Shandler: Trout's Decline Was Expected

[DOUGHBOYS]

Thanks for the debate, Glenn and Todd.
It's been a long week for me and this is quite therapeutic

One thing I think we all can agree with, there's more than one avenue to success at this game. We all use what we're comfortable with and what we believe in while trying to achieve that success.

Thanks to you too Doughy. One of the fun parts of this hobby and especially these boards is getting to give your opinions and weigh it against those whose opinions you respect even when disagreeing.

Ain't it the truth!
A lot of us cut our teeth being 'in' on a game with pools.
Sometimes, these pools are won by women who vote for favorite colors or maybe who has the best 'tight ends'.
In the meantime, a bettor can analyze all week and get drubbed by these women.

These women represent the lower end of the spectrum when putting work into a pool or fantasy sport. The sum of their 'work' comes in the few minutes it takes to fill out their pools and fantasize about a New England 'tight end'.

The other side would be the Numerish. They are analyzing, re-analyzing, and when they get a minute, analyze some more.
If betting, we'll bet on the Numerish to win. It's the smart play.
But sometimes we'll lose that bet.
Things happen for no reason sometimes.
It makes the girls squeal like a night with Mike The Mouth.
It makes the Numerish go back and hit the books.
And for those of us in the middle....We learn from these opposite spectrums and know that sometimes, all information is not needed.

[BK METS]

An example - Miguel Cabrera's BABIP in 2012 was 34th overall at .331, which incidentally was only .001 point above his actual batting average for the year of .330. He was behind names such as Danny Espinosa. What does this say about Miguel Cabrera? Does it say he is slow or unlucky? I am not sure anyone really has the answer. This is the problem. One thing for certain, guys with speed normally have a higher than average BABIP. Ichiro being one of the top all time BABIP hitters. Guys who are slow tend to have a lower BABIP. Other than that, I cannot find any consistency to the stat, year to year, while a player like Miggy consistently puts up big HR/RBI/BA numbers, his BABIP is all over the place.

So, from what I am hearing, inconsistency is the point of BABIP. It shows how lucky or unlucky a player is, after putting a ball in play. I suppose that explains MIggy's 2012 season. He was actually rather unlucky based upon BABIP .. sucks for him. He only won the triple crown.

[ToddZ]

An example - Miguel Cabrera's BABIP in 2012 was 34th overall at .331, which incidentally was only .001 point above his actual batting average for the year of .330. He was behind names such as Danny Espinosa. What does this say about Miguel Cabrera? Does it say he is slow or unlucky? I am not sure anyone really has the answer. This is the problem. One thing for certain, guys with speed normally have a higher than average BABIP. Ichiro being one of the top all time BABIP hitters. Guys who are slow tend to have a lower BABIP. Other than that, I cannot find any consistency to the stat, year to year, while a player like Miggy consistently puts up big HR/RBI/BA numbers, his BABIP is all over the place.

So, from what I am hearing, inconsistency is the point of BABIP. It shows how lucky or unlucky a player is, after putting a ball in play. I suppose that explains MIggy's 2012 season. He was actually rather unlucky based upon BABIP .. sucks for him. He only won the triple crown.

Sorry, but there's a whole lot of inaccuracy in this. Speed is third in the hierarchy.

Players that

1. Hit the ball hard
2. Hit line drives
3. Are fast

have higher than average BABIP's. Speed is important, but not the be all end all. Speed does no good if you're hitting fly balls - just ask Willie Mays Hayes.

With respect to Miggy, his BABIP was a little below his career mark. I wouldn't call it unlucky so much as within his expected skill set, just a little lower than the average of what he has done in the past.

When something is all over the place - what does that tell you? If should tell you that there is a whole lot of luck involved with the metric. When it is all over the place LOW, he's unlucky, like in 2008. When it's all over the place HIGH, he's lucky like in 2011 and so far this season. But his all over the place is .345 +/- .040.

A lesser hitter will be .275 +/-40 (or whatever.)

Miggy's LD rate is 21.4% - well above league average. He also has an above average percent of hard hit balls. That' why his baseline (.345) is so high. The variance is a combination of luck and skills not being static.

