Is Kris Bryant going to win MVP?

[jersey cubs fan]

the extra two weeks of AAA was the difference that solved all the questions about Bryant

[David]

Bryant hit .327 in the minors, he was always going to be the exception to the rule that was too talented to put in a 'but what about his contact rate?' box.

 

It was an abysmal contact rate. He figured it out, but let's not pretend it was never in question.

[jersey cubs fan]

Bryant hit .327 in the minors, he was always going to be the exception to the rule that was too talented to put in a 'but what about his contact rate?' box.

 

It was an abysmal contact rate. He figured it out, but let's not pretend it was never in question.

the only question was whether he would just be a really good player or an MVP caliber player

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Bryant hit .327 in the minors, he was always going to be the exception to the rule that was too talented to put in a 'but what about his contact rate?' box.

 

It was an abysmal contact rate. He figured it out, but let's not pretend it was never in question.

 

It was never in question.

[David]

Bryant hit .327 in the minors, he was always going to be the exception to the rule that was too talented to put in a 'but what about his contact rate?' box.

 

It was an abysmal contact rate. He figured it out, but let's not pretend it was never in question.

the only question was whether he would just be a really good player or an MVP caliber player

 

lol ok.

[David]

Bryant hit .327 in the minors, he was always going to be the exception to the rule that was too talented to put in a 'but what about his contact rate?' box.

 

It was an abysmal contact rate. He figured it out, but let's not pretend it was never in question.

 

It was never in question.

 

This is a huge understatement; your position here is MASSIVELY aided by hindsight. But OK.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

It was an abysmal contact rate. He figured it out, but let's not pretend it was never in question.

 

It was never in question.

 

This is a huge understatement; your position here is MASSIVELY aided by hindsight. But OK.

 

I mean, you can search the archives to find me talking down Bryant worriers at pretty much every turn. Schwarber? Yes it's a valid concern. Soler? Yep. Baez? Without question. Not with Bryant.

[David]

If KB doesn't figure his swing out when he went about 4-5 weeks being horrible last year, what happens? There was a 100% chance he'd be able to successfully adapt his swing? Haven't we all seen enough baseball to see someone lose it and not be able to make the adjustments to fix it?

 

I'm not saying he was 100% figured out in July last year and that was the entire reason behind his struggles, but he was struggling badly, striking out 1/3 of the time, and it was right after that that we eventually heard he made his adjustments. There was still a real chance he wouldn't be able to do that, but he's a god and he did.

[jersey cubs fan]

Wait David, are you for serious on this?

 

Bryant was the best player in the draft, the easiest selection to make and he did nothing but produce from day one in the minors with no setbacks. The dude's ability was never in question. He was going to succeed, the question was to what degree.

[David]

 

It was never in question.

 

This is a huge understatement; your position here is MASSIVELY aided by hindsight. But OK.

 

I mean, you can search the archives to find me talking down Bryant worriers at pretty much every turn. Schwarber? Yes it's a valid concern. Soler? Yep. Baez? Without question. Not with Bryant.

 

Fair enough. You were right on his defense, I was wrong...but at the time there were questions. If he's just a LF (as was a very common position at the time) and doesn't successfully make the adjustments he had to make after the league figured him out a little bit, what would he be?

 

I'm not professing to be some kind of expert here. I was convinced Soler would be an offensive beast (maybe he still will be but I definitely overlooked how bad he was at everything else)...and I was sure Bryant was a shitty 3B from a handful of innings I saw (obviously dumb) + scouting reports. I'll give myself credit for thinking Javy would eventually be useful having that kind of offensive profile w/his athleticism and defensive ability though.

[squally1313]

Kinda straddling the middle here, but I think the 2015 version of Bryant was an excellent player, just not quite in the ways people expected him to be. While he was 8th in the league in offensive WAR, he was 'only' 19th in wOBA for the year, with the remaining value coming from him being the fourth best baserunner in the league and the 38th best defensive player, neither of which were really expected, and as such expected to regress a little bit going forward. With him being 3rd in the league in K% (a mixed bag of 2016 success in Chris Davis, Michael Taylor, Ian Desmond, and Joc Pederson joining him in the top 5), it wasn't unwarranted to worry about his minor flaws going forward. ZIPs had him projected as a 5.3 win player, due to similar offensive production and decreased baserunning/defensive contributions. Still an excellent player, but somewhere in the Matt Carpenter range as opposed to future MVP.

 

To Tim's point, yes there are players that show improvement, but there have been a few articles that have come out recently showing the amount of improvement once players reach the big leagues has gone down dramatically, due to improved minor league preparation, service time considerations, etc. Here's the first link that shows aging curves for wOBA, albeit coming up on three years old.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/hitters-no-longer-peak-only-decline/

 

A more recent article, linked below, breaks it down into different types of players, of which I'd say Bryant falls comfortable into the 'young old guy' category. That category shows improvement in the 22 to 25 age range, which makes sense for the 2015 to 2016 Bryant progression, but actually shows them aging worse than other types of players.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/are-player-types-aging-differently-now/

 

All in all, I never really doubted that he'd be a 4-5 win guy for the first ten years or so of his career. But there was at least some risk of the swing and miss issue never going away, and if the defense and baserunning value disappeared quickly (which for a 6'5" third baseman, isn't an outrageous predictionn), then his ceiling would have gone down significantly.

