5 Questions - Cincinnati Reds

As is appropriate for this time of year, I've posted my most optimistic take on the Reds yet over at the Hardball Times.

What I tried to do in this piece is to do a comprehensive projection of the Reds ballclub and use that as a basis of looking forward at this coming season. This is kind of an extension to my recent pieces on 2009 catchers and 2009 opening day outfielders, but extended to the entire team. It addresses many of the very reasonable and problematic concerns that folks had about the outfield study in a manner that I think is pretty reasonable.

The results were surprising, to say the least, especially on offense:

Overall, after working through the projections and forcing the plate appearances to match last years' Reds, my estimate for 2009 Reds offense was.... 25 runs above average. If the NL average is 734 runs scored per team, as it was last year, that would put the Reds at 759 runs scored. That would have ranked sixth in the league in 2008. And this is from a team that scored just 704 runs last year with a partial season of Adam Dunn. Granted, if you adjust for park effects, you should cull 15 or so runs off of this total. But even so, most of us think of the Reds as a below-average hitting team these days. These data indicate that this isn't the case.

All rate stats are built upon CHONE, but I assigned playing time via a process that is part objective and part intuition. The article has a description of these methods at its end. The total projected plate appearances are matched to last year's team PA's, while the innings pitched are matched to last year's IP.

In the interest of showing my work, here are projected statistics for all players on this imaginary Reds team of mine:

Hitters	PT-Coef	PA	AB	H	2B	3B	HR	BB	SO	HBP	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG	wOBA	lwts	RAR	FLD	PosAdj	WAR
Brandon Phillips	100%	594	550	149	27	4	22	38	95	6	20	6	0.271	0.325	0.455	0.338	7.5	25.5	6.4	2.0	3.6
Joey Votto	100%	576	512	146	31	2	24	62	115	2	11	5	0.285	0.365	0.494	0.373	21.8	39.3	2.7	-9.7	3.4
Jay Bruce	100%	536	493	136	26	4	27	40	139	3	10	5	0.276	0.334	0.509	0.361	15.5	31.8	1.7	-5.4	3.0
Edwin Encarnacion	100%	561	499	140	31	1	23	54	94	8	5	1	0.281	0.360	0.485	0.368	19.6	36.7	-12.1	1.9	2.8
Ramon Hernandez	100%	467	425	113	22	1	16	37	63	5	1	0	0.266	0.332	0.435	0.336	4.1	18.3	-3.7	7.8	2.4
Alex Gonzalez	100%	432	400	103	23	1	12	28	74	4	2	1	0.258	0.313	0.410	0.317	-3.3	9.8	0.0	4.4	1.5
Willy Taveras	100%	543	502	137	22	3	2	35	82	6	39	9	0.273	0.328	0.341	0.303	-7.9	8.6	2.5	1.8	1.4
Jonny Gomes	74%	327	282	72	15	1	18	40	86	5	7	3	0.255	0.357	0.507	0.373	12.7	22.6	-7.1	-3.3	1.3
Chris Dickerson	75%	375	329	78	15	4	12	43	120	2	13	4	0.238	0.330	0.419	0.330	1.5	12.9	1.7	-3.8	1.2
Jeff Keppinger	57%	294	271	80	16	1	4	22	18	1	2	1	0.297	0.353	0.408	0.339	2.7	11.6	-2.3	1.0	1.1
Ryan Hanigan	43%	163	145	38	7	0	2	17	23	2	0	0	0.262	0.345	0.362	0.321	-1.0	4.0	0.0	2.7	0.7
Jerry Hairston Jr.	74%	248	226	60	13	1	4	19	34	3	7	2	0.265	0.328	0.395	0.321	-0.9	6.6	1.5	-2.5	0.6
Danny Richar	29%	153	140	37	8	1	4	12	26	1	3	1	0.261	0.321	0.418	0.324	-0.2	4.4	0.0	0.5	0.5
Norris Hopper	37%	140	130	38	6	1	1	9	14	1	4	1	0.290	0.339	0.364	0.316	-1.2	3.0	1.9	-1.4	0.4
Adam Rosales	29%	143	131	33	8	1	4	10	31	2	2	1	0.254	0.313	0.426	0.322	-0.3	4.0	-1.5	0.5	0.3
Paul Janish	29%	140	127	30	7	1	2	12	26	1	1	0	0.233	0.305	0.350	0.294	-3.7	0.5	0.2	1.4	0.2
Wilkin Castillo	21%	93	89	22	5	0	1	4	14	1	2	1	0.249	0.288	0.354	0.284	-3.3	-0.4	0.0	1.6	0.1
Pitchers	6%	326	313	39	7	0	1	12	108	0	1	1	0.124	0.159	0.157	0.146	-39.0	-29.1	0.0	0.0	-3.1
Totals		6110	5564	1450	288	30	179	493	1163	53	131	42	0.261	0.327	0.420	0.328	25	210	-8	0	21

PT-Coef is a playing time coefficient that I used to adjust time for each player. lwts is relative to average, and RAR is a conversion of that number to replacement level (using 2.0 wins/season as replacement in the NL). FLD is Rally's fielding projection, PosAdj are Tom Tango's position adjustment numbers based the designated CHONE position (I did change Hairston to an OF). WAR is the sum of RAR, FLD, and PosAdj.

