Why are so many posters fooled by Coors?

[TyCobb]

Right. But there is no reason to call this guy a great player. He's a pretty good player. People are talking like he's Hank Aaron when he's not.

What's happening is that people are getting way too excited by his OPS, and most of that is due to pre-humidor Coors.

He got hot for 2.5 months in STL, and people are deciding that somehow proves that Coors didn't matter, but it doesn't prove any such thing.

Look, I have nothing against the guy. I think he has made the most of his talent.

I'll take my hat off to any C-level MiL prospect who does good. But calling him "great" is nonsense.

Another 200 dingers leaves him 50 short of 400.

Counting on 150 hits per year until he's 40 is very iffy.

Counting on 90 RBI/yr for 10 years is counting on him to do something each and every year that he's failed to do half the time so far.

While he's averaged that during his 20's, expecting him to do that until he's 40 is a very dubious expectation.

Anybody who thinks Coors had nothing to do with this is fooling themselves.

Well I disagree with you. I think Matt Holliday is a great player and I don't even look at OPS.

He is a high BA guy with a 10+ BB% average over the last 3 seasons. He isn't going to hit a ton of HRs because he is going to have a FB% under 40%.

He is the most underrated hitter in all of baseball, IMO. Some lucky team is going to pick up at a bargain.

Like I said in my post....I think in 6 years people are going to say Holliday is HoF material.

[TyCobb]

Yet he only played 100 games that year and 82 the year before while his defense greatly declined those years. His age 33 and 36 seasons weren't exactly great in terms of OPS+ either.

So basically the guy that you say is a great comp for Holliday didn't even do what you say great players generally do, and none of the others on the list did.

Great players don't generally stay great throughout their entire 30's.

OPS is a terrible stat because it equal weights .001 SLG with .001 OBP when it clearly isn't worth the same.

Just look at Larry Walker OBP from 30-38.

.452, .445, .458, .409, .449, .421, .422, .424, and .384.

A OBP of .384 is great....the rest of those years were amazing.

[Frobby]

Great players generally stay great for their entire 30s.

Holliday didn't crack the majors until age 24. He didn't play more than 125 games until age 26. That is NOT the profile of a player who stays great throughout his 30's.

In MLB this year, there were only 8 players age 36 and older (now) who had enough AB to qualify.

Ichiro Suzuki (35) - hit .385 in Japan at age 20.

Todd Helton (35) - hit .315 in 152 games at age 24

Johnny Damon (35) - first full season at age 22

Casey Blake (35) - late bloomer, not a great player

Raul Ibanez (37) - late bloomer, not a great player

Garett Anderson (37) - first full season age 23

Chipper Jones (37) - first full season age 23

Mike Cameron (36) - first full season age 26

Of those, I'd say Suzuki, Helton and Jones are HOF candidates.

[mweb]

I didn't say anything about whether people will still use PED's. I do think it will be harder to cheat, but certainly possible.

That aside, he will have to have a very strong stretch run, I agree. All I said was I think he is capable of doing that if he stays healthy.

-Don

Well if you look at the overrated/underrated thread in the hangout section, I posted that the steroid era is overrated right before you said this. So kinda funny timing. My point over there that the steroid era is not nearly as well confined as many seem to think.

It's a little harder, but more so due to the government and media trying to uncover stuff than due to the MLB testing. Players just have to use the right stuff.

Well a lot of players may be capable of playing much better than expected for longer than expected. That doesn't mean I'm going to give them a legit chance of making the HOF.

He's a big longshot imo.

[TyCobb]

Holliday didn't crack the majors until age 24. He didn't play more than 125 games until age 26. That is NOT the profile of a player who stays great throughout his 30's.

In MLB this year, there were only 8 players age 36 and older (now) who had enough AB to qualify.

Ichiro Suzuki (35) - hit .385 in Japan at age 20.

Todd Helton (35) - hit .315 in 152 games at age 24

Johnny Damon (35) - first full season at age 22

Casey Blake (35) - late bloomer, not a great player

Raul Ibanez (37) - late bloomer, not a great player

Garett Anderson (37) - first full season age 23

Chipper Jones (37) - first full season age 23

Mike Cameron (36) - first full season age 26

Of those, I'd say Suzuki, Helton and Jones are HOF candidates.

It sure isn't, but what I meant by line was that if Holliday is a great player...he is going to stay great for his 30s.

