It’s time for my annual Giants WAR projection post. You can find the link to the 2009 projection, here. It explains a few things in general and it’s not a bad place to start if you’ve never seen a WAR projection. But, the basics are that: a team totally devised of ‘replacement level talent’ — ie: freely or cheaply acquired talent (AAA players, roster cast-offs, etc.) — would win something around 50 games. We would expect a RL team to sport a .300 winning percentage or so (162 * .300 = 48.6 wins). Then, plug in some projection numbers, find your position and pitching player’s wins added above replacement, add that to your baseline of 47-48 wins, and you’ve got a team projection.
A few assumptions before we begin:
~ I’m still using the same method for pitcher WAR as I used in last year’s post. Check the link if you want any more information on it.
~ Replacement level for starters has been set to 5.50. For relievers it’s set to 4.50 runs.
~ I used the CHONE projections for 95% of this post with a few tweaks here and there. CHONE is an awesome projection system and the ZiPS database hasn’t been fully released just yet.
~ For the defensive projections I’m working off of Jeff Zimmerman’s 2010 UZR Projections. He’s projected every defensive player for 2010 with an age adjustment. Good stuff.
Now, let’s check our numbers out.
- Right off the bat I’ve got the Giants projected as an 83-84 win baseball team for 2010. If you’ve read the Giants 2009 projection post, they were projected as an 82-83 win baseball team. I’ve said more than once that I’m not sure the Giants have actually improved themselves heading into 2010, as this initial projection seems to validate that idea some. DeRosa in LF isn’t an improvement over Fred Lewis (and maybe even John Bowker — but DeRosa does have some value from his versatility), even with a dead cat bounce Huff isn’t projected to be any better than say Ishikawa, and Freddy Sanchez will improve the 2B group — but his health concerns shouldn’t be taken lightly.
- The Giants did win 88 games last season after we projected them to win 82-83 wins. That’s over our numbers by 5 wins or so. A couple of things helped the Giants play over their heads last season: they fielded an exceptional defensive team, their pitching was incredible (clearly the best Giants pitching team in almost 50 years), and they were a “clutch” team (by FanGraphs, the Giants were the 6th best team in baseball for clutch performance). Being clutch isn’t something that you can’t rely on from year-to-year and the Giants accumulated nearly +3 wins because of it. Realize that it’s just as likely for the Giants’ luck to swing the other way, and instead of 88 wins, you end up with 78 wins. It’s a good reason why to not treat baseball performances as static and say: “OK, we won 88 wins this year, add a player here, a player there, and 90 wins!”
- Some numbers. The top 5 Giants players by projected WAR: Lincecum (6.1), Pablo Sandoval (4.1), Matt Cain (3.6), Jonathan Sanchez (2.5), and Nate Schierholtz (2). Not surprising that 3 of the 5 are pitchers. The Giants pitching is by far their best team strength. Projection systems always love Nate (calling him a slightly better than league average hitter with +6 defense in RF). I would love to see Nate live up to that projection this year but I’m skeptical on him. He looks great on D in RF, but his hitting approach leaves something to be desired. If he’s a league average hitter with +6 defense, he’s a starter on this team and quite valuable.
- More pitching thoughts: Zito turns in a slightly below average performance (1.7) in 190 projected innings pitched. He’s earning $18.5M these days and continues to be a vast overpay. But most Giants fans (me included) would be happy if he can hang around 2 wins for awhile. Brian Wilson’s projection (1.6) is very solid for a reliever. The elite guys in the bullpen tend to pitch around 2 wins per year. Wilson took some great steps forward last year with his components and if he can hold them steady, he should be in for another good year.
- The bullpen also projects some solid performances from Affeldt and Romo but outside of the top three pitchers in the ‘pen, things drop off. Medders is a replacement level reliever that out-pitched his peripherals last year. Runzler and Joaquin have some promise, but control issues in their past make them a little risky to project as sub-4.00 FIP relievers.
- I’m calling Bumgarner (0.7) the 5th starter for now even though I would prefer that he start the year in AAA. Look for the Giants to bring in someone like Todd Wellemeyer to fight for the 5th spot. Bumgarner does offer some upside vs. his projection. He could be a spot on the Giants were they could add an extra win.
