Fact: Derek Jeter is overrated.

Fiction: Arod sucks.

Not too bad. He overemphasises some parts of context (even with unbalanced schedules, strength of opponent doesn't vary much and isn't that important). Although he hints at it with the sample size and misleading stats sections, I think one key point that needs to be gotten across is the degree to which outcomes deviate from performance -- i.e. variation, be it random or not. Pitchers can pitch very well, but end up with pretty bad ERAs. "True" 300 hitters (or 400 OBPers if you prefer) can have wide variation even over a season or two.

I also disagree that BA is misleading. Over-rated I'll agree with. But BA is the primary component in OBP and usually the major chunk of SLG as well. Find a 300+ hitter and, with rare exceptions, you've got yourself a valuable hitter. Usualy not as valuable as, say, a 900 OPS hitter, but valuable.

Very good article, Dayn.

I also disagree that BA is misleading. Over-rated I'll agree with. But BA is the primary component in OBP and usually the major chunk of SLG as well. Find a 300+ hitter and, with rare exceptions, you've got yourself a valuable hitter. Usualy not as valuable as, say, a 900 OPS hitter, but valuable.

Fully agree. I'd put it the same way #1 aptly does with regard to Jeter:

Fact: BA is overrated.

Fiction: BA sucks.

Fact: Derek Jeter is overrated.

I know that this has become unshakeable dogma by this point, but is it even true anymore? Jeter lost the MVP to a vastly inferior player last year, and he's got a pretty reasonable case for being the best overall player in the AL right now. He may be overrated defensively, sure, but unless you've got people saying he's a better player than Albert Pujols, it's hard to say that he's overrated as a total package.

By any and all reasonably respected (by the sabermetric community) statistical measures, and assuming that Jeter is somewhere around -10 runs per year in defense, Jeter is not even close to one of the best players in the AL. In fact, according to my Slwts projections, Jeter is the 27th best player in BB and the 10th in the AL, behind Hafner, Ortiz, A-Rod, Posada, Guillen, Dejesus, Giambi, Sizemore, Tejada, Beltre, and Wells. And that is with him projected at -8 in defense! But let's not start another Jeter thread/argument.

I agree with Walt and Steve. One, BA is fine. It is what it is. Same thing with ERA. Actually ERA is probably a lot better than BA, if we may compare apples and oranges (which we may). In fact, ERA (park adjusted of course - although that is really not necessary for most teams), in the long run, is a great measure of a pitcher's ability/value. I think that it goes without saying that ERA or any stat in the world has to be taken within the context of league ERA (and other contexts of course, which is pointed out nicely in the article even though to some extent I think it is obvious). I think almost everyone realizes that at some level.

I also agree about strength of schedule. It is probably not even worth mentioning. People forget (or don't know) that estimating a team's strength of schedule is based upon the actual strength/talent of the opponents - not on their w/l records for that year. For example, let's say that all teams in a league were equal. Let's say that in any given season we estimated what each team's SOS affect was by their opponents' actual w/l record for that year. We would come up with all kinds of numbers for each team, right? Well, we KNOW that those numbes would all be wrong (since I just said that we KNOW that all teams are equal) and that every team had the same SOS. So what is the correct way to do it? Take a team's collective opponents and figure out their REGRESSED w/l records. In order to do that, you have to know the approximate spread of talent in the league (since the regression is based on 2 things - one, sample size, and two, spread of talent in the population). IIRC, when I computed the affect of SOS, it was like plus or minus 0 or 1 win for most teams, with an occasional 2 or 3.

he's got a pretty reasonable case for being the best overall player in the AL right now

Not with Grady Sizemore hanging around.

when I computed the affect of SOS, it was like plus or minus 0 or 1 win for most teams, with an occasional 2 or 3

IOW it is insignificant but might have a huge effect on a close wild-card race, which is most people's complaint about unfair SOS.

I took Dayn's comment to be more about individual stats, though, perhaps something like "Vlad looks great but you have to realize that he gets to hit against the Rangers' pitching all the time." Which has its merits, though for every Texas in one's division there is usually an Oakland ...

I think a lot of people understand and accept the general concept of park factors, but many still fail to apply it to specific situations. Not to single Bob out at all, but I get this sense about Texas all the time. It seems many mainstream writers, sabery writers, and fans will say that Texas would be pretty good if they just got some pitching. Well, here are their ERA+ and OPS+ from 2004-2006:

OPS+: 94, 106, 99
ERA+: 111, 90, 102

That's a three year average OPS+ of 99.7 and ERA+ of 101. I don't think many people would guess that Texas has had an OPS+ over 100 just once in the last 5 years, probably because they've been in the top in the league in runs scored each of those years.

