Thread: Article: The Blizzard of Oz

It's pretty clear that you haven't followed hardly any prospects from the minors to the majors. BA usually drops and it usually drops a lot. Throwing out a projection that is 4 pts higher than his best season ever is WAY over optimistic.

Why is Sano's scouting report at all relevant to Hicks? Sano has struggled to hit for average for one season and he actually is a special prospect. Hicks has struggled to hit for average for 3.5 seasons and that is a relevant sample size. At the very least do you have a scouting report that suggests that Hicks will hit for average?

Here are career MiLB and MLB BA's of most of the Twins that have succeeded at the MLB level in the last decade. I hope I don't need to tell you what the trend is.
Mauer MiLB BA = .330 and MLB BA = .323
Kubel .320 - .268
Cuddyer .291 - .271
Morneau .311 - .280
Span .286 - .284
Hunter .270 - .277 - the only player whose average went up
Koskie .288 - .275
Bartlett .299 - .271
Jones .295 - .277
Lecroy .290 - .260
Ortiz .310 - .285
Guzman .278 - .271
Hicks career MiLB .271

Do you have any idea how much of a statistical outlier it would be for Hicks to hit .290 in the majors? Like I said before .260's is what Hicks will likely hit and it could be much worse based on how much BA typically drops for MLB hitters.

Originally Posted by kab21

BA usually drops and it usually drops a lot.

Here are career MiLB and MLB BA's of most of the Twins that have succeeded at the MLB level in the last decade. I hope I don't need to tell you what the trend is.
Mauer MiLB BA = .330 and MLB BA = .323
Kubel .320 - .268
Cuddyer .291 - .271
Morneau .311 - .280
Span .286 - .284
Hunter .270 - .277 - the only player whose average went up
Koskie .288 - .275
Bartlett .299 - .271
Jones .295 - .277
Lecroy .290 - .260
Ortiz .310 - .285
Guzman .278 - .271
Hicks career MiLB .271

Do you have any idea how much of a statistical outlier it would be for Hicks to hit .290 in the majors? Like I said before .260's is what Hicks will likely hit and it could be much worse based on how much BA typically drops for MLB hitters.

While your point may be correct, if you're projecting ceiling, wouldn't it be more informative and accurate to look at the BEST season of the players on that list? Most of them had at least one major league season with a BA better than the overall minor league average listed. Some by quite a margin, and some did it several times. Maybe best major league average compared to best minor league is an even better way to go?

Why would I be interested in BEST MLB season? If I'm projecting someone then I'm projecting what you can expect him to do EVERY season and not just one flukey high BAPIP season. Hicks has .260's (or maybe even .250's) hitter written all over him. Luckily he walks a lot, plays great defense and has some (not 25 HR) power. Putting up a .700-.750 OPS with good CF defense is a very valuable player. Putting up mnfanforlife's numbers not only make him an all star but he's also an MVP candidate. That's how ridiculous those numbers are for a player of Hicks' track record.

I now understand your comment. Ceiling doesn't equal Best season. Ceiling is what kind of player the prospect becomes for his career (or at least his 5 yr peak).

Originally Posted by kab21

Why would I be interested in BEST MLB season? If I'm projecting someone then I'm projecting what you can expect him to do EVERY season and not just one flukey high BAPIP season. Hicks has .260's (or maybe even .250's) hitter written all over him. Luckily he walks a lot, plays great defense and has some (not 25 HR) power. Putting up a .700-.750 OPS with good CF defense is a very valuable player. Putting up mnfanforlife's numbers not only make him an all star but he's also an MVP candidate. That's how ridiculous those numbers are for a player of Hicks' track record.

Because the projection you were responding to was a one-season line.

"Throwing out a projection that is 4 pts higher than his best season ever is WAY over optimistic" - sounds like a contradiction to me. Four pts on a batting average is insignificant. There is no doubt in my mind Hicks can hit.290 in the major leagues someday. Its not WAY over-optimistic. .260 is more likely, but I don't give a crap about your practical visions. Thanks for reading my posts. They must be good since you feel the need to inject and infect them with boredom.

Originally Posted by mnfanforlife

Thanks for reading my posts. They must be good since you feel the need to inject and infect them with boredom.

I think you're confused about how your posts are coming off.

Originally Posted by CDog

Because the projection you were responding to was a one-season line.

....being used to project what we can expect of his career. I guess you could argue he was saying that was going to be his career-year, but then it leaves us all hanging on what a typical season would look like. I think it's far more rational to believe that projection was of a typical year. Otherwise that original post had even less merit than kab is arguing it has.

