SoCalBrewfan

moneyballman, what's your source for those projections?

Vladimir Guerrero changed leagues, his OPS+ went up, and he won the MVP. Brian Giles went from Cleveland to Pittsburgh, and his OPS went from .856 to 1.032. Jim Edmonds put up the 5 best OPS of his life after switching leagues. Carlos Delgado bested his career OPS in his first year in Florida, at age 33 no less. Jose Guillen this year went from the AL to the NL, and his OPS+ went from 119 to 118. If there is an effect in switching leagues, it's tiny, and far from universal.

Nice bump...I don't remember this thread...must have come up when I was out of town. A few people wished for age-related projections... Davenport at baseball prospectus has done projections of peak major league performance based on minor league stats, park / league information (MLE type stuff) as well as age and some other factors (things like K rate, I believe, and mumbo jumbo like BABIP). As I understand it, for a 27-year old player, his projection would basically be equivalent to his MLE...for younger players more projection is involved, so the uncertainty is greater. The link is down, but you can get there through the back door: baseballprospectus.com/st...turedt.php Some selected projections: Prince Fielder: .296 / .395 / .575 Corey Hart: .293 / .359 / .530 Rickie Weeks: .295 / .379 / .597 Those three are eye-popping...Hart's most of all perhaps since he is not typically held in the same regard as Fielder or Weeks. Brad Nelson: .257/ .351 / .432 (AAA stats only) .290 / .365 / .478 (AA stats only) David Krynzel: .243 / .302 / .388 Nelson Cruz: .244 / .328 / .421 (AAA only) .256 / .328 / .483 (AA only) Junior Gwynn: .246 / .335 / .308 Steve Moss: .282 / .339 / .446 More ammo for those who claim Moss is a better CF prospect than Gwynn or Krnyzel...which Nelson Cruz and which Brad Nelson do you believe? Enrique Cruz: .282 / .328 / .479 Adam Heether: .284 / .341 / .462 I don't necessarily believe these, but if those were true that's two more 800 OPS infielders. Lou Palmisano: .248 / .301 / .362 Alcedis Escobar: .301 / .332 / .419 Grant Richardson: .262 / .331 / .445 Hernan Irabarren: .286 / .346 / .362 Ryan Braun: .284 / .311 / .479 (WV only, but has him as 24?) Charlie Fermaint: .256 / .312 / .472 (WV)

The distance between the minors and majors is incredibly vast, and no MLE formula will ever properly account for that. If the gap from the minors to the bigs was so easy to bridge, then there wouldn't be so many thousands of flameouts like Mike Coolbaugh, Kevin Orie and Joey Meyer. This seems disingenuous. Incredibly vast? Thousands of flameouts? Just the usual Geno hyperbole, I reckon. But Mike Coolbaugh? Mike Coolbaugh? When did Mike Coolbaugh appear on a top prospect list? I will eat a bug if you show me a legitimate top 100 list with Mike Coolbaugh, or show an MLE that projected him as a big league regular. Coolbaugh has one thing in common with Corey Hart...he was a Southern League all star 3B with Huntsville. Coolbaugh, however, did that at age 25...Hart did it at age 21 and still hasn't turned 25. Joey Meyer, like so many Brewers prospects of that era, is a poster child for the need for park adjustment in MLEs. Minor league stats have to be examined in context, including the league, the park, and the player's age. But when you do that they are useful predictors, every bit as useful as past major league performance, which I'm sure you've noticed can be rather unpredictable as well. I am willing to give you Kevin Orie...he was #42 on the BA top 100 one year, after putting up OPS of 893 in the Southern League at 23. (The year before he was under 700 in high A, though in the pitcher-friendly Florida State League.) He then put up a 781 OPS in Chicago as a 24-year old, which isn't incredible but was above the league average. I don't remember what happened next, but given the track record of the Cubs, it's not unusual for an average prospect to be hyped beyond recognition and then trashed when he turns out to be unspectacular. And I think that brings up an important point should we choose to go with Hart, or especially Nelson Cruz. Let's have reasonable expectations, and let the guys grow into the job if necessary. That may well mean using one as a 4th OF for a year, a la Aaron Rowand.

