Don’t Worry About The Numbers
Tim Marchman is one of my favorite baseball writers. He does really good work, and is putting intelligent baseball commentary in front of casual fans who pick up a Wall Street Journal or Sports Illustrated. He combines the ability to write with a real understanding of how baseball works. I have a lot of respect for him.
So, that’s why I was shocked to read this. It’s one thing to be kind of skeptical of Fernando Martinez, who has received more attention than he’s warranted thanks to being a prospect in a New York farm system. All Mets and Yankees prospects get too much exposure. This isn’t new.
But to question Martinez on the basis of surface level mediocre minor league performances is a trap that too many statistical writers have fallen into over the years.
We talked about Justin Upton this afternoon. He hit .263/.343/.416 in his first pro season in low-A ball in 2006. Considering the hype, there were lots of questions about why he was just an average player in a league full of guys who were never going to see the big leagues. He turned out just fine, I think.
Likewise, Hanley Ramirez was a scout favorite with a minor league track record that didn’t match the tools. Before the Red Sox traded him, he was just okay in low-A, high-A, and Double-A, and his .279/.340/.412 line in Double-A had a lot of people calling him overrated.
Or, hey, let’s talk about Miguel Cabrera. He was getting remarkable hype as a teenager, but from looking at his performance through 2002, you’d wonder why – he hit .268/.328/.382 in low-A in 2001 and .274/.333/.421 in high-A in 2002. Not exactly the kind of numbers that make you think that he was developing into one of the best hitters of all time.
If you were starting a franchise from scratch, Ramirez, Upton, and Cabrera would be near the top of your list of guys that you’d want to build around. They all posted mediocre minor league performances, because their teams saw the natural talent and pushed them aggressively through the minor leagues. All three took massive steps forward, seemingly overnight, to go from high ceiling prospect to superstar in no time flat.
These types of players don’t develop on a slow and steady pace. They get challenged, they struggle, and when they figure it out, they get good in a hurry. I’m not suggesting that Martinez is going to going to reach Ramirez/Upton/Cabrera heights, but just like it was wrong to question those guys abilities when they struggled against more experienced pitchers, it’s wrong to write off Martinez just because he hasn’t figured out pitch recognition yet.
It’d be in the Mets best interest to let Martinez continue to develop in Triple-A, but suggesting that they should trade him for Mark DeRosa is a great way to look really, really bad in 20 years.
28
Twenty years? Did you forget how quickly the Kazmir blowback began?
Exactly Dave –
Marc was talking about this in the “fantasy” section of Fangraphs. Fernando is only 20 years old with 8 ABs, so lets just chalk up the initial performance as lack of experience and extreme youth mixed with an extremely small sample size.
Despite that, this kid has been the youngest player at every level he has spent time at. His ARL (age relative to league) needs to be taken into account when making projections. Using his current performance as a strong indicator of his future player, is an oversight in the way a hitter matures. The fact that he led AAA in XBH is enough to see that he is making progress even at his age.
Twenty years? He looked bad the minute that came off the press.
Love ya Dave, but you are completely misreading Marchman’s article. His central point was that F-Mart is probably unready to be a useful big leaguer in the near term (this year). This year the Mets are likely to be in yet another war for a playoff spot and Marchman doesn’t think Martinez will be able to help them. He points to Martinez’s pedestrian minor league track record to support this argument, not to say he won’t be a great player at some point. He clearly describes F-Mart as a “terrific prospect”.
Furthermore, Marchman never truly advocates trading Martinez for DeRosa. It’s an attention grabbing headline that he never addresses in the article proper. If you wanna kill him for the bait and switch headline, go for it. However he clearly doesn’t mean it.
Exactly, if you read not too far past the title of the article you get to this part: “I … consider Martinez is a terrific prospect. Still, the man is not going to do anything this year.”
Just earlier this week you stated that if the Mets were to compete this year they needed to make a significant trade. F-Mart is their only real chip. He might be great in three years, but Wright, Reyes, and Beltran may not.
“He might be great in three years, but Wright, Reyes, and Beltran may not.”
The only way those three aren’t great in three years is if they are injured, which is as likely to happen this year as it is in three. Illogical argument.
Id just like to point out that ken said on May 30, 2009 that the only way those three aren’t great in three years is if they are injured…… WHICH IS AS LIKELY TO HAPPEN THIS YEAR….. as it is in 3
YOU SHOT OUR SEASON WHEN YOU PUT THE BAD VIBES IN THE AIR
Headlines are almost never written by the actual writers. Blame the editor, who in all likelihood knows a lot less about baseball than Marchman does.
This isn’t true, by the way. It’s something reporters say to get people off their back.
Uhh…yes it is true. It’s something reporters say because that’s what happens…
Reporters virtually never write their headlines in newspapers and on newspaper websites, but a reporter’s blog is another story.
Used to be true for stories in print. Now sort of true, though at my paper reporters are expected to write our own headlines — we just write them poorly, and the copy desk rewrites them. But 100 percent not true when it comes to a blog post like this.
I know this is a quick post, but merely pointing out that some touted prospects had poor minor league numbers and then developed into good players doesn’t prove very much. Of course this happens. It also sometimes happens that touted prospects, even those who had good minor league stats, are total busts. You need to know the distribution of outcomes of players with Martinez’s profile–fairly highly touted, pretty poor minor league performance but at young age. I don’t know what the result would be, but my guess is that, in expectation, he won’t be quite as good as Mark DeRosa, although the different contract situations would still make trading him a poor idea.
According to Baseball Reference, the Midwest League hit .253/.325/.365 in 2006. There is no way Upton’s .263/.343/.416 suggests he was “just an average player” in that league, even before you account for the fact that his home park was not a hitter’s park, his age, and the fact that it was his pro debut.
