Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Love him or hate him, Peter Gammons' column is a must read. I know, he could use a better editor; on a site with the budget of ESPN.com, there's no excuse for so many typos and "unusual" sentences. Yes, it's easy to make fun of his style, or the number of rumours he floats that never come to pass, but I don't know where else you're going to get so much juicy gossip on one page.

Today, the well-connected one starts with a potentially gigantic deal -- A-Rod to Boston. It's way over the heads of the GMs, we are told; the owners are negotiating directly with Rodriguez and his agent, Scott Boras.

"If Alex doesn't take some of the money back, this thing is dead," says one person close to the deal. "If he wants this to happen, he is going to have to make it happen."


There's plenty of Jays name-dropping, too. As usual, despite repeated denials from J.P. that he is on the trading block, Orlando Hudson is mentioned, in a convoluted series of spinoff deals that even Petey admits is "a long, long, long way off." This one assumes Nomar going to the Dodgers, then gets (who else?) Oakland and Joe Blanton involved, with the O-Dog landing at Fenway.

The final paragraph features another rave for the Jays' #1 prospect and the man who drafted him.

One esteemed scout says, "the story in Puerto Rico is Alexis Rios (Toronto CF). He is not far away, and he's going to force them to move Vernon Wells to right field. He's a very good center fielder, old style in that he gets great breaks and busts it to where he thinks the ball is going to be so he's always in position to throw. He hits the ball very hard, like a Dave Winfield. Tim Wilken deserves more credit than he received in Toronto. He got Rios and Wells in the first round when most teams had them lower. Roy Halladay. Dustin Magowan. Tim did a great job."

We've gone on and on about this before, but if Rios is actually better than Wells defensively, what a wonderful "problem" that will be for the Jays. And yes, Tim Wilken did a great job, but it's not as if the Jays are lost without him, as evidenced by the last two draft classes. With Bill Livesey now gone to the Mets, there may be room in the Toronto inner circle for another veteran "baseball man" to advise J.P., but don't expect it to be someone who insists on drafting 18-year-olds.

Gammons also touches on the situation in Detroit, where it seems that owner Mike Ilitch has lost patience with the Dave Dombrowski rebuilding plan, and suddenly thinks he can fix that "horrific mess" by waving money at Miguel Tejada and settling for the likes of Fernando Vina. The pizza man isn't afraid to spend money; just look at his stable of goaltenders.
Diamond Notes | 61 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
robertdudek - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 03:30 PM EST (#78339) #
The kind of hyperbole that is starting to surround Rios is getting a little worrisome. The chief worry is that Rios will start believing he's as good as some people say.

Rios' power is developing, but isn't anywhere near a 23-year old Dave Winfield. He doesn't draw a lot of walks and his strikeout rate went up significantly at AA. He's a work in progress and as such he'll need to be dedicated to his craft if he is to achieve anything close to what some people are projecting for him.
_SportsmanTO - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 04:08 PM EST (#78340) #
I've been hearing about the potential A-Rod to Boston rumours all over the place. It really smacks of desperation if John Henry is really trying to make this happen right over the head of his GM Theo Epstein. I bet that Theo is regretting taking the Boston job as it must be very frustrating to have people surrounding you who THINK they know how to run the ballclub. It looks like they're trying for the quick fix and that's a good thing in some ways. At some point both NYY and the BoSox will have to stop spending the millions and millions of dollars.

As for Detroit, Ilitch should've given Dombrowski a big budget long ago now that the team is an embarrassment he's panicking and waving money at guys who don't really deserve it. (Vina) Now i'm not saying a big budget is the way to win, it isn't as we've seen in Oakland, Minnesota and to an extent right here in Toronto but if you can compliment building a team from the ground up with some money to keep/bring in some good talent then it would speed up the return to respectability.

