User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | The Fine Print | Advertising
Baseball for the Thinking Fan
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Updated Blogs
Onlineseats.com is your
#1 Source for Cubs Tickets, Red Sox Tickets
and all MLB Tickets.
Use discount Code THINK
for 10% off on your order
Ticket Specialists
Red Sox Schedule
All MLB Teams
#1 Source for Cubs Tickets, Red Sox Tickets
and all MLB Tickets.
Use discount Code THINK
for 10% off on your order
Ticket Specialists
Red Sox Schedule
All MLB Teams
--- adverts ---
Archives
| February 2006 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | ||||
Syndicate
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
2006 ZiPS Projections - Pittsburgh Pirates
Name P AVG OBP SPC G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS Bay lf .297 .395 .557 148 542 90 161 35 5 32 99 84 122 16 3 Wilson rf .266 .363 .482 124 421 64 112 25 3 20 67 44 117 2 1 Casey* 1b .313 .373 .441 140 540 69 169 34 1 11 64 48 46 2 0 Gerut* rf .269 .348 .446 120 446 63 120 30 2 15 62 50 54 9 6 Eldred 1b .250 .300 .502 133 476 66 119 22 1 32 86 31 135 4 2 Sanchez 3b .290 .344 .401 117 414 52 120 25 3 5 42 32 41 5 3 Paulino c .272 .325 .426 112 401 54 109 18 1 14 51 31 69 3 1 Doumit# c .264 .327 .424 118 387 55 102 21 1 13 53 27 74 2 2 McLouth* cf .283 .343 .406 144 508 83 144 29 3 9 55 39 72 28 12 Koonce* 1b .235 .339 .404 124 438 52 103 23 0 17 60 66 117 0 2 Clark* 3b .277 .348 .375 96 328 40 91 18 1 4 34 34 26 1 2 Ward* 1b .257 .311 .416 124 401 40 103 23 1 13 57 31 60 0 2 Duffy* cf .287 .338 .384 127 484 77 139 19 5 6 46 30 82 19 13 Castillo 2b .277 .325 .394 122 437 55 121 15 3 10 53 31 68 4 5 Bautista 3b .247 .315 .405 126 442 52 109 23 1 15 61 38 104 5 4 Wilson ss .272 .314 .395 160 628 70 171 31 8 10 68 35 63 7 4 Alfaro 3b .269 .313 .400 119 428 43 115 27 1 9 46 25 65 2 3 de Caster 3b .251 .305 .404 117 386 52 97 25 2 10 47 25 98 4 3 Stansberry 2b .237 .304 .396 133 472 64 112 22 7 13 62 40 118 13 6 Sadler rf .251 .299 .411 133 474 55 119 27 2 15 58 29 103 11 9 Crespo# cf .246 .318 .361 119 402 57 99 22 3 6 40 41 77 15 8 Furmaniak ss .249 .301 .386 141 511 61 127 21 5 13 59 33 115 9 7 Davis# cf .263 .326 .333 130 505 76 133 20 3 3 39 40 70 32 13 Cota c .238 .296 .373 89 303 32 72 18 1 7 37 23 75 1 2 Nunnally* lf .205 .308 .360 93 283 36 58 10 2 10 35 41 80 6 5 Thompson* cf .251 .312 .317 121 458 70 115 11 5 3 36 34 69 37 14 Velandia ss .220 .289 .320 119 372 38 82 23 1 4 35 33 70 1 3 Guzman ss .252 .278 .334 135 485 64 122 16 6 4 46 18 85 18 10 Name W L ERA G GS INN H ER HR BB K Gonzalez* 3 1 3.27 47 0 44.0 32 16 3 21 52 Marte* 5 3 3.71 70 0 63.0 49 26 4 34 72 Duke* 14 10 3.73 29 29 181.0 179 75 14 42 117 Torres 7 5 3.82 80 0 92.0 85 39 7 32 56 Maholm* 7 6 4.10 25 25 145.0 144 66 12 48 104 Meadows 2 3 4.21 60 0 77.0 81 36 8 18 43 Capps 4 4 4.27 50 0 78.0 86 37 7 18 40 Perez* 8 9 4.32 25 25 152.0 125 73 21 74 180 Bayliss 1 2 4.50 41 0 66.0 59 33 9 31 62 Strickland 2 2 4.50 30 0 30.0 30 15 5 9 24 Burnett* 7 11 4.60 25 25 135.0 148 69 12 42 61 Snell 7 11 4.62 31 25 156.0 154 80 25 50 131 Corey 4 5 4.69 64 0 71.0 69 37 9 30 62 Santos 7 11 4.75 30 26 146.0 149 77 16 60 95 Grabow* 2 4 4.81 65 0 58.0 57 31 7 26 52 Hernandez 4 7 4.86 66 0 63.0 60 34 7 32 50 Reames 4 6 4.91 38 10 99.0 101 54 10 45 69 Reith 3 5 4.94 44 1 62.0 61 34 7 31 47 Wells 8 13 4.94 30 30 175.0 172 96 21 86 131 White 3 6 4.96 65 0 78.0 86 43 9 