Stats and Context

[CubsWin]

Like many of you that post here, I've been following Cubs prospects as closely as I could for a long time, about 30 years now. Access to information has changed a lot over that span. Used to be you'd have to wait until the Sunday sports section to get the minor league stats for each level once a week. Outside of a Baseball America or Sporting News subscription, following how those stats progressed throughout the year was the best and, often, only information you had to go on. If there was a down on the farm section during the game's broadcast you'd definitely turn up the volume. If they brought in a member of the front office during a rain delay, I'd always stay and watch on the odd chance they'd talk about the prospects in the system.

 

That all changed with the internet. Every year there was greater access to information and stats, and chat boards became a thing. Then there were new stats to learn about. (I was late to that game and learned a lot from the posters on this site about sabermetrics). Now we have just about every stat we could ask for at our fingertips and can even find recent scouting reports on some players. But I'm still influenced by some of the basic truths I learned from the days of reading the sports section.

 

1. Players who have the right stuff can, at any point, breakthrough seemingly out of the blue.

2. The really talented players don't have to put up great numbers at each level in order to be promoted so long as their make-up can handle adversity.

3. The younger the prospect and the lower the level, the less meaningful the stats were.

4. Especially for younger prospects (21 and younger usually), their season long stats aren't as telling as the context under which they happened.

 

Hot or Cold Starts Don't Mean Much

I'm always skeptical of hot starts or cold starts to a season or the first few games following promotion to a new level. Candelario's hot start to this season only took on meaning for me when it continued on for several weeks. The same went for Contreras' hot start in AA in 2015. That hot start actually never stopped. He was consistently that good all year long. Out of nowhere. Conversely, Gleyber Torres started last season hitting .179/.289/.308 in April (just under 100 PAs). He actually started to turn it on April 22nd and never looked back.

 

Hot Streaks Can Be Telling

Hot streaks are a little different, especially in the minors. Obviously, consistent, good-to-great play is preferable, but having a player play at a high level over an extended period of time shows what he is capable of. I'm talking about having a good-to-great month, not just a week or two. If that player returns to earth, fine. Perhaps the league adjusted. Perhaps they got out of their game a bit and started believing the hype about themselves. Perhaps it's a bit of both with regression to the norm as far as luck is concerned mixed in. But at least they showed themselves (and others) what they're capable of.

 

For Younger Prospects the 2nd Half Is Often More Indicative

Most minor leaguers are generally young prospects who are still learning and developing, getting off to a bad start over the first 6-8 weeks (especially the first time thru a given level) doesn't scare me off given that they have talent. In this way, the player's performance over the 2nd half of the season, especially if they're 21 or younger, usually carries more weight for me than the 1st half. Prospects need innings/at bats in order to develop. If they're young, at a new level and progress as the season goes along, it makes a ton of sense to think that who they've become over the course of that season is more indicative of the type of prospect they are than their season long numbers would suggest. Conversely, if they hit better in the 1st half and struggled consistently in the 2nd half, that young player probably isn't as good as their season totals might suggest. There are exceptions to all these rather general applications, of course.

 

I'm very interested to see how you guys interpret stats as the season wears along. This is just how I do it. I continue to learn from the great posters on this board. Feel free to disagree and share your points of view.

Edited May 22, 2017 by CubsWin

[davell]

I think stats are secondary to scouting reports for me. If a young guy is holding his own or performing very well, for the level he's at, then I perk up a bit.

 

DSL/Arizona- Complex ball stats mean next to nothing, unless they're ridiculously awful. I'd much prefer reports.

 

Short Season Ball- I don't want to see college kids struggling here. If a just drafted HS kid puts up great numbers, I'll pay attention.

 

A Ball- If you're a college draftee and in your first full season, I expect you to do very well here. If you're out of HS or a J2 guy and you're putting up GOOD stats at 19 here, I'm happy. Average numbers? I suspect you're going to repeat a level soon.

