tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post2340412788691115504..comments2024-01-06T02:22:33.000-05:00Comments on Camden Depot: For Top 100 Prospect Lists, F Is A Passing GradeJon Shepherdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03521809778977098687noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-43269466220986555952016-02-02T22:04:02.095-05:002016-02-02T22:04:02.095-05:00That's a fascinating take on it. Did you miss ...That's a fascinating take on it. Did you miss the part where I noted that young team-controlled players are producing more wins than before? Regardless of the likelihood of a specific prospect being successful, it's impossible to win without prospects. <br /><br />Roger - Agreed that's the trend. I think teams would prefer dealing with veteran players but don't have much of a choice but depend on prospects at this point. Matt Perezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16191574755038653061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-70794859999110931292016-02-02T21:27:24.046-05:002016-02-02T21:27:24.046-05:00This is why it kills me when they say they don'...This is why it kills me when they say they don't want to give up the 14th pick....It would probably be another Billy Rowell, Adam Loewen, Matt Riley, Matt Blobgood, Brandon Snyder etc, etc etc!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-57669163415734803382016-02-02T11:21:05.886-05:002016-02-02T11:21:05.886-05:00Scouting journals stop ranking prospects when they...Scouting journals stop ranking prospects when they no longer qualify for Rookie of the Year status. That is a rather standard practice.Jon Shepherdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03521809778977098687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-77994994947140221512016-02-02T10:57:57.029-05:002016-02-02T10:57:57.029-05:00Keep them in. The study seems to me to be about &...Keep them in. The study seems to me to be about "team control" and "cheap performance" and that's what teams are going for with the more experienced Asian and Caribbean players. The main question for me was how it might skew BA's performance which you indicate has been inconsistent. I thought all the ratings agencies stopped rating prospects at 25-26yo. That's what kinda got me thinking. The best part of this analysis is that it clearly shows the trend we are seeing for teams to value high, stable, predictable potential and cheap early years with team control. Who wouldn't want Machado (or Trout or Harper) for $500K or even $6M for that matter? As he plays, the risk of injury or decline increases - especially in the high cost FA years. The real wheeling-dealing comes with high potential untested prospects and FA-to-be in the 28-32yo range - also the core of the QO/compensation pick drama. That's where you really have to assess risk/reward and take the biggest chances.Rogernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-22777977649460092192016-02-02T08:32:26.867-05:002016-02-02T08:32:26.867-05:00That's a really good question.
It doesn'...That's a really good question. <br /><br />It doesn't skew the accuracy of BA by much. It should be relatively easy for BA to rank the top advanced players that come from South America and Asia, and indeed they do so. If anything, it should improve their performance. <br /><br />It also probably doesn't seriously skew my results thinking that there are better performing younger players. My methodology takes actual contracts into consideration, which given that it also doesn't take signing bonus into consideration, in essence penalizes those players that come over from Asia. If they earn $12M in 2015, then they receive a 1.5 WAR penalty due to their contract. In general, the most valuable players are those that are good and making minimum wage.<br /><br />I'm also not sure a guy like Darvish should be treated differently than a guy like Donaldson. Well, maybe. Cespedes became an FA despite the fact that he only played four years and the same goes for Chen. But I think the main point of interest about young players is that it's hard to predict their performance as opposed to players that have been in the majors by awhile.<br /><br />I suppose one could go either way on whether it's necessary to exclude these players from the analysis. What do you think? I tend to lean towards keeping them in but certainly can see the other side.Matt Perezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16191574755038653061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-18612323833116225032016-02-02T07:37:24.909-05:002016-02-02T07:37:24.909-05:00How much do you think players coming from Cuba and...How much do you think players coming from Cuba and Korea at more advanced ages (i.e team controllable years at older ages) skews the accuracy of BA or skews your results to thinking that there are better performing younger players.Rogernoreply@blogger.com