29 44 Bullinger 3 4 4.97 56 0 67.0 76 37 9 18 33 Fogg 8 13 4.98 31 31 170.0 192 94 21 60 88 Gorzelanny* 5 10 4.99 26 24 146.0 153 81 18 59 106 Bullington 6 11 5.02 23 22 131.0 142 73 20 43 82 Vogelsong 5 9 5.06 36 18 128.0 130 72 16 62 94 Connolly* 5 10 5.07 26 25 142.0 155 80 19 53 82 Mallette 1 1 5.08 30 0 39.0 40 22 6 18 28 Whiteside 3 4 5.14 52 0 63.0 69 36 14 15 53 Enochs 3 7 5.17 35 13 101.0 110 58 13 41 60 Jacobsen 3 6 5.19 20 16 104.0 116 60 13 40 49 McDade 2 4 5.20 28 4 64.0 71 37 9 25 36 Roa 2 4 5.29 34 3 63.0 73 37 11 17 40 Johnston* 1 3 5.37 48 0 57.0 56 34 8 32 46 Adams 2 5 5.49 53 0 59.0 63 36 5 35 41 Roach 3 8 5.77 34 16 120.0 141 77 23 41 61 Kaye 2 5 5.82 50 0 65.0 72 42 8 36 36 van Benschoten 5 14 5.83 29 28 156.0 171 101 26 78 92 van Dusen* 4 11 5.88 27 20 124.0 143 81 24 48 69 Starling 5 15 6.06 27 27 159.0 190 107 28 68 81 Stewart* 4 12 6.12 23 22 122.0 135 83 21 67 76 Reid 2 8 6.34 29 16 105.0 123 74 25 42 68 Chiavacci 2 7 6.64 26 14 103.0 110 76 21 69 78 Bloom* 2 11 6.73 24 24 115.0 131 86 22 75 64 Peterson 3 15 7.01 27 26 145.0 175 113 33 83 76 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.
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Page rendered in 0.3194 seconds
29 querie(s) executed
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.
Thanks, Dan. Do you have a projection for Josh Sharpless?
Also, that's a really disappointing projection for Jose Castillo.
If Eldred got that much PT in the majors, he'd probably strike out at least 160 times.
Pirate fans will be hugely unhappy if Duke performs in line with that projection, but I think it's reasonable if he stays healthy. I really don't expect him to be a lot better than that. Ditto Maholm. Perez is the only guy who I think is likely to do better than the projection (if he's healthy).
Dan, got any idea what Nixon or Monroe would project to in Pittsburgh? Or Mueller, for that matter?
-- MWE
Also, that's a really disappointing projection for Jose Castillo.
Given what he's done his first two years in the majors, it's not unreasonable.
Castillo's BB-Ref comps are an interesting bunch, but they don't really include anyone who has something like his skill set. Tony Bernazard might be the closest (although I think Castillo is better defensively and not quite as skilled offensively) and Bernazard eventually had a couple of decent years.
-- MWE
Any chance of a Craig Wilson, Jason Bay, Jody Gerut OF next year? Seems like a big dropoff to McClouth or Duffy. Not sure if Gerut or Bay could handle CF.
Love the difference in decisions between Duke and Maholm.
Dan, got any idea what Nixon or Monroe would project to in Pittsburgh? Or Mueller, for that matter?
Mike, there's a link in the PrOPS thread that Mueller signed with LA pending a physical.
Mike, I don't think we'll be "hugely" unhappy if Duke puts up those numbers, but what makes you think it's reasonable? It's kind of out of line with his track record, unless he's been a fluke at every single level, including major league.
Not only is Castillo's projection disappointing, it also seems unreasonable. He hit 11 homers in 370 AB's last year, and this projects one less homer in 67 more AB's? Even the AB's are out of line. Barring another injury, and last year's was kind of fluky, he should get at least 500 in 2006.
RWC -- I think Bay could play CF, but that OF will never happen given what Tracy has said (loves defense, hates strikeouts).
