Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

A Realistic View at 2022: Part I

moonslav59

By moonslav59
in Boston Red Sox Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

harmony FCL Red Sox

harmony

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
ZIPS=Gospel to you.

The ZiPS projected standings were offered voluntarily for forum discussion.

 

ZiPS, Steamer and Marcel projections are frequently offered for the same purpose.

 

BTW the assignment of a "gospel" label is offensive on several levels.

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
The ZiPS projected standings were offered voluntarily for forum discussion.

 

ZiPS, Steamer and Marcel projections are frequently offered for the same purpose.

 

BTW the assignment of a "gospel" label is offensive on several levels.

 

What? When did "gospel" the way moon used it become offensive?

 

It's a common usage per any dictionary.

harmony FCL Red Sox

harmony

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
What? When did "gospel" the way moon used it become offensive?

 

It's a common usage per any dictionary.

It imposes a belief without consent.

 

ZiPS, Steamer, PECOTA and Marcel are offered for discussion, not as absolute truths.

harmony FCL Red Sox

harmony

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
moon's usage is perfectly consistent with some of the examples given here.

 

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/gospel

ZiPS, Steamer, Marcel and/or PECOTA projections -- often conflicting -- are offered, typically without a conclusion.

 

The inconsistent projections are evidence that nothing is offered as gospel. The reader can draw a conclusion ... or no conclusion at all.

Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted (edited)
ZiPS, Steamer, Marcel and/or PECOTA projections -- often conflicting -- are offered, typically without a conclusion.

 

The inconsistent projections are evidence that nothing is offered as gospel. The reader can draw a conclusion ... or no conclusion at all.

 

Nonetheless, offensive is not warranted, in my opinion. He was merely stating that you treat ZIPS as an authoritative source.

Edited by Bellhorn04
harmony FCL Red Sox

harmony

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
Nonetheless, offensive is not warranted, in my opinion. He was merely stating that you threat ZIPS as an authoritative source.

Fair enough.

 

This poster regrets his role in injecting semantics into this baseball discussion.

 

Back to baseball.

moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted
Fair enough.

 

This poster regrets his role in injecting semantics into this baseball discussion.

 

Back to baseball.

 

If it was offensive to you, I apologize.

 

You often quote ZIPS and Steamer and use them as a reference and as the backbone of your player evaluation. I only meant it in this sense and context.

 

My guess is you quote those sources more than all the rest of the posters combined. Once could say you use them "religiously," or would that be offensive, too?

harmony FCL Red Sox

harmony

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
If it was offensive to you, I apologize.

 

You often quote ZIPS and Steamer and use them as a reference and as the backbone of your player evaluation. I only meant it in this sense and context.

 

My guess is you quote those sources more than all the rest of the posters combined. Once could say you use them "religiously," or would that be offensive, too?

 

This poster generally refrains from making an evaluation.

 

The statistics are offered to help others make evaluations if that's what the reader wants to do. The evaluator can choose to ignore the stats or to cite the stats for whatever purpose.

 

No one should care about this poster's opinion ... if he even has one.:)

mvp 78 GOAT

mvp 78

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Fair enough.

 

This poster regrets his role in injecting semantics into this baseball discussion.

 

Back to baseball.

 

What gives you the right to inject semantics here?!?!?

Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
I believe the only One True Projection System is the WAPM. The rest are all posers.

 

Especially PECOTA…

 

If you're so good, what is Dalbec's 2022 fWAR?

mvp 78 GOAT

mvp 78

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted

ZiPS 2021 Sox vs Actual

 

C: 2.6 - 1.3

1B: 1.1 - 1.6

2B: 1.0 - 4.7 (6th best in MLB)

3B: 3.2 - 4.7 (5th best)

SS: 4.2 - 5.2 (5th best)

RF: 1.4 - 1.8

CF: 2.2 - 5.2 (5th best)

LF: 1.4 - 2.4

DH: 2.1 - 4.3 (2nd best)

Eovaldi: 2.1 - 5.6

Houck: 0.8 - 1.8

ERod: 2.6 - 3.8

Pivetta: 0.9 - 2.1

Sale: 2.6 - 0.8

RP: 2.9 - 4.6

 

So did every player play out of his mind except for Sale, Plawecki and Vaz? Or is ZiPS just not a great predictor?

notin MVP

notin

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
If you're so good, what is Dalbec's 2022 fWAR?

