What to do with Carlos?

[gregmag]

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.

 

Geno, all due respect, but IMHO this statement is just wrong. We've long since agreed to disagree on this point, but I can't let you assert it without at least setting forth the opposite assertion.

 

Prediction of players' performance is uncertain, for all kinds of reasons -- age, injury, work ethic, etc. But nothing about the difference between major and minor league baseball particularly complicates the predictive game. Is MLB a better level of competition than AAA? Hell, yes. So you make adjustments, just like you make adjustments for parks, leagues, and eras within MLB. As the point just made about bad MLB contracts illustrates, major leaguers "flame out" as surely as minor leaguers do.

 

Greg.

[rluzinski]

I have to agree with that. There are plenty of guys who flame out between AA and AAA as well. It's just aother step that many players never make.

[danzig6767]

While i can't read Melvin's mind,i ddo think it's fair to assume he won't make any moves this offseason that put much of a hit if any on the teams chances to win next season.The Brewers look to be in a win now mode,though not to the complete extreme that the future is way way on the backburner.

 

So even those that are strongly against trading Lee shouldn't worry as much if a trade was made,i'd be very suprised if it was a deal for a pack of minor leaguers.I'd guess any trade would be for a player or players who would be expected to be a big part of next years team.

 

If Melvin doesn't find that in any offer,i think he keeps Lee for the whole 06' season unless the team tanks which seems unlikely.I do though think any extension is very unlikely,Lee will probably want a package of yrs/money that Melvin isn't comfortable with.

[SoCalBrewfan]

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.

[GenoSeligPrieb]

The distance between the minors and majors is incredibly vast, and no MLE formula will ever properly account for that.

 

"Geno, all due respect, but IMHO this statement is just wrong. We've long since agreed to disagree on this point, but I can't let you assert it without at least setting forth the opposite assertion.

 

Prediction of players' performance is uncertain, for all kinds of reasons -- age, injury, work ethic, etc. But nothing about the difference between major and minor league baseball particularly complicates the predictive game... "

 

And you've stated your point, Greg, which I respect.

 

I don't agree, but again, that's just my opinion.

 

Perhaps someone here can furnish the baseball-website-blocked among us with a list of the 2002, 2003, 2004 AAA All-Stars, and we'll see just how many of them were able to turn an .850 OPS, or a 2.25 ERA into mush at the major league level.

 

My money says it's a high enough % to warrant my dismissal of the MLE formula.

 

Can we try it somehow?

 

What if we took, say the 2002 or 2003 All-Stars, said "abracadabra", multiplied by pi, carried the 1, and *presto* came up with MLE numbers for the ones who even made ther majors the next year?

 

Hell, if nothing else, maybe it'll finally drive astake into the heart of this ridiculous thread I keep perpetuating!

 

Thanks!

 

Sincerely,

 

GS-P, King of Hyperbole! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

[1992casey]

Here are some pertinent quotes about MLEs in the 2005 Major League Equivalencies for Brewers prospects thread.

 

Quoth Chris:

---

All this statistic does is it converts a players 2005 minor league statistics and converts it into an equivelent ML line. It looks to me like it assumes a certain level of performance is needed to put up certain numbers in certain leagues, and it translates that performance into an equivelent ML statistic. A player who hit 25 AA home runs, if they could take those swings and ABs to Milwaukee, would have hit X number of home runs.

 

It doesn't try to project what sort of numbers a player will put up next year, because it doesn't take into account things like age, repetition of levels, return from injuries, etc. A 32 year old AAA OFer will probably have an artificially high ML Equivelent because they are really old for their league, and a 19 year old AAA player coming of elbow surgery might have an artificially low ML Equivelent.

 

What these numbers do is provide a sort of baseline from which we can adjust the numbers based on those factors not considered. This allows us to make an educated guess about next year should that year be in the majors. One could look at JJ Hardy's 2004 Major League Equivalency and see that he'd have a good shot at hitting pretty well once fully recovered from his injury and the rust were knocked off.

