Think Tank - K's and HR's

Champ sez,

Curtis Granderson had a 18.8% minor league K-rate. Travyon is at 25%.  Guys who show "old-player skills" in the minors usually fall flat at MLB.

Travyon and even Wells are the type of prospects I try to trade in packages to other teams. Travyon is someone I wouldn't want to invest PAs in. You waste the audition time and hurt his stock as a prospect along the way. You have to make that call early on the guys you believe in.  

Maybe we can do a quantity for quality deal this offseason once we figure out who sticks.

 

Question fer yer, my man.  Have you ever seen anybody else compare minor leaguers using career numbers?  :- )  Are you coining a phrase here, as it were?  It's not one that we can spend anywhere.

***

Had the Dodgers allowed Trayvon to rise through the minors at a different rate, then Trayvon's K rate would be different.  

We have been over this before, taking age 18-22 results and applying a "career % rate" despite the wildly different circumstances two players saw.  You might as well compare career % rates between Mexican players and NL players.  Minor leaguers are playing in 9,000 different situations.

***

89, 94, 97 mph fastball is not EVERYTHING in a AAA pitcher and neither is K rate everything in a prospect.  If you nuanced your K observations against causes, context, template, etc., it would be more convincing.

It's all well and good to find an "Inverted W" pitching mechanic that intrigues you.  But then to want to use that one variable to solve all equations in physics, chemistry, and biology, life just is not that simple.

***

Granderson's K rates in his first three years in the majors, 29%, 25%, 26%, and this year as he goes nuts he's 25% again.

Granderson was over 25% in his first year in AAA ... despite being already age 24.

***

Look, fanning 175 times in a 150-game season, that's a K rate that has to be taken into consideration.  It doesn't mean that a player might not be Curtis Granderson, Dan Uggla, or Ricky Weeks.

The "fans 175 times a year, no prospect" mantra is indeed a case of applying a general principle with too little discretion.

***

One-stop Grand Principle shopping just doesn't solve complex life problems.  I'll give yer the last word.

.

.

Moe sez,

I think I was first up around here to mention the Albuquerque effect on his '11 homers. But I wasn't discounting the power he has at all.  He has shown clear homer ability.  However, how many speed guys hit 9 doubles and 26 homers AND 6 triples.  Granderson's AA year in Erie saw him have 19 doubles and 21 homers, but roughly equal homers to doubles is different than Robinson's current 3-1.  Granderson was back to a normal 29-13-15 line the next year in AAA.

We're talking about national pundits on Trayvon going bananas in AAA.  We ain't talking about you there.  You know that :- )

However, how many speed guys hit 9 doubles and 26 homers AND 6 triples.

No question.  His projection should adjust that ... we would consider that in another go-round he would hit, say, 22 doubles/triples and 18 homers, in 100 games.

Granderson ISO'ed about .215 and .225 (if I've figured correctly) in AA and AAA. Robinson's leap is from about .140 to almost .270.  Thin air helps.

It does help, although minor league hitters can indeed take huge jumps in iso, because they evolve dramatically as players.

Mike Carp had an ISO of 135 in the year 2007.  This year, his ISO was 306.  Guess why that was?  The light came on, and Mike Carp is a different hitter now.

***

Trayvon Robinson's SLG is #8 in the PCL, with several guys like Bryan LaHair above him, and Robinson's SLG on the road is comparable to his SLG at home.  

SLG was different in 1975 than it is today, but being #8 in SLG'ing is the same in 1975 or 2011.  Trayvon is a powerful man, with an explosive swing, and HQ's 4-star grade for PWR is manifesting itself this year.

.

Cheerio,

Dr D

Comments

1

I suspected that you were jabbing at more accomplished analysts than I.  Thanks...
BTW, I looked for those home and away numbers for Trayvon but couldn't find 'em!
Did you find home/away homer totals for '11?                                                                        I am disappointed that Robinson goes to Tacoma. I hope it is a quick stop. The guy can slug, he can run, he can walk.  Heck, if he hits .250 he's a heck of a CF.

2

Here's his 2011 player card my man.
14 homers in 193 home AB's ... 12 homers in 175 road AB's.  Both rate out to nearly 40 homers per 155 games.
***
Check his June numbers.  9 homers and 6 double/triples in exactly 1/6 a season, 27 games.  Would be amusing to see a leadoff hitter go for 54 homers and 36 double/triples :- )
***
Taro will be slightly mollified to note Trayvon's EYE going through his debut AAA season:
.27 = April
.29 = May
.39 = June
.52 = July
The kid learns so fast that he learns visibly.

3
Rick's picture

#3 in SB and #3 in OBP, and 10th in BA in the Southern League is even nicer.  I remember when we were pretty excited about E. Carrera's AA line a couple years ago.  But this guy...I like this guy.  Put him at leadoff.

