NFBC Message Boards

I know there are plenty of Shandler readers out there, but there are plenty of "projection" that make very little sense to me. Let me list some...



1. J.J. Hardy with 599 at bats (more than Ellsbury). of course all of Hardy's stats are inflated based on 599 at bats.



2. Gardner with 47sb



3. Andrus with 41sb



4. Trevor Cahill with the 7th most wins in the majors this year with 16

Originally posted by Gekko:

I know there are plenty of Shandler readers out there, but there are plenty of "projection" that make very little sense to me. Let me list some...



1. J.J. Hardy with 599 at bats (more than Ellsbury). of course all of Hardy's stats are inflated based on 599 at bats.



2. Gardner with 47sb



3. Andrus with 41sb



4. Trevor Cahill with the 7th most wins in the majors this year with 16 i guess all pubs have their extremes, but of the ones mentioned, Andrus is getting love from most pubs. if you average BJames, HQ, and Fanball's projections, he'll have 37. Rotowire projects him at 43.

Originally posted by Kentucky Reign:

i guess all pubs have their extremes, but of the ones mentioned, Andrus is getting love from most pubs. if you average BJames, HQ, and Fanball's projections, he'll have 37. Rotowire projects him at 43. i guess i'm an andrus hater. i believe at some point last spring, HQ projected him to have 43sb last year.



of course he came in "under" last year. i expect the same thing this year as well.

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Kentucky Reign:

i guess all pubs have their extremes, but of the ones mentioned, Andrus is getting love from most pubs. if you average BJames, HQ, and Fanball's projections, he'll have 37. Rotowire projects him at 43. i guess i'm an andrus hater. i believe at some point last spring, HQ projected him to have 43sb last year.



of course he came in "under" last year. i expect the same thing this year as well. [/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Gekko:

I know there are plenty of Shandler readers out there, but there are plenty of "projection" that make very little sense to me. Let me list some...



1. J.J. Hardy with 599 at bats (more than Ellsbury). of course all of Hardy's stats are inflated based on 599 at bats.



2. Gardner with 47sb



3. Andrus with 41sb



4. Trevor Cahill with the 7th most wins in the majors this year with 16 Those numbers seemed a little lofty to me GG, as Shandler tends to lean on the conservative end. So I checked the Forecaster's projections in the player blurbs and what I found was the following:



Andrus-39 SB in 502 AB

Gardner-32 SB in 315 AB

Hardy-441 AB

Ellsbury-616-AB

Cahill-14 wins



I know you didn't pull these numbers out of the air GG, just curious as to where you found them?

Originally posted by Spartacus:

Those numbers seemed a little lofty to me GG, as Shandler tends to lean on the conservative end. So I checked the Forecaster's projections in the player blurbs and what I found was the following:



Andrus-39 SB in 502 AB

Gardner-32 SB in 315 AB

Hardy-441 AB

Ellsbury-616-AB

Cahill-14 wins



I know you didn't pull these numbers out of the air GG, just curious as to where you found them? they update their projections via their website

Originally posted by Spartacus:

I know you didn't pull these numbers out of the air GG, just curious as to where you found them? you do know how "shandler" comes up with his projections, don't you?



from what i was told, they have a dedicated "person" who follows a couple major league teams and gives HIS opinion on the playing time breakdown and that his how the projection foundation is started. who knows the qualifications of the "person", but he plays a KEY role in the projections people see.

Andrus



age 18..A ball 40/55 in 495 AB's

age 19..AA ball 54/70 in 482 AB's

age 20..TEX 33/39 in 480 AB's



i don't know GG, it seem like he's getting better, and with a few more AB's and a year older, 40 SB's isn't out of reach for this year.

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Spartacus:

Those numbers seemed a little lofty to me GG, as Shandler tends to lean on the conservative end. So I checked the Forecaster's projections in the player blurbs and what I found was the following:



Andrus-39 SB in 502 AB

Gardner-32 SB in 315 AB

Hardy-441 AB

Ellsbury-616-AB

Cahill-14 wins



I know you didn't pull these numbers out of the air GG, just curious as to where you found them? they update their projections via their website [/QUOTE]Gekko, I'm new to Shandler as of this year.. I got his 2010 Forecaster for XMas this year, where do I go on his site to see updated projections? I assume I have to sign up as a member of his site?

Originally posted by Less than Dave:

Gekko, I'm new to Shandler as of this year.. I got his 2010 Forecaster for XMas this year, where do I go on his site to see updated projections? I assume I have to sign up as a member of his site? dave - u need to sign up for his service if you want the weekly projections update. they come out every friday.