 

Obviously in hindsight, he fixed his biggest issue, and is now 7th in wOBA while providing a lot of value everywhere else. Dropping your K rate by 8% is really tough, especially when it's now a lower rate than anything he put up since low A. But he did it, he's turned into the dong monster we always dreamed he could be, and he'll be the MVP of the World Series favorites in about 5 weeks.

[imb]

 

It's not like he was wrong that it was a concern.

 

Bryant just fixed it.

 

kyle doesn't post here anymore so you dont need to suck his dick every time someone makes fun of him now

 

lol?

 

yeah, nevermind, sorry, kyle was completely wrong to worry about bryant's contact rate and defensive scouting reports coming up. MEA CULPA.

 

looks that way huh

http://i.imgur.com/p1h83jz.png

[David]

 

kyle doesn't post here anymore so you dont need to suck his dick every time someone makes fun of him now

 

lol?

 

yeah, nevermind, sorry, kyle was completely wrong to worry about bryant's contact rate and defensive scouting reports coming up. MEA CULPA.

 

looks that way huh

http://i.imgur.com/p1h83jz.png

 

oh, thanks, this argument was completely about whether kris bryant ended up being good or not. settled.

[imb]

 

lol?

 

yeah, nevermind, sorry, kyle was completely wrong to worry about bryant's contact rate and defensive scouting reports coming up. MEA CULPA.

 

looks that way huh

http://i.imgur.com/p1h83jz.png

 

oh, thanks, this argument was completely about whether kris bryant ended up being good or not. settled.

 

 

I'm glad you agreed to stop posting.

[George Hayduke]

I could be wrong, but didn't Kyle write a front page article at one point claiming that Arismendy Alcantara would end up being the most successful player from the Alcantara / Bryant / Baez / Soler group, owing to his higher contact rates?

 

I mean a lot of people (myself included) thought Alcantara would be quite valuable after his strong 2014 debut, and there was legit concern about the swing and miss tendencies of the other three guys. But even at the time, I thought the "Alcantara > Everyone" suggestion was doom bonerism run amok.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

[Tim]

I could be wrong, but didn't Kyle write a front page article at one point claiming that Arismendy Alcantara would end up being the most successful player from the Alcantara / Bryant / Baez / Soler group, owing to his higher contact rates?

 

I mean a lot of people (myself included) thought Alcantara would be quite valuable after his strong 2014 debut, and there was legit concern about the swing and miss tendencies of the other three guys. But even at the time, I thought the "Alcantara > Everyone" suggestion was doom bonerism run amok.

I remember sneaky being a big advocate that Alcantara would be better than Baez, but I don't remember Kyle writing anything like that for the front page.

[David]

i remember kyle writing something about alcantara being very good after a few weeks in the majors, possibly based on his contact rates, but i don't remember any specific indictment of other prospects as part of it.

 

seems like this would be easy enough to look up. probably somewhere in august/sept of 2014.

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm just bummed he didn't pan out because I liked his nickname so much.

[Cubswin11]

Why doesn't Kyle post here anymore? I think I've seen him in like 3 game threads the past few months and that's it

[George Hayduke]

i remember kyle writing something about alcantara being very good after a few weeks in the majors, possibly based on his contact rates, but i don't remember any specific indictment of other prospects as part of it.

 

seems like this would be easy enough to look up. probably somewhere in august/sept of 2014.

Yeah I just tried to look it up, but it was an article and not a thread so I think it was lost in the board crash.

 

I remember the title was a play on 3-2-1 Contact, it was something like "Contact Is the Answer and The Reason Why Alcantara Will Succeed Where Others Fail".

[UMFan83]

Why doesn't Kyle post here anymore? I think I've seen him in like 3 game threads the past few months and that's it

 

it was explained to me yesterday that the difference between living in California and living in North Dakota is a lot less time to spend on a message board because there is actually stuff to do in CA.

[Tim]

i remember kyle writing something about alcantara being very good after a few weeks in the majors, possibly based on his contact rates, but i don't remember any specific indictment of other prospects as part of it.

 

seems like this would be easy enough to look up. probably somewhere in august/sept of 2014.

Yeah I just tried to look it up, but it was an article and not a thread so I think it was lost in the board crash.

 

I remember the title was a play on 3-2-1 Contact, it was something like "Contact Is the Answer and The Reason Why Alcantara Will Succeed Where Others Fail".

I still have it in the database archive. The title is actually, "Why Alcantara will succeed where Lake and Olt didn't". If you can forgive the html tags, here is the text.

 

The Cubs' frequently underestimated hopes for 2015 rest on successfully transitioning multiple position prospects to the major leagues while yet again putting together an adequate pitching staff on the fly.  And one of those transitions is already underway: Arismendy Alcantara.

