989 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

I have an issue if they are relying on data for less than 100 at bats though

I would think it’s more about approach than data.

[Mackus]

I have an issue if they are relying on data for less than 100 at bats though

I would think it’s more about approach than data.

 

I have no idea how long it takes for things like exit velocity and launch angle to stabilize, but several stats, particularly for hitters, stabilize more quickly than I would have guessed.  Basically, the closer the stat is to a raw piece of data, the quicker the stat stabilizes.  

 

These are MLB stats, where the level of competition is much more stable.  Have to imagine that things are much nosier in the minors and vastly moreso in college.  But I like this resource both as a description of the advanced methodology and for having some rough benchmarks that are easy to understand.

https://library.fang...es/sample-size/

 

But 80 PA in college non-conference play, that is probably only like 60 balls-in-play...I'd be really surprised if there is some significant signal there.  I really hope that they're opinions on some of these guys with big 2020 breakouts are mostly based on scouting takes on how the improvements to underlying skills and physical traits led to the improved short season performance.  I think it's really unlikely there is a statistical signal in such small of a sample, but we'll see. 

 

I do at least have a lot of trust that Elias & Co. are basing their opinions on something fundamentally supportable.  They have smart people who knows tons and tons about this sort of stuff from a mathematical perspective.  

[JeremyStrain]

I have no idea how long it takes for things like exit velocity and launch angle to stabilize, but several stats, particularly for hitters, stabilize more quickly than I would have guessed.  Basically, the closer the stat is to a raw piece of data, the quicker the stat stabilizes.  

 

These are MLB stats, where the level of competition is much more stable.  Have to imagine that things are much nosier in the minors and vastly moreso in college.  But I like this resource both as a description of the advanced methodology and for having some rough benchmarks that are easy to understand.

https://library.fang...es/sample-size/

 

But 80 PA in college non-conference play, that is probably only like 60 balls-in-play...I'd be really surprised if there is some significant signal there.  I really hope that they're opinions on some of these guys with big 2020 breakouts are mostly based on scouting takes on how the improvements to underlying skills and physical traits led to the improved short season performance.  I think it's really unlikely there is a statistical signal in such small of a sample, but we'll see. 

 

I do at least have a lot of trust that Elias & Co. are basing their opinions on something fundamentally supportable.  They have smart people who knows tons and tons about this sort of stuff from a mathematical perspective.  

I'd imagine that those two EV, and LA are two that stabilize fast, since they are basically individual output statistics and not really reliant on outside factors. Like bat speed. Or MPH for a pitcher, those don't really need weighed against outside traits. Their swing is their swing, so that shouldn't change much as the season progresses. Another reason while I'm pretty sure those are the biggest numbers they were looking at.

 

Just curiosity sake I really wish I knew for sure, or knew if there was something else out there we don't even know about or look at yet you know? Maybe they have 5 different data points they are using and we only know 2. Also wish I could find out if these guys were using bat sensors. Maybe swing efficiency was another they were using? I dunno...it's like back when defensive stats were still real new and raw, you were pretty sure you couldn't trust them completely cause sometimes they just really conflicted with what you saw, but you wanted to and you wanted better numbers. At the time we had no idea what teams had access to behind the curtain but they were using something.

 

I tend to think you're on to it. That they had a list of guys for whatever data points they use that made up a list of potential break outs for 2020, and then the ones that actually started out hot following what they thought were going to happen went to the top of a list somewhere.

 

It's like having the puzzle pieces, but not the picture of what the completed puzzle looks like. You know they go together, but you aren't sure what you are missing and how they fit.

[BobPhelan]

Some good info in here: https://www.prospect...lb-draft-grades

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Wow a B+  .....interesting.

[JeremyStrain]

I mused before the draft a strategy a team could take would be to go real under slot with the later round picks and use those savings on the first couple. Basically quality over quantity but punting your last 3 picks gives you a little less than $2m in savings, so you could go overslot on both picks a decent amount.

 

I just bring it up cause some teams are doing that at the moment. Mets just signed their 3rd rounder for $20k. Nats signed a 4th rounder I think for $20k.

 

This is such a weird year because of all the different approaches teams could take with just 5 rounds and then a $20k cap. Punting picks late and then overspending on your first two.

 

I'm almost surprised we didn't see a late first round team punt the first rounder and then blow everyone out of the market with their next 4 picks.

[SportsGuy]

Some good info in here: https://www.prospect...lb-draft-grades

Interesting..wonder if he right about how they had first round grades on Westburg and Haskin?

[Pedro Cerrano]

I read a couple analysts say they loved our draft.

