I’m about ready to give up on DJ Stewart

[DrungoHazewood]

17 hours ago, Frobby said:

2.   Stowers “is a question mark, but DJ is not.”   I don’t think we know everything there is to know about Stewart.   I guarantee you I couid come up with a long list of players who had less success than Stewart through age 27 and 619 PA, who turned out to have pretty good careers.   

So I ran a query on bb-ref Stathead.  LF/RFers since 1970 (min 50 games at one of those positions).  Through age 27 they had to have between 300 and 1000 PAs.  OPS+ under 100.  No more than -5 fielding runs. 

Results were 79 players matching those criteria.  Stewart is one of them.  I'll throw out some of the names on the list I recognize (career WAR in parentheses): Terry Crowley (2.4), Mark Sweeney (1.7), Ruben Mateo (0), Dwight Smith Jr (-1), Reggie Williams (-1), Phil Nevin (16), Curt Blefary (11), Bam Bam Muelens (-2), Mickey Hatcher (3), Dave McCarty (-2.2), Ken Gerhart (-1), Sherman Obando (-1).  Those were the names I recognized.  The rest of the list was guys like Harold Ramirez and Ron Pruitt and Junior Lake.  Also John "Forces" Van Der Wal.

Blefary is not really a comp, he'd been in a three-year funk by the time he was Stewart's age, and would be out of the league by 28.  Nevin had a big breakout in a time when a lot of 29-year-old mediocrities suddenly started hitting 35 homers.

I think there's little chance DJ Stewart has a productive major league career left in him.  He's 28 and his bat absolutely has to carry him, and he has a 97 OPS+, and under an .800 in AAA.  I mean, I wouldn't be stunned if he fell into a job somewhere and had a .800 OPS in 400 PAs.  But I could say that about 1000 guys.  Almost all of them end up as Ken Gerhart.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Pickles said:

Big Mac below makes my point.  An 800 OPS with negative value everywhere else, pretty extreme negative value at that, isn't very valuable at all.

Stewart was worth 0.6 rWAR in 2020 in 31.games, when he had an .809 OPS that was very heavily walk-driven.  Projected over a full season, that would be pretty valuable.   

I don’t like the term “nugget” because I don’t think people use that term consistently.    Is it a player who’s a full-time starter?   Is it a guy who can have a useful role on a team?   Those are two very different things.   Was John Lowenstein a nugget?    Benny Ayala?

I want to be really clear that I’m not saying Stewart has a long term role as a useful piece on a good team.  I’m just saying I don’t think it can be ruled out.   That doesn’t mean we should give him infinite opportunities, especially if someone comes along we like better.   
But I think it’s wrong to assume he can’t be a useful player.  
 

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

Stewart was worth 0.6 rWAR in 2020 in 31.games, when he had an .809 OPS that was very heavily walk-driven.  Projected over a full season, that would be pretty valuable.   

I don’t like the term “nugget” because I don’t think people use that term consistently.    Is it a player who’s a full-time starter?   Is it a guy who can have a useful role on a team?   Those are two very different things.   Was John Lowenstein a nugget?    Benny Ayala?

I want to be really clear that I’m not saying Stewart has a long term role as a useful piece on a good team.  I’m just saying I don’t think it can be ruled out.   That doesn’t mean we should give him infinite opportunities, especially if someone comes along we like better.   
But I think it’s wrong to assume he can’t be a useful player.  
 

I don't think we're really in disagreements here.  

The only point I'll add in reference to your Lowenstein comment is that Stewart would have a much better chance at carving out a lasting ML career if this was 45 years and there were 7-8 men benches, and pitcher's were hitting.  Then a role more appropriate for Stewart would be more readily available.

[DrungoHazewood]

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Stewart was worth 0.6 rWAR in 2020 in 31.games, when he had an .809 OPS that was very heavily walk-driven.  Projected over a full season, that would be pretty valuable.   

I don’t like the term “nugget” because I don’t think people use that term consistently.    Is it a player who’s a full-time starter?   Is it a guy who can have a useful role on a team?   Those are two very different things.   Was John Lowenstein a nugget?    Benny Ayala?

I want to be really clear that I’m not saying Stewart has a long term role as a useful piece on a good team.  I’m just saying I don’t think it can be ruled out.   That doesn’t mean we should give him infinite opportunities, especially if someone comes along we like better.   
But I think it’s wrong to assume he can’t be a useful player.  
 

On a team in 2022 with 13 pitchers, how useful can a guy be who has a 115 OPS+ and no other positive attributes?  Remembering that we're wishing and hoping for that 115, since his career mark is 97.  I guess he could turn into Jim Dwyer.

Also, projecting 31 games (out of 60) to a full season is stretching things more than a bit. I could probably find a 30-game stretch where John Stefero and Luis Mercedes looked pretty good.

