What does it mean to be a top prospect? Part 2, The Unranked Strike Back
Having looked at just how productive the Top Prospects were, the next logical step was to cross-check against the Active Career WAR leaders to see how many really productive players were missed in these Top 100 lists. I did this incrementally, so I'll just throw a couple of charts in here at this point: Active players with career WAR above 50 and above 30, and above 20, separated into groups of Top 2, Top 10, Top 20, Top 50, Top 100 and Unranked. I'll cop to a minor intrusion here: there were two active players last year with career WAR >30 who predated BA's Top 100 list: Ken Griffey, Jr. and Jamie Moyer and I handled them in two separate ways. Moyer I simply took out of the equation, because although I know he was a decently heralded prospect with the Cubs I have no good guess whether he would have been a Top 100 prospect. But Junior I included in the Top 2 list, because, being a reader of BA in the late 80s I'm satisfied that they did consider him the #1 prospect in baseball without a doubt.
There are 19 players with career WARs over 50, and 3 of them (Jim Edmonds, Mariano Rivera, Jason Giambi) were never on a Top 100 prospect list (though ironically Jeremy Giambi was). Down a notch to >30 and you get a similar percentage of players from the Top 100 (45 out of 55). And, for the most part, all of these lists show a steady upwards progression of average WAR as you move through the lists from Unranked to Top 2 (with one notable exception I'll get to in a minute).
It's really not until you get down to the 10-19 WAR range and even more so at 5-10 range that you see a real incursion of Unranked prospects as you can see here:
or with even more of a breakdown here:
So, it's in the very solid 5-20 range that the middling prospects make their major league marks. One thing we see immediately here is the inverse TINSTAAP principal. Tthe list of Unranked prospects who appear high on the Career WAR lists is littered with slightly less heralded pitchers from the great Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman, to the very very good Tim Hudson and Mark Buehrle. In fact, as an aside, for people who insist that you don't need great stuff to be a successful major league pitcher, the Chicago White Sox staff is your mecca. They field a starting 5 with poor K rates, mediocre BB rates, and unimpressive GB rates who still seem to regularly enjoy a great deal of success. I'd say that Buehrle's 42.60 and John Danks 17.20 were probably the two most shocking numbers I saw in all this digging (well, there's Darren Oliver's 16.1, too, but I'll get to that in a minute).
Second, less dramatically but still I think quite perceptible, these lists do clearly point to an undervaluation of patience as a major league tool by the scouting community. Looking at the Unranked players at the the Career WAR >30 lists we see Jim Edmonds, Jason Giambi, Jorge Posada, and Placido Polanco, and moving over one column to players who were clearly underrated in the bottom half of Top 100 we find guys like Chase Utley (#81 prospect), David Ortiz (#84), Jim Thome (#51), Bobby Abreu (#38), and of course, the great Albert Pujols (#42), all players who showed advanced plate discipline as minor leaguers and all players who have outpaced the scouting consensus of their tools by, as Grant so rightly put it last year, not swinging at crap. An apologist for BA and the scouting community might note that had the Cardinals found any live body that could stand near 3B in spring training of 2001, Pujols would no doubt have had the opportunity to leap up into the top 10 with another great year. But really, the scouting community had two chances to get it right with the greatest hitter of his generation and they whiffed pretty significantly both times, first with his 13th round draft placement, and second with his #42 prospect ranking after destroying two levels of A ball in his only minor league season.
Essentially, if you have a career WAR above 25 and you weren't a Top 100 prospect you can be grouped into one of three categories: 1) the volatility of pitching prospects; 2) the undervaluation of patience; or 3) you're Omar Vizquel.
But one really interesting question, for me that comes from looking at that group of Unranked prospects between 5-10 career WAR is the role played by relievers, and specifically middle relievers. Relief pitchers are the driving force behind the rise of the Unranked players in the last two columsn, going from about a third of the 10-19 group to well over half of the 5-10. 38 of the 90 Unranked players in the 5-10 group are relief pitchers, and 31 of them are middle relievers. In fact, of the 159 active players who have a career WAR above 5, a pretty astonishing 48 of them are relief pitchers and 41 are middle relievers (Darren Oliver, 16.1 career WAR -- who knew!). And while most closers in the majors were minor league starters, there are plenty of guys on this list with no starting experience in the minors at all (e.g., David Riske, Mike Adams, Jose Valverde) or very minimal (Brian Wilson, Brendan Donnelly).
