did, but he didn’t go for it by trading prospects or locking up a ton of money on the wrong player at the wrong time. It still sticks in my craw that the Royals will be paying Francoeur and Chen $11.25M next year that could be going to a genuinely good SP.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2012 4:37 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
JoGui Is Available
For cheap
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Feb 14, 2012 12:08 AM EST up reply actions
76 to 77 seems just right
.500 is within reach; the division title is not. Anyone who was expecting more was being a bit silly (hoping for more is a good thing, but actually expecting it is a mistake).
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 13, 2012 5:39 PM EST reply actions
I feel like a
a fucking fat guy being dangled in front of an all you can eat buffet when I process information from this site its like, I see the yummy treats but just can’t get to the yummy treats, you guys are a bunch of downers man.
Shit + Shit = More Shit
by Kansas City Keith on Feb 13, 2012 6:06 PM EST reply actions
eventually
every fat guy figures out to pay first, then grab a plate at the end of the buffet and dig in. You’re no different.
Obviously, you are not a golfer.
by Kyled85 on Feb 13, 2012 6:15 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Buffet instructions
beautiful.
by Nighthawk at the Diner on Feb 13, 2012 6:20 PM EST up reply actions
That was a literary device
used by Harland Williams in one of his standups, you could transfer it to the Royals by thinking that they have a lot of talent in place but won’t be able to win the division. Read between the lines Einstien.
Shit + Shit = More Shit
by Kansas City Keith on Feb 13, 2012 6:36 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think that the Royals will win only 77
I’d say that’s more a good low number that I would be ok with if they did that.
But the projection systems never predict big jumps. And I think that some of those will happen—if Hosmer or Moose or Montgomery or Gio takes a big step forward, good things will happen.
But the projection systems never predict big jumps
Nor do they predict big dips. They predict down the middle. And every team will experience both some big jumps and some big dips.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2012 9:18 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
True, but I think we usually tend to focus on the potential for great success. But with a bunch of young players, there is an awful lot of potential for either succes or failure.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2012 9:15 AM EST up reply actions
maybe you should transfer your literary devices back over to Arrowhead Pride, Bohr.
"You're like that guy who wrote that thing about remembering stuff!!"
- Crow T. Robot
I'll transfer
something alright my foot to your ass if thats some sort of backhanded retort you’re going for.
Shit + Shit = More Shit
by Kansas City Keith on Feb 14, 2012 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
Ok, I think we’ve all had enough now. Let’s move on.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2012 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
maybe you should transfer your literary devices back over to Arrowhead Pride, Bohr.
"You're like that guy who wrote that thing about remembering stuff!!"
- Crow T. Robot
Total Range
of 72-81 wins, which is where I think nearly everyone but a fan wearing the rose colored glasses of spring thinks their realistic range is. They have not addressed the starting pitching enough to contend this year.
Where they finish up will still make a big difference in fan attitude though. Finish at the bottom of this range or below it, and fans will be calling for heads and jumping off the process parade in droves. Finish at the top or exceed the range and even the most casual fan will be excited for 2013.
"Trying is the first step to sucking" -Jimmy Chance
I think it is a little higher because the Royals have a lot more upside to the projections then downside.
Also, They will not be hurt much by injuries because they have no stars, and are very young, it is probable that other teams will be hurt more by injuries.
Go Royals!
Yeah
’cuz having great players is the biggest cause of upside destruction, (maybe we should never have any!) and all young players improve.
Sometimes even a good players second year is his toughest in the league (I remember watching Beltran in year 2 after they had figured out he couldn’t lay wood on a change up) We have 4 players in their sophomore season, a rookie, and 2 others coming off career years.
Nope, no downside there.
"Trying is the first step to sucking" -Jimmy Chance
Oh there is downside, but if players are playing in negative WAR terriorty they tend to get replaced.
Most of the Royals players are 2 WAR and under, so you don’t lose a lot when you replace them. If you replace a 5 win player with a 1.5 win sub then you are losing a lot more then if you replace say Frenchy with Mitch. Of course, the Royals need to not be half a dozen games under their Pathag to see that improvement.
Go Royals!
Do the Royals have more upside to the projections than downside?
The Royals are relying on a lot of prospects in their first full seasons. And most prospects fail. Is the upside potential for these players more likely than their downside?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2012 9:20 PM EST up reply actions
Could have reached a 77 average ...
Thanks a lot, Yuni-corn.
Very interesting work, Scott
I assume the error bars on the projections are probably bigger for the Royals (the youngest team in MLB) than for any other team, but, even given that, it’s sad to think that a 69-win season is about as likely as an 85-win season.
