5'8" Baseball Players - the new Market Inefficiency?

[CheezWizHed]

Sal, Isaac, and Caleb (actually 5'7") have become integral parts of our offense over the last month and keying our offensive turn-around. 

The last 30 days:

Sal: 331/368/435/803

Isaac: 310/425/517/942

Caleb: 291/364/437/801 

Sal has proven himself enough for this to not be a big surprise.  High average, excellent OBP, ok SLG with excellent defense makes a nice starter.  And that is exactly what his draft profile said he could be. 

Isaac came out as a surprise.  Probably underrated due to his size, he has proven himself to be a legit MLB; especially with his strong defense - despite playing more 2B in the minors.  Not sure his power will stay, but certainly a great find.

Caleb: You could probably equate Collins and Durbin due to very similar MiLB hitting profiles...just one left the infield to prove to be excellent on D and the other is finding a home at 3B.  I'll admit that I doubted he would translate success to the MLB level, but he is proving me wrong (and I'm happy about it).

[CheezWizHed]

The comparison of Isaac and Caleb is kind of interesting too.

Both are players that were "mostly" 2B and found defensive success elsewhere.

Their career MiLB numbers are pretty close too:

Caleb: 269/371/411/782

Isaac: 266/380/422/803

[da swedish german]

so you're saying my high school football coach wasn't patronizing me when he said if I were 6'2" instead of 5' 10" I could've played d1?!?!?!

.....northern Illinois did send me some letters 🤣

I don't care about their height. I'd watch these guys over anyone any day

[da swedish german]

Athletes 

hopefully driving a nail in the coffin of 3TO baseball

Mets can have their billion dollar DH

[liveforoctober]

4 minutes ago, da swedish german said:

Athletes

This. I am pretty confident if Sal Frelick started on the mound for us tonight he would look goofy doing it but we would arrive in the 6th inning and he will have given up only 3 hits somehow. He is a gamer. The other two mentioned above are built in that same "chip on shoulder" mode.

[Turning2]

Begging to differ... Slugging / power still matter. We like these guys because they are our guys. But unless they can hit dingers like Altuve or Pedroia, you're only going to go so far with small, fast, defense first, light hitting players making up roughly a third of the starting lineup. How many WS champs over the past 15 years have had 3-4 players under 5'9" in their everyday lineups? I'm not going to look it up, but I wouldn't be surprised if the answer is zero. 

[LouisEly]

25 minutes ago, Turning2 said:

How many WS champs over the past 15 years have had 3-4 players under 5'9" in their everyday lineups? I'm not going to look it up, but I wouldn't be surprised if the answer is zero. 

The Dodgers won the WS last year and Mookie Betts, their 2nd best player in terms of bWAR despite only playing in 116 games,, is listed at 5'10".  Will Smith, All-Star catcher and 5th in bWAR, is listed at 5'10".  Max Muncy, their starting 3B, is listed at 5'10".  Tommy Edman, who they traded for at the deadline, is listed at 5'9".  

I think it's more about looking forward.  It's only a matter of time before MLB implements an automatic or augmented strike zone, in which shorter players could have an advantage.

[CheezWizHed]

2 hours ago, Turning2 said:

Begging to differ... Slugging / power still matter. We like these guys because they are our guys. But unless they can hit dingers like Altuve or Pedroia, you're only going to go so far with small, fast, defense first, light hitting players making up roughly a third of the starting lineup. How many WS champs over the past 15 years have had 3-4 players under 5'9" in their everyday lineups? I'm not going to look it up, but I wouldn't be surprised if the answer is zero. 

The OP was a bit of tongue-in-cheek, but also recognizing the oddity of having 3 short players who are playing well.  No one is suggesting that we fill each position with short players, but if they are hitting close to 800 OPS, they are above-average starters in the league. 

I mean... would you really rather have Bauers out in LF instead of Collins just because he has more power?  (413 vs 384 SLG).

Plus feel free to differ without begging...that's just embarrassing. 😉

[Guest]

1 hour ago, CheezWizHed said:

No one is suggesting that we fill each position with short players

I would suggest that, I'm fever dreaming of 8 2022 Cedric Mullins on the field. 

