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

[RZNJ]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

You can’t plan for something that you have no idea if it will happen.

I care about the process of the decision. I know you don’t.

The process of this was horrible. Every thing about it is poorly done by the team.

That’s why my stance remains unchanged even if he is a 2ish WAR guy in 2023, which I have said is possible.  Most of my issue has less to do about the player as it does the decision.  Sure the stats and where he is in his career factor into it but I didn’t want to sign one of the top SS for similar reasons.  It’s not about the talent, it’s about the decision and thought process.

It makes me question his thought process in other things.

I submit that you don't know what the thought process was on Frazier yet you make proclamations as if you do.

[Aristotelian]

12 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Good post, and I don't really disagree, but I've seen posts where people "assume" that everything the Orioles do is because of sophisticated evaluations system and all I'm saying is the results are just not there for bounce back player, which of course leads us back to Frazier. 

I was just trying to prove, and I think I did, that we just can't assume Frazier is going to bounce back because the Orioles signed him to $8 million because of some "sophisticated evaluation system" that may or may not exist.

Now we all hope he does, but hope is just that, hope. It only get frustrating when people use hope as fact vs just admitting they are just being hopeful it works out. 

 

If you had started the thread with this, I don't think anybody would have disagreed. I don't think anyone, even those who liked the move, feel super confident that he will bounce back.

For what it's worth, I did not like the move because of Frazier's likely impact on other guys' AB's, regardless of how he performs. I do think it is reasonable to predict he hits a bit better than last year which looks like an outlier. All the projection algorithms suggest that is a reasonable expectation, albeit nowhere near guaranteed. 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I submit that you don't know what the thought process was on Frazier yet you make proclamations as if you do.

Wtf? Of course we know what it was. They signed him to give him regular at bats. That’s obvious unless you are completely blind to how this team operates.

Thats all I need to know.  I may not know what they see in him that makes them think he can turn it around but again, that’s irrelevant to me.

The only point that matters is that he will take a lot of at bats away from young players who should be getting those at bats.  

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, jabba72 said:

No system is perfect when looking for cheap production. I didnt like signing Odor last year because of his struggles at Yankee Stadium. He ended up being worse than most probably guessed. Im a bit let down that they went 8m for Frazier. 

I do like Elias and Sig but I dont like this signing. And Gibson at 35 years old looks risky too.

This hasnt been a very productive offseason.

A 100% agree. Most of my argument is exactly just that, their system is not really that "sophisticated." Not that they are terrible at anything, just that they don't deserve "faith or hope" that they have some kind of sophisticated evaluations system when it comes to identifying major league "bounce back" position players.

I hope Frazier tears it up and we can say, "Damn, that Orioles evaluation system really is quite "sophisticated."

BTW, I think McCann has a better chance of rebounding. He spent most of last year hurt which accounts for his drop his production even though his EVs stayed good.

[sportsfan8703]

The silver lining is that after this year we really won’t need to bring in anymore reclamation projects because the pipeline is firmly here. 

[btdart20]

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

I decided to lock the other thread on Frazier and take a conversation out that's worth discussing. 

Frobby feels the Orioles evaluation process is sophisticated enough to give them the benefit of the doubt when they sign bounce back guys like Frazier. 

While I would have agreed a few years ago, or at least I would have hoped, I'm starting to see a trend here that suggests that haven't really hit on too many bounce back guys as positions players.

I guess you could count Iglesias as a hit a few years ago, but the last few years the Orioles have not exactly hit or fixed anyone who was an established major leaguer who was failing.

 

I don't think I missed your point.  I wasn't clear on my point.

You stated you're starting to see a trend.  And I think it's too early to determine any type of trend because there isn't enough data points to determine just how good the current regime is at picked bounce back candidates.  We only have 1 or 2 data points in Category 1 (i.e. contextually legit 'bounce back' candidates).  And we have dozens (and dozens?) of examples in Category 2.  And these two categories are qualitatively different decisions.

Category 1 are the actual 'bounce back' candidates in context

IMO, only Lyles was a true attempt at a "bounce back" prior to Frazier (and he didn't fit the parameters of the OP). I brought in the idea of context as a way of saying that the rest of the guys brought in aren't comparable.

The only other guy who comes close to being a 'bounce back' candidate of the sort that Frazier represents is Iglesias.  His 1yr/$3m contract pales, while his bounce back surpassed expectations. 

We have a max of 2 FA acquisitions who we can chart a trend from.  Frazier will be the 3rd.

Category 2 - "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"

The Mateo/Urias/Gutierrez/Odor/Aguilar/Franco-types are in the "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" category.  If the point is grading how successful we are with the rest (waiver wires and league minimum FAs), then that's a different category in my mind.  They are little more than lottery tickets and seat warmers.  I have no clue what the league average waiver wire, Rule 5, or the league minimum FAs success rate is.  (I have no idea how to find that data other than manually digging or behind some industry paywall with the rest of this elusive "sophisticated" data.)   

Unless someone does the digging league wide, I don't see how saying we've done well/we've done poorly is anything beyond speculation.  Mr. Recency Bias likes our guys!

Comparing category 1 guys with category 2 guys will lead to faulty results.  Including category 2 guys with category 1 guys in trend analysis will lead to faulty results.

[sportsfan8703]

Looks like Ryan O’Hearn will be our next attempt at a reclamation project. 

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Wtf? Of course we know what it was. They signed him to give him regular at bats. That’s obvious unless you are completely blind to how this team operates.

Thats all I need to know.  I may not know what they see in him that makes them think he can turn it around but again, that’s irrelevant to me.

The only point that matters is that he will take a lot of at bats away from young players who should be getting those at bats.  

