Projecting The Texas Rangers' 2010 Offense
David
The free agent signings of Vladimir Guerrero and Khalil Greene have produced the right-handed hitter and utility infielder that the Texas Rangers’ front office listed as priorities for the off-season. Assuming Jarrod Saltalamacchia is healthy, the top 12 position players are essentially decided, with either a fifth outfielder or right-handed first baseman likely to be selected to serve as the 25th man on the Opening Day roster.
The CHONE, Bill James, and Marcel 2010 hitting projections have been published, which makes it possible to predict how productive the Rangers’ offense is likely to be in the coming season assuming that everyone stays healthy. The table below provides OPS projections for the thirteen players that seem most likely to get the most at-bats for the major league team in 2010, along with each player’s major league OPS from 2009.
Estimates for how many at-bats each player will get (assuming everyone is healthy) are also included and used to project the team’s OPS and runs scored total for 2010. The third section includes projections for players who could see playing in 2010 due to injuries or ineffectiveness among the thirteen who are predicted to make the Opening Day roster:
A few notes on the player projection systems:
(a) CHONE: Based on his description of his algorithm, Sean Smith’s projections probably are the most sophisticated, as they incorporate prior major and minor league performance data, age, statistical trending, regression to league average BABIP, etc. CHONE is likely the most accurate in predicting the major league performances of minor league players, though it is worth noting that even CHONE tends to have a great deal of difficulty projecting young players.
(b) Bill James: Like CHONE, the Bill James projections combine past performance and age multiplier to predict future performance. The algorithm is particularly favorable to sluggers and thus tends to provide particularly optimistic projections for players like Chris Davis, Vladimir Guerrero, Josh Hamilton, and Nelson Cruz. The Bill James algorithm also tends to underestimate how difficult the jump from the minor leagues to the major leagues is and thus tends to over-estimate the contributions of prospects.
(c) Marcel: Marcel uses a player’s performance from the three previous seasons to project his next season’s performances. The most recent year’s performance is more heavily weighted in the projection than the previous two. Regressions to league averages and an age-multiplier are used to account for annual differences for a given player. Marcel has trouble projecting young players or players with recent breakout seasons. This helps explain Marcel’s extreme bullishness on Teagarden (1.205 OPS in 53 plate appearances in 2008) and bearishness on Nelson Cruz (.671 OPS in 2007).
USING THE PROJECTIONS TO MAKE PREDICTIONS ABOUT 2010
● Five players are projected to have an OPS north of .800, and Michael Young and David Murphy could make it seven. Last year’s team had four .800-plus OPS players (Young, Cruz, Kinsler, and Byrd). The Angels were the only AL West team with five players with an OPS over .800 in 2009. The Mariners had two such players (Ichiro and Russell Branyan) and the Athletics had just one (Matt Holliday).
● The Rangers' two young catchers are projected to hit much better this year than in 2009. A .700-plus OPS from the No. 8 spot in the lineup would be a marked improvement over last year, when the team’s three catchers combined for a .658 OPS. A combined .728 OPS from the catchers would be expected to produce an extra 10 runs of offense in 2010 relative to 2009.
● Unlike their pitching, the Rangers' offense lacks the depth to overcome injuries and poor performances. Teagarden can likely replace Saltalamacchia’s production and Murphy would likely be an adequate fill-in for Cruz or Hamilton, but the loss of Kinsler, Young, or Andrus could be devastating.
● CHONE provides projections for several of the Rangers’ minor league players. Smoak’s projection seems pessimistic due probably to his struggles in AAA in 2009. A strong start in AAA by Smoak, Ramirez, or Moreland could help allay concerns about first base if Davis gets off to another slow start in 2010.
● If the player performance and playing time projections prove to be accurate, then the team will finish with an OPS of approximately .786, which would be 22 points higher than the ,764 OPS the Rangers posted in 2009. A .786 OPS would rank third among Rangers’ teams in the past six years, behind the 2008 team that posted an .816 OPS and scored 901 runs and the 2005 team that posted a .798 OPS and scored 865 runs. Assuming the team’s OPS-to-runs scored ratio is reasonably consistent with its past five seasons and the team OPS projection proves correct, the Rangers would be expected to score approximately 840 runs in 2010.
● As was noted here, the Rangers' pitching staff and defense is projected to give up approximately 770 runs in 2010. The Pythagorean win/loss for a team that scores 840 runs and gives up 770 runs is 88-74.
● Using OBP and slugging predictions from Bill James, CHONE, and Marcel to calculate the Rangers optimal lineup for scoring runs produces the lineup below that is projected to score 873 runs during 2010:
Reader Comments (22)
Wow. An .829 OPS for Davi sis pretty optimistic. I also think you will have one player out of Vlad, Josh, Kinsler and Cruz that comes close to a .900 OPS. How many wins does 873 runs scored equal?
just thinking about the improved pitching in our division, runs may be harder to come by this year.
