Sanchez Projection March 2016

[Maahfaace]

Sanchez as reliever - 60 innings 60% ground ball rate 15 50 k/bb

Jansen - 60 innings 48% ground ball rate 15 50 k/bb

 

Of course you claim "they are nothing alike", you are Grant, enemy of logic, friend of Trump.

 

Statistically they are somewhat alike, especially as relievers --

 

Let's look at the logical flaws in your post.

 

1. "pigenholing" 1 stat -- NO... k and bb are two stats. I did not even use k/bb ratio. I used k and bb - that is 2... 2 is not 1

 

2. Sanchez and Jansen are similar in that they both were tried as starters and were mediocre

 

3. Both have ground ball tendencies, Sanchez obviously more extreme (Janen - 48% or so, Sanchez 60%)

 

The crazy thing is a few months ago, I was in your shoes, arguing with Nox about this... trying to argue that Sanchez is somehow unique. Nox's point was that I could not beat the machine.

 

I thought about this, and realized he is correct (of course).. now believe it or not I have a background in data analysis, so I have some concept of what it would take to beat (improve) the "machine"

 

I could not do it as a casual baseball statistics hobbyist, and could not do it alone. I would have to work full time as part of a team developing such a system. My advice to you (as I've said before) is this: If you truly believe you have unique insights that go beyond the projection systems, then please send your resume to front offices. Your unique knowledge is wasted on this board.

 

In all fairness, they really arent comparable as relievers at all other than points 1 and 2. Janssen was a completely different kind of pitcher and had at least 5 pitches he used in his mix (4 if you throw out the change) not very typical for a back-en reliever. The majority of his strikeouts were the product of hitters guessing at what was coming next as his stuff was meh across the board. The 67% to 48% groundball rate is quite the discrepancy as well.

I can see where Grant is coming from when he says they are nothing alike and would tend to agree with him.

[Olerud363]

In all fairness, they really arent comparable as relievers at all other than points 1 and 2. Janssen was a completely different kind of pitcher and had at least 5 pitches he used in his mix (4 if you throw out the change) not very typical for a back-en reliever. The majority of his strikeouts were the product of hitters guessing at what was coming next as his stuff was meh across the board. The 67% to 48% groundball rate is quite the discrepancy as well.

I can see where Grant is coming from when he says they are nothing alike and would tend to agree with him.

 

Hi Maahfaace -- my point is that even as a reliever Sanchez is statistically similar to Casey Jansen not say Dellin Betances... Sanchez' k-rate as a reliever is actually lower then Jansen's... so without a change in skill you are looking at sort of a Casey Jansen like reliever... second tier.

 

I doubt Sanchez could maintain a 1.5 era with his current rates, it would be more like 2.5... and a Sanchez relief season would look a lot like a Casey Jansen relief season.

 

So I will adjust my statement "Even as a reliever Sanchez PERFORMS like Casey Jansen"... he may be completely different, as a human being, as a ground ball machine, as a triple digit radar gun god... in those ways he may be completely different then Jansen... he still performs like him (so far)

[highhard2]

There was never a level of conversation about those guys outside of the context of the trades they were involved in. This Sanchez s*** just pops up randomly and goes on for pages with no conclusion. If Sanchez gets traded this board WILL go down. No server could handle the amount of traffic that would stimulate. Especially if the trade is for some no-name NL guy 90% of us have never seen play who would totally make sense for this team and from an analytical perspective.

 

Drabek probably got as much noise as Sanchez.He just busted out faster and settled any argument.

 

Stro got a lot of noice but silence the critics fairly quikly.

[Daniel Labude]

There was never a level of conversation about those guys outside of the context of the trades they were involved in. This Sanchez s*** just pops up randomly and goes on for pages with no conclusion. If Sanchez gets traded this board WILL go down. No server could handle the amount of traffic that would stimulate. Especially if the trade is for some no-name NL guy 90% of us have never seen play who would totally make sense for this team and from an analytical perspective.

 

I didn't read all of this thread...but there was definitely a lot of conversation about Hoffman since he was drafted.

[BTS]

I didn't read all of this thread...but there was definitely a lot of conversation about Hoffman since he was drafted.

