Preseason Projections for 2007 Revisited
Thu, Oct 11, 2007
by Geoff Young
Thank you for your excellent suggestions on the book, and keep ‘em coming. Meanwhile, as part of this project, I’m taking inventory of an entire season’s worth of entries, which means that I’m still in “looking back” mode for now. In that vein, I thought it might be fun to re-examine preseason projections for key players. We’ve already looked at my expectations for Padres hitters and pitchers, but what did others think?
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .277 | .386 | .438 |
| Actual | .271 | .361 | .416 |
Secondary skills in decline. Some of this is due to injury, some to aging.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .287 | .348 | .469 |
| Actual | .282 | .347 | .502 |
Every system underestimated Gonzalez’ power.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .282 | .352 | .436 |
| Actual | .285 | .364 | .404 |
Bard underperformed by about three runs per 500 at-bats. That’s a pretty darned good set of projections.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .284 | .344 | .474 |
| Actual | .275 | .329 | .457 |
What I said at the time:
We really need to dismiss the [Bill] James projections; I’d love to see Kouzmanoff outproduce Aramis Ramirez this year, but it’s not going to happen. The good news: Everyone else has Kouzmanoff at around .270/.330/.450. If he does that, he’s basically a younger, cheaper Adrian Beltre.
Yep.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .276 | .354 | .417 |
| Actual | .229 | .304 | .317 |
Giles became the second player in the Petco era (Sean Burroughs ‘05) to finish with one of the 50 worst hitting performances in Padres history. So at least he’s got that going for him.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .253 | .339 | .449 |
| Actual | .242 | .328 | .431 |
More decline.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .263 | .339 | .437 |
| Actual | .210 | .310 | .360 |
Hey, at least I wasn’t the only one who thought Sledge might be marginally useful.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .258 | .326 | .433 |
| Actual | .254 | .291 | .468 |
Got the OPS right, but missed badly on the shape. That’s a difference of about 2 1/2 runs created per 500 at-bats.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .236 | .294 | .354 |
| Actual | .252 | .319 | .367 |
Nobody can explain that OBP.
| BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Projected | .239 | .341 | .409 |
| Actual | .234 | .316 | .375 |
April was fun, wasn’t it?
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 3.05 |
| Actual | 2.98 |
Wisdom of crowds at work. The closest individual projection (James) missed Hoffman’s actual ERA by 0.21.
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 3.28 |
| Actual | 3.50 |
Close enough for government work.
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 3.35 |
| Actual | 2.54 |
Nobody had Peavy lower than 3.13.
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 3.78 |
| Actual | 3.12 |
Nobody had Young’s ERA lower than 3.50. Everyone got bailed out by his injury.
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 3.97 |
| Actual | 4.14 |
Three systems were overly optimistic, while the fourth missed badly on the other side.
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 4.16 |
| Actual | 3.05 |
This is why I can’t get too far down on Brocail. Who had a right to expect him to do what he did?
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 3.99 |
| Actual | 2.02 |
Must be Petco Park. 
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 3.79 |
| Actual | 6.84 |
Ouch.
| ERA | |
|---|---|
| Projected | 4.90 |
| Actual | 2.70 |
This was a pleasant surprise. Again, we should praise Petco Park and not pitching coach Darren Balsley. Whatever you do, please don’t give Balsley credit for anything.
[Update: This is a joke. I've been a Balsley fan for a long time.]
Winter Leagues
Because you can’t live in the past…
- Saguaros 5, Scottsdale 4 (box score). Will Venable batted sixth, DH’d, and went hitless again. Supposedly he’ll see action in center field at some point. Nick Hundley got the start at catcher and batted eighth, going 0-for-3. Matt Antonelli sat. No Padres pitchers worked in this one, although ex-Padre Eddie Bonine picked up the save. Ah, the knuckleballer as closer. Has MLB had one of those since Charlie Hough?
That’s all for now. More as it happens…
Picking up where last year's version left off, the Ducksnorts 2008 Baseball Annual provides in-depth analysis of and commentary on the San Diego Padres. Get your copy today.
October 11, 2007 at 8:25 am
Why shouldn’t we give Balsley credit? Did I miss a joke?
October 11, 2007 at 8:27 am
#1: Some people believe that Petco Park is the answer to every question regarding the success of Padres pitchers. Of course, Balsley deserves a great deal of credit.
October 11, 2007 at 8:50 am
well according to Keith Law Jake would look more like this Pedro Martinez http://www.baseball-reference......pe03.shtml
Than this Pedro Martinez:
http://www.baseball-reference......pe02.shtml
if he did not play in petco
October 11, 2007 at 9:30 am
i love how it says pedro’s the cousin of denny bautista, what a tasty little tidbit that i will forget in about 50 seconds.
re 3- pretty funny. bet keith laws going to feel dumb if/when peavy leaves the pads and still dominates.
at any rate im not sure how you miss the sarcasm on the balsley comment. haha
im anxious to see how this offseason turns out
heres to hoping we can get a power hitter to compliment kouz and adrian
October 11, 2007 at 9:38 am
Here’s hoping that we get some speed at the top of this lineup. Corey Patterson anyone ?