 

A+ Ball- First year college kid putting up good numbers here is good. HS/J2 guys 20 or under is the same for me.

 

AA- Stats start to matter more to me. Age appropriate still counts, but once a guy hits AA for me, its close enough that anything becomes possible, at that stage. Some of the things guys may have sacrificed stats for earlier start showing up a bit more perhaps.

 

AAA- You're one level away, one injury away. Stats matter a ton, as the Cubs aren't likely to pull a guy up, who's struggling.

 

Odds and Ends- I don't want to see guys K rates moving up a bunch from level to level. (Shocker lol)If you're in the mid to upper 20's, at a lower level, I suspect the power numbers are going to drop as you try to put the bat on the ball later on, or you're just going to never make it to the upper levels.

 

For pitchers, I don't want to see a bunch of walks. I don't want to see guys throwing 90+ pitches to get thru 5, if they're college pitchers, pitching in lower levels. I think HR rate is stupid, unless its insanely high. A huge K rate interests me. Not more important than limiting walks for me though. Definite personal preference and may be in the vast minority there.

 

I also expect improvement in the 2nd half of the season.

 

Still, I like reports much more. Contact rates for hitters aren't impressive if they're grounding out weakly a ton. K rates for pitchers may fluctuate, as the pitching coach at MB explained, as an example. I like knowing if a guy has a "go to" pitch, or two(in a perfect world) 22 and 23 year olds putting up numbers in A ball? I want to see them moved up quickly, or I don't think the org sees you as much of a prospect.

[CubsWin]

I think stats are secondary to scouting reports for me. If a young guy is holding his own or performing very well, for the level he's at, then I perk up a bit.

 

DSL/Arizona- Complex ball stats mean next to nothing, unless they're ridiculously awful. I'd much prefer reports.

 

Short Season Ball- I don't want to see college kids struggling here. If a just drafted HS kid puts up great numbers, I'll pay attention.

 

A Ball- If you're a college draftee and in your first full season, I expect you to do very well here. If you're out of HS or a J2 guy and you're putting up GOOD stats at 19 here, I'm happy. Average numbers? I suspect you're going to repeat a level soon.

 

A+ Ball- First year college kid putting up good numbers here is good. HS/J2 guys 20 or under is the same for me.

 

AA- Stats start to matter more to me. Age appropriate still counts, but once a guy hits AA for me, its close enough that anything becomes possible, at that stage. Some of the things guys may have sacrificed stats for earlier start showing up a bit more perhaps.

 

AAA- You're one level away, one injury away. Stats matter a ton, as the Cubs aren't likely to pull a guy up, who's struggling.

 

Odds and Ends- I don't want to see guys K rates moving up a bunch from level to level. (Shocker lol)If you're in the mid to upper 20's, at a lower level, I suspect the power numbers are going to drop as you try to put the bat on the ball later on, or you're just going to never make it to the upper levels.

 

For pitchers, I don't want to see a bunch of walks. I don't want to see guys throwing 90+ pitches to get thru 5, if they're college pitchers, pitching in lower levels. I think HR rate is stupid, unless its insanely high. A huge K rate interests me. Not more important than limiting walks for me though. Definite personal preference and may be in the vast minority there.

 

I also expect improvement in the 2nd half of the season.

 

Still, I like reports much more. Contact rates for hitters aren't impressive if they're grounding out weakly a ton. K rates for pitchers may fluctuate, as the pitching coach at MB explained, as an example. I like knowing if a guy has a "go to" pitch, or two(in a perfect world) 22 and 23 year olds putting up numbers in A ball? I want to see them moved up quickly, or I don't think the org sees you as much of a prospect.

Thanks, Dave. I agree scouting reports carry so much more weight than stats do at least for the younger prospects. At some point, and it's the same for me - AA -, performance starts to become more of the arbiter. And even then, it doesn't matter a hill of beans what you hit in AAA if you can't translate it to the bigs.

 

How one's ability translates to the bigs is probably where I'm weakest in my knowledge because it's all scouting report-based and specialized understanding. A scouting report can tell us a lot more than his stats do. And watching the game can tell you even more. A guy can throw 92 and hit his spot while the other more highly touted prospect is throwing 97 but is over the middle of the plate. The guy throwing 97 is blowing it by these A ball guys, but if he leaves it there in the bigs, they're going to kill it.

 

It's one thing to see that the guy hit a 2-run double and has 25 doubles on the year. It's quite another to know that he did it against a 96mph FB off the inside corner, was able to bring his hands in, still get the barrel on the ball and had worked the count to 2-2 by laying off two breaking balls down and away to even get the opportunity. And he didn't just lay off of those breaking balls, he spat on him. Didn't even flinch. That's why I got the MiLB.com subscription this year. I wish the video quality was better, but I've still learned a lot.

 

Thanks for your response.

[CubsWin]

One of the things I still look for with pitchers (that started back in the Sunday sports section minor league reports days) was less hits than innings pitched (preferably a lot less), more than a K per inning and at least a 3-to-1 K to BB ratio. (That's changing a bit now, though, as the Cubs in particular seem to be valuing pitching to contact more and more), but that trifecta is still a good barometer.

 

Obviously, WHIP, ERA, FIP and xFIP are solid indicators as well and largely reflect that trifecta.

 

For hitters, I feel that BB/K ratio is one of the most predictive stats out there. If you don't walk a lot, you better not strike out a lot. If a guy has a good slash at the lower levels but Ks a lot without a decent amount of walks, it's rare that they'll continue to have similar success as they move up. Without the ability to be selectively aggressive at the plate, a good hit tool and raw power doesn't matter much.

 

From all reports, a key fundament in "The Cubs Way" is controlling the strike zone for both hitters and pitchers. Of course, those guys figured this out long before I did...

[Aaron_Kennelly]

One of the things I still look for with pitchers (that started back in the Sunday sports section minor league reports days) was less hits than innings pitched (preferably a lot less), more than a K per inning and at least a 3-to-1 K to BB ratio. (That's changing a bit now, though, as the Cubs in particular seem to be valuing pitching to contact more and more), but that trifecta is still a good barometer.

 

Obviously, WHIP, ERA, FIP and xFIP are solid indicators as well and largely reflect that trifecta.

 

For hitters, I feel that BB/K ratio is one of the most predictive stats out there. If you don't walk a lot, you better not strike out a lot. If a guy has a good slash at the lower levels but Ks a lot without a decent amount of walks, it's rare that they'll continue to have similar success as they move up. Without the ability to be selectively aggressive at the plate, a good hit tool and raw power doesn't matter much.

 

From all reports, a key fundament in "The Cubs Way" is controlling the strike zone for both hitters and pitchers. Of course, those guys figured this out long before I did...

 

Yep, Ks and BBs (Ks being at the forefront) are my two go-to stats for both pitchers and hitters, most especially in the minors, since hitters will often develop more power as they get older.

[We Got The Whole 9]

So, here's something I've been trying to get an answer on and haven't found anything definitive yet: do they have Statcast type equipment in minor league parks yet? Seems like spin rate, EV, first step, route efficiency, etc. would be extremely helpful in scouting prospects. Maybe some guy doesn't seem like a power hitter statistically but he's basically an altered launch angle from being a stud because his average EV is in the 90s. Just an example. Statcast has revolutionized the game; I'm just wondering if it's being utilized as completely as possible.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

So, here's something I've been trying to get an answer on and haven't found anything definitive yet: do they have Statcast type equipment in minor league parks yet? Seems like spin rate, EV, first step, route efficiency, etc. would be extremely helpful in scouting prospects. Maybe some guy doesn't seem like a power hitter statistically but he's basically an altered launch angle from being a stud because his average EV is in the 90s. Just an example. Statcast has revolutionized the game; I'm just wondering if it's being utilized as completely as possible.

