Rate these third basemen.

[CBeisbol]

Please
Or rank

and give your general impressions


All three hit left-handed

The first (A), has 2 mediocre seasons in MLB where he hit worse than league average then put up about a league average line this season.
He has infield ratings of 5/4/6/4 and a -4.1 ZR in 2986 MLB innings at 3B (but +3.6 this year) and mostly DH'd last season..
He is in his first year of arbitration and will be a free agent after 3 more years and will be 24 next season.

The second (B), has 1.5 MLB seasons under his belt. In his first half season, he was mediocre offensively. And had league average production last year in a full season.
He has infield ratings of 5/4/6/5 and has a 2.2 ZR in 1342 MLB innings at 3B. He played mostly 1B in the minors.
He has one more season before arbitration and 4 years before free agency. He will be 26 next season


The third (C), has 7 seasons of MLB experience. The first 4 he had around league average hitting. The most recent 3 have been well below league average.
He has infield ratings of 6/4/6/5 and has a +1.3 ZR in 850 MLB innings at 3B. He was mostly a catcher until last season and is a 7 rated catcher.
He has 2 seasons left on his contract at a fair salary. He will be 30 next season.

Base running for A and B is poor. C's is about average.


Your team is a perennial contender and doesn't have any third base prospects close to the majors.

I intentionally am not looking at any hitting ratings - only statistics.

[Will_L]

If I need a third baseman now then I'd take B. At 26 he's coming into his prime years and gives you four years to develop his replacement. I think his production will improve a bit and he'll be a solid 3B.

If I have a third basemen that is peaking and heading for free agency after the current season or following one then I'd take A. The strikeouts are horrifying but he's young and hopefully will lower the rate of K's and continue to improve his OBP and gap power.

I would keep C as my backup for catcher & third base, probably also would force start him at 1b in spring training so he can back up there as well and give me some extra roster flexibility until he becomes a free agent. Then I'd take a hard look about resigning him if it can be done cheaply or letting him walk if not.

[rudel.dietrich]

Player C worries me. He has a OPS very similar to the other two. Yet his OPS + is terrible.
That makes me think he played in a great hitters park and outside of that, his production would take a nose dive.
Plus he is 30 so he is only going to decline.

I would rank C the worst of the bunch.


Players A and B are very similar. Player A strikes out a lot but I have never cared about that. He gets on base more and I do not care about how he does it.
Player B is a better fielder.

What it comes down to is that player B is a bit older so I would roll the dice on player A and hope that he improves a bit.
Player B is a bit older but has less ML experience so he has been a worse player and worse prospect.
Player A began to play at age 20/21 and was a below average hitter but not terrible.

Both are league average hitters with player A being a somewhat better hitter, but the defense makes them roughly as equally valuable.

I would take player A by a thin margin and hope he has some growth to do.
Player B has defense and versatility at catcher to fall back on if his hitting suffers. But chances are at 26 he is not going to get much better.

Player A has also shown over three seasons that he is about 8 % better at getting on base than his batting average. That skill seems repeatable and batting average is subject to more fluctuations.


So I would have it

A
B
|
|
|
|
C

[rudel.dietrich]

And looking at it more, player A had a worse year at the plate in season 1 vs season 2 but a 1.0 WAR vs a -0.0 in season two.
That leads me to think in season 2 he either played in a specially strong year for other players or had a terrible defensive year that is hopefully a career abnormality.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Will_L

If I need a third baseman now then I'd take B. At 26 he's coming into his prime years and gives you four years to develop his replacement. I think his production will improve a bit and he'll be a solid 3B.

If I have a third basemen that is peaking and heading for free agency after the current season or following one then I'd take A. The strikeouts are horrifying but he's young and hopefully will lower the rate of K's and continue to improve his OBP and gap power.

I would keep C as my backup for catcher & third base, probably also would force start him at 1b in spring training so he can back up there as well and give me some extra roster flexibility until he becomes a free agent. Then I'd take a hard look about resigning him if it can be done cheaply or letting him walk if not.

To be clear, I'm looking to replace my current third baseman who is a free agent.

He had a 2 WAR season on the strength of +10 defense. So, you can figure out a bit of a weak bat (especially OBP) and especially against right-handed pitching. Which is part of the reason I'm focusing on left-handed hitters.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

And looking at it more, player A had a worse year at the plate in season 1 vs season 2 but a 1.0 WAR vs a -0.0 in season two.
That leads me to think in season 2 he either played in a specially strong year for other players or had a terrible defensive year that is hopefully a career abnormality.

He mostly DH'd the second season.

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

Player C worries me. He has a OPS very similar to the other two. Yet his OPS + is terrible.
That makes me think he played in a great hitters park and outside of that, his production would take a nose dive.

This confuses me
His OPS+ is (ignoring the problems with OPS) is his production. His offensive production last season was similar to his production the previous two years. Yes, as you said, he played in a hitters park.

You did make me wonder why his WAR was so much higher last year when he split time between C and 3B despite having the same offense as when he only played catcher. That doesn't make sense. I'll have to look more into his defense.

