ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Royals 2014 Royals Repository (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=279729)

Fansy the Famous Bard 03-26-2014 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canofbier (Post 10517691)
Sheesh - I knew our payroll would be higher this year, but I didn't realize it would put us as the second-highest in our division.

so we've damn near tripled our payroll in 3 years....

alnorth 03-26-2014 09:22 AM

The Ned Yost/Andy McCullough pants saga continues

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Ned Yost, flip flopper: &quot;I could really care less about your pants.&quot;</p>&mdash; Andy McCullough (@McCulloughStar) <a href="https://twitter.com/McCulloughStar/statuses/448841685401731072">March 26, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

duncan_idaho 03-26-2014 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 10517714)
The Ned Yost/Andy McCullough pants saga continues

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Ned Yost, flip flopper: &quot;I could really care less about your pants.&quot;</p>&mdash; Andy McCullough (@McCulloughStar) <a href="https://twitter.com/McCulloughStar/statuses/448841685401731072">March 26, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Except Ned is NOT flip-flopping. Grammar indicates Yost DOES care about Andy's pants.

Three7s 03-26-2014 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 10517683)
The media's opening day payroll estimates are out:

1. LA Dodgers $235,295,219
2. NY Yankees $203,812,506
3. Philadelphia Phillies $180,052,723
4. Boston Red Sox $162,817,411
5. Detroit Tigers $162,228,527
6. LA Angels $155,692,000
7. San Francisco Giants $154,185,878
8. Texas Rangers $136,036,172
9. Washington Nationals $134,704,437
10. Toronto Blue Jays $132,628,700
11. Arizona Diamondbacks $112,688,666
12. Cincinnati Reds $112,390,772
13. St. Louis Cardinals $111,020,360
14. Atlanta Braves $110,897,341
15. Baltimore Orioles $107,406,623
16. Milwaukee Brewers $103,844,806
17. Colorado Rockies $95,832,071
18. Seattle Mariners $92,081,943
19. Kansas City Royals $92,034,345
20. Chicago White Sox $91,159,254
21. San Diego Padres $90,094,196
22. NY Mets $89,051,758
23. Chicago Cubs $89,007,857
24. Minnesota Twins $85,776,500
25. Oakland A's $83,401,400
26. Cleveland Indians $82,534,800
27. Pittsburgh Pirates $78,111,667
28. Tampa Bay Rays $77,062,891
29. Miami Marlins $47,565,400
30. Houston Astros $44,544,174

The Astros are whining about their estimate, mentioning that they have to send about $5MM to another team for example, which is fair but those kinds of things have never been included in these rankings.

Wow, so we're right smack in the middle as far as payroll goes. Now it's all a matter of how well that money was spent.

Gonzo 03-26-2014 10:26 AM

Article in the Omaha paper today:

http://m.omaha.com/article/20140325/...late=mobileart



Kansas City may not have added an impact bat to the lineup or a power arm to the pitching rotation.
But the Royals can still play some defense. Really, really good defense.
Whether that's enough to contend for an American League Central title or a wild card spot remains to be seen over a 162-game schedule, but — whether by strategy or good fortune — in assembling a team aiming for its first postseason berth since 1985, the Royals have perhaps baseball's best defensive unit.
Left fielder Alex Gordon, catcher Salvador Perez and first baseman Eric Hosmer won Gold Gloves last year for their fielding excellence, representing that they are the best at their position in the American League in an award sponsored by Rawlings, a glove company. Another glove company, Wilson, named outfielder Lorenzo Cain the Royals' defensive player of the year.
So yes, the Royals truly can pick it.
The team's major offseason acquisitions — offensive table-setters Norichika Aoki and Omar Infante — are both solid to above average defensively. The club lost starting pitcher Ervin Santana to free agency and signed Jason Vargas — but the finesse pitcher's overall effectiveness could benefit from the Royals' ability to go get it behind him.
A newer statistic called ultimate zone rating sheds light on the Royals' defensive excellence. The formula for determining the rating is complicated. But according to fangraphs.com, it “puts a run value to defense, attempting to quantify how many runs a player saved or gave up through their fielding prowess.”
Last year Alcides Escobar led all American League shortstops with a UZR of 10.9 (10.9 runs saved over the course of a season).
Many believe Mike Moustakas living up to his offensive potential will be the missing link for the Royals, but his glove is already where it needs to be — he was fourth among AL third basemen with a 10.0 UZR.
Winning Gold Gloves isn't necessarily about statistics. Hosmer was only sixth in the AL with a UZR of 2.5.
Cain was second among American League outfielders and fifth overall among outfielders with a UZR of 20.0. Gordon was 10th among AL outfielders and 19th overall at 8.6. Jarrod Dyson, among outfielders who played a minimum of 500 innings, ranked 10th in the AL and 18th overall at 10.4.
As for the newcomers: Aoki, playing with Milwaukee last season, was 29th among outfielders at 3.2, while Infante was fourth among AL second basemen at 2.4. (Former Kansas City starter Chris Getz didn't play enough innings to qualify, but was slightly better at 3.0).
Perhaps the best defensive statistic for catchers is defensive runs saved above average. Perez led the AL and was fourth best overall at 11.
Want to try to grasp just why the Omaha Storm Chasers' 2011 outfield seemed impenetrable? Consider that the outfielders were Cain, Dyson and David Lough — who, of those playing a minimum 500 innings, was fourth among AL outfielders and ninth overall with a UZR of 10.4.
With so many terrific defensive outfielders on hand, Lough was traded to Baltimore in the offseason. And it's probably not surprising he wound up there — the Orioles also like their defense, with three Gold Glove winners (third baseman Manny Machado, shortstop J.J. Hardy and outfielder Adam Jones).
Baltimore and Kansas City shared 2013 AL Defensive Team of the Year, an award handed out by Wilson. Kansas City ranked just eighth in fielding percentage, despite posting a franchise-record .986 mark. Baltimore set a major league record with just 54 errors while compiling a fielding percentage of .991.
A playoff team in 2012, Baltimore went 85-77 in 2013 and fell six games short of repeating.
So how much can defense determine a team's playoff fate? It's still pretty hard to measure. But if Kansas City makes the postseason in 2014, it will be a major reason why.

Demonpenz 03-26-2014 10:45 AM

Hosmer won the gold glove but from my eye test could have done way better.

KCUnited 03-26-2014 10:58 AM

Paul Bessire's Predictalator (cdcox style of simulator) has KC's win total at 79 this year, mainly due the Vargas, Gutherie, Chen middle of the rotation.

Prison Bitch 03-26-2014 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCUnited (Post 10517977)
Paul Bessire's Predictalator (cdcox style of simulator) has KC's win total at 79 this year, mainly due the Vargas, Gutherie, Chen middle of the rotation.

I said 80 but I think it'll be our lack of power again. We can't win in the AL without at least some power, I'm not sure what the historical data is but I'd bet teams that hit the fewest HR in the AL tend to not do very well in the standings. We really need Butler and Moose to combine for ~50 HR which they are more than capable of doing (they did in 2012) and for Hosmer to take that next step into the 20s. Alex has a lot more power than he's shown lately so hopefully he stays healthy and also gets to the 20 range.

Three7s 03-26-2014 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCUnited (Post 10517977)
Paul Bessire's Predictalator (cdcox style of simulator) has KC's win total at 79 this year, mainly due the Vargas, Gutherie, Chen middle of the rotation.

Funny that he's not including Ventura in his prediction.

CaliforniaChief 03-26-2014 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 10518001)
I said 80 but I think it'll be our lack of power again. We can't win in the AL without at least some power, I'm not sure what the historical data is but I'd bet teams that hit the fewest HR in the AL tend to not do very well in the standings. We really need Butler and Moose to combine for ~50 HR which they are more than capable of doing (they did in 2012) and for Hosmer to take that next step into the 20s. Alex has a lot more power than he's shown lately so hopefully he stays healthy and also gets to the 20 range.

I agree. I feel like at least one of those 4 guys has to top 30 HR's this season.

Also, we'll need a midseason contribution from either Duffy or Zimmer to add to the rotation.

KCUnited 03-26-2014 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Three7s (Post 10518022)
Funny that he's not including Ventura in his prediction.

He simulated the season with the expected starting rotation, Ventura included.

WhawhaWhat 03-26-2014 11:23 AM

Forbes values the Royals as next to last in the league at $490 million. Yankees are the highest at $2.5 billion. Only the Marlins had lower revenues in 2013.

alnorth 03-26-2014 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCUnited (Post 10517977)
Paul Bessire's Predictalator (cdcox style of simulator) has KC's win total at 79 this year, mainly due the Vargas, Gutherie, Chen middle of the rotation.