[Turning2]

13 hours ago, LouisEly said:

The Dodgers won the WS last year and Mookie Betts, their 2nd best player in terms of bWAR despite only playing in 116 games,, is listed at 5'10".  Will Smith, All-Star catcher and 5th in bWAR, is listed at 5'10".  Max Muncy, their starting 3B, is listed at 5'10".  Tommy Edman, who they traded for at the deadline, is listed at 5'9".  

I think it's more about looking forward.  It's only a matter of time before MLB implements an automatic or augmented strike zone, in which shorter players could have an advantage.

It helps to have a slew of MVPs woven into the roster and an unlimited payroll budget. Yes, smaller guys can hit for power, ours just don't. That power tends to come from bigger guys regardless. Don't get me wrong - I like our smaller, scrappy guys, they've grown on me. The scouts, GM, coaches and owner just need to find a way to get more thump in the lineup that can stay healthy.  Find 5 guys that can provide 20+HRs. Thought they might have that this year, but it hasn't panned out. Yelli, Hosk, Contreras, Chourio, Mitchell.... Could have been a "wallbanger" redux.

[Turning2]

11 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

The OP was a bit of tongue-in-cheek, but also recognizing the oddity of having 3 short players who are playing well.  No one is suggesting that we fill each position with short players, but if they are hitting close to 800 OPS, they are above-average starters in the league. 

I mean... would you really rather have Bauers out in LF instead of Collins just because he has more power?  (413 vs 384 SLG).

Plus feel free to differ without begging...that's just embarrassing. 😉

I like the guys, and they are developing, but "playing well" is a bit of a stretch for me. Frelick has the gold glove defense and an excellent batting average. He's a keeper. But let's say he winds up with 10-12 HRs for the year. Is that want from a corner OF? Not ideally. Collins is an older guy just now breaking into the bigs. He's probably peaking before our eyes. The average is good at the moment, and he's on pace for about 10 HRs.  Is it enough? Maybe. Durbin.. pretty much the same thing except he's a rookie. I like scrappy underdogs, and they are playing well enough to give us a...... summer of entertainment LOL. Hopefully they are really polished by the time the farm thumpers get called up in a couple of years. That could be an exciting balance of power and speed give us a few autumns of entertainment. 

[liveforoctober]

17 minutes ago, Turning2 said:

I like the guys, and they are developing, but "playing well" is a bit of a stretch for me. Frelick has the gold glove defense and an excellent batting average. He's a keeper. But let's say he winds up with 10-12 HRs for the year. Is that want from a corner OF? Not ideally. Collins is an older guy just now breaking into the bigs. He's probably peaking before our eyes. The average is good at the moment, and he's on pace for about 10 HRs.  Is it enough? Maybe. Durbin.. pretty much the same thing except he's a rookie. I like scrappy underdogs, and they are playing well enough to give us a...... summer of entertainment LOL. Hopefully they are really polished by the time the farm thumpers get called up in a couple of years. That could be an exciting balance of power and speed give us a few autumns of entertainment. 

A few rebuttals... Collins only has 160+ at bats this year thus far. If you factor in a full season of at bats he would be a 15/16 home run guy given current production. If he improves even fractionally he arrives at that 20 number that was mentioned.

None of Durbin/Frelick/Turang/Ortiz will be 25+ home run guys but they all have room to add muscle and are young. If they are all 8-12 guys now ... 12-18 isn't out of the question for any of them in the next few years and with the defense they all provide those are quality big leaguers.

[Brewer77]

1 hour ago, Turning2 said:

I like the guys, and they are developing, but "playing well" is a bit of a stretch for me. Frelick has the gold glove defense and an excellent batting average. He's a keeper. But let's say he winds up with 10-12 HRs for the year. Is that want from a corner OF? Not ideally.

Frelick is on pace for a 4 win season. Generally there are less than 15 4 win OFs each season. That is exactly what you’d want from a corner OF

[LouisEly]

2 hours ago, Turning2 said:

I like the guys, and they are developing, but "playing well" is a bit of a stretch for me. Frelick has the gold glove defense and an excellent batting average. He's a keeper. But let's say he winds up with 10-12 HRs for the year. Is that want from a corner OF? Not ideally.

