JGalt73
-
Posts
1,278 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by JGalt73
-
Gillette on Cubs chances this season
JGalt73 replied to MeatampPotatoesMan's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
"Gillette is the editor of The 2006 ESPN Baseball Encyclopedia, an ESPN.com MLB Insider and the Co-Chair of SABR Business of Baseball Committee." I also think he may be a Cubs fan. -
BK, you're off the hook for new requests... ...from Baseball Musings: "There were a couple of requests in regards to last night's lineup analysis to change the program so it would calculate the runs per game for a given lineup. Having looked at the code, it wasn't tough to do. So now if you enter an actual lineup, it gives you the runs per game for that batting order before the best and worst tables. You can try it here."
-
From David Pinto's Baseball Musings, here is a program that calculates the optimal lineups for any 9 players based solely on OBP and SLG..."the program puts very unusual people at the top of the order. It also seems to put the worst hitters 8th. It also likes to put three high OBAs in front of the best power hitter." For a Cubs lineup using BP's projected OBP and SLG (and Prior's 2005 line)...your ideal lineup: Murton, Lee, Walker, Ramirez, Barrett, Jones, Cedeno, Prior, Pierre. (4.644 runs/game) And using Bill James' Handbook projections: Murton, Lee, Walker, Ramirez, Cedeno, Jones, Barrett, Prior, Pierre. (4.954 runs/game) This takes a while to load but gives all of the OBP and SLG data (and lets you edit them if so desired) and ranked best/worst lineups for the BP projections... ...and the Bill James Handbook projections.
-
Will Carroll's response to the Cubs' denial of injury... HERE ...sounds like good news. I'll keep my fingers crossed.
-
Cubsnet has a $96M payroll and also reports what's locked in for the next 3 years.
-
Only 2 teams (St.Louis, Atlanta) actually had 90+ wins in the NL last year. And only 2 (St. Louis and Philadelphia) "should have won" >=90 games (91,90) based on how they hit and what they allowed as pitchers last year. BP predicted only the Cards as the only >=90 game winner in the NL in 2005.
-
Yes. TV was included in All Access (along with audio, and the other specials). But with the $80, only audio was included? Or only TV was included? Sorry, Audio (wgn radio or road radio) $15 TV $80 Both TV and radio and extras $100
-
Yes. TV was included in All Access (along with audio, and the other specials).
-
If all you want is live (and archived) full games, last year you could buy just MLB.TV for about $80. For $100, you could get their All Access package that would also let you watch condensed games (each AB with a hit/out) and also got you audio only included. I rarely used the condensed game, or box scores liked to video highlights - MLB.TV was enough. But if you are also going to get audio only for the $15 or so, you might as well go for the whole package. I have no idea what the prices are this year, but I have to say that I'd pay a lot more than last year as I watched 100+ games via the internet.
-
What does BP project Wood to do? Less than 20 starts? If so, then i think the Cubs could improve on the above projection just out of a healthy season from Wood (yes, i know that may be asking a lot). BP projects Wood to get 100 innings of relief. And I think what you said was MPM's point. Anyway, the way to figure it out exactly would be to take his VORP from 2003 or maybe his career average VORP, subtract William's projected VORP, and plug into baseball's pythagorean theroem. Per these projections: Wood's VORP in 99IP (of relief) = 24 Williams VORP in 160IP (28 starts) = 7.0 If you play the numbers, you unfortunately have to remove the 2 games Wood "wins" with his 24 VORP in relief and change some of those innings to Williams (or someone) in the bullpen who is unlikley to be as good. If you suppose Wood would have a VORP of 36 with 50% more innings (150IP) and his bullpen replacement is Williams, then you're looking at another 12 runs prevented. So Wood in 150IP makes this team look about a win better, and in 200IP makes it look about 2 wins better.