I agree with other posters that batting average isn't close to worthless, and that most batters with a good average are also pretty good hitters. I think the same generally goes for runs and RBI. Still, it's frustrating as an A's fan to hear some people talk about how much Jay Payton and his .296 batting average will be missed, considering he easily had the worst secondary average of any regular AL OF in 2006.

Danny, you're exactly right; my point was only that Vlad absolutely destroys Ranger pitching, no matter how well they do against everyone else. He does not hit Oakland so well.

Of course, when trying to make a point using strength of an individual opponent's schedule (or rather, favorable/unfavorable matchups for individual opponents) one runs up against the tiny-sample-size problem ...

...Jeter is the 27th best player in BB and the 10th in the AL...

Being the 10th best player in the AL is still pretty damn good, and probably an accurate assessment of Jeter's ability.

"the 10th in the AL, behind Hafner, Ortiz, A-Rod, Posada, Guillen, Dejesus, Giambi, Sizemore, Tejada, Beltre, and Wells."

Surprised to see Dejesus and Beltre up there. UZR monsters I assume?

When a statistic predicts that DeJesus and Beltre will be better than Jeter, it tells me a lot more about the statistic than it does about the relative merits of the three players.

"When a statistic predicts that DeJesus and Beltre will be better than Jeter, it tells me a lot more about the statistic than it does about the relative merits of the three players."

If I were objective, which I'm not, The only player I would rather have on my team on that list for this year would be Sizemore. Everyone else has their issues (DH, health, Tejada is a douche bag) that make it pretty easy for someone like me (read: fanboy) to take Jeter over any of them.

<i>"the 10th in the AL, behind Hafner, Ortiz, A-Rod, Posada, Guillen, Dejesus, Giambi, Sizemore, Tejada, Beltre, and Wells."<i>

I don't know enough about defensive ratings to understand the inclusion of DeJesus and Beltre. The rest of the list makes pretty much sense, but where do the glaring omissions like Manny Ramirez, Vladimir Guerrero, Joe Mauer, ??? fall after your top 10?

sure, but unless you've got people saying he's a better player than Albert Pujols, it's hard to say that he's overrated as a total package.

There used to be people like that in the New York media, Jeter worship used to be nauseating, he's probably being evaluated more accurately now (for the wrong reasons of course, "gee he's not the leader we thought he was...") You used to have columnists refer to him as "my captain" and rattle on and on about his transcendant clutchness...

THE David Dejesus? Don't know what surprises me more, no Vlad, Ichiro, or Mauer, or that apparently 17 of the top 27 players play in the inferior National League.

"Don't know what surprises me more, no Vlad, Ichiro, or Mauer, or that apparently 17 of the top 27 players play in the inferior National League."

My guess, it's harder to seperate yourself from the pack in the much deeper AL. Not saying that Pujols and Cabrera and Beltran aren't great players, but there projections (and overall numbers) are probably a little inflated relative to the AL players because they play in a weaker league. Unless MGL accounts for that and then I guess that it's just a lot of top tier talent and nothing on the level below it that makes the NL worse.

I think the NL is really a case of the latter. There are lots of truly excellent players in the NL, it's just that there are so many crummy players that not only hang on to roster spots but also get starting jobs. I'd say the top NL players are Pujols, Howard, Cabrera, Wright, Berkman, Carpenter, Reyes, Beltran, McCann, Andruw, Bonds, Utley, Sheets, Furcal, Bay, Rolen (defense), Smoltz, Oswalt, Webb, Holliday, Aramis, and maaaaybe Soriano. That has to stack up well with the equivalent AL group.

oh, and peavy.

No pitchers allowed, only position players

given the way the AL list was, I won't be surprised to see Adam Everett up there in mgl's list

No pitchers allowed, only position players

DH is a position?

Even mgl has said something along the lines that Everett is so bad offensively that his defense basically makes him average to maybe a bit above. He certainly wouldn't be one of the top players in the league.

Lists off the top of one's head are always difficult, but if we're stacking up NL and AL, I don't think Jeter is worse than McCann, Utley, Furcal, Bay, Soriano, or Holliday. That's conservatively.

Wanna get aggressive and controversial? I don't think he's worse than Berkman, Carpenter, Andruw, Reyes, Rolen, Aramis, or Webb either. But I understand there are disagreements to be had there.

