2009 Bill James Projections for the Reds

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by jojo

James has a crush on him for some reason. Then again he thought Bruce would OPS 1.800 last season too...

I thought James predicted Bruce would OPS around .950 last year, but your hyperbole is very appropriate in this situation.

[_Sir_Charles_]

So he thinks Hanigan will only play in 33 games? Apparently the Reds will use this for the remaining 129 games.

[SMcGavin]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

This is a sentiment I've never understood. The leadoff hitter is going to come to the plate with the fewest men on base. That would suggest that there's the least value in merely putting the ball in play compared to other spots in the lineup. And since strikeouts also correlate with seeing more pitches, it would seem like it might not be a bad thing all.

If there's anybody in my lineup who strikes out a ton, let it be the leadoff guy.

Yeah, and not only that, but the difference between a walk and a single is less the more often you come up with bases empty. Another good reason why a guy of Dickerson's skill set is best situated to hit first.

With that said, your reason and logic probably make Dusty's head hurt.

[SMcGavin]

FWIW, the projected rotation numbers don't look all that pretty on their own, but the NL average for a starter this year was a 4.41 ERA. The five projected ERAs that James gives would actually make a slightly above average rotation.

[Spring~Fields]

Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine

There's no way I would trade Harang unless the Reds receive a huge return. Besides, these are only projections. I fully expect Harang to return to his 2005-2007 form.

OnBaseMachine
But, but, Harang might end up pitching out of the bullpen again with Volquez and maybe even Cueto this year. You know how unpredicatable a certain character with the Reds can be.

Bet you a dollar to a stale donut that someone tinkered with Harang, Arroyo, Cueto and Bailey last year.

[Spring~Fields]

Originally Posted by SMcGavin

Yeah, and not only that, but the difference between a walk and a single is less the more often you come up with bases empty. Another good reason why a guy of Dickerson's skill set is best situated to hit first.

With that said, your reason and logic probably make Dusty's head hurt.

Aw Dusty is working the phones to bring in the Free Agents, Dusty will get it right this year. Just have faith.

[Spring~Fields]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

So he thinks Hanigan will only play in 33 games? Apparently the Reds will use this for the remaining 129 games.

Is that one of those no fangled Bako-matics that I seen, see the ball miss the ball models?

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by SMcGavin

FWIW, the projected rotation numbers don't look all that pretty on their own, but the NL average for a starter this year was a 4.41 ERA. The five projected ERAs that James gives would actually make a slightly above average rotation.

Right, it projects a pitching staff ERA of 4.32. That's an improvement from 2008's 4.55 ERA and would put the Reds 8th in the NL in pitching instead of 13th. It's amazing how people can misinterpret numbers paradoxically.

And that's with the typical misguided playing time predictions you see in projections like this. Is Nick Masset really going to be run out there for 57 innings if he has a 5.82 ERA? Won't Johnny Cueto and Aaron Harang throw more innings as long as they stay healthy?

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine

Wow, he's projection huge seasons from the young hitters. A .891 OPS for Bruce, .814 from Dickerson with 21 homers and 37 stolen bases, and a .922 OPS from Votto.

But I also think he sells the pitching short. I think he's right on with Arroyo but off on the others. That's a solid season from Harang but I expect him to return to his 2005-2007 form. While I don't expect Cueto to develop into an ace just yet, I do think he'll take a step forward next season with at least a league average or better ERA and a strikeout per inning. He's also got Volquez taking a step back. I don't see that happening. Volquez's curveball seemed to improve throughout the season, plus he's now got a full season under his belt...I think he'll be as good, if not better than he was in 2008. As for the bullpen projections, I don't see Majewski and Lincoln on the 2009 team, especially Majewski. Burton has a 2.92 ERA in 101.2 career IP, there's no reason he can't repeat that. Affeldt should be better too.

I like the hitting projections but I think he's far off on the pitching projections.

Your eyes/heart might tell you one thing, but the statistics are telling me something different. His 2008 xFIP was 4.02, so he was very lucky to have the ERA he had considering how atrocious the defense was. The defense might be improved in 2008, but he is still going to have to take a huge step forward to improve his true skill level to the point you are expecting. I would be very happy with 192 innings of a 4.08 ERA...

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

Your eyes/heart might tell you one thing, but the statistics are telling me something different. His 2008 xFIP was 4.02, so he was very lucky to have the ERA he had considering how atrocious the defense was. The defense might be improved in 2008, but he is still going to have to take a huge step forward to improve his true skill level to the point you are expecting. I would be very happy with 192 innings of a 4.08 ERA...

That's true but a good # of his BR/9 this past season was due to a somewhat high # of BB's. I would think if he improves that aspect and the defense is improved that overall we should see an improvement, by how much is the question. Will his improved command lessen his baserunners but will he be around the zone so much that his HR allowed goes up? I think it's safe to say his #'s should improve if he does and the Reds improve that SS defense at least.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

This is a sentiment I've never understood. The leadoff hitter is going to come to the plate with the fewest men on base. That would suggest that there's the least value in merely putting the ball in play compared to other spots in the lineup. And since strikeouts also correlate with seeing more pitches, it would seem like it might not be a bad thing all.

If there's anybody in my lineup who strikes out a ton, let it be the leadoff guy.

Wouldn't James' line for Dickerson equate to a .389 babip?

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by SMcGavin

FWIW, the projected rotation numbers don't look all that pretty on their own, but the NL average for a starter this year was a 4.41 ERA. The five projected ERAs that James gives would actually make a slightly above average rotation.

Rhetorical question...would you rather have 5 average guys or 2 above average, one average and two below average?

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

Rhetorical question...would you rather have 5 average guys or 2 above average, one average and two below average?

If I may answer, you want the two above average because there is more room for improvement and the staff can be more easily leveraged in big games...

[OnBaseMachine]

I think Volquez's control will be better in 2009. He seemed to nibble at times. If he can cut 20 walks off his 2008 total it would help a lot, as will an improved defense. It was unreal how many times he was bitten by the defense this season... the fact that he posted a 3.21 ERA with that defense behind him was amazing. An improved defense and a few less walks should allow him to take another step forward IMO.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

Wouldn't James' line for Dickerson equate to a .389 babip?

I haven't done the math, but I'm right there with you. If that's what it works out to, that's clearly not going to happen. My statement was more based on the assumption of holding the rate stats where they were. If you adjusted them down given a realistic BABIP, we have an issue -- but due to the OBP, not the strikeouts. Give me a .360 OBP and I don't care how many times you strikeout - especially if you're a leadoff guy.