I wanted to see whether this perception is accurate so I
looked at all prospects ranked in Baseball America’s Top Hundred list from 1998-2007
and all free agents that earned an annual salary of at least five million, have
completed their contract, and whose contract information was either in MLBTR or
ESPN’s transaction tracker. These free agents were primarily players that
signed a contract starting from 2007 to 2014. A more detailed description of my
methodology can be found here.
Position prospects ranked 1-10 produced an annual average of
2.08 fWAR while free agent position players earning $15 million annually
produced 2.09 fWAR per year. In addition, 56% of the prospects and 60% of the
free agents produced more than 1.5 fWAR per year. This indicates that these
position prospects were about as successful as the top free agents.
Free agent position players that earned between ten and
fifteen million and those that earned between five and ten million performed
similarly. Position players earning between ten to fifteen million produced on
average 1.24 fWAR per season while those earning between five to ten million
produced 1.13 fWAR. The position players that earned between ten to fifteen
million did have slightly higher success rates as 41% were successful and 22%
were stars. In contrast, 34% of the position players that earned between five to
million were successful and 19% were stars. But in general, there’s little
difference between position players that earned ten to fifteen million and
those that earned five to ten million. This suggests that the best strategy for
teams is to go after top position free agents or to stick with the ones that
are affordable.
Free agent position players that earned between $5 and $15
million annually performed similarly to position prospects ranked 51-100. The
prospects produced an annual average of 1.06 fWAR while the free agents
produced an average of 1.17 fWAR. 32% of the prospects and 36% of the free
agents produced at least 1.5 fWAR per year. They also performed similarly to
position prospects ranked between 26 and 50. Position prospects ranked 26-50
produced 1.34 fWAR per year while 35% produced at least 1.5 fWAR per year. It
is worth noting that position prospects ranked 26-50 from 2003 to 2007 averaged
1.5 fWAR per year while 46% produced at least 1.5 fWAR per year.
Position prospects ranked 11-25 produced 1.63 fWAR per year
while nearly 47% produced at least 1.5 fWAR per year. These prospects are
easily better than free agents earning between $5 and $15 million annually but
not as good as the top position free agents.
The chart below shows position category results.
Pitching prospects ranked 1-10 weren’t as successful as the
top free agent starting pitchers. These prospects produced 1.98 fWAR on average
per year while the top free agent starters produced 2.74 fWAR per year. 61.11%
of the prospects and 70% of the free agents produced at least 1.5 fWAR per
year. However, pitching prospects ranked 1-10 from 2003-2007 performed
similarly to the top free agent starting pitchers. These prospects produced 2.36
fWAR on average per year while 81% of these prospects ultimately produced at
least 1.5 fWAR per year. Pitching prospects ranked between 1 and 10 from 2003
and 2007 may not have had the same ceiling as the top starters but they
arguably had a higher floor. Still, it appears that the top free agent starters
are better than the top pitching prospects.
Pitching prospects ranked 11-25 performed similarly to free
agents starting pitchers that earned between $10 and $15 million annually. From
1998-2007, the pitching prospects produced an annual average of 1.58 fWAR and
43% produced at least 1.5 fWAR per year. However, from 2003-2007 the prospects
produced an annual average of 2.18 fWAR and 58% produced at least 1.5 fWAR per
year. Free agent starting pitchers earning between $10 and $15 million annually
produced an average of 1.85 fWAR and 53% produced at least 1.5 fWAR per year.
Pitching prospects ranked 26-50 from 1998-2007 produced an
annual average of 1.01 fWAR produced an annual average of 1.05 fWAR while 31%
produced at least 1.5 fWAR per year. Those ranked between 26 and 50 from 2003
to 2007 produced an annual average of 1.05 fWAR while 35% produced at least 1.5
fWAR. Free agent starting pitchers that earned between $5 and $10 million
annually produced an average of 1.04 fWAR while 30% produced at least 1.5 fWAR
per year.
Pitching prospects ranked between 51 and 100 from 1998 to
2007 produced an annual average of .73 fWAR while 20% produced at least 1.5
fWAR per year. There was no difference between the 1998 to 2007 and the 2003 to
2007 results.