4
ghost's picture

...I seem to recall you seeing a similar jump in EYE from Adam Jones and declaring him to have "solved AAA"...granted, Jones had an EYE of 1 when he made the jump...but we're still talking about doubling the EYE while the other skills continue uninterrupted.
I think Robinson is a keeper in our farm system...I think that, while not a lock, he isn't less likely to succeed than Adam Jones was (he's a better fielder, a better baserunner, a better power hitter...somewhat less skilled with the EYE, but better HIT IMHO) and most of the Ms blogosphere liked Jones just fine as a building block until he got traded.
I do understand the nerves about K rate...but it's not like he's a whiff king in the minors...many guys fan more than he does. I'd rather work on building him up at the big league level now than write him off and trade him again assuming he'll never pan out.

5
Taro's picture

K-rate is function of ABs, not PAs.

MiLB K%

Successes

Burnouts

Success Rate

>16.4%

154 (51.9%)

163 (71.8%)

48.6%

>18%

109 (36.7%)

142 (62.6%)

43.4%

>20%

52 (17.5%)

109 (48.0%)

32.3%

>22%

21 (7.1%)

69 (30.4%)

23.3%

>24%

10 (3.4%)

34 (15.0%)

22.7%

 

6
ghost's picture

...I still think you should not be looking at Trayvon's CAREER K-rate when it doesn't represent the bulk of his career, and I still think you shold not compare K rate as though the same things always create strikeouts. There are many ways to strike out...players need to be grouped in terms of phenotypic attributes and their K rates examined under that microscope instead.

7

NO ONE hit 500 doubles and 300 HRs from age 27 on...except Edgar Martinez.  Only one other person in history did, that, BTW.
NO ONE had a straight decade of 200+ hit seasons...except Ichiro.
Strange things happen.  Strange careers happen.  I agree with you, it's not the percentage play, but when you see an Ichiro play you can either say, "Man, that's a low percentage skillset for success, I should go with Chone Figgins as my leadoff man" or you can say, "If ANYONE can make that skillset into a world-beater, it's this guy."
I agree with you, if it's me I'd like a higher-percentage success rate if someone will give it to me for my volatile but highly-promising new CF.
If they don't...then they don't, and I run that kid out there because he's still got more upside and more chance of hitting that upside than Michael Saunders or Greg Halman, and Guti is dying on the vine as we speak.
Besides, what are you gonna say if he drops his Ks from 25% to 22% and all of a sudden tears up the league? "See, I told you he had to do that?"
I don't think Jack would argue with you that 22% is better than 25% in K rate, and that optimally Trayvon would get back to 22% or lower as he progresses in his career.
And he'd probably even say that he's betting Travon WILL.
~G

8
Taro's picture

Over the past 20 years only 2 prospects from BAs top 100 list have been successful with a minor league K-rate higher than Trayvon's 28.6 K% (per ABs).
Russel Branyan and Wily Mo Pena are the biggest "successes" over the past 20 years with the highest minor league K-rate.
Success, under the study below, is defined as having over 1500 MLB ABs.
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2011/4/22/2123847/the-significance-of-min...
Only two players in the past 20 years from BA's top 100 have managed 1500 ABs in the MLB with a higher K-rate than Trayvon.

9
Taro's picture

In other words, the percentage play is to maximize Robinson's value in trade and invest ABs in someone else at the MLB level.

10
benihana's picture

 
But isn't the career K-rate hugely dependent on when you call them up? 
You have to give a prospect the chance to consolidate his gains in order for the k% to decline.  When you agressively promote a raw, toolsy player with limitted prior baseball experience, while adding in switch hitting, what do you expect?
He is demonstrating a vastly accelerated learing curve - the k's are dwindling month by month.  
How long do you leave him down? Long enough so that he can accumulate the requisite number of ABs to lower his k-rate to acceptable levels? Seems a silly paradigm. 
- Ben.

11
Taro's picture

K-rate is a big part of translating success to MLB as you can see in the graph above.
This is one reason I am very high on Kyle Seager and wouldn't blink an eye if Z traded Wells, Trayvon, Halman, Saunders, Peguero, Liddi, Johermyn, etc tommorow.
You don't want to bet your future on a dice roll.

12
Taro's picture

Right, but an Ichiro type prospect is a very high percentile for success. The same as Edgar.
If we had Ichiro in the farm, I'd hype him higher than I hyped Ackley.
If we had an Edgar-type prospect in AAA right now, I'd say his chances of being an impact player at 3B are excellent but would admittedly blow off any chances of averaging 25 HRs over several years (a bit off-topic but not sure if Edgar was clean in his 30s).
No single career is predictable, but I'd rather play the percentages in this case. 
Why would Trayvon be an exception to the rule? Both Branyan and Wily Mo have lighttower power that allowed them to hang around and neither of them were even regulars most seasons. No one else in BAs top 100 over the past 20 years has managed success with a higher minor league K-rate than Trayvon.   

