Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Otto von Ballpark

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,662

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Otto von Ballpark

  1. Otto von Ballpark
    That hypothetical does not illustrate a problem with WAR. WAR is estimating a player's value to a team. After the first couple Buxtons (heck, after the first one, presuming his current bat wouldn't play in a corner), the other Buxtons would be of decreasing value to their team. True, any of the 9 Buxtons could theoretically play CF and capture the highest WAR value -- it seems arbitrary to give it to just one. But that's not what WAR is trying to estimate either. WAR isn't (and can't) give theoretical credit to a player for something his team doesn't ask him to do. It can't credit a pitcher for value they could create as a starter when his team only uses him in relief; it can't credit a prospect for what they could contribute in MLB when his team keeps him in AAA. Does the positional adjustment (Rpos) feel a little theoretical and arbitrary? Perhaps. It's debiting Palka for something didn't exactly happen on the field. But keep in mind, WAR is measuring a player's value to a team, not in isolation. And we know each team is subject to the defensive spectrum -- it's harder defensively to be (or find) an average CF than an average 1B. If a team chooses to use an average CF at 1B, there is actual value they are leaving on the table -- and I think it would more arbitrary to ignore it rather than at least try to estimate it.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Did you read the link I posted from B-Ref? I think you are expecting a precision from WAR which isn't intended. It's an estimate of value. No one who is using WAR properly will claim that a random CF at 3 WAR is definitively more valuable than Kepler in RF at 2 WAR, for the reasons you mention and also simply the general concept of errors in our measurements. (Even if they play the same positions, rendering Rpos equal, most take WAR numbers with a plus/minus 0.5 margin of error, perhaps more depending on the defensive component.) If WAR didn't exist, I think most would estimate Palka's overall value exactly the same -- better than replacement, but below average. MLB team behavior seems to confirm this -- teams don't consider 27 dingers alone as all that important or valuable. This isn't a new WAR thing. Tony Batista was losing jobs with that profile before most knew that WAR existed.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    No way in the world? Pillar, Hamilton, and Bourjos have all been considered MLB contributors of value recently, with careers OBPs less than .300. Lagares too at exactly .300, and Leonys Martin at .303. Buxton's .285 is lower than these guys, but not by much -- it's not as if there is a bright dividing line at .290 or something. (And historically, keep in mind that leaguewide OBP is down 15 points from just 10 years ago, OPS is down 50 points from 20 years ago, and strikeout rates are way up too, which might explain the lack of unadjusted comps from the 1990s and 2000s.) Obviously this isn't MVP or even all-star level -- it's much closer to average. And value based on speed and defense is less sustainable long-term, due to injuries and age -- very few guys (generally infielders?) can make a 10+ year career out of doing this. And expectations were undoubtedly higher for Buxton than these others guys. (And Buxton's performance has been variable enough to question whether he could actually sustain his overall career OPS.) But my specific point, that a player can contribute overall value in MLB with Buxton's career batting line, is true. This was considered true long before the advent of WAR and defensive metrics too. (Ironically, the early proponents of WAR probably would have agreed with you, that measurable offense trumps any possibe defensive value.) Edit to add: I think we are in agreement when you say "I am willing to put up with him around his fictional 162 game average.Then again, if he does that I try look for another option in CF for 2020.Honestly." Nobody ever looked to commit to Hamilton or Bourjos long-term, and I wouldn't do so for Buxton if that is the type of player he proved to be. But he still could provide us some value in the short term.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Isn't WPA highly context-dependent? Similar to RBI? Sounds like Palka hit a few more dingers in closer games. I don't think anyone considers that a repeatable skill. Palka posted a respectable 111 OPS+ as a rookie, but his peripherals were pretty bad (6% BB%, 34% K%) and they weren't much better in the minors. And he's already 27 years old now, with zero or negative defensive and baserunning value. Barring any shocking development going forward, I really don't see how the Twins could regret losing him -- similar or better players are available as nontenders or bargain FA every year.