2024 Projections

[Snider]

John, we've already traded like 12 emails on this topic, and I've told you what my expectations are for the improvements in the next couple of weeks. I don't really have anything else to add to what we've already discussed directly.

Ray - my apologies. Yes you have been very gracious in trying to help me. I have deleted my message as I was just frustrated last night. I have spent way too many hours on this but in a weak moment I posted my note which in hindsight I should have passed on.

[Whistler]

DLDays (and yes, should be changed to IL) are never projected, they're always last three years. Is there somewhere that's saying that's a projection? If so I need to fix that for sure.

But yes, we definitely need better column explainers in general. We'll do that as things settle here.

Well, DL is a column in the projected stats. Obviously you can't project IL days. Just wasn't clear to me at first glance that DL was a historical 3 year number, as in, what is this number? (I figured it out pretty quickly). An excellent column to have (especially sorting by best to worst). It's just not a projection, it's a 3 year historical stat. Only need is to change DL to IL and have the hover popup read "IL days last 3 years". For aging minds such as mine! Not a priority, just pointing out something to put on the to-do list.

[RAY@HQ]

Got it, just wanted to make sure I understood. We had DLDays in the same place on proj files on the old site. But we have these nice tool tips now, we def want to make better use of them.

And I'm as bad with DL vs IL as I am with Indians/Guardians. At least I've finally gotten it through my head that the Astros are in the AL.

[Snider]

Ray - There are many hitters and pitchers with names but no projections which have blank columns. There are other hitters/pitchers that have a very few number of innings pitched projected or at bats. I'm not sure what you used for a threshold in the past maybe 15 IP - but will those meaningless players with blanks be eliminated when the projections gets cleaned up and put in A-Z order? thank you.

[RAY@HQ]

Yeah, my threshold is 5% PT for batters, 2% for pitchers... which is like 35 PA/25 IP... if the projection is at those percentages or below, I take my time in adding them to the system. There's a good chance those guys aren't making the Opening Day roster anyway. Once camps start, all of our Team Analysts know that if someone is popping in camp or something, all they need to do is bump the guy past those thresholds, and I'll add a projection immediately.

[Snider]

Yeah, my threshold is 5% PT for batters, 2% for pitchers... which is like 35 PA/25 IP... if the projection is at those percentages or below, I take my time in adding them to the system. There's a good chance those guys aren't making the Opening Day roster anyway. Once camps start, all of our Team Analysts know that if someone is popping in camp or something, all they need to do is bump the guy past those thresholds, and I'll add a projection immediately.

Thank you. But my question centered more around the players who have no projections. Will they ultimately be taken out of the projection files? Right now you have a lot of players with names and no projections. I was hoping to have them eliminated in my spreadsheet.. The old projections didn't have blanks or gaps. if the threshold is 35/25 than only include those players who have that and above - I'm hoping your answer will be to include only those players and players falling below be eliminated.

[RAY@HQ]

Thank you. But my question centered more around the players who have no projections. Will they ultimately be taken out of the projection files? Right now you have a lot of players with names and no projections. I was hoping to have them eliminated in my spreadsheet.. The old projections didn't have blanks or gaps. if the threshold is 35/25 than only include those players who have that and above - I'm hoping your answer will be to include only those players and players falling below be eliminated.

By Opening Day, those players will either have their projected PT removed (so they will fall out of the file) or their PT% will be increased and we will add a projection for them. For now, you can delete them from your spreadsheet manually.

[tuna411]

Well, DL is a column in the projected stats. Obviously you can't project IL days. Just wasn't clear to me at first glance that DL was a historical 3 year number, as in, what is this number? (I figured it out pretty quickly). An excellent column to have (especially sorting by best to worst). It's just not a projection, it's a 3 year historical stat. Only need is to change DL to IL and have the hover popup read "IL days last 3 years". For aging minds such as mine! Not a priority, just pointing out something to put on the to-do list.

IL ... DL .... why is this so important to have it IL? it was DL for 100 seasons...

[JonE]

But MLB calls it the IL now, so it's important to be consistent.

[Snider]

Ray - under your 2024 projections tab - you have hitters with negative AB’s. Why is that and when will those players either be eliminated or given new positive AB totals. Before the change to the website there were never players with negative AB’s or players with no projections. Having both in the new format calls the credibity of the new projections into question. Just my two cents but the new projections would look much improved if you would for now eliminate those players with negative AB or those players with no projections - as you did for us in the old version. If one of those player’s PT becomes altered during the spring just add them back as you have done in the past. Thank you - your consideration of this is much appreciated.

[RAY@HQ]

Yes, this issue has been reported. Please understand that I can't get you timelines to resolve every specific issue. We're making dozens of fixes a day, hopefully you've noticed the amount of progress since Sunday. That will continue, but I can't tell you what's going to happen in what order.

[GarthHewitt14]

In the meantime, there are obvious data issues with low-PA records. Anybody want to bet the high on Corby Mayo's .700 Avg? That comes with a projected .167 Slg so there is obviously a math or linkage problem somewhere. It is not just rookies; I doubt that BBHQ is really projecting Sam Huff to hit .301. On the players with obviously-wrong projections, the PA, AB and BB totals are not compatible. However the database acts differently for guys with up to 102 PA (or not projected to make opening day), it is acting incorrectly.

I did compare yesterday's CSV to pre-changeover projections and the really bad were all low PA; I think Huff is the only one over 100 PA.

[RAY@HQ]

In the meantime, there are obvious data issues with low-PA records. Anybody want to bet the high on Corby Mayo's .700 Avg? That comes with a projected .167 Slg so there is obviously a math or linkage problem somewhere. It is not just rookies; I doubt that BBHQ is really projecting Sam Huff to hit .301. On the players with obviously-wrong projections, the PA, AB and BB totals are not compatible. However the database acts differently for guys with up to 102 PA (or not projected to make opening day), it is acting incorrectly.

I did compare yesterday's CSV to pre-changeover projections and the really bad were all low PA; I think Huff is the only one over 100 PA.

Yeah, I put data cleanup at the top of the tech list today. This stuff isn't consequential in the data set, but it still looks awful. We'll have that cleaned up asap.

[Snider]

If a column is left blank with no number in it in both your projection files plus the CSV files can we assume the number that would have gone in there is a zero in the old format. I look forward to seeing the players listed in alphabetical order as it did in the old format. It just makes it so much easier since we don’t have to do the extra steps in excel. Thank you.

[RAY@HQ]

Yes, blank is zero.