I'll be honest...I'm not very familiar with these projection systems and I usually come up with my own by looking at 3-year stats and such. I keep hearing how PECOTA is the best, though, and I'm not going to have time to make up a complete set of projections for myself this year. So I'm thinking of using PECOTA at least as a basis for my 2008 projections.

Is it just me, or are these projections a little conservative? I'm looking at the weighted means...I assume that's what I should be looking at? It just seems like they have everything on the low side. I just want to make sure that I'm looking at the right thing, and for someone to reaffirm that PECOTA is the best of the best.

GotowarMissAgnes wrote:Two years ago he had 35 and 121 Four years ago he had 36 and 106.

Over the last 4 years he's averaged 43 and 128. You tend to trend downward since he's now 32.

It's conservative, but it's hardly unbelievable.

No, not unbelievable at all. But it just seems that every one of their projections is pretty conservative. It's not for players over 32, either. Even younger guys like Hanley, Reyes, Utley, Holliday, Crawford, etc. all seem to regress.

They are pretty conservative with their projections. Then again some of their rookie projections are overly optimistic. I don't even look at them actually.

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin

I don't even look at the numbers most of the time. If I know a guy can hurt me or help me in a category I look at the numbers but I just go by the rankings according to PFM and use ADP to figure out how I should draft them. I guess I look at the numbers a little bit just to figure out the method to the madness, but the rankings are more important to me and they've worked for the past three years.

I agree that Pecota's numbers are pretty conservative for hitters. Their Pitching to me is a tad overly optimistic.. Overall, I look at their #'s does with HQ,James,Notebook and a few others.

GotowarMissAgnes wrote:Two years ago he had 35 and 121 Four years ago he had 36 and 106.

Over the last 4 years he's averaged 43 and 128. You tend to trend downward since he's now 32.

It's conservative, but it's hardly unbelievable.

No, not unbelievable at all. But it just seems that every one of their projections is pretty conservative. It's not for players over 32, either. Even younger guys like Hanley, Reyes, Utley, Holliday, Crawford, etc. all seem to regress.

If you are looking at the projections in the book, you have to remember that those are the 50th percentile projections. They are very accurate for rate stats, imo, but less accurate for counting stats. For the counting stats, iirc, using the onine stats at the 67-75 percential generally is more accurate.

"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to chase it."

GotowarMissAgnes wrote:Two years ago he had 35 and 121 Four years ago he had 36 and 106.

Over the last 4 years he's averaged 43 and 128. You tend to trend downward since he's now 32.

It's conservative, but it's hardly unbelievable.

No, not unbelievable at all. But it just seems that every one of their projections is pretty conservative. It's not for players over 32, either. Even younger guys like Hanley, Reyes, Utley, Holliday, Crawford, etc. all seem to regress.

If you are looking at the projections in the book, you have to remember that those are the 50th percentile projections. They are very accurate for rate stats, imo, but less accurate for counting stats. For the counting stats, iirc, using the onine stats at the 67-75 percential generally is more accurate.

I don't have the book, I'm just looking at the website. Initially I was looking at the individual player cards at the weighted mean line, but then Ender said that I should look at the player forecast manager...so that's where I've been looking now. Is the book different? Should I get the book?

Honestly, I'm a bit confused on how this all works. What is the difference between the projected stat line on the PFM as compared to the line on the individual player cards (which list the numbers for all the percentiles as well as the weighted means)?