Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Talk about the Cardinals minor league baseball
Locked
User avatar
themiddle54
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4524
Joined: August 24 10, 2:49 pm

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by themiddle54 »

cpebbles wrote:I just wonder where in your reading you came across this steep an aging curve. haltz's criticism is right in line with everything I've read.
All aging curves call for an increased rate of decline the more advanced the age. Which is not what haltz is saying when he says Pujols will lose a half a win per season, which represents a misunderstanding of aging patterns or a simple typo/math error. No one loses a steady half-win per year unless he's an outlier.

User avatar
cards2468
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 14763
Joined: October 28 06, 11:10 pm
Location: LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by cards2468 »

themiddle54 wrote:
cpebbles wrote:I just wonder where in your reading you came across this steep an aging curve. haltz's criticism is right in line with everything I've read.
All aging curves call for an increased rate of decline the more advanced the age. Which is not what haltz is saying when he says Pujols will lose a half a win per season, which represents a misunderstanding of aging patterns or a simple typo/math error. No one loses a steady half-win per year unless he's an outlier.
And 3 years is a poor basis to determine a trend.
Chipper Jones' best year he posted a 7.7 WAR at age 27. Age 30 season: 6.3 WAR, Age 31: 4.2, Age 32: 3.5... Age 35: 7.5 WAR, Age 36: 7.5 WAR. After age 32, Chipper has been averaging 4.6 WAR a year (last 3 years he's been between 2.1-2.9). I just don't see why it would be ridiculous to think Albert could average 5 wins a season for the next 7 years.

Online
AWvsCBsteeeerike3
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
Posts: 25019
Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Location: Thinking of the Children

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by AWvsCBsteeeerike3 »

I think at this point there are two destinctly different points being made.

1. Albert Pujols is following a typical aging curve and as such is going to regress greatly throughout his next contract to the point he won't come close to living up to that contract. There are examples of this. Basically most players.

2. Albert Pujols is not a typical player and the typical rules don't apply directly to him the way they do to other players because he's a once in a lifetime type player. There are examples of this. Basically a lot of but not all elite players.

Can we just leave it at that and you all kiss and make up?

User avatar
JackofDiamonds
Bringer of Boston Baked Blue Balls
Posts: 15056
Joined: April 16 06, 9:15 pm

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by JackofDiamonds »

Anyone have any new thoughts on Matt Adams?

User avatar
docellis
America's Most Beloved Twitter Joke Thief
Posts: 24839
Joined: April 18 06, 6:54 pm

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by docellis »

Matt Moore thoughts, yes, not Adams

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/qa-matt-moore/

his articles induce boner comments

User avatar
cards2468
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 14763
Joined: October 28 06, 11:10 pm
Location: LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by cards2468 »

JackofDiamonds wrote:Anyone have any new thoughts on Matt Adams?
I wonder how many lbs of wings he could eat in 1 sitting

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20017
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by haltz »

