Jump to content

RatkoVarda

2019 Tiger Prospects

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, tiger337 said:

No, but it's an age where you don't usually expect a great deal of further development.  

I acknowledge that no one is talking about Christin Stewart ever going to the Hall of Fame, but just for kicks, I took a look at the 232 players in the Hall, and found that only 12% of them was a rookie at age 25 or older.

The most common age for a Hall of Fame player to have shed his rookie designation was age 21 (25%), followed by age 22 (18%), age 23 (15%), age 20 (14%), then age 19 (9%). That's 81% of all Hall of Famers having debuted at these ages.

The (admittedly tenuous) takeaway one could surmise here is that if a player debuts at age 24 or higher, chances of them having a great, or perhaps even good, career is greatly diminished. In general, the closer to 21 they start, the better their chances.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

I acknowledge that no one is talking about Christin Stewart ever going to the Hall of Fame, but just for kicks, I took a look at the 232 players in the Hall, and found that only 12% of them was a rookie at age 25 or older.

The most common age for a Hall of Fame player to have shed his rookie designation was age 21 (25%), followed by age 22 (18%), age 23 (15%), age 20 (14%), then age 19 (9%). That's 81% of all Hall of Famers having debuted at these ages.

The (admittedly tenuous) takeaway one could surmise here is that if a player debuts at age 24 or higher, chances of them having a great, or perhaps even good, career is greatly diminished. In general, the closer to 21 they start, the better their chances.

Probably not the best comparison. Even the highest end projections never had Stewart near a HOF level player. And HOF level players probably start younger because they have significantly more talent than average or good players and are ready for a big leagues a few years earlier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, chasfh said:

The (admittedly tenuous) takeaway one could surmise here is that if a player debuts at age 24 or higher, chances of them having a great, or perhaps even good, career is greatly diminished. In general, the closer to 21 they start, the better their chances.

That would be a logical conclusion based on the fact that great talent is usually pretty apparent at a young age.   

 

Without a deep dive into the HoF players that debuted at an advanced age it's possible some of them were delayed by military service back when that actually happened for MLBers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Keepleyland2 said:

Probably not the best comparison. Even the highest end projections never had Stewart near a HOF level player. And HOF level players probably start younger because they have significantly more talent than average or good players and are ready for a big leagues a few years earlier

First thing is that age curves for hitters and pitchers should be considered separately because they are such different activities. Pitchers do not need extraordinary perceptual and reaction speed. For a hitter, there are two curves going in opposite directions as they enter their 20's. Generally your reflexes first start to slow sometime before about age 25,  but your strength may still climbing past that age and then holds for several years. Then the third factor is experience (knowing pitchers etc). The optimum in the sum of those three factors is what makes 27-29 the peak performance point for most MLB hitters. The strength and reflex  curves are higher across the board for good players than for mediocre ones, which means that in better players the sum of the curves usually hits MLB performance level younger and doesn't fall below it until older (ignoring injury accumulation - which in the real world may end as many or more careers as performance aging). There is all kinds of noise overlying this basic relationship of course. For instance, some players end up waiting longer than they had to to learn something that unlocked their talent that was probably already there (e.g. JD), or lose development time to injury (Derek Hill-assuming he ever does make it). The final complication is that some skills get less learnable the older the player gets. Fly ball perception being an example. Chasing fly balls as an adolescent or even younger will form your perceptual system to that task much faster and more efficiently than chasing them at 26 will, if it still will at all.

It's more of a speculation, but I tend to believe the same is true for seeing top level pitching. The younger you are when you get to ML and see top pitching, the more likely your pitch recognition skill is still capable of improving to match it. I think that is the Tiger thinking behind pushing guys right up to the maximum level of pitching that doesn't defeat them completely - though obviously this can be overdone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, LooseGoose said:

That would be a logical conclusion based on the fact that great talent is usually pretty apparent at a young age.   

 

Without a deep dive into the HoF players that debuted at an advanced age it's possible some of them were delayed by military service back when that actually happened for MLBers.

That would apply to Bob Lemon and Warren Spahn. Here's the list:

HoFer Age Rookie Yr
Sam Thompson 25 1885
Jimmy Collins 25 1895
Jack Chesbro 25 1899
Eddie Plank 25 1901
Red Faber 25 1914
Bill Terry 25 1924
Kiki Cuyler 25 1924
Lefty Grove 25 1925
Carl Hubbell 25 1928
Bob Lemon 25 1946
Warren Spahn 25 1946
Randy Johnson 25 1989
Trevor Hoffman 25 1993
Mariano Rivera 25 1995
Old Hoss Radbourn 26 1881
Mordecai Brown 26 1903
Sam Rice 26 1916
Stan Coveleski 26 1916
Jesse Haines 26 1920
Earle Combs 26 1925
Roy Campanella 26 1948
Phil Niekro 26 1965
Edgar Martinez 26 1989
Earl Averill 27 1929
Joe McGinnity 28 1899
Jackie Robinson (RoY-1st) 28 1947
Hoyt Wilhelm (RoY-2nd) 29 1952
Dazzy Vance 31 1922

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Keepleyland2 said:

Probably not the best comparison. Even the highest end projections never had Stewart near a HOF level player. And HOF level players probably start younger because they have significantly more talent than average or good players and are ready for a big leagues a few years earlier

Acknowledged, and just for kicks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Acknowledged, and just for kicks.