It seems like everyone has improved.
I'm sure our hitting is improved, plus last year was a down year for us.....
I am looking forward to an improved team/division, should be exciting.
I have to admit, I am a little disappointed in the 88 win pythag. prediction. I was really hoping for a 90-92 win prediction. Looks like we'll still have to have a a lot break right for us to make it to the playoffs.
Andrew in Boston, I dont think anyone will run away with our division this year, even Oakland with their pitching are going to be tough to score on.
so 88 may be good..
I think our div. will do good against the central, and fair in the east.....
what do you guys think, am I just dreaming???
Haven't posted in a while, but the offseason is truly exciting.
The competition for starter and relief pitching should improve the overall pitching this year and the depth should allow the Rangers to avoid any critical meltdowns like the one that happened at the end of the 2009 season.
Last year's hitting was way off. The new hitting coach should bring a more balanced approach. That combined with the major improvement in the DH position and a return to normal by a few other players should create a definite improvement in hitting.
Last year the defense significantly improved. Andrus @ SS and Young @ 3B improved both positions. Davis couldn't hit, but he definitely was an improvement defensively at 1B. The biggest surprise was Kinsler @ 2B. His error count was way down. If the Ranger's maintain their 2009 defense into 2010 they will win the division.
It will be a tough win. No one is going to run away with the division this year.
IMO the key to 2010 will be if the Rangers can learn to NOT play down to the level of the competition. To many games were lost to pitchers no one ever heard of suddenly having, per Tom Grieve "Good Stuff". Yeah, right. Split within the division and clean up on the bottom feeders and the Rangers will reach the promised land.
One thing this doesn't account for is the tremendous speed we have at 9 and 1 and Borbon is likely to steal 35+ bases if he's on 35% of the time. I think this team is going to score at least 850 runs (if healthy.)
James,
10 runs ~= 1 win. So now pythag gives 88.9 wins. Better but not by much.
"That's why they play the game." :) It ought to be fun anyhow. (95 wins)
Question for the masses. (I am at work and don't have time to look it up.)
Do teams that steal bases (like LAA) outperform thier pythag record?
I forget the percentage, but it takes a very high success rate to off set being thrown out.
I believe the Rangers greatly exceeded that percentage in 2009. With the speed and growing maturity the Rangers should exceed the threshold in 2010.
IMO, the ability to successfully steal significantly increases the pressure on the pitcher and defense which also helps the batter.
Anyone have the 2009 numbers and the breakeven percentage? As long as you are at it - do you have it by Ranger player?
Jon,
I am currently reading "The Book: Playing the percentages in Baseball" (which is an excellent read BTW). They have a caught stealing as worth -0.467 runs and a stolen base as worth 0.175 runs. So to break even you would need to be successful stealing 72.7% of the time. Last year the Rangers stole 149 bases and were caught stealing 36 (80.5% successful). So we did well.
Note: this is based on a random situation, the "break even point" shifts in specific situations (like one run down in the ninth). Just the potential of a base stealing can improve the offense by disrupting the pitcher and holding the 1st baseman on base.
Rob M.
My initial thought is pythagorean prediction is based on runs, not hitting and so the total runs scored (RS) already captures the stolen bases (SB). So there should be very little correlation.
I ran a quick calculation based on 2009 numbers looking at two different correlations. The first is between how much a team exceeded their pythagorean prediction (Actual Wins - Pythag Wins) and # of SBs. The second between is how much a team exceeded their pythagorean prediction and SB%.
Pythag and # SB correlation - .052
Pythag and SB% correlation - .088
A correlation of 0 means the variables are not related, while a correlation of 1 means that that they are completely dependent. So there is essentially no relation between stolen bases and exceeding pythagorean prediction as expected.
Now if your question is, do the predicted RS from David's article include SB, that I do not know.
Old school here. This all sounds good, but if it was really that accurate, why would we even play the games? The human factor, injuries, team chemistry all have a factor, and as for the Rangers' this year all of the following will surely come into play. Offensively, there are three players that have the potential to have rebound years that will/should put the Rangers over the 90 win mark. When a player with as much talent and pride as these three have, the odds are very high they will rebound. For the rest of my take on the 'old school' side of this, and the three players mentioned go to http://tsheat.mlblogs.com (not any new type of stats, just the RBIs and hitting lines, etc.).
I forget - does Texas usually run with 12 or 13 position players? If 13, who is the 13th?
