Playing time forecasts - your Reds knowledge needed!

Tom Tango is collecting playing time forecasts to plug into the Marcel forecasting system. Past research has shown that while objective forecasting systems do a great job of predicting rate stats, communities of fans are much better at forecasting playing time.

Here, Tango's trying to integrate both community playing time forecasts with a basic objective rating system. Together, they might turn out to be the best way of forecasting player performance among competitors in this year's projection showdown competition...despite being the simplest system among all contestants.

If this works, expect that such forecasts could be an annual part of Marcel projections...which means that they will likely be a terrific resource for all of us, be we basement-dwelling wannabes like myself or fantasy baseball players looking for an edge.

So please head over to Tango's site and cast a ballot giving your projections of playing time for our Reds players. I was first for the Reds, but ideally we'd need 30 or more ballots to get a reliable forecast for our team. Boston's already there...

Click here to submit your playing time projections

Japan wins again

Kudos to Japan for a fairly improbable (due to sample size, alone) repeat of the Classic.

So how good is the Japanese league? As Patriot points out, it's good, but the proof of how good is in the larger sample: MLB is clearly superior. Of course, MLB is the cream of the crop from (increasingly) all over the world. I'd still take team USA in a do-over, as it was stocked with high caliber MLB talent at every position. But Japan's clearly no slouch team either. I'm sure we'll continue to see more and more Japanese players heading directly to the states rather than working their way over via the NPB.

So, time for the final reckoning on the 'ole bracket. It's not pretty.Oh well! I did successfully "predict" (guess) the semifinal game between the USA and Japan, even if the path I took to get there wasn't correct. I'd tally it up if anyone else cared, but given the interest my other WBC posts have gotten (zero), it's probably not worth it.

I do wonder a bit whether Japan's repeat actually hurts the WBC. They clearly will be the team to beat in four years, no matter who is on the team (and Ichiro, perhaps, may not be). But if the WBC starts to get the reputation as "their" tournament, I can't help but wonder if the interest of other countries may start to fade a bit. And somehow, a second victory for a team featuring so few MLB players just seems to further emphasize that it is a small sample size crapshoot. I knew that before, of course, but now it's bugging me a little bit more than it used to. Maybe I'm just a sore loser.

That all said, this year's WBC was vastly better than the last one. The double-elimination format might be confusing at times, but it's so much more BASEBALL than the ridiculous round-robin + tiebreakers we saw in '06. And while Team USA ran into some major defensive breakdowns, not to mention injuries, it seemed like the guys on that team really played hard. And usually, they were managed to win. That made everything--even the defensive implosions we saw late in the tournament from team USA--a lot easier to take.

I'll leave you with a fun fact: my first daughter was born just a few months after the first WBC. And my second daughter will be born just a few months after this year's tournament. :)

Is the 2009 Reds opening day outfield worse than last year's?

The Reds are a faster team this year, most notably in the outfield where they might open the year with Dickerson/Taveras/Bruce after beginning last season with Dunn/Patterson/Griffey. Offensively, the latter combination is better than we we have this season. But can the speed of the 2009 trio make up for this loss in offense?

Here's a quick study to that end, inspired by an e-mail exchange.

Hitting

2008:
Dunn: +28.2 runs/150 g
Patterson: -38.9 runs/150 g
Griffey: + 4.6 runs/150 g
Total: -6.1 runs

Granted, I'm counting one of the worst seasons in recent memory here with Patterson. But he was the opening day center fielder, and for all intents and purposes was the CF starter for much of 2008. Who else should we use here?

2009 projected:
Dickerson: -15 runs/150 g
Taveras: -22 runs/150 g
Bruce: +4 runs/150 g
Total: -33 runs/150 g

Obviously, we're losing a lot of sock this year, even taking into account the pure misery of Patterson's season.

Baserunning

2008 baserunning using Dan Fox's stats:

Dunn: -2.5 runs/150 g
Patterson: +1.0 runs/150 g
Griffey: -5.4 runs/150 g
Total: -6.9 runs/150 g

2009 "projections" (average of 2007 & 2008 stats/150 g for Taveras...For Bruce and Dickerson I extrapolated from their 2008 performances, but then regressed half-way to zero in recognition of the small sample sizes on both of them) using Dan Fox's stats:

Dickerson: -1.1 runs/150 g
Taveras: +9.8 runs/150 g
Bruce: -0.1 runs/150 g
Total: +8.6 runs/150 g

That's a difference of 15.5 runs per 150 g in baserunning.