Why does everyone on this board keep acting like a guy who is not even 30 years old is probably never going to have a good year again? It's as if every time a player hits 29, according to quite a few people on this board, the Brewers should trade him immediately. I don't see 'everyone' saying that...I'm not sure anyone at all has said anything close to 'never going to have a good year again.' The discussion I see describes Lee as productive this year, and as a good bet to be next year...but some (including myself) question how much and how fast he will decline. That's an important factor as you decide whether it makes sense to commit to a multi-year contract extension, particularly given the tight budgetary constraints Milwaukee faces. I think Ron Wolf said that it's better to get rid of a player a year too early than a year too late. (Someone else may have said it first.) Given that Milwaukee has young corner OF options, who will be paid much less than Lee, they have to at least consider trading Lee if they get a good offer. That doesn't mean dump him no matter what...it means he's not untouchable. Does anyone really think Carlos Lee is one of the Brewers' untouchable players at this point?

The options, as I see 'em: 1. Deal Lee this offseason. 1A. Deal Lee, acquire veteran LF, evaluate Hart and Cruz in AAA/4th OF. 1B. Deal Lee, give Hart or Cruz the job outright. 1C. Deal Lee, put Hart or Cruz in a job share with veteran lefty bat. 2. Keep Lee but do not extend contract, evaluate Hart and Cruz. 2A. Keep Lee, use Cruz/Hart as 4th OF, plan to deal Lee in July. 2B. Keep Lee for '06, plan to let him go via free agency. 2C. Keep Lee, decide later on his future status, resign or deal as needed. 3. Extend Lee now, trade Jenkins, Hart, and/or Cruz. I think many of those who talk about Lee as a risk are warning of the dangers of option 3...that will likely take 3 years beyond 06, for upwards of $25M? The odds are good that you're holding the bag for a bad year at the end of the contract, if not two....and remember that defense counts, too...often players lose defensive value before they stop hitting. I think you probably deal an OF then, presumably dealing a prospect to get a veteran pitcher, 3b, or catcher. But of course options 1 and 2 carry some risk as well. Dealing Lee now ensures that you get something for him while his value remains high, but leaves you vulnerable to a poor showing by his replacement, especially if it's a rookie learning on the job. Is Lee worth more than Hart / Cruz + whatever you trade Lee for + $7.5M? Depends on the deal of course. If you go that way, it would be smart IMO to get a good lefty power bat as a 4th OF, to cover for possible shortcomings of your rookie. Going into the season with Lee covers you for next year, but only postpones this discussion until next season...you may, at that time, have more information about Hart or Cruz, but opportunities were limited in the Milwaukee OF in '05 and 2006 could be much of the same. My guess is that you almost certainly get less for Lee in July than you do in February, and you may well have to pay more to extend him at that point. So, Geno, which option are you advocating? Sounds like 3 to me, or maybe 2C.

Most players peak somewhere between 27 and 29 and then post 4-5 pretty steady years of production. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you're saying that age 34 is about the same as age 30 for most players. And that is not in general true...many players who are productive regulars at 30 are bench players or out of the league at 34. As pogo said, superstars are usually very productive in their 30s because they have a long way to go from their peak to average. While I'm a fan of Lee, he's not in that class. Amongst the most-comparable players at bb-ref.com to Lee you see examples. His best comp is George Bell. Bell hit 47 HR at age 27, with an OPS+ of 146 (Lee's top OPS+ has been 124). Ages 29-32 he had two league-average years and two in the 120 range. At age 33 he hit like a backup catcher...average .216, OPS+ of 66. Kent Hrbek had OPS+ of 147 at age 27, and dropped steadily until he was below average at 34. Raul Mondesi had his best year at 26, OPS+ of 141, and was basically done at 33 with OPS+ of 81. Bobby Thomson declined even more quickly, from 150 OPS+ at 27 (see a trend?), to below average by 30. The guys from Lee's comp list who played into their late 30s were much, much better hitters...Jack Clark, Reggie Smith, Andre Dawson, with peak OPS+ values for those three: 176, 167, 167. You can decline a lot from there and still be a productive player. (Each guy also had seasons in their early 30s that were in the same range as their peak.) These comps also bring up another issue...Smith and Dawson were Gold Glove CF in their 20s, so as they aged, they could handle a corner slot. The guys who were out of the league quickly had much less defensive value to start with, and became pretty limited in their 30s. Even Jack Clark, whom I remember in his 30s as an immobile slugger at 1b or DH, was a pretty good RF and even played some CF and 3B early in his career. Which category would you put Carlos Lee into? The moral of the story for me is that it's a good bet that Lee is a productive hitter next year, but that the odds decline with each passing year. Lee's offensive and defensive profiles look like a lot of guys who were out of the league before they hit 35. Sure, he could keep going longer...but that's an expensive gamble for a team with limited resources like Milwaukee. His salary is likely to go up, his production to go down...those trends spell trouble if you go long-term with an extension. The nice thing is that if they decide to deal him, the guy has value...especially so if you can find a GM who focuses on Triple Crown numbers like some of the posters above. And the MLEs suggest that there's reason to believe that somewhere in the next year or two, Corey Hart and/or Nelson Cruz will outproduce Lee for a small fraction of the price.