13

Taro...now first, I find it funny that you're making me stake out a position on a player I am moderately-warm on but by no means blazingly-hot in support of, but this line of thinking doesn't make any sense.
Look, I get that more Ks = more risk of failure.  So does terrible defense.  If you did this chart for great defender ---> terrible defender it would look much the same, I would think.  The great defensive guys fail only half the time, the terrible defenders fail more. 
Why?  Because being a great defender means your bat doesn't have to be as good.  You have more opportunities for success. If you're The Wizard of Oz nobody cares that you can't hit your way out of a paper bag.  If Ozzie was your 1B you'd fire him after a hundred at-bats.  Does it mean you NEVER take a risk on a defense-challenged bat?  Heck no.  You just make sure that the greatness with the stick outweighs the risk of the bad defense by enough.
Defense-challenged bats have to hit A LOT to stick in the bigs.  How does that apply to high-K bats?
Well as you illustrated, most of them happen to play BAT positions.  So if they can't thump enough for a corner, they're done for their careers. Slap hitters who don't strike out play other positions on the diamond where they don't have to carry as much offensive weight.
Robinson plays a glove position.  He doesn't have to hit like most of the High-K, corner-power-required guys would to be a success, so the Chart of Failure doesn't apply to him in the same way it does most of its constituents.  If Robinson "only" hit like Wily Mo Pena or Russ Branyan he'd be an all-star in center field.  He doesn't have to clear the same bar that the corner guys do with his offense.
.250/.310/.440 from Trayvon and he's a fixture in the lineup.  Get that from Branyan and he's out of a job. I'd love to see this chart broken out by position so we could see how any glove-position hitters fared in their transition with high Ks versus corner guys.
It's not as simple as "this good, that bad."  Ks at this rate IS bad, but we don't need him to post an .850 OPS to have value.  We didn't trade for a 1B with this K rate - if we did, I'd need him to hit like Adam Dunn.  If Tayvon gives me an Adam Dunn performance he's gonna be a HOFer.
One piece of information is very helpful for determining some things, but not everything, m'man.  Like I said, given Ichiro or Edgar, or Trayvon or Francisco, I take the first group.  But of course I take the HOFers over the question marks.  If you could get Reggie Sanders in CF over Ichiro in RF, you might actually do better to take Reggie, as heretical as that might be.
And since nobody offered us an Ichiro it's not a stupid risk to try for Reggie, who would be just this side of Carlos Beltran as far as flat-out awesomeness in CF.
A risk yes, but I can't call it a stupid one, especially as most people are reluctant to give you a sure thing - they tend to keep those for themselves, if they even have any.  The Dodgers don't.  Neither do the Red Sox.  Now that Ackley's promoted there are just a handful in the entire minors that might qualify.
Have I mentioned that Denard Span is not a sure thing either?
~G

14
blissedj's picture

The ahead/behind in count splits are fascinating:
Ahead in count BB/K - 45/18 (!)  OPS 1498 (!!)
Behind in count BB/K - 0/71 (!?)  OPS 514
As he matures further and sees more pitches he could be elite at any OF position, but can that "0" figure be correct in the behind in count BB column? Such odd numbers, what a payoff if the eye improves though!

15
Taro's picture

Well based on your analogy, ya, if a guy is one of the worst fielders over a period of decades I wouldn't be high on his chances as a prospect either unless he were a pure DH. On that line Trayvon has run really poor zone ratings in CF over his Milb career. Not sure what it means given the roughness of these defensive stats.
Generally a K rate around 22% or slightly above is okay if it comes with other elite tools. Some of the best hitters in basball had above-average K-rates in the minors.
When you get too high though, theres a tendency for guys to crash and burn unless they have really have great secondary skills. Usually the High K rate guys that DO translate have massive power to compensate. The defensive types with high Ks don't hit the list at all.
The guys that have stuck around with a K-rate over 24% are Ryan Ludwick, Dean Palmer, Jack Cust, Preston Wilson, Tony Clark, Tim Salmon, Ryan Howard, Glennallen Hill, Wily Mo Pena, and Russel Branyan.
Of those guys Tim Salmon and Ryan Howard were impact players for a few years. Tony Clark and Preston Wilson were average/above-average players for a few seasons. The rest were mostly below-average regulars for most seasons, with a randomly great year from Ludwick.

