What's Next For Byron Buxton?

And if you are reading "firm conclusions" into what Chief or I have posted, you might be misreading us. The only "conclusion" I've drawn is that the start of Buxton's MLB career has been worse than any elite hitter's. Which probably lowers the odds of Buxton becoming an elite hitter.
 

It's a neat conclusion you have drawn, but fairly meaningless.  How many "elite hitters" have even had ML at bats at 21, let alone productive ones?  

Recent history; Trout, Machado, Harper... and...?  Buxton might not have the offensive upside of these once in a generation talents... oh well.  

Looking at some of last years Batting Leaders

Donaldson? 26 his rookie year

Goldschmidt? 23

Nelson Cruz? 25

AJ Pollock? 25

McCutcheon? 22

Kris Bryant? 23

Sure, age is a factor, but if Buxton's rough start is nothing to be concerned about at all in terms of his odds of becoming an elite MLB hitter, certainly there must be another elite hitter who debuted at 21-22 at a similarly poor level? Buxton debuted young but not exactly unusually young. Trout, Machado, Harper, Correa, Lindor, etc., going back through history. Did none of those guys have as rough a start as Buxton?

You're listing 5 guys... a few of which are under 25 and practically locks for the Hall of Fame already.  No, he did not start as well as them... throw in Ken Griffey Jr and A-Rod as well.  

That's as meaningful of sample size as posting his OPS+ (which someone else did above) in 50 plate appearances this year.  

The sample size of players making the Major leagues at ages 23 or 24 and becoming super stars is pretty damn big.  He's been terrible in his ~180 major league plate appearances which have been spread out over 2 seasons (most at 21 yo), with a DL stint mixed in there as well.

Josh Donaldson just won the American League MVP and was just getting his feet wet in low-A ball at 21.  

R-E-L-A-X

I'll reiterate: if Buxton winds up becoming one of the best hitters in MLB over a 5 to 10 year stretch or whatever, a level some here are still not worried about him achieving, will his first 187 PA in MLB go down as the worst first 187 PA among players in that group?

That doesn't mean it is impossible, of course, but doesn't it suggest that maybe his odds aren't as good as they were, say, 187 PA ago?

I'll reiterate - if he becomes one of the 5-10 best hitters in MLB will anyone care what his 1st 187 at bats looked like? He wasn't ready at 21 off an injury plagued, throw away season, oh well. 

To the 2nd question. No... again, many of the best hitters in MLB aren't even sniffing the majors at 21.  

Well stated. This existential concern for Buxton's career being on the brink- just a bit overblown- methinks.

Kris Bryant was swinging a metal bat at 21 and Byron Buxton's career was already over at that age, pretty sad!

It wasn't meant to be a definite sample, as evidenced by the "etc going back through history" part. I feel like my simple point is getting deliberately twisted here.

The point is, some folks here are not worried about Buxton becoming an elite MLB hitter, presumably over a meaningful 5 to 10 year stretch.

To my knowledge, no hitter has ever achieved that level of sustained success with as poor of a start as Buxton's over a comparable sample (187 PA).

I think it's fair to worry a little bit over that fact. Again, it is not impossible for him to achieve that level, and the worry probably doesn't rise to any actionable level, other than noting it on an internet forum, and maybe not as readily plugging him into projected lineups as an offensive savior.

But it seems odd to me to deny it completely. Baseball is a game of adjustments, true, but we have a long 100+ year history of no one making an adjustment of this particular degree.

Would it make you feel better if say, the DBacks had immediately sent Paul Goldschmidt at 21 after signing him out of College to the Majors, and he struck out a bunch, instead of sending him to Rookie ball which they did? 

I think its safe to say at this point Buxton was rushed... Just a guess, but if he spent all of last season, and half of this season in the minors his "1st 180 plate appearances" might look a little different, as a 22 year old (still younger than many "elite hitters") debuting in the Majors.  

I'm not really seeing in anyway how giving a baseline 1st 180 Major league PA test to players is in anyway meaningful. 

Kris Bryant, Paul Goldschmidt, and many others were in college at 21... Byron Buxton came from rural GA where he faced poor competition, spent most of his Age 20 season not playing, had ~250 PA's above A ball, and struck out a bunch in the Majors

Internet baseball commenters.

Seriously, though -- you don't think Buxton's epic K rate over 187 PA wouldn't get trotted out every time an elite hitting prospect scuffles out of the gate? Look at how often Trout's 2011 season gets bandied about, and that wasn't even a bad performance. Or even Mike Schmidt's poor BA and K rate, some 40 years after the fact.
 

Sure, they might point back to that... but I think the only meaningful thing people will talk about in 5-10 years is how it was pretty clear Buxton wasn't ready in 2015.  

Before I go any further in this, please state for me what you think MY position is. I think you are primarily arguing with a strawman and not with me.

I know you're point, and I strongly disagree. You think it is reasonable to lower expectations for Buxton because of his ML at bats thus far. 

We don't really need to go any further, I'm not going to change my mind that 180 PA at age 21/22 are fairly meaningless in the scheme of things.

You think it is reasonable to lower expectations for Buxton because of his ML at bats thus far.

 

I think maybe it's reasonable to lower expectations some because they were too high for someone:

 

- with an .870 career MiLB OPS,

- who reached that level of production only in AAA (his rookie, A and AA OPS's range between .790-.830

- who hasn't displayed a lot of power, and doesn't look like he will develop it any time soon

 

AND

 

- who struggled mightily in his first small taste(s) of the big leagues, including an alarming inability to make contact, or punish pitches that he did make contact with

I guess it depends what your expectations are. If his MLB ops is .870 he's a superstar. I think the best case scenario is a McCutcheon with better defense and slightly less power. McCutcheon had a minor league OPS almost .100 points less than Buxton fwiw. Also, McCutcheon hadn't even reached the majors by the age Buxton is today.

FYI, his ops in low A was .990 so your numbers are a little off.

or 2016...and very likely 2017.

Ok. That's an odd assumption to make, but sure

well, he's certainly not ready for 2016, since it's 2016 now.  Offensively, he's not even close, which puts into question 2017 as well.  So not sure what makes it odd.

Well it's May 9th and he's had all of 49 at bats in 2016, but yeah it's probably a good idea to let him tear up AAA for 2 full seasons because of those 49 at bats

well, your sarcasm aside, it's not just the results of his PAs that are the problem, it's how he looked during them, which would be totally lost.  I'm going to stop now since it's apparent by your tone with me and others you can't have a conversation about this topic without putting snark into your comments.

That wasn't intended to be sarcastic or snarky, it's May 9 2016, you don't think it's a tad preposterous to say someone considered by most to be a high end prospect who has something like an .875 ops in AAA right now won't be ready to hit Major league pitching this year OR next year?

That's fair, and we can agree to disagree there, but next time please leave the comments like "Byron Buxton's career was already over at that age, pretty sad!" at home, okay? That's just flat out rude to knowingly mischaracterize someone's statements like that.

I'm done with this.

I should have said "chance at stardom is over", that is what I meant