Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: The Nova Blog for Villanova Fans!

2009 Cardinals by WAR. Do over!

Make that 85, maybe 86 wins.

That seems about right. 88 wins was too much of a Billy Mumphrey story for me. Sky at Beyond the Boxscore worked out whatever bugs may be in the old spreadsheet, making it more accurate and user friendly.  This time I pretty much went straight CHONE on the projections, hitting, ERA, and defense.

I had a few snags you all can help me with, and that is

  • How many plate appearances should some of the bench players get? Seems like it is anyone's guess as to who is the utility infielder, and what about the outfield?
  • Sky says 350 pinch-hits...any guesses as to what the avg. wOBA would be for those 350?
  • To WonderBrad or to not WonderBrad? I'd lean towards not given that he's on shaky ground, but how would you allocate those innings?

I should probably make a Colby the starter version in a separate tab. Right now, I have Colby the midseason call up, but at least for now TLR is saying all the right things about playing from the get go Rasmus if he has a strong spring.

Anyway, I'd love any input you all would have to offer and will change the sheet accordingly.

One last thing: BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS BEN SHEETS. 

That is all.

5 recs  |  Comment 48 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Minor Quibbles

Joey Bombs – .334 as 1B/3B, .343 as OF ? – Input mistake I assume

Molina BR at -.05 but Glaus at -.25 ?

From BB-Ref, I calculated the wOBA for PH as 0.301 from (1.75*OBP + SLG)/3

I asked Sky, but I wonder if the -2.0 POS adjustment should be applied to PH.

I actually did quite a bit of work trying to figure out predicted lineups and estimate PA, but overall they were only minor differences and didn’t have significant impact on the end result.

I don’t think any of these will change the result much and we all could probably argue all day about each individual wOBA, but it would only waste our time (I do enough of that already).

by JBrew on Jan 15, 2009 11:31 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

thnx

For Yadier, I meant -.5, not -.05. Mather indeed was another input mistake. And I changed the PH to .301. All told, it dropped the Cards to 85.1 wins.

I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9

by erik on Jan 15, 2009 11:46 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

PH's tend to come from pretty weak hitters.

So to give them a -2.0 WAR penalty seems harsh. My advice is to not put any NL at-bats in the DH section. Keep everyone within a real position. I’ll continue to think about the best method. I might end up asking folks to change the DH section to PH and add a new positional adjustment lookup, but that would be easy to do.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 15, 2009 5:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks

for now I just kept everyone at their normal position.

I left out Chris Duncan before but brought him back for 225 PA’s at his CHONE projected wOBA of .351, and gave him a -1 for his bummy defense. Objections, anyone?

I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9

by erik on Jan 15, 2009 7:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

forgot to mention

that gets us up to 87 wins.

I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9

by erik on Jan 15, 2009 7:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

tab 4

Sheets at 150 innings gets us to 90.5

I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9

by erik on Jan 15, 2009 8:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Really good work but really bad news

If we are shaping up right now as is to only be a 85 win team than this is bad news. We still need to acquire players that will give us a +5 Wins over current Replacement. Their is some big drop offs in most of our players compared to last year.

Schumaker is only going to be worth .8 Wins when he was worth 2.5 Wins last year? That seems rather unlikely to me. I expect CHONE doesn’t expect him to sustain his rather high GB% which is likely but I still think they are rather bearish on him.

Kennedy is another player seeing a rather large drop off being worth 1.7 wins in 08 to only .7 wins in 09. They project his offense to be around the same so they expect his glove to drop off that much? In 07 he had a -3.9 UZR/150 and 08 had a 22.0 UZR/150 so which one was the anomaly? I think this says more about Iz2 being great a great defender to relieve pressure off Kennedy. So we get have to see how good Greene is going to be on defense to really see how good Kennedy is going to be.

Looking up and down our roster it is the same story. A lot of career years in 2008 and 2009 a lot of regression to the mean. Some I find to be true such as Wellemeyer coming down to earth especially in terms of IP. But overall it seems like everyone is getting worst than last year. Which imo seems rather unlikely with such a young team. CHONE is far and away the most conservative league wide in their numbers which could easily skew the whole lot of numbers.

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 15, 2009 2:47 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Good points

I agree on Schumaker — I think if he stays in a platoon, like erik has him basically, that he’ll be worth around 1.5 to 2.0 wins next year. I don’t think he has as good a season as 2008, but I don’t see him dropping off that much.

I think the 2008 Kennedy is the standard to go by. He was hurt for a lot of time in 2007 which limited his range defensively, and 2008 is better than his career numbers, but much more in line with how good he was from 2000-2006.