16
Taro's picture

So the percentiles for the 24+%K group of top 100 prospects since 1990:
Impact player: 4.5%
Average/Above-average Regular: 4.6% (9.1% including impact players)
Below-average MLBer: 9.1%
Flash in the pan: 77.3%

17

It's one in ten that he becomes a star?  Because if we're using those guys as success comps, any of those lines from CF is a star (except for Pena, maybe, but would have had some star years).
By OPS+:
Ryan Howard (ha) - 139
Tim Salmon - 109
Tony Clark - 112
Preston Wilson - 103 
Ryan Ludwick - 111
Glennallen Hill - 112
Dean Palmer - 107
Wily Mo Pena - 94
Russel Branyan - 113
I probably agree with those odds: 1 in ten that he's a star, say 3 in ten that he hangs in there for a few years running a 90 OPS+ while playing CF until we get somebody better, and 60% that he's Jeremy Reed doing an impression of a windmill at the plate.
That'd be 40% success, 60% fail. Carp, Seager, Guti, Wells...how much better are their odds?
Not one bit, IMO.  They just have different ways to succeed or fail.  I'm not mandating a solution to a problem for a decade with this trade of a 3 month arm.  It'd be great, and Trayvon is a chance at that (as it Chiang), but that's not the definition of succeed or fail on this trade.
I just want to get a bat who can do better than what we have and put up a league-average number for his position, cheaply. More than that is gravy at this point.
The Mariners will stop bleeding all over the field the second they field a league-average offense and let their pitching carry the rest of the weight.  That means no more years like Guti, Saunders, Figgins, etc.  Maybe Trayvon will make it worse, and have another year like those guys that drags us back into the sewer.
I guess I'm not sure what you want to see, other than Denard Span.  I wanted Rasmus, but that didn't happen.  I don't think Trayvon is as good as Rasmus, but for all I know he could turn out better.  But if Rasmus was an A-, B+ plan, I don't put Trayvon any lower than a B, B-.  I would have put Span as a B or B+ as well, so I too like that plan better than Trayvon simply because he's shown he can be a positive contributor at the major league level and Trayvon hasn't.
But I don't like it the length of a football field better.  And if Trayvon had, he wouldn't be available, because that power potential if he was already being successful would be too tempting to get rid of. Span will NEVER have power so if his BA ever drops he's toast.  See Figgins, Chone.  But just like Figgins, he can be a plus contributor if it doesn't.  I still think Trayvon has more upside, but the middle ground of Span is steadier and more likely - though not guaranteed.
Where do you see a Trayvon acquisition if the Ms keep him, taro?  You thinking the odds of him contributing are so small because of Ks that it's like a C-, D level acquisition?  And would would Span be / have been?
~G

18
Taro's picture

Because of the extremely high Ks I think his chances are below average. All the successful comps were power hitting types with little or no defensive value. Possibly because they hit enough HRs to make up for the holes in their swings.
Even then, only 9.1% of the 24+%K group ended up having careers with a few years of 2 WAR seasons or better. Another 13.6% sticked around as MLBers for 1500+ ABs as below-average regulars or back-up players.
In general I don't think its efficient to spend time developing below-average players, so Trayvon is worth it in the scenario that he hits enough and fields enough to stick as a regular.
Span has averaged a little over 3 WAR over four seasons by both fangraphs and Bref (they use different defensive systems). I think trading for someone like Span and trading Trayvon away (perhaps in the same deal) is a better strategic move if it can be done.   

19
ghost's picture

We don't think we want glove men at every position...but we certainly want one in CF.  If Trayvon Robinson is the glove man that people say he is...an above average CFer with the leather...then he'll be a superstar in Safeco even while he's batting .240/.300/.450 (and if you think his odds are low of hitting THAT line...you've got another thing coming).
You continue to refer to Trayvon as "extremely high Ks"...I don't see it as extremely high anything.  His Ks are a little higher than your 22% cut in the meat of his career...23% to be exact.  At that point, a 100 OPS+ becomes 50/50...not 40/60...and if he has the glove people say he does...that makes him an ALL-STAR, taro.  And an MVP candidate in Seattle (though the league would probably not recognize that).  See: Cameron, Mike, 2003 (he ran up 30+ defensive runs saved that year by some metrics...making him a +1.5 win bat and a +3 win fielder with a +1 win position adjustment.  Say hel-LO to my little friend.
That's the thing that will help Trayvon...it's all about the glove.  We'll see how good he is defensively in short order, I'm sure.  I know I'm not buying into the low ZRs in the minors...those numbers have ZERO value in this discussion since minor league numbers have a slightly NEGATIVE correlation with major league numbers when it comes to ZR across that transition.

20

 
.298/.389/.494/.883 with 30 doubles, 24 HRs and 10 triples per 162, across 2.2 162 game seasons with a .46 batting eye, ages 21-23 in the high minors at a glove position.
 
If I gave you that stat line and just left the Ks off, what would you think of it?
 
The one bad number is the Ks, which you don't get to see here.  The batting eye isn't stupendous, but certainly survivable.
 
The strikeout figure helps better interpret this data set, but just based on this, which is not a small sample size, what's the impression?  It's both really impressive...and just a bit better than Mike Saunders and his .280/.373/.457/.830 AAA line at the same basic ages.  Does Robinson have the same sort of fatal flaws to work out before he can succeed in the bigs?
 
