Obviously not, or he would be performing this year. probabilistic outcomes. so weighing the probability that a Derosa having good year vs. Durham having a good year is not a skill, but a crapshoot? give me a break. lucky you aren't the gm or we'd have the awesome tandem of lugo and durham maning the Middle Infield! Yeah, what our arrogant friend doesn't understand is that it's not all about projected numbers. Yeah, PECOTA is a nice tool, but if a player has really made a breakthrough due to a change in his approach at the plate, the PECOTA numbers are going to be biased w.r.t. his previous performance. Ray Durham has suddently gotten old, and Marcus Giles is off steroids now. That's why scouting is also a part of the game. you dont need pecota to see durhams career norms were derosa's career year. i cant believe some of you are saying derosa was the right signing. well there is a difference when you compare durham to derosa. One is middle of his career, and following up on his 1st year as a starter, the other is nearing the end of his career. It is more "probable" (see i can use it to) that durham is washed up, and won't produce very much for the rest of his career, than it is that derosa is having a flukish year and a half, and will revert to his numbers as a platoon player.