...........
Very fine article here on the probability of Prince Fielder aging badly. In all seriousness, it's a much better article than my satire will be.
FG: 200 heavy players, as a group, aged more quickly than other players. Therefore, signing Prince Fielder to a Mark Teixeira contract would be an incredibly risky move.
Poster: Hey, wait, though. Fielder already beat the general population here. The graph said that he'd be feeling his weight badly at age 27. But actually at age 27, Fielder took a huge step forward, especially in his batting eye.
FG: ........ :blinks:
Poster: Most of those heavy players were probably Jack Cust. What about elite players?
FG: Good question. If I isolated to fat HOF guys, like Babe Ruth and Prince Fielder, I would have a small sample, so forget that little nuance.
Poster: :blinks:
Poster: Frank Thomas weighed more than 3.25 lbs. per inch. Does it matter whether you're fat, vs. whether you look like an ancient minotaur?
And what about guys who get to play 1B and DH? Didn't some of those guys lose their jobs because they couldn't play 3B any more?
FG, defensively: We did the best we could. If you can do better, be my guest. We're about facts here. I had more facts than you did, at least, so you can assume I'm right for the time being.
Local Seattle 'net right: "The best we could" would be to advise the audience when we do not have a sound inference. "The best we could" would be to present the data as the beginning of an investigation and as a desperate cry for help.
"The best we could" would be to not sell a tentative, preliminary investigation as the basis for a $150M decision.
Blog reader: :blinks: Hey, what was that about SIRIUSXM radio? That part was good.
And like that.
.
In fairness, Ryan set out to ask, "Is Fielder's weight a negative factor going forward?" And he found the fact reflected that ---- > hey, if you're trying to make your living as an athlete, an extra 30 lbs. are not an advantage.
The only problem comes with the overreach, to deduce so much from such a general observation to such a specific case. As a group, 20-year-old men wouldn't pitch well in the American League. Does that make it safe to rule King Felix out of Safeco at 20? How about Taijuan Walker?
Sabermetricians are eager to find generalizations and then to cast the generalizations as insurance-company absolute bets. But after the generalizations are in mind, we proceed to do the extra work. We analyze King Felix specifically, as opposed to applying a single rule of thumb to him from a distance.
The same is going on with Taijan Walker right now. His ETA, we hear, is 2014. Why? Because other kids his age need that much time. ::BZZZZZZT floor drops out under you::
.
=== Dr's Prognosis ===
Where are we with Prince? His weight is a factor. Thirty pounds overweight would be one thing; he looks like he's seventy.
But the overriding factor for me is that, at age 27, he just leaped a plateau. Fielder's progress in 2011 is a factor that trumps the weight factor. One factor is more important than the other.
........
Yep, you might overpay him at 32. That part doesn't matter. You'll underpay him now.
Where Campbell says, "According to these aging curves, to treat Prince like an average player would cost a team over $17 million on a 7-year deal." The only one of those charts that came out to 17 million per year was the one that undervalued Prince as a 4.5 win player because he overperformed last year, because obviously he shouldn't have been that good even though there's nothing to say that last year's performance was aberrant or lucky.
1. Good catch.
2. In fairness to him, he acknowledged that Fielder's value is high, whichever table you look at.
3. I agree with you that --- > his pointing at the 4.5 win table is way too pessimistic. It gives a not-too-reasonable impression from his own data, if you ask me.
4. Even granting that $17M scenario, it's clear (to me) that Fielder's "Stars & Scrubs" roster-clearing value is more than $17M. The Scrubs that he clears room for, they would likely get that $17M back in the first two years with no problem.
Hey, most decent rookies (LF, 3B, whatever) net you $8 or $10M in overperformance.
Our intent in making a post-reply here, rather than making it in Fangraphs...
1. I'd imagine the Fangraphs guys would prefer it that way. I find it convenient to have protracted replies offsite; then I can engage or not as I have time, without cluttering my own board.
2. These are very topical ideas, worth responding to.
3. Gotta spend 90% of my time on front-page articles at SSI.
We surf around the web and find ideas, many of which we see a chance to debate-and-improve. Fangraphs, Hardball Times, etc., provide ideas of such quality that they launch fascinating discussions.
Ryan Campbell does good stuff. Compliments to him.