Players A and B are very similar. Player A strikes out a lot but I have never cared about that. He gets on base more and I do not care about how he does it.
Player B is a better fielder.

What it comes down to is that player B is a bit older so I would roll the dice on player A and hope that he improves a bit.
Player B is a bit older but has less ML experience so he has been a worse player and worse prospect.
...
But chances are at 26 he [player B] is not going to get much better.

This is a good point.

I would take player A by a thin margin and hope he has some growth to do.
Player B has defense and versatility at catcher to fall back on if his hitting suffers.

To be clear, it is player C who catches.

Player A has also shown over three seasons that he is about 8 % better at getting on base than his batting average. That skill seems repeatable and batting average is subject to more fluctuations.

Good point

[ThePretender]

I don't like player A but he and B both had 3.5 WAR. So the question is does player A have more upside to tap into, given he is 24? Player A, if he could get more aggressive with the steals could probably have more value there too.

I'd also want to know the BABIP for A/B. Player A has a massive K rate especially compared to player B. Can player A sustain the 264 BA? If not, and he isn't going to improve, then player B is better. Player A has more ISO as well so if he can sustain the 260 BA he's definitely the better option.

There isn't enough evidence here to say whether A/B is better, IMO. I'd also want to know how they did vs RHP - if one guy is clearly better vs RHP, I'd use him and platoon that guy.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

I don't like player A but he and B both had 3.5 WAR. So the question is does player A have more upside to tap into, given he is 24? Player A, if he could get more aggressive with the steals could probably have more value there too.

I'd also want to know the BABIP for A/B. Player A has a massive K rate especially compared to player B. Can player A sustain the 264 BA? If not, and he isn't going to improve, then player B is better. Player A has more ISO as well so if he can sustain the 260 BA he's definitely the better option.

There isn't enough evidence here to say whether A/B is better, IMO. I'd also want to know how they did vs RHP - if one guy is clearly better vs RHP, I'd use him and platoon that guy.

Player A's BABIP the last 3 years from least to most recent: .316, .338, .355
Player B's BABIP the last 2 years from least to most recent: .269, .296

Player A last season: vs L .614 OPS (15BB/45K); vs R .813 (54BB/126K)
Player B last season: vs L .877 OPS (9BB/23K); vs R .709 (35BB/43K)

[ThePretender]

Yeah I can't bet on player A then. Gotta go B unless there is untapped potential ratings player A hasn't hit yet.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

Yeah I can't bet on player A then. Gotta go B unless there is untapped potential ratings player A hasn't hit yet.

Player A did have a .360 AAA BABIP
and .322 in A.
He only had 10 games in AA, but a .433 BABIP

That's a .337 BABIP in 2776 career professional PA's

It OOTP at least, players can sustain high BABIPs (Contact-Avoid K)

[ThePretender]

I flat out ignore minor league stats, they're pretty meaningless imo. I don't doubt some players can maintain a high babip in ootp. I don't buy a guy with that avoid k can though.

[rudel.dietrich]

One thing I forgot to ask, what are these players injury ratings?
If A and B are the same I would still give a slight edge to A. If B is durable then I would give an edge to B since having payroll that is not on the IL is a good thing.

And you are correct that player C is the one that can play catcher. I read that and then made a mistake in my response.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

This confuses me
His OPS+ is (ignoring the problems with OPS) is his production. His offensive production last season was similar to his production the previous two years. Yes, as you said, he played in a hitters park.

I feel like I should explain myself a bit here.


Let's use the most current season for our numbers.
Player C had an OPS of .755
Player A .761
Player B .751

Yet their OPS + is vastly different
C - 86
A - 103
B - 100

So C and A had a .006 point difference in OPS but a 17% point difference in OPS +
Player B actually had a .004 lower OPS than player C but player B was a 14% better hitter as judged by OPS+
That is pretty massive actually.

That leads me to believe that since OPS+ is league neutralized and park neutralized that player C plays in a very friendly hitters park (in fact I would say almost historically friendly given that 6 points in OPS led to a 17% change in OPS+)

OPS+ in OOTP is NOT neutralized by player position and that has been confirmed by Markus in the past.
So my theory is that if you took player C out of their hitter friendly park is that their offensive production would nosedive and it would make an already poor hitter into an even worse hitter.
Player C was a pretty similar hitter to players A and B (.OPS within .010 of one another) but only because of the park effects, In a neutral park, he would come in pretty far behind both player A and B.

You confirmed that by saying that player C does indeed play in a hitter friendly park. How else could I have surmised that from the given information?


I will agree with you that OPS is not perfect. But I do like it as a stat because it is a quick and dirty way of looking at a player's offensive production in one easy to understand stat.
And it sums up the two primary ways that players contribute to run creation, by getting on base and hitting for power.

I also am a fan of OPS + because it is a quick and dirty way to tell me a player's offensive production and is adjusted for league and park effects and works across eras.

In no way is it perfect, but no stat is. That is why you look at several stats when doing player evaluation.
But if I am looking at lines like that, then having .OPS and OPS + are my preferred 'quick and dirty' stats.
I have to go to another screen to look at oWAR and WAR in the default OOTP UI adds in dWAR which muddies up the quick and dirty part of things.