Fielding

Here is the projected runs per 150 games for the 2009 trio of outfielders vs. what the 2008 Reds did according to bUZR:

2008:
Dunn: -19.8 runs/150 g in LF
Patterson: -1.4 runs/150 g in CF
Griffey: -20.6 runs/150 g in RF
Total: -41.8 runs/150 g

2009 projected:
Dickerson: +3 runs/150 g in LF
Taveras: +3 runs/150 g in CF
Bruce: +2 runs/150 g in RF
Total: +8 runs/150 g

That's a difference of almost exactly 50 runs, due to the change in defense in the outfield between opening day last year and opening day this year. Staggering.


Hitting + Baserunning+Fielding:

For the 2008 opening day squad, I have them as -6.1 runs on offense, -6.9 runs in baserunning, and a mind-blowing -41.8 runs in the field for a total production of 55 runs below average.

For the 2009 opening day squad (assuming Dickerson is in LF), I have them as a miserable -33 runs/150g on offense, +8.6 runs/150 g baserunning, and +8 runs per season in the field for a total projected production of 16 runs below average.

...

So, what these data indicate is that our speed-focused outfield combination of Dickerson/Taveras/Bruce is projected to more productive--on the order of 40 runs and ~4 wins--than the combination we started with last season of Dunn/Patterson/Griffey. I certainly didn't expect the difference to be this large, and wasn't sure it would even be in this direction.

There are all kinds of potential critiques you might levy here, of course. The biggest is that 2008 saw Patterson have one of the worst seasons in reent memory, far below his 2008 projection. And therefore, what we got from our 2008 outfielders might be below their true talent levels.

So let's make Patterson a replacement player and take 20 runs off the difference. Even then, we're talking about a projected 2-win improvement over last year's opening day squad, despite the substantial offensive dropoff.

Maybe there are other changes that you'd make...but can you come up with reasons to subjectively shift the data another 20 runs toward the 2008 team's ledger? Even at that point, you'd only make the 2008 outfield the equals of the 2009 outfield.

If you ask the typical saber-leaning fan, I doubt you'll find many that would believe that our outfield might be at least as good, if not demonstrably better, than it was opening day last season. But that's what these data indicate, and I'm finding the numbers pretty compelling. It's all about improved baserunning and (especially) improved fielding. It makes a huge difference.

Edit: Further discussion at Red Reporter and Redleg Nation. Thanks for the links, guys.
Edit2: And RedsZone.

Using statistics in personal relationships

I love this:

WBC Games, Round Two - Saturday

Didn't get to watch either of today's games kicking off the second round.

Venezuela(*) over Netherlands, 3-1

Venezuela is clearly the better team over a large number of games, but the Netherlands has shown that it can win a baseball game or two. They continue to play great defense (pitching + fielding = 2.68 ERA), thanks in part to another good start by Sidney "I'd really like a job" Ponson. Their bats just can't keep pace, though--the team has an OPS of 0.385, scoring 7 runs in 5 games! Which do you think is more indicative of their true talent? Team OPS or Team ERA?

Puerto Rico mercy rules USA, 11-1

Ouch. Jake Peavy clearly didn't have a good day, and Team USA couldn't get anything going against Javier Vazquez and company despite a ridiculously stacked lineup. By the time Matt Thornton started giving up doubles in the 7th, what was already a big hole became subject to the mercy rule.

Not quite the start the US was going for in round 2. Assuming they can beat the Netherlands tomorrow (and they should, of course), USA will have to beat either Puerto Rico or Venezuela on Tuesday to stay alive...and both of those teams beat the US the last time they met. Team USA absolutely has the talent to advance, but things are starting to look a little shaky. Heck, by this time tomorrow, our team could be on its way home!

On the personnel front, losing Pedroia is a significant loss...MVP's tend to be pretty good players. But replacing him with Brian Roberts is about as good as you could possibly do, at least given Chase Utley's situation.

My brackets after round 1

So the first round of the '09 WBC had its share of upsets, the Netherlands advancing to the second round obviously being the largest. How's my bracket holding up?

For each game played, I put a green box around it if I guessed the winner correctly (regardless of who the loser was), and a red box around it if I guessed wrong. And the results?
Not so good. :) That's 10 correct, 13 wrong. I can't count the first games in the Asian bracket because I posted this after those games started...but that's how I would have picked them, so maybe I can cheat and say I was 12-13? Oh, all right, nevermind.

Dominican is killing me, as I picked them to go all the way. And I was probably foolish to choose Canada over the USA in the first game of that bracket, but you gotta choose an upset now and then (right?) and I was hoping it would be Votto's team that did it.