This really begs the question of whether prospects who are relief pitchers are undervalued, and frankly I'll leave it as an unanswered question. Yes there's a lot of value in this area from middle relief, but middle relievers also make up the lion's share of all those Negative WAR categories above, and the great unranked of middle relief throughout the majors is also mostly a pretty motley, <0 group. If you figure there are somewhere above 200 roster positions in the majors for relief pitchers, and further consider that most of these relievers have taken 5-10 years aggregating their WAR, then some thousand or thousands have tried to do what these 48 guys have achieved, so the flameout ratio is particularly high. Also, from having spent time looking at all these careers, I'd say that the relievers as a group take the longest and most circuitous development curves, frequently going through several organizations before catching on, some formerly high ranked prospects who blew out there arms (like Matt Thorton and Scott Linebrink), others guys who marched up their systems in anonymity and made the best of their opportunity when it came (Brad Ziegler or Jason Frasor or Kevin Gregg).
Still my takeaway is that I undervalued, say Sergio Romo simply because he was a minor league reliever and it's pretty clear to me that there's solid production to be gained there that I at least haven't been valuing highly enough. And it's clear to see why the middle relief market has exploded at the MLB FA level -- club's are rightly seeing that this is an area of tremendous scarcity that can give a real competitve advantage production. Whether or not it turns out to be a good contract, someone like Matt Guerrier whose been a little better than a 1 Win player every year in his career is scarce commodity. And conversely it will be interesting to see if the Rays and Twins choice to not pay these guys and take the comp picks is a gamble that hurts their chances in 2011. The vast majority of middle relievers provide negative value over the long haul, which is why I suppose the relief market is going through the roof. There's such a scarcity at the position that when you find a Dan Wheeler (6.6), Joaquin Benoit (8.1), Jason Frasor (5.8), Scott Downs (8.4), Matt Thorton (9.5), Matt Guerrier (6.8), or even Jeremy Affeldt (6.7), you hold onto them for dear life (or collect the comp picks and smile).
And then there's one further breakdown I'd like to make. I've used the term "Unranked" pretty liberally, and that term is naturally lazy and incorrect. There's no "Here be monsters" sign after the 100th prospect of course. This group of "Unranked" includes lots of guys who were at or near the top of their team's rankings, like Robinson Cano (#2 prospect in the Yankees system in 2005) or Dan Haren (#1 propsect for the Cardinals) who fell just a little outside the Top 100 (which tends to include the top 1-6 players in each organization depedngin on their relative strength of system). So just to give us a better feel for what the chances are for the lesser profiled prospects, here's one last breakdown that differentiates the Unranked into an Organization's Top 5, Org Top 10, and beyond that.
So at this point you're looking at 62 players out of 400 with career WAR over 5 who came from outside even their organization's top 10s (159 out of 400 were not Top 100 prospects). The highest of them is, perhaps not surprisingly, the ageless knuckleballer Tim Wakefield (32.20). Only 5 other players from lower than their org's top 10 have managed to accumulate 20 career WAR: Melvin Mora (27.4), Kevin Millwood (24.2), Casey Blake (23.1), Chone Figgins (22.4), and David Eckstein (21.4 -- which just goes to show you that all those intangibles of his that "don't show up in the numbers" really do!).
So that's 6 guys out of 400 who've gotten to the 20 WAR plateau which is a heck of a career. But in the perfectly productive <20 range there are some real fabulous stories. Casey McGehee was not only never in a Top 30, he was frnakly a pretty terrible minor league player. Aaron Harang, as far as I can tell was never in a Top 30, nor was David Ross. Randy Wells was the #22 player in the Blue Jays system, but then released and picked up by the Cubs, where in the 2007 Prospect Handbook he was listed 13th on the depth chart for RH Relievers in the system (the 3rd guy in that list was the #29 prospect).