One of the biggest reasons for underrating the Cubs' near-term chances is simply giving up on projecting rookies. It's easier to just throw up your hands, say “well, they are rookies, who knows what you'll get from them,” and mark them down for nothing.

Cubs fans are feeling especially burned by Junior Lake, who turned 64 games of 284/332/428 (1.2 fWAR) last year into 213/242/371 (-0.4 fWAR) through 89 games this year. A piece that many thought was in place turned out to be irrevocably broken. Not to mention Mike Olt, who got rave reviews in spring training to earn a starting job, only to come in with 139/222/353 (-0.7 fWAR) in 72 games before being sent to Iowa.

So while Alcantara is posting a 258/351/455 line (0.8 fWAR) through 16 games with the Cubs, many are understandably reticent to feel comfortable that he's going to be a useful player in the major leagues.

But Alcantara is different, and here's why in one number: 77.3.

I'll take a quick step back. One of the most interesting recent trends in the saberfriendly section of baseball fandom has been the exodus from the box score. New streams of data (detailed play-by-play, PitchF/X) have given us a new appreciation for results that could most accurately be described as more pure. A double in the box score could be anything from a 397-foot line drive off the wall to a botched chop-bunt attempt. So we look at stats such as contact rate, ground ball/fly ball ratio, average fly ball distance, and we start to get a deeper understanding.

77.3% is Arismendy Alcantara's contact rate through 77 plate appearances.

Contact rate, literally the percentage of swings on which a batter makes contact (fouls included), is a wonderfully useful little stat. It stablizes very quickly, so that we can be sure we are seeing “real” talent more than variance in incredibly small sample sizes, as few as 40 plate appearances. It's fairly consistent year-to-year, and changes in it usually are a leading indicator on changes in production.

The 2014 MLB average is 79.4%, and the normal range tends to run from 70% to 90%. Guys on the low end of the range tend to either be high-power guys who can make up for their low contact rate by doing more damage when they do make contact, or they bring defensive value by playing demanding positions to make up for their offensive weaknesses.

Compare that with Junior Lake in 2013. In July, he put up a 68.1% contact rate in 61 plate appearances, and followed that up with 68.1% again in 123 Pas in August. A deeper takedown of all the ways that Junior Lake was a magical luckbox of unsustainability would be beyond the scope of this article, and sure enough in 2014, he has been exploited even further by MLB pitching, dropping his contact rate down to 61.4%.

Mike Olt averaged 65.5% in the majors, coming up empty 34.5% of the time he took the bat off his shoulders.

It was the same story in the minors:

Junior Lake

2011, 21, AA, 69.0%

2012, 22, AA, 67.4%

2013, 23, AAA, 73.1%

2013, 23, MLB, 66.5%

Arismendy Alcantara

2013, 21, AA, 73.8%

2014, 22, AAA, 74.1%

2014, 22, MLB, 77.3%

Lake's 2013 AAA, a total of 170 plate appearances, stand out as an odd outlier from the rest of his career, and one that I'd be fascinated to hear a scouting take on why, but that's also another story.

We can be fairly confident already that Alcantara has always been better at making contact than Junior Lake. Will he stay at 77.3%? Maybe. There's two opposing forces at work in the future: the downward pressure of the league getting a better “book” on him vs. the upward pressure of his talent getting better as he follows the aging curve. It's a young man's game in MLB right now, but at 22, Alcantara should still have some development left.

But he can afford a drop even if the book gets the better of him. His overall profile is one of a guy that should play up beyond his contact ability. He can at least credibly play either CF (2014 MLB average 264/325/397) or 2b (254/311/370), he should be a plus baserunner, and he's got a chance to continue showing average power, all of which give him plenty of margin for error even if pitchers knock his contact rate down to the low 70s. It would take a pretty big collapse from where he is now for him to be anything other than a productive MLB player.

And given that he'll be replacing plate appearances taken by such sink-holes of suck as Lake (-0.4 fWAR), Olt (-0.7 fWAR) and Darwin Barney (0.3 fWAR), it's not hard at all to imagine him being a 2-3 win upgrade for 2015.

Put enough of those upgrades together across eight lineup spots, five rotation spots and the various bench and bullpen jobs, and we could be at least credibly thinking about something we haven't seen at Wrigley in six years.

[Tracer Bullet]

Why doesn't Kyle post here anymore? I think I've seen him in like 3 game threads the past few months and that's it

 

it was explained to me yesterday that the difference between living in California and living in North Dakota is a lot less time to spend on a message board because there is actually stuff to do in CA.

 

or maybe it's b/c we're not terrible. it doesn't take a ton of time on kyle's post history to see that he's active when the cubs are struggling ("still a good chance this team doesn't win 90 games") and less active when they're doing well (he's bored with the winning).

 

Maybe what we're seeing is: Successful Cubs = Less Kyle.

[jersey cubs fan]

Why doesn't Kyle post here anymore? I think I've seen him in like 3 game threads the past few months and that's it

 

it was explained to me yesterday that the difference between living in California and living in North Dakota is a lot less time to spend on a message board because there is actually stuff to do in CA.

didn't he take over the cardinals website?