The Stoeten 7
So I guess Stoeten is accomplishing something, because I am going to his blog more often to see what he's writing about.
I think I've seen this a couple of times. Stoeten takes the 7 blue jays underperforming players, Reyes, Johnson, Morrow, Dickey, Cabrerra, Lawrie, Izturus and compares their 2012 WAR to 2013. They had like 20 WAR in 2012, and -0.5 or something this year.
This kind of stuff just gets my blood boiling. He sort of frames it as if the Blue Jays were hit by this once in a life time stroke of bad luck. Nobody can be blamed for this. Who could of saw it coming?? Nothing like this has ever happened before to any team in the history of baseball. A once in a lifetime black swan.
2013 Washington Nationals: Laroche, Span, Espinosa, Gonzales, Storen, Mattheus, Trace, 2012 WAR 19.3, 2013 - 0.5.
WHAT?? It happened to them too?? This once in a life time stroke of bad luck hit two teams in one year??
It's utter nonsense. The 2013 Jays are a team that (if together) would of won 90 in 2012, they will win around 70 in 2013. They belong in the category of teams that won 90 and then won 70. In this category there is nothing unnussual about them.
Stoeten is trying to frame it as if, in the context of a collapse, it is a terribly unlucky collapse. No. It is a run of the mill collapse. It not unnusual for a team that underperforms by 20 wins to have 5-9 hugely underperforming players.
So the pattern of collapse is typical. The next question is whether this is a predictable collapse or not. Within the collapsed players are a steroid guy, a couple of injury prone guys, a once in a life time cy young guy. Did we expect 20 WAR from these guys?? No one expected 0 certainly.
A good way to frame it would of been the baseball prospectus way. Where they give a collapse percentage for each player.
Izturus - 18% Laroche 1%
Lawrie - 1% Span 3%
Reyes - 3% Espinoza 4%
Dickey - 26% Gonzales 26%
Johnson - 24% Storen 24%
Morrow - 29% Mattheus 21%
Cabrerra - 7% Tracy 13%
Interesting. Dickey, Johnson, Izturus, and Morrow are relatively high. Cabrerra not so high but the system probably doesn't account for steroid withdrawal.
Once in a life time stroke of bad luck that no one, ever, could of seen coming?? I don't know. To be fair the collapse percentages for pitchers always seem high. Dickey, Johnson and Morrow are a bit high... but Gonzales is also at 26%. Maybe it's just never a good idea to trade for a boatload of established pitchers because established pitchers collapse more than established players??
Would developing pitchers and trading for position players be the better route?? Anyway instead of framing this as a terribly unlucky random disaster, it should be framed for what it is, a typical collapse. Then take a look at why the collapse happened, and what can be done differently in the future.
The Following User Says Thank You to Olerud363 For This Useful Post:
We were expected to win in either 2007 or 2009 also but injuries was ridicously high. Especially in starting pitching. Where at one point we lost our whole staff. If I remember right we lost Marcum, McGowan, Litsch, Ryan all the same year. Last year we lost Hutch and Drabek in back-to-back starts.
However, I don't know why high injury problems keeps recurring here. Is Farrell right in our player development? Is it our medical staff? Is it playing on turf? Or combination of these? I don't know
Somewhere down the road, I think you've lost york mind mate?
Not that I'm defending Stoeten or anything, but really you can make an argument that all of the players who retrogressed this year at the sime can be attributed to luck. Just because it happened to two teams in the same year isn't really evidence of something that should have been forseen.
Originally Posted by Olerud363
Take your own numbers that you provided from baseball prospectus. You names 7 players with a percentage chance of collapse, none of whom had a higher chance than 29%, and 3 of whom were less than 10 percent. I don't think it takes a math genius to tell you the odds of all 7 collapsing, especially to the degree that they did in the same year is pretty low.
Lawrie, Reyes, Bautista, JPA all basically performed exactly to expectations this year when on the field. Edwin and Colby performed at a level higher than expected.
Dickey, Johnson underpeformed. Morrow got hurt. Buerhle has done Buerhle type things. The back end of the rotation/depth was always shitty.
The Jays were a 85 to 88 win team coming into the year based on whatever projection system you wanted. The error bars on those projections is like +- 8 wins. Finishing below .500 is not really that crazy at all.
Stoeten only understands numbers enough to be dangerous. This is a pretty good example of that.
Oh wait, he can't even be dangerous. He's just a blogger with 2000 twitter followers and has no influence.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nox For This Useful Post:
ExposFan (08-26-2013),TheHurl (08-26-2013)
This idea is amusing to me. How else does a team underperform so severely without its players playing poorly? Of course these guys are having terrible seasons. The problem is, their 2014 projections won't be anywhere near their 2012 production. You can't just give them a pass, the 2013 season is really happening and is more recent than 2012.
Front offices are evaluated based on their real season results, not on pre-season consensus predictions. Go back and look at the pre-season predictions that sites like ESPN put out -- they're riddled with teams like the Giants, Angels, Nationals, Royals, Yankees, etc. Are we supposed to give those teams passes too? And then simultaneously assign credit to teams that overcame the predictions? No, because then we'd end up with 25 teams whose front offices did a good job.
Blue Chip Prospect
"I don't think it takes a math genius to tell you the odds of all 7 collapsing, especially to the degree that they did in the same year is pretty low."
The problem with your premise here, is that you've taken the lowest seven performing players, as opposed to seven players that are a natural subset of the Jays.
In other words, you're asking the wrong question.
You're asking what are the odds of Izturis, Lawrie, Reyes, Morrow,Johnson, Dickey and Cabrera underperforming?
But you have only arrived at this question, because you are cherry-picking the worst performers after the data is in.
A more honest and accurate question would be, what are the odds of seven players with good projections greatly underperforming.
So, you're no longer finding the odds of 7/7 occurring, but rather 7/16 occurring which is astronomically lower.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to AdamGreenwood For This Useful Post:
BTS (08-26-2013),NorthOf49 (08-26-2013),Nox (08-26-2013)