Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: Projections?

  1. #1
    Please ban me! All-Star stringer bell's Avatar
    Posts
    3,587
    Like
    199
    Liked 540 Times in 350 Posts
    Blog Entries
    32

    Projections?

    I check espn and mlb.com every once in awhile for a non-Twins centric view of baseball and see what the outside thinks of the Twins. Recently, I checked a couple of player pages and they recorded this year's stats plus a Pecota projection for the balance of the season and then combined them for an overall projection. Most of the projections weren't too kind to the Twins--Dozier is projected to fall off to a .735 OPS for the season, the pitchers aren't tabbed to improve much and Hughes is seen as regressing to the mean. I am mystified how these projections are made. I checked Wikipedia and it says that the whole system was designed by Nate Silver, a pretty well-respected numbers guy (unless you're a Republican) and among things the article notes that the exact methodology is secret.

    Also, in checking the standings, the mlb.com site has a playoff projection. The Twins currently stand at 12.5%, how on earth can that be projected at this point in the season? In the East, first place Baltimore has the lowest playoff probability and the Yankees and Red Sox have the highest.

  2. This user likes stringer bell's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    glunn (05-17-2014)

  3. #2
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,759
    Like
    882
    Liked 859 Times in 553 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by stringer bell View Post
    I check espn and mlb.com every once in awhile for a non-Twins centric view of baseball and see what the outside thinks of the Twins. Recently, I checked a couple of player pages and they recorded this year's stats plus a Pecota projection for the balance of the season and then combined them for an overall projection. Most of the projections weren't too kind to the Twins--Dozier is projected to fall off to a .735 OPS for the season, the pitchers aren't tabbed to improve much and Hughes is seen as regressing to the mean. I am mystified how these projections are made. I checked Wikipedia and it says that the whole system was

    designed by Nate Silver, a pretty well-respected numbers guy (unless you're a Republican)


    and among things the article notes that the exact methodology is secret.

    Also, in checking the standings, the mlb.com site has a playoff projection. The Twins currently stand at 12.5%, how on earth can that be projected at this point in the season? In the East, first place Baltimore has the lowest playoff probability and the Yankees and Red Sox have the highest.
    Actually, Nate Silver is now a pariah to the Democrats, as well, given his current forward political projections- and he's been pretty opaque about his methodology in both sports and politics- inviting controversy and speculation. And he has now wisely returned to a sports focus to reduce the slings and arrows, leaving the NY Times and joining ESPN.

    Good stuff, though, Stringer. Do you have the direct links to the meaty projection stuff?

  4. #3
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    498
    Like
    2
    Liked 80 Times in 50 Posts
    There are a variety of projection systems and massive amounts of discussion out there with respect to methodology. They are all based on the players' past performance... The differences have to do with adjustments that are made based on historical data (e.g., differences in how players at different positions age).

    A player with a big breakout or collapse season will obviously veer a lot from the projection, which is really more of an expectation baseline than a true prediction.

  5. #4
    Like said above, it's generally some combination of the player's history and how historic data. I would imagine they are predicting that Dozier's power numbers will start to regress at some point since he never really showed it in the minors.
    Once held a .900 OBP in Church League Softball.

  6. #5
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    248
    Like
    16
    Liked 39 Times in 34 Posts
    There will always be outliers in these formula but it is fascinating as I believe overall they are pretty accurate. When looking at individuals there will be a decent amount of error but if you look at an entire team the predictions are more likely to be on. There will be some players that out hit and then others the under hit the projections to equal it out.

    That said, I was at least somewhat skeptical of Dozier and there almost has to be some regression coming soon. If not, holy crap, he's on pace for what? 35-40 homeruns? That would shock me. That said, I think some of his homers will be replaced by doubles and he'll still end up 750 - 800 OPS.

  7. This user likes halfchest's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    tarheeltwinsfan (05-17-2014)

  8. #6
    Senior Member Double-A
    Posts
    146
    Like
    358
    Liked 46 Times in 26 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    That's exactly what I was thinking. It doesn't take a degree in statistics to say Dozier will not hit 40 HR this year. My hope is that he does and I'll be forced to eat these words. This leads me to the following question: exactly how does one eat his words when they are electronically conveyed?