I find Trayvon's .300 BA while striking out that much to be intriguing. It's something Greg Halman could never do, for instance.  Or Carlos Peguero, or Mario Martinez, or any of our other really-free-swingers.  It's even 20 points better than Saunders, who also strikes out a lot at 24% career, though 21.5% in AAA.  I'd be REALLY curious to know what Jack's scouts told him about Trayvon's swing and potential to reduce his Ks by 20 a year.
 
Because especially if Trayvon is the 2nd piece in the trade, he's a really interesting piece. 
 
~G

21

1.  You don't say "only 2 guys higher than 28.6%."  You say "guys between 25 and 30%."  You don't compare a player by making his performance the edge of the data pool.
Extend it to 25% and you've got lots of players - Salmon, Clark, Preston Wilson, Ryan Howard, etc.  "Only 2 guys higher" is wayyyyy misleading.
***
2.  Everybody who would have struck out more --- > washed out and didn't get the chance.
***
3.  "Top 100" lists edit the player pool against high-K players.  He didn't measure minor leaguers; he measured SUBJECTIVELY WELL-REGARDED minor leaguers.
***
4.  K% ... that is, K/AB rather than K/PA ... edits the pool against guys with BB's, guys who work the count.  This is unwise.
***
5.  The guys promoted early are not caught in the pool, as Benihana pointed out.  
***
6.  If Trayvon spends two more years in the minors his K% will go way down.
***
7.  etc. etc. etc.
Taking that little mini-"study" and saying "see, look, only 2 guys ever whiffed like Trayvon and made it to the majors," that is 100% false.

22

Those who say, "Look, those 175 K's per 155 games are a big red flag - I'll believe him when I see him," fine.  I'm sympathetic, but think that they are failing to nuance the assessment.
Those who look at Trayvon Robinson and say, "1 in 100 shot," .... :shrug: that is obvious error, and it indicates a major problem with our thinking processes.

23

Probably none, right?
***
It's not that Dustin Ackley did something virtually impossible.  It's that he did something not especially welcome in baseball.
***
That Trayvon Robinson would be allowed to hack away, and still get promoted quickly despite the K's, that's not something that baseball usually prefers.  
It doesn't mean the kid can't hit.  It certainly suggests the Dodgers didn't mind the K's.
***
"Career minors stats" is a fractured way to try to make sense of a baseball player.  His ability vs. challenge has been a totally subjective context.

24
Taro's picture

His career K-rate is 28.6%. Not high on him running a 750 OPS at the big league level, but you never know. Roughly 10% of this profile become good players.
I agree the defense is relevant. I've heard mixed reviews. That could be a swing of 10-15 runs if hes at either extreme. 

25

According to Shandler, only 14% of EYEs from .26 to .50 will bat .300 the next year, while 26% will bat under .250.
Grant an EYE of .51-.75 and the numbers go to 18% vs 17%.
***
EYE and K correlate with success, dude.  But not at 0.99 efficiency.

26
Taro's picture

Trayvon has had a lot of minor league time. Granted, he was an inexperienced guy so that understandable, but typically MLBers have around 2000 minor league PAs. Hes going to be at 3000+ before hes promoted.

27

Nowhere in here have you addressed the following questions about this strange paradigm of "Career Minor League" stats:
***
1.  The fact that the longer a player stays in the minors, the better his "career minor league" numbers are.
2.  The fact that one org promotes a 19-year-old, and another one doesn't.  One org sees a kid fan 120 times and holds him back; another one moves him on, as the Dodgers did Trayvon.
3.  The fact that even within a single level, say AAA, one league is much tougher to hit in than the other.
4.  The fact that a college player starts off with a huge head start in development when the clock begins on his "career minor league" numbers.
5.  The fact that kids who would have failed at higher levels, aren't allowed to.
***
Would you mix Jeremy Reed's or Garrett Olson's AAA and MLB stats into one blended milkshake and assess him based on those?  Then what are we doing blending A+, AA, and AAA stats and calling them one rational milkshake?
"Career minor league" numbers have ZERO credence with me.  No more credence than Garrett Olson's blended AA/AAA/AL "career professional" numbers do.

28
Taro's picture

Right, I'm saying its closer to a 1 in 10 shot. Its not worth the gamble IMO. Better to take advantage of that value in trade.
I'm aware of the flaws in the study, but its still relevant as it shows how the success rate drops as Ks increase.
The non top 100 guys aren't included  (like Nelson Cruz), but it probably wouldn't help the high K guys much. Non top 100 guys have higher bust rates.

29
Taro's picture

One thing about this profile is that the success cases tend to be late bloomers. Trayvon is running a career-high K-rate at AAA.
If he does become successful, odds are it will take awhile (his development has already been slow relative to other highschool success cases). Either way, I think you're better off trading him than investing time developing him.