[Glenneration X]

An example - Miguel Cabrera's BABIP in 2012 was 34th overall at .331, which incidentally was only .001 point above his actual batting average for the year of .330. He was behind names such as Danny Espinosa. What does this say about Miguel Cabrera? Does it say he is slow or unlucky? I am not sure anyone really has the answer. This is the problem. One thing for certain, guys with speed normally have a higher than average BABIP. Ichiro being one of the top all time BABIP hitters. Guys who are slow tend to have a lower BABIP. Other than that, I cannot find any consistency to the stat, year to year, while a player like Miggy consistently puts up big HR/RBI/BA numbers, his BABIP is all over the place.

So, from what I am hearing, inconsistency is the point of BABIP. It shows how lucky or unlucky a player is, after putting a ball in play. I suppose that explains MIggy's 2012 season. He was actually rather unlucky based upon BABIP .. sucks for him. He only won the triple crown.

Actually my fellow Mets fan, Miggy's BABIP was higher than league average last season just as it has been every year of his career. While it's true that his BABIP was slightly lower than his career baseline, I think that can be more attributed to a BA and K-rate that remained in line with career averages combined with a spike in his HR/FB and home runs in general rather than any random luck factor.

By the way, this year both Miggy's BABIP and HR/FB are at or around career highs. What does it all mean? I'm not sure, but I sure wish I had Miggy on a few of my teams (and yes I know, I didn't need any metric whatsoever to tell me that ).


And Doughy, I ALWAYS lost to the girls in those football pools.

[Money]

I know to draft Miggy number 1 every year, no matter what this stat says

[knuckleheads]

Ah, Money. Nothing like a post to bring a thread full circle...Mike Trout will be the prize of each draft for the foreseeable future.

There was a legitimate debate coming into the season that last year's performance was a fluky result from a good player. Now 60 games into this year, there is little doubt, Mike Trout is a player we haven't seen the likes of.

He only hits the ball hard, usually on a line. His home runs are line drives. If his line drives are too low, then he is standing on third by the time the fielder gathers the ball off the fence. Anything not directly at a fielder might be a double. Perhaps most importantly, he does not swing at pitches he cannot hit hard. This leads to more strikeouts, but it also leads to the attributes listed.

Per Zola's BABIP contributing skills (hits hard, hits flat, runs fast), Trout is in a league of his own...as for Cabrera, he's meat loaf ( two out of three ain't bad).

[Navel Lint]

.......there is little doubt, Mike Trout is a player we haven't seen the likes of.

I picture DOUGHBOYS at his desk right now preparing a little history lesson

[Money]

There will always be a player or two in the mix with Miggy every year until he doesn't put up the unbelievably consistent numbers that he does year in and year out. Next year it looks like Cargo will slide into the mix. Braun, Kemp, Trout, Cargo there will be someone every year. The one constant is Miguel Cabrera. For me, give me the 8 year running record over the 1 year plus of Trout. This combined with the infield slot being taken over an OF spot and it's a no brainer. Defensive styles and vulnerability to injury play a part also. If I were drafting a team today for the remainder of the season, Cabrera is the choice, no question.

I can honestly say I have never passed on him in a draft if available and I don't think I'll be starting anytime soon.

Happy Fathers Day Everyone!!

[Captain Hook]

that fish is regressing again .....

[Greg Ambrosius]

For many of you that don't know, Ron Shandler became a free agent this season and has left BaseballHQ.com into the hands of USA Today. He has now started a new site at:

ronshandler.com

If I were Ron, I'd debut this site with a big headline that said "I WAS WRONG ON MIKE TROUT" and have fun with that story. That would get people to check out his new site right away.

Anyway, I think a lot of you folks know I respect Ron a lot and I admire all that he's done in 25+ years in the fantasy baseball industry. He's a baseball guy, through and through. He's also a great stats guy, an analytical guy and if he felt Trout would regress he must have seen something others didn't. But now he should market that on his new site!!

Check it out and good luck Ron. I know you'll do well in this second career.