---

Quoth Al:

---

I would prefer some sort of age factor to let guys like Escobar look better, but that's not what this does.

---

(In both quotes, I added the bold type.)

[GenoSeligPrieb]

I genuinely appreciate you stepping up and providing some unvarnished, honest answers, 1992casey.

 

But look at those answers. Honestly, you could see why dopes like me would tend to pay so little (OK, make that "zero") attention to these numbers, then, right?

 

While it's a fun sort of parlor game, the fact that there are so limitations and disclaimers in the formula, as well as the fact that, by its very nature, you can't road test the formula and predict anything with it.

 

To me, applying any sort of MLB numbers by using minor league measures is like predicting the high temperature in Moscow, based on Montreal's from 2 days ago.

 

Sorry to be stubborn on this one, but until someone can convince me with a plausible predictive formula, you can see why I continue to doubt this practice.

[Katuluu]

Perhaps if you looked at MLE's as more of a Farmer's Almanac for prospects, instead of a true predictor of future success, you wouldn't be so gung ho against them Geno.

[gregmag]

Of course you can road test the approach. People have been calculating MLEs for years. Baseball Prospectus uses MLEs, prorated based on age, predicted development, etc., to calculate likely performance for hundreds of prospects. BP predicts performances for major league vets as well, so the book would seem to provide a good test for the relative accuracy of minor league performance and past major league performance as predictors. I haven't made any systematic study of their predictions, so I'm not offering a substantive defense right now. I'm just saying that anybody can open up BP and check the methods for himself.

 

Geno, please stop resorting to the rhetorical game of treating MLEs as if they're exceptionally arcane and unrooted in logic. I understand your argument, which I take to be that minor league stats have too many variables to equate them with MLB performance. That's fine; maybe you're right. But your repeated suggestions that the method is entirely random and not thought through is tantamount to calling those of us who disagree with you stupid.

 

Greg.

[MadisonBrewerBlue]

What to do with Carlos ? I think I would like to have him around a couple years. I am not a big proponent of changing a line up that works. We need to build on last year versus unloading a contract for mythical results from Hart and Cruz.

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"Perhaps if you looked at MLE's as more of a Farmer's Almanac for prospects, instead of a true predictor of future success, you wouldn't be so gung ho against them Geno. "

 

I know what you're saying, Kat, and I would...if only it weren't taken as a true predictor so often. Over the months, (years?), I've been told I'm wrong about players based on this formula! Read some of the amazing accomplishments some guys now expect from a Nelson Cruz or a Corey Hart.

 

MLE should be treated like a paintball gun in the hands of my 3-year-old. Fun for some, yes, but put it down, and don't point it at anyone.

 

When a fun statistical exercise, with more disclaimers than a Tom DeLay speech, is applied too literally, the distortions it draws can be pretty unrealistic, right?

 

______________

Make room for the Edit!:

 

"But your repeated suggestions that the method is entirely random and not thought through is tantamount to calling those of us who disagree with you stupid."

 

Greg:

 

There's no way I would want to characterize anyone who disagrees with me as stupid. Everyone here is entitled to their opinions, without question, and as we know, opinions aren't wrong...or stupid. Unless you go to the American Idol board, but.... http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

Anyway, to those who believe in MLE, there's nothing I could or would do to stop you. The only thing I would ask is that whoever uses it in one of our little debates here, you should definitely preface it with: "...MLE says Brad Nelson in 2005 graded out at .280-25-100. Grain of salt...MLE's not a predictor and there are a lot of disclaimers, but it helped convince me, that he could be useful if he keeps this up..." to temper it a bit, or something to that effect.

 

Fair? I hope so. Honest!

[1992casey]

---

To me, applying any sort of MLB numbers by using minor league measures is like predicting the high temperature in Moscow, based on Montreal's from 2 days ago.

---

Actually, that's an excellent illustration. But keep in mind that we just might use Omaha's temperature from a day to two ago to predict today's temperature in Milwaukee.

 

MLEs are just a tool, and a tool has to be used appropriately. If you're going to drive in a nail with the handle end of a screwdriver, you stand a good chance of cutting your hand.