30
Taro's picture

I see where you, Doc, and everybody is coming from there. A high BB/power guy with high Ks is far more likely to pan out than one without. Still, Travyon's Ks are high even taking BBs into consideration (25% in relation to PAs). I'm not high on terrible BB/K types either.. The strikezone is main part of hitting.

31

Allowing a 1-in-10 chance of stardom is a much different thing than writing a dude off as a 1-in-100 chance of being decent.  ;- )
My own estimates for Trayvon might be something like:
25% - Dynamic, minor-star CF or better
40% - At least holds his own with the bat (85+ index), good D in CF
35% - Washout
I'd expect that Trayvon is a comfortable favorite to get 2,500 AB's in the bigs, which is what John Sickels means by B/B+ prospect.
The 35% washout has gotta be in there, 'cause if you go back and look at ANY historical list of PCL blue chippers, you're going to find that many Dallas McPherson style washouts.
But I'm not going any higher than 35%, 'cause this kid doesn't have to hit much to play in the big leagues.  McPherson and Wood and Pickering did.
***
As G-Money says, if Trayvon's K's weren't sky-high, he'd probably be a grade A, and if his K's weren't real high, he wouldn't be a Mariner right now.
***
So assuming that you slide 10%, 15% from HI and MID down to LO, then we're not talking different languages, anyway.

32

I definitely get where Taro is coming from.  And he's done a STELLAR job in assembling "aggregate" data to support the idea of a K-rate "tipping point".  Bravo.
That said ... I will bring up a few points I "think" might help the Trayvon cause. 
In my years of scanning minor leaguers (informally), I seem to recall a tendency for high SPEED guys with high Ks to 'generally' beat their counterparts in "stickability".  As Doc notes, there are still some Ryan Howard slug successes.  But, after you go ... 25% K = 25% chance of success, I want to go see if there are any traits which seperate the 25% and the 75% in the high K group.
The REASON high Ks are bad is they are outs without a BIP.  And given "standard" BIP rates, (.300), you can't get back to near a .300 average unless you hit a LOT over the fence, (the Howard profile). 
Trayvon stole 47 bases in 2009.  His percentage isn't great ... but he's a switch-hitter with speed, so he's almost guaranteed to run a higher BABIP than "normal". 
The utterly ridiculous 2011 HR/2B rate is also a typical sign of "sluggers" who "got it".  Even counting 2/3 of the triples as doubles, he's got a 2:1 HR/2B ratio ... which is one of my tells on sluggers taking it to the next level.
Another point is ... BA.  The stat statheads have all but forgotten.  If a K-rate is going to crush a guy, it'll tend to crush him in the minors too.  You show me a .250 high-K minors guy, and I'm betting on MLB failure, too.  You show me a .300 average high-K guy ... I'm gonna look further.  Trayvon hit .300 in 2010 and .293 in 2011. 
As for career minors rates ... *I* am one of those who "foolishly" look at career MiLB rates.  My rationale?  I want to try and temper my enthusasiasm for "career years".  The biggest trap (IMO) with prospects is the core belief that every stat produced is based on ability.  You can't tell the difference between an "outlier" year and "real" improvement until after the fact.  Examination of career lines is good for tempering fixation on the "latest greatest" season of data.  (Not the whole story - and you have to look when & WHERE the big numbers were produced, of course).
Trayvon's .293/.375/.436 (.794) line isn't astounding.  But, a .293 career average with a 25% career K-rate ... THAT is.  Or, at least encouraging.
Another primary key for me with high-K guys is simple.  Do their Ks rise as they do?  The high-K failures I've noted tended to get progressively worse as they came up.  That's an indication of being overmatched and unable to adapt.  The successes seemed (IIRC) to have flatter K-rates.  They struck out a ton in A, but got no WORSE in AAA.
I see Trayvon getting worse from AA to AAA, (but not outside normal variance), but he's doing it at the same time he went from 23:9 2B:HR to 9:26 2B:HR.  His ISOBB dropped, his K-rate goes up, but his ISO goes completely off the charts, (150 career compared to 270 in AAA). 
Trayvon morphed in 2011.  And the subtlest tell of all?  He went from 53 SB "attempts to 14.  Trayvon *became* a HR stalker in 2011.  Whether by choice or by coaching, he ditched his speed game almost entirely. 
Trayvon Ks roughly once per game played.  Been true since he was 18.  Still true.  It's not a "pattern" of being overmatched.  And his line from 2011 shows a massive change in approach, with only a nominal rise in K-rate (in exchange for a massive increase in ISO). 
I see the danger.  But, I'd gamble on Trayvon waaaay before I'd bet on Saunders.  The biggest danger (IMO), is not the K-rate ... but the risk that 2011 is an outlier.  But the sheer magnitude of the 2011 power surge demands that "some" of it is legit. 

