Behind the Curve with Analytics?

[Brion McClanahan]

With recent comments from Gausman, Britton, and Brach and of course the growing interest in analytics based decision making--all post season teams are using it with success--it should be asked if the Orioles are already behind the curve and perhaps should be interested in the next new approach to winning.

When Duq and Buck began the defense/HR/strong pen strategy, they were capitalizing on a modified "moneyball" team building effort. HRs, defense, and good bullpens were undervalued. The Os and the Royals were both on the cutting edge of this strategy and both had success, with the Royals doing it just a bit better. Everyone then jumped on board, the result being the drive for more and more HRs, shortening games to five or less innings, openers, defense analytics, etc. The Os fell behind because they did not use the "science" of the process and also made some bad personal decisions, including not participating in the salary jump for players that were now hot commodities because of the new direction of the game. The top teams now not only use analytics, but the a similar approach to players as the Os and Royals just a few years ago. Yankees, Sox, Dodgers, Brewers, Astros, all fit this mold.

So what is the change that could beat this approach? There is one, I think, that is undervalued. Yelich is proving that with the Brewers: contact (bat control), speed, and defense with occasional pop but not the 40-50 HR guy that dominated a few years ago. Even Kakes is a nice example of a contact guy taking control of a game. This is makes the Brewers the most unique team offensively in the remaining four. They are on the cutting edge in contrast to the 3 HR mold of the other teams, perhaps the Sox excluded.

The Os need more Boggs, Bretts, Baines, and Hendersons, and fewer mashers. With more Ks, contact players would change the game and mitigate the increasing number of strikeouts and the impact that is having on games. So would contact, as it would make the "shift" irrelevant. You open the entire field for play, put pressure on the defense, and with speed manufacture runs. You won't be able to erase large leads so it is also necessary to have good defense (where analytics can help) and have pitchers who are countering the trend for more power (Ks), but perhaps the new GM should think about the next trend and not going with the sheep in the current trend.

It looked like Duq was moving in this direction before he was let go. He was on to something. To be successful, the Os need to set a trend like they did a few years back and not be part of the current trend and get left behind.

Speed, contact, defense. The new "moneyball."

Thoughts?

[esmd]

Already a thread on this:  

 

[Brion McClanahan]

2 minutes ago, esmd said:

Already a thread on this:  

 

No, this is a different topic. Read the post.

[Babypowder]

Is there data that suggests these qualities are undervalued? I suspect if they were, there would be more emphasis on them. Basically all the publicly available data says all of those things are generally overvalued by the traditional baseball minds. If there's data that suggests otherwise, I'm certainly open to it and I'm sure the budget conscious O's would be too. That would be an obvious cost saver.

[Brion McClanahan]

5 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

Is there data that suggests these qualities are undervalued? I suspect if they were, there would be more emphasis on them. Basically all the publicly available data says all of those things are generally overvalued by the traditional baseball minds. If there's data that suggests otherwise, I'm certainly open to it and I'm sure the budget conscious O's would be too. That would be an obvious cost saver.

Example: Tampa certainly saw value in Mallex Smith before almost anyone else, and he is the type of player the Os should be looking to develop/acquire. Whit Merrifield, Trea Turner, Cain (KC/MIL), etc. One or two power hitters are nice, but image a lineup that could manufacture runs every inning. Look at what Villar brought to the table with the Os late in the year. Not a high contact hitter, but more in the "undervalued" mold. Hitters like Schoop are overvalued. Villar undervalued.

[Babypowder]

12 minutes ago, Brion McClanahan said:

Example: Tampa certainly saw value in Mallex Smith before almost anyone else, and he is the type of player the Os should be looking to develop/acquire. Whit Merrifield, Trea Turner, Cain (KC/MIL), etc. One or two power hitters are nice, but image a lineup that could manufacture runs every inning. Look at what Villar brought to the table with the Os late in the year. Not a high contact hitter, but more in the "undervalued" mold. Hitters like Schoop are overvalued. Villar undervalued.

And there are already well accepted offensive metrics that both support and dispute some of these thoughts. Mallex Smith had a 117 wRC+ and over 3 WAR, Merrifield has 120 and over 5 WAR, Lorenzo Cain had a 124 and over 5 WAR, Trea Tunrner was at 105 and nearly 5 WAR, all of these players are valued very highly by the current generally accepted metrics. If you're looking to buck current analytic trends,  you'd need to identify data suggesting players that do not seem appropriately valued by these metrics are actually more valuable than they appear. As far your last comparison, Villar and Schoop are similarly valuable hitters for their careers by most metrics, wRC+ has them at 94 for Villar and 97 for Schoop. Do you have data that suggests otherwise? That would be the kind of thing I think you're encouraging the Orioles to consider.