 

---

MLE's as more of a Farmer's Almanac for prospects, instead of a true predictor of future success

---

Excellent analogy.

 

---

Of course you can road test the approach. People have been calculating MLEs for years. ... I haven't made any systematic study of their predictions, so I'm not offering a substantive defense right now. I'm just saying that anybody can open up BP and check the methods for himself.

---

That's actually what I was looking for earlier today when I posted some links to the second page of the Equivalencies thread. The best I could do was come up with second hand evidence from some respected sources. That's not all that bad, though. Sometimes the math?heavy stuff loses a lot us us, anyway. I'm in that category. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Weirdos19]

i think some of you guys overanalyze things. Do you think Doug Melvin is looking at VORP and total baserunners per RBI? I really don't think so.

 

Bottom line. If Carlos isn't in the middle of the lineup, splitting Jenks and Overbay, we see every lefty in everybody's pen. To me, the main reason 2004 was as bad as it was. Remember Pods, Spivey, Overbay, Jenkins, Branyan hitting 1-5 that year? YUCK.

 

What the general consensus is is that Carlos is good, but we need more for 8.5 million. How? Look at the money that was thrown at free agents last year (Beltre, Beltran, Delgado, etc.). Carlos had better numbers than any of them, for way less money.

 

Plus, everybody overlooks that Carlos changed leagues last year. Almost everybody has a down year after changing leagues. I look for Carlos to go to .290/35/130 next year. Then you same people that want to move him will be begging him to resign here.

 

Now, if you want to contend next year, you don't trade him. No way. You'd have to stick Hart in left field and would have no cleanup hitter. You have to have a right handed stick between Fielder and Jenkins.

 

Trading Lee would put us in the same place we were in 2004.

[endaround]

To answer your first question, yes.

 

Lee is not anywhere close to Delgado. Delgado was twice as valuable as Lee

[Weirdos19]

I'm guessing we weren't in the market for Delgado. Another LH hitting first baseman.

[pogokat]

i think some of you guys overanalyze things. Do you think Doug Melvin is looking at VORP and total baserunners per RBI? I really don't think so.

 

He better be...If he's not using every available resource, then why does he have the job?

[1992casey]

weirdos19,

 

If Doug isn't using VORP, he's using something similar that better suits his tastes. There are lots of good metrics to choose from. He'd certainly be familiar with VORP, though. It's necessary to know and understand a stat before choosing not to use it.

 

I don't think anyone is saying we necessarily need more from Carlos Lee for the $16.5 million he's getting this year and next. What we're saying is that a player that the market might value at as much as 4 years/$40 million needs to have had a much better career. Carlos Lee justifies his job?and his pay?on the club right now. But come contract time, that .825 career OPS becomes paramount. If we can pay him like a career .825 OPS 31 year old should be paid, fine.

 

If Lee goes .290/35/130 next year and still puts up an .811 OPS, I'll be unimpressed. Right now, he gets a pass because even at that relatively low number, he helped drastically improve this year's team.

 

If he goes .290/35/130 with an .850 OPS, he's still not worth a huge lengthy extension. If he goes .290/35/130 with a .900 OPS, we'd still have to consider that he took 8 years to finally get around to doing it, and we sure couldn't gamble on it ever happening again.

[GenoSeligPrieb]

Darn it!

 

I was hoping this thread would end, but when I read this, my fingers began typing by themselves...

 

"If Lee goes .290/35/130 next year and still puts up an .811 OPS, I'll be unimpressed. Right now, he gets a pass because even at that relatively low number, he helped drastically improve this year's team. If he goes .290/35/130 with an .850 OPS, he's still not worth a huge lengthy extension. If he goes .290/35/130 with a .900 OPS, we'd still have to consider..."

 

If a guy puts up a stat line like that, he's absolutely worth keeping. Not at $15 million a year (even though, based on that kind of eye-popping stat line, he'd get it on the free agent market), because we can't afford it.