1. Davis 1B
2. Kinsler 2B
3. Andrus SS
4. Young SS
5. Teagarden C
6. Hamilton OF
7. Borbon OF
8. Cruz OF
9. Guerrero DH
10. Murphy OF
11. Salty C
12. Greene IF
13. ?
Craig Gentry
So assuming these stats are an accurate projection of our season, where does in game managerial strategy figure in? That could prove to be our Achilles heel.
Now that Wash has said publicly that he'll play Josh in CF afterall, when Borbon needs back-up (ie vs LHPs), I think #13 will be a lefty-masher who can play RF (Moreland?), or one who can address the danger that David mentions above:
" .......... the loss of Kinsler, Young, or Andrus could be devastating."
Greene may well cover for Andrus, so, since Wash has said he plans on playing Vlad in RF some, a lefty masher who can play 1st, 2nd & 3rd may be our priority: WELCOME Matt Brown.
In case you missed this from Jamey's Newberg Report on Jan 7th, when we signed him after the Angels let him drift:
· "I found this fairly interesting. Check out Matt Brown’s left-right splits since reaching AA in 2006:
In 2006 (AA), Brown hit .293/.362/.495 overall – but .339/.388/.589 against lefthanders.
In 2007 (AAA), Brown hit .276/.358/.509 overall – but .302/.386/.603 against lefthanders.
In 2008 (AAA), Brown hit .320/.373/.580 overall – but .339/.397/.653 against lefthanders.
In 2009 (AAA), Brown hit .245/.333/.415 overall – but .330/.404/.532 against lefthanders.
Is Brown, whom Texas signed to a non-roster deal today, the league-minimum right-handed-hitting DH stopgap we were hoping a year ago that Max Ramirez would be?"
Interesting indeed, Jamey.
By the way, the Rangers just signed lefty-mashing veteran back-up, Toby Hall to a Minors deal with a spring invite. It seems to me that, if they thought Salty was in doubt, the FO would have gone after a righty-masher to platoon with Tea (who mashes lefties and can't touch righties).
I think this signals their confidence in Salty's health, and their intention to give Tea one more year at AAA, learning to hit righties.
Rob M - 873 runs scored vs 770 runs allowed produces a pythagorean win-loss record of 91-71. Of course, the 873 run prediction is for the Rangers best line-up, which is only likely to go 4 or 5 times per week.
Andrew in Boston - On paper, the Rangers have the best team in the AL West heading into the 2010 season. It should be fun to see how it plays out.
Jon - My pet theory for the Rangers troubles against lightly regarded pitchers is that the team wanted to get to bad pitchers early and often. Don't work counts because the last thing you want to do is lose opportunities to swing against a mediocre pitcher. Of course, the problem with that is that you often get yourself in pitcher's counts or you allow a pitcher to develop some confidence and things snowball. I think that taking a measured approach with all pitchers would be a good idea in 2010.
Andrew and Rob - The predicted runs for 2010 does account for stolen bases.
Jim - The Rangers usually roll with 13 position players and 12 pitchers. DW is probably right about Craig Gentry given his ability to play centerfield. Brandon Boggs, Joe Inglett, and Esteban German are also possibilities. Personally, I would like to see the team sign Ryan Garko as a platoon partner for Chris Davis and as insurance for Vlad Guerrero.
The geeky stat that is crucial for me is the 94 win stat. No team that has won 94 games since the current playoff system has been adopted has ever missed the play offs. If you put a pencil too it you can see how it would be almost impossible to win 94 games and not make the playoffs as a divisional winner or wild card. Seattle is not going to be as good as they were last year. Neither are the Angels. Oakland could hit their way out of a paper bag and teams have to score more than 3 runs a game to win a division. The neat thing with the 94 win stat is that it does not matter who you win the games against.
So the questions is: "Have the Rangers improved by 7 wins over last years record so that they can reach the 94 win level?" I believe they have or at least have a good chance of it.
Another thing to remember, by the trading deadline the new ownership will be in place. The Rangers will have the money and the farm system to make a move at the deadline. this year.
"My pet theory for the Rangers troubles against lightly regarded pitchers is that the team wanted to get to bad pitchers early and often. "
david,
That is also my thinking. The Rangers under Rudy were a swing for the fences group which produced IMO a wide variance of results your basic feast or famine with way to much famine. A measured approaach with more walks taken will work well with the improved defense & pitching the club has recently developed.
Now this is a great example of having your cake and eaiting too:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/baseball/mlb/01/23/athletics.desme.ap/index.html?eref=sihp
A's lose a prospect, we gain 1 more good man in God's army... I love it!
Pretty neat kid... not really sure he was really a "top" prospect, this was probably thrown in for some drama... but nevertheless a cool read.