FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Great stuff. Will there be a similar article on pitchers?

    Comment by Kevin — February 26, 2013 @ 2:09 pm

  2. Yep!

    Comment by Dave Cameron — February 26, 2013 @ 2:14 pm

  3. Good article.

    What shocks me about ZIPS’ projections for J. Upton is the .263 avg. Is ZIPS putting *that* much stock into his Arizona home/road splits? I guess so. Seems awfully low to me given his career to date, especially for a guy who’s still just 25.

    Comment by Tchaikovsky08 — February 26, 2013 @ 2:17 pm

  4. pfffft!

    Comment by Jeyckol De Leon — February 26, 2013 @ 2:24 pm

  5. Very Intresting article I’m intrested to see the article on pitchers and see if there will be a pattern for players being viewed diffrently in that reguard. Something Guthrie will be on that list, just a hunch.

    Comment by Le Vagabond — February 26, 2013 @ 2:27 pm

  6. I’d like to see everybody compared with Marcel, to start. Probably easier to see where systems are deviating from the middle more than against each other.

    Comment by byron — February 26, 2013 @ 2:27 pm

  7. See what happens when barbarians invade the Interwebs? Gratuitous insults.

    Comment by Jeyckol's Fan Club -- President — February 26, 2013 @ 2:37 pm

  8. Would be very interesting to check outcomes for similar dis-similar players based on last year’s projections… no?

    Then we’d have some outcomes to examine.

    Comment by Dave S — February 26, 2013 @ 2:45 pm

  9. I assume the “flatter aging curve” for the likes of Ortiz and Hunter is laden with compliments and encouragement, particularly about how fit and youthful they appear to be, perhaps even featuring a sweet smile or playful wink.

    Thank you, thank you. You’ve been great. They’ll validate parking in the lobby.

    Comment by AC of DC — February 26, 2013 @ 3:13 pm

  10. While I don’t see it here, when you compared the steamer/fans projections the biggest thing I saw repeatedly was that fan always had better babips for players. Maybe its still tje thought of the .300 being the average (at least for pitchers, with no base set for all players people need a base reference point) while in actuality babip are much lower than that. Is be curious if the fan projections simply has .010 taken off of babip how much that would bring them in line

    Comment by jesse — February 26, 2013 @ 3:13 pm

  11. I bet if ZiPS had run something on Jeyckol De Leon, it wold be more like Mr. Hyde. /rimshot

    Comment by Jaack — February 26, 2013 @ 3:16 pm

  12. I noticed this too and wrote a long wordy post about it on Viva El Birdos earlier today:
    “I noticed that both Wong and Taveras have pretty awesome ZiPS projections” is the title of my post

    Steamer seems to have much, much lower BABIP forecasts than the other projection systems for players with little major league experience. I’m not sure why this is. I can’t think of a reason or any evidence that rookies are more susceptible to lower BABIPs. I did some cursory math on it and didn’t find huge differences between the average BABIPs for rookies and the MLB as a whole.

    Comment by mattybobo — February 26, 2013 @ 3:21 pm

  13. What about me?

    Comment by Hyde De Leon — February 26, 2013 @ 4:19 pm

  14. “Many tests have shown that combining multiple projections is better than simply relying on one system anyway”

    Now that FanGraphs has five different projection systems on player pages, have you considered adding such an average of all five? (Or four, if you wanted to exclude Bill James so you could keep WAR.)

    Comment by KilroySleptHere — February 26, 2013 @ 5:12 pm

  15. On pitchers, doesn’t Steamer factor in fastball velocity? I suspect that will lead to some substantive (but explainable) differences based on methodology.

    Comment by Hmm — February 26, 2013 @ 5:29 pm

  16. That fountain I found had some weird side effects.

    Comment by Ponce De Leon — February 26, 2013 @ 5:42 pm

  17. “To see if this was a persistent pattern, I went and looked at the projections for players who had never played an MLB game, and ZIPS was consistently higher for most of them as well. There are 15 minor leaguers that ZIPS projects out to +2 WAR/600 or better for 2013, and ZIPS is higher on every single one of those 15 than Steamer is. – See more at:

    Good article, but this particular part has issues–when you select for young players ZiPS projects to +2WAR/600 you’re selecting for minor leaguers ZiPS happens to like–not a random sample of minor leaguers…

    Comment by sambf — February 26, 2013 @ 5:44 pm

  18. I was scanning through these lists to see what was accounting for the big differences. Almost all of the huge projection differences can be explained by gaps in projected BABIP (Profar, Harper, Stanton), defense (Gentry, Lawrie, Murphy), home run rate (Ortiz, Upton), or some combination thereof (Olt, Hunter, Rosario, Goldschmidt). But then I ran into this.

    David DeJesus
    Steamer: .330 wOBA, -3.0 Fld+Bsr (575 PA)
    ZiPS: .326 WOBA, -2.2 Fld+Bsr (507 PA)

    How does Steamer gives DeJesus an extra win over 600 PA? Does ZiPS have DeJesus playing in right field while Steamer has him in center?

    Comment by JC — February 26, 2013 @ 5:57 pm

  19. or exclude Bill James because it doesn’t appear to use much regression and over-projects counting stats and general expected abilities

    Comment by cody k — February 26, 2013 @ 6:02 pm

  20. I think that’s probably it. The Fans give DeJesus (on average) 12 games in left, 78 games in center, 42 games in right and 6 as utility outfielder. Since, CF is the most common, his replacement level (for Steamer) is based on CF.

    Comment by J. Cross — February 26, 2013 @ 6:57 pm

  21. Zips curently projects Adam Eaton to be HBP 21 times thins year which, if that did happen, would tie the current rookie record of 21 HBP by David Eckstein of the 2001 then Anaheim Angels (no LA necessary). This feat was accomplished in 664 PA.

    Thought you should know.

    Comment by equist — February 27, 2013 @ 10:51 am

  22. Probably won’t happen but interesting

    Comment by bgburek — February 27, 2013 @ 3:45 pm

  23. “Many tests have shown that combining multiple projections is better than simply relying on one system anyway, so that methodology will smooth many of these gaps.”

    Which tests are these and what are they testing? I’ve observed that averages are ‘safer’ and produce lower RMSE but just ends up serving the same function as regression. Might as well just use Marcel rates then…

    Comment by Rudy Gamble — February 27, 2013 @ 5:27 pm

  24. Hindsight is 20/20. He hit exactly .263 in 2013!

    Comment by Noah — November 29, 2013 @ 4:45 pm

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Close this window.

0.195 Powered by WordPress