Individually the projections seem pretty on target, but invariably isn't there a bust or two? Who was James off the most with last year?
How exactly does James' formula work? Is it posted or explained somewhere I can look at?
What were James' predictions for the other Sox regulars last year? It's great that he was on the mark with Youk, but that's one prediction out of many. Specifically, did he successfully predict down seasons for Tek & Timlin? How was he with predictions for players changing leagues (Loretta, Beckett)?
Seems BP'S PECOTA projections aren't the only ones who love Pedroia. Heh.
The Sox player he was off the most on was Varitek, whom he projected at .266-20-75, if I recall correctly. (I'm at work and don't have the book handy.) Obviously, 'Tek's injury threw the numbers off, as did the fact that he turned into a mummy in September. Two non-Sox players he missed big on were Gary Matthews Jr. (for reasons that are becoming obvious) and Jermaine Dye, whom he had down for 24 homers, not the 40-something he hit.
If I get the chance, I'll compare all of his Sox prognostications last year to how the players actually did.
I'll also see if he explains his formula in the book this year, not sure if he does. I'm pretty certain it was in last year's handbook.
To be picky about it, James' numbers are statistical projections, not predictions. I think James would reject the notion that he specifically thinks Coco will hit .284, or Pedroia will have 47 doubles.
James himself has written that each player's performance can vary widely from year to year. He once did a computer simulation of 1,000 seasons of Willie Mays; in one year, I think Willie hit .250 with about 12 home runs. He did the same with Wade Boggs, and Chicken Man hit .450 one year. There's no way to tell exactly how a given season will go; James looks at an individual's past performance and projects it forward by comparing with similar players in the past. Plus some adjustments for age, injury history, home ballpark, etc. (The actual formula is probably a frightening thing to behold.) The result is a reasonable expectation for each player; actual results, as they say, may vary.
Thanks for saving me from having to explain it in detail, John.
. . . it's also worth noting that Lugo's and Drew's projections are based on playing for the Dodgers, not the Sox. That might explain Drew's higher home run projection.
Projections or predictions, it's all a black art, I think. Look how the big-budget predictors compare on ranking even the top 20 or so prospects this year:
Prospect Rankings Matrix
From all of that, some will be right, and most will be wrong.
But either way, James is a Nerd King, not a nerdLing.
One point about Lugo vs. Gonzalez. The more sophisticated defensive measures show that Gonzalez is not really that great defensively. He does not make a lot of errors, but his range is not very good, sort of like a certain gold glove winner in New York.
I am sure that the Red Sox front office took that kind of analysis into account when making their decision. Lugo is more erratic for sure, but I think he's a huge upgrade over Gonzalez who is absolutely brutal at the plate.
"More sophisticated defensive measures" be damned... Gonzalez was the finest Red Sox shortstop with the glove that I can remember.
Measuring only with my eyes, of course. Lugo will need to better than those projectiosn to justify the hype, and any defensive downgrade, in my opinion.
Be curious how many runs James thinks Lugo will score.
Anyone catch Holley and Ned Flanders on 'EEI this morning talking about the Pedroia projection? Glad to know those peabrains are reading. Frauds.
I've always said that there are three things that are always constants in baseball: Manny having usually the same numbers, Wakefield eating up innings, and there'll be 162 games. Of cousre it's not as constant as death and taxes but close enough
If Lugo gets to 50 more balls than Gonzalez did (Or would have if he didn't miss games--not an unreasonable estimate--he can make 10 more errors and still be 40 outs (one and a half games' worth) ahead.
Late post to this string, comparing Bill James' projections to Baseball Prospectus'. I just wrote one on the pitchers; BP is generally more pessimistic than Bill. In many cases, substantially more pessimistic.
Funny thing... BP and BJ are pretty much in sync on the Red Sox' hitters. Almost without exception, the numbers are very close. The most significant gap is on J.D. Drew; BP apparently doubts his ability to stay healthy, giving him 430 at-bats, and projects .284/15/63, which would be a disappointment.
If you put BP's hitting and pitching projections together, you get a team that will score a lot of runs but have trouble outscoring the opposition. And a bullpen with no 9th-inning closer.
Commenting by HaloScan