- On the hitting side of things the Giants could improve themselves in a few places: (1) As soon as possible use Posey behind the plate. He’s set to almost outproduce Bengie Molina in just 25% PT as compared to Bengie’s projected PT of 60%. Catcher is one of the few areas on the Giants where a clear and reasonable upgrade is available. (2) Play John Bowker. Bowker gets the 2nd best projection for hitting on the team behind Pablo. Bowker probably won’t be in the open RF competition in ST, making his avenue to the team narrow. But a poor hitting team like the Giants just can’t ignore the possibility of a .350 wOBA hitter on their roster. I’ve got Bowker backing up in RF and LF, but you can probably cut that back at the moment — taking down the total team WAR a few runs. (3) If Huff looks done, don’t be afraid to play Ishikawa at first base, he still profiles as the better player. (4) This also applies to Renteria vs. Uribe.
- Uribe comes back to earth in 2010 but his defense is still good enough in the infield that he should be the preferred sub at 2B/3B.
- Aaron Rowand gets a below average projection (1.6) in 80% PT. I find Rowand to be a pretty volatile player. He’s going to be an average hitter in most seasons, but his defense, which has also been average, could go quick. He’s projected as an average defender in CF for next year but if he posts, say, a -5 run season in CF, he’s going to be lucky to break 1 win. The Giants tried to rest Rowand more last year to help his bat and he was basically the same hitter. His defense did bounce-back, though. Only three more years left.
Feel free to click around the spreadsheet above and check out the numbers. The 2010 Giants team looks pretty similar to the 2009 team. The Giants are going to have to hope that last year was for real and that they’ve actually improved themselves over this offseason. I’m not seeing in right now in February. The team is still weak on offense and there’s reason to think the defense (losing Winn, reduced PT to Ishikawa, Renteria, Rowand) might take a step back. The pitching should be very good again but any missed time to either Lincecum or Cain (or even Pablo, or if he regresses) and you can kiss the season goodbye. The Giants don’t have the depth on offense/defense to make up for any missed time in the rotation. Once again, the rotation will carry the team with a below average offense.
Before you jump into the comments section, check this post from Dave Cameron on what projections are. Because these projections can sometimes bring out the worst in people, please keep your comments respectful in the comments section or I will edit them with pictures of sheep.
Comment Starter: How many wins do you think the Giants will net in ’10? Is it enough to win the NL West?
The Numbers aren’t displaying.
Try it now, I set it to public view.
Thanks. Seems about right. Though it is scary that if a SP goes down early with injury, then we are just a high 70′s win team. These look much more realistic than the CHONE team win projections.
I predict JSanchez will put up more IP and come out as a 3 WAR pitcher. Tim may actually do better than projected–he’s a unique athlete and I wouldn’t put it past him. If we can get Posey some playing time that should help things, too. Can we repeat our 88 wins? Maybe, but that seems like a ceiling to me. I’m thinking, at best, +2 more than your projections. Otherwise, it’s hard to argue with much of what you said. If we can get Bowker and Schierholtz and Ishikawa out there more then maybe their “secret sauce upside” will kick in and we’ll get a lot better. Otherwise, the old stiffs–and Bochy’s fondness for them–really worry me.
Mark,
How many more innings would you project for Sanchez? In the last two seasons he’s pitched 158 and 163.1 innings. I think I would give him an absolute upside of 180 innings? He’s hard to project in that sense.
The more I think about Sanchez, the more I convince myself that he really could be a superstar in the making. He’s still young, and he’s got essentially one weakness. If he can make any kind of headway on his control, then he’ll be one of the best pitchers of this era, and merit the comparisons that have already been made about him.
I’ll also note that I might tweak the offensive numbers when ZiPS releases it’s final build but things should stay largely the same.
hairball,
Check out Sanchez’s comps by ZiPS — Randy Johnson is among them. His ability to strike guys out is amazing. Even if his control stays in the area of 4 walks per 9, he’s still going to be an above-average pitcher.
180 IP for Sanchez. I know it’s “stretching him out” but WTF, I have to assume SOMEONE on the team will actually IMPROVE!
Good stuff as usual. Honestly, I love that J. Sanchez projection, that’s close to what Cain’s put up the last 4 years and you have to love Sanchez’s comps. Even if they don’t truly mean that much, they do show what a guy with his skill set can become.
Honestly, 83-84 seems a little high to me. I’m thinking more like 80, which is probably splitting hairs. It’s also probably irrational pessimism. I’ve got a gentleman’s bet going with my dad on this. He thinks this team is a 90 win team (88 wins last year + DeRosa, Huff, Sanchez) and I think it’s an 80 win team. Knowing my luck, he’s going to be “right” and the Giants will somehow still miss the playoffs.