This Rios guy sounds REALLY good but IIRC he wasn't even on the radar to be anywhere this good so soon so let's hope he doesn't believe the hype that he's getting. It's awful nice to hear Dave Winfield comparisons but let's wait and see if he draw walks and hit for more power.
_AGF - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 04:09 PM EST (#78341) #
The last time I spoke out against a potential A's-Jays trade it ended up happening (Lilly-for-Kielty) but I really do not want the A's to give up Blanton. I guess I like the Dye and money for LoDuca deal better.
Leigh - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 04:12 PM EST (#78342) #
Has anybody other than Gammons ever suggested that Orlando Hudson could be traded?
_Evair Montenegr - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 05:23 PM EST (#78343) #
Rios played right field in the pre-olympics, so is he didn`t play CF in PR it is not likely he will in Toronto with Wells here.
Pistol - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 06:03 PM EST (#78344) #
I've been hearing about the potential A-Rod to Boston rumours all over the place. It really smacks of desperation if John Henry is really trying to make this happen right over the head of his GM Theo Epstein. I bet that Theo is regretting taking the Boston job as it must be very frustrating to have people surrounding you who THINK they know how to run the ballclub.

I think Henry getting involved is more of a budgetary decision and not a player personnel decision. I don't think he would be getting involved if Epstein & Company were against the trade.
_Matt - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 06:10 PM EST (#78345) #
I love Gammons, except for the fact that he thinks every second player in baseball is a "special" person.
_Skywalker - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 07:57 PM EST (#78346) #
how in the world does an 'esteemed' scout say that rios will move vernon to right. has he seen wells? which fuckin planet has he been living on?
_Kristian - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 08:27 PM EST (#78347) #
More than one expert has suggested that Hudson could or will be traded. Ken Rosenthal had it last year and on the radio just recently, Buster Olney I believe had it as a rumor with Hudson and Cliff Lee, and now Gammons has it again. Where there is smoke there is fire and I would love to see the Jays get Joe Blanton. I do agree with skywalker on the fact that I cant see Rios pushing Wells to right.
_Smirnoff - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 08:35 PM EST (#78348) #
This would be as good a time as any to ask how Toe Nash is doing these days.
Mike Green - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 09:05 PM EST (#78349) #
I'm with Robert. My one worry about Rios is maturity level. I think that he can be a great player if he applies himself. We'll see if he continues to. I'd let him spend the season in Syracuse with a September call-up to the Show, assuming that he progresses reasonably well.

As for the Wells/Rios centerfield issue, I'm in the wait and see camp. Wells looks very good in centerfield, but his defensive numbers are about average (win-shares somewhat above; BP rating somewhat below). Reports on Rios are very good, but I've never seen him and we have no defensive numbers whatsoever.

In the Gammons article, the rumored Hudson trade was described as a very, very long way off. Good.
Mike Green - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 09:21 PM EST (#78350) #
Alexis Rios is 22, turning 23 in February. At 22, Dave Winfield was in the majors and hit .265/.318/.438 with 40 walks and 96 strikeouts. He really wasn't ahead of where Rios was last year, except that he had been advanced more quickly through the minors than Rios. Winfield had a good pattern of growth afterwards. Matching that will be Rios' challenge.
_Jok - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 09:36 PM EST (#78351) #
The Rios performance (and hype) continues...

Dec 4 Rios update from www.ondeckbaseball.com:

"Can't stop, won't stop. Blue Jays CF Alexis Rios drove in 2 runs to help lead Caguas to a 4-1 triumph over Santurce. Rios has now driven in 15 runs in 17 games. He's hitting .324 overall. E-lec-tricity... eeee-lec-tricity."
_Chuck Van Den C - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 09:38 PM EST (#78352) #
At 22, Dave Winfield was in the majors and hit .265/.318/.438 with 40 walks and 96 strikeouts.

I have no opinion on where Rios stacks up to Winfield, but just to place Winfield's numbers in context, NL non-pitchers in 1974 hit 262/335/380 (just so no one falls into the trap of looking at Winfield's 1974 line in a 2003 context). Winfield's OPS+ in 1974 was 114.
robertdudek - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 10:08 PM EST (#78353) #
Chuck makes a great point. Rios' power was average (using Power Index) compared to the 2003 Eastern League; Winfield was an above average National League hitter in 1974.
_StephenT - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 10:13 PM EST (#78354) #
To "third" the notion, my program puts Winfield's age 22 line at a .274 EqA with 75 Equivalent Runs. (In real numbers, he had 20 HR and 75 RBI that year.)
_Ben - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 10:15 PM EST (#78355) #
The one thing about the Gammons article that is totally off is the future potential of Joe Blanton for Paul LoDuca. Blanton was untouchable last year, why would Beane turn around and deal him for LoDuca? LoDuca has faded badly the past two years and Blanton is 22 and just coming into his own. This makes absolutly no sense to me.
_S.K. - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 10:17 PM EST (#78356) #
Dave Winfield is a hall of famer. I don't think anyone's saying that Rios is his exact double. If he's 90% of the player Winfield was, I'll be ecstatic.
_Tassle - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 10:28 PM EST (#78357) #
KC has parted ways with Jose Lima. Why not make it Lima time in TO next year? A low cost, potentially high reward 4th starter. I think it seems like a great idea
_Kristian - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 11:21 PM EST (#78358) #
I must be the only person on this site who thinks Orlando Hudson is expendable! I definitely dont have the knowledge of stats as most on this site but to me he isnt that valuable in any area except defence. If the Jays got a good young pitcher for him and then picked up a Chris Gomez or some to fill in till Adams or Hill are ready I would be very happy. Hudson does not run, he does not hit for power, he does not get on base and last year he only hit from one side of the plate yet every time I mention in a posting or some expert mentions it everyone seems to be against it. Why? Not looking to argue with anyone just enlighten me to how Orlando Hudson became so indepensable.
_Kristian - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 11:25 PM EST (#78359) #
An interesting note in the Gammons column was the Blue Jays acquiring Joe Blanton. Where would he rank on the prospect poll? To me he is #3 behind Rios and Quiroz but ahead of any current Jays pitching prospect.
Leigh - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 11:29 PM EST (#78360) #
Kristian, I think that his defence is very important. Halladay is an extreme ground ball pitcher and the jays are trying to sign him to a long-term deal. It would send a bad message to Doc were Hudson to be dealt.

Here is a question. Who has a metric for how we can figure out the effect of Hudson's defence, over replacement level, on Halladay's batting average per balls in play? Exactly how much does Hudson contribute to Doc's success?
Leigh - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 11:29 PM EST (#78361) #
With such a metric, we could figure out Halladay's "Without the O-Dawg ERA"
_greenfrog - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 11:37 PM EST (#78362) #
After seeing O-Dog last summer in interleague play Tony LaRussa said his future was "very bright". High praise from someone who oughta know.
robertdudek - Saturday, December 06 2003 @ 11:39 PM EST (#78363) #
I would rank Blanton the #4 prospect if he were in the Blue Jays' organisation.
_greenfrog - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 12:00 AM EST (#78364) #
I agree with Ben re Blanton. I just don't see it happening. Beane would have to get a very substantial player(s) to give up Blanton.
_Scott Lucas - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 03:00 AM EST (#78365) #
http://www.scottlucas.com
...on a site with the budget of ESPN.com

They're spending it all on fantasy baseball correspondents.
_Lefty - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 03:19 AM EST (#78366) #
""Hudson does not run, he does not hit for power, he does not get on base and last year he only hit from one side of the plate""

Umm, nobody on the Bluejays "runs", I don't think his running game can be critized. Cripes he'd probably be in for deeper critisism if he did run more. As well I think his power is still going to develope, at the major league level he's still pretty green. Lets wait and see if he can hit for a bit more pop. At any rate his power numbers as they are right now are fine for me when you throw in the glove.

Color me as one not interested in trading this fellow for a prospect.
_Cristian - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 03:43 AM EST (#78367) #
Why trade Hudson for a young pitcher? The Jays have young pitchers. What they need is a #2 starter. Short of a #2 starter, why trade Hudson? Hudson has as much upside as any pitcher you could get for him.

I don't think that Hudson is indispensable but he has great short term value to the Jays. Ideally, we get his cheap years and trade him when he starts to realize his potential and starts getting expensive. If you trade him then, hopefully he'll have made enough flashy defensive plays and showed enough pop to net something much more valuable than a pitching prospect.
Dave Till - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 07:08 AM EST (#78368) #
I'm opposed to trading Hudson because the Jays don't really have anyone to replace him. Adams and Hill aren't ready, there's no one good enough in AAA to do the job, and there aren't a lot of good cheap second basemen out there in the free agent market.

A player shouldn't be judged by what he can't do, but by what he can. Hudson can hit .270, he plays great defense, he runs well, and he seems to have a good work ethic (from what I've heard). Until the Jays have somebody better, the O-Dog should remain at second.
_A - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 08:36 AM EST (#78369) #
I was going to rationalize trading Hudson for a #2 starter but then I reconsidered because we aren't making a playoff run this year. Plus, by next year we should have some solid prospects that have (approx) a half season's experience already (in theory one or two of the young arms comes up sometime around the middle of the '04 campaign).

Hudson still has a fairly high ceiling that he hasn't even approached yet and last year his power numbers improved significantly. What's left to be desired is plate discipline -- something Blue Jay hitting instructors seem to be able to teach (Greg Myers). If we still need a pitcher next year at this time, there will always be a handful of teams looking to improve their DP combo.
_Joe H. - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 09:10 AM EST (#78370) #
Would any of you guys give up Rios for Ben Sheets of the Brewers? That is a rumor that I've heard some, and as a Brewer fan I would want (at least) someone's top prospect for Sheets but to tell you the truth, I looked at Rios' stats and they didn't really impress me. He seems more like a toolsy guy with no plate discipline. Sure he could become Winfield or Sosa, but he could also become David Green (a late '70s Brewers prospect who was said to have Willie Mays's tools and Pete Rose's makeup (minus the gambling, obviously)). How would you guys feel about such a deal?
_Chuck Van Den C - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 09:17 AM EST (#78371) #
I was going to rationalize trading Hudson for a #2 starter

With all due respect, what possible #2 starter could they get for Hudson?

Hudson still has a fairly high ceiling that he hasn't even approached yet

I like Hudson but don't share the sentiment about the height of his ceiling. He's turning 26 in a week so he should be getting close to his peak. He certainly has a lot of potential growth areas (hitting LHP, more walks, more power), so 2004 will be a pivotal year for his long term future. He'll have to improve on his 268/328/395.

plate discipline -- something Blue Jay hitting instructors seem to be able to teach (Greg Myers)

Myers' AB:BB ratios over the past 5 years:
1999 200:30
2000 125:8
2001 161:21
2002 144:26
2003 329:37

His 2003 AB:BB ratio was actually the second lowest. It's pretty clear the Toronto coaching staff didn't teach him plate discipline. He returned to Toronto already able to draw a walk.
Coach - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 10:11 AM EST (#78372) #
It's pretty clear the Toronto coaching staff didn't teach him plate discipline.

Chuck's right -- Myers always had a good eye, but he certainly bought into the Mike Barnett philosophy of using the whole field, looking first to drive the up-and-away strike into the opposite gap, then reacting down and in. That changed Crash from a dead-pull guy, and all those singles and doubles to left were responsible for the surge in his batting average.

The best part of that approach is when you're fooled by an off-speed pitch, you still have a chance to go deep. If you're reacting to 90+ but trying to hit it hard the other way, that swing can pull a changeup into the seats almost by accident. When you're trying to turn on the fastball all the time, the most you can do with something slower is hit impressive foul balls.
_whizland2000 - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 10:21 AM EST (#78373) #
I think if you are going to trade hudson then the time to do it is a year from now. Hudson's stats will only improve next year and i am saying this because most players in baseball specially hitters have reached their true potential around the age of 26, 27(unless he pulls an Erick Hinke on us which is unlikely). Also, Adams should be ready for the major leagues by 2005 assuming he doesn't hit a bump on the road at AAA. Therefore, basically by 2005 you will have a player with increased trade value in Hudson and another player to replace him if he is traded.
Pistol - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 10:36 AM EST (#78374) #
I looked at Rios' stats and they didn't really impress me

Rios hit .352/.402/.521 this year. He was only the Eastern League MVP and BA's top OF prospect.

But regardless, I think it's safe to say that he's not being traded for Rios. Unless I'm mistaken, Rios for Sheets is just something that's been spectulated here after reading that the Jays were interested in Sheets.

An interesting note in the Gammons column was the Blue Jays acquiring Joe Blanton. Where would he rank on the prospect poll? To me he is #3 behind Rios and Quiroz but ahead of any current Jays pitching prospect.

Blanton was drafted in 2002 and only has 35 innings in AA. He should have dominating numbers. I'd rather have Bush and McGowan, and perhaps even Arnold (who made AA hitters look foolish as well). He wouldn't make my Jays top 5 prospect list.

But I would rather have Blanton than Adams. I wonder how much the Jays deliberated between the 2 on draft day.
Mike Green - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 11:47 AM EST (#78375) #
Pistol, I agree.

Chuck, here's the full comparison between Winfield age 22 and Rios age 22:

Winfield 74: .265/.318/.438
NL non-pitchers 74: .262/.330/.380

Rios MLE: .310/.360/.460 (courtesy of John Sickels)
AL 03: .262/.333/.427

Interesting how close the general 03 and 74 figures are except for power. Anyways, the most conservative interpretation of these figures is that Rios is at the same place as Winfield. The GPA+ stat would show a large advantage for Rios.
_SportsmanTO - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 12:00 PM EST (#78376) #
Hmm trading Orlando Hudson.....I agree with the notion that some posters have that we shouldn't trade him at least not now. The O-Dawg has upside and he'll eventually hit for some power. he did frustrate me last season with some of his defensive miscues but we don't really have anyone down on the farm that's ready to take over the everyday job until '05. I'm willing to wager that Hudson will have a breakout season defensively and power wise. This will make him a far more valuable comodity to put on the market.

Besides I really like Orlando he's a very nice guy with a big heart from what I can tell from interviews and profiles. The only other Blue Jay that gets any kind of press like that was/is Carlos Delgado. Too bad the whole situation with the media a couple yrs ago tarnished that good guy reputation slightly.
robertdudek - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 12:02 PM EST (#78377) #
Mike Green,

Do you honestly believe those MLE's for Rios? Those are fantasy land MLEs.
Joe - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 12:31 PM EST (#78378) #
http://me.woot.net
SportsmanTO,

Were you watching the same Hudson that we were? The one who led the league in defensive Win Shares?

If he's having a breakout defensive year over that, I think Tosca will be safe in just playing 8 men on the field, benching Woodward altogether.
_SportsmanTO - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 01:00 PM EST (#78379) #
Joe said:

"Were you watching the same Hudson that we were? The one who led the league in defensive Win Shares?"

This is why I need to get into SABRmetrics "sigh"
Mike Green - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 01:14 PM EST (#78380) #
Robert, "Do I believe Sickels' Rios MLEs?" Hmmm. I think they're pretty close. I doubt that Sickels factored in the right/left split for Yale Field. Taking that into account, Rios' .352 batting average in the Eastern League is quite something. I really do believe that the MLE of that is better than .300 and actually might be better than .310. Anyways, if the MLE is in fact .310/.350/.450, the conclusion would be the same.

One good way to look at that would be to look at the last 10 players 22 years olds or younger to hit .350 in the Eastern League. I'm guessing that you'll have to go back a long, long way to find them.

I did a quick look at some recent Eastern League graduates: Jody Gerut hit .281/.368/.461 while there in 2002; Victor Martinez hit .336/.417/.576 in 2002. If anyone has more systematic numbers that show what the average drop-off is, I'd be interested. I'm not at all impressed with the EqA methodology.
robertdudek - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 01:34 PM EST (#78381) #
Mike,

The problem is and has always been selection bias. I wrote an article on this site about potential pitfalls of MLEs.

The MLE you quoted suggests that if Rios had been in the American League (as opposed to the Eastern League) LAST YEAR he would have hit .310. The number of 22 year olds that have finished in the top 10 in AL or NL batting average is a short short list.

There is simply too large a gap between AA and the majors. Major league pitchers are so much better at exploiting weaknesses than AA pitchers that a hitter who can dominate AA pitching is just not going to have the same success until he's been through the big league ringer a few teams and adjusts.

