Challenge To All Statistical Gurus!

[The Wedge]

Again, I will argue to the death that trying to predict future major league success based soley on minor league stats is a crap shoot or similar to throwing darts at a board.

Not one Hangout member has taken my challenge so far. So how useful can all these stats be? Anyone can say that minor league stats support the truly great players, but that is usually hindsight. As a prediction tool they are virtually useless, and scouts and manager input much more reliable along with spring training games.

No one has taken your challenge because it's eff'n retarded.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Hey guys, I have a proposition. I'm gonna propose it here and hope it catches on. Maybe the FO reads this!

My grandmother... well, she's 80 years old and she's in a wheelchair and she has terrible lumbago... but she really wants to play shortstop for the Orioles. It's been her dream her entire life.

So you know what I think?

I think the O's should give her a chance. I mean, she's never held a baseball in her life before(it was banned in the old country) and she needs to take a nap every 15 minutes... but can you prove she can't be a successful major leaguer? No, you can't. Because anything can happen. With grandma playing baseball, it's really just a big crap shoot. Maybe when she walks(rolls) onto the diamond, her lumbago will be cured and she won't be such a narcoleptic? It could happen.

I also think she should skip all the minor leagues because they're just seasons of meaningless games played by androids in which no talent is involved. I hear minor league games played in an anti-gravity space simulator, too! No, what granny really needs is the guidance of Terry Crowley, who will surely turn her into a major league hitter. She deserves that help just as much as anyone else.

Granny can be a major leaguer. An All-Star, even. I know it.

YOU CAN'T DISPROVE IT.

Stop posting like a 19-year-old.

Wait, are you actually 19? Is there any proof?

[Eli Eon]

Thats just a horrible, ass backwards statement. Because stats are an indicator of what happens on the field....

No, stats support (for the most part) what happens on the field. What happens on the field occurs prior to any stat taking place. For example a batter has to walk to the plate and receive a pitch from the pitcher before he is counted for as an at bat. So the action always takes place before the stat. I cannot believe I have to explain that to anyone here!

[PaulFolk]

Again, I will argue to the death that trying to predict future major league success based soley on minor league stats is a crap shoot or similar to throwing darts at a board.

Well, if that's what floats your boat. There are people who will argue to the death that the world is flat and that gravity doesn't exist. All evidence contradicts them, but bless their little hearts.

[Lt Melmo]

Lol so there we have it!!! Eli's brilliant thesis boils down to this. There is absolutely no way to tell whether or not Joe Mauer is better than Geronimo Gil unless you actually see both of them play.

Wow.

Is there anyone alive who's seen Ty Cobb play? There probably aren't many.

I think this means that we should take Ty out of the hall of fame once the last person who remembers him passes away. Cause no one living now knows if he was good or not. His talent is really a crap shoot, to be honest.

[Eli Eon]

No one has taken your challenge because it's eff'n retarded.

Well, if stats can be used to predict future major league sucess as has been preached on this forum like a gospel, it would seem that somebody ought to be able to use these same stats to show their gospel is correct or at least has the possibility? What is retarded about that? Apparently you accept anything as fact without proof eh? I shudder to think of the consquences of that!

[Moose Milligan]

No, stats support (for the most part) what happens on the field. What happens on the field occurs prior to any stat taking place. For example a batter has to walk to the plate and receive a pitch from the pitcher before he is counted for as an at bat. So the action always takes place before the stat. I cannot believe I have to explain that to anyone here!

Yeah, so what?

Stats are used as a good predictor, though. Using stats, I can tell you that Ty Cobb had a chance of getting a hit 36% of the time.

Mario Mendoza had a chance of getting a hit 20% of the time.

I don't know about you, but I know who I'd want batting leadoff for me.

[Mackus]

Nobody can tell you with certainty who WILL be the next impact player. Nobody has claimed the ability to do so. People have claimed that minor league stats do in fact correlate to MLB stats. In general, the guys with the best MiLB stats (adjusted for age and level) will be the guys who have the best MLB stats. The guy that probably best answers your question is actually already in the majors, Nick Markakis. People raved about his minor league numbers because they were both very good numbers and he was very young for his levels. I'm sure you would have pronounced him a bust after 30 at bats last April, but the longsighted people realized he was just adjusting to the league and eventually his MLB numbers were right in line with what you'd predict from his MiLB numbers (adjusted for age and level).

So I can't 100% say who will be the next greatest thing. I can tell you who are the most likely to be an impact player:

Nolan Reimold - Solid stats (950+ OPS at AA this year) but a bit old for his level. Still a solid prospect, should be a solid starting corner OF, although whether he can be better than that is up in the air.

Billy Rowell - Fantastic numbers as a 17 y/o in short season ball last year, has held his own at the low-A level as an 18 year old this year (765 OPS). Still a long ways away, but you've gotta like his production at such a young age.

This is a pretty silly argument though, as obviously we won't know if these guys are solid MLBers for several years (and even more in Rowell's case since he's so far away). The best argument would be for you to go find a player who's had incredibly low numbers in the minors and suddenly blossomed into a solid regular.