 

Not really in the same way. It just feels that way because you were in the center of the biggest Hoffman debate.

[Spanky99]

lol..

 

lol

[Angrioter]

I didn't read all of this thread...but there was definitely a lot of conversation about Hoffman since he was drafted.

Debate top:

1-Sanchez ceiling

2-Hechavarria

3-Goins real value

4-Kyle Drabek

5-JP Arencibia over TdA, YanG

[L54]

Ang has been getting his thoughts across through numbered bullet points today.

[Grant77]

Sanchez as reliever - 60 innings 60% ground ball rate 15 50 k/bb

Jansen - 60 innings 48% ground ball rate 15 50 k/bb

 

Of course you claim "they are nothing alike", you are Grant, enemy of logic, friend of Trump.

 

Statistically they are somewhat alike, especially as relievers --

 

Let's look at the logical flaws in your post.

 

1. "pigenholing" 1 stat -- NO... k and bb are two stats. I did not even use k/bb ratio. I used k and bb - that is 2... 2 is not 1

 

2. Sanchez and Jansen are similar in that they both were tried as starters and were mediocre

 

3. Both have ground ball tendencies, Sanchez obviously more extreme (Janen - 48% or so, Sanchez 60%)

 

The crazy thing is a few months ago, I was in your shoes, arguing with Nox about this... trying to argue that Sanchez is somehow unique. Nox's point was that I could not beat the machine.

 

I thought about this, and realized he is correct (of course).. now believe it or not I have a background in data analysis, so I have some concept of what it would take to beat (improve) the "machine"

 

I could not do it as a casual baseball statistics hobbyist, and could not do it alone. I would have to work full time as part of a team developing such a system. My advice to you (as I've said before) is this: If you truly believe you have unique insights that go beyond the projection systems, then please send your resume to front offices. Your unique knowledge is wasted on this board.

 

They have one f***ing stat in common, that doesn't make them alike. Sanchez uses a power 98 mph sinker to get outs and rather wild at times. Janssen was a finesse pitcher with multiple good pitches. Sanchez gets an elite number of groundballs, Janssen was closer to average. Somebody like Zach Britton is a much better comparable.

 

If you believe that projection systems work for every player then I'll have to play you at fantasy ball sometime. You have to be awfully naive to just take the numbers at face value. It's been stated many times on analytics sites that they don't accurately account for the type of contact a pitcher gets. At least not yet. The smartest people take these numbers look at the big picture, using them to come up with their own projection.

 

Obviously baseball people are on the Sanchez side or they wouldn't have ranked him so highly as a prospect and the Jays wouldn't keep giving him chances to start. They know what they have, whatever the reasons are.

[Maahfaace]

Debate top:

1-Sanchez ceiling

2-Hechavarria

3-Goins real value

4-Kyle Drabek

5-JP Arencibia over TdA, YanG

 

Dont forget all the f***ablility polls

[Olerud363]

They have one f***ing stat in common, that doesn't make them alike. Sanchez uses a power 98 mph sinker to get outs and rather wild at times. Janssen was a finesse pitcher with multiple good pitches. Sanchez gets an elite number of groundballs, Janssen was closer to average. Somebody like Zach Britton is a much better comparable.

 

If you believe that projection systems work for every player then I'll have to play you at fantasy ball sometime. You have to be awfully naive to just take the nu Jambers at face value. It's been stated many times on analytics sites that they don't accurately account for the type of contact a pitcher gets. At least not yet. The smartest people take these numbers look at the big picture, using them to come up with their own projection.

 

Obviously baseball people are on the Sanchez side or they wouldn't have ranked him so highly as a prospect and the Jays wouldn't keep giving him chances to start. They know what they have, whatever the reasons are.

 

Again bb (walks) and strikeouts are two stats,

 

This is why you are so annoying.... they have two (very f***ing important) stats in common as relievers... walk rate, and k-rate --

 

Casey Jansen was very good for three or four years... are you saying Sanchez would outperform him?? He might

 

Are saying Sanchez would be as good as Miller as a reliever?? As good as Dennis Eckersley??

 

I see Sanchez as a 2.5 true era reliever... you are disagreeing?? What is his true talent level as a reliever??