 

To your credit, you did admit "he helped drastically improve this year's team", which I commend you for. But it seems that just because ONE stat, his OPS, may not be to your liking, you'd be ready to jettison him, which, no offense, doesn't work for me.

 

OK, 1992, how about this?:

 

Carlos Lee next year goes .260/25/85 but his OPS is .960? Let's say, when RBI opportunities present themselves, he instead stands there and takes a walk a lot more often, and his OBP rises over the .400 mark. He also hits a few more triples and doubles, but only plays 120 games, so his RBIs and HR totals drop, but that OPS is high.

 

Would you now consider him "keep-able?"

 

.290-35-130 is great, by probably everyone else's standards, except those who consider OPS the be-all and end-all. It's ONE stat, and while it's a very important one, it shouldn't take precedence over those other 3 also-very-important ones, like BA, HRs and RBIs.

[backup catchers]

It's ONE stat, and while it's a very important one, it shouldn't take precedence over those other 3 also-very-important ones

 

Amen to that. OPS may be the best single stat we have today. Which is why it gets abused. It can't be used alone as an indicator of value. No stat can. So to use it alone to assess a player's value is useless. When we dissect OPS into it's parts to determine if it is on base heavy vs slugging heavy we get differant results. I believe Rluz did his usual excellent analysis on this a while back and found all OPS was not created equal. And as Geno just stated it doesn't take into account number of games or trying to get a hit to score a run vs a walk and let the scoring up to a lesser hitter in the lineup. So to me if OPS is Carlos' only fault you need to show why this particular stat for this particular guy is so important that you can dismiss his other stats.

[endaround]

Other Lee faults:

 

BA

OBP

VORP

Defense

RBI/baserunner

 

Lee supporters are the ones who dismiss all stats to focus on RBIs and to a lesser extent HRs. There is nothing out there that projects well for Lee going forward.

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"Other Lee faults:

 

BA

OBP

VORP

Defense

RBI/baserunner

 

Lee supporters are the ones who dismiss all stats to focus on RBIs and to a lesser extent HRs. There is nothing out there that projects well for Lee going forward."

 

OK, there's NOTHING that projects well for Carlos, going forward. Wow. Not his power, his health...ah forget it.

 

In the interest of fairness, end, I won't dismiss all stats for Carlos Lee, but I do retain the right to not embrace all of them you look for:

 

BA - Also very important, no question. And I'll spot you batting average THIS year, but you aren't considering that this was his first year in a new league after 5+ in the AL. Sure, I wish his BA would be higher, too. But we've already heard from 1992Casey, that even if his BA were .290, he'd still catch crap from the OPS guys, so...

 

OBP - If he keeps driving in runs, and that average goes right back to his usual .289 pre-Brewer days, I'm not concerned if he draws more walks, unless they change his responsibilities to leading off or batting 2nd.

 

VORP - Sorry, no.

 

Defense - I'm not saying he's even good, but someone's got to play LF, and you CAN hide a big slugger with questionable D in left, so the impact of his suspect glove is somewhat mitigated. Again, I wish he were a better defensive player, but given his offensive contributions, the trade-off is worth it. Ask any GM if they'd take him, even with his D, and you know the answer.

 

RBI/baseruner - Isn't he pretty good at this? I thought the argument was that Geoff Jenkins was right there with him in 2005, which I already admitted had altered my view on them. But Carlos is not a negative in this department. Why not look at his RISP?

 

As I wrote before, since there are so many stats in baseball, if you dig long enough, you can find reasons to argue a case that Alex Rodriguez and Johan Santana aren't worth keeping. Carlos Lee is primarily paid to hit homers, drive in runs and stay healthy, which he does, and that was good enough for Doug Melvin, who's no dope.

[1992casey]

---

.290-35-130

---

The main reason I commented as I did was to illustrate the flaw in concentrating solely on triple crown stats. While not perfect, OPS covers a whole lot more and is more accurate. The same can be said for a host of other stats. We don't necessarily have to focus on OPS, but rather than falling back on BA/HR/RBI, we should be looking for corroboration elsewhere.