[Tx Oriole]

1 hour ago, Brion McClanahan said:

With recent comments from Gausman, Britton, and Brach and of course the growing interest in analytics based decision making--all post season teams are using it with success--it should be asked if the Orioles are already behind the curve and perhaps should be interested in the next new approach to winning.

When Duq and Buck began the defense/HR/strong pen strategy, they were capitalizing on a modified "moneyball" team building effort. HRs, defense, and good bullpens were undervalued. The Os and the Royals were both on the cutting edge of this strategy and both had success, with the Royals doing it just a bit better. Everyone then jumped on board, the result being the drive for more and more HRs, shortening games to five or less innings, openers, defense analytics, etc. The Os fell behind because they did not use the "science" of the process and also made some bad personal decisions, including not participating in the salary jump for players that were now hot commodities because of the new direction of the game. The top teams now not only use analytics, but the a similar approach to players as the Os and Royals just a few years ago. Yankees, Sox, Dodgers, Brewers, Astros, all fit this mold.

So what is the change that could beat this approach? There is one, I think, that is undervalued. Yelich is proving that with the Brewers: contact (bat control), speed, and defense with occasional pop but not the 40-50 HR guy that dominated a few years ago. Even Kakes is a nice example of a contact guy taking control of a game. This is makes the Brewers the most unique team offensively in the remaining four. They are on the cutting edge in contrast to the 3 HR mold of the other teams, perhaps the Sox excluded.

The Os need more Boggs, Bretts, Baines, and Hendersons, and fewer mashers. With more Ks, contact players would change the game and mitigate the increasing number of strikeouts and the impact that is having on games. So would contact, as it would make the "shift" irrelevant. You open the entire field for play, put pressure on the defense, and with speed manufacture runs. You won't be able to erase large leads so it is also necessary to have good defense (where analytics can help) and have pitchers who are countering the trend for more power (Ks), but perhaps the new GM should think about the next trend and not going with the sheep in the current trend.

It looked like Duq was moving in this direction before he was let go. He was on to something. To be successful, the Os need to set a trend like they did a few years back and not be part of the current trend and get left behind.

Speed, contact, defense. The new "moneyball."

Thoughts?

This organization is so behind the times.  

 

 

 

[Brion McClanahan]

11 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

And there are already well accepted offensive metrics that both support and dispute some of these thoughts. Mallex Smith had a 117 wRC+ and over 3 WAR, Merrifield has 120 and over 5 WAR, Lorenzo Cain had a 124 and over 5 WAR, Trea Tunrner was at 105 and nearly 5 WAR, all of these players are valued very highly by the current generally accepted metrics. If you're looking to buck current analytic trends,  you'd need to identify data suggesting players that do not seem appropriately valued by these metrics are actually more valuable than they appear. As far your last comparison, Villar and Schoop are similarly valuable hitters for their careers by most metrics, wRC+ has them at 94 for Villar and 97 for Schoop. Do you have data that suggests otherwise? That would be the kind of thing I think you're encouraging the Orioles to consider.

Yes, I agree that "offensive metrics" like WAR, wRC+ already support that these players are good players, but none are going to receive the type of contract say Manny or Harper will receive. And that's not necessarily "analytics," at least not how people are talking about it now (swing and miss rates in certain situations, etc). Cain is not paid like an elite player whereas Manny will be, yet Cain is perhaps more valuable. He doesn't hit for more power, but he is perhaps a more complete baseball player. He'll make half of what Manny will cost a team. Turner, Merrifield, etc will never be paid like Trout, but if you had several players like Smith, Turner, etc on your team, it would be better than a Trout and then some overpaid sluggers.

And the fact that the Os acquired what they did for Schoop shows that a player like Schoop is overvalued while Villar is undervalued.