33

... in terms of where you're betting.
That's why adding a quanitity of potentially good players is a good thing.
You don't bet the pot on a single prospect.  You bet on the group as whole to produce something you can win with.
Or you can bet on replacing high potential in a package for kinetic - the guy who can do it now.
 
I have no problem with keeping the group of them and developing them, or packaging a guy like Trayvon in another deal to get what you want.  What Z and his team are paid for is to find out what it is that you want and whether any of these guys are it.

34

Taro always has good input, but there are at least two ways that things aren't meshing here.
First, Taro is insisting on K/AB, which is fine, but fangraphs is the only place that I've found it easy to find K%, and it reports K/PA.  So a lot of the data is confused.
Robinson is career 25.1% K/PA and 28.6% K/AB
Granderson  MLB career 21.8% K/PA and 24.7% K/AB
Granderson in minors career 18.8% K/PA and 21.8% K/AB
Cammy is MLB career 24.2% K/PA and 27.9% K/AB
Cammy in minors career 21.8% K/PA and 25.4% K/AB
When we are talking about thresholds, it's really important to compare apples to apples.  So there's a ton of confusion here.
So, yes, if you are looking at career minor league numbers per AB, as Taro has it, and using his criteria:
Granderson 21.8%, "within the threshold" but just barely
Cammy 25.4%, "not likely to succeed"
Trayvon 28.6%, "virtually no chance to succeed"
What G and others point out is that Cammy brought glove/speed/60+ walks/30+ doubles/20+ HR to the table.  Take any of those away and the K% might have done him in, sure.  But he did have all those things, and brought them to the table every year.  So I don't see how you rule out Trayvon, when he might bring all of those things, too.
Second, as Sandy already pointed out, Robinson switched in 2011 from speed game to power game -- either by design or accident or because he found the thinner air to his liking, whatever. 
For the three years prior, he was using his speed game.  For those years, his K/PA was 23.1% and his K/AB was 26.5%.  Still a hair higher than what Cammy did in the minors (21.8 and 25.4), but not massively so.  But, yes, definitely higher than what Granderson was doing in the minors.
In 2011, his Ks have spiked again, but as we've said, he's switched to the power game.
My comment yesterday was "I love his AA line," and it certainly seems that he has shown that he can dial back the Ks to at least a roughly Cammy level and if he can do that with 0.4 eye + glove + speed + doubles + decent HR, I don't see why he can't have a roughly Cammy career, which, of course, can be an all-star career in Safeco.
If he remains so enamored with the power game such that he can't get the Ks back down, then, yes, I think Taro is right that he'll struggle in the majors, and I give him credit for that.  If the big-HR game comes at the expense of a K rate that is way higher than Cammy's, then Trayvon needs to be coached back to his speed-doubles game.
That's not the case with Mike Carp, who sacrified a 15%/18% K rate to go to a 20%/23% K rate and double his HRs. Robinson went from 23%/26% in his speed-doubles phase to 29%/33% in his HR phase, and Taro's right that that's danger zone.

35
Taro's picture

I think the main disagreement is in the probability. Based on the track-record of these players, 24+K% would have a 1/4 chance of being an MLBer. 1/10 of being a good regular or better.
The BABIP point made by Sandy is an important one (most of the success cases ran high BABIPs), but the success cases run high BABIPs through power not speed.
Power is the big equalizer for this group and because Trayvon doesn't have the kind of the power the success cases did, he has to show more secondary skills. Honestly, my gut feel is that his chances are worse than the average percentages because he doesn't fit the profile of the success cases. Michael Saunders is a similar type player to the Trayvon group, and they usually fall flat at the MLB because they don't hit enough HRs to make up for the holes in their swings. It creates a breaking point with the bat.
Another trend is that this profile tends to late-bloomers. If you are keeping Trayvon, you give him a TON of time in AAA.