  9. #7
    Senior Member Double-A
    Posts
    146
    Like
    358
    Liked 46 Times in 26 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Interesting post. I guess all I can say is that's why we play the games. Did anyone project both the Twins and the Braves going from worst to first in 1991? I doubt it.

  10. #8
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,126
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    49
    Liked 1,598 Times in 831 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    And this is why projection models are kinda broken. They can't tell you that Dozier changed his swing and had immediate success with it. They can't tell you that he looked like a different player after that date. All models can do it look at his season, compare it to his age, cross-compare them to similar players, and then spit out a number.

    Except that Dozier was no longer the player his overall 2013 stats said he was, which renders the projection mostly useless.

  11. This user likes Brock Beauchamp's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    glunn (05-17-2014)

  12. #9
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    498
    Like
    2
    Liked 80 Times in 50 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    And this is why projection models are kinda broken. They can't tell you that Dozier changed his swing and had immediate success with it. They can't tell you that he looked like a different player after that date. All models can do it look at his season, compare it to his age, cross-compare them to similar players, and then spit out a number.

    Except that Dozier was no longer the player his overall 2013 stats said he was, which renders the projection mostly useless.
    Except that the projection models aren't "broken" because they do not attempt to consider unusual changes in player ability. A good projection tells us what to reasonably expect. That's all. It's a starting point. The fact that some people don't understand a tool, or use it incorrectly, has zero bearing on its validity.

  13. #10
    Senior Member All-Star crarko's Avatar
    Posts
    1,228
    Twitter
    @crarko
    Like
    156
    Liked 782 Times in 411 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by drivlikejehu View Post
    Except that the projection models aren't "broken" because they do not attempt to consider unusual changes in player ability. A good projection tells us what to reasonably expect. That's all. It's a starting point. The fact that some people don't understand a tool, or use it incorrectly, has zero bearing on its validity.
    Except that we can't know because the basis of the model is being kept as a secret sauce recipe, and the results are being thrown around with no mention of confidence levels, or what the involved measure of the variance is, or what assumptions the model makes.

    If one did have training in statistics one might say it's pretty shoddy work. If one had training in advertising one might call it brilliant work. It's all in how you treat ambiguity.
    Last edited by crarko; 05-18-2014 at 06:03 AM.
    Oh, I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay,
    I sleep all night and I work all day.

  14. These 2 users like crarko's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    PseudoSABR (05-18-2014), tarheeltwinsfan (05-18-2014)

  15. #11
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,126
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    49
    Liked 1,598 Times in 831 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by drivlikejehu View Post
    Except that the projection models aren't "broken" because they do not attempt to consider unusual changes in player ability. A good projection tells us what to reasonably expect. That's all. It's a starting point. The fact that some people don't understand a tool, or use it incorrectly, has zero bearing on its validity.
    Many projection models simply predict regression from good players and progression from bad players.

    In the aggregate they have some use but I've found them mostly useless for individual performance because, as you just admitted, they cannot compensate for individual drive, changes to approach, and other assorted things that human beings do on a daily basis.

  16. This user likes Brock Beauchamp's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    PseudoSABR (05-18-2014)

  17. #12
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,863
    Like
    182
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    Dismissing a projection because it isn't Nostradamus is as silly as putting total faith in it.

  18. #13
    Twins Moderator MVP USAFChief's Avatar
    Posts
    6,608
    Like
    3,682
    Liked 3,170 Times in 1,357 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by drivlikejehu View Post
    Except that the projection models aren't "broken" because they do not attempt to consider unusual changes in player ability. A good projection tells us what to reasonably expect. That's all. It's a starting point. The fact that some people don't understand a tool, or use it incorrectly, has zero bearing on its validity.
    Wouldn't a projection system that, by design, doesn't attempt to include new information, be of questionable validity?
    Every post is not every other post. - a wise man

  19. This user likes USAFChief's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    tarheeltwinsfan (05-18-2014)

  20. #14
    Twins News Team All-Star PseudoSABR's Avatar
    Posts
    1,955
    Like
    257
    Liked 207 Times in 116 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    Many projection models simply predict regression from good players and progression from bad players.

