community projection results: rick ankiel

by lboros on Jan 31, 2008 8:20 AM EST in St. Louis Cardinals News

we got 99 individual forecasts on the rick ankiel community projection --- i think that's a record. let's get right to the bottom line:

AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	AVG	OBP	SLG
484	75	129	27	3	27	81	33	.266	.319	.501

i'll add a note in the comments section re how i derived the figures for doubles / triples / walks, in case anybody is interested. before i compare our projection to the computer-generated ones, i'd first like to compare it to some similar real-life seasons, as revealed through the magic of the lahmann database:

	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	AVG	OBP	SLG
ankiel 08 (proj)	484	75	129	27	3	27	81	33	.266	.319	.501
jay gibbons 2005	488	72	135	33	3	26	79	28	.277	.317	.516
jason lane 2005	517	65	138	34	4	26	78	32	.267	.316	.499
richie sexson 1999	479	72	122	17	7	31	116	34	.255	.305	.514
albert belle 1991	461	60	130	31	2	28	95	25	.282	.323	.540

jay gibbons and jason lane were both 28 years old in 2005, the same age ankiel will be this season; belle and sexson were both 24 in the respective seasons listed above. on a pure gut level (and that's what this exercise is all about, right?) , gibbons and lane seem like fair archetypes for ankiel --- guys who hit with enough power that you're willing to live with their other limitations. we should not overlook the fact that both of them have gone due south since 2005; lane batted .201 and .175 the last two years, while gibbons (a steroid / hgh user who's been suspsended for the first 15 games of 2008) slugged below .350 last season.

let's put our projection alongside the name-brand ones:

	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	AVG	OBP	SLG
VEB	484	75	129	27	3	27	81	33	.266	.319	.501
Marcel	264	42	73	14	2	12	47	23	.277	.334	.481
bill james	456	67	117	19	2	29	94	29	.257	.301	.498
CHONE	510	66	127	21	3	27	75	34	.249	.300	.461
ZIPS	448	46	108	18	2	25	77	25	.241	.285	.458

as in the yadi molina projection, VEB has a sunnier forecast for ankiel than the objective models; we can be excused for that, 'cause we're fans. and in our defense (in another parallel w/ the molina projection), we diverge w/ the objective models primarily in batting average, the least predictable stat; we generally agree w/ them re isolated power and walk rate:

	ISO	BB/PA
VEB	.235	.06
Marcel	.204	.08
bill james	.241	.06
CHONE	.212	.07
ZIPS	.217	.05

if you add 11 singles to ankiel's ZIPS line, the forecast is very close to ours (.266 / .309 / .482). add 9 singles to CHONE, and you get the same thing (.267 / .316 / .478). those differences aren't meaningless --- you'd expect 10 or so singles to be worth nearly a full win over the course of a year --- but they're highly influenced by random chance. so we're not way off base here, just mildly hopeful as fans are wont.

the quintessential projector was bigcardsfan5:

	AB	R	HR	RBI	AVG	OBP	SLG
VEB	484	75	27	81	.266	.319	.501
bigcardsfan5	488	85	27	85	.266	.316	.510

tournament results to come this afternoon.

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

interpolation

to derive estimates for doubles/triples:

i calculated the total bases for each individual forecast. easily done: at-bats x slugging = total bases.
i averaged the individual estimates to get a mean total-bases figure (in this case, 242).
from the mean total-bases figure, i subtracted the bases already accounted for --- 1 base for each hit (129), and 3 extra bases for each homer (81).
that left 32 extra bases unaccounted for (242 total bases minus 129 hits minus 81 extra bases on homers). i simply applied ankiel's rate of triples from last year (1 per 170 at-bats), which yields an estimated 3 triples per our projected total of 484 at-bats.
all the remaining extra bases (26) must be doubles.

to estimate walks, i did the following:

for each individual forecast, multiply at-bats x batting average to derive a hits total.
then use the following formula to estimate walks+hbp for each forecast: ((OBP*AB)-H)/(1-OBP)
average the individual walks+hbp totals to get a community mean (in this case, 37)
arbitrarily decide that ankiel would get plunked once per 125 at-bats, or 4 times overall. subtract that from 37, leaving 33 walks.

by lboros on Jan 31, 2008 8:46 AM EST reply actions

wait a sec

the mean total bases projection was 243, not 242 --- hence the total for doubles was 27.

by lboros on Jan 31, 2008 8:47 AM EST up reply actions

Bullish

Compared to my personal projection for Ankiel, the community consensus is awfully optimistic.

I'd be thrilled with the community line for Ank, but considering his low walk rate, I see pitchers throwing him a lot of junk and letting him hack at it. I don't see his power as being as high either on account of him not getting as many fastballs to cream.

If he can be a smart hitter, he's got a chance to put up these numbers batting in front of Albert.