WTF?    WTF is your problem?  Again, they may have signed Frazier with the idea of moving Urias or Mateo later.   Under that scenario there would still, conceivably be plenty of AB's for Westburg.   I agree that Frazier is going to get the majority of 2B AB's but I could see Westburg getting 3-4 starts a week in multiple positions.    Just because a trade wasn't worked out before they signed Frazier doesn't mean one won't happen.

If no trades happen, then I will be more down on this move than I already am.

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Looks like Ryan O’Hearn will be our next attempt at a reclamation project. 

And Vallimont is the odd man out.   Props to Wildcard on that one.   I thought Vallimont would outlast a couple of other guys including Gillaspie.

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

WTF?    WTF is your problem?  Again, they may have signed Frazier with the idea of moving Urias or Mateo later.   Under that scenario there would still, conceivably be plenty of AB's for Westburg.   I agree that Frazier is going to get the majority of 2B AB's but I could see Westburg getting 3-4 starts a week in multiple positions.    Just because a trade wasn't worked out before they signed Frazier doesn't mean one won't happen.

If no trades happen, then I will be more down on this move than I already am.

A trade May happen but they didn’t know it was going to when they signed him.

If you went to jump off the roof of a tall building and ended up miraculously ok, would that make the decision to do it smarter?  

Stupidity isn’t rewarded by a later outcome that is in your favor.

And btw, let’s say they do trade someone. He is still blocking a young bat because if they move Mateo(for example) Ortiz should be starting at SS, Westburg should be at second and Frazier shouldn’t take at bats away from Stowers.  
 

 

Edited January 3, 2023 by Sports Guy

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

And Vallimont is the odd man out.   Props to Wildcard on that one.   I thought Vallimont would outlast a couple of other guys including Gillaspie.

Plenty more Vallimonts on the 40 man. 

[Tony-OH]

59 minutes ago, E-D-D-I-E said:

I don't know if its sophisticated or not. Like any evaluation, alot of it is based on probability. To me, its irrelevant with Frazier and here is why.

-Signing a guy like Frazier, has 2 outcomes, both suck IMO. Frazier signing for 8 million, IS playing most days.

*If we are really trying to win now and Frazier was your addition, well then our front office truly is lost. Payroll was certainly available to make a big move. Hell, a medium sized move. Barring anything big forthcoming, I don't see it. That would be sad.

*If we are not trying to win now, then he blocks players we all want to see. Our future. The guys that have to be good for us to win.

-I don't believe the O's are trying to "win now". They obviously don't feel they are a player or 2 away from being true contenders. They've proven that this off-season with no real additions. I mean, think about it, we have debated whether we are better than last year, many times on this site. If we are truly trying to win, counting on bounce backs and big leaps from our young players, is a dangerous game to play during year 1 of your "window".

 

Last year the Orioles were in "win now" mode from about mid-August on. Elias acquired Phillips in August, brought up Vavra and Stowers, then signed Aguilar for September to hit against lefties when he hadn't hit all year and he had a prospect who mashed them in the minors despite batting left-handed. 

So the only thing we have to go by when the Orioles are contention was to sit Vavra and Stowers and play Odor and Aguilar. That was their evaluations during that time. 

During August-October, the Orioles went:
18-9 (.667) when Vavra started
12-11 (.521) when Stowers started
19-21 (.475) when Odor starter
5-7 (.417) when Aguilar started.

Now, obviously wins and losses when a player starts is not the be all end all to value, but it does highlight the team players better with Vavra and Stowers in the lineup then with Orioles veteran choices when they were in "contention."



 

 

[Tony-OH]

12 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

a 'bounce back' candidate of the sort that Frazier represents is Iglesias.  His 1yr/$3m contract pales, while his bounce back surpassed expectations. 

 

We're clearly not discussion the same issue. 

The part I highlighted, which was the only part of your post that was on the topic at hand, is just plain wrong. Odor is clearly a guy the Orioles thought would bounce back and he did not. Aguilar is clearly a guy they thought would help them hit left-handed pitching in a playoff run over a rookie who mashed the in the minors, he did not. 

That's twice we have guys who were bad that the Orioles picked up and guess what, they were bad.

I never said it was significant trend, I said we now have two time (last year) of the Orioles picking up players who were bad and needed to bounce back, but did not.

Now they are going against the grain and trying it again, but this time have invested $8 million instead of major league minimum. If you want to say he's different because of the money invested, sure, that's valid strictly due to the monetary investment into the bounce back player. 

At the end of the day, this is all about their evaluation system of these players. I've shown if they do have a sophisticated evaluations system it has the same limitations as every other evaluations system and should not be just blindly trusted.

No one should just have blind faith that the Orioles have some sophisticated evaluations system that is infallible or can find these bounceback players because they've never actually done it.

Perhaps Frazier will be the guy to prove them right. 

 

 

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Good post, and I don't really disagree, but I've seen posts where people "assume" that everything the Orioles do is because of sophisticated evaluations system and all I'm saying is the results are just not there for bounce back player, which of course leads us back to Frazier. 

I was just trying to prove, and I think I did, that we just can't assume Frazier is going to bounce back because the Orioles signed him to $8 million because of some "sophisticated evaluation system" that may or may not exist.

Now we all hope he does, but hope is just that, hope. It only get frustrating when people use hope as fact vs just admitting they are just being hopeful it works out. 

 

True, and I get that.  And quite frankly, I'm not expecting Frazier to bounce back in any sort of way.  I'm expecting maybe similar production to what he did last year or a slight decline.

 

[sportsfan8703]

36 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

And Vallimont is the odd man out.   Props to Wildcard on that one.   I thought Vallimont would outlast a couple of other guys including Gillaspie.

We must like Gillaspie better that Vallimont as an up/down guy. I would not be surprised to see us at least get cash considerations for Vallimont. Would be nice to get a Dominican lotto ticket.