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    It's a medicinal leech. The player's union apparently prohibits the team doctors from trying bloodletting on him.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Check out the section "Rpos, Positional Adjustment Runs" at the following link: https://www.baseball-reference.com/about/war_explained_position.shtml It is worth quantifying, and this is probably the best way. It's not going to apply perfectly and evenly to every player -- Kepler might be an example of that. Maybe he is capable of playing a league average CF, but isn't given the opportunity? In that case, though, the player is usually able to record above-average defensive performance in the corner outfield, which offsets some of the negative Rpos credit. And teams are incentivized to correct these situations too -- the Twins are likely wasting resources by keeping an average CF in a corner spot long-term. So if this is really the case, the Twins will try to find a way to get him opportunities in CF, either in Minnesota or elsewhere as a trade asset. But Palka is a really odd case on which to raise this question! By all accounts, he's a bad corner OF, so much so that he was often banished to DH. He's also a bad hitter aside from the dingers, sometimes even finding himself on the bench on one of the league's worst teams. His WAR suggests his performance was above replacement level, but below the level of a competent starter. I'd say it has pegged him pretty well, no? Even the league's behavior seems to conform with this conclusion -- Chris Carter was considered nearly worthless after leading the league in HR, a better hitter in Cron was non-tendered, etc.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    If Buxton was a consistent .672 OPS hitter, capable of playing a healthy 162 games to make his 162 game average relevant, his present value case would actually be better than it really is. That is all I meant about understatement. Buxton's chief problem is that he is often well below a .672 OPS and/or hurt, moreso than that his career OPS is only .672. Keep in mind, the comment to which you first responded on this thread was "Even if Buxton’s bat struggles again, he continues to provide value through his defense and base running abilities." Quoting Buxton's .672 career OPS in response to that is actually reinforcing the point -- it's only .057 below average for the position, and it's not that hard to see excellent defense/baserunning making up a .057 gap in OPS. And an average player is undoubtedly contributing value as the original poster said, even if we would like it to be more, and even if it's not sustainable long-term as defense/baserunning erodes with age. That is all I was responding to, and that is all I intended to discuss. So I will bow out of this tangent now.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    But actual defense (Rfield) is calculated relative to position, it is not absolute. So Palka is -11 Rfield compared to other corner outfielders. Hicks is +3 compared to other CF. Rpos is simply an attempt to put them on the same scale. It's even worse than that for Palka -- 40% of his starts were at DH, which has no defensive baseline with which to compare. DH is Palka's primary source of negative Rpos credit, and judging by his -11 Rfield in only 62 starts relative to the average defensive corner outfielder, this DH penalty is absolutely justified for him. You don't even need Rpos to see it. The 1991 Twins intuitively knew that Shane Mack was more valuable than Chili Davis, even more than the difference in batting lines and defense relative to position would suggest.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    By definition, there won't be many .672 OPS (80 OPS+) regulars. In order to do that, one needs to play a premium defensive position, and one needs to be one of the best defenders in the game at that position. It's going to be fairly uncommon. But Buxton does play a premium position, and there is evidence he is among the best defenders. If Buxton actually had a full season .672 OPS as your first post in this thread alluded to (and called a "black hole"), Buxton would likely contribute just as much value to the Twins as Greg Gagne did, or rookie Knoblauch did. He wouldn't be a star, but he'd easily be an average or above average regular overall. That doesn't mean that Buxton and the Twins shouldn't strive for more than a 80 OPS+, or that there aren't glaring concerns about his game right now. Chiefly, the ~.550 OPS months, which are truly black holes, and health are the obvious ones. If anything, the .672 career OPS, which you introduced to this thread, actually understates the concern about him -- that was what struck me about your post. I'm not making excuses for him, or coddling him, as you so often object.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    MLB salaries/incentives cannot be performance-based. They can only be based on playing time (games / plate appearances, innings, etc. -- although relievers can also do "games finished" which is often a shorthand for closer performance).