None of the offensive numbers are park adjusted (i.e. they are given as expected to be seen playing half of one's games in GABP)--this is because I wanted to directly compare them to 2008 raw numbers. But that means that the WAR values, in particular, are overestimates of value if you wanted to take them and convert them to
You'll note that the smallest number of PA's went to Castillo with 93. Most "real" teams have a lot of players in the 10-30 range by the end of the season, and they don't tend to be good performances. I sort of think of Castillo's and maybe Janish's line as essentially taking all of those performances and lumping them together. So I don't think that's a huge problem here, though I could be wrong..

Now the pitchers:

Pitchers	G	GS	IP	ERA	ER	R	H	HR	BB	SO	HB	RAR
Edinson Volquez	30	30	166	3.58	66	71	138	16	78	170	9	34
Aaron Harang	29	29	193	4.01	86	93	192	26	50	162	5	31
Bronson Arroyo	30	30	188	4.40	92	99	196	24	62	143	7	21
Johnny Cueto	27	27	146	4.19	68	74	138	21	54	130	9	19
Micah Owings	20	20	111	4.29	53	57	109	14	39	86	10	13
Homer Bailey	20	20	103	4.61	53	57	104	13	48	77	3	9
Francisco Cordero	65	0	64	3.38	24	26	54	5	28	69	2	7
Bill Bray	62	0	62	3.48	24	26	54	6	25	65	2	5
Jared Burton	60	0	68	3.97	30	32	63	7	30	60	3	2
Mike Lincoln	42	0	45	4.00	20	22	44	5	16	36	2	2
Nick Masset	49	0	57	3.95	25	27	56	5	22	47	2	2
Matthew Maloney	2	2	12	4.34	6	6	11	2	4	10	1	2
Ramon A Ramirez	2	2	10	4.38	5	5	9	1	5	8	0	1
Arthur Rhodes	44	0	31	3.77	13	14	28	2	15	31	1	1
Daniel Herrera	42	0	49	4.41	24	26	50	7	17	37	2	1
Daryl Thompson	2	2	10	4.73	5	6	11	2	4	7	0	1
Pedro Viola	13	0	15	4.91	8	9	15	2	8	13	1	-1
Dave Weathers	60	0	62	4.35	30	32	63	6	26	40	3	-1
Josh Roenicke	51	0	50	4.50	25	27	49	7	24	47	2	-1

RAR in this case is straight from Rally's tables (prorated for innings), and so it should be park-neutral. He also (somehow) adjusts for fielding, and given how close the Reds' forecasted team is to average in the field (it should be just a bit below average), I see no real payoff to trying to do any further adjustments. This rotation, if it lives up to these numbers, would be freaking fantastic. Let's hope it at least comes close!

Anyway, that at least should help you see where these data are coming from.s.

You'll note that the smallest number of PA's went to Castillo with 93. Most "real" teams have a lot of players in the 10-30 range by the end of the season, and they don't tend to be good performances. I sort of think of Castillo's and maybe Janish's line as essentially taking all of those performances and lumping them together. So I don't think that's a huge problem here, though I could be wrong..

Now the pitchers:

Pitchers	G	GS	IP	ERA	ER	R	H	HR	BB	SO	HB	RAR
Edinson Volquez	30	30	166	3.58	66	71	138	16	78	170	9	34
Aaron Harang	29	29	193	4.01	86	93	192	26	50	162	5	31
Bronson Arroyo	30	30	188	4.40	92	99	196	24	62	143	7	21
Johnny Cueto	27	27	146	4.19	68	74	138	21	54	130	9	19
Micah Owings	20	20	111	4.29	53	57	109	14	39	86	10	13
Homer Bailey	20	20	103	4.61	53	57	104	13	48	77	3	9
Francisco Cordero	65	0	64	3.38	24	26	54	5	28	69	2	7
Bill Bray	62	0	62	3.48	24	26	54	6	25	65	2	5
Jared Burton	60	0	68	3.97	30	32	63	7	30	60	3	2
Mike Lincoln	42	0	45	4.00	20	22	44	5	16	36	2	2
Nick Masset	49	0	57	3.95	25	27	56	5	22	47	2	2
Matthew Maloney	2	2	12	4.34	6	6	11	2	4	10	1	2
Ramon A Ramirez	2	2	10	4.38	5	5	9	1	5	8	0	1
Arthur Rhodes	44	0	31	3.77	13	14	28	2	15	31	1	1
Daniel Herrera	42	0	49	4.41	24	26	50	7	17	37	2	1
Daryl Thompson	2	2	10	4.73	5	6	11	2	4	7	0	1
Pedro Viola	13	0	15	4.91	8	9	15	2	8	13	1	-1
Dave Weathers	60	0	62	4.35	30	32	63	6	26	40	3	-1
Josh Roenicke	51	0	50	4.50	25	27	49	7	24	47	2	-1

RAR in this case is straight from Rally's tables (prorated for innings), and so it should be park-neutral. He also (somehow) adjusts for fielding, and given how close the Reds' forecasted team is to average in the field (it should be just a bit below average), I see no real payoff to trying to do any further adjustments. This rotation, if it lives up to these numbers, would be freaking fantastic. Let's hope it at least comes close!

Anyway, that at least should help you see where these data are coming from.

Update: More discussion at RedsZone, RedReporter, and RedLegNation.

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: