This series or articles was way more fun to write back when we were covering pitchers. If a hitter didn’t match the projection, they typically performed better. The pitchers on the other hand have done way worse. Anyway, here’s Matt Harvey. I wonder how he did compared to projections (sarcasm).
| Matt Harvey | ||||||
| IP | Record | ERA | BB | K | WHIP | |
| 2016 | 92.2 | 4-10 | 4.86 | 25 | 76 | 1.47 |
| Projections | ||||||
| MLB.com | 170 | 12-8 | 3.49 | 40 | 162 | 1.16 |
| Steamer | 141 | 9-8 | 3.64 | 34 | 130 | 1.17 |
| ZiPS | 141 | 3.83 | 45 | 112 | 1.22 | |
| ESPN | 6-7 | 3.91 | 1.26 | |||
| Baseball Prospectus | 156 | 10-9 | 3.74 | 154 | 1.2 | |
| Sporting News | 153 | 8 | 3.47 | 36 | 136 | 1.22 |
| NBC Rotoworld | 175 | 13-8 | 3.39 | 39 | 176 | 1.14 |
| Rotowire | 116 | 7-6 | 3.80 | 27 | 106 | 1.25 |
| Baseball America | 110 | 5 | 2.86 | 21 | 81 | 0.97 |
| FBG 2017 | 150 | 10-10 | 3.50 | 32 | 140 | 1.16 |
| Average | 145.778 | 8.3-8 | 3.56 | 34.25 | 133.00 | 1.18 |
2o17 Stats:
5-7, 19 G, 92.2 IP, 6.70 IP, 47 BB, 67 K, 1.694 WHIP
Well. That was fun.
Harvey struggled. A lot.
Here’s what I’m taking from this projection review. Every projection, and there were a lot of them, all had Harvey bouncing back from his tough 2016 campaign. They were all wrong.
I was wrong.
The universe was wrong.
