or is he 2b exclusive?

he would be a very expensive 4th OF/platoon partner. the idea would be a cameron/corky/luddy OF.

but yes to being able to fit in with the team. you’re lumping a lot of “emotional” “decisions” together, some of which are not created equal.

just a general rebuttal to the dismissal of those “unquantifiables”, not you specifically, MC. it’s not about bringing down the morale — it’s the fact that this clubhouse has a lot of guys who are committed to making their teammates play better. we’re seeing it pay off. this is how the Cardinals win games. why take an obvious plus of this team and hamper it? just because we can’t quantify it?

it’s not about “bad personalities”, it’s whether these guys are team players. obviously gambling on those personalities pays off if they commit to playing baseball with the rest of the team. as with Lugo. the main objection to some of these guys is not the lump-sum “we don’t like them” …. it’s the long, long track record of some of these players being unable to play well with others.

I would definitely consider some of the guys on that list based on their field performance. I just disagree that their individual stats are the measure of their ability to work together with their teammates, aka value, when there is ample evidence to the contrary. Until the Cardinals play baseball like tennis, it’s a team sport, and I don’t think value to the team should just be discounted as “emotional”.

Head ⇶ here ⇺ for tons of arrow codes.

To use them, replace the XXXX in the following code with the number from the first column on that page:

&#XXXX;

The Latin market is cool because it’s a free market so in theory teams should be paying something close to the expected value of future performance in the big leagues (probability of making it * value if you make it)—-less some risk premium. The eye thing introduces new risk into the equation on top of simply “will he develop into a big leaguer” risk, reducing the chance of Mateo making the big leagues at all and probably his value if he did make it. Obviously from the Cards perspective, the eye thing dramatically changed that valuation.

it’s the same home run.

if he can just learn to hit it in Busch Stadium (without any cubs “outfielders”), he’d have just enough weaponry to really compliment this lineup

you mean 2010, yeah?

as a slappy singles hitter who doesn’t walk, he could OPS .650 or .740. it’s very luck driven. i would guess he’s up for regression, but a lot will just be luck.

The vast majority of his ML plate appearances bear out a higher value for OPS. I could easily see what you are saying happen, but I’m just curious how you got there.

He put up a combined ~.305 wOBA in 2 years Boston, which is dreadful, and was decent this year, but in a small sample size.

Sorry. I thought everybody here knew who Bill James was, so I took as sarcasm.

Which ones do you disagree with?

I’m saying because he has consecutive, consistent years that you are more likely seeing his true talent. I trust that more than just generally assuming that he is a league average catcher. I don’t understand that constant normalization that you seem to do with individual player projections.

but I don’t think we should dismiss the very real possibility that he became a better hitter as he progressed in his MLB career. I think that what etp_stl is saying is that he believes Yadi improved as a hitter and that his true talent level is a .740-.749 OPS as we sit in our chairs today and type. And I think that I agree with him.

He came up pretty young, and he was really brought up because of his defense. So it really wouldn’t be a surprise that his bat caught up a little bit as he matures.

Also his 2006 season appears to be a little bit of an outlier, not only compared to more recent seasons, but also compared to his prior ones. He outperformed that level even at age 21 and 22.

I’m expecting what we’ve got in the last 2 seasons is pretty close to what we can expect for the next few too.

And while it may seem to be just mental masturbation, it has a very direct purpose to it

Say you have a player, let’s call him Yadi. He comes into the league at 5:10 (I think), is a catcher and is considered a good enough hitter to be considered a major league player. There is other information we have on him of course, he is someone short, is slow, has good contact skills, a good eye and limited power; however, in the absence of any glaring trait that separates him from anyone else, we can assume that he will hit like a major league catcher, which is a wOBA of about .318. In Bayesian terms, that is our prior.

Then his first season comes along. In 04, he had a .294 wOBA in 151 plate appearances. Obviously he performed poorly, but we don’t assume that he is in fact a bad hitter, because anyone can play poorly in 151 plate appearances. That would only slightly change our estimates of how good a player he is.

Then 05 comes along, and he continues to struggle. He puts up a .282 wOBA in 421 plate appearances. If you combine that with our previous record of his performance, his 04 season, and weigh it more heavily (because more recent performance is going to be more predictive), you get an equivalent wOBA of .284 in 572 plate appearances. Again, we don’t assume that he is actually that bad, because it’s very possible to get unlucky in 572 plate appearances; however, we do regress slightly less to the mean than we did after 04, because we have a larger record of his statistical performance.

