Funny ... the only thing I feel I was a tad bit wrong on Ackley about was the speed at which he'd do exactly what he has done (to date).
Of course, *I* am not a scout. My talent (if one wishes to call it that) is an ability to see patterns in numbers that others miss. My call on Ackley was based on his college numbers. He was a student in all senses of the word. I don't want this post to just sound like tooting my own horn for comping Ackley to Brian Giles -- but to explain HOW I could see that probable outcome from just an examination of stats. The reason is the CHANGE.
Every single Minor League Equivalency in existence predicts on the "curve". So, they predict *ALL* players to perform worse in the majors than in the minors. This makes sense on the surface - because the competition is better in the majors.
But clearly, some players perform better in the majors. Who are they? They are, by and large not simply guys that hit .400 in A ball and get steadily worse. They are guys that are able to get better results from year to year against the same competition ... or who show signs of improving despite facing better competition.
The Lopez/Yuni template are great against weak competition and methodically get worse as they face tougher and tougher competition. The "greats" behave a lot more like Ackley. They transcend the competition once they figure out what THEY need to do with their skill set to optimize their production.
What is odd to me is that it seems few statheads notice one simple oddity. That the MLE conversion is to get consistently worse until you reach the majors ... but that MLB production doesn't peak until age 27. Does this indicate that when a 24-year-old hits the majors, that the competition gets worse for the next 3 years?!?
One of my standard saws is that players don't get better because they age. They get better because they learn something. Improvement in the majors isn't about getting athletically better. It's about getting cerebrally better.
While tomes of text are written on tweaking batting stances, pitching motions, arm slots, etc., boiled down to its essence, it is simply about making better choices (given the athletic skillset you're stuck with). The greats figure out that they strike out on the slider outside and figure out a way to not do that quite as much. The not-so-greats just accept that as an unavoidable outcome of their skillset.
The reason Ackley was voted best college hitter of the decade was because he showed, during college, all those signs of refusal to accept failure and an unwavering work ethic to get better at something. Moreover, he showed the ability to improve at one thing largely without sacrificing in another area. THAT is what makes a great player.
That statistical "tell" that you might be onto someone special is "chaos" in the minor league stat line. Not simply good, then bad, then good seasons - but good/bad/good swings where the breakdown of "choice" stats (walk, K, ISO), swing wildly. If a player's BA swings wildly, but his BB%, K% and ISO remain stable, he's not learning, he's just erratic. (If the K-rate simply climbs, and everything else is stable, that is the tell that he's losing the game to better competition).
The organizational stampede away from the quick-twitch Yuni/Lopez model to the "chaotic" (teachable) prospect could hardly be more stark. The club lucked into tanking the perfect season to land Ackley. The "skill" for Z is in viewing the 'chaos' of mere mortal students like Carp and rolling the dice anyway.
Comments
Angels announcers last night (paraphrased):
Announcer 1: I don't understand why he doesn't get more changeups and curves thrown at him. the way he's always early on his front-side...he can keep his hands back long enough to hit fastballs but offspeed stuff should be really hard for him.
Announcer 2: Well we did see him hit some stuff hard into LF by keeping his hands back long enough...
Announcer 1: Sure, maybe on fastballs, but it takes a really special hitter to be that far into your swing before the ball reaches the plate and hit off-speed stuff.
Announcer 2: Sure, but that's just adjustments. This kid's gonna hit.
Announcer 1: Oh yeah, no doubt.
--------------------------
But we see him more than they do and he DOES keep his hands all the way back on changeups or breakers. His hand control is phenomenal with a swing like that. Only freaks can swing like that for a .300+ average and power - and Dustin is most certainly a freak.
Aside - can I just say how demoralizing and irritating it is to listen to the Angels' announcers feeling sorry for us and our lack of offense? They were practically beaming that the little kids up the street drafted and traded for some hitters that might eventually make them competitive enough to take note of.
Grrr. Come back around soon, Smoak. Be the real deal, Carp - and man is he looking good at the plate, composed and focused.
But I think Ackley doubters just see his frame and that "long" swing and figure he can't possibly hit like this. Of COURSE he's gonna hit like this. Everybody talked about how he was likely to win a batting title, but guys who get tagged as likely to win batting titles should perform more like Ichiro power-wise and less like Edgar, apparently.
I've been calling him John Olerud with wheels since his junior year - and what wheels they are. He's a born base-runner in addition to all his other skills.
Other guys use Don Mattingly (or Brian Giles, which I love as a comp Sandy if Giles wasn't roiding). George Brett is good...but I think he's gonna walk more than Brett.
But how much more? Giles walked more, Brett walked less, both had basically the same OPS+ and statline.
I'd be awfully impressed if he IS around George Brett (.300/.370/.490), Brian Giles (.290/.400/.500), or Will Clark (.300/.380/.500), who also stepped on to the scene like a man and never let up (Y=5). Will Clark at 2B would be one of the five best 2B of all time.
The list of 2B who put up an OPS+ of 130 or greater:
- Rogers Hornsby (1915-1937)
- Eddie Collins (1906-1930)
- Nap Lajoie (1896-1916)
- Joe Morgan (1963-1984)
- Jackie Robinson (1947-1956)
I think that's it. Charlie Gehringer (the Mechanical Man, 1924-42) would be the old-timer I'd love to think Ackley could be...and he didn't put up a 130 (though 124 at 2B is good enough for a slam-dunk HOF career).
Which makes moving Dustin to 2B look less like a move of desperation ("Oh, his bat won't play on a corner...") and more like a stroke of genius with every passing day. Ackley can and will HIT. And he has power, and the speed to turn singles into doubles and doubles into triples. And the bloop hits of others into scores from 2nd. Will Clark was a tremendous 1B. Brian Giles and George Brett would have been as well. If any of them could have played 2nd instead and their front office moved them there...genius. "Hedging your bets" turns into "maximizing a HOF skillset" really quickly.