Thanks Marcello. I think if you wanted to be pessimistic, I would take the under on a few of these projections mostly:
* Nate’s +2 wins – I’m just not sure he’s a better than league average hitter. Not seeing it yet.
* Bowker is adding +1 win by backing up in RF/LF — it sounds like he might not have a place on the roster to start the year. He still has an option, right?
* I did not project Velez. The more PT the Giants give him, the worst our projections should look.
* Renteria’s 1.4 WAR looks a little rosy to me, too.
I think we’re just as likely to win 78 games as we are 88 games next year. And, if anyone in the rotation (or Sandoval) skips a beat, things are going to be bad. Real bad.
Talking out loud here. The other problem I had with these projections was Freddy Sanchez’s PT assessment. I just have no idea what to set his PT at. Right now he’s at 525 PA’s but I can’t tell if that’s optimistic or pessimistic.
Chris, As usual well thought out and presented. Putting aside my personal disagreement with trusting Chone (or any projection system) as the foundation, I have a comment and a question.
My comment is that while you and Fangraphs use different assumptions to get your numbers for position players they do end up being the same at the team level. You assume that a NL team made up entirely of replacement level players will win 50 games and that the difference across 100% playing time between an average NL position player and a replacement level player is 2 wins. Fangraphs assumes that a replacement level NL team will win 48 games and that the difference across 100% playing time between an average NL position player and a replacement level player is 2.25 wins. Since there are eight position player positons multiplying this .25 difference across these eight positons gives you the 2 win difference and thus both you and Fangraphs balance at the team level. This does however tell us that you value an average NL player with 100% playing time .25 WAR less then Fangraphs does.
My question is: How do you account for the negative WAR NL pitchers produce as hitters? For example, last year according to Fangraphs Giants pitchers combined to hit for -3.8 WAR.
http://www.fangraphs.com/winss.aspx?team=Giants&pos=all&stats=bat&qual=0&type=6&season=2009&month=0
On second thought I see that you are now using the same 2.25 Win difference between an average position player and a replacement positon player with 100% playing time that Fangraphs does. Thus I must ask why your assumption for how many wins an NL replacement team will get (50) is higher then the 48 Fangraphs assumes?
Seems to me that if you substract these 2 wins and 4 wins for the offense of the pitchers you get to 78 wins which is damn close to the 76 Wins Chone projects directly.
http://www.baseballprojection.com/2010/standings2010.htm
Chris, have you been editing this? I could of swarn the first time I looked at this you had 50 wins as replacement level and now it is 48.5? This is making me think that my initial recollection that you initially had 2 Wins rather then 2.25 Wins as the difference between an average player and a replacement player with both having 100% playing time was correct. Have you adjusted both of these?
This still leaves me with the question of just how you are accounting for the negative WAR of NL pitchers hitting?
Hi GRM,
>> Chris, have you been editing this? I could of swarn the first time I looked at this you had 50 wins as replacement level and now it is 48.5? This is making me think that my initial recollection that you initially had 2 Wins rather then 2.25 Wins as the difference between an average player and a replacement player with both having 100% playing time was correct. Have you adjusted both of these?
Nope. You’re just going crazy. Kidding!
When I first posted the WAR projection I was using +2 wins for the NL as replacement and 50 wins as my baseline for the team. After some thought I decided to change both. I went to 2.25 wins for replacement to keep some consistency with last year’s post — I keep going back and forth on this. Replacement level in the NL is lower than the AL, and +2 wins seems a pretty good start, but most (FG included) as using 2.25 wins for replacement. I decided to buckle on that one. Same with the baseline, I’m a little more comfortable with using .300% winning percentage for the baseline which works out to 47-48 wins.
If you want to scale back the projections slightly because of pitching hitting, I won’t stop you, but I’m not too concerned about it. Pitchers accounted for slightly under 6% of the Giants total PAs last season. True, pitchers are bad hitters and you can find extra “hidden” value in a guy like Carlos Zambrano because of how well he hits, but the impact of most pitcher hitting (and defense) seem minimal to me. I see that FG tabbed the Giants pitchers, as a group, at -3 wins last season. I’m comfortable if you want to knock 1-2 wins or so off the total of my projection to account for pitchers and bench players hitting.
Thanks for posting! I’ll be tinkering with the projection again before Opening Day to reflect any roster changes. I’d also like to add more ZiPS into the hitting numbers. So, stay tuned.
RE: The CHONE standings, we probably disagree in playing time. That’s one area where the difference in wins could be coming from.