Is the Orioles evaluation process for bounce back players "sophisticated"?

[Tony-OH]

17 minutes ago, nvpacchi said:

Jorge Lopez, Jorge Mateo, Ramon Urias, Austin Voth, and Cionel Perez suggest that the O's have some pulse on players they can pick up off the scrap heap.  Not everyone wire pickup succeeds, but the amount of WAR that was accumulated by these guys for next to nothing suggests that the scouting/analytics combo of finding these players had been successful.  Whether it will continue... 

First, I'm talking about hitting prospects, not pitchers. Mateo and Urias were obvious waiver claims as the #1 team on the waiver, not bounce back guys available as free agents,

You are mixing up what I'm trying to show.

Frazier is a free agent that they spent $8 million on in the hopes he bounces back. Odor and Aguilar were free agent hitters that the Orioles felt would help them and they both failed miserably. Grant it they were bargain basement minimum money guys, but they failed. Valaika was once a starter with the Rockies who then failed. The Orioles signed him and he even played the most games at 2B for the Orioles in 2021 despite failing. Franco was actually decent the year before with the Orioles but failed with them in 2021. Gutierrez had 386 PAs of failing with the Royals. The Orioles got him, put him as the everyday 3B for a bit then he continued to fail.

I think a lot of folks take what Elias has done with the drafting development and assume they are sophisticated when they get these "bounceback" guys. I think people believe the Orioles have some amazing computer system that finds players that will do better with some magic "Orioles hitting instruction fairy dust," but I'm failing to see where.

Heck, you brought up Mateo, but he was terrible with the bat this year when given an entire year. Sure, he made up for it with his defense at SS which was unexpected, but at the end of the day, they did not fix his bat.

Let me address one other thing here since some people fail to understand that you can be critical of a GM, manager, or player in a certain area and not be anti-them. I don't dislike Elias as GM, but I do question his ability to properly access major league ready hitting talent, especially when it comes to trying to figure out what players will be able to "bounceback" or do well after they've been failing for awhile at the major league level. 

I see nothing that tells me they can improve a hitter that has been failing at the big league level. 

Pitching is a whole other thing. I do think they have some ability to do that because of Holt. Voth was a great example of that as well as the improvements of Kremer, Bradish and even Watkins.

Lastly, I don't know about you, but I'm ready for the Orioles to acquire an impact guy who was really good last year vs hoping guys bounceback. I think it's time for that kind of acquisition. Time get out of Dollar General and move up to Nordstrom.

[LTO's]

Don't see the point in comparing players before Elias was able to give out contracts over a couple mil. I don't think they expected Odor or Chirinos to "bounce back" rather than just take up space as vets on a young team for a year. Odor played over 100 games for a playoff Yankees team the year before so it's not like there weren't people interested in his ability. 

I will say that Lyles did have what one could consider a bounce back year as did Voth and Perez. Mateo and Urias put up 3+ WAR seasons as waiver claims. Bryan Baker put up a 2.74 FIP after being cut loose by a divisional rival. I think their success rate is pretty good especially if you include Iglesias and Galvis who were solid players for them as well.  

[btdart20]

The O's bounceback targets in 2018-2021 were in a different context.  

The candidate choice itself is more than just the projection of a bounceback.  There is a budget and a willingness of the player angle to it as well.  Better candidates (at least in prior years) were just not offered contracts because of the budget.  This year there is a willingness to spend (at least to some degree).  

Iglesias was a 1yr/$3m deal.  He played in Cincy (every bit as hitter friendly as the old OPACY dimensions) in 2019 and posted an 83 OPS+.  In 2020 he posted a 157 OPS+ for the O's.  Not too shabby. 

Franco was a 1yr/$800k deal.  No dice.  

Galvis was a 1yr/$1.5m.  Another guy who moved from Cincy to Baltimore.  Posted an 84 OPS+ in 2020.  And a .720 OPS+ for the O's in 2021.  We traded him to Philly for a lottery ticket high K% guy who gives up HRs...

Odor for league minimum.  No bounceback, but no real regression/continued downward trend in performance either.  82 OPS+ in 2021 with NYY.  79 OPS+ in 2022 with us.

[clutch2113]

5 minutes ago, jrobb21613 said:

Mateo who I wouldn’t classify as a bounce back guy but clearly someone the O’s saw something in and have gotten pretty good value in return. 

I think Mateo absolutely qualifies, he was a waiver claim.  And his 2nd half of 2022 showed marked improvement.

Split	G	GS	PA	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	SB	CS	BB	SO	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	TB	GDP	HBP	SH	SF	IBB	ROE	BAbip	tOPS+	sOPS+
1st Half	85	80	303	278	32	57	12	4	7	23	22	4	16	93	.205	.258	.353	.610	98	4	4	2	1	0	1	.279	90	72
2nd Half	65	62	230	216	31	52	13	3	6	27	13	5	11	54	.241	.280	.412	.692	89	4	1	1	1	0	2	.293	113	94

[btdart20]

33 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

First off, try some respect ok?