 

I think there is partial installation of Trackman equipment in minor league parks, but the big thing is that the teams own that information as opposed to MLB as a whole for big league stadiums. So the data is getting partially collected, but it's not making its way to the public sphere.

[We Got The Whole 9]

So, here's something I've been trying to get an answer on and haven't found anything definitive yet: do they have Statcast type equipment in minor league parks yet? Seems like spin rate, EV, first step, route efficiency, etc. would be extremely helpful in scouting prospects. Maybe some guy doesn't seem like a power hitter statistically but he's basically an altered launch angle from being a stud because his average EV is in the 90s. Just an example. Statcast has revolutionized the game; I'm just wondering if it's being utilized as completely as possible.

 

I think there is partial installation of Trackman equipment in minor league parks, but the big thing is that the teams own that information as opposed to MLB as a whole for big league stadiums. So the data is getting partially collected, but it's not making its way to the public sphere.

Ah that makes sense. Yeah I saw someone in the comment section on a Cubs Den article mention that Maples curve was measured at 2900 rpm and I was like, how the hell does he know that... I hope we have installed something of that nature in our parks. You would think it would be very helpful in trades as well as your own player evaluation.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

As far as the main thrust of the thread goes, the biggest thing for me is that the absolute rule is prospects fail. I find it much easier to frame understanding of a prospect's chances when you understand that the default is not how successful the player will be, but if he will ever even spend a day on a MLB roster.

 

With that in mind, I think of performance/stats as the engine that powers a player to whether or not they can reach a potential that scouting information puts on them. People like to point to the exceptions to show why you shouldn't scout a stat line, but I've never seen compelling info that there's more of those than the reverse, where scouting undersells a guy's potential(Donaldson, Matt Carpenter, Hendricks, etc). Or in other words, there's more all-stars that never made a Top 100 list than there are all-stars that couldn't hit(or strike people out) in AA.

[CubsWin]

As far as the main thrust of the thread goes, the biggest thing for me is that the absolute rule is prospects fail. I find it much easier to frame understanding of a prospect's chances when you understand that the default is not how successful the player will be, but if he will ever even spend a day on a MLB roster.

 

With that in mind, I think of performance/stats as the engine that powers a player to whether or not they can reach a potential that scouting information puts on them. People like to point to the exceptions to show why you shouldn't scout a stat line, but I've never seen compelling info that there's more of those than the reverse, where scouting undersells a guy's potential(Donaldson, Matt Carpenter, Hendricks, etc). Or in other words, there's more all-stars that never made a Top 100 list than there are all-stars that couldn't hit(or strike people out) in AA.

Great points, TT. Thanks! I agree with you especially as the player reaches AA and AAA and are age appropriate or younger. As always, there are exceptions.

[CubsWin]

So, here's something I've been trying to get an answer on and haven't found anything definitive yet: do they have Statcast type equipment in minor league parks yet? Seems like spin rate, EV, first step, route efficiency, etc. would be extremely helpful in scouting prospects. Maybe some guy doesn't seem like a power hitter statistically but he's basically an altered launch angle from being a stud because his average EV is in the 90s. Just an example. Statcast has revolutionized the game; I'm just wondering if it's being utilized as completely as possible.

 

I think there is partial installation of Trackman equipment in minor league parks, but the big thing is that the teams own that information as opposed to MLB as a whole for big league stadiums. So the data is getting partially collected, but it's not making its way to the public sphere.

Ah that makes sense. Yeah I saw someone in the comment section on a Cubs Den article mention that Maples curve was measured at 2900 rpm and I was like, how the hell does he know that... I hope we have installed something of that nature in our parks. You would think it would be very helpful in trades as well as your own player evaluation.

It was actually 3100 rpm and he knew it because it was mentioned by the Pelicans broadcasters. That said, I sure would love Statcast info on a regular basis for minor leaguers. I got the MiLB subscription this year and some of the announcers have been mentioning exit velocity for some hits. I remember one of them said Eloy had hit a ground ball at 103 mph.