Yes, I think the error bars would be quite large
Projections on these young players are exceptionally tough and unreliable.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 13, 2012 9:21 PM EST up reply actions
Everyone understands the projections have Royals getting WORSE, right?
Last season, the Royals scored 730 and allowed 762. Of course, losing Melky’s career year hurts, but these projections very much assume the offense is going to trend down badly. The 2/7 CAIRO projections has the Royals 12th in the AL in runs scored—possibly 13th now that the A’s signed Cespedes. Last season, they were 6th in AL runs scored. That same CAIRO has the Royals surrendering the exact same amount of runs—762. Thus, cutting out SOS and Davies for Sanchez, and adding Cain in CF = the same exact thing.
In short, all the projections say the Royals are getting worse. Could be—but people seem to look at 74-75 wins and say “it’s getting better.” No—not according to the projections. The 78 win Pythag of 2011 is going backwards.
I might get dismissed for this, and perhaps rightfully so, but I think the projections sell the Royals short. Maybe not contention short, but I actually think the Royals will be a little better this season than last. I don’t optimistically expect 80 wins—I think 80 is a very realistic goal.
The Royals got 14 wins out of their outfield last year, and they are unlikely to repeat that.
Also they did very little to improve their starting rotation other then to switch out Francis and Sanchez. They may very well go backwards if their starters do not play above their projections.
Go Royals!
The OF should regress, the but the infield should improve.
I think your language is telling in regards to my main point. “They may very well go backwards,” implies surprise. Of course it could happen that way—the projections say that is how it will be.
My main point is that the projections have the Royals going backwards, and the general sentiment seems to be that they are improving. Ignore my editorializing about the Royals being better than the projections—the headline is “2012 Royals Worse Than 2011 Royals, projections say.”
BB already said it, but just the outfield regression could cost 5 wins
Even if the regulars are at 3 wins each, that’s down to 9 from 14 (plus whatever the backups might provide). So the infield and pitching needs to make up for that and then some. The projections seem to lean away from that happening, but trying to predict what the 5 young infielders are going to do is difficult. They might be better, they might be worse, but do you think our eyeballing of their playing and their stats makes a better guess than these projections? That’s a tough case to make.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 14, 2012 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
I don't know if it is that tough of a case to make.
You have pretty much give the classic argument of “stats vs. scouting.” Given the fact that the infielders are all young players (a couple high ceiling prospects) with small sample sizes, I would argue the data is highly inconclusive—especially given the wild statistical swings in the minors. However, I would also agree that scouting (in this case, optimistic and extremely amateur scouting) doesn’t provide anything conclusive, either.
I suppose I expecting Hosmer’s 1.7 WAR (- Kila’s 0.1) to go up. I expect Gio’s 0.0 WAR (+ Getz’s 1.0) to up. I expect Moose’s 0.7 WAR (+ Betemit’s 0.9) to go up. I expect Escobar to not get hurt and let Yuni ruin everyone’s happy time. Will it make up for OF regression? If Gordon misses any substantial time, I will guess “no” right now. Otherwise, call me crazy, I say yes.
STILL—underlying and important fact—Royals getting worse. The expectation is that they will get better with age. At what point do we actually think it will occur? Safe projections won’t give an answer until it has happened (as they shouldn’t). Knowing that, if there is ever a breakout, the projections will be a year behind them.
Knowing that, if there is ever a breakout, the projections will be a year behind them.
Yes, projections will never predict a big breakout. Nor will they predict a sudden collapse. And while prospects can and do have breakouts, it is even more common for them to fail (in a given season, or in general). The Royals will likely have some of both. They certainly may have much more of one than the other, in which case they’ll win significantly more or fewer games than the above down-the-middle projections.
Based on that, I think it is fair to say that the Royals possible win total covers a wide range. Perhaps that means something like 70 to 83 wins. But I don’t think it is fair to say that 76 is the floor and that greater success would just push the win total higher. I think fewer wins than the above projection is at least equally likely than more wins.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2012 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
I see far more chances for sudden breakouts than sudden collapses
That’s what you get when you go young.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Is that really what you get when you go young? More prospects fail than succeed, so is young player success really more likely than young player failure? Perhaps that’s true if the young player has already put up good numbers (Hosmer). But is it true if the player’s MLB numbers to date aren’t so good (Moustakas, Giavotella, Duffy), or if the player has a very small MLB performance record so far (Perez, Cain)?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2012 5:08 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not saying more prospects will succeed than fail
I’m saying your team will experience more upsides than downsides. When you go young, you have more guys with upside (whereas older players tend to be constant in performance) and those that do “fail” as you say, are more likely to be removed from the roster, whereas vets that suck have to continue to be played usually because the team has sunk so much money in them.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
I'd really like to see data backing this up.
