2016 ZiPS Projections – Pittsburgh Pirates

After having typically appeared in the very hallowed pages of Baseball Think Factory, Dan Szymborski’s ZiPS projections have been released at FanGraphs the past couple years. The exercise continues this offseason. Below are the projections for the Pittsburgh Pirates. Szymborski can be found at ESPN and on Twitter at @DSzymborski.

Other Projections: Atlanta / Cincinnati / Kansas City / Philadelphia / Toronto.

Batters
Andrew McCutchen has produced between -15 and -20 fielding runs in center field over the past two seasons, according both to Defensive Runs Saved (DRS) and Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR). It’s not ideal, that, but it also represents basically all the flaws in McCutchen’s current profile. Indeed, ZiPS projects the Pirates’ center fielder to improve slightly on his WAR total this coming year in slightly fewer plate appearances.

Because his role was unclear entering 2015, Jung-ho Kang was omitted from the infield portion of last year’s Pittsburgh depth chart; this year, he’s the centerpiece of it. The algorithm in Dan Szymborski’s computer doesn’t account specifically for how Kang’s season ended with a torn meniscus and fractured tibia. What it does account for is how Kang recorded something less than a full complement of plate appearances. Projected to miss all or some of April, Kang’s projected plate-appearance total (494) seems reasonable.

The most notable weakness among the club’s positional projections appears to be first base, currently occupied by Michael Morse. It would be a surprise to find that position occupied by Morse on opening day.

Pitchers
Pittsburgh pitchers recorded the third-highest WAR figure among all 30 staffs in the league last year. A.J. Burnett and J.A. Happ, whose first names are palindromes of each other, were responsible for roughly five of those approximately 22 wins. They’ve departed this offseason, however, replaced (for the moment) by Jon Niese and maybe Allen Webster. Niese and Webster are projected for only about two wins. Which is to say, three fewer. That seems dire. On the positive side, Burnett and Happ themselves were also projected for only two wins before the 2015 season — which is to say, before profiting from the tender ministrations of pitching coach Ray Searage.

The gold standard for bullpen construction over the last two seasons has been supplied by the Kansas City Royals. It’s notable, then, that Pittsburgh’s top-five relievers receive a better collective wins projection for 2016 than Kansas City’s. Mark Melancon and Tony Watson are responsible for much of that. Not inessential, however, is the newly acquired Juan Nicasio (101.2 IP, 0.7 zWAR), who signed for merely $3 million after being non-tendered by the Dodgers.

Bench/Prospects
Pittsburgh’s greatest holes currently reside in the infield and at the end of the starting rotation. Serendipitously, these are also the positions at which their two top prospects (by the projections) are most qualified. Alen Hanson didn’t receive a major-league call-up last year but did record 529 plate appearances at Triple-A Indianapolis in just his age-22 season. He’s forecast to provide roughly average major-league production this next season. Among the pitchers, right-hander Tyler Glasnow also ascended to Triple-A this past year — in this case, as just a 21-year-old. His plus raw stuff is complemented by an encouraging statistical projection (116.0 IP, 1.5 zWAR), as well.

Depth Chart
Below is a rough depth chart for the present incarnation of the Pittsburghers, with rounded projected WAR totals for each player. For caveats regarding WAR values see disclaimer at bottom of post. Click to embiggen image.

Ballpark graphic courtesy Eephus League. Depth charts constructed by way of those listed here at site and author’s own haphazard reasoning.

***

***

***

***

***

***

Disclaimer: ZiPS projections are computer-based projections of performance. Performances have not been allocated to predicted playing time in the majors — many of the players listed above are unlikely to play in the majors at all in 2016. ZiPS is projecting equivalent production — a .240 ZiPS projection may end up being .280 in AAA or .300 in AA, for example. Whether or not a player will play is one of many non-statistical factors one has to take into account when predicting the future.

Players are listed with their most recent teams unless Dan has made a mistake. This is very possible as a lot of minor-league signings are generally unreported in the offseason.

ZiPS is projecting based on the AL having a 3.93 ERA and the NL having a 3.75 ERA.

Players that are expected to be out due to injury are still projected. More information is always better than less information and a computer isn’t what should be projecting the injury status of, for example, a pitcher with Tommy John surgery.

Regarding ERA+ vs. ERA- (and FIP+ vs. FIP-) and the differences therein: as Patriot notes here, they are not simply mirror images of each other. Writes Patriot: “ERA+ does not tell you that a pitcher’s ERA was X% less or more than the league’s ERA. It tells you that the league’s ERA was X% less or more than the pitcher’s ERA.”

Both hitters and pitchers are ranked by projected zWAR — which is to say, WAR values as calculated by Dan Szymborski, whose surname is spelled with a z. WAR values might differ slightly from those which appear in full release of ZiPS. Finally, Szymborski will advise anyone against — and might karate chop anyone guilty of — merely adding up WAR totals on depth chart to produce projected team WAR.