Each time a player goes up on the pro baseball ladder, he has to make an adjustment. The only thing that Rios has proven is that he can dominate AA pitching - it is not yet proven he can dominate AAA pitching, much less hit .310 in the majors.
_Thesaurus Dude - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 03:02 PM EST (#78382) #
Dudek,

So what your saying is since projecting prospects is an imperfect science, we should all just quit.

There is decision usefullness in minor league numbers. That's a fact brotha.

Your point about what his numbers mean, dominating AA pitchers is true, and obvious. But for fun, can't we attempt to extrapulate these numbers into the Toronto outfield of the future? Can't we all be Baseball-Cyber nerd friends?
_Ryan Day - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 04:43 PM EST (#78383) #
I'm not really sure why everybody's jumping on the Winfield quote. The scout simply says "He hits the ball very hard, like a Dave Winfield".

Not "He's as good as Dave Winfield," or even "he will be as good as Dave Winfield." He even says a Dave Winfield. It's simply an observation about one aspect of Rios' play, a fairly useful one given the questions people have about his power potential. It's a purely subjective physical observation. If someone says "He's got a fastball like Roger Clemens," it doesn't mean the player in question is going to be Roger Clemens; it just means he's got a really good fastball.
robertdudek - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 06:22 PM EST (#78384) #
Thesaurus,

Considering that I've presented my own system for comparing minor league statistics on this site, it's difficult to put me in the "just quit" camp. I question the methodolgy behind just about every widely available MLE system - leading to the major flaw of those systems, which is that they are overoptimistic. As long as you're comparing minor leaguer to minor leaguer, there's no problem. But when you try to compare what some guy did in AA with what someone else did in the majors, then that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Ryan Day,

When you bring up the name of a Hall of Famer in your comparison, the onus is on you to qualify your statement such that the reader doesn't get the impression that this guy will be as good as Dave Winfield. And "a Dave Winfield" is a meaningless statement, since there is only one actual Dave Winfield and Rios isn't him. What the author meant was that Rios hits the ball as hard as Dave Winfield did. Looking at Rios' power numbers (which are average WRT double A) it's difficult to justify that comparison. If Rios is hitting the ball hard, he's hitting lots of singles and doubles hard, but not homeruns. Right now, most of Rios' offensive value is contained in his batting average - statistically, he's not very similar to Dave Winfield, who at the same age hit for more power in the major leagues.
Mike Green - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 08:23 PM EST (#78385) #
Robert, I did a mini-study. I looked at all Eastern Leaguers 23 and under who had an OBP .400 and over and a slug of .500 and over from 1996-2001. I assumed that any player with these stats would be an All-Star in the season. The list is as follows going backwards:

2001- Michael Cuddyer and Marlon Byrd
1999- Nick Johnson and Pat Burrell
1998- Calvin Pickering
1997- Mark Kotsay and David Dellucci
1996- Scott Rolen and Vladimir Guerrero.

The only one who hit .350 was Vladimir Guerrero, who was obviously a much better prospect at that point than Alexis is.

Not all of the EL greats became a major league greats, but you'd have a hard time convincing me that the EL stats were not equivalent to slightly above average major league ability at worst.

No one is saying that Alexis Rios is now as good as Dave Winfield became. I am saying that he could develop into a player of this quality if he puts in a fine effort and is lucky with his health. He could also become Mark Kotsay, or slightly better.
_George Tsuji - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 08:41 PM EST (#78386) #
I looked at all Eastern Leaguers 23 and under

Which of those players were 23 and which were under 23? (I'm not being sarcastic, I don't know). Are those who were under 23 really that relevant? Anymore than those who did it at 24 or 25?

Lumping Rios in with younger players makes him look better than he would, otherwise...
Mike Green - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 09:33 PM EST (#78387) #
I lumped him with older and younger players. Rios was 22 last year. Anyways, Byrd and Dellucci were 23, Cuddyer, Burrell and Pickering were 22, Johnson, Kotsay and Rolen were 21 and Guerrero was 20.