I think there’s still some aspect of numbers you need to look at Dave, your article goes a little over dismissive.
For one , the 3 guys you meantioned almost all played well ahead of their competition in terms of age. which is one aspect of minor league # that doesn’t get enough adjustment. sure. hitting say… .280/.340/.400 in AAA isn’t impressive… but if you did it as a 19-20 year old. then it’s pretty darn impressive indeed.
If a highly touted guy hits .100/.100/.100 in Rookie ball over 200 PA as a 20 year old. then you DO need to worry no matter how much hype he gets.
Right… F-Mart is twenty. Right now. And he raked in AAA. Meaning that we can ignore his non-impressive results as a teen in AA.
“hey all posted mediocre minor league performances, because their teams saw the natural talent and pushed them aggressively through the minor leagues”
Second part relevant. A twenty y.o. in rookie ball isn’t being aggressively pushed through the minor leagues.
Marchman was joking with the headline.
Wright Reyes and Beltran won’t be good in 3 years??
Beltran will be starting his decline. Why on earth should Wright and Reyes suck in 3 years?
F-Mart is a terrible nickname. Trade him now.
To the Mariners please.
For Betancourt??
Well…they’d have to throw in Wright in that case.
Way to point out the exceptions to the rule, what about the oodles of minor league players that have shitty numbers, yet tons of hype, and end up being nothing but hype? Futhermore, OBSESS OVER THE NUMBERS. Yet, truly obsess, as Lorring Wave pointed, out you need to take age and batter peripherals into account…such as contact%, LD%, and others. Also, Hanley Ramirez is hardly the rule you’d like to use when judging young prospects. He’s one of the five best players in the world right now, and to use him as an example when talking about Fernando Martinez is really unfair.
Omar, are you saying that Fernando Martinez is definitely going to be a bust? Because all I read in this post is that Dave doesn’t think you should write him off yet, and you certainly shouldn’t trade him for Mark DeRosa.
1) Fernando Martinez is 20 years old.
2) Don’t trade him for Mark DeRosa.
3) “I’m not suggesting that Martinez is going to going to reach Ramirez/Upton/Cabrera heights, but just like it was wrong to question those guys abilities when they struggled against more experienced pitchers, it’s wrong to write off Martinez just because he hasn’t figured out pitch recognition yet.”
Which one of those statements bothers you so much?
I think there is a middle ground. from a prospect point of view. Fernando is pretty good because of age adjustment. but then again, another rules pretty much apply to all prospect. and that is even the most flawless prospect CAN fail for various reasons. and Fernando’s not the most flawless prospect.
I don’t think they should trade him unless it’s a very big peice. but that doesn’t mean I think he’ll surely succeed.
I don’t recall suggesting that he’s going to be a bust, I don’t think he’s going to be the next huge thing, but I think he’ll be a good player.
“Don’t Worry About The Numbers,” I think you should put them in proper context. Furthermore, comparing a prospect to one of the two most valuable commodities in the game is pretty stupid, it’s much more prudent to put the numbers in proper context.
Yeah, you know what would be awesome? If he said we should ignore the numbers in a specific case, like one where a highly-touted prospect was challenged against players several years older than him. You know what else would be sweet? If he provided several players who put up ‘mediocre’ numbers in the minors, only to blossom into flat-out studs. That might provide the context necessary for not giving up on Martinez.
Oh, wait…
In case there were any doubts that Tim was being sarcastic with the trade suggestion, it looks like he’s added the following update to clarify:
“(UPDATE: I already addressed this in comments, but there seems to be a bit of confusion. Just to be clear: I do not really think the Mets should trade Fernando Martinez for Mark DeRosa. Especially not when they could get Omar Vizquel for him!)”
Beyond that, while it’s true that Mets prospects do get overhyped, it’s also true that there are always doubters out there on the opposite extreme, who seem to not want to believe it when they actually have a good prospect. This happened with Pelfrey as well, who maybe got oversold at times as a future “ace”, but nonetheless was a clear top pitching prospect, who has so far done about as should have been expected, and is settling in as roughly a solid #3, with #2 upside maybe still possible as he refines his secondary offerings.
With Fernando, I’ve seen every extreme from people claiming great tools, saying he was faster than Jose Reyes (someone who obviously had him confused with Carlos Gomez somewhere along the way), to those claiming he was a bad defender who would have to end up at 1B, and wasn’t likely to hit for power.
Reality is he’s a decent defender in CF now but will likely be a better long run fit in LF, where he might even be above average. His overall tools though, are mostly average. The one real tool everyone was excited about was his bat. When you have a guy of Fernando’s size, with his sweet swing, and batspeed, there’s a pretty good chance he’s going to be a 30 HR guy down the road. And as well as he’s hit for his age, there’s a pretty good chance he’ll hit for average. He won’t be great at drawing walks, but that is something that tends to be poor with hitters who are rushed, and will catch up some once he is at one level a couple of years. He should be better there than his minor league numbers.
In short you have a guy who is a good bet to be at least an average corner OF, with a decent possibility still there of something more than that.
Fernando has never had a year in the minors that can be even remotely described as disappointing.
He was playing high A at 17/ AA at 18(319wOBA)/AA at 19(wOBA346)/ at 20 AAA(wOBA386). Most top prospects are still at high A at 20- Fernando’s minor performance and improvement year over year certainly warrants a good deal of hype regardless of the city he plays for.
And F! really does seem to be a true 5-tool guy. I’ve seen an arm, great speed, and some range, though the catching the ball part is still not quite evident.
I wish there was a way to get Dave to address these type of fails. He was so smug about dismissing legit concerns with a flawed prospect. His whole case was built around comparing him to three of the best prospects from the past decade. The whole aggressive placement argument was fine, but it should have stayed at that.