Originally posted by Gekko:

I know there are plenty of Shandler readers out there, but there are plenty of "projection" that make very little sense to me. Let me list some...



1. J.J. Hardy with 599 at bats (more than Ellsbury). of course all of Hardy's stats are inflated based on 599 at bats.



2. Gardner with 47sb



3. Andrus with 41sb



4. Trevor Cahill with the 7th most wins in the majors this year with 16 1. Of course he would have to play 150+ games to hit that mark, and although there isn't much competition behind him, seems like a reach to expect that from a guy who got demoted to AAA last year.



2. Can't see this, because it doesn't seem like anyone(Yankees included) consider him a "full time" player.



3. I don't think 40 steals from him is that much of a reach. I don't have him for that many, but I do have him in the 30's.



4. Cahill would need RIDICULOUS run support early in the game (since he probably won't work past the 6th much), and need a H% around 27 for this to happen. If he gets 16 wins.... the apocalypse is near.



[ January 23, 2010, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: billywaz ]

They're updated everyday. I guess Geeko will be the Ron stalker from here on out. I'll be in Vegas!

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Spartacus:

Those numbers seemed a little lofty to me GG, as Shandler tends to lean on the conservative end. So I checked the Forecaster's projections in the player blurbs and what I found was the following:



Andrus-39 SB in 502 AB

Gardner-32 SB in 315 AB

Hardy-441 AB

Ellsbury-616-AB

Cahill-14 wins



I know you didn't pull these numbers out of the air GG, just curious as to where you found them? they update their projections via their website [/QUOTE]Thanks for the info GG. I just checked it out and I have little issue with the aforementioned projections (most fall under the realm of possibility) except for Cahill. This is clearly a quality control issue. Not only do they project him with 16 wins-which is not defensible considering his underlying statistics-but they also project 28 decisions (16-12). This for a guy who has trouble getting through the 6th inning. I'm guessing It's a typo from the magazine that was compounded in the update. Somebody should inform them that their "Pants on the ground, pants on the ground, looking like a fool with their pants on the ground.............' (That's for you American Idol fans out there.)

Those projections look high but thank heavens there are unusual projections to talk about. I'm sick and tired of people passing off last year's stats as this year's projections and charging you $10 for the "insight"

Originally posted by bluenose:

Those projections look high but thank heavens there are unusual projections to talk about. I'm sick and tired of people passing off last year's stats as this year's projections and charging you $10 for the "insight" you'd rather hear that joba is the #1 SP and napoli is the #1 catcher and mike jacobs was in for a great year. oh ya, they said that too!!! last year!

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by bluenose:

Those projections look high but thank heavens there are unusual projections to talk about. I'm sick and tired of people passing off last year's stats as this year's projections and charging you $10 for the "insight" you'd rather hear that joba is the #1 SP and napoli is the #1 catcher and mike jacobs was in for a great year. oh ya, they said that too!!! last year! [/QUOTE]I still cant believe Shandler had Joba the hut the top pitcher in baseball.What a joke, then others from Shandlers list try to justify it.

That was enough for me go win Tout Wars where no money is put up but is where all the experts hang out.

The Cahill projection has been discussed on the HQ boards - and I think you can expect to see that one get fixed in short order.



The Gardner projection is given with the caveat that it is based on the presumption that he gets 400+ AB's - if you think he will then the SB's will follow.



I've found a couple of glitches mainly with playing time projections that don't quite add up as well.

Less than Dave,



I don't subscribe to HQ anymore, I think its mostly a waste, but be on the look-out for instructions on how to get online spreadsheets for free due to being a buyer of the Shandler print annual. They kind of hide it but there is a secret passcode each year that you can only answer if you have the Forecaster and it gives you access to a one-time projection update in excel. That ought to be enough.



-Craig K.

I am big fan of Ron Shandler and Baseball HQ. Understanding that the projections are related more to the skill set and probabilities helps one to utilize the information and approach better. I have been able to target a couple of guys each year because of this approach and it has worked out for me (most of the time).



Having said that, I do feel this year has not been their best. It seems the online projections do not have the same care or quality of the past. I have noted between one and two dozen errors in position eligability (predicated on 20 games played at a position in 2009). Also, some wonky projected skills like Kelly Johnson went from PX and SX (power and speed potential to those who are not familiar) in the 110-115 range to 130 to 136 for both after he signed with Arizona. I can see perhaps some upside to power, but do you get faster in the desert?



So far this year I am a bit disappointed and currently am not planning on relying on Baseball HQ as much for my prep. I just feel like they are a bit more careless than in the past.