If I had just used 22 year olds, it would have been a study going back to 1980. Well worth doing, but much more work. You could safely throw out Guerrero and just use the 21-23 year olds and I think you'd have a pretty rough idea of what's reasonable to expect.
robertdudek - Sunday, December 07 2003 @ 09:54 PM EST (#78388) #
"Not all of the EL greats became a major league greats, but you'd have a hard time convincing me that the EL stats were not equivalent to slightly above average major league ability at worst."

You haven't presented any evidence that they were in fact above average major leaguers the year in question, or the year after or 2 years after. It looks to me like only Rolen was above major league average 2 years after the year in question (and he was a year younger than Rios).

You've got to do a lot more work with this group. My first suggestion is to drop Vlad, since he's 2 years younger and that amounts to a huge difference. You've defined the lower bounds for inclusion, but you haven't come up with a composite average. Once you do that, we will see if this group was ahead or behind Rios in terms of performance and age. Then we can look at what they did the year after, and 2 years after. Then we can reverse project those stats and see how they would have performed if they had played in the majors instead of playing in AA.

If you're trying to convince me that Rios is likely to be above major league average when he's 25 or 26, don't bother. I agree completely with that proposition. What I object to is the MLE you provided, which suggests that Rios was the equivalent of above major league average in 2003.
_Kyle Sturgeon - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 01:10 AM EST (#78389) #
As a lifelong Braves fan who just found this site a few weeks ago and is posting for the first time, I really appreciate the caliber of the discussion and the interest in the 'jays that most posters here have. Atlanta is known as a bad sports town because our attendance numbers aren't that great any more (at least compared to clubs like the Yankees" when we make the playoffs every year. Without touching that subject, I do wish there was a Braves blog of this quality I could read and post at every day.

Anyway, without knowing much about Alexis Rios besides what I read here, the prospect who he strikes me initially as very similar to is Wilson Betemit. Wilson hit .355 in more than half a season at AA Greenville back in 2001. He was rated as the Braves' top prospect and one of the top infield prospects in all of baseball. The last two years, he's struggled with injuries and AAA pitching, has tons of strikeouts, and is no longer thought of as a top 5 Braves prospect.

So sure, Rios could be Vlad Guererro or he could be Wilson Betemit. The problem with minor leaguers is that a lot of the time, you just don't know which you'll get. In my eyes, this is like drafting NFL running backs: Ahman Green was taken in the 3rd round, and he's one of the NFL's best; Ki-Jana Carter was taken in the top 5 overall, and he's not done anything.

For yall's sake, I hope Rios turns into a stud :)
_Joe H. - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 09:36 AM EST (#78390) #
I meant that Rios' secondary stats didn't look so impressive. Obviously, hitting .350 is impressive, but I don't think (from what I've heard) he is ever a good bet to hit for nearly that high of an average in MLB. That means his OBP would probably be well under .400 unless he improves his plate discipline. If he is a CF, a .350 - .370 OBP might make him a star. If he is a corner OF, he would need to slug .600 to be a star. The guys with his skill set seem very hit or miss. I want more of a sure thing for Sheets, who was almost as good as Kevin Millwood last year and threw 220 innings. Ben is still only 24 and is a good bet to improve significantly. Sheets has among his top 5 comps through 24 Tom Glavine, Frank Viola, and Brad Radke.

All of that said, congrats to Alexis on his #1 ranking by BA among OFs. Hopefully he will fulfill his potential.
_coliver - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 09:52 AM EST (#78391) #
All of this is getting on my nerves (LOL), so it is time for me to sove all O-Dog / Rios-Wells / Toe Nash stuff:

1. Keep the O-Dog, while his game is deficient in some areas, he is a good artifical surface infielder and afterall, he is da man.

2. Rios is not a major league all star yet. Let us see how he does in the spring. Chances are he will be at Syracuse to start the year. Wells is our centrefielder! Rios will play right if he gets called up.

3. Toe Nash? He is probably in a trailer with his cougar-lady doing whatever scary things the Toe Nash's of the world are doing.