The idea an out-of-shape kid like Eveland doesn't think he needs any work Al, this is obnoxious. I just don't get this comment, nor the one about Hardy and Eveland up the thread. You're putting words into his mouth, or rather his head: 'doesn't think he needs any work' doesn't necessarily follow from what's been reported. Let's all think back to Nick Neugebauer, and the fact that he apparently neglected to mention arm issues to someone who could change his workload...from what I remember it was a matter of not being frank with the organization, partly macho, partly "I don't want to sink my chances of making the bigs." What message do you send to Eveland by sending him to the AFL despite his apparent concerns about his workload? Al says, hey, suck it up, kid, and pitch when we tell you to pitch. Got problems? Tell your momma but we don't want to hear about it...a complaint makes you a whiner who doesn't want to improve. That's just a stupid way to handle one of the few impact arms on the horizon, and a stupid message to send to Eveland as well as the rest of the young pitchers. I was pleased to see them publicly state they wanted to limit Eveland's innings this year, but this subsequent development seems bizarre. I'm with Mass..they didn't think the AFL through...or they did but then didn't respond to changes resulting from developments in the majors. Hardy made sense until he started hitting...Eveland might have made sense had his season gone differently. Yeah, they didn't have the clearcut choices they have in the past...our system has something of a gap right now between last seasons' WV and Nashville teams. But off the top of my head, in addition to Stetter, it seems like Adams or Bennett might have benefited from some work, as both missed time in AAA as I recall, and both are presumably candidates for major league jobs this coming spring.

I'm onan Pleased to meet you. Forgive me for not wanting to shake your hand... What school? I played a lot of ultimate back in the day...

That's gotta hurt for the Pirates. Hope they're in a giving up kind of mood...

Your 2006 Pirates: A Vast Left-wing Conspiracy

Given that I've got a three year old, I've seen Jay Jay the Jet Plane a number of times. I have to say it's the children's show I have the hardest time watching...though one dark Saturday morning I found myself having inappropriate thoughts about Brenda Blue.

Try your roman numerals. 506 = LVI which must mean 'Lion' in some language...cz = czech republic I believe.

It's a shame that an arbitor (sorry, I'm a Halo 2 fan) would use a stat ... clip... If I were an arbitor, I'd look at, in no particular order: Remember, though, the person hearing the case doesn't look at the numbers and determine the appropriate salary. Rather, he or she chooses between two salaries, the one offered by the team and that offered by the player's agent. Each side presents stats to support its case. What's most important typically is the salaries of comparable players with the same level of experience...then they argue who is truly comparable, whether Capuano's first three years are more like Zito or Mulder or Buerhle or whoever. So the agent will put forth wins when it's to his advantage, and the team will do so when it's to theirs. The Brewers would argue that he's not as good as 18 wins might suggest, etc. Which is why players don't like the process, where the team basically has to argue that the player isn't as good as the agent says he is, that he's worse than the names they've put forth as comps.

I REALLY hope win/loss records aren't used at ALL to determine arby numbers. Replace 'arby numbers' with 'Cy Young award' or 'All Star berth' or 'free agent contract,' and that should give you the answer. They are certainly used...they're not the only thing, but I think it's a safe assumption to say that W-L record plays more of a role than DIPS ERA in a good many of these discussions. Of course, arby hearings involve presentations by both sides, so each side will put forth whatever is necessary to make their case...the Brewers would whip out run support etc just as Capuano's agent waxes nostalgic about how few 18-game winners the Brewers have had...

No, the save opp is determined by the condition when the pitcher enters...unless the pitcher goes three innings.

Tying run on deck makes it a save opp.

Apparently any reanimated former pitcher can have success under Mike Maddux. Except I guess Gary Glover...maybe he didn't like to eat brains.

Ohka really isn't that good of a player guys. TRADE HIM. He would have been the ace on a few Brewers staffs in recent memory...as a fourth starter he ain't too bad.

Darn it, a walk. Now I've seen everything.

Nice to have Branyan make his presence known once again. And how about that Bill Hall this month...OPS almost 1000, but without a HR?

Does anyone know the whereabouts of Jason Conti? www.baseballamerica.com/t...entin.html

this is a must win Game 3:24 pm. Who wins the pool? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

It's important to keep Capuano in there, because we only have sixteen or so pitchers on the staff now.

Capuano has an OPS of 1.136 in September. Maybe his arm is tired, but his bat is somethin else babeeee! Ahem.