Reyes and Rolen, really? Assuming Reyes has taken that next step, they're both in the same neighborhood as hitters, and both way better in the field. The others I can see pretty easy arguments against (the position players anywya, I don't feel like making the pitcher/player comparison), but not so much for those two.

Oh, and the same applies to Utley.

Yeah, no pitchers or Santana should be on the AL list.

Vlad must have a very poor UZR rating. I know Manny does, but I'm sure both play better OF defense than Giambi, Hafner, and Ortiz. If Manny or Vlad were moved to DH, I'm also sure they could be average +0 defenders there just like Hafner.

If we take that assumption, I agree with you, Le. But at this point, I'm not quite ready to anoint him.

Adjusted for position, McCann will be as valuable if not more valuable than Jeter

"I don't think Jeter is worse than McCann, Utley, Furcal, Bay, Soriano, or Holliday. That's conservatively."

I think Utley is better then all of the other players you listed in your second paragraph. I'd probably put him in the top 5 in the NL at least (Beltran, and some other people I'm sure).

If I were objective, which I'm not, The only player I would rather have on my team on that list for this year would be Sizemore. Everyone else has their issues (DH, health, Tejada is a douche bag)

RDF.

DH is a position?

Ugh. Not this again.

"Assuming Reyes has taken that next step, they're both in the same neighborhood as hitters, and both way better in the field."

Reyes is not in the same neighborhood as Jeter as a hitter. There was a 30 point difference in their EQAs last year. Reyes doesn't need to be as good as Jeter at the plate to be better then him as a player and I have no problem admitting that he might be better then him this year, but Reyes still has a ways to go to be in Jeter's league at the plate.

okay, pull out pitchers. i'll even put mine in order!

pujols
cabrera
berkman
utley
beltran
wright
howard (awful baserunner, awful defender)
mccann
reyes
bonds
bay
andruw
rolen
aramis
holliday
soriano
furcal

i'd slide jeter in around the andruw/rolen area, probably. i'd take the ones above those two without thinking much about it.

But last year was one of Jeter's career best years, not a typical year.

Since 1998, Jeter has ranged from .290 to .313 in EqA all but two years. On average in those years he was at about .303 (too lazy to do an actual weighted average). I would say Reyes is in the neighborhood at .294 (and he could easily improve on that by at least a few points, putting him around .300), though slightly but clearly inferior. Making that assumption is one thing, of course, but if you do make it, I find it hard to argue against Reyes.

Watching the Yankees first two games I think we need to remember that Jeter is an atrocious defensive shortstop. -10 is a very generous estimate of his defensive value. If Jeter hits like he did last year he's still very good but last year was an anomaly. The second best year of his career and the best this century. I'll believe MGL when he says there are only 26 guys better than him but what surprises me is that it's only 26.

Kyle S. - don't you think that's a bit high for Bay? He's gone 135-148-136 in OPS+ and is really damn poor in the field.

FWIW, here are the top 27 position players in PECOTA projected VORP/PA (so position adjusted, but no defense or baserunning):

Bonds, Pujols, Cabrera, Hafner, Wright, Berkman, Howard, Beltran, Mauer, McCann, Guillen, Durham, C. Jones, Guerrero, Ortiz, Kent, A. Ramirez, Jeter, Utley, Rodriguez, Zimmerman, Rolen, Dunn, A. Jones, Tejada, Hall, Soriano.

Bonds, Pujols, Cabrera, Hafner, Wright, Berkman, Howard, Beltran, Mauer, McCann, Guillen, Durham, C. Jones, Guerrero, Ortiz, Kent, A. Ramirez, Jeter, Utley, Rodriguez, Zimmerman, Rolen, Dunn, A. Jones, Tejada, Hall, Soriano.

I'm surprised Bonds is still ahead of Pujols/Cabrera/Hafner with his last two seasons. Also, Ray Durham that high? Damn. And I didn't expect Zimmerman ahead of Rolen either.

"Watching the Yankees first two games I think we need to remember that Jeter is an atrocious defensive shortstop. -10 is a very generous estimate of his defensive value. "

Yeah, cuz that's a good way to evaluate defense. According ZR, Jeter has been +5, 0, and -5 over the last three years. UZR is probably the metric most down on his D and MGL has him projected at -8. I don't think -10 is generous at all and you're going to be hard pressed to back up your assesment of Jeter, unless you think he's going to finish the season with 243 errors. He looked terrible for two games no doubt, he won't look that bad all season.