I'll do Josh Sharpless. Only having a handful of relief innings above the Sally league, he's one of those players that I would hold off on projecting unless someone asks me.
Mike, I don't think we'll be "hugely" unhappy if Duke puts up those numbers, but what makes you think it's reasonable?
Well, Duke was both a bit hit-lucky and HR-lucky last year in the majors, in that he allowed fewer hits/BIP and fewer HR/OF FBIP than one might have expected given his BIP and distribution. Hardball Times has an experimental version of FIP (xFIP) that accounts for the fact that HR are relatively predictable based on the # of fly balls allowed and the home park characteristics. Duke's xFIP for 2005 was 3.72 (his actual FIP was 2.98). Duke also had an unusually high percentage of line drives in play (25.1%, highest on the team except for Gorzelanny, who only pitched six innings), a lot of which were caught by someone; that's not likely to be repeated. Based on all of that, I see a mid-to-upper 3s ERA as being quite reasonable.
-- MWE
Mike, I don't think we'll be "hugely" unhappy if Duke puts up those numbers, but what makes you think it's reasonable? It's kind of out of line with his track record, unless he's been a fluke at every single level, including major league.
His strikeout rates in both AAA and the majors are less than enthralling and even for a groundball pitcher, it's a lot to ask a 23-year-old pitcher to allow single digit home runs per 200 innings.
It's kind of funny - this is the exact same discussion we had last year when ZiPS projected Oliver Perez to go from his 2004 ERA of 2.98 to 3.84 (and he ended up much worse than that, as everyone here knows). Young pitchers, even tremendously talented ones with great potential and performance, are going to have their growing pains more often than not. Two steps forward, one step backwards is standard practice - guys like Roy Oswalt are the exception.
I'd say Duke's projected statline would be reason for celebration for a 2nd year player.
Thanks, Dan. Sharpless is relatively likely to wind up in Pittsburgh's pen at some point this year - and, I think, fairly likely to do well once he gets there. But I can see how projecting him would be a problem.
"guys like Oswalt are the exception."
But Duke is exceptional!
The thing about predicting Perez's 2005 is that the prediction and actual outcome weren't out of line with his record. 2004 was the aberration.
I can't go all old school on you, but Duke is not Perez, and it's a far deeper thing than K rates.
I'd say Duke's projected statline would be reason for celebration for a 2nd year player.
It would be, but I think most Pittsburgh fans have higher expectations based on the splashy debut. Ditto Maholm.
-- MWE
It would be, but I think most Pittsburgh fans have higher expectations based on the splashy debut. Ditto Maholm.
True, and these are the same fans that expect Duffy to "regress" to batting 315-320.
It's surprising to me how similar the projections are for Doumit and Paulino.
Is the Jim Tracy "My system works, look at the results in LA" filter applied?
I think it might be off on Castillo, but everything else seems reasonable to me. I have read in some print and heard in other media interviews that Littlefield was projecting burnett to contribute to the MLB team this season. That seems highly unlikely, but I'll ask if the ZiPS takes the rehab into consideration, or is that projection for a healthy Burnett?
I love that McLouth projection, but I think he'll surpass it. Duffy's an atheletic guy, but McLouth is a player who can do a lot of things for you in centerfield. And the Pirates could do a hell of a lot worse than running Craig Wilson between first and right and McLouth between center and right. Interesting as well that McLouth is in line to possibly outproduce Gerut next year...
Healthy. ZiPS ain't a doctor.
I'm glad to see that McLouth projection, because I'm half-expecting Duffy to come to camp with a bad hammy and just totally crash and burn.
A while back, WTM (or was it Mike) suggested that McLouth had a Dykstra-like profile (although maybe not Dykstra-like talent)... I still like that comp for him and it would make him a useful player for a long while (and maybe even he'll challenge for a batting title someday!).
FREE NATE MCLOUTH!
Prolly Wilbur - weren't me.
-- MWE
Dykstra would be nice. The comp that immediately came to my mind was Dave Martinez, but that might be selling Nate short.
Is that comp pre or post-steroid Dykstra?
Well, I think it was more like, McLouth LOOKS like Dykstra.
Well, I think it was more like, McLouth LOOKS like Dykstra.
If I remember correctly (it's been a while, and I'm a bit archive lazy), I said that when I pictured Chris Duffy, I always pictured a Lenny Dykstra type player. You must have said something like McLouth looks a lot more like Dykstra than Duffy and I took that a little too strongly.