(Not to besmirch the name of Jim Dwyer, but if you shifted his career 10 years later everyone would look at the progression and say oh yea, he got some help.)

(Realizing that 3/4ths of the board is too young to remember who Jim Dwyer is.)

[HowAboutThat]

@FrobbyI tried to quote your comment but was unsuccessful, and I had to come to the end of the common thread to reply at all.

However I have to push back. Getting to the major leagues as a huge accomplishment, as I said. But nobody can call Stewart a success at this point. Those who do so have a curious definition of “success.”

You pointed out that he had been more successful than, I think, 40% of all guys drafted in that spot, and I submit that that means nothing. Being more successful than failures doesn’t make one a success.

There is a ratio of actual performance to expected performance That can go along way towards helping one determine whether a career is successful.

Yaz has certainly had a successful career even if he never plays again, for instance, Because the Orioles expected nothing of him, And the Giants picked him up as a gamble.

TJ Macfarland Can certainly be called successful.

Regardinf DJ, my question is whether his current career WAR of .5 can be called a success, and whether he offers anything on Defense or offense that can’t be pretty easily acquired by a waiver claim. 
I think Stewart is an answered question because of what he has shown us so far and because of his trends. Send him on his way.

[jabba72]

Well Stewart is a LH hitter playing at Camden Yards with some potential power in his bat. I think the team is probably done playing him in LF,  so that eliminates one option for him. Not too many chances left though. If Stowers is hot in spring training the leash gets shorter. This is probably his last season with the O's barring something unseen. 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

2 hours ago, Pickles said:

I don't think we're really in disagreements here.  

The only point I'll add in reference to your Lowenstein comment is that Stewart would have a much better chance at carving out a lasting ML career if this was 45 years and there were 7-8 men benches, and pitcher's were hitting.  Then a role more appropriate for Stewart would be more readily available.

I agree and suspect DJ Stewart might have ended up a favorite of Earl Weaver. Earl would have only put Stewart into play when he could be an asset to the team.

That isn’t possible in the era of three position player benches. A platoon bat that can’t play defense has little value if they aren’t a plus hitter. 

[OriolesMagic83]

I'm not a fan of Stewart, but I can see the O's holding onto him until Stowers or someone else is ready to take over an OF spot.  It seems like teams are constantly maximizing their bullpen slots over bench slots.  I believe that if teams had 30 man rosters, 17 or 18 would be pitchers.

[Moose Milligan]

5 hours ago, Frobby said:

  
But I think it’s wrong to assume he can’t be a useful player.  
 

Eh, I'll assume that so no one else has to.

He doesn't do much well outside of walk.  I mean, let's be real here, his on base percentage and patience at the plate is the only reason any one of us is remotely interested in keeping him around.  

He's a one trick pony.  And I guess there's room in the game for guys that are one trick ponies.  But it better be a hell of a trick.  Since Stewart can't get that batting average up high enough, the OBP still isn't that great despite the nice separation between the two.

 

5 hours ago, Philip said:

@FrobbyI tried to quote your comment but was unsuccessful, and I had to come to the end of the common thread to reply at all.

However I have to push back. Getting to the major leagues as a huge accomplishment, as I said. But nobody can call Stewart a success at this point. Those who do so have a curious definition of “success.”

You pointed out that he had been more successful than, I think, 40% of all guys drafted in that spot, and I submit that that means nothing. Being more successful than failures doesn’t make one a success.

There is a ratio of actual performance to expected performance That can go along way towards helping one determine whether a career is successful.

Yaz has certainly had a successful career even if he never plays again, for instance, Because the Orioles expected nothing of him, And the Giants picked him up as a gamble.

TJ Macfarland Can certainly be called successful.

Regardinf DJ, my question is whether his current career WAR of .5 can be called a success, and whether he offers anything on Defense or offense that can’t be pretty easily acquired by a waiver claim. 
I think Stewart is an answered question because of what he has shown us so far and because of his trends. Send him on his way.

 

What are you blathering about, Phil?

Getting to the major leagues is a huge accomplishment, but it's not a success?  How are you defining what a success is?  

 

[Frobby]

46 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Eh, I'll assume that so no one else has to.

He doesn't do much well outside of walk.  I mean, let's be real here, his on base percentage and patience at the plate is the only reason any one of us is remotely interested in keeping him around.  

He's a one trick pony.  And I guess there's room in the game for guys that are one trick ponies.  But it better be a hell of a trick.  Since Stewart can't get that batting average up high enough, the OBP still isn't that great despite the nice separation between the two.

 

 

What are you blathering about, Phil?

Getting to the major leagues is a huge accomplishment, but it's not a success?  How are you defining what a success is?  