"And I didn't expect Zimmerman ahead of Rolen either."

Yeah, I would slot Zimmerman ahead of a few guys Kyle S lists. At least as high as Aramis.

Jeff Kent? Live in the now, man!

I'm surprised Bonds is still ahead of Pujols/Cabrera/Hafner with his last two seasons. Also, Ray Durham that high? Damn. And I didn't expect Zimmerman ahead of Rolen either.

Durham had a monster year and plays 2B. I guess he got a big positional adjustment. Zimmerman is supposed to have as good a glove as Rolen, and certainly hit better than Rolen in that trashdump called RFK

Yeah, cuz that's a good way to evaluate defense. According ZR, Jeter has been +5, 0, and -5 over the last three years. UZR is probably the metric most down on his D and MGL has him projected at -8.

The Fielding Bible stats rate Jeter as worse than that. He looks especially bad when you account for his extremely low number of plays made outside the zone - far fewer per inning than any other SS in baseball.

Zimmerman is supposed to have as good a glove as Rolen, and certainly hit better than Rolen in that trashdump called RFK

Rolen had a 127-111 OPS+ advantage.

"He looks especially bad when you account for his extremely low number of plays made outside the zone - far fewer per inning than any other SS in baseball."

I don't remember exactly, but didn't you have him at -11 when you did that study? Hardly makes -10 a generous prediction.

Revisiting your article Sean, Hanley has to get on that best players in the NL list.

Rolen had a 127-111 OPS+ advantage.
in 15 less games.

Though to be fair, I had no idea Rolen's final #s were that good last year. But still, Zimm is a rookie!

I understand nobody wants to admit it but that Bill Hall guy is pretty d*mn good. League average defense at short plus 35 homers in '06. Moved to centerfield this year. If he has an "Age 27 season" given his current development pattern the 2007 season could be MVP caliber.

Bill was good in 2005. Bill was very good in 2006. It's not unrealisitc to expect excellence in 2007. And hence, a mention among the best players in the NL.

I understand nobody wants to admit it

? Is Bill Hall a lightning rod of criticism of which I was unaware?

I think it's more that nobody remembers who he is. On a team with Sheets, Weeks and the Prince he gets overshadowed. But yes, I'd love to have him on my team.

Freakin' Bill Hall. Never let that name be mentioned again!

Actually, I couldn't pick him out of a criminal lineup. Of course, this AL East guy similarly can't pick McCann, Bay, or Holliday out either.

Le S:

There were sectors of the baseball community who were adamant in 2004 that Bill was a utility player. They remained adamant in 2005 that his season was fluke. Around mid-2006 the last remaining holdout at BPro grudgingly admitted that Hall was "better then expected."

However, you will still read caveats, etc. from those same quarters. Some just can't accept that the analyst community blew the call on Bill Hall.

I was led to believe that only knowing who Geoff Jenkins was would qualify me as a Brewers expert.

Jeter's bad rating in any UZR type metric has nothing to do with errors of course (errors are incorporated into the metric of course). In fact, he is generally a low-error guy, right (although error rates among players have VERY little correlation from year to year, which tells us what class?).

Anyway, my "list" does not account for the difference in average offensive talent between the NL and the AL, which is considerable at this point in time (the AL is even better this year than last, BTW, relative to the NL). So that would elevate all the AL players relative to the NL ones. So Jeter may jump a few notches as far as the "27th best player" is concerned.

Plus, I was going by Slwts RATE and not total value prorated by estimated playing time. Some of these guys may be injury prone and only projected for 400 PA's, while Jeter usually gets projected for 600 some odd PA. And of course catchers usually only play 130 some odd games, generally reducing their "counting" value.

Manny is nowhere near one of the best players because of his atrocious defense (according to UZR and the other similar-type metrics I assume).

The thing about looking at a player like Manny as a DH is that DH's do not hit nearly as well as they "should" since many teams do not cultivate great-hit, no-field players as full time DH's, so that players like Hafner once they are positioned adjusted get a real boost. Sure if Manny WERE a DH (and he SHOULD be of couse - so should Griffey - a long time ago), he would be one of the best players in baseball, but alas, he is not. Mauer is #10 in BB, but probably higher after a league adjustment. Did I leave him out?

Dejesus may be the most underrated player in baseball. Of course, I am evaluating him as a CF, which is where he should be, 100%. He plays monster defense, has a great arm, and is one of the best baserunners in baseball. And he can hit pretty well for a CF'er.

And of course I was not including pitchers, although I am not sure that any pitcher, even Santana, would crack the top 10 (OK, maybe Santanta, but pitchers are simply not worth what pos players are).

Ah, gotcha. I really had no idea who the guy was for a while. I remember he flipped his bat after homering off Anthony Reyes in the latter's MLB debut, and the first thought in my head was, "Screw you, who the hell are you, Bill Hall?"

error rates have very little corrolation from year to year?

I also disagree that BA is misleading. Over-rated I'll agree with. But BA is the primary component in OBP and usually the major chunk of SLG as well. Find a 300+ hitter and, with rare exceptions, you've got yourself a valuable hitter.

Juan Pierre is a career .303 hitter, but his .303/.350/.377/.727 line makes pretty useless in terms of offensive value. To be more general any .300 hitter who doesn't walk much or have power is not helping his team offensively.

Another problem with BA is that it is subject to the wide fluctuations in a players BABIP from year to year. A .300 hitter who has a .360 BABIP is actually only a .258 hitter, who is having a lucky season (assuming his true normal BABIP is .300).

Durham had a monster year and plays 2B. I guess he got a big positional adjustment.

I don't have a BPro subscription, but in this article, they give his hypothetical PECOTA projection with St. Louis as .304/.373/.500. This seems absolutely insane, given that:

- He's 35 years old
- His career high in BA is .296, set back in 1999
- His career high in OBP is .374, set back in 2002--he hasn't been over .370 since
- Last season was the only year in his career he's slugged better than .484
- There's no reason to think Busch is a better hitter's park than AT&T;

Erik:

To qualify as a "Brewer expert" you need to know the answers to the following three questions:

--What were the circumstances of Don Money's Game-winning Grand Slam That Wasn't?

--What young shortstop was named to Baseball Digest's All-Rookie team only to be replaced the following season?

--What player hit the game-winning home run to extend the Brewers winning streak to 12 games to open the 1987 season? (Everyone in Milwaukee remembers who TIED the game. Few remember who WON it)

Extra credit:

The Milwaukee Brewers have had two switch-hitters hit 3 home runs in the same game. Name them. Hint: They were both infielders.

MGL, in those projections above, are you evaluating Giambi as a 1B or a DH?

I know that this has become unshakeable dogma by this point, but is it even true anymore? Jeter lost the MVP to a vastly inferior player last year, and he's got a pretty reasonable case for being the best overall player in the AL right now.

It's pretty hard to make a case for Jeter as long as Johan Santana is in the AL. I think that Mauer is also likely a better all-round player than Jeter, but that is at least close.

The All-Rookie shortstop was Listach, right?

At least one of those answers has to be Robin Yount.

Didn't Don Money sing "Two Tickets to Paradise"?

Jerry:

No.

Erik:

No.

Come, come. It's the Brewers. How hard can this be for my big city brethren?

My recollection is that Listach lost a nip and tuck battle for RoY with Kenny Lofton.

And, of course, later got traded to the Yankees. Wasn't Greg Vaughn in that deal too?

There was some malarky about someone being hurt before the trade. Maybe Graeme Lloyd?

"What young shortstop was named to Baseball Digest's All-Rookie team only to be replaced the following season?"

That guy who got hit in the head who they were talking about on the HOM thread the other day? Or maybe that was in the NL.

Off topic here, I think that the fact that a "stats 101" thread evolved into a "who's better than Jeter" thread, and then evolved into a "brewers trivia" thread is a strength of this community, not a weakness.

Kyle S. - don't you think that's a bit high for Bay? He's gone 135-148-136 in OPS+ and is really damn poor in the field.

If memory serves, the Fielding Bible loved Bay. Of course he plays a position with plenty of slugs, so maybe he's merely the best of a bad lot.

I hope Perry recognizes the difference between value and projection stats.

Erik, the Don Money question involved the Yankees.

The young shorstop later had a moment of fame as a manager.

The player who struck the winning home run is now wandering around the majors as a coach.

You're making me feel bad, Harvey's. I'm only 32, and I came upon baseball pretty late in life. I barely remember the Mel Hall era.

MGL, how come you're willing to project DeJesus as a 100% CF based on what he 'should' be but not Manny as a DH because of what he likely 'won't be? Doesn't seem to jibe.

These discussions always tend to devolve into apples and oranges as people interweave what players did in the past, what a theoretical projection based on assumptions for this year generate, what a player theoretically 'could' do if on a different team or at a different position, and how to apply (or discount) future seasons improvement/regression.

Erik:

Well, you aren't getting much help from the normally boisterous peanut gallery.

Answers:

April 10, 1976. Don Money appears to hit a game-winning grand slam only to have the first base umpire run in stating he had called time immmediately before the pitch.

Tim Johnson (Oh yes he was!)

Dale Sveum hit a 2-run homer to win the game 6-4 versus Texas.

And the bonus round:

Dale Sveum (vs. the Angels) and Jose Valentin (vs. the Marlins)

--What were the circumstances of Don Money's Game-winning Grand Slam That Wasn't?

Did he not touch a base or pass a runner?

--What young shortstop was named to Baseball Digest's All-Rookie team only to be replaced the following season?

Would have said Listach. I guess not.

--What player hit the game-winning home run to extend the Brewers winning streak to 12 games to open the 1987 season? (Everyone in Milwaukee remembers who TIED the game. Few remember who WON it)

Dale Sveum

Extra credit:

The Milwaukee Brewers have had two switch-hitters hit 3 home runs in the same game. Name them. Hint: They were both infielders.

Sveum is one. Valentin the other?

Everyone knows who tied the game?! not me :-(
Though I might still guess Yount!
The only answer I know for sure is Dale Sveum, because it was in the article they wrote when he was hired a coach. ie. the guy who hit the winning HR

oh Valentin! I forgot about that. I should have guessed that. dammit

There were sectors of the baseball community who were adamant in 2004 that Bill was a utility player. They remained adamant in 2005 that his season was fluke.

I can't imagine why. Hall finally made the majors for good in 2004 at the age of 24 after putting up a .263/.305/.386 line in the minors in over 2200 AB. He then hit .238/.276/.374 in the majors as a utility IF. He bumps that 70 OPS+ all the way up to 117 in 2005.

Yes, people were wrong about Bill Hall. But is that really something to get upset over? His performance never merited that type of optimism. The scouts were never enamored, as--as far as I can tell--he never made a BA top 100 list or the Brewers' Top 10 list.

It's great that he broke out and sustained that performance. But why the anger?

BS:

Rob Deer hit a TITANIC three-run blast into the left field bleachers. Against the wind he hit the ball 440 feet. It was, as they say, a BLAST.

the AL is even better this year than last, BTW, relative to the NL

How did you arrive at this conclusion? (This is a genuine question, not snark.) Matsuzaka is a great addition to the AL, but it seems like the FA movement trended toward transferring talent from the AL to the NL this offseason.

Danny:

I don't think I am "angry". What bothered me is that while Bill was succeeding on the field in a series of comments spread out over public chats, Internet articles, interviews, etc. the talking heads of the stathead community just dismissed Hall as just another guy who "looks good in the uniform" but couldn't play.

I disagreed. And in those same forums was branded a "homer", "dumb", and "foolishly misguided" to name just a few highlights. And one writer had the gall to brand Bill a "Dale Sveum redux".

Our gathering should focus on EVIDENCE. Whatever our preconceived notions at the end of the day the emphasis should be on FACTS. When we look past the facts we are just another collection of white noise to be ignored.

Actually seems like most of the significant free agents stayed put as far as league goes.

The changes:

Zito and Ted Lilly to NL, Pettite to AL

Carlos Lee started in the NL, played 2 months in the AL, and returned.

Aubrey Huff and Julio Lugo took the opposite path.

JD Drew and Mike Piazza went to the AL.

Not that big a change, but net hitting to the AL and net pitching to the NL. Did I miss anyone good?

Did I miss anyone good?

Matsuzaka, Igawa, and Iwamura.

Revisiting your article Sean, Hanley has to get on that best players in the NL list.

A year ago MGL gave us a top shortstops projection lists, and a lot of people argued that Felipe Lopez or Jhonny Peralta should have been on it. MGL was right to exclude them, and while Ramirez may prove that he belongs on the best NL players list, one year should not be enough to rank him there. He's got to show that he can repeat his great 2006 season and that he's not the same player who put up lackluster minor league stats for the Red Sox.

MGL, how come you're willing to project DeJesus as a 100% CF based on what he 'should' be but not Manny as a DH because of what he likely 'won't be? Doesn't seem to jibe.

Isn't DeJesus supposed to get close to all of the CF playing time in KC?

You missed Freddy Garcia going to the Phils.
And Clemens going nowhere.


Prospect wise,
The AL got Gordon, Marte, Dukes and Young getting fulltime gigs
And King Felix getting unleashed, and the prospect of Harden staying healthy.

The NL got Chris Young, Quentin and possibly Milledge getting full time gigs.
Bonds and Sheets getting healthy

#83.

Given that Gathright is now in Omaha, most likely it's going to be all the playing time.

I don't think I am "angry". What bothered me is that while Bill was succeeding on the field in a series of comments spread out over public chats, Internet articles, interviews, etc. the talking heads of the stathead community just dismissed Hall as just another guy who "looks good in the uniform" but couldn't play.

Did the scouting community have a different impression than the stathead community? It doesn't look like he got any love from Baseball America. In their 2005 Handbook they project the Brewers 2008 lineup, and it has Weeks, Helms, and Hardy but no Hall. He didn't make Milwaukee's top 20 prospects in the 2004 book. In the 2006 book, they list Hardy, Braun, and Escobar as the 2009 projected IF starters.

After the 2004 season, Prospectus noted that Hall hasn't progressed on offense over the past 3 years despite great defense. After the 2005 season, they said he wouldn't hit enough to be a regular at 3B, but he'd be a fine SS for many teams.

You obviously paid more attention to Hall's press than I did, but I don't see how the analyst community (BPro) was any more skeptical of him than the scouting community (BA).

Our gathering should focus on EVIDENCE. Whatever our preconceived notions at the end of the day the emphasis should be on FACTS. When we look past the facts we are just another collection of white noise to be ignored.

I don't see how the facts suggested he would breakout after 2004. He did, just like Brandon Inge started did, but I don't see people ignoring obvious facts to slight Bill Hall.

"He's got to show that he can repeat his great 2006 season and that he's not the same player who put up lackluster minor league stats for the Red Sox."

Good point, I forgot how lame his minor leauge production was.

A .300 hitter who has a .360 BABIP is actually only a .250 hitter, who is having a lucky season (assuming his true normal BABIP is .300).

Well, that's a silly assumption to make.


It's a fact, not an assumption, and it most certainly is not silly.

Let's look at a player with a career .300 BABIP who gets 600 at bats, strikes out 100 x's, puts the ball in play 500 times. If his BABIP is .360 he will get 180 hits (500 * .360) resulting in a batting average of 180/600 = .300.

If that player had his usual BABIP there would have been only 150 hits (500 * .300) and his batting average would have been 150/600 = .250.

Fluctuations, both negative and postive, in a hitters BABIP are not sustainable. Research shows that they revert to a players norm in subsequent seasons. So these fluctuations represent luck as opposed to any hitting skill.

It's similar to a coin flipper who has a long history of flipping 50% heads. If he suddenly gets 350 heads in 600 flips, there is no expectation, in most people's minds, that he has suddenly developed a big improvement in his "head flipping ability". Most rational people expect that his future success rate will be 50%. BABIP is basically the same for major league hitters. Once you've established a base level, that is pretty much where you will be for the long-run, subject to random fluctuations.

Since batting average is so dependent on BABIP is can fluctuate significantly for a player from season to season without any change in his underlying skill.

BA = (AB - K)/AB * H/AB - K) = contact rate * BABIP = H/AB.

If a player has a change in his batting average because of a change in his contact rate, then this is sustainable. This is a real skill and improvements have been demonstrated to be maintained into future seasons.

I can't imagine why. Hall finally made the majors for good in 2004 at the age of 24 after putting up a .263/.305/.386 line in the minors in over 2200 AB. He then hit .238/.276/.374 in the majors as a utility IF. He bumps that 70 OPS+ all the way up to 117 in 2005.

Yes, people were wrong about Bill Hall. But is that really something to get upset over? His performance never merited that type of optimism. The scouts were never enamored, as--as far as I can tell--he never made a BA top 100 list or the Brewers' Top 10 list.

It's great that he broke out and sustained that performance. But why the anger?


Becaus he started using PED and made himself into a totally different player?? Just a thought. What is the Brewer's official spin on the turn around?

You obviously paid more attention to Hall's press than I did, but I don't see how the analyst community (BPro) was any more skeptical of him than the scouting community (BA).

I don't think Harveys is complaining about the projections of Hall (by either camps), but of what he saw as a stubborn refusal by some to alter their assessment once Hall demonstrated that he had become a damn good major league player.

Becaus he started using PED and made himself into a totally different player?? Just a thought. What is the Brewer's official spin on the turn around?

This is disgusting.

Well, that's a silly assumption to make.

It's a fact, not an assumption, and it most certainly is not silly.