36

Taro, I agree that most of the successes run high BABIPs from power.  My point with this kid is that he *also* has the kind of speed to nudge his BABIP up.
I think the comp to Saunders is a great one ... but brings in data on both sides of the argument.
Like Saunders, Trayvon was whiffing once per game from A ball.
Saunders, at age 22, in AAA, had a large spike in production, jumping from low to mid 800s to post a .922 AAA season.  That season is why many fell in love with him.  And, as noted, that season was (at the time), an outlier.  But ... comp his career to that season and what do the slash lines look like?
.277/.368/.444 (.811) - career
.310/.378/.544 (.922) - 2009
The thing here is that he had a 33 point spike in BA, which (when doubled), would create a 66 point spike in OPS.  What actually happened was he only gained 10 points of OBP while his ISO jumped from 170 to 230.  And ... his K-rate dropped.  He only fanned 48 times in 64 games.  Did his K-rate drop because his BA went up or vice versa?  While the .310 was a minors high, he had hit .298 in 2007 and .290 at West Tenn in 2008.  And his 2b:HR ratio while improved slightly ... only went from 22:11 to 15:13 from '08 to '09.  In truth, except for the dip in K-rate, is "feels" more like just a good year off the same template as always.
Trayvon saw his 2B:HR ratio go from 23:9 to 9:26 (or 13:26 if you slosh some 3Bs to the 2Bs column). 
Trayvon wasn't a .300 hitter in '06 or '07 or '08.  He was in '09, '10 and '11.
But, his line is all over the place:
2009: .300/.373/.493 -- 74 patience -- 193 ISO
2010: .300/.404/.438 -- 101 patience - 138 ISO
2011: .293/.375/.563 -- 82 patience - 270 ISO
The reason *I* would be intrigued by Trayvon way ahead of Saunders is because you have three different APPROACHES to hitting indicated over a 3 year period.  That tells me he is altering his approach repeatedly ... and (oddly), managing to maintain a .300 average while doing so ... DESPITE the high K-rate.  My sense is that he's using the same "approach" this year as in 2009 ... but he's harnessing a LOT more power. 
Which players manage good BABIPs from power?  Those that hit more HRs than doubles.  Saunders only came close to an equal HR/2B ratio once.  Trayvon in 2011 is showing the power domination to cover the K-rate *AND* he has already shown the kind of speed to *ALSO* mask the K-rate. 
Why have *I* been reluctant to buy into the Smoak hype?  Because in the minors, his BEST HR:2B ratio before acquisition was only 13:9.  And, even in Texas he managed only a 10:8 ratio before moving Northwest.  From day one, I've been waiting for Smoak to give an indication that he's more than 20-HR guy.  I haven't seen it.  Carp HAS given that indication.  Smoak is loved because he looks so darn GOOD while posting his 30-2B, 15-HR numbers that everyone assumes he's going to eventually swap those two numbers. 
I *love* the skepticism over the one-good-year minors slash line.  But, my sense of Trayvon is that his K-rate is probably staying a "little" high because he is adapting and tinkering and adjusting.  And the ability to adapt is what I look for in a prospect to actually continue improving after reaching the majors (rather than just taking the normal MLE discount).  I'd give him slightly better odds than Taro on succeeding ... but would certainly caution that his first touch of the Majors could look ugly. 
But, as a slugger ... I like his odds of becoming a 40-HR guy a *LOT* better than I like Smoak.  Is he Preston Wilson?  Cameron?  Andruw?  Hard to say. 

37

I think that says it all. o.O *laughs*
The reason *I* would be intrigued by Trayvon way ahead of Saunders is because you have three different APPROACHES to hitting indicated over a 3 year period.  That tells me he is altering his approach repeatedly ... and (oddly), managing to maintain a .300 average while doing so ... DESPITE the high K-rate.  My sense is that he's using the same "approach" this year as in 2009 ... but he's harnessing a LOT more power. 

That intrigues me too.  I watched his game in Tacoma last night...his swing potential really is interesting.  Can't wait for him to come to town in a couple weeks.
~G
 

38
Taro's picture

I do see the growth in his minor league career, and the defense, speed, and BABIP are other factors to take into consideration. I understand why everyone thinks I'm being a little too dogmatic about the Ks, but putting it into perspective you can really see how rare it is for this profile player to succeed. None of comps that succeded K'ed like Trayvon in the minors. Its because a success case with this profile doesn't really exist.
Theres never been a speedy/defense success case with Ks this high from BAs top 100 list in the past 20 years. Mike Cameron is the big success profile for this type (never a top prospect, but similar BB/defense/power), but even he K'ed around 25% in his minor league career (Trayvon 28.6%).
I could see a Cameron upside if he can get the contact rate under control soon (how good is his D?), but a ton of guys flame out trying to hit the Cameron career line.

39

Again, if a guy has 107 RBI's you don't ask, "who had 107 or more RBI's?"
You ask, "Who had 100-115 RBI's?"
***
Then it becomes clear:  fanning 175 times in a 150-game season is not platypus baseball.
True, most minor leaguers doing that are held back until they're striking out less.  
***
You have to capture the variable --- "GM subjective intervention into a career" --- which those databases do not do.
The logic also does not capture the variable --- "Top 100 Lists Like To Exclude High-K Players".

40
Taro's picture

While true, its a function of there being less of a population at the extremes (very high contact and very low contact). Brandon Wood and Dallas McPherson were high Ks guys that were top 10 prospects and never panned out.
There will always be non top-100 successful MLBers, but the bust rates for those type will also be higher. While the population rate of the high K guys is smaller, the success rates are less than half of the average contact types and nearly three times less than high contact types.
There are high K guys that have had success like Mike Cameron and Nelson Cruz (not on top 100 lists), but even these guys ran lower K%s in the minors than Trayvon.

Add comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><p><br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

shout_filter

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.