Looking at Hollidays stats doesn't make me say he is going to be great into his 30s, but I think Holliday is a great player...and great players stay great for their 30s.

It is just an opinion I have of Holliday. Not sure what the big deal is...

[RShack]

It sure isn't, but what I meant by line was that if Holliday is a great player...he is going to stay great for his 30s.

Looking at Hollidays stats doesn't make me say he is going to be great into his 30s, but I think Holliday is a great player...and great players stay great for their 30s.

It is just an opinion I have of Holliday. Not sure what the big deal is...

There's lots of great players who didn't stay great until they're 40... the overwhelming majority of them, in fact.

Now, I fully agree that you can think he's great if you want to, but it's pretty much a faith-based argument, not a stats-based one...

[mweb]

OPS is a terrible stat because it equal weights .001 SLG with .001 OBP when it clearly isn't worth the same.

Just look at Larry Walker OBP from 30-38.

.452, .445, .458, .409, .449, .421, .422, .424, and .384.

A OBP of .384 is great....the rest of those years were amazing.

And you have to factor in that Coors helped him a ton, a big reason why the OPS+ is not that good. Are there any stats that you like that adjust for park?

Of course you ignore his durability during his 30's. If Holliday only players 1000 more games, he's going to have a very hard time compling HOF numbers.

Regardless of that, you can have Walker if you really want, it doesn't matter to me because you're still clearly wrong that players like Holliday generally stay great throughout their entire 30's.

[RVAbird]

I can promise you I'm not confusing correlation with causation.

Yes, that is what I'm predicting, and I have some results. Using Fangraphs I found (since 2006) 475 pairs of batter seasons in which the batter had at least 400 PAs in each season. The first thing I did was run a simple correlation on LD% for those 475 pairs of seasons. I was actually surprised at how low the correlation is - only 0.29. In other words, yes, batters do have a good bit of control on their LD%, but not nearly as much as I thought they did.

Not including the 2008/2009 pair of seasons I found 19 batters who saw their LD% decline by 5% points or more from season 1 to season 2. Let me say that of those 19, only 14 had 400+ PAs in season 3, but I included the other five players anyway (they had 130, 297, 377, 384, and 392 PAs). Some results for you:

1. Position distribution: Catchers (5), Corner Infielders (4), Middle Infielders (6), Outfielders (4)
2. 17 of 19 saw their season 3 LD% go up (as compared to season 2)
3. The two who saw a drop in season 3 were Jason Kendall (23.9% to 18.5% to 17.7%), and Brandon Inge (22.0% to 16.4% to 15.2%).
4. On average, the 19 batters had a LD% drop of 6.05% points in season 2.
5. On average, the 19 batters had a LD% increase of 3.06% points in season 3.
6. I divided the year 2/3 change by the year 1/2 change. These were the results:
   • 2 - dropped
   • 4 - increased by 0% to 25%
   • 5 - increased by 26% to 50%
   • 4 - increased by 51% to 75%
   • 1 - increased by 76% to 100%
   • 4 - increased by more than 100% (or more than it dropped the previous season)

[*]Based on the above there's a 21% chance his LD% will actually be higher in 2010 than it was in 2008 - not to mention the 89% chance it will be higher than it was in 2009.

---------------------------

Either way, the numbers on bullet items 4 and 5 support my theory that his 2010 LD% will be roughly 19.3%. In fact, run the numbers and they suggest that it will indeed be 19.3%. (Note: yes, I understand that since Atkins is a human it figures to be something different, but my point remains.)

Great stuff, 1970! This was pretty much exactly the kind of analysis I hoped you would provide.

The probability of rebound is higher than I expected. Of course there are some additional concerns with Atkins - a declining FB%, anecdotal observations of reduced bat speed, and, of course, the switch from Coors that keep his fly balls and line drives from travelling as far and will also likely cause problems for his contact rate. Even if Atkins' LD rate does bounce back by 50%, he'll still be a less effective hitter outside of Coors.

But I will tip my hat to you in that a one year drop in LD rate does not seem to be as a big of a red flag as I thought. Coupled with other factors, I'm still skeptical of Atkins' chances of success, but I appreciate the thought you put into this. Thanks again. It'll be interesting to watch him in 2010.

EDIT: Oh look, I gave you your first little bird. You deserve it.

[TyCobb]

There's lots of great players who didn't stay great until they're 40... the overwhelming majority of them, in fact.