    In the aggregate they have some use but I've found them mostly useless for individual performance because, as you just admitted, they cannot compensate for individual drive, changes to approach, and other assorted things that human beings do on a daily basis.
    Right. Prognosis models must demonstrate their worth in the aggregate (which as sums (or league totals) stay relatively the same year to year)--which means their models necessarily emphasize regression to the mean for nearly all players (both in terms of league averages and the player's career averages).

    They are fun to look at and tell you something about where league totals sit and about the biases of their authors but probably aren't practically useful for much.

  21. #15
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,863
    Like
    182
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    The fact that projections are accurate in the aggregate is informing. In sports, fans like to believe their guy is the outlier because he changed his approach, he's a new player, he's "fill in token optimism here!"

    In reality, most players DO regress to the mean over time. There will be outliers who establish new performance standards, but they are just that - outliers. We can all hope that Dozier is an outlier like Jose Bautista was. But for every Dozier there are a dozen Colabellos or Diamonds.

    Their practical use is in tempering expectations by overzealous fans.

  22. #16
    Twins News Team All-Star PseudoSABR's Avatar
    Posts
    1,955
    Like
    257
    Liked 207 Times in 116 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by drivlikejehu View Post
    A good projection tells us what to reasonably expect.
    I think the debate is it's not very reasonable to expect a player to perform to a model limited by historical data and 'secret sauce' metrics. I think projections are a far more opaque tool (or lens) than simply looking at the historical data ourselves.

    If a glass hammer breaks, it's not user error.
    Last edited by PseudoSABR; 05-18-2014 at 12:22 PM.

  23. This user likes PseudoSABR's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    tarheeltwinsfan (05-18-2014)

  24. #17
    Twins News Team All-Star PseudoSABR's Avatar
    Posts
    1,955
    Like
    257
    Liked 207 Times in 116 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    The fact that projections are accurate in the aggregate is informing.
    Is it? For me, it's a symptom that league totals don't change over time. Of course, as one guy gets inexplicably better, another guy gets inexplicably worse; for me, the usefulness is in identifying who is who.

  25. #18
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    498
    Like
    2
    Liked 80 Times in 50 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by USAFChief View Post
    Wouldn't a projection system that, by design, doesn't attempt to include new information, be of questionable validity?
    They are based on objective, comparable information. Every year, there is huge amounts of talk regarding adjustments players are making, new pitches, new approaches, etc. Most of the time it is noise.

    But again, the issue here is just not understanding what the system is and what it is trying to do. For any individual player, there may be information that could potentially improve a projection. But that defeats the purpose of objectivity and consistency.

    That's why the correct use is to start with the baseline provided and consider whether other factors may result in exceeding or falling short of the projection. Switching the order of that process is human error that does nothing to diminish the projections.

    Also, it's not true they are all "secret sauce." The formula for Marcel (Tom Tango) is published, among others.

    It is true you can basically replace their use by just studying a player's historical performance. That's not very efficient though.
    Last edited by drivlikejehu; 05-18-2014 at 12:26 PM.

  26. #19
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,863
    Like
    182
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by PseudoSABR View Post
    Is it? For me, it's a symptom that league totals don't change over time. Of course, as one guy gets inexplicably better, another guy gets inexplicably worse; for me, the usefulness is in identifying who is who.
    Did Diamond suddenly become a turd overnight? Colabello's deal with the devil expired at midnight on April 23rd?

    The myth is that you can identify the trends any better than a projection system - even one that functions like a caveman club. Parker, who is an excellent analyst of baseball, had two blogs earlier this year detailing the successes of Kubel and Colabello. He identified things that had changed that would indicate why they were being successful.

    They still succumbed to regression. There are few that don't over time and it's a valuable lesson for fans to keep in mind. (Sometimes, it's also a very good thing! Nudge Nudge to Mauer right now)

  27. #20
    Twins Moderator MVP USAFChief's Avatar
    Posts
    6,608
    Like
    3,682
    Liked 3,170 Times in 1,357 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    The fact that projections are accurate in the aggregate is informing.
    My projection system predicts the combined W-L record of the AL and NL this year will be .500, and my system has been accurate in the aggregate for going on two centuries now. However, I'm having trouble deciding what good the data is to me.
    Every post is not every other post. - a wise man

  28. This user likes USAFChief's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    PseudoSABR (05-26-2014)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.