Callis said we were one of  the six best drafts.

 

(shrugs) I was sort of annoyed.  shows how much I know lol. 

[Chris B]

I mused before the draft a strategy a team could take would be to go real under slot with the later round picks and use those savings on the first couple. Basically quality over quantity but punting your last 3 picks gives you a little less than $2m in savings, so you could go overslot on both picks a decent amount.

 

I just bring it up cause some teams are doing that at the moment. Mets just signed their 3rd rounder for $20k. Nats signed a 4th rounder I think for $20k.

 

This is such a weird year because of all the different approaches teams could take with just 5 rounds and then a $20k cap. Punting picks late and then overspending on your first two.

 

I'm almost surprised we didn't see a late first round team punt the first rounder and then blow everyone out of the market with their next 4 picks.

 

Yup. Many teams used their typical 7th-10th round draft strategy of under-slot senior signs in the 4th and 5th round this year (and some even the 3rd).

[Slidemaster]

It is absolutely baffling to me how they could have a first round grade on Haskin. Everything about him screams minor league burnout as the floor, and 4th outfielder at his ceiling, unless they completely overhaul his hitting mechanics. And if you're going to do that, why not just take someone who is already set up well?

[SportsGuy]

It is absolutely baffling to me how they could have a first round grade?

I know! I mean, all those pro scouts, data, etc...they have zero basis for that thought!

[Mike B]

I know! I mean, all those pro scouts, data, etc...they have zero basis for that thought!

Hell all that time they spent preparing for the draft, and they only needed to ask;.

[Slidemaster]

I know! I mean, all those pro scouts, data, etc...they have zero basis for that thought!

Basically you just live in a world where if the team does it, it must be right. That's what I'm gathering from your stance.

[Slidemaster]

Hell all that time they spent preparing for the draft, and they only needed to ask;.

I'm here 24/7 if they want to call.

[Slidemaster]

Nothing says "top 30 player in the nation" like long loopy swing that chops down at the ball.

Future star.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Basically you just live in a world where if the team does it, it must be right. That's what I'm gathering from your stance.

Thats definitely Shields. Has always rocked the orange tinted sunglassed.

[SportsGuy]

Basically you just live in a world where if the team does it, it must be right. That's what I'm gathering from your stance.

Not at all.

But I also don’t live in a place where I think I know more about a topic than very intelligent baseball people do. I would doubt old Os regimes but not as much these guys although I do need to see Elias doing something soon.

Guys make wrong calls all the time. It happens but Elias and his group have the benefit of the doubt in a lot of ways. I didn’t love the draft early but they made up for it with the HS school picks.

So I’m willing to say even if I wish they went another way that they get the benefit of the doubt for now.

[Slidemaster]

Not at all.

But I also don’t live in a place where I think I know more about a topic than very intelligent baseball people do. I would doubt old Os regimes but not as much these guys although I do need to see Elias doing something soon.

Guys make wrong calls all the time. It happens but Elias and his group have the benefit of the doubt in a lot of ways. I didn’t love the draft early but they made up for it with the HS school picks.

So I’m willing to say even if I wish they went another way that they get the benefit of the doubt for now.

So to understand your position, you believe that the Orioles draft was as perfect a draft as they were capable of executing, because they are "very intelligent baseball people."

Do I have that right?

Because if you don't believe that, calling someone else out for doubting a pick is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.

By the way, you must think much more of the Orioles regime than the Ravens one, as you question Ravens picks every year. Can you explain why that would be?

[BobPhelan]

I saw someone say Haskin is one of the only real potential five tool players in the draft. 20-20 potential. Let’s not act like the upside isn’t there with him. He was also a sophomore so almost a year younger than most college draftees.

[SportsGuy]

So to understand your position, you believe that the Orioles draft was as perfect a draft as they were capable of executing, because they are "very intelligent baseball people."
Do I have that right?
Because if you don't believe that, calling someone else out for doubting a pick is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.
By the way, you must think much more of the Orioles regime than the Ravens one, as you question Ravens picks every year. Can you explain why that would be?

Per usual, no you don’t have that right. I have already said I wish they had taken Wilcox or Kelley. That would have been my preference.

But we aren’t talking about a preference. We aren’t talking about, which way should they have gone in a given round. You are questioning them having a first round grade on a player you know nothing about. A player you have zero data on, zero scouting, etc...

So, you are essentially saying that someone like Mayo, for example, knows more than Elias and his group because those rankings are the only info you have.

I guarantee you that Elias can articulate an opinion as to why they see him as a first round talent*.

*this is assuming that person is right, which we have no idea if they are, why we should believe them, etc...