You could be right, but it's highly unlikely that's what he meant.

I'm sure Hicks will have a year (probably several) that he hits over his career minor league BA, but like most everyone else, his career MLB average likely will not be higher than his career MiLB average.

However, seeing as his MiLB average is low likely due to his high strikeout totals, and if those totals are high because he is being too selective (unlike most MiLB'ers who have high K% because they chase evey breaking ball thrown), that may be something he can adjust if the team asks him to. In that situation I could see his average remain what it is at the MiLB level. Of course by asking him to be less selective, you also have to expect his BB% and by proxy his OBP to decrease, so is that really a trade off we should advocate the team to make?

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

....being used to project what we can expect of his career. I guess you could argue he was saying that was going to be his career-year, but then it leaves us all hanging on what a typical season would look like. I think it's far more rational to believe that projection was of a typical year. Otherwise that original post had even less merit than kab is arguing it has.

You could be right, but it's highly unlikely that's what he meant.

Based on subsequent posts, it seems more like he meant the best he could be. Also based on subsequent posts, it seems like he may think he can do it for years and years. So I really have no idea.

Originally Posted by CDog

Based on subsequent posts, it seems more like he meant the best he could be. Also based on subsequent posts, it seems like he may think he can do it for years and years. So I really have no idea.

So then perhaps rather than criticizing kab's reply, you should be seeking clarification from the original poster. Rationally, kab's interpretation is the only one that makes sense.

Ceiling projection or a "career-year" is what I had in mind with the numbers that have caused such sour moods. Sorry everyone. People will believe what they want. Including myself. I encourage all posters on TD to believe what they want as well. Go ahead and disagree, it makes this site more fun. Thank you. Have a good night.

Originally Posted by mnfanforlife

Ceiling projection or a "career-year" is what I had in mind with the numbers that have caused such sour moods.

That's not at all how your post came across. Having conversations about prospects isn't very productive if we've sprinkled them with magic prospect dust to make them well beyond reasonable projections.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

That's not at all how your post came across. Having conversations about prospects isn't very productive if we've sprinkled them with magic prospect dust to make them well beyond reasonable projections.

Haha! Sprinkled them with magic dust. Love it. Yeah, its fun to imagine the best in prospects. Sorry if I am wrong. I just am not afraid to be disappointed about this kind of stuff. It really is a gamble with no consequences for losing...for me. Not for everyone.

It strikes me more as unjustifiable optimism. That project was an MVP season. I like the guys coming through, but you have to be reasonable about what they may be. Kab's numbers showed it, and those numbers would look like that for most team's players. On that list, only Morneau was one where I kind of wonder if his would have been different had the concussion not happened.

The reason it bothers me is that a lot of people read the site and when they start seeing projections like this then they start believing that Hicks can be that type of player. And then they are disappointed when Hicks is hitting .265 with 14 HR's. He's a damn good player if he does that.

Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan

It strikes me more as unjustifiable optimism. That project was an MVP season. I like the guys coming through, but you have to be reasonable about what they may be. Kab's numbers showed it, and those numbers would look like that for most team's players. On that list, only Morneau was one where I kind of wonder if his would have been different had the concussion not happened.

.290 with 25 HR's and 35 Sb's is not an MVP season, in my opinion. All-Star yes, but honestly, its not that crazy of a projection. He is still just 23 and getting stronger. He can do it. But please...believe what you want. If that right is taken away from us, we are screwed.

Originally Posted by kab21

Hunter .270 - .277 - the only player whose average went up
.

Thank you for providing an example of how there are exceptions to nearly every statistical trend. Hicks may not have a better comparison as a player, than Torii Hunter.

Hunter never hit .300 in a full minor league season. He has since had seasons of .299 and .313 at age 33 and 36, respectively. I really like comparing Hunter to Hicks. Hunter never hit for power until about 24...so we will see if Hicks follows suit

Originally Posted by mnfanforlife

If that right is taken away from us, we are screwed.

What? No one is knocking down your door to take your rights. We're explaining why your projection isn't very realistic. Like if I predict 2013 will be a 50 homerun season for Mauer. COULD it happen? Sure, but it's so unrealistic that it's clownish. If you wish to project clownish numbers, no one is taking that right from you. It's just going to be pointed out that it's clownish.

Now, if we see some changes in his approach (ala Hunter) then we can start to alter projections. But it's going to be some major changes to reach your projection. And the thing is, he could be a DAMN good player at significantly less than your projection.