Sounds like something Joe Morgan would have said as a commentator about Moneyball! Seriously though, Fangraphs is a great tool. Lots of info and knowledge to take from it. Obviously you have to take every piece of analysis with a grain of salt. Baseball reference is another, traditional scouting, they're all important IMO. I'm always open to hearing anything that can help me learn more about the game, even if I don't agree with it. I agree with some of the previous posters that a lot of these projections seem more like floors. I agree with you on taking an eclectic approach to player evaluation. The more info. you can draw from a wide range of reliable sources, the better you're analysis and projections should be in the end. I simply take issue with a projection system that seems to be extremely conservative when it comes to players with limited data to draw on. In my opinion, such a projection system has very little utility. Based on this, it would seem inexperienced players will rarely project well. I would find more value in a projection system that would occasionally project someone such as a Keon Broxton to break out. It appears as though FanGraphs projects no young Brewers' players to show significant improvement. I'll admit, I'm a relative newbie to sabermetrics, so maybe I'm just ignorant to the methodology behind such projection systems. I still maintain a strong nostalgic feeling for stats on the back of baseball cards, dating back to my childhood, but I am open to learning.