[knuckleheads]

Nice suggestion, Greg. However, Shandler just gave his confession away for free on Sirius XM. One of the Rotowire guys asked him the question, "What about Mike Trout," and Shandler didn't handle it that well. He acted a little putout to have been asked, then said, "I was just wrong. He's clearly at top five player."

[whale4evr]

Who will be doing the Forecaster now?

[ToddZ]

Ron will still be contributing to Baseball HQ. The day to day operations are in the more than capable hands of Ray Murphy (long time NFBC participant) and Brent Hershey.

I'm not 100% sure how they are handling the Forecaster - on the recent First Pitch Forum Arizona promotion, one of the inclusions was Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster. Either way, I'm willing to bet you won't notice the difference either way.

I'm actually now going to be contributing to BHQ - I have a regular weekly spot on HQ Radio and will be doing some research and other features for them.

[Edwards Kings]

Ron will still be contributing to Baseball HQ. The day to day operations are in the more than capable hands of Ray Murphy (long time NFBC participant) and Brent Hershey.

I'm not 100% sure how they are handling the Forecaster - on the recent First Pitch Forum Arizona promotion, one of the inclusions was Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster. Either way, I'm willing to bet you won't notice the difference either way.

I'm actually now going to be contributing to BHQ - I have a regular weekly spot on HQ Radio and will be doing some research and other features for them.

Congrats Todd. Baseball HQ will be better for your contributions.

[Glenneration X]

I'm actually now going to be contributing to BHQ - I have a regular weekly spot on HQ Radio and will be doing some research and other features for them.

Man, they'll let anyone write for that site.

[rmurph3]

I'm not 100% sure how they are handling the Forecaster - on the recent First Pitch Forum Arizona promotion, one of the inclusions was Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster. Either way, I'm willing to bet you won't notice the difference either way.

Yup, the Forecaster continues on as normal. It's still "Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster". Ron will be writing the introduction as always, and heavily involved in the overall process. There will probably be some changes in how the sausage is made, but (assuming we do it right) nothing that will jump out at the reader.

And yes, we're very glad to have Todd (and Glenn for that matter) contributing under the HQ banner.

Ray

[DOUGHBOYS]

I'm not 100% sure how they are handling the Forecaster - on the recent First Pitch Forum Arizona promotion, one of the inclusions was Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster. Either way, I'm willing to bet you won't notice the difference either way.

Yup, the Forecaster continues on as normal. It's still "Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster". Ron will be writing the introduction as always, and heavily involved in the overall process. There will probably be some changes in how the sausage is made, but (assuming we do it right) nothing that will jump out at the reader.

And yes, we're very glad to have Todd (and Glenn for that matter) contributing under the HQ banner.

Ray

Ray, thanks again for the autograph. You're a good sport.
A pleasure sitting next to you at the draft.
Now, if you can concoct some kind of formula to take down KJ, I'm all ears

[rmurph3]

That would be some formula, all right. We could merge teams and I'm not sure it would help...

[Captain Hook]

Angel "Fish" currently on pace for 112, 27, 104, 36, .315

[KJ Duke]

I'm actually now going to be contributing to BHQ - I have a regular weekly spot on HQ Radio and will be doing some research and other features for them.

Man, they'll let anyone write for that site.

With Ray running the show, Todd and Glenn contributing and presumably no crazy Trout calls I might have to subscribe next season!

[Floyd]

Final word on the "Trout wars" -- Mike Trout did basically repeat his historic rookie season.

Below are follow-ups on on my predictions/rationale that Trout *should* repeat, posted May 7 when Trout was hitting .274:

Shandler's original article for Baseball HQ, "Don't Draft Mike Trout" was essentially a publicity stunt, and not his first one. (Ever wonder how many books he sold because of the "LIMA Plan"?). Now that Trout is off to a slow start, the USA Today article is basically Shandler's I-told-you-so.

Here was my (unpublished) response to "Don't Draft Mike Trout"...

