2003 Prospect Outcomes: C+ Prospects
by maguro on Jul 25, 2011 3:37 PM EDT
Email
PrintWith all the trade deadline talk and the posts, comments and arguments about the possibility of the Pirates trading prospects for veterans, I thought it might be interesting to take a look back at previous prospects and see how they panned out.
I used John Sickels' 2003 Baseball Prospect Book as the baseline for the study. He's even-handed and well-respected, and most people on this board are at least somewhat familiar with his work. He evaluates a huge number of prospects and assigns letter grades to them, and his methodology and grading has been quite consistent over the years. This lets us evaluate groups of similarly rated prospects together so that we can get a very rough idea of how valuable certain types of prospects might be.
I started out by looking at the C+ prospects from 2003. A C+ prospect is a guy who is a little more interesting than your garden variety C prospect, but still has some serious question marks going against him. These players are generally ranked anywhere from No. 7 - No. 20 in their own organization, depending on its strength, and would rank somewhere between 200 and 400 in baseball. For comparison purposes, the Pirates had six C+ prospects, ranked No. 10 to 15, in 2011:
10. Starling Marte
11. Bryan Morris
12. Colton Cain
13. Brock Holt
14. Nick Kingham
15. Tony Watson
Sickels assigned a C+ grade to 189 prospects in his 2003 book. I went through and looked up each player's Baseball Reference WAR and put it in a spreadsheet. Here are the results:
- 109 players (58 percent) went on to make at least one appearance in the majors as of today.
- 29 players (15 percent) have compiled least 3 career WAR so far.
- 12 players (6 percent) have exceeded 10 career WAR so far, with two more - C.J. Wilson and Erick Aybar - reasonably likely to join that list.
- 47 players (25 percent) have a negative career WAR, led by Manny Parra with a spectacular -2.7. That's a lot more than I expected.
- Those 189 prospects have produced a total of 260 WAR so far, or roughly 1.4 WAR per person.
Here are the Top 20 C+ Prospects from 2003 in terms of WAR:
| Player | POS | Org | Majors? | WAR |
| Ryan Howard | 1B | PHI | Y | 22.4 |
| David DeJesus | OF | KC | Y | 21.7 |
| Jon Lester | RHP | BOS | Y | 20.9 |
| Nick Swisher | OF | OAK | Y | 19.1 |
| Erik Bedard | LHP | BAL | Y | 18.8 |
| Joey Votto | 1B | CIN | Y | 16.9 |
| Chris Young | RHP | MON | Y | 11.8 |
| Yadier Molina | C | STL | Y | 11.8 |
| Josh Willingham | OF | FLA | Y | 11.4 |
| Jose Valverde | RHP | AZ | Y | 10.4 |
| Omar Infante | SS | DET | Y | 10.1 |
| C.J. Wilson | LHP | TEX | Y | 8.8 |
| Erick Aybar | SS | LAA | Y | 7.9 |
| Adam LaRoche | 1B | ATL | Y | 6.8 |
| Mike Gonzalez | LHP | PIT | Y | 6.7 |
| Jon Rauch | RHP | CHW | Y | 6.5 |
| Kelly Shoppach | C | BOS | Y | 5.9 |
| Jonathan Broxton | RHP | LAD | Y | 5.6 |
| Grant Balfour | RHP | MIN | Y | 5.2 |
| Jody Gerut | OF | CLE | Y | 4.4 |
Conclusion: It is pretty unlikely for a C+ prospect to become a solid major league regular or starting pitcher, somewhere around 5-7 percent. Almost half will never make the majors at all and most of the rest will have a brief (often extremely brief) career in the bullpen or on the bench.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
108 comments
|
11 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Very interesting...
but all of our prospects are going to reach their ceiling. I’m surprised you don’t know that.
by King Oskar on Jul 25, 2011 3:39 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Let me FTFY
but all of our prospects are going to reach wildly exceed their ceiling. I’m surprised you don’t know that.
What does that mean?!
The people that believe we shouldn’t trade guys will say “this is why you can’t trade guys…you have to keep them all to make sure you get the 5% that are going to be good.”
And the people that think we should trade guys will say “see, none of these C+ knuckleheads are going to amount to squat.”
Seriously, though, it’s an interesting analysis, and I’d love to see the same thing done with B- guys, etc.
I'll
admit, I’m definitely in the first camp. I’d hate to trade away Joey Votto or Jon Lester.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 25, 2011 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions
By that same token, you’d hate to keep Manny Parra when you could have gotten better.
www.stealingfirstbase.com
by Stealing First Base on Jul 25, 2011 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Nope
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 25, 2011 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Small market vs big market
A big market team can afford to use their prospects as trade chips during the season and thus miss out on the 5% that turn out to be good, because they can sign more ML talent in the offseason.
A small market team can’t afford to build through free agency, so has to keep as many prospects as possible to maximize the chances on having around that 5% that turns out to be good.
Both sets of people are right – but the first are right for the Pirates and the second are right for the Yankees.
Of course, Pena and Willingham are unlikely to give you 1.4 WAR over the next two months. We’re over halfway through and Pena has .8 WAR and Willingham .5.
A C+ guy for one of them is an overpay. You still might do it for urgency of making the playoffs, but it’s not that great a deal.
by Adam Reynolds on Jul 25, 2011 5:07 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Projecting WAR for the remainder of the season for individuals is a tricky task. Many people want to project it by prorating the WAR they have already amassed for the season. This seems to be the most frequently used method, but I don’t think it’s the best way. This is assuming that players will continue to play at their current levels for the remaining part of the year, and disregarding regression and digression.
That was said because even though Pena may only be a .8 WAR player up to this point in the season, that’s with a .338 wOBA so far this year. His projected wOBA for the rest of the season is a drastically better .369. That’s a huge difference, so in effect, Pena is actually probably right around a 1 WAR player for the rest of the season. Overbay, has posted a .8 WAR so far, due to his wOBA of .293. His rest of the year projected wOBA though is only .301 (an increase, but not nearly the increase of Pena). That wOBA probably puts him slightly below replacement value for the rest of the season. He’s probably a -1..2 player for the rest of the season.
Thus, the marginal upgrade of adding Pena to take Overbay’s position is probably best calculated at right around 1.2 wins for the rest of the year.
This may be slightly below the market value of a C+ prospect as shown above by maguro, but the 1.65 WAR (/- a bit) that a C is expected to generate won’t come until at least 4-10 years down the road. Thus a win now should be worth more than a win in the future, so a future win should be discounted (into a present value). Depending on the value used to discount, that 1.65 would obviously decrease and be much closer or potentially less than 1.2 (the marginal value of acquiring Pena). In the end, I think a C+ to get Pena is a wash, and by no means “overpaying”.
and if we toss away Overbay
and start Hague/Pearce/Jones/whomever then it won’t be negative at all so once again Pena isn’t worth it.
Case not proven
Extremely dubious that a combination of that trio will have significantly more value than Overbay: Hague is a complete flier; Pearce’s upside is league average bat (that is, well below average for 1B) with OK defense; Jones doesn’t play well at 1B at all, with a below average (for 1B) bat and minus defense.
Furthermore, last I checked we can’t actually spare Jones from the OF for the next few weeks, if not the rest of the year.
Jones was negative value in 80 ABs in 2007. Since then, none of these guys has ever produced negative WAR. If you add in Bowker, based on past production he would be about the same value as Lyle or slightly better.
If we need Jones at 1B, Paul in OF is better than Lyle at 1B.
I think it’s GUARANTEED that combo could be replacement level at worst, so yes that takes off -.7 WAR from his value calculations.
saying whomever could take overbay's spot is why i get bent out of shape...
i understand that Lyle should be replaced, but by “whomever” is completely out of spite and not by reasoning. Jones is pretty much Lyle with a much smaller contract. Pearce is pretty much a utility guy; he has value but is not an upgrade. Hague? who knows what he brings. If the pirates were losing, Hague would already be given a shot at 1B by now.
we all know my opinion of Pena, so i’ll not harp on about that. (youre welcome)
but the replace Overbay with “whomever”, or “whatever”, doesnt really solve anything.
by white angus on Jul 26, 2011 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
I would disagree that it’s out of spite. I don’t think anybody has a personal vendetta against the guy. I know you’re not a believer in WAR, but some of us are, and by WAR, he has been playing below replacement level, and thus replacing him with pretty much any scrap heap guy (“whomever,” for the purposes of this discussion) should theoretically be an upgrade.
theoretically
In theory, communism works. In theory.
I’m not sure if this is smart-ass or if you’re actually questioning whether there are 20 guys in baseball who could be acquired for peanuts that would out produce a -.7 WAR for the rest of the year
mostly smart-ass
But the problem with the “a replacement player could outproduce Overbay” argument is that it assumes, because it’s theoretical, that a replacement player will perform at replacement level (0.0 WAR) while Overbay will continue to perform at a sub-replacement level. Neither is guaranteed. You could easily put Bowker or Pearce or Hague in Overbay’s spot and watch them go .201/.237/.368 like Clement did last year.
I’m totally in favor of getting an upgrade at 1B, but I agree with angus that “whomever” is not an upgrade.
That's why I said theoretically, and I'm glad you caught that
I was mostly just responding to whiteangus saying that replacing Lyle with whomever is a statement born out of spite and has no reasoning behind it. I was just saying that if we’re going by our SABR stats, you could argue that “reasoning” says that the theoretical “whomever,” replacement level, scrap heap guy actually WOULD be an upgrade.
I do pretty much agree with you and WA, but after rereading my initial post, that really isn’t clear. It’s true that there’s no guarantee that our internal options will perform at replacement level and that Lyle will stay below.
sure, in the same sense
that there’s no guarantee that Cutch outperforms Brandon Wood in the next 2 months, but I’d still take my chances on Andrew.
okay
But in that analogy, Cutch is Overbay and Wood is “whomever.”
I did not mean a name out of the telephone book and if you interpreted it that way… I dunno. I dunno why you would take that serious anyways.
Basically any realistic option would be better than Overbay. Garrett Jones, Brandon Wood, James Loney, Chris Davis, any number of AAAA guys I’ve never heard of and so on. That’s what I meant by whomever, I’m sorry I confused you all so.
Garrett Jones, Brandon Wood, James Loney, Chris Davis, any number of AAAA guys I’ve never heard of and so on
thats the problem i have. its not coming off as an opinion, its coming off as spite… because i know you dont really like those 4 players either.
if you say Konerko, or Kotchman, or maybe even Pena i can understand. but saying those 4 guys are a better option than overbay tells me that you truly just want Overbay gone and that anyone can be better than Lyle.
by white angus on Jul 27, 2011 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
"anyone can be better than Lyle."
pretty much, yeah. I don’t need to like a player for him to be better at baseball than Mr. Overbay.
I’ve got nothing against Lyle, he can go live a long and fruitful life, I just want to see my team put the best men on the field so that we can win a World Series.
no confusion
I just don’t think that replacement-level players should be expected to be better than Overbay. Garrett Jones, sure, but he’s our starting RF right now, so that’s not really an option. Loney and Wood are worse than Overbay, no joke. I’d take Chris Davis as an upside play, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s worse than Overbay going forward. (And I’m not saying Overbay’s good, just that a 0.5-1.0 WAR player is better than a replacement-level player, and I don’t want any random AAAA player to take Overbay’s spot just because people are frustrated.)
within reason is implied. The fact that we have at least 4 immediate internal upgrades is enough for me to use whomever.
Jones – better hitter, same overall defensive value
Pearce – at least samish hitter, way better defensively
Hague – wildcard. Likely to have better bat and slightly better D
Bowker – slightly better D, slightly better bat
Jones, pretty much the same player as Overbay... Bowker, cant even get on the field
Pearce is really the only argument here and hes not going to be taking time from anyone.
Hague would be a good choice if the team were not in contention.
the Pirates HAVE to look elsewhere to improve the 1B situation.
by white angus on Jul 27, 2011 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm ok with that too
I just don’t see why we can’t replace Overbay now, while continuing to look for a short and long-term solution.
i have no problem replacing overbay right now.
as long as its with a truly better player. so far, i havent heard many names on this site that inspires a better option.
WAR vs. revenue
I made a fanpost about this. While projecting WAR for a rental vs. the WAR we expect to get from a prospect, it’s also crucial to consider how an acquisition might motivate or depress the fan base (think: acquiring Beltran vs. trading Walker). While trading for Carlos Pena might not put a lot of extra butts in the seats, it certainly wouldn’t hurt attendance.
+1
I was thinking this too. Basically you’d have to look at their grade when they broke into the majors.
Watson is there, Morris and Holt likely to tread water, Cain and Marte probably B- this year, Kingham too early to say either way.
I had a similar thought
This was a cool post, but if maguro felt like going a little further, I’d be interested in seeing results when including additional factors: what is the expected outcome if you break it down by guys who are in the upper minors (AA or AAA) vs. guys who are in the lower minors (presumably, guys in the upper minors have lower ceilings but are safer, generally speaking). Also, how do prior years’ grades affect the expected outcome? For instance, Marte was a C+ last year, but also a C+ the year before. Holt was a C+ last year but only a C the year before. I’d guess there’s a higher rate of return for consistent C+ guys than for C/C+ guys. Finally, what if you break it down by position? Do C+ pitchers offer less value than C+ hitters? (Probably.) Do outfielders offer less value than infielders? I’d be very interested to see results that account for all those variables.
Either way, cool study maguro.
Yeah
To keep it reasonably simple, just divide into upper and lower minors. Watson was a C+ because he’s not that talented, not because of uncertainty. Marte is far more talented, but also far less certain.
If Sickels is grading correctly, you’d actually see very similar profiles between the two groups; I wonder if that’s the case.
If Sickels is grading correctly, you’d actually see very similar profiles between the two groups; I wonder if that’s the case.
My guess is that you’d get a pretty similar average WAR for both groups, but the lower minors groups would have more flameouts and more stars, while the higher minors groups would have more guys who made the majors but fewer guys who were impact players.
Sounds about right
Look at the Pirates’ C+ listed above. Tony Watson looks like a guy who could put up a few WAR for his career, but surely no more than a few. Marte could well be a 15+ WAR guy, but of course could never get more than a cup of coffee.
Just to take the top few guys on the list
Lester and Votto were coming out of the GCL, Chris Young out of A ball, Howard and Swisher A+ and Bedard and Dejesus were coming out of AA. I don’t think anyone particularly accomplished was coming out of AAA.
Players decrease their grades as they move up, too
Jon Rauch, for instance, was BA’s #4 overall prospect before the 2001 season.
Is there another Mike Gonzalez that played for the Bucs in the early 2000's that I'm not aware of?
How the hell is that guy a nearly 7 WAR career player?
Especially
given that WAR is unfriendly to relievers. I mean, Mariano Rivera is worth 38 wins over ~16 years, but Gonzalez was worth 7 over ~8?
Actually, this is partly a FG vs. B-R thing. FG has Mariano at 2.4 WAR/year and Gonzo at 0.6; B-R has Rivera at 3.4 and Gonzo at 0.8.
Does it seem right that Rivera is worth 4X Gonzo? Seems plausible to me.
A very interesting piece, great study, and fun read. Amongst other things that others have suggested, I’d be curious to know if the fact that these (a handful of) players are still actually accumulating WAR, has any effect on the study. I think it’s quite obvious that it does, but I wonder by how much.
Other than the top 10 - 15 players.on the list
No one is accumulating much WAR at this point. Obviously Votto, Lester, Howard, etc are still adding to their totals, but they’re also running out of years of team control, too, so the majority of their value as a prospect is already accounted for.
Beyond the top 20 you still have some active guys, mostly relievers like Chad Gaudin and Mike McDougal, but their production is pretty minimal. Most of the rest are out of baseball by now, and the vast majority are guys that I never even heard of.
Good point about the team controlled years
I hadn’t even thought of that before I posted. I realized that the WAR these guys are still to amass wasn’t probably much of anything to up the average WAR of a C+ guy by any more than a few tenths. Just curious on your thoughts of the subject since you took to the time to do the research. Cool stuff, much appreciated.
Yes and no
Someone did a study last year that the vast majority of career WAR, even among stars with long careers, accrues to the drafting team. Between the age curve, short extensions, and efforts to keep the hometown star with his first club, it’s not really accurate to look at only the first 6 years of control – the odds are that many of the WAR accumulated beyond that point will also go to the drafting team (albeit at market prices, but we’re not talking WAR/$ here).
Yep
gotta include players that teams get back in trades/draft picks.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 26, 2011 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point
It’s very rare for a team to draft a player, keep him for ~6 years, then let him go elsewhere without compensation to produce lots of WAR.
Actually, the whole Type A FA thing practically guarantees that can’t happen. I mean, you’re getting attenuated value, but it’s value nonetheless.
Worth noting
Still a lot of WAR coming from the positive group. Probably very few WAR (plus or minus) from the ones who haven’t yet produced above 3 WAR, but among those 29, another 30-50 WAR is probably likely (hell, Votto and Howard alone could account for most of that), which shifts the average per C+ prospect to 1.65 or so. Not a huge change, but it can add up, especially if you’re packaging prospects.
Very nice post, Maguro
When people cringe at the thought of trading a guy like Staling Marte, we all think about his ceiling as opposed to what he is really worth. Now, I think Marte should move up to a B- prospect so perhaps he is worth more (in theory) than 1.4 WAR, but still, we need to stop pretending like he is a lock to be a five-year starter in Pittsburgh with at least 2 WAR each season. That borders a best-case scenario.
Disagree
2-3 WAR a season isn’t close to bordering a best-case scenario. I see Marte as a B or B+ prospect for one. I do that because I think he can hit .300 in the bigs, even though his OBP will probably come in at around .330-.340 range. I think that will come with about 10-12 HR’s and plenty of doubles and triples dude to speed and gap power; he will probably slug around .420-.480 so he will OPS .750-.820, with speed on the basepaths to boot and an elite glove and arm in CF (or LF, where his value would, admittedly, be diminished).
I’m not sure how exactly to calculate it, but that’s gotta be more than 3 WAR. Plus, I see that as a mildly optimistic view of him. He has the raw power and bat speed to hit 20+ HR’s in the big leagues, and if he can figure out how to walk a bit, that OBP could jump to .360 and that SLG to .520 and suddenly we have a guy with a .880 OPS playing elite CF defense. That’s similar to what Cutch does right now. That’s a best case scenario.
Still, I’m very confident believing Marte settles in and becomes a 3-4 WAR player every year for 5 years. Ain’t no pretending here.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 26, 2011 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
6 % of the players listed in the OP exceeded 10 career WAR so far
I’d certainly consider top 6% to be bordering a best-case scenario. The more relevant gauge will be to see how B- prospects have performed, since I think Marte more accurately falls into that category.
I hope Marte becomes a “3-4 WAR player every year for 5 years,” but there’s probably* a <5% chance of that happening, even for a B- prospect.
- haven’t done the research, just trying to make an educated guess
I don't
see Marte as a B- prospect. Now that he’s broken out of his funk, he’s a solid B for me, and he could be a B+ by the end of the year. I bet players rated with that grade have much better average WAR etc. Guys like Votto and Lester became that B and B+ prospect after C+ status and Marte is on the same path.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
how confident?
What kind of odds will you give me if I bet against Marte posting 15+ WAR in his team-controlled years?
If
he stays all 6 years, and is basically injury free (~140-150 games a year on average, so lets say at least 830 games those 6 years), I need 15 WAR?
I’d give you 3:1 odds.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
injuries
are part of why people don’t succeed sometimes. That’s a huge caveat to throw in there, especially for a guy who’s yet to play a full pro season because of various injuries.
Well
I mean.. I understand, but Mike Trout or Bryce Harper could have their careers ended tomorrow by injuries and I’m sure you’d feel confident they’d produce 15 WAR over their team controlled years.
Marte does have a bit of an injury history, so basically injury free is a probably too strong. But if he tears his ACL twice and misses two seasons, I don’t see how that settles our debate at all. I’d drop it to 770 games to put in time for a DL stint or two.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
As
a contrast.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
it sure seems like you want a bunch of escape clauses on this one, which should tell you what epoc is trying to say.
If you bet the over on 15 WAR on Trout or Harper, I bet epoc takes it. And you are pretty hesitant to bet that on Marte, so…
Uh
Epoc? Deal? I’ll give you 5:1 on the over on Trout with 15 WAR on the day he accrues 6 years of major league service time.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Injury
free or injury riddled.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
deal
I might not do it straight up, but with 5:1 odds, sure, I’ll take that bet.
How
much me wagering? Haha. 5:1 was probably a stretch for me, but if I’d go 3:1 on Marte (even injury free) I gotta go higher than with Trout.
Be much more comfortable with 4:1, but I’ll man up.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions
beers
Your five to my one. Plus the three to one on Marte. We’ll meet up in Pittsburgh sometime ten years down the road to settle up.
I don't
drink haha. You can buy the equivalent in wings haha. I eat those.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 30, 2011 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions
it's cool
I drink, and you’ll be the one who’s buying. ;)
Naw
Starling Marte’s got my back. I told him we could split the wings, so he’s gonna be trying extra hard.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 30, 2011 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions
and Mike
Trout, he gets the celery or carrots.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 30, 2011 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
That sounds like Freddy Sanchez in CF, who put up ~11 WAR in a 3 year period before injuries caught up to him. I imagine Marte would be slightly more valuable due to position and base running.
sounds like
But Freddy Sanchez had an 11.9% K rate and 8.3% walk rate in AA. There’s a very good chance that Marte is never as good as Sanchez.
I agree with MC Truth that Marte’s upside is crazy-high, but right now he doesn’t have the skill-set to hit .300 in the majors. Quite simply, he strikes out way too much. His performance in AA this year has mostly convinced me that he can hold his own even with his poor approach, but he seems more like a .270/.300/.400 hitter unless he learns to control the strike zone. Of course, he’s only 22 and doesn’t even have 1500 professional PA yet, so he could definitely improve and become a superstar (and the sky’s the limit, really, with him).
i agree
Marte has to bat near 300 to be sucessful. if not, his OBP could end up being similar to Cedeno’s. not exactly stellar, is it?
by white angus on Jul 27, 2011 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
depends
on what you mean by “success.” With his defense and baserunning value, he’d be a fine player if he hits .270/.300/.400. He’d make a solid second-division starter with those numbers.
But yeah, the downside with him is that he could hit .270/.290/.380 or something like that if he doesn’t improve his control of the strike zone.
Making
this up, but I’d have to think 6 years of .270/.300/.400 if he’s a 10-15 UZR/150 guy in CF would easily surpass 15 WAR, if you include his base-running.
My thing is, even if his approach never changes, I’m convinced he can hit .300 in the major leagues, so it’d be more like a .300/.330/.440 line, which would definitely do the trick. (I think?)
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
well, im almost convinced that Marte's career ends up similar to Corey Patterson
but i like your positive outlook on him.
I'm
down
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions
it would be close
In the current run environment, .270/.300/.400 would be about five runs below average per 600 PA. With +10 fielding and plus baserunning he’d be 2.5-3.0 WAR per year, so he’d be just on the border.
I still think you’re being optimistic though. He’s a great defender, yeah, but 10-15 runs above average (consistently) is Franklin Gutierrez territory. Plus, I’m not sure what convinces you that he can hit .300 in the majors without a change in approach. He has a 19% K rate and .370 BAbip in AA and he’s only barely above .300. I can understand thinking that his natural ability will limit the inevitable rise in K rates somewhat and keep his BAbip high, but even with a .350 BAbip and 20% K rate, that’s more like .290 than .300, and even that’s a little on the optimistic side unless he improves his approach. I respect your optimism, but I think your certainty is unrealistic. I’ll gladly take 3:1 odds against Marte producing 15 WAR in his team-controlled years.
Nonetheless, Marte is certainly a very good prospect, and I hope he lives up to your expectations and then some.
Using advanced metrics
I wouldn’t be surprised if Marte is the second or third best defensive OF in all of baseball for the first few years he’s up. The top two guys this season (and off the top of my head, those were the two guys I picked based on scouting reports, reputation etc.; therefore I have no qualms about picking those two when the statistics back it up, even in a SSS as 2/3rd of a year is a SSS for UZR) are Gardner and Bourjos.
I think Marte could be in that mix, or in the tier right below those two and at the top. He has elite range, good instincts, and an absolute cannon attached to his right shoulder. Btw, Gutierrez is a 21.0 UZR/150 guy in his career. He’s been down this year, but Marte won’t have to be on that level.
I think it’s doable, both the defense and the overall WAR.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions
okay
Personally, I think you’re overrating him again. He’s a great defender, but I think second- or third-best, while possible, is more like a best-case scenario than a likely outcome. I personally don’t think he’s any better than Cutch, and Cutch’s UZR ratings have been pretty inconsistent.
I think you and I basically agree on Marte’s skills, right? You are just very optimistic about him fulfilling his potential, while I am more pessimistic. In the end, we really aren’t too far apart on this. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.
Ya
We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.
Damn reality. Where’s my freakin time machine?
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Not to one-up you but...
A more comprehensive study of this has been done at Beyond the Box Score (well really summarized there but done at The Hardball Times).
This is good work though…whereas the other article was more concerned with the value of all types of prospects, you gave an interesting, more detailed look at a specific class of prospects using basically the same methodology (they used the ugly step-sister of WAR, Win Shares Above Bench, but the results should be basically the same).
I think it’s fair to say Marte is no longer a C+ prospect however. Obviously the plate discipline is an issue but those grades were prior to the season and he was coming back from the hamate. Would it be overrating him to call him a B prospect? B- at worst?
Marte
He’s a B in my book. And I’m not all that optimistic about him, relatively speaking. I think B- would be underrating him.
I’d say B. I’m always conscious of not overvaluing Pirates prospects though. I could be talked into B+ t looking at last years B+ Outfielders. He’d be on the low end of that group certainly.
Desmond Jennings B+
Aaron Hicks B+
Jaff Decker B+
Brett Jackson B+
by rj.reynolds on Jul 26, 2011 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions
yeah
I wouldn’t go to B+. The strike zone control is still a big concern.
Until
this recent slump, he’d be a B+ in my book. He’s down to a B, a solid one, with a better chance of moving up then moving down right now. I’m optimistic on him though and really believe in the glove.
See above.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 26, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
He's a B+ for me...
I think he has tremendous upside and I, like epoc, like that he has cut down the K’s against tougher competition. The walks are a concern but I think he may be one of these guys who doesn’t walk because he really hasn’t had to yet. I thought that might change this year but we’ll see in AAA. I like the fact that he is aware that he needs to improve in this area.
#AllTheBuntsAreBad!
walks
Marte doesn’t walk much because he has a poor approach and doesn’t recognize pitches well. It’s correctable, but it’s not an issue of him just being too good to have to walk. If that was the case, he wouldn’t strike out nearly as much as he does. I can see a B+ for him if you absolutely love him, but you should be realistic about his flaws. It’s not just an issue of not walking much – it’s a very serious problem with a critical aspect of hitting.
I love his upside...
couple that with holding his own at AA is why I would grade him a B+. I didn’t mean to gloss over his weaknesses because I do think the walks are a concern especially if they aren’t coming due to pitch recognition issues. I’ll have to defer to your judgment on pitch recognition because I haven’t seen him this year so I can’t tell firsthand if he’s improved in that area to any significant degree. I look at the improvement in K’s and deduced that he is getting better at it since he has stated that was a goal this year. I guess I should have said that I’m hoping he is one of those guys who hasn’t had to walk a lot because he hasn’t really had to yet. I have a hard time believing that his ability to hit over .300 at every level is a fluke. To that point though I have an equally hard time figuring out how he has been able to accomplish that given the poor K and walk totals. Time will tell I suppose.
#AllTheBuntsAreBad!
Did you watch the Futures Game at all? That’s the only time I’ve seen him this year, and I did think his pitch recognition was improved (though mostly from horrible to bad), but his approach was still very poor. He did not control the strike zone or work the count at all. It could have been just one bad game, but because it was similar to what I saw last year, I took it at face value.
I agree with you that his ability to hit .300 every year isn’t a fluke. He’s obviously very talented, and his performance this year in AA gives me a good bit of confidence that his talent will win out in the end, despite his problems. Still, it’s not a good bet that he continues hitting .300, especially at the highest level, unless he makes significant adjustments.
I’m kind of becoming sympathetic to the argument for Marte as a B+. I wouldn’t go there myself, but it seems reasonable based on the combination of tools, upside, and performance/ARL in the upper minors. Plus, he’s still very raw for his age, since he didn’t sign until he was 18 and still hasn’t played a full season because of injuries. Plus, you could argue that the hamate injury is still holding his power back. And by all accounts he’s very smart and a hard worker. I just can’t get past the inability to control the strike zone. He might make me look foolish in a couple years, though (if he hasn’t already, considering that before this season I was very convinced he would struggle mightily at AA).
Where would you rank him in our system? I’m guessing, if you give him a B+, you’d have him #2 (not counting 2011 draft picks).
ive seen Marte in person 6 times... he played in 5 games...
1. very athletic
2. covers lots of ground in CF
3. looks alot bigger in person, could really fill out
4. his arm is legit
5. swings at anything, and everything
- is one of the hardest things for a player to improve upon.
pitch recognition and reaction is going to be a challenge for him.
and for Cunningham.
by white angus on Jul 27, 2011 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn't catch the Futures Game unfortunately...
That’s a pretty fair assessment you list above I think. I pretty much agree with everything you wrote and trust your assessment of his approach (Angus also confirms this below). You pointed out all the reasons I am high on him: still raw, hamate issue sapping power, .300 + at all levels, tools, tools and more tools. As things stand right now he is my top position player. I suppose you are correct in that I would have him right after Taillon at #2. Allie is the project everyone talked about when he was drafted, Herredia is still so young and Sanchez is having a rough go of things in Altoona so I I don’t think anyone else is wothy of being #2 right now..
#AllTheBuntsAreBad!
fair enough
I’d have him as a B, ranked fourth (after Taillon, Sanchez, and Allie). But I have Sanchez, Allie, Marte, and Heredia all as B, and there’s not much separation between them.
I wouldn’t drop a guy half a grade because he slumps for 20 games. If you believe in him enough to give him a B+, then stick with him through the slumps.
Eh
it was more of a, he’d be a B+ if he had stayed hot all year, but he hasn’t so I’ll go conservative B. I mean it’s really close. If he ends the year with the stats he has now, he’s a B+. I was just afraid he was gonna go off the deep end as pitchers figured him and his bad approach out. He’s relaxed those fears a bit.
Very reactionary I know.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
okay
But if you’re acknowledging that he has a poor approach and that there’s a very real concern that more advanced pitchers will be able to exploit it, aren’t you tacitly acknowledging that he has to improve his approach if he’s going to have long-term, high-level success?
He might still be a B+ even if you acknowledge that, but it seems like you’re implicitly agreeing with me that we should reserve some of our optimism because the approach is so poor. Certainly you can’t acknowledge a significant, exploitable weakness and still believe that he can consistently hit .300/.330/.440 in the majors without correcting it, right?
I don't
think he needs to make significant improvements. I think as long as he doesn’t stagnate (a possibility), he will be a good player in the major leagues. If he has a break through (particurlarly in the plate discipline and power departments) he could become a star.
Basically, if you continue to see the type of improvements he’s shown (K rate decrease), even if its at a slower pace and to a lesser degree. Clearly, as he is, he would get eaten alive in the MLB (I mean look at Mike Trout).
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 28, 2011 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
fair enough
I’m with you, to a certain extent. I do think, with even marginal improvements, he could be a 2-2.5 WAR, .270/.300/.400 CF with good defense and baserunning. I hope like hell he becomes the 15-WAR star you’re predicting, and I’ll gladly buy you a beer if you’re right.
That's good to hear...
He’s still alergic to walks but his getting down the K rate the main reason you’d bump you’re grade up. Curious because we’ve had the Marte discussion before and I am higher on him than you were and the K rate was the big issue iirc.
#AllTheBuntsAreBad!
Marte is having a pretty awful July
His OPS is down to .778. These last 40 games can still make a difference in how he’s viewed. He can be a guy that hits but has plate discipline issues, or he could be stalling out. I’m curious to see how he’ll do against the junkballers in AAA next year.
Agreed.
Fantastic post and another rec’
"I choose to gamble with my life
Twice the risk, four times the prize
Nothing knocks me over"
by lighthouse913 on Jul 26, 2011 1:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