Cheers,
Jeff
I'm awfully skeptical about a 'Plateau Leap' that is coincident with a 'WalkYear'. Fielder's awesome; I want him here; but I'm leery that his bump in performance was anomalous and not predictive.
Great point about being wary of walk years. We remember Adrian Beltre, don't we...
In this Beyond the Boxscore article, Jacob Peterson finds that the root cause of Fielder's plateau leap is a verrrry encouraging one...
Fielder not only has a vastly improved ability to tell a ball from a strike, but once he swings, his hand-eye is remarkable. His Z-Contact rate, 91.5%, is higher than Dustin Pedroia's (who doesn't swing quiiiiite as hard).
Fielder's reliability in covering a Z-pitch is approaching Ichiro's.
.........
Fielder and Pujols are now the two men playing baseball who can maintain Z-contact rates over 90%, while hitting 40-50 homers. Next tier, Mark Teixeira is the only one who can do that and hit 35 homers.
IMHO, at this point you are pretty much talking about the LH Manny Ramirez.
...its name was Barry Bonds...and it was steroidally enhanced.
The question with Fielder is...how can such a lardo be a steroid user? :)
Thanks to your earlier post discussing it... :thumbsup:
Scratching my head a little bit... the article says Fielder's K rate dropped from something like 23% last year to 13% this year... while bb-ref shows his SO% at 19.3% in 2010 and 15.3% in 2011. With a career SO% of 18.5%. Is Beyond the Boxscore using a different formula? Am I looking at two different statistics here?
At 15.3%, that's a very good K% for a power hitter. But Pujols (and Ichiro, natch) lives in the high single digits - Fielder's not going there.
Regardless, the bb-ref numbers give a bit more tempered view of the Plateau Leap. Was I Jack Z - or anyone else contemplating forking over a Brinks truck full of Benjis to Mr. Fielder - I'd have my stats or research guys compile a couple reports for me. One, a statistical analysis of how likely the 4% K improvement is just an anomolay vs. a permanent improvement. Two, a historical analysis of similar 'plateau leaps', and how they panned out.
My *guess* is that a bit of luck, combined with being in the prime of your career, combined with a strong desire to make a hundred million dollars, could conspire to create a 4% improvement in SO% over 162 games.
That being said... Get 'er done, Z! : )
So obviously he didn't maintain those sky-high numbers all year.
Agree with you, that before a $150M decision, you'd want to see the historical comps, guys who'd cut their K's like that, and what the results had been.
As a general rule .... the default interpretation of an EYE (K/BB) leap at age 27 would be that it was simply improvement, right?
Good stuff GL - no doubt you gotta watch the walk years - of course every FA is coming off a walk year :- )
I figured the BTBS numbers were from earlier in the season, but that still doesn't explain their '23.9%' K rate cited from last year.
True that all FA's are coming off walk years. And I bet there is a fair amount of confimation bias going on - we don't register when a player gets signed and keeps his performance up, only when it disappoints.
Yes you would assume improvement at age 27, even up to mid 30's perhaps. But if anything with Fielder I think what we saw was incremental improvement - or a career year - and not a jump to another level. Still, that makes him a top-10 in baseball bat - below Pujols and Cabrera, but around Texieira territory IMO.
I don't know for sure, but I suspect the difference in the K rates for the different sites is whether they calculate the K per plate appearance or per at-bat. By doing it per plate appearance (which I believe fangraphs switched to in the last year or so), when an increase in walks coincides with a decrease in strikeouts, the rate will change more than it will in a per at-bat rate.
Hey there Jeff,
Long time no talk to. I noticed your conversation here regarding Prince Fielder and the whole aging question. I actually did an extensive piece of my own in which I took a look at this very issue back in July over at Mariner Central -- take it FWIW. Enjoy ...
http://www.marinercentral.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=6335&view=findpo...
MA
Hey there Jeff,
Long time no talk to. I noticed your conversation here regarding Prince Fielder and the whole aging question based upon the Fangraphs article. I actually did an extensive piece of my own in which I took a look at this very issue of Prince and how his performance might project over time back in July over at Mariner Central -- take it FWIW. Enjoy ...
http://www.marinercentral.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=6335&view=findpo...
MA