Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Tue Sep 30, 2014 4:57 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 4:15 pm 
Online
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2456
Location: Tejas
Steamer and Oliver projections are starting to come out, with ZiPS being released in team-by-team installments. It's not the bible, but it's interesting and typically reasonably accurate. I decided to poke around at some of the 1B options out there and compare to Lambo. I was surprised at how in-line he was with everybody that's been brought up. Some of that is youth (he has more ability to grow than a guy like Moreland who is 28), some if it is underwhelming options, and some of it is park factors giving him an automatic boost in wRC+. But side by side with Loney, Moreland, Smoak, and Davis he'd be kind of tough to pick out. Here are the projections (and I'm not using Steamer for the HR stat as they project guys for different PA, whereas Oliver projects 600 PA for all of these guys):

Player A: 11 HR, 7.8% and 7.3% BB rates, 12.5% and 12.3% K rates, 103 and 99 wRC+

Player B: 21 HR, 12.2% and 11.5% BB rates, 20.9% and 22.5% K rates, 103 and 101 wRC+

Player C: 23 HR, 7.5% BB rate in both, 28.8% and 24.5% K rates, 107 and 100 wRC+

Player D: 23 HR, 13.1% and 12.7% BB rates, 23.8% and 25.5% K rates, 120 and 117 wRC+

Player E: 25 HR, 8.7% BB rate for both, 20.5% and 20.3% K rates, 103 and 108 wRC+

For perspective, Morneau had a 98 wRC+ for us last year, Jones had a 97 wRC+ with us, and Lambo had a 98 wRC+. So we aren't necessarily looking at a huge boost either way....or shoes that are particularly hard to fill.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 4:23 pm 
Online
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2456
Location: Tejas
A is Loney, age 30.

B is Smoak, age 27.

C is Lambo, age 25.

D is Davis, age 27.

E is Moreland, age 28.

Some of these guys the computers might have soured on due to lack of production at their age so far.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:46 pm
Posts: 5015
Location: Washington, DC
Player D looks like a significant upgrade. 20% or 17% better than average is nothing to sniff at.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 3138
J_C_Steel wrote:
Player D looks like a significant upgrade. 20% or 17% better than average is nothing to sniff at.


I certainly wouldn't be opposed to an Ike/Gaby platoon. As awful as the last year's final statline was for Davis, the platoon splits being so extreme is a relatively significant culprit ... an incredibly putrid .203 OBP against LHP (for perspective, Gaby posted a .304 OBP against RHP). Of course, Ike didn't mash righties nearly as much as you would anticipate with how hopeless he was against LHP, but he was much better in the second half and the career numbers look to pan out.

Of course, I'm also not as down on Lambo as 90% of Pirates fans seem to be.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 6:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:46 pm
Posts: 5015
Location: Washington, DC
TheShark wrote:
J_C_Steel wrote:
Player D looks like a significant upgrade. 20% or 17% better than average is nothing to sniff at.


I certainly wouldn't be opposed to an Ike/Gaby platoon. As awful as the last year's final statline was for Davis, the platoon splits being so extreme is a relatively significant culprit ... an incredibly putrid .203 OBP against LHP (for perspective, Gaby posted a .304 OBP against RHP). Of course, Ike didn't mash righties nearly as much as you would anticipate with how hopeless he was against LHP, but he was much better in the second half and the career numbers look to pan out.

Of course, I'm also not as down on Lambo as 90% of Pirates fans seem to be.


I'm not "down on Lambo" as a good option for playing time from the bench. He's perfect for that. What he's not perfect for, in my view, is being handed the starting job at first base (as the platoon candidate receiving 70-75% of the playing time). I'd rather that job go to someone else like Ike Davis, thus making the overall team stronger by putting Lambo on the bench or in right field (if he earns playing time).


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:34 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:46 am
Posts: 2111
I'm not opposed to Davis either. I'm opposed to giving up a top prospect for him. Hope Huntington is as well.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:40 pm 
Online
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2456
Location: Tejas
I think Davis will come down to 2 things:

1. How the Pirates feel about the swing. Have seen a couple of tidbits in chats that say scouts think he needs a swing overhaul as he's sacrificed contact for loft and now won't hit enough to see the power translate.

2. If the Mets come off of their delusion of a Nick Kingham type. Thornburg was Milwaukee's #1 prospect in 2013, he's not a scrub (it's a weak system, though).