themiddle54 wrote:Why would I project Pujols at 6.5 wins next year when he was worth 5.1 this year?
Because he's been worth 21.7 wins over the last three years. That's the way projections work. It's what have you done for me recently, with lately weighted a little more. If you don't think his last three years warrant more than a 5 WAR projection for next year then you have a fundamental misunderstanding of a very simple concept on a subject you claim to know a lot about.
Am I going to just throw my hands up at his first half and say that it didn't happen this year, because he was good in the last half? Am I going to neglect that a 32+ player is actually more likely for cold streaks as he gets older than he is to be steady all through the season?
I'm not neglecting the first half of the season. If did I would be (numbers are more for illustrative purposes) projecting him at 7-8 WAR. Older players are streakier? I've never read anything on the subject one way or the other that wasn't in a Joe Morgan chat.
Am I going to forget that his walk rate went from 14.7% to 9.4% this year, and that he's not having quality PA the way he used to, and just assume that he'll quickly and easily fix that next year? Am I going to neglect that the BB rate decline is now a two-year trend and not a one-year blip? What about his discipline in swinging at pitches outside the zone and how that impacts his BB rate? What about his BABIP being only 277 this year, about 45 points lower than his career average.
So since it's a "two-year trend," do you expect it to continue to decrease? Next year he'll be walking about as often as Ryan Theriot. Go on fangraphs and overlay his career wOBA graph with his BABIP graph. You might be making a case for the chicken instead of the egg here.
Or I could just assume that he's a 6.5 win player next year on blind faith
Not on blind faith, it's simple math and how projections work. I'll weight the last three seasons in bWAR 1/2/3 and average them out. 9.2+14.2+16.2 = 40.5/6 = 6.6 WAR. That was a pretty good guess.
flying in the face of what he's actually doing and can control. Which would be a pretty bad idea and would = "making up numbers here."
[SHOW]
Image
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/artic ... ge-part-2/
Assuming 4.4 million of free agent dollars per marginal win, player in a decline phase (at 0.5 wins per year), and inflation rate of 10%, here is how a player's perceived talent level, number of contract years, and total contract payments correspond.

If someone signs a 6/120 deal, then go to column numbered "6", and look for the closest dollar figure to "$120" you can find. In this case, we see "$122.6", which corresponds to row "5.0", meaning 5 wins above replacement (3 wins above average, for a full-time player). This player is being paid with an evaluation of 5.0 wins above replacement, with a 0.5 wins per year decline, and baseball payrolls increasing at 10% every year.

Note: a full-time league-average player would be worth +2.0 wins above replacement. Therefore, a league-average player should get an 8.8 million$, 1-yr contract, or 24 million$, 4-yr contract.
http://www.tangotiger.net/salary2008.html
Since he's lost 1.5 and 2.5 wins each of the last two seasons, yeah, I can project that he'll lose a half win this year.
You would be wrong, then. That's not how it works.
Saying that he's gonna be a 6.5 win player next year based on no supporting evidence
See above.
and without looking at what Pujols has actually been doing the last two years that has caused his decline would = "making up numbers here."
Last year he led the league in OPS+, just like the year before and the year before. This year his BABIP dropped and he swung at more pitches out of the strike zone. Project him to "continue the trend" and get worse, and hang your hat on a guy who would be a replacement player in St Louis this year if you want, but I'd rather see Pujols back in a Cardinals uniform next year.

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20017
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by haltz »

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:I think at this point there are two destinctly different points being made.

1. Albert Pujols is following a typical aging curve and as such is going to regress greatly throughout his next contract to the point he won't come close to living up to that contract. There are examples of this. Basically most players.

2. Albert Pujols is not a typical player and the typical rules don't apply directly to him the way they do to other players because he's a once in a lifetime type player. There are examples of this. Basically a lot of but not all elite players.

Can we just leave it at that and you all kiss and make up?
I'm not arguing for #2. Albert Pujols literally led the league in WAR for six consecutive seasons from 2005-2010. He has more WAR than all but 26 players who have ever played Major League baseball and he's 31 years old. His WAR ranking was still in the top ten of all players in the league this year and supposedly he's now experiencing a steep decline.

Following a typical aging pattern, Pujols is a good guy to have around even if 10/300 was never a good idea.

User avatar
JackofDiamonds
Bringer of Boston Baked Blue Balls
Posts: 15056
Joined: April 16 06, 9:15 pm

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by JackofDiamonds »

Image

User avatar
Maclowery
Child Pot Activist
Posts: 7745
Joined: June 15 06, 7:27 am
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Matt Mothergrabbin' Adams

Post by Maclowery »

A month or couple ago, I opined that we should un-retire Mark McGwire and have him play second. I would now like to put an addendum on this, and have Matt Adams at shortstop.

Now that I'm laughing at myself, I wonder, dear stat gurus, what kind of production Adams would have to put up offensively to negate what would be a stunningly hilarious negative fielding component.

Locked