I don't see his comment having more disrespect than what I've seen with some of the regulars.  It's an empty response that didn't really add anything new, but there has been much worse from a disrespect perspective.

[clutch2113]

Of course the formatting looks crazy - I tried to clean it up best I could.

I copied an article from the Sun from August about how Mateo worked with the Orioles to improve his at-bats.

How a meeting with Orioles coaches helped unlock Jorge Mateo’s swing — and a deeper lineup

By Andy Kostka

- Baltimore Sun

Aug 13, 2022 at 6:00 am

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. — A month ago, Jorge Mateo might not have even reached the pitch. It has been the formula against him for some time — aim low and outside with breaking balls, and the Orioles shortstop would open his stride and miss.

But in the second inning Friday night at Tropicana Field, Mateo’s stride remained square with the plate, and he poked the low-and-away curveball from Tampa Bay Rays starter Corey Kluber into shallow right field for a bloop RBI double. It’s the kind of swing that’s now going Mateo’s way ever since he met with manager Brandon Hyde and co-hitting coaches Matt Borgschulte and Ryan Fuller after a series against the Minnesota Twins during the first week of July.

“He was like, ‘We have to make an adjustment,’” Fuller recalled. And the adjustment came in the form of batting practice sessions full of sliders away, practicing in bulk against the pitch that has given him the most trouble. To that point, Mateo’s .173 batting average against sliders was his lowest against any pitch type, per Statcast, and he whiffed on 36.9% of his swings against that offering.

The heavy slider regimen in batting practice has led to a breakout at the plate since early July, including a career-high five hits Friday that led Baltimore to a 10-3 victory against the Rays. If Mateo can keep it going — laying off pitches off the plate while reaching the ones he can hit — he unlocks a new level for the Orioles’ lineup.

“Any time we get threats at the bottom of the order and make the lineup as deep as possible, that’s huge,” Hyde said. “That’s been a huge boost for us the last couple months.”

From opening day through the end of June, the biggest problem for Mateo was chasing those sliders. He had a 32.3% strikeout rate during that stretch, a mark that made Fuller and Mateo cringe. That prompted Mateo’s insistence to find a solution at the start of July, and the results have played out on the field.

His first double Friday came on that low-and-away breaking ball. The next came when Mateo turned on an inside sinker. He had initially been opening up his stance and stride to reach such pitches, but as Mateo adjusted his open stance to include a square stride, his plate coverage improved.

Since July 4, the day after Mateo met with the hitting coaches and Hyde to improve his approach, the 27-year-old’s strikeout rate is down to 21.6%. He hit .196 up until July 3. Since July 4, he’s hitting .308 with a .922 OPS.

“I’ve been working really hard at that,” Mateo said through team interpreter Brandon Quinones. “I credit the hitting coaches with helping to put in the work with things like that, focusing on staying in the zone and focusing on shortening my swing a little bit.”

The biggest improvement came when Fuller and Borgschulte ran Mateo through mixed rounds of batting practice, throwing two-seam fastballs in on his hands and sliders away at random. Mateo had to react on the fly, as he does during games. As Fuller watched Mateo steadily reduce his whiffs on outside sliders, he knew a breakthrough was coming.

“Those sliders that we could usually get him to swing on, he was in a good position to say no,” Fuller said. “We were like, ‘Man, he was swinging at those, chasing those before.’ Those are really strong takes, setting himself up for the mistakes that he can hit.”

It’s turned Mateo, a nine-hole hitter, into one of the Orioles’ most dangerous offensive threats, routinely sending the speedster sailing around the bases and leaving his helmet in his dust.

He laughed when asked why his batting helmet always flies off his head as he sprints from one bag to another. He doesn’t know exactly. But “if it works, I take it,” Mateo said with a smile.

And right now, just about everything is working.

[LTO's]

1 minute ago, Tony-OH said:

Odor and Aguilar were free agent hitters that the Orioles felt would help them and they both failed miserably.

So you'll include Aguilar as a failure but not Mateo and Urias as successes? That makes no sense. Iglesias and Galvis were successful FA signings relative to what Elias was permitted to spend.  Really just seems like you have an irrational hatred for Odor that's clouding your judgement. The dude was bad but he really wasn't as bad as it's made to seem especially for what was essentially a warm body. He also had many of the highest leverage hits of the season. 

[Frobby]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

 

The one previous signing that is comparable is Lyles and I could count him as a success. 

That acquisition was harshly criticized by most posters, and I would definitely say it was successful, in terms of Lyles producing more than most expected.   