What's amazing to me is that as bad as that went, the fact that the US lost to Venezuela in the seeding game of round 1 means that I actually have three games "correctly" forecasted to kick off round 2! That's the best I could possibly do given that two of the teams I thought would be in round two are no longer with us. I'm thinking we should up-weight round two games a little bit in the scoring. And given that I'm scoring against myself (i.e. no one else submitted a bracket, save Patriot), I don't have a problem with changing the rules mid-way through the tourney! :)

FWIW, my modified picks are that the Netherlands do not win again, and that the US will finish first in pool 2, with the runner up being Puerto Rico. Venezuela loses game 4 and will be out of the tourney. And I'm rooting for team USA the rest of the way, folks!

Update: Jeff Sackman loves the WBC. Bravo!

On the WBC & patriotism

Tango linked to this great article citing comments by Endy Chavez and Yadier Molina on the WBC:

Chavez was beaming after going 3 for 4 to help Venezuela eliminate Italy with a 10-1 victory in the World Baseball Classic. The victory assured Venezuela of a trip to the second round; its game Wednesday against the United States will be for seeding.

The final hero of Game 7, St. Louis Cardinals catcher Yadier Molina, is also playing in the W.B.C., for Puerto Rico. Molina hit a go-ahead two-run double on Monday to beat the Netherlands, and he surprised reporters when he said it meant more to him than the homer that sent the Cardinals to the World Series.

But the revelation did not surprise Chavez.

“It’s not even close,” Chavez said. “When we’re in the majors, it’s our job. We are professionals. You play for your team, but you just try to do your job. Here, it’s something special. You feel like a little kid. It’s not money. No matter who you are, you have to play hard for your country. I think it’s the biggest thing that has happened in my life.”

The biggest thing in his life? Bigger than The Catch?

“That was outstanding in that situation, to make that catch and save the team,” Chavez said. “It’s unbelievable, and it’s a pretty good play. But like I say, representing my country is something special. Nothing compares to that.”

Supports what I was saying the other day about player attitudes and loyalties in MLB and the WBC:

We see the people on our team as "our" heroes, but the truth is that they're employees of a large conglomerate who ultimately are playing for our team because a) that's who drafted them, or b) that's who offered them the best contract. They will have loyalty to their teammates, and over time some may adopt a city as their second home. But I think for most players, their team and "home" city is just the place where they go to work. That's probably especially true for players born outside of the USA.

My perception is that the World Baseball Classic is different. Players are playing for their true home countries (or, at least, the country of their ancestors). My sense is that many of them take real pride in these games and play them with an intensity that is at least on the level of the regular season, if not the postseason.

Anyway, at Tango's blog, a commenter wrote this:

i am phlegmatically pro WBC, because if done correctly it should be a great way to promote the sport around the globe and also provides entertaining baseball at a compitition level above that of a typical exhibition tournament. but i find the whole nationalistic prism it is framed in pretty discouraging. aren’t we above this kind of thing? i know sports nationalism is considered ‘harmless’ and everybody loves the world cup and the olympics and whatever but nationalsim is, to me, pretty much anathema to global progress.
...
nationalism is evil. homerism is just geeky, and when it leads to irrational behavior, yes, sometimes very annoying.

Here's my response:

I love the WBC for many reasons. I love the huge talent differences across clubs, because you get to see teams like the Netherlands pulling massive upsets despite AAA-level (at best) talent. I love that it’s a way to learn more about the personal backgrounds of all the players we follow in MLB. And I love the nationalism of the event.

I completely reject the idea that nationalism (actually, I think patriotism is probably a better word for what we’re seeing) on the level shown in the WBC is evil. The WBC is all about pride in your country. There’s nothing wrong, and a lot right, about that. I wrote when Obama was elected that I felt a genuine since of pride in my country for the first time in a long time. It’s made a tangible difference in my attitude toward team USA this go-around. Maybe that’s shallow, but that’s where I’m at.

I also love to see the patriotism exhibited by the players and fans of other countries. It helps me remember that there is far more to this world than this tiny part of our country where I closet myself. Fans and players of other teams are proud of their own countries, and they should be.

The kind of nationalism we’re seeing in this event is not, or at least does not have to be, the same thing as isolationism or exclusionism. It does not mean that you don’t respect and admire other countries. It just means you’re proud of your own country and the players representing it.

Never really thought I was the patriotic type...but dangit, I am. Maybe I'm not the boot-up-your-ass patriot type, and I'm definitely about as socially liberal as they come...but yeah, I'm a patriot, and I love my WBC.