-
Each year BP forecasts runs scored and runs allowed using predited playing time forecasts and player projections (PECOTA) for all teams. This year's NL Central predictions: Cardinals: 88-73 (RS 772, RA 701) Cubs 85-76 (RS 733, RA 689) Brewers 83-78 (RS 752, RA 725) Astros 81-80 (RS 724, RA 726) Reds 80-81 (RS 801, RA 812) Pirates 80-81 (RS 747, RA 754) Their predictions for the Cubs are based upon: 28+ starts from Z, Prior, Maddux, and Williams with Miller and Rusch splitting the 5 spot. Wood is slotted at no starts and 100 innings of relief. The projection also uses a 3-way split of current 2B slot. They usually update the playing time projections throughout ST. (And, yes they did not round to 162 games!) FWIW, your other projected NL winners: Mets 88-73 LA 87-74 Phils 86-75 Last year the pre-seaon predictions were: Cards 91-71 (802RS/707RA); Cubs 89-73 (759RS/690RA); Astros 78-84 (709RS/739RA)
-
A Review of Three Prospect Books
JGalt73 replied to vance_the_cubs_fan's topic in Cubs Minor League Talk
BP is currently forecasting prospects on-line. For CF's, they have Pie at #4 behind Chris Young(ARI), Brian Anderson(CHA), and Franklin Gutierrez(CLE). "PECOTA takes Felix Pie reasonably seriously as a prospect, as least as much as it can for a guy whose number one comparable is Corey Patterson. We do not make this stuff up, folks. I’d be reluctant to read too much into Pie’s power breakout at Double-A, as it came in only 59 games worth of playing time. Although Pie is built differently than Patterson, he’s presently a little bit undersized for a power hitter. Lastings Milledge belongs in the same broad category as Pie, and shares some of his comparables. PECOTA sees growth potential for both of these guys, but reminds us that it might not come immediately; either could very easily have a Franklin Gutierrez type of season next year (at which point they’ll go from being overrated to underrated)." -
Quite simply, he's not the norm. Most statistical analysis, including PECOTA, uses a system of comparables. In the case of certain players... Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, even Julio Franco... there just haven't been enough players in the major leagues like them to get an accurate idea of how their career path is going to progress... especially once a player gets to an advanced age. Putting numbers on it :"PECOTA's similarity index is a gauge of the player's historical uniqueness; a player with a score of 50 or higher has a very common typology, while a player with a score of 20 or lower is historically unusual." For the immortals: Clemens '05 similarity index: 6 ('06 top comparables of Nolan Ryan, Phil Niekro, Gaylord Perry) Bonds '05 similarity index: 0 ('06 top comparables of Ted Williams, Edgar Martinez, Carlton Fisk) Maddux '05 similarity index: 17 ('06 top comparables of Dennis Martinez, Warren Spahn, Tom Seaver) For the mortals: Prior similarity index: 22 (Don Wilson, Erik Hanson, Fergie Jenkins) Wood similarity index: 30 (Rick Sutcliffe, Jose Deleon, Len Barker) Derrek Lee similarity index: 59 (Dave Winfield, Cliff Floyd, Eric Karros)
-
As easy as it is to disparage the Astros 2005 offense, the Cubs were only 10 runs better on the year (703 vs 693).
-
Red Sox, Agonz II agree to 1-year deal
JGalt73 replied to E.J.'s topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
That lineup outstrips the Cubs by a projected 70+ runs. (If you remove the DH and let Ortiz play first.) That's without any platoons, though admittedly less than the 200 runs the Cubs spotted them last year. -
Below is a great explanation: Offensive VORP is measured in runs provided above those that would be gotten from this "replacement player". A negative VORP is Neifi Perez bad with the bat.
-
Where can we get one of these Coco Crisps? In 660PA, BP predicts him to equal the offensive output of the entire Cubs starting outfield (1730PA).
-
After year one of PECOTA, BP compared it to other prediction systems here. Correlation coefficients for OPS: .700-.711 Correlation coefficients for ERA: .479-.486 PECOTA performs better than most, but its certainly not ironclad. On the pitching side, no one's got a good prediction system. The Bill James Handbook took its first crack at pitcher projections this year, without the help of James who doesn't believe a good system can be made.
-
Nice, what did you use for playing time? By comparison, in a BP chat they have the Cards scoring 750-775 runs next year.
-
Bullpen: Demptster 1.45 WHIP, 3.97 ERA, 7.0 VORP Eyre 1.40 WHIP, 4.28 ERA, 5.6 VORP Howry 1.29 WHIP, 3.98 ERA, 6.7 VORP Novoa 1.36 WHIP, 4.16 ERA, 4.9 VORP Ohman 1.42 WHIP, 3.88 ERA, 6.5 VORP Williamson 1.29 WHIP, 3.43 ERA, 9.3 VORP Wuertz 1.36 WHIP, 4.10 ERA, 8.3 VORP With just these numbers can you pick out the $3M+ players from the $1M (or less) players?
-
yeah and how do they figure cedeno/walker/neifi are going to get 1200 PA. Guess Hairston is getting 0 PA at 2nd. Later in the year BP sets up more accurate playing time scenarios for a given roster to predict runs scored/allowed.
-
Is VORP normalized to position, or is defense included, or both? Why does Cedeno get more VORP with lower rate stats over fewer PAs? VORP is additive, position dependent, and only includes offense.
-
Heeeeeere's Neifi... .263/.295/.358 in 407 PA, 1.7 VORP
-
I don't buy that for Maddux. That's barely a stepdown from their prediction from 2004 188.0 3.56 33.8. I thought I saw he was at 28.1 last year. So they are assuming he'll improve? He'll turn 40 this year, and his past 3 ERA+ have been 105, 113 and 101. I realize he doesn't have any real comparables throughout history, but I think we would be lucky if he just doesn't regress. Counting on improvement seems far-fetched. note, I just googled VORP and Maddux for my numbers, so if some other source has something else, I could be wrong. Not sure why, but the Bill James abstract is similarly optomistic on Maddux: 210 innings, 3.56 ERA. Perhaps it's because the only pitchers regularly pitching at age 40 are generally very good (or have been)?
-
And eight position players: Barrett .272/.336/.443, 16.0 VORP Cedeno .274/.320/.387, 13.4 VORP Jones .268/.327/.441, 6.0 VORP Lee .298/.383/.570, 51.0 VORP Murton .281/.343/.418, 8.5 VORP Pierre .297 /.348/.361, 13.0 VORP Ramirez .293/.356/.540, 42.0 VORP Walker .279/.341/.424, 15.0 VORP That outfield is scary (27.5 VORP!).