[Tony-OH]

9 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

The guys you mentioned cost the O's nothing. Frazier and Gibson represent a pivot in that the Orioles are actually paying market rate well above the league minimum. 

I don't think it is an attempt to be "sophisticated" per se as much as there is a constraint from above preventing them from committing to long term contracts. I see these guys as playing the high end of the one year market and trying to do the most within the constraints that they have. They do not need to put up 3 WAR seasons to count as a "win". The O's are paying for about 1 WAR each.

Keep an eye on Frazier vs Profar, Segura etc, Gibson vs Syndergaard, Kluber, Clevinger. If they perform even or better with those guys I would count that as a win. 

The one previous signing that is comparable is Lyles and I could count him as a success. Voth could also be considered a successful bounceback guy although he was picked up through waivers. 

I don't disagree with anything you are saying here though you missed the part about me saying this was about positional prospects, not pitchers. 

But this is not my point. I understand that Elias may be under some financial restraints put on him by ownership that he may not have been expecting.

My point is some people think the Orioles "know more than us" and have a "sophisticated" analytics program that allows them to identify and sign hitters that will "bounce back" with the Orioles, and I'm just showing that they have not found much success doing so.

I have little doubt they have more information than we do about players, but until they start hitting on these bounceback positional players, they have not proven their system or analysis works. 

[Aristotelian]

7 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

I don't see his comment having more disrespect than what I've seen with some of the regulars.  It's an empty response that didn't really add anything new, but there has been much worse from a disrespect perspective.

+1. I'm all for improving the civility of the board but that was an odd one to target. 

[Tony-OH]

5 minutes ago, clutch2113 said:

Of course the formatting looks crazy - I tried to clean it up best I could.

I copied an article from the Sun from August about how Mateo worked with the Orioles to improve his at-bats.

 

Lol.. Don't fall for the propaganda. That article was posted on August 13th.

From August 13th to the end of the year, Mateo slashed .200/.244/.320/.564. Guess the magic didn't stick.     

[Tony-OH]

10 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

I don't see his comment having more disrespect than what I've seen with some of the regulars.  It's an empty response that didn't really add anything new, but there has been much worse from a disrespect perspective.

Openly questioning moderation is against board rules. If you have an issue with how I handle a board issue, take up with me personally. 

[Tony-OH]

4 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

+1. I'm all for improving the civility of the board but that was an odd one to target. 

Questioning the board moderation is against board rules. You have an issue, take it up with me.

 

[Aristotelian]

Just now, Tony-OH said:

I don't disagree with anything you are saying here though you missed the part about me saying this was about positional prospects, not pitchers. 

But this is not my point. I understand that Elias may be under some financial restraints put on him by ownership that he may not have been expecting.

My point is some people think the Orioles "know more than us" and have a "sophisticated" analytics program that allows them to identify and sign hitters that will "bounce back" with the Orioles, and I'm just showing that they have not found much success doing so.

I have little doubt they have more information than we do about players, but until they start hitting on these bounceback positional players, they have not proven their system or analysis works. 

Got it. I agree they haven't really had success with this strategy for position players, but they also haven't really tried. Odor and Franco were brought in as placeholders. They were paid for replacement level and we got perhaps slightly worse than that. We'll see what happens with Frazier but it's a very small sample size we're talking about. Overall, I'd say they have a solid track record in evaluating talent

[Tony-OH]

10 minutes ago, LTO's said:

So you'll include Aguilar as a failure but not Mateo and Urias as successes? That makes no sense. Iglesias and Galvis were successful FA signings relative to what Elias was permitted to spend.  Really just seems like you have an irrational hatred for Odor that's clouding your judgement. The dude was bad but he really wasn't as bad as it's made to seem especially for what was essentially a warm body. He also had many of the highest leverage hits of the season. 

Galvis was coming off a .712 OPS season and OPS'd .720 with the Orioles. Iglesias was coming off a .724 OPS season and got on a heater with the Orioles in that weird 2020 season where he hit like he's never hit in his life. 

I have no irrational hatred for anyone. I'm just showing that Elias and company have not had any success in trying to get bounce back guys to actually bounce back. 

I don't believe their evaluation system for hitters at the major league level is special. 

Odor was a terrible signing but instead of realizing that, they stuck with him all year. How many more games would the Orioles have won with a 2 WAR 2B?

Now, nobody saw the Orioles improving like they did and Odor was just a cheap veteranosity guy who was just supposed to bridge the Orioles to some prospects. 

Now, you guys can act like I'm down on Elias or whatever, but not one of you have found a guy a major league "bounce back" guy that they identified, who then came to the Orioles and did well. 

Iglesias is literally the only one that you can possibly use and that's a stretch because I don't think the Orioles did anything other than catch lightning in a bottle with him for a few months.

Sometimes you guys have to call them as you see them, not as your heart wants to see them.