If one believes that Baseball America is getting better at
predicting pitching prospect performance over time then it makes sense to use
the 2003-2007 prospect results. In fact, it makes sense to presume that current
prospects will be even better than those ranked from 2003-2007. Therefore, it
suggests that pitching prospects ranked from 1-10 have similar production to
free agent starters earning $15 million or more, pitching prospects ranked from
11-25 have similar production to those free agent starters earning $10 and $15
million and those pitching prospects ranked from 26-50 have similar production
to free agent starters earning between $5 and $10 million.
If one believes that Baseball America simply had good luck
when selecting top prospects from 2003-2007 then this suggests that pitching
prospects ranked from 1-10 are similar but better than those free agents that
earn between $10 and $15 million and prospects ranked from 26-50 are similar to
free agents that earn between $5 and $10 million.
The chart below shows pitching category results.
Ultimately, the following groups have similar production:
- Free Agents earning at least $15 million per year = Prospects Ranked 1-10
- Free Agent Starting Pitchers earning between $10 and $15 million annually = Pitching Prospects Ranked from 11-25
- Free Agent Starting Pitchers earning between $5 and $10 million annually = Pitching Prospects Ranked from 26-50
- Free Agent Position Players earning between $5 and $15 annually = Position Prospects Ranked from 51-100
Prospects ranked by Baseball America have become
significantly more productive and valuable over the years. Today the best free
agents have similar success rates and production to the best prospects. Maybe it
is time to start saying that free agents will break your heart.
8 comments:
Really nice thorough analysis! I, like you and many people, have wondered about this over the years, and now you have shown very interesting results to think about. Thanks!
This is really good work. I was talking with a friend of mine earlier this off-season about the Cruz and Markakis deals and we went through and (non-scientifically) looked at all the 4 year or longer contracts that were signed just last off-season. Only about 20% of them can you look at, just a year later, and say "yeah, I'd take on the rest of that deal right now".
The MLB service time/arbitration/FA system, coupled with the typical player's career arc means that a big majority of players have already reached their maximum usefulness before they get near the open market.
Glad you liked it.
In my last post I noted that about 70% of wins come from players that are still under team control. There's enough talent in free agency to add 10-15 wins over the average club. That's enough to turn an average club into a wild card or division leader with average team controlled talent. But a team with only minimal team controlled talent will struggle to win 80 even if they're spending $200M.
The scary thing is that I'd say that probably 7 of the 12 players that meet your criteria have probably performed as well as should be expected or better.
Good stuff Matt. Any idea how the 2003-2007 pitching prospects shake out in terms of coming from college or high school? It may be nothing, but you mentioned that they could have been a lower ceiling/higher floor aspect going on. This made me think of one of the early 2000 A's (aka "moneyball") strategy to draft college players over high school players, and the possibility of other teams copying that strategy.
Again, just curious and probably isn't anything there, because as you mentioned, it's possible that BA has just gotten better at ranking prospects.
Thanks Nate.
Ranked high school pitchers are usually better. But the sample size is tiny. There were 13 pitchers ranked between 1-10 from 2003 to 2006. Only five went to college.
I discussed the impacts of high school vs college somewhat in this post.
http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-impact-of-age-on-prospect-success.html
The problem with a high-priced free agent bust is that it locks the franchise in financially for a long time. That is not true of the top prospects. When Markakis flattened out it left the Orioles spinning their wheels for years, and he did not "bust." Neither did Wieters, except if you go by the estimates of his potential at draft time.
What we are seeing is a failure to get true stars out of top draft picks. A damn shame that. But not as bad as $150 million dollar men not panning out.
This is great work, Matt
As an Indians fan who welcomed Nick Swisher and Michael Bourn two years ago, I can vouch for the truthiness of this.
Free agents tend to be older (given that they need six years of experience), so the likelihood of injury is that much greater. Plus, I tend to think that players in the last year of their contracts tend to play through the injuries that they nurse a year later (when richer).
Post a Comment