 

I mean, there are varying levels of success.    I’m a lawyer.   I work at one of the largest and most successful firms in the world.   I’m a partner there.   Yet, there are thousands of lawyers in the world  I’d say are more successful than I am.   Does that mean I’m not a success?   Depends what you mean.   

There are hundreds of baseball players better than Stewart.   He’s less successful than them.   He’s more successful than thousands of others who are playing professional baseball, and millions who wish they could.  
 

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

I believe that if teams had 30 man rosters, 17 or 18 would be pitchers.

That is about what happens now for teams who have enough relievers with options.   J.P. Feyereisen and Louis Head are Terry Crowley and Benny Ayala.

[DrungoHazewood]

9 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

What are you blathering about, Phil?

Getting to the major leagues is a huge accomplishment, but it's not a success?  How are you defining what a success is? 

He's just repeating the common refrain that you have to be among the top 5-10% of draftees to not be called a failure. 85th percentile performance out of a 2nd round pick is judged by most to be a failure.

Take the 2nd round of the 2010 draft, for example.  Jimmy Nelson and Vince Velasquez were taken with the 5th and 6th picks.  Both are like 30-45 with an ERA over around 4.50, led the league in things like losses and HBP.  But have been more successful than 90%+ of the players drafted that year.  I think most fans of the teams of Nelson and Velasquez are disappointed by them, despite the fact it's impossible to argue that they're not in the top tiny fraction of 1% of baseball players in the world.

To most fans failure and success is only defined in the context of the best 500 or 750 players alive today.  So 99.9%+ of all ballplayers are failures.

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

He's just repeating the common refrain that you have to be among the top 5-10% of draftees to not be called a failure. 85th percentile performance out of a 2nd round pick is judged by most to be a failure.

Take the 2nd round of the 2010 draft, for example.  Jimmy Nelson and Vince Velasquez were taken with the 5th and 6th picks.  Both are like 30-45 with an ERA over around 4.50, led the league in things like losses and HBP.  But have been more successful than 90%+ of the players drafted that year.  I think most fans of the teams of Nelson and Velasquez are disappointed by them, despite the fact it's impossible to argue that they're not in the top tiny fraction of 1% of baseball players in the world.

To most fans failure and success is only defined in the context of the best 500 or 750 players alive today.  So 99.9%+ of all ballplayers are failures.

I think it's clear that if any non-Oriole player in a particular draft outperforms an Oriole draft pick chosen before them then that Oriole draft pick was a mistake and the player is a disappointment.

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

He's just repeating the common refrain that you have to be among the top 5-10% of draftees to not be called a failure. 85th percentile performance out of a 2nd round pick is judged by most to be a failure.

Take the 2nd round of the 2010 draft, for example.  Jimmy Nelson and Vince Velasquez were taken with the 5th and 6th picks.  Both are like 30-45 with an ERA over around 4.50, led the league in things like losses and HBP.  But have been more successful than 90%+ of the players drafted that year.  I think most fans of the teams of Nelson and Velasquez are disappointed by them, despite the fact it's impossible to argue that they're not in the top tiny fraction of 1% of baseball players in the world.

To most fans failure and success is only defined in the context of the best 500 or 750 players alive today.  So 99.9%+ of all ballplayers are failures.

Which is OK, but where is the bright line where you cross from failure to success?  To me, there is no bright line, other than reaching the majors at all.   Once that line is crossed, there are relative degrees of success but everyone has been successful to some degree.   

243 players debuted in 2018, including DJ Stewart.   103 didn’t get into a major league game in 2021, but DJ Stewart is still hanging in there.   He’s 87th in rWAR in that group of debut players.   So, more successful than even the average guy in his debut class who reached the majors, at least so far.   
 

[MCO'sFan]

18 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

He's just repeating the common refrain that you have to be among the top 5-10% of draftees to not be called a failure. 85th percentile performance out of a 2nd round pick is judged by most to be a failure.

Take the 2nd round of the 2010 draft, for example.  Jimmy Nelson and Vince Velasquez were taken with the 5th and 6th picks.  Both are like 30-45 with an ERA over around 4.50, led the league in things like losses and HBP.  But have been more successful than 90%+ of the players drafted that year.  I think most fans of the teams of Nelson and Velasquez are disappointed by them, despite the fact it's impossible to argue that they're not in the top tiny fraction of 1% of baseball players in the world.

To most fans failure and success is only defined in the context of the best 500 or 750 players alive today.  So 99.9%+ of all ballplayers are failures.

I am disappointed in DJ’s development and believe he has not been successful. I don’t remember his scouting report but I think he was a question mark on the hit tool because there was questions that he could make the swing adjustments to hit as a pro. Those appear to be accurate. His defense and base running to me are where I am disappointed.