Originally posted by Gekko:you'd rather hear that joba is the #1 SP and napoli is the #1 catcher and mike jacobs was in for a great year. oh ya, they said that too!!! last year! [/QB]No, I'd rather hear this:



"tell me how many shortstops have made it at the big league level at THE AGE OF 20. now tell me how many of them stole 30+ bases.



on top of that,

1. never played AAA.

2. never hit over .300 in ANY minor league season.

3. this spring he's hitting .265 with a whopping 2 steals in 49 AB.



and somehow this kid is going to last the whole year and ring up 30+ steals?



pipe dream my friends. anyone drafting him AND counting on 30+ steals is gonna be very dissappointed."



The verdict:

Avg .267

HR 6

RBI 40

Runs 72

SB 33





So how is what RS says about JC and MJ any diferent than what you said last year?



[ January 23, 2010, 04:05 PM: Message edited by: JohnZ ]

Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

Also, some wonky projected skills like Kelly Johnson went from PX and SX (power and speed potential to those who are not familiar) in the 110-115 range to 130 to 136 for both after he signed with Arizona. I can see perhaps some upside to power, but do you get faster in the desert?

While my real suggestion is to post this question on the BBHQ boards, I'll offer my opinion why this is the case.



While I obviously can't post Ron's complete SX formula here, if you go to his web site, you can see it consists of 4 elements.



Stolen base efficiency -- won't change



Stolen base frequency -- since this has 1B and BB as components, and Chase Field positively impacts 1B, the SB frequency should increase (more times on base)



Triples frequency -- (NOTE: this is likely the reason behind the increase) Basically measures triples per balls put in play. Chase SERIOUSLY increases 3B (154 index) and also HR. Since triples is in the numerator, and HR is in the denominator as it takes away from balls in play, when the numerator gets bigger and the denominator smaller, the resulting number increases. FWIW, they have KJ for 9 triples after hitting 3 in 330AB last season. I suspect he was not projected for 9 triples in Atlanta.



Runs scored percentage - won't change due to venue.



So 2 of the 4 input data have improved with the new park, likely accounting for the increase in SX.

Originally posted by JohnZ:

The verdict:

Avg .267

HR 6

RBI 40

Runs 72

SB 33

so the rangers moved young to 3B for a .267 hitter with 6 hr and 40 rbi AND a .968 fielding %. remember his glove was supposed to be why he was playing in the majors.



in the end, the rangers were more stubborn than i thought they would be. i have a feeling that it woulda benefit the organization more if andrus spent most of last year in AAA.

another one...Callaspo Alberto, 593 at bats, even with getz in the picture? i'll take the under on all the projections i listed and i'll win 90%+ of them.



[ January 23, 2010, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: Gekko ]

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

Also, some wonky projected skills like Kelly Johnson went from PX and SX (power and speed potential to those who are not familiar) in the 110-115 range to 130 to 136 for both after he signed with Arizona. I can see perhaps some upside to power, but do you get faster in the desert?

While my real suggestion is to post this question on the BBHQ boards, I'll offer my opinion why this is the case.



While I obviously can't post Ron's complete SX formula here, if you go to his web site, you can see it consists of 4 elements.



Stolen base efficiency -- won't change



Stolen base frequency -- since this has 1B and BB as components, and Chase Field positively impacts 1B, the SB frequency should increase (more times on base)



Triples frequency -- (NOTE: this is likely the reason behind the increase) Basically measures triples per balls put in play. Chase SERIOUSLY increases 3B (154 index) and also HR. Since triples is in the numerator, and HR is in the denominator as it takes away from balls in play, when the numerator gets bigger and the denominator smaller, the resulting number increases. FWIW, they have KJ for 9 triples after hitting 3 in 330AB last season. I suspect he was not projected for 9 triples in Atlanta.



Runs scored percentage - won't change due to venue.



So 2 of the 4 input data have improved with the new park, likely accounting for the increase in SX. [/QUOTE]Todd,



Always the gentleman and always makes sense.



BUT...



I will bet you a beer on their next iteration the numbers come down as the jump (15+) just looks like too much for the venue change, even with the excellent points you bring out. I cannot remember any other player getting that kind of love from changing ballparks.



BTW, which Auction championship time did you decide to join?

Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

I have noted between one and two dozen errors in position eligability (predicated on 20 games played at a position in 2009). ditto, which is why i went through every player and determined his elgibility myself. took some time, but the results are 100% accurate. apparently GG Industries has more quality control workers than HQ!