From what I can see, it seems like our season really comes down to three things:

  1. How much, if any, does Ryan Ludwick regress?
  2. What kind of production are we going to get in CF from either Ankiel, Rasmus, Skip, or a combination of all of them?
  3. How much, if any, do Wellemeyer and Lohse regress?

I guess you could also say that a lot hinges on whether the team gets another starter or not too.

"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 15, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not sure if I dare to say it

but that Carpenter guy is a pretty big wild card too.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Jan 15, 2009 4:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

To your questions...
  1. I think you have the outfielders about right. The only guy I would quibble with is Barton; I’m just not sure that he’s going to take AB’s away from Bombs even though we’d need a leadoff hitter when Skip isn’t playing. I’m bullish on Mather, though, so maybe that’s why I feel this way.
  2. I’ve seen .301 wOBA used for pinch hitters in some spreadsheets done by other teams, so I would assume that it’s right.
  3. I think that you have to include Thompson because of all the health concerns of the starting staff Ben Sheets, and the fact that Boggs won’t throw all of the innings to replace injured starters Ben Sheets.

I do think you should do a sheet with Rasmus starting the season in St. Louis, just to see what the difference looks like if he starts there. May I suggest doing three different ones though? One with Ank in RF, Colby in CF, and Ludwick in LF, one with Ank traded and Skip/Mather replacing him, and one with Ludwick traded and Skip/Mather replacing him. I’m just interested to see how moving either of those guys and calling up Colby effects the team. You could even add in a young starter that might be a trade target and give him 150 innings to see what difference it would make.

"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 15, 2009 3:24 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

another wild card factor

is if Mather becomes the next spezio (without the cocaine)

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 15, 2009 4:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd be ok if

Mather sports a soul patch, wears a flat bill, forgets his sunglasses, and plays in a band.
But no drinking and driving, and definitely no coca, or weed for that matter.

born Dodger blue, now dyed Cardinals red

by totalloser on Jan 15, 2009 7:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

a ben sheets with Rasmus starting the season in St. Louis…?

* sarcasm might be involved in this comment

by mattyfrommo on Jan 15, 2009 5:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

done

I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9

by erik on Jan 15, 2009 8:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

PK's on shaky ground?

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!

by gdm426 on Jan 15, 2009 3:30 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I would say so he is currently number 25 on the roster

Next pitching asset acquired could sign the end for him

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 15, 2009 3:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

OH NOES!!

whatever will i do?

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!

by gdm426 on Jan 16, 2009 12:22 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Colby, Magic Wonderland

I added two tabs.

First, I bumped Skip to his Bill James/Marcel projection on all sheets.

On the 2nd tab, I gave Colby 500 PA’s and redistributed most of the 4th OF PA’s to Skip. Net gain of .4 wins, if Colby plays good defense. (Which I expect he will)

Third tab is a Dreamworld of Magic, 90 win with no trades/signings. Carp throws 135 innings, Pujols repeats his 2008 campaign, Colby has a ROY type of season, and Perez, Motte are thrust into key roles and excel whereas Ryan Franklin takes a backseat.

I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9

by erik on Jan 15, 2009 4:33 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Do you know when the PECOTA projections are due out?

I think it would be most accurate if you used CHONE for hitters and PECOTA for Pitching since those are 2 most accurate systems.

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 15, 2009 6:07 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I think it would be most accurate if you used CHONE for hitters and PECOTA for Pitching since those are 2 most accurate systems.

Most accurate? I think that’s a pretty strong statement to make without posting supporting data >_<

by astrostl on Jan 15, 2009 6:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

This is how they ended up last year

Do you remember yesterday when I showed these to you? I guess not

So how did THT projections do?

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 15, 2009 6:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

if those are ops and era differences, then what that article is really saying those systems are interchangeable. 10 points of OPS and .06 runs per 9 innings are noise.

by greenback06 on Jan 15, 2009 9:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I’ve linked to this discussion thread with several of the system authors recently – it’s a post-analysis of that first BP article. We’ve got Nate analyzing and saying that PECOTA > ZiPS > ESPN, people considering what methods should be used to do analyze, some methods showing a near-tie between everyone, Rally (CHONE) lamenting his failure to beat Marcel on MLB same-team veterans.

And all of this is just a one-year perspective anyway. And it’s using OPS, so a result of .250/.350/.450 would be viewed the same as .275/.300/.500. The THT article is the same: one year as viewed by OPS, except it concludes that ZiPS (which fared very well per Nate) is lagging behind.

