After having typically appeared in the very hallowed pages of Baseball Think Factory, Dan Szymborski’s ZiPS projections have been released at FanGraphs the past couple years. The exercise continues this offseason. Below are the projections for the Cincinnati Reds. Szymborski can be found at ESPN and on Twitter at @DSzymborski.

Other Projections: Atlanta / Kansas City / Philadelphia / Toronto.

Batters

In terms of results, Cincinnati’s 2015 season was unambiguously poor. In terms of indicators, it was much more ambiguously poor. By BaseRuns, the club ought to have won nine more games than they actually did in 2015 — and most of those potential wins appear to have been conceded by the offense. Sequencing was largely the culprit: despite producing the ninth-best park-adjusted batting line (92 wRC+) in the National League with the bases empty, the Reds recorded the very worst batting line (72 wRC+) with men in scoring postion.

Entering the 2016 campaign, the starting corps of the Reds’ offense actually appears to be quite strong. It isn’t surprising to find that Todd Frazier (624 PA, 3.6 zWAR) and Joey Votto (574 PA, 4.6 zWAR) are both projected to produce comfortably above-average seasons. But Jay Bruce, Zack Cozart, Billy Hamilton, and Brandon Phillips all profile as roughly average players, too.

Of some interest is how the Reds will manage left field. Eugenio Suarez (607 PA, 2.3 zWAR) would appear to represent a legitimate solution to the problem. There’s also Adam Duvall (536 PA, 1.7 zWAR), though, too. In both cases, the projected numbers are more optimistic than one might have otherwise supposed. Omitted from the tables below — because damn Szymborski submitted the relevant forecast as the author was shuffling off to bed — is Rule 5 selection Jake Cave. ZiPS projects Cave to slash .223/.274/.319 and record a -0.4 zWAR in just over 600 plate appearances.

Pitchers

Cincinnati traded not merely one of their own best pitchers, but one of the best pitchers in the league, at the deadline this past year, sending Johnny Cueto to Kansas City in exchange for a collection of prospects. Cueto, whose name was included among Kansas City’s projections, is forecast to produce roughly four wins in 2016. That figure, which would represent the best mark among Reds starters, has effectively been replaced by the worst one — in this case, Michael Lorenzen’s zero-win projection.

Of course, one can’t ignore the players included among that “collection of prospects,” either. Indeed, two of them — left-handers Brandon Finnegan (90.1 IP, 1.1 zWAR) and John Lamb (149.1 IP, 2.0 zWAR) — occupy a place among Cincinnati’s provisional rotation. The former profiles as a league-average starter already, while the latter would do that were it not for a conservative innings projection.

In the bullpen, one continues to find the name Aroldis Chapman, whose departure for the Dodgers appeared certain enough that Jeff Sullivan took the trouble of authoring an entire post about it. As history illustrates, there isn’t a 1:1 correlation between upstanding conduct and success on the baseball field. ZiPS, an algorithm, understands only the latter.

Bench/Prospects

A weakness for the 2015 edition of the Reds wasn’t their starting corps, but rather the players called upon to replace the starters in case of injury. One finds, for example, that the triumvirate of Brennan Boesch, Jason Bourgeois, and Skip Schumaker produced three negative wins in roughly a full season’s worth of plate appearances. Avoiding the awful is one part of succeeding, and the 2015 Reds didn’t avoid it sufficiently.

As for how they’ll cope in 2016, there are options. If he doesn’t start in left, Suarez features the precise sort of profile that could allow him to patch holes at any defensive position. Two rookies — shortstop Alex Blandino and corner outfielder Jesse Winker — both already profile as bench-type bats, with more growth ahead. Among pitchers, left-hander Cody Reed — another piece in the Cueto trade — also profiles as something better than replacement-level already.

Depth Chart

Below is a rough depth chart for the present incarnation of the Reds, with rounded projected WAR totals for each player. For caveats regarding WAR values see disclaimer at bottom of post. Click to embiggen image.

Ballpark graphic courtesy Eephus League. Depth charts constructed by way of those listed here at site and author’s own haphazard reasoning.

***

***

***

***

***

***

Disclaimer: ZiPS projections are computer-based projections of performance. Performances have not been allocated to predicted playing time in the majors — many of the players listed above are unlikely to play in the majors at all in 2016. ZiPS is projecting equivalent production — a .240 ZiPS projection may end up being .280 in AAA or .300 in AA, for example. Whether or not a player will play is one of many non-statistical factors one has to take into account when predicting the future.

Players are listed with their most recent teams unless Dan has made a mistake. This is very possible as a lot of minor-league signings are generally unreported in the offseason.

ZiPS is projecting based on the AL having a 3.93 ERA and the NL having a 3.75 ERA.

Players that are expected to be out due to injury are still projected. More information is always better than less information and a computer isn’t what should be projecting the injury status of, for example, a pitcher with Tommy John surgery.

Regarding ERA+ vs. ERA- (and FIP+ vs. FIP-) and the differences therein: as Patriot notes here, they are not simply mirror images of each other. Writes Patriot: “ERA+ does not tell you that a pitcher’s ERA was X% less or more than the league’s ERA. It tells you that the league’s ERA was X% less or more than the pitcher’s ERA.”

Both hitters and pitchers are ranked by projected zWAR — which is to say, WAR values as calculated by Dan Szymborski, whose surname is spelled with a z. WAR values might differ slightly from those which appear in full release of ZiPS. Finally, Szymborski will advise anyone against — and might karate chop anyone guilty of — merely adding up WAR totals on depth chart to produce projected team WAR.