October 11, 2007 at 9:41 am
Re: 5 speed does not help if you cant get on base
October 11, 2007 at 9:42 am
Haha you got me. Balsley is indeed the man.
October 11, 2007 at 9:43 am
#5: I don’t want to see a career .298 OBP anywhere near the top of the lineup next year.
October 11, 2007 at 10:10 am
i’d shy away from him considering the pack of center fielders this year
October 11, 2007 at 10:11 am
corey patterson that is
October 11, 2007 at 10:13 am
How do the projections deal with Petco? If the projections do not consider park factors, the projections on these players are heavily biased. My recommendation is to look at all of baseball’s home/road splits for players, take the Padres road performances, add the home hitting boost that is you see in baseball. For example, some OPS splits of players (home/road/overall):
Adrian: 760/928/844
Khalil: 670/840/755
KK: 743/824/783
Overall MLB splits: 772/745 (27 pt boost for being at home); so, one could argue that the road numbers are the best baseline, then add 27 OPS pts. If you do that these three look like:
Adrian: 953/928/940
Khalil: 867/840/853
KK: 851/824/837
They suddenly look like vastly different players (OK, maybe KK not vastly), which shows just how distorting Petco is.
October 11, 2007 at 10:15 am
OT: Schuerholz is stepping down as Braves GM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7322496
October 11, 2007 at 10:20 am
#12: This comes as a surprise to most of us Braves fans, as we figured he’d go out when Bobby went out. I’m still not sure what to make of it, but Wren has been his assistant for 7 years or so now and hopefully he’s learned a few things.
Though I wish now that Dayton Moore hadn’t taken the KC Job.
October 11, 2007 at 10:25 am
Friar Watch did a great job of finding Fukudome Videos:
http://www.friarwatch.com/2007.....-fukudome/
The more I think about it the less I like signing Fukudome if he cant play CF. As I posted yesterday the Pads will probably have about $20MM next year to spend on CF, LF, 2 SP’s, 2B and a backup catcher. If the Pads tie up $12-13M of that on a RF and move Giles to left then that leaves $7-8M to get a CF who is not atrocious with the bat and can cover CF in petco, 2 quality SP’s, a backup catcher who can play 30+ games, and a 2B. They may go with Antonelli but they have to have some kind of backup plan if he is not ready and I really hope that plans name is not Geoff B(l)um.
October 11, 2007 at 10:26 am
Re: 13 do you know why he stepped down?
October 11, 2007 at 10:26 am
Geoff…I believe that Wakefield closed for the Red Sox for a while back in ‘99. That would be your Knuckle-Closer.
October 11, 2007 at 10:29 am
#11: Marcel is not park adjusted, but I’m 99.9% certain the others are.
#12: Wow, that is shocking.
October 11, 2007 at 10:36 am
11:
The home away splits show the Petco factor to be more than just home runs, it is hitting in general. I believe, Petco is such an extreme pitchers park, that it neutralizes good pitching. Along with that it gives a sense of frustation to Padres hitters and fans.
October 11, 2007 at 10:49 am
I can’t understand why players averages and OBP go down so dramatically at petco. The only everyday player where their home/road splits are close is Kouz (where he actually hits better at Petco). Even line-drive guys who don’t rely on the long ball like Giles and Bard have a dramatic reduction in both Ave and OBP at petco. You figure they would do better the larger gaps.
October 11, 2007 at 10:51 am
15: Haven’t heard. Like I said a bit of shock really, there’s a press conference scheduled for 12:30 ish pacific time.
October 11, 2007 at 10:55 am
Well now it looks as JS will stay with the Braves as the Team President. Handing the reins of GM to Frank Wren.
October 11, 2007 at 10:56 am
Re: 21 Ha you can breath again RD
October 11, 2007 at 11:00 am
19:
It may be as simple as pitchers being more agressive at Petco. When a ballpark is 400 feet gap to gap, there is no reson to be timid.
October 11, 2007 at 11:29 am
That’s a great point fields. Why put a guy on for free when you can let him make contact that might result in an out.
Does anyone have a comparison on BABIP for each park? I’d be curious to know where Petco ranks.
October 11, 2007 at 11:39 am
22: Yeah that makes me feel a bit better. lol
October 11, 2007 at 1:00 pm
If memory serves, PetCo suppresses singles, doubles and home runs. I think there is also an increase of strikeouts. I’ll have to check later.
October 11, 2007 at 1:20 pm
ESPN has Park Factors for HR, H, 2B, 3B, and BB …
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor
… for 2001-2007.
October 11, 2007 at 1:55 pm
27:
According to those factors, Qualcomm was a serious pitchers park too. I never go that impression.