If you look at their minor league stats, it's obvious that Dykstra had more speed and a better batting eye, so maybe McLouth is Dykstra-lite (but that's still better than the whole Redman or whole Mackowiak that the Pirates have been running out in CF the last few years).
The Martinez comparisons are probably a good lower bound on McLouth's ceiling (think about it, it makes sense), although I think Nate has more power than Martinez (who wasn't that bad of a player, when you look at it).
The big question, I guess, is whether McLouth's walks will go up at some point. His rate is acceptable now, but if it were better, it would make him a lot more valuable.
I was just thinking: How bad would things have to get for the team to actually call up Kyle Bloom next season? Are we in alien attack territory, or would a simple structural collapse that buries the locker room be enough to do it?
To be more specific, McLouth has the small size but barrel-chested build that Dykstra had. Anyway, I think Dykstra-lite is a pretty good description of Nate's upside.
One of the more problematic projections, to me, is Perez. He seems far more likely to repeat either 2004 or 2005 than to fall in between. His problem this year wasn't the standard growing pains, like learning to work hitters and make adjustments. It was a loss of control and a significant drop in velocity. If he's throwing 89 mph in 2006, he's not going to sniff a 4.32 ERA.
Can you run Ty Wigginton's ZIP projection for me please? Seems to me he would be a better offering for 3B over Sanchez irregardless of his rough D.
i just have to say: my ####### god is Bay a stud.
I have Wigginton projected at 263/336/436.
The defense is more than rough - using Dial's linear-weighted zone rating method and adjusting for team balls in play, I have Wigginton at -9 in 2004 and -10 in a mere 305 innings in '05 (which comes out as an abysmal -48 per 162 games!)
Thank you Dan.. we know Ty is a horrible glove man but showing part-time stats in 2004 and 2005 doesn't tell the real tale, in my opinion. He is a career .945 glove guy at 3B.. which is not good, but certainly not -48 by any means. And Freddy's 2005 .979 FPCT over 60 games at 3B isn't anymore accurate than Ty's -48 is. :)
When we consider the G/F ratio of Duke, Maholm, Perez, Wells, and take your pick for #5, there will be a lot of balls on the ground, to be sure. But few RH MLB hitters are going to get on top and pull any of those guys heat like they would to Fogg and Redman in 2005, or Fogg and Burnett in 2004... especially with all the lefties throwing into the RH batters. The spray charts vs Maholm and Duke and Perez show us that.
Wiggy was comfortable above replacement last year to warrant an additional look at age 28, especially after his more than productive numbers late at Indy. His D tightened up there as well. But that is my opinion..
i just have to say: my #### god is Bay a stud.
Guys like Bay (late to the big leagues for a great player) have funny comps:
Age 26 comps:
Marty Cordova, Hack Wilson, Jim Edmonds, Zeke Bonura, Mitchell Page,
Bobby Higginson, Pedro Guerrero, Tim Salmon, Wes Covington, Jason Giambi
FWIW, just eyeballing it, it looks like the better comps for Bay are Tim Salmon with more speed or Jim Edmonds with more power... not too shabby, as long as Bay can stay healthy.
The funny part to me is that Wigginton put up a .789 OPS last year despite getting benched late in the season when he was finally starting to hit. Randa, who apparently is now Littlefield's top choice for 3B, had a .787 OPS, his second best showing in the last five years. Wiggy is 28, Randa 36 and will cost considerably more. So, even taking defense into account (I suspect there's little difference between the two) why is Randa worth signing as a FA and Wiggy not worth a roster spot?
One of the discouraging things about Littlefield is that, once he gets down on a player, even if it's only for oversleeping once, that player is toast no matter what he does on the field afterward.
I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but I consider Randa pretty good at third and Wiggy pretty not so good.
Does anyone else think Wiggy would be more valuable as a somewhat stiff second baseman rather than a somewhat stiff third baseman who occasionally pegs a fan with a wild throw?
Comps for Bay? B. Giles is a great one. Their unadjusted mL numbers are eerily similar, they both arrived a bit late to the Bigs, and have had similar numbers early on.
I don't even think he's in the org anymore, but just because I'm curious, what's the projection for Josh Bonifay look like?
HOW IS WILSON ON DEFENSE, ESP. LF AND 3B????!!!!
Craig's never played third at any level, so I don't think he'd be very good at it. He's a slightly below average corner defender in the OF, maybe a -5 or so, and right around average at first.
maybe a -5 or so
Jesse Barfield was a -5...oh wait, you weren't talking about his SOM arm... never mind...