The problem with projections is that they don't work very well with young teams. They'll do the best they can with them, if you take a AAA ERA or a AAA OPS, we can convert those to MLB-level numbers, and they try to project improvement as a young player ages, but the variance is enormous.

If you take every rookie and 2nd-year player in baseball, and compare their projected 2014 season numbers with the actual combined total 2014 numbers of all those players, it may end up being very close, but the projections for any particular individual young player are going to be way off for many if not most of those players. Young players tend to crush or fail their projections, and those projections adjust until they get old enough to know what to expect.

Once you get a track record and you are looking at 29-year old players the projections get better. There are still some surprises and some variance, but not nearly as much. Those projections are better suited for older teams like the Yankees.

The scouts think Moustakas has fixed his swing and is ready to roll, but the projections have no way of quantifying that. He played decently in 2012 and looked like dogcrap in 2013, so they take something in between those 2 years and project a slight age-based improvement on that. The projections have no clue what to do with a Ventura who the scouts all say has really put it together and will be a ROTY candidate, the projections don't have anything to back that up, and just take his minor league numbers and assume he'll be a typical SP rookie with that minor league pedigree.

If you hard-coded "someone will hit 30 HR, and Ventura will be great" into the system, the results will change quite a bit.

duncan_idaho 03-26-2014 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 10518122)
The problem with projections is that they don't work very well with young teams. They'll do the best they can with them, if you take a AAA ERA or a AAA OPS, we can convert those to MLB-level numbers, and they try to project improvement as a young player ages, but the variance is enormous.

If you take every rookie and 2nd-year player in baseball, and compare their projected 2014 season numbers with the actual combined total 2014 numbers of all those players, it may end up being very close, but the projections for any particular individual young player are going to be way off for many if not most of those players. Young players tend to crush or fail their projections, and those projections adjust until they get old enough to know what to expect.

Once you get a track record and you are looking at 29-year old players the projections get better. There are still some surprises and some variance, but not nearly as much. Those projections are better suited for older teams like the Yankees.

The scouts think Moustakas has fixed his swing and is ready to roll, but the projections have no way of quantifying that. He played decently in 2012 and looked like dogcrap in 2013, so they take something in between those 2 years and project a slight age-based improvement on that. The projections have no clue what to do with a Ventura who the scouts all say has really put it together and will be a ROTY candidate, the projections don't have anything to back that up, and just take his minor league numbers and assume he'll be a typical SP rookie with that minor league pedigree.

If you hard-coded "someone will hit 30 HR, and Ventura will be great" into the system, the results will change quite a bit.

Projections have a hard time with:

1) Young players (as you pointed out and I and others have before. For example,even a premium star like Mike Trout, the projections keep saying is going to hit right around .300 even though he has two .320+ seasons so far)

2) Players who consistently outperform their peripheral stats. Since becoming an Oriole in 2007, Guthrie has outperformed his FIP by somewhere between 0.75 and 0.25. All the projections just drop him in at 4.75-5.00 ERA, but odds are good he outperforms that significantly.

3) Defense. Projection systems typically look at a great defensive team/performance as a fluke.

Considering the Royals are stacked with young player, rely heavily on defense and run prevention, and have two starting rotation members who consistently outperform peripherals (Guthrie and Chen), I just don't place much stock in what any projection system has to say about the team as a whole.

alnorth 03-26-2014 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 10518207)
2) Players who consistently outperform their peripheral stats. Since becoming an Oriole in 2007, Guthrie has outperformed his FIP by somewhere between 0.75 and 0.25. All the projections just drop him in at 4.75-5.00 ERA, but odds are good he outperforms that significantly.

Someone should probably study this, I think this is one thing the SABR folks can probably figure out. The question: "how many years do you need to outperform FIP until we can reasonably believe they will continue to outperform?" One or two years is a fluke. What about 5+ years? For all we know, that could also be a very unlikely fluke, we were lucky, and we're just wrong about 2014.

They should be able to perform some kind of cohort analysis where you gather players in MLB history that have outperformed for 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, all the way through 6 and 7 years, and figure out what they did the following year. Players who outperformed for 1 year would be expected to generally crash back to earth, but what about players who keep doing it? (we don't need to study players who underperform, they just wind up demoted and out of baseball)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.