I’m not dissing the analysts in any way, shape or form here, and certainly not dissing the any of the projection systems. I’m just very reluctant to personally conclude that anything is the “best” from a given one-year OPS study with specific viewpoints though, especially with the amount of chattering I’ve seen by people who know infinitely more about it than I do.

I think it’s awesome to have all of them, and I see them as better indicators of future performance than I could predict just by looking at numbers. Especially when they agree with each other. I wonder if anyone’s done specific blend studies, as Nate alludes.

by astrostl on Jan 16, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

In The Book they

give pinch-hitting a 6% wOBA penalty and somewhere on the blog I saw a positional adjustment of -.5. I gave them 220 plate appearances at .300. Assuming that’s close and whatever wOBA I fashioned out of ZiPS is reasonably accurate I get 84 wins according to that system. That’s with the old spreadsheet though.

by haltz on Jan 16, 2009 12:18 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

FWIW...

… a Yanks blog did some sims, and have the Cards at 85 wins, 5th-best record in the NL, and first runner-up to the WC.

http://www.replacementlevel.com/index.php/RLYW/comments/extremely_early_projected_standings

quite frankly, i might take those odds. the season will probably come down to how healthy we are (Pujols, Carp, whatever random injuries) relative to other teams (esp. Cubs and Phillies). we’re certainly not favored to make the playoffs, but the odds can’t be terrible.

in fact, i looked the odds up: Cards are 8:1 to win the NL Pennant in Vegas. so their odds of making the playoffs in some form or other must be much better than that (not listed at the site i checked, and tradesports.com seems to be out of business). 3:1? 2.5:1?

i’m content with those odds.

by kindred on Jan 16, 2009 12:54 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

actually...

… didn’t notice at first, but the site than ran the sims also ran odds and had the Cards at 25% to make the playoffs. my gut says it’s a bit higher than that, maybe 35-40%, but that could just be my bias.

by kindred on Jan 16, 2009 1:01 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That should also show the tremendous value

of adding 2-3 more wins to this team. It literally appears to be the difference between October baseball or couch sitting.

by azruavatar on Jan 16, 2009 8:08 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

For the players.

I’ll be couch sitting regardless.

by azruavatar on Jan 16, 2009 8:08 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

you're right...

… a team in that position (on the bubble) should be willing to pay a bit more for those extra 2-3 wins than a team facing different odds.

it really is a shame that Dunn and Abreu are still on the market. we’d have a lot more flexibility if we could trade AND sign.

by kindred on Jan 16, 2009 12:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I wonder how many wins we were projected to win last year

and how far above that we were, because it seems to me that we have made some slight improvements… was last year just lucky? we could have been luckier without all those injuries though.

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 16, 2009 2:01 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Aside from PECOTA

hating the Cardinals, it was 78-83 wins.

Practically the entire lineup outperformed their projections. Wainwright went down obviously, but the ~600 innings that Lohse, Looper and the Colonel provided were pretty surprising. Depends on how you want to define luck, but sure, at least somewhat. Although it probably would have been fair to take some of those true talent estimates with a grain of salt at the beginning of the year (Looper, Wellemeyer, Ludwick, Ankiel) and those turned up in a real way in our favor.

by haltz on Jan 16, 2009 2:16 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think you can use WAR to project a team

There are way too many variables that can affect your projection. Right now you everyone thinks we will be around an 85 win team. But we could end up being a 70 win team if Glaus, Carp, Ankiel and Waino miss time and if Ludwick regresses significantly. That would drop to a 65 win team if none of our young guys in the bullpen have good years and if Colby and Greene really tank. Or we could be a 55 win team if Pujols gets injured for the season (yup, Pujols is worth 30 WAR).

But if Carp pitches a full season at the 05-06 level, than that bumps us up to a 88 win team. If Lohse doesn’t regress, which for some reason everyone assumes he will despite the fact that his ERA and FIP were very close and his BABIP was very close with his career numbers, than we are up to a 90 win team. If Kahlil Greene goes back to 07 form, than we are a 91 win team. If Perez, Motte and Kinney actually pitch like they are capable of, instead of everyone else’s uber-conservitave projections and our bullpen helps us outperform our Pythag record, than we are a 93 win team. If Ludwick doesn’t regress, than it’s up to 95 wins. If Piniero pitches like he did in 07 with us, which considering some of his younger years in Seattle and the fact the his BABIP was about 20 points higher than his career last year and the fact that his LOB% was just 68.7, than we are a 97 win team.