And off course, all those players who were Organizational Top 5 prospects didn't just march lockstep into the majors and take their rightful place as slightly overachieving and productive major leaguers. There were a lot of long and winding roads, and because following some of those roads was my favorite part of this whole process, I'll end by just enumerating a few of my favorites:
Andres Torres, #6 prospect for Detroit in 2001 and 2002. We know the rest of his story pretty well.
Ramon Ramirez was once an OF prospect for Texas in the DSL, and after being released was out of baseball for 4 years before surfacing as a pitcher in the Japan for the Hiroshima Karp. Spotted by the Yankees he rose to be their #5 prospect as a hard throwing starter. The next year he was their #23 prospect as a hard throwing reliever, and then he was traded for Shawn Chacon, Jorge de la Rossa, and Coco Crisp before finally making his way to our World Series bullpen.
Casey Blake was 25 when he made the majors with Toronto, but it took 4 more years and 4 more organizations before he ever got more than 25 PA in a season. Once he did, at the age of 29, he made them count.
Denard Span was Minnesota's #5 prospect the winter after they drafted him in the first round, thinking he was a polished college hitter. He then proceeded to go backwards in the rankings for 5 straight years as he underperformed, until, when finally making the show, a polished hitter emerged after all.
Matt Diaz was waived by terrible Tampa Bay and Baltimore organizations, and given away by the Royals before turning into a pretty productive player in his late 20s.
And lastly, given the news of his re-signing with the Cards, let's say a cheer for the remarkable career of one Jim Edmonds. Drafted out of High School in the 7th round of the 1988 draft, he started his pro career hitting .221 and slugging .254 in rookie ball. And he followed that up with a .261/.313/.337 year at age 19. Four more minor league years followed in which he got better and better, showing good plate discipline and an improving bat, and even a little power. Finally at age 23 he snuck into the Angels Top 10 as their #9 prospect, and later that year he began a career that has so far accumulated 68.3 WAR and a 132 OPS+. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him climb over 70 this year.
If all the proceeding were one of Xanthan's heat maps, than the Top 20 prospects would be a huge dark red blotch in the center soaking up most of the WAR, and the Top 100 would be lighter red around the periphery. But these white blotches are really where all the best stories are and where you can find a decent amount of exceptional 5-20 WAR careers.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
17 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As was pointed out in the first post, this all just way too much detail underlining a blatantly obvious point, but its a topic we tend to argue around a lot hereabouts with different people carrying differing assumptions into their posts, and at least going forward we’ll have some baseline stats to help inform some of these discussions.
MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!
Roger
I just wanted to say that this post was awesome. I haven’t commented in a few years, and I have thought about updating my account to the “new” mccovey chronicles many times, but this is the post that convinced me to do it.
Very cool research.
by Nick Schulte on Feb 9, 2011 11:23 PM PST up reply actions
lol
Essentially, if you have a career WAR above 25 and you weren’t a Top 100 prospect you can be grouped into one of three categories: 1) the volatility of pitching prospects; 2) the undervaluation of patience; or 3) you’re Omar Vizquel.
Might the hated-Eckstein fit into that Vizquel category? or is he too patient and not a good enough defender?
Vizquel – giving hope to no-hit all-d shortstop prospects everywhere.
Please don't cut Ishikawa! 2009 Tops All-Star Rookie and World Champ 2010!
You should be getting paid for this. Or something. Did you research the data for those graphs or did you fin them somewhere?
Hensley "Bam Bam" Meulens!
Better than you! Mejor que tú! Beter dan jij! 良い場合も! Mehor than abo!
"The trouble with baseball is that it is not played the year round." - Gaylord Perry
Great work!
I posted this in the first thread, but I’ll put it here too – with an added observation.
Could you do a chart that has the career WAR per season played, instead of just the cumulative career WAR? Obviously, at least to me, a guy that puts up a career WAR of 30 in 5 seasons was a hell of a lot more valuabe than one that put up the same WAR in 10 seasons.
