Friday Morning Reading

Let's start off the Friday Morning reading with some Bobby Jenks projections.  I think Sox fans should at least be mildly concerned.

For you fantasy baseball nuts, my 2006 Fantasy Guide is still just $9.99.  Everyone's drafting soon, so pick up a copy.  Some customer feedback from Kay H:

"Just wanted you to know how helpful your guide has been. I drafted my first team last week and feel that I have a wining team this year, due only to the information I received from your guide. Your guide is the most complete source of up-to-date information I have seen. No fumbling through magazines and reading contradictory opinions from so called experts, who change their minds day after day. In short your guide gave me the facts and just the facts, all in one source."

Alright, enough plugs for today.  On to the readin':

Brandon Webb's 2006 outlook, graph style...Why Gaslamp Ball loves the WBC...What the?  Someone blogs about the Royals...The Cards may be a tad reluctant to re-sign Mark Mulder...Turk Wendell sounds off...Could Prior possibly miss two months? A very similar injury to another Chicago pitcher had that result...

Comments

[Allan]

Conincidence that the Cubs projections look overly optimistic, but Jenks projection looks mediocre at best? Considering the tiny sample size used for the projections, I hope all those who predict gloom are ready to eat a fairly healthy portion of crow at the end of 2006.

[RumorMonger]

By all means crack into the stats and tell me which Cubs projections are overly optimistic. Hop to it! Instead of making blanket generalizations of course.

Did I mention that my Jenks projection was probably the most favorable of the bunch?

And how is 282 minor league innings a small sample size?

At any rate, I won't be "eating crow." No set of projections are 100% correct, and I'll be happy to discuss the biggest hits and misses after the season.

[Allan]

Where were they overly optimistic?

Prior pitching 200+ innings, Maddux winning 15 games with an ERA under 4.00, and Wood-Williams-Miller-Rusch combining to win 35 games.

Jenks has how many *MAJOR LEAGUE* innings under his belt? How many of those minor league innings you refer to were as a starter, in a different league, with a different organization?

The answer: 221.1 of those innings were as a starter, at different levels of the minors, for a different organization.

He has pitched exactly 80.1 innings for the Sox, between AA and the majors, as a reliever. Those are the ones that count, not the pre-injury starter stats with a different organization.

[RumorMonger]

Hindsight is 20/20 man, Prior was a fair bet for 200 innings until news that came out later.

A lot of projection systems have Maddux under 4 (BP has him at 3.92) and given that he's shooting for 230 IP I don't find 15 wins biased.

I don't have a problem with those four pitchers winning 35 games, but you've skipped the meat of the projections.

When I said crack into, I meant look at the peripherals, the things that can really be projected. Did I make Rusch's hit rate too low? You don't agree with Miller's walk rate? If you're going to criticize you should look at it how I look at it, don't just skim the win totals.

What's your point? That Jenks cannot be projected at all? Then how is it that you're so firm in your prediction of success? Is it because you're reading into a 39 inning Major League sample?

[Allan]

Projecting young/small sample size pitchers is not possible with any degree of accuracy. Personally, I don't believe that Jenks 'team' numbers (saves, wins) can be projected at all, and I find the overall projections to be lacking. As a starter, you face the same batter multiple times. As a reliever, you only have to face them once (in most cases). Thus, the stats as a starter are skewed by facing the same batters multiple times in a single game. Comparing stats as a starter and as a reliever is not accurate, especially when there is such a small sample size on one side of the comparison.

If 'wins' can't really be projected (which they can't), then why include them in your projections? Same goes for saves.

I don't find anything particularly wrong with the peripherals. What I do find wrong is the optimistic win total predictions from a team that many are projecting to be right around .500

[RumorMonger]

I have the White Sox's front 5 winning 73 games. It's not something I try to tie directly to the team's projected win total, because there are too many variables. Sure, I'll downgrade it if it's the Royals, but I'm not trying to divide up the Cubs' 80 wins somehow.

Fantasy baseball players need those stats even if everyone's estimates are shaky. That has to go into the dollar values. It's what makes pitchers hard to project.

[Teetz]

"As a starter, you face the same batter multiple times. As a reliever, you only have to face them once (in most cases)"

That has little to do with it. If you have control issues you're going to give up a decent amount of runs, especially if his velocity is down as much as they say. Without velocity, Jenks is a really bad pitcher. I doubt he starts throwing low 90's, but I can see him settle in around 94-95ish. This is attributed to his lack of conditioning. As he gets older his velocity will go down....very soon. It also wouldn't surprise me if he had an injury, again, based on poor conditioning. Jenks isn't a guy who can consistently hit corners over the course of an entire season, nor is he a guy that has shown the ability to consistently throw his curve ball for a strike when he is behind in the count.

I am avoiding him like the plague in my fantasy draft.

[Randy]

No way does Maddux win 15 this year. I'll bet that he doesn't even throw 200 innings.

His career has been going straight downhill. It's not going to start going back up because he's turning 40.

[RumorMonger]

I don't agree. Maddux isn't a normal pitcher. His 1.22 WHIP was sparkling, he should be right where he was the last three seasons.

[Allan]

"...he should be right where he was the last three seasons."

And yet you predict his ERA to go down, when it has been rising the last few years?

[RumorMonger]

Yeah. An ERA is not as a good a predictor as peripheral stats are. I have him at:

9.45 H/9
1.4 BB/9
1.2 HR/9

3.84 ERA, 1.21 WHIP

If you agree with that, then using Bill James's component ERA formula yields 3.84.

[Erik]

"If you agree with that, then using Bill James's component ERA formula yields 3.84"

Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that similar to DIPS ERA? If not, what distinguishes the two?

I believe DIPS uses Ks and not hits allowed, but I could be wrong. CERA doesn't use Ks. I know CERA is meant to approximate real ERA and is mapped against that historically. DIPS I don't think is expected to.

[Brandini]

Jenks has said he doesnt know about this apparent velocity drop and that on the first game he pitched he was told he hit 97mph (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.asp?sport=MLB&id=3824).

[RumorMonger]

Radar guns vary, and sometimes guys wait a little while until they dial it up. I'd be more concerned about his weight at this point.