The thing that bugs me about Stewart this year is that he forgot how to hit for power. I mean in his first 50 ABs in April he was quite useful. 121 OPS+, and OPS of .831, 3 dingers. Low average, OKish OBP. 

In the 260 ABs since? Nearly useless. 4 total homers, bad OPS and below par OPS+. But the average is decent. I worry that he/the team spent too much time trying to make him into a .260 hitter at the extent of his power. Just let him become 2018 version of Joey Gallo and that is still more valuable to the team than this current version of Stewart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Keepleyland2 said:

The thing that bugs me about Stewart this year is that he forgot how to hit for power. I mean in his first 50 ABs in April he was quite useful. 121 OPS+, and OPS of .831, 3 dingers. Low average, OKish OBP. 

In the 260 ABs since? Nearly useless. 4 total homers, bad OPS and below par OPS+. But the average is decent. I worry that he/the team spent too much time trying to make him into a .260 hitter at the extent of his power. Just let him become 2018 version of Joey Gallo and that is still more valuable to the team than this current version of Stewart.

Could have just as easily been health-related. Power has never been a problem for him, and I'm sure the org isn't trying to turn him into a singles hitter. Let's see what he does next year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, chasfh said:

That would apply to Bob Lemon and Warren Spahn. Here's the list:

HoFer Age Rookie Yr
Sam Thompson 25 1885
Jimmy Collins 25 1895
Jack Chesbro 25 1899
Eddie Plank 25 1901
Red Faber 25 1914
Bill Terry 25 1924
Kiki Cuyler 25 1924
Lefty Grove 25 1925
Carl Hubbell 25 1928
Bob Lemon 25 1946
Warren Spahn 25 1946
Randy Johnson 25 1989
Trevor Hoffman 25 1993
Mariano Rivera 25 1995
Old Hoss Radbourn 26 1881
Mordecai Brown 26 1903
Sam Rice 26 1916
Stan Coveleski 26 1916
Jesse Haines 26 1920
Earle Combs 26 1925
Roy Campanella 26 1948
Phil Niekro 26 1965
Edgar Martinez 26 1989
Earl Averill 27 1929
Joe McGinnity 28 1899
Jackie Robinson (RoY-1st) 28 1947
Hoyt Wilhelm (RoY-2nd) 29 1952
Dazzy Vance 31 1922

 

Spahn did pitch 15 innings in MLB at age 21 prior to leaving for a distinguished military career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Keepleyland2 said:

The thing that bugs me about Stewart this year is that he forgot how to hit for power. I mean in his first 50 ABs in April he was quite useful. 121 OPS+, and OPS of .831, 3 dingers. Low average, OKish OBP. 

In the 260 ABs since? Nearly useless. 4 total homers, bad OPS and below par OPS+. But the average is decent. I worry that he/the team spent too much time trying to make him into a .260 hitter at the extent of his power. Just let him become 2018 version of Joey Gallo and that is still more valuable to the team than this current version of Stewart.

This might come back to the stated philosophy coming into the season of focusing on implementing a two-strike approach at all times. The Tigers still subscribe to "put the ball in play and good things will happen," and the data bear out the Tigers' efforts on this count. The Tigers have the highest percentage of whiffs in baseball and strikeouts swinging and are near the top in foul ball strikes and all strikes swung at, while being at or near the bottom in strikes taken, 2-0 counts and 3-1 counts. Yet with all this emphasis on trying to put the ball in play, they are third from the bottom at actually putting balls in play. All these data points come from here: https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019-pitches-batting.shtml

In the midst of this strategic direction, teams have been actively defending against balls in play with modern defensive alignments for a few years now. But apparently the Tigers haven't gotten the memo on that and are still emphasizing bat on ball to get the ball in play, which is a disaster strategy for a team of minor league lifers and fringy 39th and 40th man types.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, LooseGoose said:

Spahn did pitch 15 innings in MLB at age 21 prior to leaving for a distinguished military career.

Yes, Spahn is a special case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Yoda said:

Could have just as easily been health-related. Power has never been a problem for him, and I'm sure the org isn't trying to turn him into a singles hitter. Let's see what he does next year. 

I don't think they are trying to turn him into a singles hitter, but I think so many people talked about beating the shift and not hitting .210 that he might have become too focused on taking that slap the other way instead of waiting for a pitch to drive. 

And your right could be injury related too. 

But, it was something I noticed the other day when looking at his numbers. His Slugging is god awful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Keepleyland2 said:

I don't think they are trying to turn him into a singles hitter, but I think so many people talked about beating the shift and not hitting .210 that he might have become too focused on taking that slap the other way instead of waiting for a pitch to drive. 

And your right could be injury related too. 

