Owing to the screen size of your device, you may obtain a better viewing experience by rotating your device a quarter-turn (to get the so-called "panorama" screen view).
owlcroft logo
An Owlcroft Company web site
Click here to email us.

The Owlcroft Baseball-Analysis Site

Baseball team and player performance examined realistically and accurately.

Search this site, or just roll your cursor over the colored boxes below the pictures.

  Advertisement:


  Advertisement:


Padres 2020 Projected Pitching Performance


All raw data supplied courtesy of Baseball-Reference.com.
They do a wonderful job, and deserve your support.

2020 Padres Projected Pitching

Through games of Tuesday, 29 September 2020.
All results are from true, unadjusted data.

Explanation of the Table

The Table below shows two lines for each pitcher and for the team as a whole: Actual and Projected. The Actual lines are just what it says: the actual stats for this season to date; the Projected lines want a little explanation.

The projecting has two steps. The first is simple: for each man, we calculate the ratio of his current-season-to-date BFPs (Batters Faced Pitcher, the equivalent of Plate Appearances for batters) to his career BFPs, then multiply all his career stats by that ratio to get what one might call his “raw” career-performance data pro-rated to his current-year number of BFPs. So, as a hypothetical example, a man with 5,000 career BFPs and 250 BFPs this season would have a ratio of 250/5000, or .050; so, if he had yielded, say, 1215 career Hits, his raw projected Hits number for this season would be 1215 x .05, or 61 (if the calculated number is fractional, as with 60.75, we round it off to the nearest whole number).

That much is simple and, we hope, clear. The second adjustment takes a little explaining. It derives from the fact that—for a team or for an individual man—the number of BFPs that will be had for a given number of Outs made (which is to say “innings played”) depends exactly on the on-base percentage: the higher the on-base percentage, the more BFPs the man or team will see in any given number of innings.

To clarify: imagine a staff with a great .250 on-base percentage; that number means that, on average, one man in four that they see at the plate will get on safely. The converse of that is that three men in four will make out. (For simplicity’s sake in this elementary example, we ignore outs made on the bases.) So, in an average inning, the batters, to make the three outs that constitute an inning, will send 4 men to the plate. If we next imagine a staff with an equally absurd .500 on-base percentage, only half the batters it faces make an out: thus, to make the three outs that define an inning, the batters would have—again, on average—to send 6 men to the plate. So (as should be intuitively obvious anyway), for a given number of innings, a higher OBP means more PAs.

The consequence of that is that each man’s “raw”stat projections, which were based on his BFPs for this season, are slightly inaccurate, because his—and the team’s—BFPs would be different (perhaps higher, perhaps lower) from what they are if all the men were performing at their career rates. To correct for that, we calculate each man’s career "outs rate" (all Outs made per plate appearance, which does include outs made behind him on the bases) and multiply it by his percentage of the staff’s total BFPs; we then sum up those outs rates to get a projected team Outs rate, and from that—holding Outs made (which, again, is just innings played) constant—we can reckon the projected team BFP total. We can then adjust each projected stat line by the ratio of expected team BFPs to actual BFPs (which normally yields a number fairly close to, but not equalling,1.0), giving us the true projected stats for each man and for the team.

(For this season for this team’s pitching, the adjustment factor, rounded to three decimal places—the actual calculations use many more decimals— is 1.02)

Incidentally, that last adjustment is the reason that even rookies, whose whole “career” is just the current season, can have “adjusted” lines that differ slightly from their actual data lines, and why the TPP numbers here may differ slightly from those on other pages here.

You can see the overall “win-capability” of the team (its wins projected from these team numbers and the corresponding team batting numbers) at our “Projected Team-Performances” page.

