Royals, Dodgers, Blue Jays discussed on Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

That kind of threw off the numbers a little bit for this past year. So I had to make some adjustments for that and kind of normalize the numbers a bit. But yeah, those were the three, I think, biggest and difficult, difficulties. I had to work around. And so what form did your results take? How do you de system either good or bad or successful or unsuccessful at player development in any given season or a range of seasons? So yeah, I just take the projection and you compare it to the actual performance and then just the simple delta, you can do a couple different things. I felt like you could weigh it based off played appearances. So that way, players in the organization with the higher plate appearances would be weighted higher than players would say somewhere with like 50 plate appearances. Or you can just take a qualifier, like say 202 150 PAs, whatever you feel good with. And just look at the raw average, I thought about it a little. I couldn't decide which one was better. I think I went with a weighted plane appearance. So yeah, the average of the deltas weighted or unweighted. And then adjusting that to basically the seasonal environments of so really caused me into a just for seasonal environments. Again, was the 2021 season. Adjusting for that. And then applying it on a scale of 100, just like a lot of baseball stats, WRC plus OPS plus. And yeah, so if you were with an organization was like at one O three, that means they were hitters were 3%. They were able to overperforming 3% if they were at 95 there underperforming 5% 100 average. So yeah, that's how the numbers were displayed during the organizations. And were there any organizational surprises for you as you were working through your results? Yeah, again, at the top, there was a lot of non surprises. Which was really what I was looking for to validate it with the eye test. I did two tables. I looked back three years and I looked back at this past year. So on the three or one Blue Jays being at the top was a little bit surprising I think. I think they're pretty well regarded in play development, but they were headed to astors and raised which I wouldn't have guessed to be true. Another one was the pirates being up there. I know they've gotten a lot of recent flack. Especially the major league level with their play development department, but I think they've made some changes in the past years, and they're minor league. At least the data for their minor leagues. They perform pretty well for both hitters and pitchers. And then at the 2021 one, the royals were at the top, which I thought was a bit surprising. They were number three for hitters and number three for pictures, number one overall. Watching back in 2019, they had all of their top prospects underperformed severely. I think actually in the so I think I had 390 organizations going back to 2007 organization seasons. And the 2019 royals were 390th out of 390 teams and hitting development and the score I had. And then this year they were number three overall in hitting development. They May and that coincided with a lot of changes they made in their playing development organization. I know they switched some guys around in some roles and then added a broad and drew sailor from the Dodgers organization to help with their hitting development and all the prospects that struggled for them last year. They all had amazing years at higher levels, which was kind of amazing to see. But then again, yeah, it was good to see a lot of the non surprises at the top. The Dodgers Astros race. So I felt like that at least semi validated what I was doing. But yeah, there were some surprises mixed in for sure. Yeah, do you know anything about the year to year consistency of this metric? I mean, it's hard to judge what a single season means, especially in this era where you have so much overhaul and turnover and expansion in player development and teams can just really re jigger their entire approach to player development in a year or two or three. So even if you were good at this three years ago, doesn't necessarily mean you are now. But do you know if that tends to be the case? I guess you looked over three years and maybe it's almost useless to go back much further than that. But I wonder what the consistency is. Yeah, in the minor League One, I didn't really dive too deep into that in the major League One. I think I found a low level of correlation like small relationship. I don't know if that was just noise or if there was something to that. But yeah, that was part of the reason. I did two tables. I wanted to give an insight into what was going on in 2021, but you know I felt like one season of sample size maybe wasn't fair to make a 100% drawn out conclusions, but going back three years also has issues. It does improve your sample and I think it gives you metric a bigger chance to stabilize, but there are issues, as you mentioned, player development is constantly changing the landscape within baseball. Overall, just between all 30 teams and then team to constantly making changes with their departments, philosophy changes, it's constantly evolving. So that was why I wanted to give those two different insights. But yeah, with the minor league with a minor league project, I didn't really dive too much into your correlation. But I would be shocked if there was some for sure..

Coming up next