2017 ZiPS Projections – Oakland Athletics

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

Other Projections: Arizona / Atlanta / Baltimore / Boston / Chicago AL / Chicago NL / Cleveland / Detroit / Houston / Kansas City / Los Angeles AL / Los Angeles NL / Milwaukee / Minnesota / New York AL / Miami / Pittsburgh / St. Louis / San Diego / San Francisco / Seattle / Tampa Bay / Toronto / Washington.

Batters
Yesterday, in these pages, Jeff Sullivan wrote a brief post entitled “How Much Hope Do the Bad Teams Have?” In it, he examined the end-of-season outcomes for clubs that had received uninspiring preseason projections. It’s likely that Sullivan’s post has some relevance to this Oakland club as it’s currently constructed.

According to Dan Szymborski’s computer, only two field players, Marcus Semien (627 PA, 2.7 zWAR) and Stephen Vogt (467, 2.1), are expected to exceed the two-win threshold, typically the mark of an average player. By comparison, the Milwaukee Brewers — a club definitively in the midst of a rebuild — feature six field players forecast for two or more wins. Minnesota also has six. San Diego, five.

One, searching for optimism, might note that a number of Oakland’s starters — Rajai Davis (410, 1.1) and Jed Lowrie (399, 0.4), for instance — receive only modest plate-appearance projections, and thus better prorated figures. That said, the playing-time numbers are based on sums from previous seasons, too, which themselves have been modest due either to injury or role.

Pitchers
While also lacking anything like an elite projection, the starting rotation appears more likely to produce something in the average range. Sonny Gray (159.1, 2.3 zWAR) and Sean Manaea (146.0, 2.3) both receive better than a two-win forecast, while Jharel Cotton (138.2, 1.9) and Kendall Graveman (158.1, 1.6) are in proximity of same. Andrew Triggs (66.2, 0.6), meanwhile, is treated mostly like a reliever because he’s been mostly a reliever since entering pro ball in 2012. Prorated to a starter’s load, though, his projection is more appealing.

As for the bullpen, what it lacks in a definitive relief ace it possesses in competent depth. There are a number of decent arms here. Indeed, four relievers — Santiago Casilla (51.3, 82 ERA-), Sean Doolittle (41.0, 82), Ryan Dull (68.2, 84), and Liam Hendriks (67.2, 82) — receive a park-adjusted ERA projection 15% lower (i.e. better) than league average.

Bench/Prospects
While some of the rebuilding clubs cited above feature dynamic young talent — think Lewis Brinson in Milwaukee or Manuel Margot in San Diego — Oakland has less of it. Third-base prospect Matt Chapman (451 PA, 1.9 zWAR) earns the top wins projection among players absent from the depth chart below. It appears as though he could be a useful piece for the club almost immediately. After him, though, the collection of major-league-ready talent is relegated mostly to Matt Olson (572, 1.0) and Joey Wendle (571, 1.3). Each has his own strengths, of course, but neither is indicative of a “wave” of talent making its way to the majors.

In terms of pitching, veteran right-hander Cesar Valdez (110.0 IP, 1.1 zWAR) receives the top win projection among the pitchers excluded from the depth chart below. Frankie Montas (32.0 IP, 0.4 zWAR), who arrived in Oakland from the Dodgers, has encouraging rate figures, including the fourth-best ERA projection (84 ERA-) on the club. Injuries have been troublesome for him.

Depth Chart
Below is a rough depth chart for the present incarnation of the A’s, with rounded projected WAR totals for each player. For caveats regarding WAR values see disclaimer at bottom of post. Click to enlarge 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 2017. 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 4.05 ERA and the NL having a 3.97 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.