[Spanky99]

2001 for me. Spanky and hurl might be earlier.

 

Feb... 03'

[Olerud363]

Debate top:

1-Sanchez ceiling

2-Hechavarria

3-Goins real value

4-Kyle Drabek

5-JP Arencibia over TdA, YanG

 

The longest running debate had to of been Travis Snider --

 

Did Gaston ruin Olerud (not really, he recovered as a Met) -- Did Gaston ruin Green (no, prospered when Gaston left)

 

Will Gaston ruin Snider ?? Answer - Snider will be ruined, impossible to prove Gaston ruined him... probably not actually -- Snider got chances under a lot of different managers.

[Olerud363]

Sanchez's GB% as a reliever is 66.7%.

 

Fine I change my mind. You guys are right. Sanchez is not the next Casey Jansen... you have convinced me. He is the next Brandon League. He will never be as good as Jansen and will only get 2.5 WAR over many, many years.

[Olerud363]

They have one f***ing stat in common, that doesn't make them alike. Sanchez uses a power 98 mph sinker to get outs and rather wild at times. Janssen was a finesse pitcher with multiple good pitches. Sanchez gets an elite number of groundballs, Janssen was closer to average. Somebody like Zach Britton is a much better comparable.

 

If you believe that projection systems work for every player then I'll have to play you at fantasy ball sometime. You have to be awfully naive to just take the numbers at face value. It's been stated many times on analytics sites that they don't accurately account for the type of contact a pitcher gets. At least not yet. The smartest people take these numbers look at the big picture, using them to come up with their own projection.

 

Obviously baseball people are on the Sanchez side or they wouldn't have ranked him so highly as a prospect and the Jays wouldn't keep giving him chances to start. They know what they have, whatever the reasons are.

 

Grant -- I concede to your genius. I want to say it directly to you, even though I said it allready to some other guy. I will say it again

 

Sanchez is not the next Casey Jansen. He will never be that good. You have convinced me. Sanchez is the next Brandon League - 2.5 WAR career. Thank you. Make baseball great again!

[Angrioter]

The longest running debate had to of been Travis Snider --

 

Did Gaston ruin Olerud (not really, he recovered as a Met) -- Did Gaston ruin Green (no, prospered when Gaston left)

 

Will Gaston ruin Snider ?? Answer - Snider will be ruined, impossible to prove Gaston ruined him... probably not actually -- Snider got chances under a lot of different managers.

Maybe Snider suxx after all

[Jimcanuck]

From the hive the message has gone from bust to gas can to to Brandon League comp. Progress.

 

Yet, as a reliever Sanchez has been >> League.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Jimcanuck

[Olerud363]

The smartest people take these numbers look at the big picture, using them to come up with their own projection.

 

Grant - I wrote fangraphs about this -- here is their reply

 

Dear Olerud363

 

Our projections are done using advanced machine learning techniques. We put a lot of work into it but it isn't really that good. In fact the smartest people just come up with their own projections. So if you are one of those smarter people we recommend coming up with your own projections. If you are not one of the smarter people... well we still don't recommend using our projections... ask one of the smarter people if you can look at theirs.

 

Love fangraphs and other projection people

[Olerud363]

From the hive the message has gone from gas can to bust to Brandon League comp. Progress.

 

Yet, as a reliever Sanchez has been >> League.

 

Yes. But the point is this -> League (98mph ground ball machinist) was very good in 35 inning samples in 2006 and 2008

 

He was injured and bad in 2005, 2007

 

Is Sanchez WAY better than League because he is WAY better than League??

 

Or Sanchez and League are the same. They both can look awesome in 35 inning samples, 60 innings samples even, as the years progress and the sample sizes grow they regress to the means (as the hive loves to say)

[Olerud363]

Let's put this debate to rest.......... until his next appearance

 

I voted for future ace -- my logic -- projection systems are OK, but the smarter people make their own projections, and I have read the posts by those people and am convinced.

[L54]

Olerud trying too hard ITT

[BTS]

Olerud trying too hard ITT

 

I don't think so.