 

The other reason for my comment was to point out that not all .290-35-130 lines are created equal and stats like OPS, VORP, RC (RC27), OBP, SLG, ISOP, etc. differentiate those similar triple crown lines. While there are flaws with the modern stats, there are many fewer flaws than with the triple crown stats.

 

I really can't believe the amount of debate about RBI. To me it shouldn't take a stathead, a formula, or an empirical study to tell is that individual RBI totals are affected in a big way by others. All I can say that if Carlos gets 130, I'll cheer him on for breaking the team record and I'll definitely get enjoyment out of it. Beyond that, I'd like to know a lot more if I'm going to decide how much to pay him.

 

As far as HRs, they generally show us something, but then you can run into someone like Tony Batista, who can find a way to hit 30 homers, drive in 100, and still be bad or horrible. (26 HR, 99 RBI, .663 OPS, 76 OPS+ in 2003; 32 HR, 110 RBI, .728 OPS, 88 OPS+ in 2004)

 

We talked about the volatility of BA in the Forecasting OXS/OPS plus examination of Brady Clark thread. It's affected a lot by statistical variance and luck. The thread doesn't conclude how much statistical variance is involved, but there's enough to encourage us to look for information elsewhere.

 

I'd look at it this way, though. If Carlos hits .290 and walks at a rate that's matches his career best (95 point difference between BA and OBP in 2002), things look pretty good. If he walks at his career rate (53 point difference between BA and OBP), his OBP becomes a big yawner.

---

Darn it!

 

I was hoping this thread would end

---

Obviously, very few are going to be convinced to change their minds, but at least everyone's being respectful to each other this time around! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif Geno's likely right, though. I think there's probably a lot of repetition at this point.

[Weirdos19]

I say give him a chance this year. He changed leagues last year. You people seem to throw that right out the window, like it doesn't mean anything. He will be better next year.

 

Is there a way to find the average decline in a players stats after changing leagues? If there is, look at it, then come back with an argument.

[reillymcshane]

Someone mentioned this earlier - in this or another thread, but isn't anyone worried about Carlos' conditioning? He looks like he could shed some weight, which, you would think, would help him.

 

Many younger guys can carry the extra weight, but when a guy gets around 30, it can affect him more - slower afoot, slower at bat.

 

It kind of worries me because Carlos has a lot of 'old player skills' (here's a quote from John Sickels about this: "Old player skills are power and walks, combined with lack of speed, and/or mediocre defense, and mediocre or poor overall athleticism.")

 

These guys tend to decline rather quickly - frequently around 30 or shortly thereafter. Not always, but often quicker than other players - especially premium blue chip type stars.

 

It's not as if he's going to tip over and die any moment, but it makes you wonder about beyond 2006.

 

As we debate this, I think the thing to perhaps do is let 2006 play out and see how Carlos does - then make a decision. We could trade him this off season, but I wouldn't do it just to get rid of him -- only if the club felt a deal made us better. Losing a 30 HR guy is tough for this team - even if he's not the .900 OPS guy we'd like him to be.

[1992casey]

Changing leagues has been mentioned several times by more than one person. People probably aren't commenting further because it's likely that the effect of doing that would be difficult to prove one way or the other.

 

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Home Run Derby. That's something Carlos has brought up on several occasions. He's said he feels it screwed up his swing and that he never wants to do that again.

 

As far as giving him a chance, I can't recall a single person on any message board advocating not picking up his option. The real division occurs (obviously) when we talk about how much to spend to keep him after next year. There's minor division when discussing the 'in between' choices.

 

It's not that people don't appreciate Carlos, but at times it ends up sounding that way if someone doesn't want to see the team invest a small fortune into keeping him.

 

EDIT:

 

---

Is there a way to find the average decline in a players stats after changing leagues? If there is, look at it, then come back with an argument.

---

I took a quick look for something like that, but came up empty. It seems that I've seen information like that before, but I can't recall where it was or how good it was. Maybe you can find something?