I get what you're saying.  But, solo HRs don't win games.  You have to have guys get on base before them.  As we saw yesterday, when a couple of guys get walks and a single in front of a power hitter... that's when damage is done.  You have to have those guys, too, who get walks and singles.

The Brewers are 8th in runs per game despite being 22nd in HRs.  What they're doing is for the most part working well.

[Turning2]

9 minutes ago, Brewer77 said:

Frelick is on pace for a 4 win season. Generally there are less than 15 4 win OFs each season. That is exactly what you’d want from a corner OF

? Never heard of that. Is that another of the new fangled metrics that have been invented. 

My 4 wins for a corner OF are (regardless of size)

.265+ average

Minimum of 15 HRs

At least average defense

At least average speed

Frelick checks off all those but the power which, nbt surprisingly,  brings it back to where my opinions started. 

 

[umphrey]

It is a little bit. But it’s also the result of the big money clubs chasing tools, power, velocity and sending guys like Durbin to small/mid market clubs that don’t have the money to buy the upside. The Brewers are smart to pick up these guys to fill out a roster but they still need a few guys like Yelich and Mis to be stars. 
 

Once in awhile a “low upside” guy will break through and be a star too, I’m hoping Frelick has done it. 

[Turning2]

My posts probably come off too hard on short stature guys. It's the light hitting more than the height. Nothing wrong with 5'8" Jose Ramirez who has a ton of power. Collins is 27, just breaking into the top level at age 27. When Ramirez was 27, he hit 17 HRs and .292 average. When he was 25, same age as Frelick and Durb, he hit 39 with a .270 average. Maybe some of these guys will develop bigger power numbers (not expecing HOF numbers like Ramirez) as they grow older, but they're already mid 20's and older.

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, Turning2 said:

My posts probably come off too hard on short stature guys. It's the light hitting more than the height. Nothing wrong with 5'8" Jose Ramirez who has a ton of power. Collins is 27, just breaking into the top level at age 27. When Ramirez was 27, he hit 17 HRs and .292 average. When he was 25, same age as Frelick and Durb, he hit 39 with a .270 average. Maybe some of these guys will develop bigger power numbers (not expecing HOF numbers like Ramirez) as they grow older, but they're already mid 20's and older.

I think you get hung up on power too much.  It is worth understanding those "new-fangled metrics" 😉 because they show a player's value that comes from multiple spots and not just power.  Remember the Braun/Fielder era where our offense often sputtered because ALL we had was homers?  If the wind blew in or they had a heavy sinker (or heavy K) pitcher, our offense was almost always silent. 

6'4" Chris Carter was our starting 1B one year and hit 41 HRs... and was out of the MLB a year later. Why? Because he had zero other value offensively or defensively. His batting line of 222/321/499/821 looks great... but that year he produced 0.7 WAR in 644 plate appearances.  By contrast, Collins has put up 1.2 WAR in 189 PAs. 

Yes, we all want to have every position on the team hit 20+ dingers per year... but that doesn't happen.   There were 23 players that hit 30+ and 90 that hit 20+ HRs last year. So why not look for value in other ways - defense, steals, OBP.... 

Collins and Durbin's overall numbers are pretty ho-hum... but in the past month, all three (with Frelick) have been on a tear. That was the main point of my post.  I expect Frelick to hit around 300 with a 750 OPS range.  Not sure that Collins or Durbin will continue to be 800 OPS players.  But if they can, that is perfectly acceptable (even wonderful) at the bottom of your batting order. 

[Turning2]

1 hour ago, CheezWizHed said:

I think you get hung up on power too much.  It is worth understanding those "new-fangled metrics" 😉 because they show a player's value that comes from multiple spots and not just power.  Remember the Braun/Fielder era where our offense often sputtered because ALL we had was homers?  If the wind blew in or they had a heavy sinker (or heavy K) pitcher, our offense was almost always silent. 

6'4" Chris Carter was our starting 1B one year and hit 41 HRs... and was out of the MLB a year later. Why? Because he had zero other value offensively or defensively. His batting line of 222/321/499/821 looks great... but that year he produced 0.7 WAR in 644 plate appearances.  By contrast, Collins has put up 1.2 WAR in 189 PAs. 

Yes, we all want to have every position on the team hit 20+ dingers per year... but that doesn't happen.   There were 23 players that hit 30+ and 90 that hit 20+ HRs last year. So why not look for value in other ways - defense, steals, OBP.... 