1. Trout's power did not come from nowhere, he had an ISO of .218 in AA in 2011, and an ISO of .221 in AAA in 2012.

- note: Trout's power continued with a .234 ISO in 2013

2. Shandler's intro to the 2013 Forecaster insinuates that 2012's outlier performances (such as Trout's) may result from the use of PEDs. Not to suggest this is true, but if an outlier in a data set has a proposed cause, is it correct to assume the cause will be removed and the outlier will regress?

3. Trout logged a BABIP over .400 at three levels -- Rookie League (2009), A ball (2009-10), and AAA (2012) -- plus a .390 at AA (2011). Wasn't Trout's 2011 Angels BABIP (.247) the real outlier rather than his .383 from 2012?

- Trout posted a .376 BABIP in 2013.

4. Playing Time: Trout has logged 600+ Plate appearances each of the last three seasons (majors/minors combined). Isn't Trout, hitting top-of-order, more likely to do this again than most first-rounders?

- Trout had 716 plate appearances in 2013.

5. Fly Ball Rate: Shandler says Trout's 33% FB% from 2012 is too low for a home run hitter. What about his 40% FB% from 2011?

- Trout's 2013 flyball rate was 35.6%.

6. Regression: Wouldn't .300, 110, 25, 75, 40 still be worth an early first round draft pick?

- Trout's actual 2013 stats: .323, 109, 27, 97, 33

7. Why would Shandler consider Bryce Harper, a player a year younger with fewer major league at bats, less likely to regress than Trout on the basis of maturity factors?

- Harper's playing time declined even from his partial rookie season, and was not worthy of a first-round pick in 2013.

8. Shandler says Trout's increased body weight no longer fits his stolen base profile. If so, doesn't it enhance his home run profile? To add a qualitative angle: did Trout actually look heavy, or slow this Spring?

- Trout stole 33 bases in 40 2013 attempts.

9. Isn't Trout's potential to play 23 more games at the major league level a reasonable hedge against regression?

- Trout played 18 more games in 2013 than 2012.

10. Among the following first round Speed/Power targets: Trout, McCutcheon (Batting average/power), Braun (playing time), Kemp (power, playing time), can't we make a good case that all of them are less likely than Trout to return first round value?

- McCutcheon's batting average declined slightly (.317 from .327) and home runs declined (21 from 31) in 2013.
- Braun's playing time declined (suspension).
- Kemp's power and playing time declined.

11. Mickey Mantle also debuted at age 19 and broke out at age 20. Did Mantle experience a single regression season before, say, age 27?

12. Yes, speed is available later in the draft. But how often does that speed come with a high batting average, 129 runs scored, 30 HR, or 83 RBI, let alone all of the above? This package together is not replaceable. Not a single other player is capable of matching his 2012 season, yet Trout (still) has a possibility to exceed it.

- Trout exceeded his 2013 output in At Bats, Hits, Doubles, Triples, RBI, Walks, and OBP.

[bjoak]

That was good analysis, Floyd. Yes, the thing about that article was it was mostly arguing against projections by using arguments that should be taken into account while projecting. A good model has appropriate regression built in, will regress more for players with less history, and will account for good minor league traslations.

Most of the projection systems have all that built in and still projected him well so it's sort of like shouting 'fire' in the proverbial theatre when there is, in fact, no fire. I'd be interested to see the forecaster's original line for Trout. If you argue for regression and your projection says otherwise, aren't you arguing that you project incorrectly?

[sek729]

It's unfair to jump down Shandler's neck for a missed call. His track record is superb. Every one of us, every season has had guys we completely whiffed on, and guys who we wrote off that had huge years. It happens to everyone, even the best.

[whale4evr]

Yes, we all remember Joba and Mike Jacobs. But we still buy the Forecaster.

[Hells Satans]

It's unfair to jump down Shandler's neck for a missed call. His track record is superb. Every one of us, every season has had guys we completely whiffed on, and guys who we wrote off that had huge years. It happens to everyone, even the best.

It wasn't a missed call. It was a calculated attempt to go out of his way to take a contrarian view. It was ridiculous at the time and was proven to be even more ridiculous over the course of the year. He did get some attention though, and I guess that was the intention.