Now, before attacking me, as always, remember I am smiling as I write this
Mike Green - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 09:58 AM EST (#78392) #
Robert, I stupidly did not check on the link in your post #43. You did very fine and thorough research (much better than mine) on the appropriate conversion rate from AA to the majors, and found that the appropriate multiplier for Tennessee to Toronto was .855. Applying that number to Rios' stats would give .301/.344/.445, not significantly different to what I would have it. My intuitive MLEs are slightly higher in light of the right-left splits in Yale Field discussed in another thread.

Anyways, the MLEs generated using the numbers in your prior thread for Rios' are a little better relative to league than Winfield's at age 22. I repeat that I am not saying that Rios will be as good as Winfield, but that if you take the "age 22" snapshot, he is about at the same place. What made Winfield great was not his age 22 performance (he wasn't like Albert Pujols or Ted Williams), but his consistent and strong growth after that, which he sustained for many, many years.
_coliver - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 10:26 AM EST (#78393) #
Kyle, thanks for the excellent posting. We have had quite a few Wilson Betemet-type ballplayers. I am still hoping that he will turn it around. It would be nice if one of the "underagers of 1996" (Benemet and Jossephang Bernhardt) would end up productive. Benemet is all that's left--Bernhardt was released by Toronto this year and has not resurfaced. There was a lot of money spent on these kids. Something you are not going to see, in the future, in J.P.-like organizations.
robertdudek - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 10:31 AM EST (#78394) #
Mike Green,

Fair enough. I take that .855 conversion rate with a grain of salt (even thought it's the result of my own analysis). I'm confident that it applies to a player like Reed Johnson; I'm much less certain that it would to a player with a high batting average.

Batting average is more variable from year to year than other components of offensive production, and as such we should expect significant regression towards the mean in 2004 for Rios. His secondary skills are not (yet) that good, which could limit his production in his rookie year when he does arrive in the bigs.
Mike Green - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 10:48 AM EST (#78395) #
Agreed. His BABIP was .396, which is very high. It's doubtful that he can sustain this as he loses speed.

Since the end of the AA regular season, he has hit roughly 10 homers in 120 ABs in the AA playoffs, Olympic qualifier and the Puerto Rican league. My major worry about him is the development of his strike zone judgment; I am quite confident that his power will be there when he arrives.
_Jonny German - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 11:37 AM EST (#78396) #
Robert, how much can we learn from players who spend a significant amount of time in AA and the majors in the same year? I'm thinking of Miguel Cabrera, who did this at age 20:

AA .365 / .429 / .609 in 266 AB
NL .268 / .325 / .468 in 314 AB

This is more like a 75% conversion, but it's just one player and a very young one at that. (Incidentally, this was a bust-out year for Cabrera - he went .274 / .333 / .421, 489 AB in High-A in 2002). If we had a sample of 100 players with at least 250 AB each in AA and the majors, could we construct a reasonable MLE? Perhaps we'd have to go back too far in history to find enough players who fit the description, and perhaps the age at which they do it is such a big factor that the MLE would still be fairly inconclusive.
robertdudek - Monday, December 08 2003 @ 12:44 PM EST (#78397) #
We must be very careful in analysing players as young as Cabrera. At that age, skills sometimes progress very rapidly. It's doubtful his AA stats represent his true level; nevertheless, the conversion rate implied by the AA and NL stats is a little pessimistic.
_Frank - Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 09:43 AM EST (#78398) #
good to see
_Steve Z - Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:40 PM EST (#78399) #
Gammons' latest column includes some optimism for Jays fans (as usual):

Blue Jays' GM Ricciardi has three or four potential No. 2-3 starters in Triple-A and No. 3-4-5 starters in Ted Lilly, Miguel Batista and Pat Hentgen. And with what one GM calls "the best group of positional prospects of any team," the Blue Jays have a chance to make the playoffs a couple of times in the next four years and a chance to one year go all the way, even in the same division as the Yankees.

Also, Bob Elliott files his first Blue Jays Spring Training report today, opening with the buzz surrounding Dustin McG:

Tosca was looking straight ahead and both eye brows were raised and he said "Wow!"

"He has a great delivery and outstanding balance," Tosca said.
Diamond Notes | 61 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.