[Babypowder]

3 minutes ago, Brion McClanahan said:

Yes, I agree that "offensive metrics" like WAR, wRC+ already support that these players are good players, but none are going to receive the type of contract say Manny or Harper will receive. And that's not necessarily "analytics," at least not how people are talking about it now (swing and miss rates in certain situations, etc). Cain is not paid like an elite player whereas Manny will be, yet Cain is perhaps more valuable. He doesn't hit for more power, but he is perhaps a more complete baseball player. He'll make half of what Manny will cost a team. Turner, Merrifield, etc will never be paid like Trout, but if you had several players like Smith, Turner, etc on your team, it would be better than a Trout and then some overpaid sluggers.

And the fact that the Os acquired what they did for Schoop shows that a player like Schoop is overvalued while Villar is undervalued.

To make this an analytics trendsetting, you'll need data that supports this position. Cain won't make as much as Manny mostly because he was a late bloomer and wasn't a free agent until he was 31. Getting a 5/80 deal at 31 in the recent free agency climate is no small feat. Cain is pretty rightfully highly valued, I would say.

[BarclaySouthway]

I think the ultra superstars are undervalued.  Guys like Trout, Scherzer, Betts, Machado.  Seager and Bregman look to be reaching that level.  

Players that have the ability to rack up $20-$30 million in surplus value.  Since nobody makes more than $35 million or so a year,  these elite players are actually underpaid.

I guess that means when you're lucky enough to hit upon one, it's a good idea to go ahead and back up the truck.

[spiritof66]

On 10/11/2018 at 11:55 AM, Brion McClanahan said:

With recent comments from Gausman, Britton, and Brach and of course the growing interest in analytics based decision making--all post season teams are using it with success--it should be asked if the Orioles are already behind the curve and perhaps should be interested in the next new approach to winning.

When Duq and Buck began the defense/HR/strong pen strategy, they were capitalizing on a modified "moneyball" team building effort. HRs, defense, and good bullpens were undervalued. The Os and the Royals were both on the cutting edge of this strategy and both had success, with the Royals doing it just a bit better. Everyone then jumped on board, the result being the drive for more and more HRs, shortening games to five or less innings, openers, defense analytics, etc. The Os fell behind because they did not use the "science" of the process and also made some bad personal decisions, including not participating in the salary jump for players that were now hot commodities because of the new direction of the game. The top teams now not only use analytics, but the a similar approach to players as the Os and Royals just a few years ago. Yankees, Sox, Dodgers, Brewers, Astros, all fit this mold.

So what is the change that could beat this approach? There is one, I think, that is undervalued. Yelich is proving that with the Brewers: contact (bat control), speed, and defense with occasional pop but not the 40-50 HR guy that dominated a few years ago. Even Kakes is a nice example of a contact guy taking control of a game. This is makes the Brewers the most unique team offensively in the remaining four. They are on the cutting edge in contrast to the 3 HR mold of the other teams, perhaps the Sox excluded.

The Os need more Boggs, Bretts, Baines, and Hendersons, and fewer mashers. With more Ks, contact players would change the game and mitigate the increasing number of strikeouts and the impact that is having on games. So would contact, as it would make the "shift" irrelevant. You open the entire field for play, put pressure on the defense, and with speed manufacture runs. You won't be able to erase large leads so it is also necessary to have good defense (where analytics can help) and have pitchers who are countering the trend for more power (Ks), but perhaps the new GM should think about the next trend and not going with the sheep in the current trend.

It looked like Duq was moving in this direction before he was let go. He was on to something. To be successful, the Os need to set a trend like they did a few years back and not be part of the current trend and get left behind.

Speed, contact, defense. The new "moneyball."

Thoughts?

I'm pretty sure that the "next new approach to winning" is one that is bubbling up in the analytics departments and front offices of one or more teams that value creative thinking, and that we don't know about it yet. 

To compete with teams that have a lot more resources for their ML payrolls and for scouting and for analytics departments and for signing international free agents, the Orioles first have to catch up with them on analytics (where they can try to compete), and then try to get ahead of them with smart, creative analysts, innovative executives and a manager who is not wedded to ancient baseball wisdom. Watching what other teams are doing and imitating their successful moves is fine, but the goal should be to go beyond that. 

[baltfan]

This is so overblown.  I have it on good authority that every member of the analytics department has a graphing calculator 

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Thinais so overblown.  I have it on good authority that every member of the analytics department has a graphing calculator 

[Barnaby Graves]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Ladies and gentlemen, meet your new Vice-General President Manager of Baseball Operations.  As the new VGPMBO, Abacus Mikey will report directly to Brady Anderson.

[Can_of_corn]