 

 

Ok, first of all, in the WAPM system, it’s wWAR.

 

But I understand the confusion. fWAR was the basis for the now defunct WAFL system.

mvp 78 GOAT

mvp 78

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Based on how many PA? That’s a very important factor..

 

Steamer is projecting 545. ZiPS is projecting 489. You can project however many you'd like to.

notin MVP

notin

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Steamer is projecting 545. ZiPS is projecting 489. You can project however many you'd like to.

 

It is important.

 

There’s a big difference between getting 1.0 fWAR in 100 PAs and in 600 PAs…

Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
It is important.

 

There’s a big difference between getting 1.0 fWAR in 100 PAs and in 600 PAs…

 

Yes. The point is that WAPM also has to project the PAs.

notin MVP

notin

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Yes. The point is that WAPM also has to project the PAs.

 

Projecting PAs is just guesswork. I like how Steamer600 handles things. “Give a player 600 PAs and this is how he should do.”

Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Projecting PAs is just guesswork. I like how Steamer600 handles things. “Give a player 600 PAs and this is how he should do.”

 

It's all guesswork.

notin MVP

notin

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
It's all guesswork.

 

No. There’s math behind any projection system that helps the projector determine performance. But how often anyone plays? That’s just guessing.

 

Just because it isn’t always accurate doesn’t make it guessing…

notin MVP

notin

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Don't count on it.

 

The WAPM never projected PAs. All I did was assume 600 PAs. Or 450PAs for RHH and 150 for LHH if there was a platoon…

mvp 78 GOAT

mvp 78

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Projecting PAs is just guesswork. I like how Steamer600 handles things. “Give a player 600 PAs and this is how he should do.”

 

Ah, but how does Steamer600 account for time spent at DH vs time spent at 1b?

Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
No. There’s math behind any projection system that helps the projector determine performance. But how often anyone plays? That’s just guessing.

 

Just because it isn’t always accurate doesn’t make it guessing…

 

So you're suggesting that Steamer and ZIPS pull their PA projections out of thin air.

harmony FCL Red Sox

harmony

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
So you're suggesting that Steamer and ZIPS pull their PA projections out of thin air.

Brief descriptions of Steamer, ZiPS, Marcel and PECOTA:

 

mlb.jpg

favicon.png Steamer | Glossary | MLB.com

WWW.MLB.COM
The Official Site of Major League Baseball

 

mlb.jpg

favicon.png sZymborski Projection System (ZiPS) | Glossary | MLB.com

WWW.MLB.COM
The Official Site of Major League Baseball

 

mlb.jpg

favicon.png Marcel the Monkey Forecasting System (Marcel) | Glossary | MLB.com

WWW.MLB.COM
The Official Site of Major League Baseball

 

mlb.jpg

 

Projections of forum posters often seem to be pulled out of thin air but Steamer, ZiPS, Marcel and PECOTA apparently are the products of methodology.

 

Assign whatever weight is appropriate.

moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted
Brief descriptions of Steamer, ZiPS, Marcel and PECOTA:

 

mlb.jpg

favicon.png Steamer | Glossary | MLB.com

WWW.MLB.COM
The Official Site of Major League Baseball

 

mlb.jpg

favicon.png sZymborski Projection System (ZiPS) | Glossary | MLB.com

WWW.MLB.COM
The Official Site of Major League Baseball

 

mlb.jpg

favicon.png Marcel the Monkey Forecasting System (Marcel) | Glossary | MLB.com

WWW.MLB.COM
The Official Site of Major League Baseball

 

mlb.jpg

 

Projections of forum posters often seem to be pulled out of thin air but Steamer, ZiPS, Marcel and PECOTA apparently are the products of methodology.

 

Assign whatever weight is appropriate.

 

What if the very act of assigning weight is inappropriate?

 

(sarcasm alert)

 

moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted

So, ZIPS projects these PAs:

672 Devers

622 Bogey

591 JD

568 Verdugo

540 Kike

510 Iggy

497 Schwarber

489 Dalbec

481 Duran

486 Vaz

481 Hamilton

458 JBJ

433 Casas

401 Arauz

385 Munoz

222 Arroyo

 

It's obvious their method for assigning PAs is based on many assumptions, including some near impossibilities.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

Become a Caretaker

  • Member Statistics

    8,550
    Total Members
    48,845
    Most Online
    Leftier1
    Newest Member
    Leftier1
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...