I wouldn't go so far as Keith Law and dig my heels in on a relief pitcher being adequate return, but they can't be looking for a potential 2/3 starter either. At least not a young, controllable one. He isn't that much of an upgrade to sacrifice that pitching production and be better going forward.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 8:17 pm 
Offline
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:47 pm
Posts: 301
I think these project tools/models are good for players with major league track records. I don't trust them at all for projecting a 25 year old rookie.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 11:16 pm 
Online
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2456
Location: Tejas
Sure, but you aren't exactly looking at guys projected to set the world on fire themselves, even with lengthy track records. I'd take upside over the results that were spit out for the more tenured guys in a heartbeat. No reason to put resources into fringe-average when you have your core locked up til 2018.

Even if Lambo does nothing but replicate his small sample from last year (which was underwhelming, given the hype) you're barely behind the other guys, equal to Morneau/Jones, and doing it at little/no cost. Plus he's 25 so there's hope that he improves as opposed to hope that he merely plateaus and doesn't fall off rapidly when he hits age 30.

I thought Law and Schoenfield made solid points when they said last week that the Pirates actually had a good offseason because they didn't fall into the trap of thinking that they arrived and there is nothing but improvement from here. Both pointed out that the future was really bright, but that the Pirates are a prime regression candidate with more weaknesses than the record showed.

Obviously that's debatable depending on perspective of sustainability of certain things (they cited bullpen, defensive runs saved, Liriano's BB rate, and getting a Locke-esque performance from someone for half a year) but I don't think there's a really overwhelming sentiment that the Pirates needed to make a move to improve the franchise's position. The main guy I've seen saying that is Jim Bowden....which kinda reinforces to me that staying put is the wise thing to do.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Fri Dec 27, 2013 1:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4200
Location: Zelienople, PA
Lambo is not going to get anything the way he played in winter ball. And before anyone says "short period", I would agree... if 2013 wasn't the outlier and his play in winter ball, the norm for the last few years.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 3138
ZelieMike wrote:
And before anyone says "short period", I would agree... if 2013 wasn't the outlier and his play in winter ball, the norm for the last few years.


I think that's a pretty big stretch to say that posting a .648 OPS in winter ball is the "norm" for someone who has a career .802 OPS in the minors. Could 2013 ultimately end up being an outlier, sure, and it almost assuredly is in regards to the power surge, but he wasn't nothing before last year. He was a top prospect in the Dodgers system and was basically an average player in the high minors before reaching his peak at age 25. I have no idea what I would project from him at this point, but again, he wasn't just a minor league depth piece before last year.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 11:59 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7269
The Mets asked the Orioles for minor league pitcher Eduardo Rodriguez, the team's #3 prospect, and was told no.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/ ... er=ya5nbcs

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:44 pm
Posts: 10692
nad69dan wrote:
The Mets asked the Orioles for minor league pitcher Eduardo Rodriguez, the team's #3 prospect, and was told no.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/ ... er=ya5nbcs

I saw that. The rumors also indicate Alderson asked the Pirates for Nick Kingham, and Huntington said no.

Alderson appears to believe that Ike Davis is worth a top-tier SP prospect who is very close to major-league ready. I believe that the market will correct that view.

Davis has value. He takes a walk, can get on base (when he hits above .230), and has power. However, he also has a scary K rate, suffers incredible slumps, is strictly a platoon player, plays the least demanding defensive position, and has an injury history.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:00 pm 
Online
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2456
Location: Tejas
Might as well aim high, but I'd be surprised if they get what they want. Still, with what the Angels got for Trumbo, you never know who gets desperate and does something dumb.

They're probably going to need to accept a potential 2/3 man that's a ways away in his development (like Clay Holmes) or a guy with a 4/5 ceiling but who is pretty much ready-made (like Cumpton). I don't necessarily agree with the guys who think he's only worth a reliever. But then again, I'm not sure how much work the swing needs (which is what the people most down on him are pointing to).

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 7:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4200
Location: Zelienople, PA
Bucfan wrote:
nad69dan wrote:
The Mets asked the Orioles for minor league pitcher Eduardo Rodriguez, the team's #3 prospect, and was told no.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/ ... er=ya5nbcs

I saw that. The rumors also indicate Alderson asked the Pirates for Nick Kingham, and Huntington said no.

Alderson appears to believe that Ike Davis is worth a top-tier SP prospect who is very close to major-league ready. I believe that the market will correct that view.

Davis has value. He takes a walk, can get on base (when he hits above .230), and has power. However, he also has a scary K rate, suffers incredible slumps, is strictly a platoon player, plays the least demanding defensive position, and has an injury history.



So, your saying Adam LaRoche, part deaux?

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4200
Location: Zelienople, PA
TheShark wrote:
ZelieMike wrote:
And before anyone says "short period", I would agree... if 2013 wasn't the outlier and his play in winter ball, the norm for the last few years.