Now, I fully agree that you can think he's great if you want to, but it's pretty much a faith-based argument, not a stats-based one...

I think that is going to change with the improvement in health and wellness of the ball players.

I don't think there is a system that isn't a little faith-based for future performances of an individual.

And you have to factor in that Coors helped him a ton, a big reason why the OPS+ is not that good. Are there any stats that you like that adjust for park?

Of course you ignore his durability during his 30's. If Holliday only players 1000 more games, he's going to have a very hard time compling HOF numbers.

Regardless of that, you can have Walker if you really want, it doesn't matter to me because you're still clearly wrong that players like Holliday generally stay great throughout their entire 30's.

OPS+ is park adjusted. If you don't think Larry Walker's OPS+ of 150 from 30 to 38 isn't great, your standard of great is way to high.

If I am going to look at one stat for a hitter...it will be his wOBA. And wOBA isn't park adjusted which isn't a problem for me.

[Frobby]

There's lots of great players who didn't stay great until they're 40... the overwhelming majority of them, in fact.

Now, I fully agree that you can think he's great if you want to, but it's pretty much a faith-based argument...

Just to take my list a step further, there are 26 hitters age 36 and older who had 200 AB in 2009. I'd consider the following to be possibly Hall of Fame quality:

Suzuki, Helton, Ramirez, Posada, Sheffield, Jones, I. Rodriguez, Thome, Griffey, Giles.

Most broke into the majors very young and many were not that good once they hit their mid-30's.

[mweb]

I think that is going to change with the improvement in health and wellness of the ball players.

I don't think there is a system that isn't a little faith-based for future performances of an individual.

OPS+ is park adjusted. If you don't think Larry Walker's OPS+ of 150 from 30 to 38 isn't great, your standard of great is way to high.

If I am going to look at 1 stat for a player...it will be his wOBA.

You said great for their entire 30's. He was great for much of his 30's, but not every year, he was also hurt a lot, and didn't even play his entire 30's. Regardless I said fine, you can have him. But the point remains that his case is not typical, and you're saying it is. So even if Holliday is great right now, he is not very likely to stay great throughout his entire 30's.

I know OPS+ is park adjusted. I asked for a park adjusted stat that you like better, is that park adjusted? It is very important when judging Colorado players.

[mweb]

Just to take my list a step further, there are 26 hitters age 36 and older who had 200 AB in 2009. I'd consider the following to be possibly Hall of Fame quality:

Suzuki, Helton, Ramirez, Posada, Sheffield, Jones, I. Rodriguez, Thome, Griffey, Giles.

Most broke into the majors very young and many were not that good once they hit their mid-30's.

Yep, most of those guys are not still great.

[TyCobb]

You said great for their entire 30's. He was great for much of his 30's, but not every year, he was also hurt a lot, and didn't even play his entire 30's. Regardless I said fine, you can have him. But the point remains that his case is not typical, and you're saying it is. So even if Holliday is great right now, he is not very likely to stay great throughout his entire 30's.

I asked for a park adjusted stat, is that park adjusted? It is very important when judging Colorado players.

Park adjust it yourself if you want to. Park Factors are on baseball-reference for individual parks.

[TyCobb]

Just to take my list a step further, there are 26 hitters age 36 and older who had 200 AB in 2009. I'd consider the following to be possibly Hall of Fame quality:

Suzuki, Helton, Ramirez, Posada, Sheffield, Jones, I. Rodriguez, Thome, Griffey, Giles.

Most broke into the majors very young and many were not that good once they hit their mid-30's.

Who on that list don't you consider to be good into their mid-30s?

[TyCobb]

You flipped me the bird? (I do appreciate that, even if it isn't all that important to me.)

Here's the thing, I absolutely agree that the chances of Atkins having even a decent season appear to be pretty slim. This whole thing started because I couldn't understand the concern with Atkins' LD% when very few seemed to be concerned about Hardy's LD% (which presents a huge red flag for me).

I played some tricks with some numbers. Even if his LD% goes up to the expect 19.3% he's still only looking at about a .720 OPS (if memory serves from last night). That coupled with subpar range at 3B is troubling to say the least.

Atkins problem lies in his IFFB and HR/FB

Both have been trending the wrong way now for 4 years.

Something is wrong with his swing and needs to be corrected. Maybe AM had a talk with the Crow and asked if it could be fixed.