Collins and Durbin's overall numbers are pretty ho-hum... but in the past month, all three (with Frelick) have been on a tear. That was the main point of my post.  I expect Frelick to hit around 300 with a 750 OPS range.  Not sure that Collins or Durbin will continue to be 800 OPS players.  But if they can, that is perfectly acceptable (even wonderful) at the bottom of your batting order. 

I stepped away from following pro ball around 1986 when salaries and such were beginning to get stupid, and teams couldn't retain their players. So, no, I don't know anything about the Braun / Fielder era teams. The game has been taken over by the moneyball front office mindset thanks to Bill Gates providing the software to overanalyze what baseball didn't need to obsess about for over a century. In my mind, stats are calculable, whereas metrics are highly subjective and can be twisted to serve talking points and a cottage industry developed by computer nerds. 

When I speak of power, I don't mean it is the end all be all. Of course, you have to have more to your game than just power. That's what HRs, batting average, RBI's traditionally provided. On base and slugging percentages are useful too. But I put no stock in any of the Wins about replacement because from what I've read it's how much value you bring which equates to W's versus your replacement. You simply can't measure that because there are 8 other guys / positions whose performances have to be accounted for in a W or L. 

These supposition metrics just provide often useless data that some use to create new employment opportunities. The data paints a picture that doesn't necessarily reflect reality. I have to question how baseball managers ever managed to win without all these new measurements. Purely dumb luck? No, they indentified guys who could hit, play defense, pitch, run and had baseball instinct and smarts. They also recognized guys who had the competitive fire and heart for the game. There are no metrics that can spit out data on that. It's a new era for a younger generation weaned on video games and XL spreadsheets and I'm old... it is what it is LOl. 😁

[liveforoctober]

3 hours ago, Turning2 said:

My posts probably come off too hard on short stature guys. It's the light hitting more than the height. Nothing wrong with 5'8" Jose Ramirez who has a ton of power. Collins is 27, just breaking into the top level at age 27. When Ramirez was 27, he hit 17 HRs and .292 average. When he was 25, same age as Frelick and Durb, he hit 39 with a .270 average. Maybe some of these guys will develop bigger power numbers (not expecing HOF numbers like Ramirez) as they grow older, but they're already mid 20's and older.

Jose Ramirez didn't lose his entire first full season+ of professional baseball due to COVID. 

There is a whole draft class or two in '19-'20 range that you cannot use age as a fair comparison.

[Jim French Stepstool]

1 hour ago, CheezWizHed said:

   Not sure that Collins or Durbin will continue to be 800 OPS players.  But if they can, that is perfectly acceptable (even wonderful) at the bottom of your batting order. 

That's the thing--bottom of the order. If these guys (Ortiz included) continue to even come close to what they've done in recent weeks, then it's on Chourio to figure out consistency & Yelich to stay productive. They'll have done their job IMO, power or not.

Can't let this go w/o bringing up that my username was a backup catcher for the Washington Senators who stood about 5'6". A friend of mine once asked an old Senators' ballplayer how tall Jim French was, and he replied "I don't know, but he used to run around the clubhouse going 'BOSS!! DE PLANE!!! DE PLANE!!'" ***

***Won't be funny unless you're familiar with late 70s television.

[tmwiese55]

1 hour ago, Turning2 said:

I stepped away from following pro ball around 1986 when salaries and such were beginning to get stupid, and teams couldn't retain their players. So, no, I don't know anything about the Braun / Fielder era teams. The game has been taken over by the moneyball front office mindset thanks to Bill Gates providing the software to overanalyze what baseball didn't need to obsess about for over a century. In my mind, stats are calculable, whereas metrics are highly subjective and can be twisted to serve talking points and a cottage industry developed by computer nerds. 

When I speak of power, I don't mean it is the end all be all. Of course, you have to have more to your game than just power. That's what HRs, batting average, RBI's traditionally provided. On base and slugging percentages are useful too. But I put no stock in any of the Wins about replacement because from what I've read it's how much value you bring which equates to W's versus your replacement. You simply can't measure that because there are 8 other guys / positions whose performances have to be accounted for in a W or L. 