After being scoffed at for comping his offensive production to Olerud's and having consistent 20 HR power I find it interesting that Ole is now considered a slightly low projection. Gotta love that. *grins* Waiting for him to struggle a bit, but really...he's already got most of that out of the way. He worked out his groundball issues, his lefty issues, his power issues all in the minors. Methodically. With a purpose. Whatever struggles he has, I expect him to fix them in short order.
And now that he's here...he plans to BE this guy. It could be a glorious next few years if we can get the rest of the lineup right.
~G
does get out on that front foot early. I would imagine that his second time through will see many change ups low and away and fb's up and away. He squares the ball so nicely that he is able to generate surprising power despite not really being a back-leg hitter. I am anxious to see the adjustments he will make to the pitchers moving the ball away from him.
I didn't see him much in the minors, I can't remember outside of JR. being so impressed with a hitter right out of the gate.
Ackley's immediate dominance has been suprising, but this is pretty typical of superstar HOF-level players. They usually only take 100-300 PAs of adjustment and many hit right off the bat. The late bloomer type superstar hitters are more rare.
I was expecting Ackley to hit immediately, but for the power to come next year. It came in his first game and has been here to stay.
Trayvon I'm obviously not very high on.
I expected the "order" for Ackley would be OBP first, then average, then power.
What I suspect changed this is the new (organizational?) focus on aggression at the plate. The honest truth is that Ackley's eye is BETTER than what he has shown so far in the majors.
So far, he's running a 9.2% walk rate, when 16% is both where he started and ended his minor league career. I suspect that he has (so far) benefitted slightly from MLB pitchers 'unimpressed' with his rep thinking -- "Yeah, c'mon and try to hit MY stuff, Meat."
That error will correct itself in short order.
He's running a 61 isolated BB rate at the moment. That'll eventually settle around 100.
That'd be my question, too, CA.
The offspeed question is a non-starter, but Ackley's attack is indeed geared to the inner half of the plate, as the TL.com charts also confirm.
He can deal with stuff on the black, but am not sure how often he drives it. That'd be the last remaining Q for me. Ackley tends to tip his cap on pitches outside, to some extent.
Would suppose that if he looks for a pitch away, he can step up the middle and drive it. But that creates the inside/outside guessing game that Ichiro has finally started losing this year.
Not only in the slash line profile -- .300 with 30 doubles, 20 homers, and 70 walks --
But also in the hitting approach. Trying to remember Clark in the mind's eye, he seemed to have the extra bat wrap from the LH side, the extra poise and relaxation, the same rising line drives, and (LOL) the same looking-for-the-cure-to-brain-cancer, grim concentration that put off the sportswriters.
You remember when Canseco and Clark used to get into arguments across the Bay as to who the #1 player in baseball was? :- )
As G-Money demonstrates, if Ackley hits anything like he has so far, that's exactly where he winds up...
Considering he could drop from 165 to 125, and rate the Hall ... and considering that he visually looks, anyway, like a career 150 hitter so far ...
***
I'm the worst offender :- ) in using "HOF player" as a sort of "objective" way to describe that level of talent.
Probably a better way to say it is, "Great player." Jay Buhner was a star; George Brett was a great ballplayer.
Right now, playing a solid 2B and hitting like Will Clark, Dustin Ackley is looking like a great ballplayer.
As you noted, Robinson managed to hit .300 three straight years while employing radically different approaches three straight years. That, to me, jives well with jemanji's obsevation that Robinson, in his first game, made an adjustment to Jered Weaver after one swing and broke out the pepper game, to good results no less.
I am guessing, then, that you are high on Robinson relative to, say, G Money (who thinks he's high risk, but high ceiling) or taro (who thinks he is so high risk that it's not even worth playing him).
Brett is a great comparison. If you look at the three seasons before Brett went nuts and hit .390 he hit .312-.373-.532 then .294-.343-.467 then .329-.376-.563. Those were the years that Brett was 24-26 years old.
If he had the same number of PA's each year during that run (which he didn't) he would have averaged something like .311-.365-.521.
That is a VERY similar line to Ackley's current .301-.368-.529. Incredibly similar.
Give Ackley another 10-15 OBP points as pitchers avoid him a bit more and even if he hits .290 then he remains very Brett-like.
Would you bet the over or under if I said that Ackley's accumlative line for the next three seasons (not counting this one) would be .295-.375-.529?
His bottom might be .280-.350.-480! That's what we would LOVE Trayvon to be...and it may be Ackley's worst-case scenario of healthy)
B-R says that Brett is the 24th best hitter of all times (with P. Rose, J. Bench and C. Yaz as the next three).
If Ackley is that good he is better than Morgan (who is ranked 44th) and Alomar (who is ranked 69th).
Enjoy guys, enjoy. And if I'm Jack Z., Ackley gets the big time extension after NEXT year.
BTW, B-R has Felix as the 123rd best pitcher of all-time, already.
Really wish Boras wasn't his agent. I'd hand him a Longoria-deal on the spot.
Never heard of a Boras client locking up FA years unless they get FA money. We'll get his 6 prime years. Or 5+ a bunch of young talent.
We do get him for 6 years after 2011 right? I'm unfamiliar with the details of his contract..
That means he hits FA as a 30-year old or in trade as a 29-year old. We get the meat of Ackley's career.
To clarify, I think keeping Trayvon in AAA to build his trade value rather than playing him is the better percentage play with his prospect-type.
Develop the guys you believe in and trade the excess for proven young MLB talent (and then you lock those guys up).