Another look at Cintron
1 Comments Published by Colin Wyers on Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 12:28 AM.
Earlier I took a quick look at how Cintron might fare next season, seeing as how, y'know, we have him and everything. I used the rather pessimistic CHONE forecast - not that any of the other forecasts put him with an OPS over .700 or anything useful like that, but even considering that it's Alex Cintron we're talking about the numbers weren't kind.
Running an absurdly, dumber-than-Marcels dumb forecast, I come up with a .287 wOBA for Cintron next season - I'm missing regression to the mean as a component. (Marcels figures him for a .303 wOBA next season.)
I've run across some comments that last season's performance was degraded by health issues that have seemingly cleared up, and maybe there's some cause for optimism. So... let's redo our absurdly dumb projection, except let's give his 2007 performance less weight - say, use a 3/4/3 weighted average.
Doing that, we get a .291 wOBA. Not a whole heck of a lot of difference - we should be regressing to the mean here, but it's getting late and I'm tired.
This is just me thinking out loud here - but this is an instance where we can consider data that our projection systems aren't able (as of yet) to process and see what conclusions we can draw. Do I stand by any of this? Not a chance. Like I said, thinking aloud. I'd like to hear what some of you think, too.
Running an absurdly, dumber-than-Marcels dumb forecast, I come up with a .287 wOBA for Cintron next season - I'm missing regression to the mean as a component. (Marcels figures him for a .303 wOBA next season.)
I've run across some comments that last season's performance was degraded by health issues that have seemingly cleared up, and maybe there's some cause for optimism. So... let's redo our absurdly dumb projection, except let's give his 2007 performance less weight - say, use a 3/4/3 weighted average.
Doing that, we get a .291 wOBA. Not a whole heck of a lot of difference - we should be regressing to the mean here, but it's getting late and I'm tired.
This is just me thinking out loud here - but this is an instance where we can consider data that our projection systems aren't able (as of yet) to process and see what conclusions we can draw. Do I stand by any of this? Not a chance. Like I said, thinking aloud. I'd like to hear what some of you think, too.
Labels: Alex Cintron, Baseball, Chicago Cubs, Projections
I tend to agree with the projection you posted yesterday. I think his injury could have hurt his value in 2007 (probably did), but we don't know for sure. At his age, I'd tend to believe that his production in 2008 would be similar to his career averages if given enough playing time, which he won't be so his numbers could vary anywhere from shitty to below average to average.
I don't think this affects the Cubs at all to be honest. Lou said yesterday that he sees Cedeno as an infielder only. Hendry said otherwise, but from what we know last season, Lou's statements on issues like this have much more relevance than Hendry's do.
One thing I thought was interesting was that Levine or maybe Miles recently said that Cedeno could win the starting shortstop job in spring training. I've also seen "insiders" on O's Hangout say they've heard the same thing about Cedeno and Theriot -- that it's more of a competition than we've heard.
That would change if the Cubs traded Cedeno obviously, but at this point, I don't think Cintron is going to be playing in Chicago except for maybe a 2 or 4-week stint on the bench as a back-up in case of injury.