I think that's a pretty big stretch to say that posting a .648 OPS in winter ball is the "norm" for someone who has a career .802 OPS in the minors. Could 2013 ultimately end up being an outlier, sure, and it almost assuredly is in regards to the power surge, but he wasn't nothing before last year. He was a top prospect in the Dodgers system and was basically an average player in the high minors before reaching his peak at age 25. I have no idea what I would project from him at this point, but again, he wasn't just a minor league depth piece before last year.


You simply cannot look at the career OPS by itself Shark. That does not reflect his terrible three years since he got here until last year, including a demotion because he was so poor. That is his norm as a Pirate minor leaguer, and was how he performed in winter ball. 2013 was most certainly his outlier year as a Pirate. Was he having a career or breakout year last year? I don't know, but I have read and heard the FO's analysis of him, and it certainly did not point to a guy they would give a job to.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 10:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 3138
ZelieMike wrote:
You simply cannot look at the career OPS by itself Shark. That does not reflect his terrible three years since he got here until last year, including a demotion because he was so poor. That is his norm as a Pirate minor leaguer, and was how he performed in winter ball. 2013 was most certainly his outlier year as a Pirate. Was he having a career or breakout year last year? I don't know, but I have read and heard the FO's analysis of him, and it certainly did not point to a guy they would give a job to.


Again, I think your terminology is a bit harsh. 2010 was a shortened season due to a suspension and an injury when he ran into an outfield wall. Yes, he struggled in AAA the following year but had a bounce back year in AA, and it was probably an ambitious promotion on the Pirates part to begin with considering he was slightly below average the year prior. 2012 was another shortened season due to injury but overall he had a solid but not great year. By last year he was destroying AA pitching (which was to be anticipated by repeating it that many times) and did the exact same damage when promoted to AAA. I don't say this as a matter of the context of his peripherals (which is another whole discussion re: his plate discipline issues), and I already said that it could very well be that 2013 was an outlier year, but no, it's inaccurate to say the .648 OPS he's posting in winter ball is "the norm" or that he been"terrible" overall. I stand by what I originally said, he was basically an average player before who still at the upside at his age and previous prospect status to break out.

As far as your point about how the Pirates won't give him a job, I'm not sure which current Pirates 1B you're expecting to get the RHP ABs if a FA isn't acquired, and that's looking more and more likely considering how slim (not to mention mostly unappealing) the 1B FA marketplace is looking to be, especially with the high asking prices being reported from NYM with Ike Davis, having inquired about Kingham and top pitching prospects from other teams. And again, this is purely about the context of the team's current configuration, not at all influenced by own opinions or expectations about Lambo.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:23 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4200
Location: Zelienople, PA
Regarding the market, it is still early, and by early I mean plenty of time for GM's to realize the true worth of their players. You listening Alderson?

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:51 am 
Online
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2456
Location: Tejas
I think it's tough to gauge Lambo one way or the other at this point due to age and the way he was rushed.

He wasn't age appropriate for his levels until last year, and by that point he'd seen them more than once.

Point is, I wouldn't really write him off at this point because of his age.

It's somewhat similar to my view of Tabata. I don't think he's doomed as a baseball player because he didn't succeed as a 20-22 year old at the MLB level. He absolutely wasn't great, but I don't think he's done developing once he's reached the professional ranks. He's still a 24-25 year old.

I don't know what Lambo will be. But he did hit 33 HR in the upper levels of professional baseball as a 24 year old. That's something. 24 is 24, to me.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Fun with projections, 1B edition
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:24 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 3138
ZelieMike wrote:
Regarding the market, it is still early, and by early I mean plenty of time for GM's to realize the true worth of their players.


I just don't really follow where you're coming from. Being optimistic about acquiring a FA is fine, but Huntington/hypothetical GM X is not assuredly going to be able to magically pull in a 1B FA, especially with the slim pickings the market has gotten down to at this point, plus the foolishly steep asking prices of those left (see: Ike).

You're referencing a guy you think won't have a job (Lambo) who fills a role of which there are zero other internal options. And so, if they decide he's not going to have a job like you predict they view him ... then what?

Not to mention that they are simply not going to choose not to give him an opportunity based on the sample of 90 winter ball ABs coming off of a year when he hit 32 HRs in the high minors.

I agree that Huntington assuredly made an off-season 1B acquisition priority # 1 the second they decided to stand pat in RF and letting Jones walk (i.e. the entire off-season), but it's beginning to look like that won't be the case, and if not, there is no other solution than a Lambo/Gaby platoon experiment.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], LtCol Kojak Slaphead, StarlingArcher, val and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits