Sox have 5 in BA's Top 100

[Dadawg_77]

Originally Posted by Randar68

Does a top 100 list mean anything, Dawg? Who cares, really, it's not what teams use other than as bargaining chips... Who really cares if a scouting service favors players they've known about a long time over newcomers?

How in the hell does that validate statistical analysis. Your arguments are so shallow...

Shallow? I was using you point to make mine. A scouting service, what BA does, you do here, is filled with personal bias that make it nonobjective. The only truly objective rating of players that I have seen is their production. Tools don't mean a thing unless they translate into production.

Scouting can help you figure out who may produce in draft and such, but once you hit the minors, production is much more telling then scouting. You can adjust for any variable such as age, park or league.

[rdivaldi]

Originally Posted by Dadawg_77

The thing is Sweeney's ISO power was lower then what you normally see. I wouldn't be concerned if it was .20 higher. You expect a guy to grow into more power but the concern is does his current performance show a lower celling. Some scouting report mention he has a slower bat so that might be playing into his low power numbers.

Fair enough, honestly I've never seen or heard about bat speed concerns though.

Most scouts have him as a guy that is going to be a 15- 20 home run hitter with an average in the .300 range (Olerud is who most compare him to). From what I've seen during ST and in Winston-Salem that's a pretty fair comparison.

[maurice]

You're oversimplifying, Dawg. Even if you think that all scouting observations are worthless because they're subjective, Sweeney's age and level are not subjective. A 19-year-old at high-A is very unusual. Reason dictates that he would have produced significantly better numbers in rookie ball or even low-A. Moreover, the assumption that, on average, 19 year olds fill out and become stronger as they age is a medical fact.

If you manage to pull together a large body of data comparing the major-league performance of hitters to their performance as 19 year olds in high A ball, then you might be on to something. Otherwise, it's extremely unfair and illogical to compare Sweeney's numbers to 22 year olds at high A and 19 year olds in rookie ball. You acknowledge that "[y]ou can adjust for any variable such as age, park or league." Please factor these adjustments into your evaluation of Sweeney.

[SoxxoS]

I would take a John Olerud. He was flirting with .400 a WHILE ago... what 1992? Is Sweeney going to wear the helmet on defense as well?

The only thing about Sweeney is...wouldn't him playing 1B wasting that arm we hear so much about?

[rdivaldi]

Originally Posted by SoxxoS

The only thing about Sweeney is...wouldn't him playing 1B wasting that arm we hear so much about?

Sorry, I meant at the plate only. Sweeney is an outfielder without a doubt, putting him at first would definitely be a waste of a great arm just like you said.

[Randar68]

Originally Posted by SoxxoS

I would take a John Olerud. He was flirting with .400 a WHILE ago... what 1992? Is Sweeney going to wear the helmet on defense as well?

The only thing about Sweeney is...wouldn't him playing 1B wasting that arm we hear so much about?

Yeah, it would be somewhat wasteful, but he has great size and is left-handed and agile.

[Randar68]

Originally Posted by Dadawg_77

Want to know the best way to figure out who is going to be a good player in the MLB. Look at their production, in general those who produce in the minors produce in the majors and those who don't, don't. It is that simple. You want to make it more complex, go head, but someone just looking at the numbers will have a better percentage of picking MLBers in the minors.

LOL! If you insist, Dawg. Please let me know what Robert Valido's production is going to be so I can stop wasting my time. *****. Stats don't allow for "improvement" or making good on a player's athletic ability, defense, or instincts. Never mind that these young kids/adults have yet to physically mature and the fact that each player does so at different rates and times in their lives, mentally and physically, if at all...

Let me know when you have stats that measure that.


"but someone just looking at the numbers will have a better percentage of picking MLBers in the minors"

These kind of craptastic unsupportable statements are what make your comments utterly useless.

[Dadawg_77]

Originally Posted by maurice

You're oversimplifying, Dawg. Even if you think that all scouting observations are worthless because they're subjective, Sweeney's age and level are not subjective. A 19-year-old at high-A is very unusual. Reason dictates that he would have produced significantly better numbers in rookie ball or even low-A. Moreover, the assumption that, on average, 19 year olds fill out and become stronger as they age is a medical fact.

If you manage to pull together a large body of data comparing the major-league performance of hitters to their performance as 19 year olds in high A ball, then you might be on to something. Otherwise, it's extremely unfair and illogical to compare Sweeney's numbers to 22 year olds at high A and 19 year olds in rookie ball. You acknowledge that "[y]ou can adjust for any variable such as age, park or league." Please factor these adjustments into your evaluation of Sweeney.

I think I stated this. Sweeney's ISO Power (SLG - AVG) is low for his age at his level. I am not saying he should be like A Rod, but it should have been higher. Yes, he should develop more power over the years, just at 19 he underpreformed. The large data pull has been done, just too lazy to go out and find it and link it.

[Dadawg_77]

Originally Posted by Randar68

LOL! If you insist, Dawg. Please let me know what Robert Valido's production is going to be so I can stop wasting my time. *****. Stats don't allow for "improvement" or making good on a player's athletic ability, defense, or instincts. Never mind that these young kids/adults have yet to physically mature and the fact that each player does so at different rates and times in their lives, mentally and physically, if at all...

Let me know when you have stats that measure that.


"but someone just looking at the numbers will have a better percentage of picking MLBers in the minors"

These kind of craptastic unsupportable statements are what make your comments utterly useless.

I said "in general" and you bring up a single case to dispute it. The fact is lot more "tools" phenoms without the production fail then guys without the "tools" who produce do and guys without the "tools" but produce succeed more often then the "tools" phenoms without the production. You can back that claim up with research.

Scouting isn't worth much when you look at minor leaguers, all the intangibles you mention would be worth something if a player produces thus covered by looking at the numbers. The player tells you everything you need to know by whether or not they are producing in the minors.

Back to the list, ***? Joe Mauer is their number one prospect? Come on now, the only reason this guy could be consider was he got hurt last year. That is a cheap choice.

[Jabroni]

Originally Posted by Dadawg_77

Back to the list, ***? Joe Mauer is their number one prospect? Come on now, the only reason this guy could be consider was he got hurt last year. That is a cheap choice.

I guess a "small sample size" of 107 major league at bats only counts when you want it to.

[maurice]

Originally Posted by Dadawg_77

I think I stated this. Sweeney's ISO Power (SLG - AVG) is low for his age at his level.

I don't mean to nit pick, but you said "Sweeney's ISO power was lower th[a]n what you normally see." You might have meant age / level, but I didn't read it that way . . . hence my response.

Originally Posted by maurice

If you manage to pull together a large body of data comparing the major-league performance of hitters to their performance as 19 year olds in high A ball, then you might be on to something.

Originally Posted by Dadawg_77

The large data pull has been done, just too lazy to go out and find it and link it.

That's very surprising, given the derth of 19 year olds at high A. It's even more surprising that somebody took the time to calculate the ISO power for a statistically significant sample of 19 year olds at high A who are now old enough to have an established MLB performance level. Quite an undertaking.

I can see why Bill James' group might have the interest (and financing) to compile this information, but they'll propably keep most of their cutting-edge data proprietary as long as they're working for the Red Sox.

In any event, y'all have a nice weekend. I'm off to do some relatively worthless subjective scouting in Tucson.

[Daver]

Statheads, and their self appointed superiority, will never fail to crack me up.

[Dadawg_77]

Originally Posted by Daver

Statheads, and their self appointed superiority, will never fail to crack me up.

And teams never fail to amaze me by wasting millions and selling off MLB stars for pipe dreams.

[Jabroni]

Originally Posted by Dadawg_77

And teams never fail to amaze me by wasting millions and selling off MLB stars for pipe dreams.

Please tell me this is not another Jeremy Reed-related post.

[fquaye149]

you'd better hope he comes down w/ laryngitis then