October 11, 2007 at 2:12 pm
27: The only thing I would say about park factors is that the home team is responsible for half of the numbers put up at that park. Thus, if you have a crap team (like the Padres before coming to Petco), you’d be dragging down the numbers a bit. The same could be said of the BABIP numbers I was looking for.
I haven’t been able to find BABIP stats by park for the year. I’m really curious if there’s any value to the “let them hit it, it will probably be an out” argument. I know that this is part of the sabaermetric approach, with issues like WHIP, K/9, and K/BB being so important. Obviously BABIP can reflect luck, but I would think a full season would balance out and tend to give you some useful trends. Realistically, we would expect that BABIP should be almost universal across all parks, right?
October 11, 2007 at 2:27 pm
#26: I ran some numbers last year:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/m.....etco-park/
October 11, 2007 at 2:28 pm
re: universal BABIP … that’s not how I understand BABIP-theory … what is “universal” is BABIP in a given park across all pitchers … so that if, for example, BABIP in Coors is .280 but in Petco its .220, the difference is park factor …
October 11, 2007 at 2:38 pm
29: http://www.tangotiger.net/BIPteam9902.html
So, no, BABiP shouldn’t be universal across all parks.
October 11, 2007 at 2:40 pm
31: As a result, it would make sense to throw a pitcher like Cassel at Petco, while using someone like CY at Coors (He’s gotten shelled there if memory serves, but basically you’d want a low BAA guy throwing in a park with a higher park effect, yes?)
I wasn’t sure how BABIP and Park Effect related, but I guess it makes perfect sense that he lower the park effect, the lower the BABIP. I’d love to see an analysis of those side by side. It would really be interesting to see how much of BABIP is a function of the park as opposed to luck, defense, great pitching, or crap hitting.
October 11, 2007 at 2:40 pm
29. That’s one of the arguments against “plate discipline” at Petco, however, look at these averages from LM’s reference: runs: average: 1.004, SD:75.2%; HR average 1.0055, SD:68.2%; H 1.002. SD:85.4% and BB:1.003, SD: 90.3% This seems not to indicate a big fall of in walks compared to hitting. In other words Petco is seeing relatively close to the average # of walks althogh it is second to last in walks.
October 11, 2007 at 3:00 pm
34: Wouldn’t a tougher park effect make you want to take more walks and thus exhibit more plate discipline?
I don’t use Mozilla, so I’m a little miffed by what you were trying to present with you rnumbers.
I always kind of thought, like most people, that gap hitters would excel at Petco. Since they do better on the road, that would seem to indicate that Petco just gobbles up balls in play, period. Of course, if I have any empirical evidence of this, I’d feel much more comfortable.
October 11, 2007 at 3:01 pm
34: What exactly are you trying to say?
October 11, 2007 at 4:56 pm
35. The pitchers as you say in 29 would be more inclined to throw strikes in Petco, knowing hitters are less likely to get a hit there. That would make taking pitches less benefical because there would be fewer balls out of the strike zone and fewer walks. Going deep in the count would result in more pitchers counts. But the numbers do not show Petco to have radically lower walks. (90% of the average park) So this walk % evidence does not confirm the theory that pitchers are just laying the ball in there at Petco or that the Padres are seeing more strikes in Petco than others are around the league. But that doesn’t necessary mean that there are less strikes at Petco. There must be more precise numbers out there to help us with that theory.
October 11, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Here’s another way to look at the Petco effect based on the parks’ %’s vs. the Padre’s %’s. ESPN ’s chart (see 27)shows Petco had 68% of the average park HR total, yet the Padres had 103% of the average team HR total (171 vs. 165) (see BR-leagues). That seems shocking. Petco had 85% of the average park’s hits and the Padres had 94% of the average team’s hit total, which indicates the park is a factor, but not as radically as much as for HR. I’d be glad to give you the 2B and run #’s if anyone is interested. You’ve got to wonder what effect this is having on attendanc.
October 11, 2007 at 6:05 pm
38 … re: attendance … I gotta believe that the primary / first-order effect on attendance is “wins” (rather than “runs”) …
OT … D-backs go up early …
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/boxscore?gid=271011129
October 11, 2007 at 6:06 pm
39 … but Rox get it right back … *and* they score on the classic “bases-loaded-nobody-out-GIDP” …
October 11, 2007 at 6:10 pm
40 … here’s a way OT tought … re: the “LOB” column in the box score … assuming that “higher is worse” … shouldn’t a “bases-loaded-nobody-out-GIDP” result in “2 LOB”? I realize that after all is said and done, only 1 runner is left-on-base … but it seems like this is a bit of an understatement when compared to this perspective: at the start of the AB, 3 runners were on-base, but after the AB only 1 had scored, so 2 need to be accounted for.
Eh, I’m in that kinda mood … feel free to ignore … it’s one of those days that I’m hoping I don’t do something like this in a memo to a boss that might be “career limiting” …
October 12, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Hey, Geoff. This is awesome. You did a great job with most of the predictions. It’s nice to see how some players has progressed versus their expectations and it’s even nicer to see them outperformed said expectations.