Color me doubtful, though.

by arch support on Jan 31, 2008 9:26 AM EST reply actions

Results

Did you get Will Leitch's projection? He's in Arizona and may not have been able to send one in. I'm guessing his projection would skew the results upward by about 5 homers.

by birdjam on Jan 31, 2008 9:26 AM EST reply actions

hmm

His vote couldn't scew the results that much unless he has Ankiel hitting 500 HRs since there would be 100 total votes everyone's vote would be divided by 100 to give their individual affect to the outcome. That is assuming that LB does a straight average. Also I would prefer to throw out the top and low end projections and average the middle as well but with fewer results that doesn't work as well.

by StLHugo on Jan 31, 2008 9:33 AM EST up reply actions

You obviously aren't familiar...

... with how Leitch feels about Ankiel.

by birdjam on Jan 31, 2008 10:11 AM EST up reply actions

guess not

I have read very little deadspin before so please enlighten me to his "love affair" with Slick Rick.

by StLHugo on Jan 31, 2008 10:20 AM EST up reply actions

LOL

There is an entire chapter in his new book titled "My Unhealthy Man Crush on Rick Ankiel."

by birdjam on Jan 31, 2008 10:23 AM EST up reply actions

Leitch has the same

affection towards Ankiel as a teen-age girl would've had regarding either the NKOTB or 'N Sync.

"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it."

by cardsrul on Jan 31, 2008 11:13 AM EST up reply actions

lboros's line

lboros, do you submit a guess on the community player projections? If so, what was your guess for Ankiel?

Just curious.

by arch support on Jan 31, 2008 9:32 AM EST reply actions

i had him at

375 at-bats, .250 / .300 / .460, with 18 homers. i think there's a significant chance he gets hurt, and a significant chance he hits .230 --- but there's also a reasonable chance he will do well. i underestimated him last year; for the team's sake, i hope i'm underestimating him this year.

by lboros on Jan 31, 2008 10:07 AM EST up reply actions

I like Ankiel to suprise this year...

He has the power. He hit 40 homeruns last year. He is quick enough for the bat to make up for his lack of hitting experience. Also he should have an idea as to what he will be seeing for pitches due to his experience as a pitcher himself. I do agree though that he could become injured at some point. That bum knee concerns me.

"Why does he keep saying that?"

by Red Blazer on Jan 31, 2008 10:29 AM EST reply actions

The Natural

His overwhelming skillset will take over, and he will be a star.

I'm bullish on Rick, and believe he is really going to break out.

I do hope Tony bats hin in the 5 hole though. I don't like a .320 OBP in front of Albert.

"You're either rebuilding for something special, or you're on the verge of something special. To be in between is foolish." Billy Beane

by bobbyballgame1 on Jan 31, 2008 10:42 AM EST reply actions

to me

If he has an OPS of .800 or above then he's had a nice year. It might be streaky---but good enough.

I understand OPS on an individual basis but is an .800 OPS and above a fair expectation for a corner OFer?

SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Jan 31, 2008 10:58 AM EST reply actions

I didn't get mine in on time, so here's mine...

Sorry, if this should go in the other thread, so be it...and since I'm so late, I'm not going to put it in the right order or whatever.

I am also assuming good health:

.270/.315/.470
500 ab
135 hits (17 doubles, 4 triples, 25 home runs)
75 runs
85 rbi (if he hits #2 all year, switch those two numbers.)
5 steals, 1 caught

stlfan

by stlfan on Jan 31, 2008 11:18 AM EST reply actions

Ank

I think the community is a bit high on Mr. Ank. I had him posting a .290 OBP! I just feel he's too much of a hacker to ever put up good OBP numbers. On the other hand, he's got enough pop to get a good number of homers and doubles, and enough speed to get some extra singles that he shouldn't be getting.

Of course, the guy could go off the deep end. God, I hope not. He's been through so much in his life that I just hope he can be a positive member of the 08 St. Louis Cardinals. Anything beyond that would be gravy.

"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 31, 2008 11:47 AM EST reply actions

BTW

This has nothing to do with anything, but I was over on the Worldwide Leader's site seeing what was new with the Santana situation...and I had a hard time wading through all of the Tom Brady hero-worship going on over there. Yikes...The guy is a hell of a good player, but unless I missed something he's yet to cure cancer or make babies love rainbows because he kissed babies AND rainbows...

"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 31, 2008 11:50 AM EST reply actions

Thus, my reason

for having absolutely nothing to do with anything WWL-related for the last two weeks. In fact, ESPN Radio is no longer on my radar; it's become completely unlistenable.

"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it."

by cardsrul on Jan 31, 2008 12:01 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed

ESPN has gotten a little nauseating re: big games. It seems that all 1 billion of their shows talking about the same thing from 6 gazillion angles. The only shows I can stand to watch are Sportscenter in the morning before I go to work and PTI occasionally. I believe the key phrase here is "oversaturation."