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    Maybe it should make you look closer at the data you just posted instead. You posted that Buxton's career OPS is .672 and said that was a black hole in the lineup. Well, MLB CF collectively posted only a .726 OPS in 2018. The league non-pitcher OPS was only .740. In that context, .672 isn't good, of course. But it's not a black hole either, and certainly not anything that good defense and baserunning can't vault to average or even above-average overall performance, which was the contention of the post to which your were originally responding. You don't even need to WAR to see that either -- Buxton's career OPS+ relative to the league is 80, and Greg Gagne's was 83 during his tenure with the Twins. Chuck Knoblauch posted a 90 and 91 in 2 of his first 3 seasons. Nobody really disputed that those guys were still valuable overall performers, with or without WAR (although I feel that WAR is a handy shorthand for illustrating the concept). Buxton is certainly capable of even worse, truly "black hole" type performances in smaller samples, and there are posters here who have argued those bad months have an outsized effect on his overall value. But his overall numbers which you presented, by themselves, don't suggest a black hole that can't be overcome by defense and baserunning.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Looks like we're gonna need a bigger napkin (to calculate on the back of).
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Buxton's 162 game average is also 3.7 WAR. That seems like more good than harm.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    If one trusts the Castro projection, and assumes he's a similar framer to Realmuto, the projection difference is just 1.4-1.8 WAR (based on 416-512 PA). If one doesn't trust the Castro projection, you are right that the gap could widen with more playing time for Garver (based on framing). But the gap could also hold steady or even narrow with Astudillo -- Fangraphs said "BP’s framing metrics graded his minor-league receiving in a positive manner": https://blogs.fangraphs.com/another-fascinating-thing-about-willians-astudillo/
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Fangraphs is projecting almost 100 extra PA for Realmuto over Castro, and a 2.1 WAR advantage for Realmuto. Prorated, if Realmuto only played as much as Castro is projected, there would only be about 1.4 WAR between them. If you think Castro would play less, and Garver/Astudillo more, it could be an even smaller difference, because Garver and Astudillo both project better (on a WAR per PA rate basis) than Castro.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, while Fangraphs projects Realmuto at 3.6 WAR, they also project the Twins current catching group at 2.5 WAR. So adding Realmuto may only net us 1.1 WAR by those projections. Although there are certainly more factors that can be considered beyond just the projections. And indeed, the difference in actual catcher WAR between the Marlins and Twins was 2.9 for 2018.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    If those ace pitchers aren't available, then it's kind of beside the point, isn't it? The point of my response was, if you are really considering pulling the trigger on Realmuto (at whatever price), but you also think "man, I'd rather have an ace for the same price" -- you might still be better off trading for Realmuto, rather than waiting for an ace that may never come. Of course, it doesn't sound like you are really considering trading for Realmuto at this price. Which is defensible too, but it doesn't really have anything to do with aces.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Do you think Realmuto will fetch significantly more than Kirilloff? I've thought that in the past, but after Kirilloff's 2018, and the fact that they are the Marlins, I am not so sure. I think they could be a match.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    The Marlins have a long history of dealing players, often for less than inspiring returns. I think we can all agree that we'd like to see the Twins involved, regardless of what price we are comfortable with.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    I know Kirilloff could be the next Yelich -- but it's worth noting that, until last season, Yelich never really achieved much more than what Realmuto is doing right now, and is projected to do this season. There's still value in that, of course, but it's not as lopsided as you might think. Also, Yelich didn't achieve that until year 5 of team control. It also took an extension to make Yelich really valuable. Can the current front office do that?
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't know, we've been hearing about Mets pitchers coming available forever. But the Mets have the resources to consistently reload, I don't think you can really count on them to sell.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    I disagree. I don't think a Kirilloff-led package would get you either Syndergaard or Kluber right now. Those teams are trying to win (and in Kluber's case, his team is in direct competition with the Twins). I think if you change this from an abstract thought to reality, you will find there are few if any pitchers on that level who would be available for a Kirilloff-led package. (Edit to add: I know Kirilloff raked in 2018 and is ranked well, but he is also a corner player who has yet to play in AA. I think he is a clear step below up-the-middle top prospects like Lewis, which is probably the minimum prospect quality that would be required to pry Syndergaard or Kluber right now.)
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Keep in mind, Lucroy wasn't traded until he was already 30 years old. Realmuto isn't quite yet 28. (It might be a data point against an extension, more than against a trade.)
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually, I could see them going without a no-trade clause, or with a weaker one, especially in Minnesota -- as long as they have opt-out clauses. So then, in theory, you could trade them in a few years just before their opt out, effectively as a rental.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
×
×
  • Create New...