Now my added thought. It would be a huge amount of work, but I would like to see your reseach refined a bit. I don’t think that it’s enough to just say that a guy has been ranked in a top 100 list at some point in his minor league career. After all, there are plenty of prospects that get listed in the top 100 near the beginning of their minor league careers, only to drop off of it in later years. Conversely, there are even more players that never get put onto a top 100 list until just before they get promoted to the majors. BBelt is a good example of this. Is it really surprising that a middling prospect has a break-out season below the AAA level, gets rated in the top 100 for the first time the following offseason, then plays some combination of AAA and major league ball the following season and ends up having too much major league experience to be on the list after that? Should that really be considered succesful ranking? In other words, there’s more than a little bit of 20/20 hindsight going into these lists.
I think for this data that you’ve put frward to be entirely rigorous you have to go back and establish how many seasons each prospect was on the top 100 list versus how many seasons that prospect spent in the minor leagues. In other words, it’s pretty easy for a ranking service to tell us in February of 2011 that BBelt is a top 30 prospect, but where were they when the propositiion of him even making it to the majors was much more up in the air? BA certainly didn’t rank him in the top 300 draftees prior to the 2009 draft, nor did they have him in the top 500 MLB prospects at this time in 2010. However, using your system, Belt will be seen as a rating success story for BA, and others, if he ends up putting up the type of career numbers that most see him doing in the future.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Hmm… I can see what you mean. Although Belt’s not a great example as the end result for him would be 1 year in the Top 100 and 1 (or 1.5) years in the minors. If you incluce the year he was drafted but didn’t sign early enough to play it would still look like 1 Top 100 appearance out of a potential 2 (also, Belt was listed in the top 300 draft propsects before the 2009 draft).
I can tell you that the average for all Top 100 prospects is approximately 2.4 appearances on the list, with about 1 out every 6 of them making 3 or more appearances on the list. And of course, that’s much higher for Top 20 guys. I’m not sure of the number, but I’d guesstimate that about 2/3 or all the Top 20 guys make two appearances. The rest are typically players who move up to the majors after their first appearance and thus lose eligibility. There certainly are cases of Top 20s who fall back down before making it to the majors (Josh Hamilton being the obvious one) but very very few of those guys (typically involving pitcher arm blowouts).
MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!
Yeah, I have to believe that guys in the top 10 are rated there most of their minor league careers. It would be interesting to see a chart with a weighted score what percentage of minor league games each prospect played while ranked in the top 100. Another interesting chart would be how many of the top 100 guys were only on the list prior to their final minor league season. I know this is way too much work for you to do now, but it’s something to put in your memory banks if you ever go into this stuff again.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Weighted would be an interesting approach. Although one problem I would think of immediately is I would think you’d have to separate out college and high school draftees because there’s enough of a deviation between their development arcs that it would fuzz up results. These are extreme examples of course, but Tim Lincecum was only ever eligible for one Top 100 list (he was ranked #11) and then he only threw 31 more innings in the minors. Justin Verlander was only eligible for one list (#8) and he never threw another inning in the minors. But recent profile High School guys I can think of, Joe Mauer was a Top 10 prospect 4 years in a row, as I believe was Delmon Young. Jason Heyward was on the list 3 years in a row, the last 2 in the Top 10 and Jay Bruce was on it 3 years, the last two in the Top 20.
Just spitballing a guestimate based on all the numbers I looked at, I would guess that Top 10 players probably average around 3 appearances on the list. But of course, as much as talent can force issues, timing and circumstances play a huge role in these things of course. Pujols spent one year in the majors because of a rash of injuries at the parent club (and the fact that he made an immediate impact). Jonathan Sanchez’ minor league career probably develops differently if the organization didn’t think it had a chance to compete in 2006 and yank him up to be a lefty out of the bullpen after he’d only thrown 31 innings above low A. Etc etc. etc. It’s a big talent/chance/opportunity stew.
MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!
More good stuff.
As Dave Emory might say ‘Food for thought and grounds for further research’.
2010 World Series Champions!
Adopted 'nephew' to the ever avuncular and always awesome Jon Miller

by 



