Except that your original post didn't stipulate that the player in question had a substantial track record that demonstrated a true BABIP ability of .300. You simply assumed that this was the case. If that's not what you intended, fine. But it certainly would have been silly. What if we were talking about as player who had a substantial track record that demonstrated significantly above-average BABIP ability, but I decided to use that season's league average to calculate what he "should have" hit? Wouldn't that have been a silly assumption to make?

Also, your calculation in #88 assumes that the player in question *never* hits the ball over the wall. Which I think also would be a silly assumption for most major league hitters. Oh wait, were we talking about Juan Pierre?

I don't think Harveys is complaining about the projections of Hall (by either camps), but of what he saw as a stubborn refusal by some to alter their assessment once Hall demonstrated that he had become a damn good major league player.

I might be misreading, but post 51 talks about 2004, when Hall was in no way a damn good major league player, and 2005, when most analysts would suspect his breakout was flukey considering his minor league and major league performance record and lack of scouting touts.

He also refers to statheads, the analyst community, and BPro--stating they thought he was just another player who "looks good in a uniform" but can't play. That seems to indicate that the statheads dismissed him but he scouts didn't. But, again, I could be misreading.

He's got to show that he can repeat his great 2006 season and that he's not the same player who put up lackluster minor league stats for the Red Sox.

Jiminy Cricket, the guy put up incredible numbers at age 22 -- looking at baseball reference, his black ink 6, grey ink 24, and HOF standard already at 17.0 after one season -- in the MAJOR LEAGUES. Anyone who would give his minor league stats more weight, esp. considering his age, doesn't have a blind spot, but should be declared legally blind.

He may not be as good as he showed his first season, may not develop into a HOF caliber player, but comments like the one above and rating David DeJesus above Derek Jeter fit the stereotype of a stathead perfectly.

Who said anything about giving the minor leagues more weight? In fact, my weights are heaviest for his major league season, since it was most recent. I'm just saying we can't just ignore his minor league stats completely.

But lets move on to another player. Jhonny put up incredible numbers at age 23 - He slugged .520, hit .292 - as a shortstop - in the superior AMERICAN LEAGUE!

Was it right to throw out his MLE's and his poor 2003 half season in the bigs?

Let's not move one -- you stated he's got to show that "...he's not the same player who put up lackluster minor league stats for the Red Sox."

Again, has he proven that he can consistently deliver that production? No. But the above quote implies that the minor league player stats are better data than the major league breakout -- that he's got to "prove" he's not that young minor leaguer.

Peralta is just changing the subject -- he's in fact put up a crap major league season, and his best season, beyond certain rate stats, was not as good as Ramirez's last season.

Peralta may turn out to be a pretty decent player, but I'd wager my savings right now, barring injury, that their careers won't even be close.

This Sox trade will turn out as badly as the Bagwell one. If not, I'll put those MLE's in my pipe and smoke 'em.

AROM -- I apologize for being a little harsh -- somewhat the result of the cumulative effect of this thread, which has comments more off-base than I believe yours to be, mainly the result of some major crap hitting my fan this week.

Have a good weekend.

No. But the above quote implies that the minor league player stats are better data than the major league breakout -- that he's got to "prove" he's not that young minor leaguer.

I'm the one who wrote it so I am the only one who can imply anything here. (I can't control what you infer from my statement.) I never used 'better' and I certainly didn't mean to. If you check out my projections (Fangraphs has them) they are pretty good. Not quite as good as last year but far better than his 2005 MLE, or even his 2005 unadjusted batting line.

The context of him having to prove anything is in response to whether he can be considered a top 20 player, or a better overall SS than Derek Jeter, stuff like that. And to consider him that high, I stand by saying he ain't there yet. He needs to repeat his 2006 season.

I'd still take Peralta's 2005 over Hanley's 2006. Power over speed and playing in a tougher league.

Whizz, no problem, and I posted #98 before I read #97.

Peralta may turn out to be a pretty decent player, but I'd wager my savings right now, barring injury, that their careers won't even be close.

As I said, I'd take JP2005 over HR2006, but you are probably right on that, as Ramirez seems to have the skill set to age better.

Except that your original post didn't stipulate that the player in question had a substantial track record that demonstrated a true BABIP ability of .300. You simply assumed that this was the case. If that's not what you intended, fine.


Here is my original post (#56), which you yourself reproduced in post (#67), when you were busy calling my post a "silly assumption".

"A .300 hitter who has a .360 BABIP is actually only a .250 hitter, who is having a lucky season (assuming his true normal BABIP is .300)."