Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

The value of minor league prospects study


reillymcshane
Brewer Fanatic Contributor

I found this article from earlier this year done regarding minor league prospects. Using Baseball America Top 100 lists from from 1994-2010 and Fangraphs WAR values, the authors broke players into tiers, calculated how much WAR they produced in the first six years of their career (meaning pre-arbitration and arbitration years), and then assigned a Surplus Value (this is the WAR a player produced, minus their salary).

 

They use Fangraphs valuation of 1 WAR as being equal to $8M. So if a player made 10 WAR during his first 6 years, he would produce $80M in value. Let's say his salary was $20M during this time frame. $80M - $20M = $60M Surplus Value (SV).

 

http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/mlb-prospect-surplus-values-2016-updated-edition/

 

I think it's a fascinating look at assigning a value to a player not yet in the majors. And even if you don't care for idea that 1 WAR is worth $8M, it still gives a look at how much WAR players in different tiers produced.

 

Top 10 prospects (both pitchers and batters) are, without a doubt the most valuable players.

 

Some interesting items:

 

- Hitters generally have more Surplus Value than pitchers of the same ranking (likely because they more prone to injuries and flame outs)

- The difference between a 51-75 ranked prospect is very little compared to a 76-100 prospect. This is something often noted by people ranking talent. The higher up you get, the more players get placed into a blob. I remember John Sickels saying that a 140th ranked guy isn't much different than the 90th ranked guy.

 

It's all kind of cool to look at. You can see a ranking of a player and say, "Using MLB Pipelines lists, Phil Bickford falls into the #51-75 group. As a whole, they have produced 3.7 WAR and $16.5M of Surplus Value. 69% of these guys have produced less than 3 WAR and 44% have produced zero or lower WAR."

 

It's kind of interesting to see that perspective.

 

Perhaps someone has posted something like this before - but I don't recall - so here it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

Surplus value seems pretty useless. Straight value or WAR seems more useful. The first 3 years are going to be pretty similar salary wise for almost every single player. Yes better players will get more in arbitration but much of that is already mitigated by 3 surpressed years so the spred in salary over 6 years will be much smaller.

Fan is short for fanatic.

I blame Wang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brewer Fanatic Contributor
Surplus value seems pretty useless. Straight value or WAR seems more useful. The first 3 years are going to be pretty similar salary wise for almost every single player. Yes better players will get more in arbitration but much of that is already mitigated by 3 surpressed years so the spred in salary over 6 years will be much smaller.

But three arby years can add up to a lot of money, so I see the value in adding it. I mean, $20M is nothing to sneeze at adding - so I don't see the harm. But as you said, even without it, it's still interesting just to see the raw WAR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely a very interesting study and a good reminder that even the highest rated prospects often times don't live up to their billing. Pretty sure I referenced it at some point in the Arcia thread shortly after he was called up when posters were underwhelmed by his offense relative to his prospect status.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely a very interesting study and a good reminder that even the highest rated prospects often times don't live up to their billing. Pretty sure I referenced it at some point in the Arcia thread shortly after he was called up when posters were underwhelmed by his offense relative to his prospect status.

 

Honestly, I was underwhelmed by Arcia's performance at Colorado Springs. He had dropped to #14 on my mid-season ballot for 2016 compared to #2 on the preseason ballot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brewer Fanatic Contributor

Honestly, I was underwhelmed by Arcia's performance at Colorado Springs. He had dropped to #14 on my mid-season ballot for 2016 compared to #2 on the preseason ballot.

 

[sarcasm]But he was 3-4 off of Suter in batting practice![/sarcasm] ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Brewer Fanatic Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Brewers community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of Brewer Fanatic.

×
×
  • Create New...