Why We Hate Marcel
Last week Bill Petti did battle with Marcel and came away bruised, if not beaten. Numerous mathematicians and would-be projectionists have done the same: few strategies, no matter how cunning, have been able to provide a long-term advantage over Tom Tango’s painfully simple forecasting system. But Marcel goes beyond taunting the experts; he bares his nasty little teeth at us all.
I began using projection systems in my fantasy preparation a decade ago; I lined up Marcel, CAIRO, and CHONE and let them help me break ties for the rankings I was unsure about. Many of you probably do the same. Even then, I mistrusted Marcel. Metaphorically speaking, if the Bill James projections are the mother who pats your head and makes you hot chocolate when you make a mistake, Marcel is the crotchety old uncle who snarls at you to stop being such a screw-up. That guy hated everyone, but I could never bring myself to get rid of him.
He hasn’t changed. Here’s how Marcel felt about Mike Trout, blue-chip prospect and demigod-in-process, in 2012:
| PA | AVG | OBP | SLG | wOBA | |
| Marcel | 268 | .258 | .313 | .421 | .326 |
| 2012 | 639 | .326 | .399 | .564 | .409 |
You can’t blame him for the plate appearance prediction, but the rate stats are a little on the light side. Admittedly, Marcel wasn’t putting this guess in stone (a reliability rating of .37, pretty low). Okay, but perhaps using Trout as an example isn’t exactly fair. How about a young, up-and-coming star in Buster Posey?
| PA | AVG | OBP | SLG | wOBA | |
| Marcel | 337 | .289 | .338 | .454 | .347 |
| 2012 | 610 | .336 | .408 | .549 | .406 |
That .347 wOBA puts Posey just below Alejandro De Aza in the 2012 rankings (on a side note, Marcel really liked Alejandro De Aza last year). Marcel didn’t know that Posey was returning from a horrific injury last year. It didn’t care. Absolutely no one looked at Posey’s 2011 and saw true talent level, but into the system it went.
You can accuse me of cherry-picking examples, and you’d be completely right. But this is what we all do, for the year behind and the year ahead. We don’t go to a projection system to look for how it feels about Chris Shelton or Ronny Paulino. We go to them for insight on the most interesting, the most divisive of players. And this is when Marcel turns his furry little back on us; we get no secrets from him.
Though not to the extent of football, fantasy baseball is not generally won in the early rounds. It’s the Chris Sales and the Edwin Encarnacions of the game that give a team an advantage over their foes. This is who we’re looking for: when we look at projection systems, we’re looking for the glint of gems among the rocks, not just an accurate description of how ugly all the rocks are.
It’s not that Marcel is flawed; it’s that we are. We want to see the perfect ascending arc of the promising rookie, the narrative of the guy who beat the odds and came out of nowhere. We look for reasons to believe we know the real story behind the numbers, that were smarter than the monkey. And we should all keep trying, experts and fantasy players alike. But much as we hate him, we should also probably keep him on our shoulder, like the little devil he is, to whisper his bitter nothings into our ear on draft day.
Patrick Dubuque is a wastrel and a general layabout. Many of the sites he has written for are now dead. Follow him on Twitter @euqubud.
when will the marcel projections become available on the player pages?
Wasn’t Marcel’s prediction of Trout almost entirely just what it expected league-average to be?
This is true, and something I’d forgotten in my rage. Even so, it’s just another example of how unhelpful Marcel tends to be in terms of offering hope.
Yeah, but projection systems aren’t for offering hope or making you feel good on draft day, they’re for projecting how players will do and making you feel good on the day you win your league.
Marcel basically regresses towards the mean. Unfortunately, as Bill James (almost) pointed out a generation ago, there is no mean – or if there is, it’s your ex-girlfriend who played high school softball.
marcel is the ecclesiastes of projection systems and i love it all the more for that
I don’t understand this post. What you’re saying about Marcel can be said about all projection systems – they aren’t very good at projecting young players. Tango has looked at this, and none of them were really better than Marcel at rookies.
so, you either don’t like ANY projection systems b/c they are bad at rookies, or you don’t like Marcel…for some other reason. but not like Marcel b/c it’s bad at rookies doesn’t make any sense
No. It does makes sense. Marcel makes zero attempt to use minor league stats. So unless you think minor league stats are 100% useless, you’ll probably be able to find a way to project young players that is better than Marcel. In fact, I cannot think of a single use for Marcel. If it disappeared tomorrow, no good fantasy player or baseball analyst would be at a loss.
Marcel wasn’t created for fantasy baseball players to use. Marcel was created to be a replacement level projection system, a baseline for the others to be compared to. The idea is that if you can’t make your projection better than Marcel, you’re doing something wrong. The fact that Marcel’s projections are comparable with all the rest show how difficult (some might say impossible) projection is.
“you’ll probably be able to find a way to project young players that is better than Marcel.”
OK, then why haven’t they been able to?
Here are Tangos’s multi year results. Marcel nearly won the “average error” for rookies contest against CHONE, ZIPS, PECOTA, etc. CHONE was the only one that seemed to be better – and that is no longer available at all to fantasy players
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/testing_the_2007_2010_forecasting_systems_official_results/
I like Marcel. It reminds me of the work of Nobel economist Daniel Kahneman. Basically one of Kahneman’s insights is that simple scoring systems can have powerful predictive powers, especially relative to subjective, expert opinion. The more complicated the projection system, the more subjective choices the person designing the system has built in.
Even with its flaws I still prefer its simplicity to other systems and I take it as a baseline for my own thinking about player. Knowing how it works allows you to make a seperate evaluation for players that are going to be outliers based on context like the examples you give above.
Good article on Kahneman: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/dec/22/how-dispel-your-illusions/?pagination=false