[Lt Melmo]

Stop posting like a 19-year-old.

Wait, are you actually 19? Is there any proof?

Well, I don't know... it's what my birth certificate says, but you know how unreliable those are... I'll have to ask my mother if she's counted every single day since I've been born, cause that's the only way we'll really know.

It's a crap shoot, really.

[Mackus]

Well, if stats can be used to predict future major league sucess as has been preached on this forum like a gospel, it would seem that somebody ought to be able to use these same stats to show their gospel is correct or at least has the possibility? What is retarded about that? Apparently you accept anything as fact without proof eh? I shudder to think of the consquences of that!

Why do you seem to think people are saying stats are right 100% of the time? Where has anybody stated this assertion of yours?

Are you ignoring people's statements or are you simply incapable of reading and analyzing English sentences?

[The Wedge]

Well, if stats can be used to predict future major league sucess as has been preached on this forum like a gospel, it would seem that somebody ought to be able to use these same stats to show their gospel is correct or at least has the possibility? What is retarded about that? Apparently you accept anything as fact without proof eh? I shudder to think of the consquences of that!

It's retarded because many people have given you many examples of stats predicting success, mediocrity, or failure from the past. You didn't see it then, so what's the point of having a bet where the stats show that in the future? You're just going to ignore it then, too. That's why the challenge is retarded. It's a flawed premise, to begin with, but you're so damn thick and stubborn that it's also incredibly biased and one-sided.

We might as well go to Vegas, throw down a grand on the blackjack table, then hit on 20.

[Eli Eon]

Is there anyone alive who's seen Ty Cobb play? There probably aren't many.

I think this means that we should take Ty out of the hall of fame once the last person who remembers him passes away. Cause no one living now knows if he was good or not. His talent is really a crap shoot, to be honest.

Ty Cobb proved himself on the major league field as did any HOF player. I would imagine most of their stats in the minors were good. However all minor league players with good stats don't become HOF major leaguers. So that is like saying, I saw the Mona Lisa and it is a great artwork ergo DaVinci must have been a great artist. No Duh? Some players in the HOF never even played much minor league ball like Al Kaline who was drafted right out of high school and made it to the bigs almost immediately.

The point I am making is stats are pretty much worthless in foretelling the future major league sucess of a minor league player. Once they hit the majors anything can happen.

[Baroquen131]

Eli:

You've let your actual debatable stance (scouting reports are more valuable than MiL stats) degenerate into a pretty silly "challenge". I actually agree with you that scouts play a vitally important role in allowing FOs to look beyond the stats.

That said, to dismiss the statistical performance of players in the minor leagues.... just because.... your stubborness to assign any importance to that aspect of the development of the modern day ballplayer is what is getting you hammered.

Stats are a quick, easy, factual, black-and-white way to see if a player is having success on the field. The various tiers of the MiL system provides the framework to judge the players' achievements as he approaches the major league level. (Not even against current competition, but even historically). If stats were completely invalid as you suggest, why even play the games?

Again.... original premise is interesting... the value of scouting vs. the value of stats. The stubborness and internet bravado being thrown around is somewhat entertaining, but entirely trivial.

But I digress... back to the mudslinging.

[Mackus]

Again, I will argue to the death that trying to predict future major league success based soley on minor league stats is a crap shoot or similar to throwing darts at a board.

Predicting future major league success based solely on stats is equally as effective as basing it solely on observations. Neither are great ways of doing business solely on their own, they need to be used together to be most effective. The guys with the best tools and physical skill sets AND also produce the best at the minor league level are the guys who are most likely going to produce the best at the major league level. Guys that have the stats OR the tools / physical skill sets (but not both) are less likely to succeed. Guys that don't have either the stats or the tools (guys like Luis Hernandez) are the least likely to succeed at the MLB level.

[Eli Eon]

Eli:

You've let your actual debatable stance (scouting reports are more valuable than MiL stats) degenerate into a pretty silly "challenge". I actually agree with you that scouts play a vitally important role in allowing FOs to look beyond the stats.

That said, to dismiss the statistical performance of players in the minor leagues.... just because.... your stubborness to assign any importance to that aspect of the development of the modern day ballplayer is what is getting you hammered.

Stats are a quick, easy, factual, black-and-white way to see if a player is having success on the field. The various tiers of the MiL system provides the framework to judge the players' achievements as he approaches the major league level. (Not even against current competition, but even historically). If stats were completely invalid as you suggest, why even play the games?

Again.... original premise is interesting... the value of scouting vs. the value of stats. The stubborness and internet bravado being thrown around is somewhat entertaining, but entirely trivial.

But I digress... back to the mudslinging.

I don't say stats are completely invalid, of course not. They do track a players progress though the levels of the minor leagues. However, when it comes to predicting whether or not a player will make the successful transition to achieve major league sucess I say they are not worth much as it becomes a crap shoot with stats. Scouting and actual performance in spring training against major league competiton is far more telling.