These supposition metrics just provide often useless data that some use to create new employment opportunities. The data paints a picture that doesn't necessarily reflect reality. I have to question how baseball managers ever managed to win without all these new measurements. Purely dumb luck? No, they indentified guys who could hit, play defense, pitch, run and had baseball instinct and smarts. They also recognized guys who had the competitive fire and heart for the game. There are no metrics that can spit out data on that. It's a new era for a younger generation weaned on video games and XL spreadsheets and I'm old... it is what it is LOl. 😁

Fair attitude in general to have, longing for simpler times.      That said, if the Brewers did not think outside the box like this they'd have no chance. Because the obvious things you point out that every player/team should want, welp everyone knows that and those guys get the big bucks. Which MKE can't do.   Thus, they have to scrap together an edge where they can.  And I'd by no means call them useless, its how teams like MKE, Cle, TB and OAK (before they intentionally quit) keep winning.   And a really simple way to look at some of it is that one run taken away from the other team is just as useful as one run scored for your own, that's the 'efficiency' that MKE has figured out because elite D and relief pitching does not cost near as much money as the obvious stats that you pointed. 

But mostly I was just gonna say don't get too caught up with the "Wins" aspect of WAR, its a bad or deceptive name. Just view it as a metric for average/mediocre that is trying its best to aggregate all metrics.  Think other sports use similar things Player Efficiency Rating and things of the like or think of QB rating in football.  This name implies too much direct correlation to Win. 

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, Turning2 said:

I stepped away from following pro ball around 1986 when salaries and such were beginning to get stupid, and teams couldn't retain their players. So, no, I don't know anything about the Braun / Fielder era teams. The game has been taken over by the moneyball front office mindset thanks to Bill Gates providing the software to overanalyze what baseball didn't need to obsess about for over a century. In my mind, stats are calculable, whereas metrics are highly subjective and can be twisted to serve talking points and a cottage industry developed by computer nerds. 

When I speak of power, I don't mean it is the end all be all. Of course, you have to have more to your game than just power. That's what HRs, batting average, RBI's traditionally provided. On base and slugging percentages are useful too. But I put no stock in any of the Wins about replacement because from what I've read it's how much value you bring which equates to W's versus your replacement. You simply can't measure that because there are 8 other guys / positions whose performances have to be accounted for in a W or L. 

These supposition metrics just provide often useless data that some use to create new employment opportunities. The data paints a picture that doesn't necessarily reflect reality. I have to question how baseball managers ever managed to win without all these new measurements. Purely dumb luck? No, they indentified guys who could hit, play defense, pitch, run and had baseball instinct and smarts. They also recognized guys who had the competitive fire and heart for the game. There are no metrics that can spit out data on that. It's a new era for a younger generation weaned on video games and XL spreadsheets and I'm old... it is what it is LOl. 😁

Well, I'm not exactly young either, though my engineering and mathmatics education tends to help me adapt to metrics. 😉 

Molly is still my favorite player and I'm so sorry that you missed 1987 and Team Streak.  Still the most exciting team that never made the playoffs... (yes, I'm still bitter that they had a better record than the Twins and didn't get in the playoffs on a year the Twinkies won the WS).

The funny thing is that metrics are all based on stats, so I'm not sure the comparison there. Now there are a TON and not all are cracked up to be what you'd expect and you need to understand their weaknesses. But they have gotten much better.  They also help small market teams like the Brewers (that are very metrics-based) compete.  The days of Sal Bando guessing badly on draft day are long gone (thank GOODNESS!!!). 

The funny thing is... watching baseball, I knew Yount was good, but he wasn't a big HR guy so I never quite understood why he won two MVPs.  Likewise, I'd see Gumby hit 275, but still not look like he was contributing much.  Then someone figured out OPS (and OPS+)and WAR.... suddenly you see all of Yount's value built in the 2B and 3Bs.  While Gumby proves himself to be an empty singles hitter.  

Good metrics match what is seen... but also quantifies it so you can compare players more directly - even in different eras (i.e. ERA+, OPS+, etc...).  

[CheezWizHed]

25 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

***Won't be funny unless you're familiar with late 70s television.

[Guest]

Important question, is Seigler considered a short at 5'10"?  I want to know if I should be mad at Murph when he takes at bats from Durbin.