But, it was something I noticed the other day when looking at his numbers. His Slugging is god awful

He's hitting well in Toledo right now.  It'll be interesting to see if he can continue that once he's called up.  I'd imagine he gets all of the LF starts vs RHPs once called up, and with Jones out and with Stewart being basically the same hitter vs LHPs as he has been vs RHPs this season, might as well keep him in the lineup there as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chasfh said:

This might come back to the stated philosophy coming into the season of focusing on implementing a two-strike approach at all times. The Tigers still subscribe to "put the ball in play and good things will happen," and the data bear out the Tigers' efforts on this count. The Tigers have the highest percentage of whiffs in baseball and strikeouts swinging and are near the top in foul ball strikes and all strikes swung at, while being at or near the bottom in strikes taken, 2-0 counts and 3-1 counts. Yet with all this emphasis on trying to put the ball in play, they are third from the bottom at actually putting balls in play. All these data points come from here: https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019-pitches-batting.shtml

In the midst of this strategic direction, teams have been actively defending against balls in play with modern defensive alignments for a few years now. But apparently the Tigers haven't gotten the memo on that and are still emphasizing bat on ball to get the ball in play, which is a disaster strategy for a team of minor league lifers and fringy 39th and 40th man types.

Except I don't see the biggest K rate offenders ever trying to go the other way - e.g. Candelario, Stewart. I think the logic of your data is that most of the Tigers are swinging away all the time and they still have a horrendous offense. Management may have an emphasis, but most of their hitters are not paying any attention to it once in the box.  But I don't think it really matters because the biggest problem the Tigers hitters have is lack of command of the strike zone. They let too many cookies go by - esp 1st pitch FB strikes, and then swing at too many pitcher's pitches out of the zone when down in the count. Their aggression is mostly backwards. They are most aggressive when they are least likely to see a strike. Opposing pitchers make plenty of mistakes to Tiger hitters, but we either don't swing or swing and miss. I just don't think there is much you can do for  hitters that can't tell enough strikes from a balls on the way in or who can't barrell up balls in the heart of the zone when they get them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Manning today a little bit human 5.2IP 6H 3R 1BB 6K leaves the game down 3-2.

Lakeland wins the 1st of a double header, Thompson, DeCaster, DeJesus combine to hold Tampa to one run in 8 eight innings. (Game was tied at the end of 7, FTigers scored 4 in the eight to win)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, leflore said:

More recently Aaron Judge's first full season was at age 25.

Is that a fair comparison?  He’s an elite All-Star.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chasfh said:

This might come back to the stated philosophy coming into the season of focusing on implementing a two-strike approach at all times. The Tigers still subscribe to "put the ball in play and good things will happen," and the data bear out the Tigers' efforts on this count. The Tigers have the highest percentage of whiffs in baseball and strikeouts swinging and are near the top in foul ball strikes and all strikes swung at, while being at or near the bottom in strikes taken, 2-0 counts and 3-1 counts. Yet with all this emphasis on trying to put the ball in play, they are third from the bottom at actually putting balls in play. All these data points come from here: https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019-pitches-batting.shtml

In the midst of this strategic direction, teams have been actively defending against balls in play with modern defensive alignments for a few years now. But apparently the Tigers haven't gotten the memo on that and are still emphasizing bat on ball to get the ball in play, which is a disaster strategy for a team of minor league lifers and fringy 39th and 40th man types.

i think the tigers problem has more to do with a lack of talent than refusing to hit over a shift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Buddha said:

i think the tigers problem has more to do with a lack of talent than refusing to hit over a shift.

So it might not be all Legendary Lloyd's fault?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LooseGoose said:

So it might not be all Legendary Lloyd's fault?

Perhaps Legendary Lloyd actually compounds the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Tigrrfan said:

Perhaps Legendary Lloyd actually compounds the problem?

Perhaps.  Does the other side of coin apply?  Does Lloyd get any credit for Mercer having a nice stretch compared to what he's been in his career? 

Honestly I wouldn't be a smidgen upset if they replaced Lloyd this winter, but I think he gets a lot more blame than he actually deserves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, LooseGoose said:

Perhaps.  Does the other side of coin apply?  Does Lloyd get any credit for Mercer having a nice stretch compared to what he's been in his career? 

Honestly I wouldn't be a smidgen upset if they replaced Lloyd this winter, but I think he gets a lot more blame than he actually deserves.

Llegendary Lloyd is llikely on a llong lleash llately.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LooseGoose said:

Perhaps.  Does the other side of coin apply?  Does Lloyd get any credit for Mercer having a nice stretch compared to what he's been in his career? 

Honestly I wouldn't be a smidgen upset if they replaced Lloyd this winter, but I think he gets a lot more blame than he actually deserves.

Agreed, dont these guys have personal coaches or something too? I would assume that with all the people that can/do influence a player over the course of a season, or career, that it is pretty tough to place blame or praise on any individual source

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Or that we can all clearly see Lloyd is a problem, but the organization cannot.

If Lloyd is in fact a problem and the org doesn’t see it, or act on it, the organization is the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...