The Table

Pitcher (alphabetical by last name) PA AB H 2B 3B HR TB BB SH SF HBP CI TPP
Austin Adams, actual: 17 15 3 0 0 1 6 2 0 0 0 0 680
Austin Adams, projected: 17 14 3 1 0 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 602
Dan Altavilla, actual: 35 30 6 3 0 0 9 5 0 0 0 0 426
Dan Altavilla, projected: 36 31 7 2 0 1 12 4 0 0 0 0 616
Michel Báez, actual: 23 21 7 2 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 1011
Michel Báez, projected: 23 20 5 1 0 0 8 2 0 0 0 0 574
David Bednar, actual: 32 30 11 3 0 1 17 2 0 0 0 0 1404
David Bednar, projected: 33 29 9 2 0 2 16 3 1 0 0 0 1188
Mike Clevinger, actual: 69 66 14 3 1 1 22 3 0 0 0 0 309
Mike Clevinger, projected: 70 63 14 3 0 2 23 7 0 0 0 0 537
Zach Davies, actual: 276 255 55 8 1 9 92 19 1 1 0 0 505
Zach Davies, projected: 282 256 66 12 2 8 105 20 2 2 2 0 686
Javy Guerra, actual: 67 60 25 3 0 1 31 5 0 1 1 0 1599
Javy Guerra, projected: 68 61 21 3 0 3 33 5 0 1 1 0 1277
Tim Hill, actual: 79 71 17 4 0 3 30 6 0 0 2 0 727
Tim Hill, projected: 81 72 17 3 0 2 27 6 1 0 1 0 594
Pierce Johnson, actual: 80 70 15 3 0 2 24 9 0 1 0 0 519
Pierce Johnson, projected: 82 71 16 3 1 2 28 10 0 1 0 0 689
Dinelson Lamet, actual: 267 242 39 9 0 5 63 20 0 1 4 0 333
Dinelson Lamet, projected: 272 239 48 12 1 9 88 27 1 2 4 0 593
Joey Lucchesi, actual: 32 28 13 2 0 0 15 2 0 1 1 0 2231
Joey Lucchesi, projected: 33 29 7 1 0 1 13 3 0 0 0 0 641
Adrián Morejón, actual: 79 75 20 2 0 7 43 4 0 0 0 0 891
Adrián Morejón, projected: 81 76 23 5 0 5 45 5 0 0 0 0 1030
Chris Paddack, actual: 245 229 60 12 2 14 118 12 0 2 2 0 811
Chris Paddack, projected: 250 232 51 10 1 11 97 13 1 2 2 0 615
Emilio Pagan, actual: 87 77 14 1 1 4 29 9 0 1 0 0 546
Emilio Pagan, projected: 89 82 17 3 1 4 33 5 0 1 1 0 597
Luis Patino, actual: 85 70 18 1 0 3 28 14 0 0 1 0 984
Luis Patino, projected: 87 71 18 1 0 3 29 14 0 0 1 0 946
Luis Perdomo, actual: 74 64 13 4 0 3 26 10 0 0 0 0 691
Luis Perdomo, projected: 76 68 20 4 0 2 30 6 0 0 1 0 882
Drew Pomeranz, actual: 73 62 9 0 0 1 12 10 0 1 0 0 324
Drew Pomeranz, projected: 74 66 16 3 0 2 26 7 0 1 0 0 701
Cal Quantrill, actual: 74 65 17 2 0 2 25 6 1 0 2 0 675
Cal Quantrill, projected: 76 69 18 3 0 2 29 5 0 0 1 0 712
Garrett Richards, actual: 213 193 47 10 1 7 80 17 0 1 2 0 652
Garrett Richards, projected: 217 195 46 9 1 5 70 19 1 1 1 0 618
Trevor Rosenthal, actual: 35 33 3 2 0 0 5 1 0 1 0 0 116
Trevor Rosenthal, projected: 36 31 7 1 0 0 10 4 0 0 1 0 479
Craig Stammen, actual: 105 97 27 4 0 2 37 4 2 0 2 0 710
Craig Stammen, projected: 107 98 25 6 0 2 39 7 1 1 1 0 631
Matt Strahm, actual: 83 74 14 2 0 3 25 4 0 0 5 0 498
Matt Strahm, projected: 85 76 17 4 0 3 30 6 1 0 2 0 611
Taylor Williams, actual: 5 5 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1380
Taylor Williams, projected: 5 4 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 763
Kirby Yates, actual: 25 20 7 0 0 1 10 4 0 1 0 0 1852
Kirby Yates, projected: 26 23 5 1 0 1 8 2 0 0 0 0 665
Padres, Actual: 2160 1952 456 81 6 70 759 170 4 12 22 0 624
Padres, Projected: 2206 1976 477 93 7 70 806 184 9 12 19 0 683
Pitcher (alphabetical by last name) PA AB H 2B 3B HR TB BB SH SF HBP CI TPP


Assorted Team Stats:
Stat Actual Projected
Batting Average: 0.234 0.241
Slugging Average: 0.389 0.408
Walks (per PA): 0.079 0.083
SOs (per PA): 0.262 0.241
On-Base Average: 0.301 0.310
Power Factor: 1.664 1.690
OPS: 0.689 0.718
TPP Runs (to date): 241 250

Runs differential:
Actual Runs -9 less than Projected Runs.





  Advertisement:


  Advertisement:



Want detailed, careful, unhysterical analysis of the effects of “Performance-Enhancing Drugs” in baseball? Click here to visit the Steroids & Baseball web site.

All content copyright © 2002 - 2020 by The Owlcroft Company.

This web page is strictly compliant with the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) Extensible HyperText Markup Language (XHTML) Protocol v1.0 (Transitional) and the W3C Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) Protocol v3 — because we care about interoperability. Click on the logos below to test us!



This page was last modified on Wednesday, 30 September 2020, at 1:20 pm Pacific Time.