2017 ZiPS Projections – St. Louis Cardinals

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 St. Louis Cardinals. Szymborski can be found at ESPN and on Twitter at @DSzymborski.

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

Batters
On Monday, the author of this post published the ZiPS projections for the Milwaukee Brewers. Among the findings one might have extracted from that document? No Brewers position player receives a forecast greater than 2.8 wins for 2017. Not much better than average, in other words.

Examining the numbers presented here, one finds a similar trend. Among those players currently employed by the St. Louis Cardinals, no batter is projected by Dan Szymborski’s computer to record more than 3.1 wins in 2017. Which is to say, not much better than average.

This might comes as a surprise. While the Brewers weren’t particularly good in 2016 and aren’t expected to be particularly good in 2017, the Cardinals missed the playoffs by a single game in 2016 and have comported themselves this offseason — as they have in many other, recent offseasons — as a team that intends to compete for a World Championship.

Pitching is one variable that separates the Cardinals and Brewers, of course. Another is sheer volume of competent pieces, though. The Cardinals appear to have a distinctly egalitarian approach to roster construction. While none of their starting field players is projected for more than 3.1 wins, all of them are forecast for more than 2.2 wins. They are infested with competence.

Pitchers
Like their field-playing counterparts, the Cardinals’ starting rotation is populated uniformly by average or slightly better pieces. Carlos Martinez (192.0 IP, 4.2 zWAR) represents the one exception: at four-plus wins, he not only receives the club’s top overall projection, but is acquitted as something more like a legitimate star. But Mike Leake (173.2, 2.0), Michael Wacha (138.1, 1.6), Adam Wainwright (149.1, 2.1): they’re all in the average range.

A note on the final member of the Cardinals’ likely Opening Day rotation, Lance Lynn (98.0, 1.6): ZiPS accounts for the fact that he missed the 2016 season, not why he missed it. All reports suggest he should be fine for spring training, etc. His absence is almost certainly what informs his modest innings projection, however.

Bench/Prospects
While Jhonny Peralta (454 PA, 1.8 zWAR) appears as Kolten Wong’s (495, 2.4) platoon partner in the depth-chart image below, the Cardinals’ infield situation is likely to be a fluid one — or has the potential to be, certainly, given the presence of five useful options. Matt Carpenter (601, 3.0), Aledmys Diaz (511, 2.7) and Jedd Gyorko (477, 2.4) are all capable of playing multiple positions and all receive a projection of two wins or better.

Nor does that even represent the entirety of the club’s competent infield depth. Greg Garcia (427, 1.5) and the cruelly neglected Wilfredo Tovar (454, 1.3) profile as strong bench players. Harrison Bader (441, 1.2) and Tommy Pham (347, 1.3), meanwhile, represent the top outfield alternatives.

With regard to pitchers, Alex Reyes (121.1 IP, 1.8 zWAR) was quite impressive in his brief exposure to major-league competition last year. Szymborski’s computer suggests he profiles as basically a league-average starter already. Luke Weaver (115.2, 1.6) was less impressive in terms of run prevention, but actually produced superior fielding-independent indicators to Reyes during his own, brief major-league run. His projection is also promising.

Depth Chart
Below is a rough depth chart for the present incarnation of the Cardinals, 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.