"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 31, 2008 2:04 PM EST up reply actions

entertainment

somewhere along the line ESPN stopped being about sports and started being about entertainment. thats when they lost me.

by dmb60614 on Jan 31, 2008 4:58 PM EST up reply actions

I'm...

...not sure the two can't coexist. The thing that bothers me the most is all the screaming and yelling and blowhards like Stephen A. Smith and Bill Plaschke that they let talk because, um, well I don't know why. I guess they think that screaming is very entertaining, b/c they center about 1/2 of their programming around it. Maybe if the people screaming weren't knuckleheads, that may help too...

"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 31, 2008 5:05 PM EST up reply actions

shocked

to actually be the close to avereage

i was figuring him as hitting in the 2-hole all year in front of albert, so if he hits elsewhere, or pujols gets hurt all bets are off

Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.

by bigcardsfan5 on Jan 31, 2008 11:54 AM EST reply actions

espn

i was watching espn a few days ago when they had a fantasy baseball segment. the topic of rick ankiel came up. two of the personalities said not to draft him, he was a mirage. they thought the hgh nonsense or something else would screw with his fragile mind. while i tend to think his pitching problems were caused by some anxiety disorder, i think he will handle those issues better as a batter. his power is real. i definitely think he can up that .266/.319/.501 line.

by dmb60614 on Jan 31, 2008 12:34 PM EST reply actions

BPro's Top 100...

List just came out.
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7092

Cardinals on the list:
Colby Rasmus - #8
Chris Perez - #69
Bryan Anderson - #71

Boomer.

by glamboomer on Jan 31, 2008 12:59 PM EST reply actions

ESPN's (Keith Law's) is out as well

Here.

Colby Rasmus #5
Mitch Boggs #74
Jaime Garcia #85

by holden on Jan 31, 2008 2:26 PM EST up reply actions

Law high on Boggs

I was surprised to see Law has Boggs higher on his list of Cards prospects (#2 overall) than any other minor league expert I've seen. How much of a shot do you think he has of being the fifth starter out of spring training? I would think the odds are good that we will see him at some point this year in the rotation if he impresses at AAA.

by pitchingandefense on Jan 31, 2008 2:55 PM EST up reply actions

Read his chat

If you read Law's chat it isn't that he is really that high on Boggs, he is higher then most though, but he is really low on the others, Garcia's elbow, Perez's control, Anderson he doesn't think is a catcher(uh what?), Ottavino is a reliever, etc.

Boggs should make an appearance this season but I doubt it will be out of spring training.

by StLHugo on Jan 31, 2008 3:22 PM EST up reply actions

Boggs...

Law's placement of Boggs in his top 100 has nothing to do with his evaluation of our other prospects. He didn't make it because there had to be a Cardinal there, he made it because Law believes he belongs.

"You're either rebuilding for something special, or you're on the verge of something special. To be in between is foolish." Billy Beane

by bobbyballgame1 on Feb 1, 2008 12:03 AM EST up reply actions

BP

Goldstein said in his chat that Garcia just barely missed the top 100 due to the elbow concerns.

by mikedallas23 @ Viva El Birdos on Jan 31, 2008 4:22 PM EST up reply actions

I don't have a man crush, but

I still like the Ankster. If you take the VEB AB projection times last year's MLB numbers you get a line of .285/.328/.535 of course with totals of 31HR, 110RBI and 115K. Now I don't expect him to be off the charts like he was when he first came up and there wasn't much of a book on him, but I don't expect him to tank like he did after the HGH news.

After all, he did come back at the end of the season with a .325 avg, .357 OBP and 2HR/9RBI in his last 10 games when teams should have had some scouting reports on him. Pretty good numbers considering he was probably seeing most pitchers for the first time.

I'll stick with my projection of .290/.337/.548 with 32HR and 86 RBI. More RBI if he bats 5th/6th and probably a little lower BA/OBP

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

by giveml on Jan 31, 2008 5:33 PM EST up reply actions

I can't help but think

that Rick is an all or nothing proposition. His AAA line and performance upon his call up are truly exciting given his experiences as a professional hitter/outfielder. The fragile psyche remains the wild card and that may be so throughout his career. I hope not. I would not be surprised to see him hit 40 + homers this year and also would not be surprised to see him struggle mightily. If things go well the one area I do expect to see him improve is his obp. I am sure that, after his conversion, he was not given instructions to work pitchers for walks when he can. As a major league starter hitting ahead of Albert I would assume this would get more attention. If he's as good as he's shown in stretches he should have the ability to significantly improve this part of his game.

by easy on Jan 31, 2008 8:34 PM EST reply actions