Not saying you’re pulling it out of nowhere or anything, just that it’s a very interesting question.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
I don't know why I'm stating it so baldly
When its just a theory.
I guess thinking back when I think of young teams, quite a few of them actually do have failures. I’m thinking of the recent O’s staff. OTOH, you also get teams that have a lot of guys take big steps forward like the recent Rays. I guess we’ll see which way the Royals go.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
I'm guessing it ha something to do with when a team has young guys and improve, we remember that
But when the young guys don’t, the team just gets placed into the “they still suck” pile. Sort of like the Orioles lately.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
The issue with the Royals, looking at the current infielder WAR numbers...
they suck. So a collapse is only possible if negative WAR is posted. I doubt it. Certainly, it CAN happen. But I doubt it cause they scout it.
Sure, the infield shouldn't be much worse by WAR.
But the team could go a lot of ways and the infield isn’t guaranteed to improve.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
And had I made a guarantee...
you would have put me in my place.
As it is, I MATHEMATICALLY GUARANTEE HOSMER WILL POST AT LEAST A 4.0 WAR!!! I took an advanced formula wherein Will Clark and Eddie Murray did it, so Hosmer will do it, too.
Didn't realize I was "putting you in your place"
Apologies.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
giavotella and moose cant really get significantly worse than they were last year....
they could improve immensely though
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Feb 14, 2012 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
My point is that they could fail and perform well under their projections (just as they could succeed and perform well over their projections). Here, we’re comparing possible 2012 performances to their 2012 projections, not their 2011 performances.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 15, 2012 1:55 AM EST up reply actions
you really think its possible that they undershoot their projections
by as much as its possible to overshoot their projections?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Feb 15, 2012 11:12 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure
Probably their ceilings (with regard to 2012 performance) are further from their median projection than their floors. But my gut says that underperforming their projections is more likely than overperforming.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 15, 2012 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
Relatively conservative, all-positive eyeball projections:
Hos improves to 2.6 WAR ( +1 compared to 2011)
Gio is average, 2 WAR ( +1)
Moose improves to 2.6 WAR ( +1)
Escobar stays the same, maybe improves a bit ( +.5)
Perez and Pena combine for 3.5 WAR ( +.5)
So just to get back the 5 WAR of outfield regression, Hos and Gio and Moose and Escobar and Perez have to perform at a good/decent level, and we’re still 1 WAR short. Maybe someone breaks out, maybe the OF doesn’t regress all the way, but that’s a lot of positive results that have to happen with no negative results, and we still don’t see any substantial improvement offensively.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 15, 2012 1:36 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think anyone is disputing the conversion to WAR
I think people are saying one of two things:
1) They expect a greater possible boom than the moderate gains you described, or
2) In the off-season of optimism, the team has been projected to get worse.
Really?
30ish runs better than their composite projection?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 16, 2012 9:37 AM EST up reply actions
77 huh?
My prediction has settled on 80, because any major jump by a couple of young players could easily turn the record northward.
Nice work, McKinney
it’s reassuring that the mean of three mean-tending projections is basically right where most of us would put it. If lots of things go right it’s a .500+ team. If Butler and/or Gordon get injured it’s probably a 70-win team.
Okay so now that the projections are out it’s time for ST to start! Within a week we’ll be getting box scores every day. Can’t wait. Last year was the most fun season since 1994 for me. And I expect this one to be even better.
What about some alternate universe projections?
Have you ran the numbers assuming some alternatives? I bet a lot of people would be interested in projecting out the following scenario: Francouer and Chen don’t get new contracts, sign a decent SP with the money saved, and they snag another decent SP.
That would be interesting and a lot of work
We’d have to figure out which pitchers the Royals acquired and who replaced Francoeur in the OF. A quick estimate might be:
RF (subtract Francoeur, add a cheap player) net -1 win
SP (subtract Chen and add a good SP) net +2 wins
SP (bench or demote the #5 SP and add a good SP) net +3 wins
That’s a total net improvement of 4 wins, for a likely win total of about 81 wins. And that would require the addition of two genuinely good SP’s.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Feb 14, 2012 11:48 AM EST up reply actions
and 10 million or so in salary
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Feb 14, 2012 11:53 AM EST up reply actions
Not necessarily Expensive
RF -for Francoeur – Meir for 2 months then Will Myers
for Chen Roy Oswalt for 1 year
for #5 rotation spot farm system pitcher not unrealistic somebody steps up
is that supposed to be a poem or something?
b/c it’s not english as i learned english
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Feb 15, 2012 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