Then in 06, he had his worst season yet. He had just a .261 wOBA in 461 plate appearances. But, since we know he is a major league catcher, and thus should be expected to hit better than that AND we have previous records of his performance that show he has hit better than that in the past, we don’t take his 06 season at face value. We simply weigh it and incorporate it to our record of past performance. So after 06, he has a career equivalent wOBA of .272 in 1033 plate appearances.

Then 07 happens. He has his best season yet, with a wOBA of .311, but it comes in a relatively small sample size, just 396 plate appearances. Do we assume that he has turned the corner and will be a decent hitting catcher in the near future? Of course not, anyone can play above their head in 396 plate appearances. Again, we simply weigh that record of performance into our previous records of his performance, and after the 07 season, we can say that Yadi’s equivalent wOBA is .285 in 1429 plate appearances. Which of course is still miserable. However, since 1429 is a small-ish sample, only 3 season worth of data, it’s possible that he has played below his actual ability (remember that our prior is that he is a .318 wOBA guy). So we regress a little bit to the mean, due to our uncertainty of his actual performance.

Than, 08 happens. He improves again to a .323 wOBA in 485 plate appearances. Again, we don’t take that performance at face value, because it’s possible that he was performing over his head that year, so we weight it into our previous records of his performance. Doing so, gives us an equivalent wOBA .300 in 1914 plate appearances.

Then 09 happens. He improves his performance, once again, and puts up a .337 wOBA in 544 PA. However, that is only about 1/5 of his career numbers, and is a relatively small sample size in itself. Anyone can play above their head in 544 plate appearances, just look at Jason Barlett this year. So we don’t assume that this sample represent his true ability, we only only weight it more heavily than previous seasons, because it is most recent, and then combine it with his previous totals.

So after 09, his equivalent wOBA is .316 in 2458 plate appearances. That is how he has performed. Period. However, since our prior is that he is a major league catcher, and thus should be expected to have a .318 wOBa, we regress his numbers to the mean, because it’s possible that he played under his head, albeit unlikely so we only regress a little bit. That leads a projection for a .316 wOBA, which equates to an OPS of about .710, right about where Mr. James projection has him.

There are two major parts of projections. 1) is weighting the data. You can never assume that 1 season, or even 2 or 3, represents a players’ true ability. People can get lucky or unlucky, or simple play over or under their head, in 1 or 2 or 3 seasons (hell, it’s even possible to do so over an entire career). That’s why we incorporate ALL data we have on the player.

The next part is regression to the mean. As I mentioned, a player can under or over perform his true talent level even over the course of a career. That’s why we have to regress, always, to our prior estimate of his ability, which isn’t based off of stats. Usually, it is the league average, however, you should obviously incorporate any other information you have about the player into it.

You absoulely cannot just take a players nubmers in 1 or 2 seaons, and say that is his true ability. Yes Alex, he may be “improving”, you can’t just assume that he will continue to play at his improved level. We have 1500 other plate appearance that say he isn’t as good as he has been over the past 2 years.

a #2 and #4 hitter. I think that Skip’s OBP is on-par with the best we’ve put out there in the lead-off position since Fernando Vina put up a .380 in 2000. Since then, Skip’s .364 this year is the best we’ve had, and typically we’ve been getting something in the .350s.

If Molina and Ryan are hitting 7 & 8 respectively, then the OBPs they’re putting up are respectable, as well. Obviously, I’m not worried about the 3-hole.

Depending on Ludwick’s recovery this coming year and Rasmus’ improvement, we need a high OBP guy for the two hole and a dangerous clean-up hitter. The problem is that neither probably describes David Freese, so unless Rasmus can take over the 2 spot with Freese in the 6, the Cards will have an OBP problem. They still are going to have to sign a high OPS guy for that 4-hole. Holliday is probably the best bet, and it just goes downhill from there. I don’t think they have an internal option, and the externals are going to be expensive.

who knows how to play baseball, but can’t mentally handle all the stuff that comes with baseball. except…. if that includes one’s teammates …

Around the middle of the season, Bradley told a reporter he felt “isolated” in the clubhouse.
“I think for the most part that was his choice,”said Reed Johnson, whom Bradley once gave credit for getting in his face and helping straighten him out — however temporary.

…. like I said, even Khalil tried to include himself in the fray, and that’s the most inward-looking guy you’d probably meet who’s in a public job like that, and not in his mom’s basement. Baseball is a team sport. The type of baseball that’s played in STL, Albert-or-no-Albert, relies on the strength of the team, not any one part.

the mice can make disparaging comments about former prospect-crushes