[Olerud363]

Olerud trying too hard ITT

 

Not sure I understand trying to hard?? trying at the same level I always have -- a little bit looney, a bit mean to Grant, horrible spelling, horrible grammar, willing to admit I am wrong, a little unhinged

[Jimcanuck]

Yes. But the point is this -> League (98mph ground ball machinist) was very good in 35 inning samples in 2006 and 2008

 

He was injured and bad in 2005, 2007

 

Is Sanchez WAY better than League because he is WAY better than League??

 

Or Sanchez and League are the same. They both can look awesome in 35 inning samples, 60 innings samples even, as the years progress and the sample sizes grow they regress to the means (as the hive loves to say)

 

As a reliever, career:

 

xFIP - Sanchez: 3.15, League: 3.72

K/9 - Sanchez 6.98, League: 6.34

BB/9 - Sanchez 2.43, League 3.13

 

Sanchez >> League as a reliever

 

AND Sanchez is 23 and only getting better

 

The comp suxxxxx

[Olerud363]

As a reliever, career:

 

xFIP - Sanchez: 3.15, League: 3.72

K/9 - Sanchez 6.98, League: 6.34

BB/9 - Sanchez 2.43, League 3.13

 

Sanchez >> League as a reliever

 

AND Sanchez is 23 and only getting better

 

The comp suxxxxx

 

Scouting report - Young Sanchez

 

His fastball has been clocked as high as 98 MPH, works consistently at 94-95, and has vicious sinking action. He will mix in a curveball and changeup, Both secondary pitches are inconsistent, varying between plus and below average depending on what day you see him.

 

Scouting report - Young League

 

He created a stir this year by touching 102 mph during the Eastern League All-Star game. His fastball is more - often in the 94-96 mph range, sometimes a notch higher. The fastball drops sharply in the strike zone. His second pitch is an erratic slider. When it works, it is devastating in combination with the fastball, but he will go through phases where he can't control it properly. When used as a starter, League adds a straight changeup to his arsenal. Like the slider, this is an effective pitch when it is working. League's main flaws revolve around command and control, related to inconsistent mechanics. He had a few problems with confidence early in his career, but he took very well to the bullpen and performed well under pressure this year.

 

-- So

 

Sanchez/Jansenn not a good comparison because they're stuff is very different

Sanchez/Leauge not a good comparision because Sanchez is way better

[BTS]

As a reliever, career:

 

xFIP - Sanchez: 3.15, League: 3.72

K/9 - Sanchez 6.98, League: 6.34

BB/9 - Sanchez 2.43, League 3.13

 

Sanchez >> League as a reliever

 

AND Sanchez is 23 and only getting better

 

The comp suxxxxx

 

That's actually pretty close. Especially if you adjust for run scoring environment and remove League's post prime s***** years. The two have very similar skill sets.

[Olerud363]

Olerud trying too hard ITT

 

Report card

 

Spelling and Grammar: F

Gets along with others: F

Stays on topic: E

 

Comments - Olerud363 is not trying hard enough. Needs to pay attention to spelling and grammar. Also needs to be more polite to others and stay on topic. While he occasionally shows creativity he goes overboard seeking attention.

 

So I am not sure about "trying to hard", it says "not trying hard enough"... or maybe the part about "goes overboard seeking attention" is what you are referring to?? OK. I think I understand now. you have a point.

[Jimcanuck]

Watching Sanchez reminds me of Chris Carpenter's early years. Carpenter struggled with control then, only found command several years later with the Cardinals, was never a high K rate guy, known for inducing weak contact.

 

Carpenter had a two seam fastball, 12-6 curve, cutter early, added 4 seam and change later for a 5 pitch mix.

 

Sanchez doesn't quite have Carpenter's height (~2" difference) and has a couple MPH more on the fastball.

[BTS]

Multiple people have talked about how Sanchez is improving, but that probably isn't true. The pitcher we saw last year was much the same guy that was drafted: big fastball with spotty command, and nothing else. That's not to say he can't improve, but he hasn't really done it yet, and most pitchers don't at 24 years old.

[Dick_Pole]

Olerud trying too hard ITT

 

You do not know Olerud363 well enough if you think this is him trying too hard. On a scale of 1 to 10 ranking his passionate rants, this scores a 3.