I think all of those good things are a possibility but also all of the bad things are a possibility too. Therefore you really can’t try to project a teams record down to the nose.

by vivaelpujols on Jan 16, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nobody is trying

see the future, just what’s most likely. There are a ton of outcomes surrounding that since they only play the season once.

by haltz on Jan 16, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Any projection has implied error bars.

Whether someone is projecting with their guy or projecting by crunching the numbers, it’s still “just a guess”. That doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing. And, mind you, projections done by crunching the numbers tend to beat most other methods, with ESPN-style experts getting their butts whooped and even Vegas lines not quite keeping up with things like PECOTA.

Of course there are a lot of “ifs”. But you can find the middle ground reasonably well.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 16, 2009 5:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

obviously number crunching will beat out John Kruk everyday

But, especially for our team next year, it is to hard to try and predict the season. Next year, our team will have so many relatively unproven guys like Kinney, Lohse and Ludwick, so many health risks in Carpenter, Ankiel, Waino and Glaus, and so many young guys that were counting on like Rasmus (hopefully), perez, Motte and McClellan that number crunching really doesn’t work on those guys.

by vivaelpujols on Jan 16, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

What do you mean by "really doesn't work on those guys"?

I agree projecting the future is tough. I agree it’s harder with young guys. But it’s still worth doing, no?

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 17, 2009 11:13 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think a better way to put it would be to say

that the margin of error in projecting outcomes (in terms of wins and losses) is higher for the Cards than for most teams. It’s actually a pretty interesting argument. Basically I think you are saying that the Cards are subject to more variance than most teams, and projecting them is therefore harder. I guess I can see that.

This brings up and interesting point: I wonder what the margin of error is for these predictions, and how one derives them. 85 +/- 6 wins… something like that perhaps. Meaning 95% of the time the Cards would win between 91 and 79 games, assuming a normal distribution (which you might not be able to assume).

Gregatron is not responsible for any of the crap he just wrote.

by Gregatron on Jan 22, 2009 10:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Just swapped out all the CHONE numbers

I just swapped out the CHONE numbers for Bill James numbers. Bill James has us winning 89.7 games. Here Here to Bill James!

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 16, 2009 11:28 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Your joking right?

Bill James has Pujols at .459wOBA. So I kind of doubt they think he is only slightly above league average. Did you mean .345 cause I can believe that?

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 17, 2009 12:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Uh, typo, sorry.

Should be a .345 wOBA league average for BJ. That’s till high, but, well, not .445 high. ; )

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 19, 2009 11:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

But wouldn't a higher

Wouldn’t a higher win total on the offensive side balance itself out by lower ones on the pitching side? For the Cardinals though the Pitching side was same with CHONE and BJ. But with BJ offense was 2 wins higher.

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 19, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Bill James

predictions are always optimistic, all the way around.

Chone seems to like the Cardinals quite a bit. I get 87 wins with zero adjustments.

by haltz on Jan 20, 2009 6:07 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Start posting about the Cardinals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

Cbs_fantasy_baseball_promo

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar_small
Do the Cardinals need to add another Bullpen arm?
Ozzie_small
VEB Needs a Tagline
Photo_29_small
Rich Hill still has two arms for some reason.
Cardinals_spring_baseball_small
2010: A Baseball Odyssey
Pcb_sunset_web_small
What does the BA Top 100 tell us?

Recent FanPosts

Mizzou_small
VEB Bracket Contest (EDIT: Created)
Veb-adam-yadi-boog_small
Strasburg v. Wainwright - March 14, 2010
St
1985 Don Denkinger bad call photo
74591_missouri_state_small
(Another) Fantasy League
Images_small
Wednesday Morning Fun Fact
Cardinal70-48_small
2010 Cardinal Approval Ratings

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SBNation.com Recent Stories

New York Yankees' Robinson Cano follows through on his 200th career hit during a baseball game against the Boston Red Sox at Yankee Stadium, Sunday, Sept. 27, 2009, in New York. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens) link

Is Robinson Cano A Good Choice To Hit Behind A-Rod?

Arizona Diamondbacks' Mark Reynolds connects for a three-run home run against the Houston Astros during the sixth inning of an MLB baseball game Friday, June 12, 2009, in Phoenix. It was Reynolds' fourth hit of the night. (AP Photo/Matt York) +1 updates

Mark Reynolds Signs Three-Year Contract With Diamondbacks

via danhoard.mlblogs.com

Top Sox Prospect Ryan Westmoreland Scheduled For Brain Surgery

More from SBNation.com >


Managers

Jack_benny_small DanUpBaby

Editors

Images_small azruavatar

Trigun_001_small the red baron

Adam1_small chuckb