I hope that goes a ways towards explaining what I meant.
What I was trying to say is that player C was helped out by his home ballpark in a pretty significant way based on the limited information given.
Taken out of that park I would expect his batting production would fall off pretty quickly and since this thread is about moving a player to your team then he would drag down you're lineup quite a bit away from the park he is currently playing in.

If we had his home and away stats for the time that he has played in that park, I bet it would confirm a pretty sizeable gap between home and away hitting.

Sorry if that added on any more confusion as to what I meant

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I feel like I should explain myself a bit here.

Yes
I very much understand how OPS and OPS+ work

It's because I understand them that I'm confused

If I were expecting Player C to hit. 300/.340/420 in another park, then, yes, their production would "take a nose dive". But, because I understand how OPS+ works, I wouldn't be expecting that. I'd be expecting an OPS+ around 80 since that's what he's put up the last three seasons. If that's a .300/.340/.420 line in a hitters park or a .260/.300/.330 line in a more neutral park is irrelevant. That's the whole purpose for adjusting. He didnt get better when he changed teams. It was just easier to hit. Likewise, if he leaves thst stadium, he won't get worse. It'll just be harder to hit.

I will agree with you that OPS is not perfect. But I do like it as a stat because it is a quick and dirty way of looking at a player's offensive production in one easy to understand stat.
And it sums up the two primary ways that players contribute to run creation, by getting on base and hitting for power.

Seems like a good place to promote my favoring OBP/ISO/wRC+ triple slash line. It tells us the three main things we want to know about a hitters performance.
WRC+ how good their performance was compared to league average
ISO how much of that performance came from power
OBP how much of that performance came from avoiding outs
I suppose OBP+/ISO+/wRC+ would be even better, but OBP+ and ISO+ aren't readily available most places.

There's no reason to prefer OPS+ to wRC+. I only included it here because of limitations with OOTP's display.

Sorry if that added on any more confusion as to what I meant

No. It was a good explanation of where our minds failed to meet and a good explanation of why it's important to look at adjusted stats.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

I flat out ignore minor league stats, they're pretty meaningless imo. I don't doubt some players can maintain a high babip in ootp. I don't buy a guy with that avoid k can though.

I don't agree that they are meaningless
I'd expect a decent correlation between minor league rate stats. Especially if there were a control for any change in talent level.

It's my understanding that BABIP is independent of K%/avoid K since BABIP only looks at results that include strike outs. There may even be a slight inverse correlation between BABIP and K%. If K% is a result of "swinging harder" and if swinging harder means hitting the ball harder, it should result in increased BABIP. Might be interesting to look at sometime.


I wrote this some time ago

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

Contact is batting average
Avoid K is the inverse of strike outs

There's a high correlation between the two; if a player K's a lot it's hard to have a high batting average.

Because of this correlation, when Contact and Avoid K are similar, BABIP is average.

But, any player who has a high contact and, relatively, low Avoid K they must have a high BABIP to compensate

Imagine players with 600 at bats, 0 walks, 0 home runs

Making up numbers, say that a 50 contact is a .275 batting average
A .275 batting average with 600 at bats is (.275×600) 165 hits

A player with 50 K's would have 550 balls in play
A player with 165 hits on 550 balls in play would have a (165/550) .300 BABIP

A player with 100 K's would have 500 balls in play
A player with 165 hits on 500 balls in play would have a (165/500) .330 BABIP

A player with a high contact rating and low avoid K rating will have a high BABIP by definition

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

One thing I forgot to ask, what are these players injury ratings?
If A and B are the same I would still give a slight edge to A. If B is durable then I would give an edge to B since having payroll that is not on the IL is a good thing.

Not sure at the moment
I am sure that nothing stood out. Which probabky means, at least, that nobody was fragile.

[ALB123]

There have been so many good points raised already and I'm not going to repeat any of them.

I know I have an irrational bias against most players 30-years-old and older. In this particular case, I don't think it would be irrational to say that Players A & B are better choices. Having said that, I'm having a very hard time deciding between A & B.

I like that Player A has improved his defense. So, they're probably even there. His strikeouts are ridiculous, but that doesn't necessarily bother me. In fact, my starting 3B for the previous three seasons never faced a pitcher he couldn't strike out against, leading the American League in SO's just like yours... If whomever you pick is going to be a 7, 8, 9 hitter then the strikeouts don't bother me. If he's going to be anywhere else in the order, the strikeouts would be a big concern. Unfortunately, for Player B, get wood on the ball only translated into a handful of more RBI than Player A.

Ugh...With the info we have, I think it's a tough pick. I think I'd go with Player A. He's only 2 years younger, but they appear interchangeable to me, so I'd go with the younger player. Neither player excites me, obviously, but yeah...I have to rate them: A, B, C.

[Will_L]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

To be clear, I'm looking to replace my current third baseman who is a free agent.

For me it's B then.
Let us know which one you choose.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Will_L

For me it's B then.
Let us know which one you choose.

I have to ask, "why?"

[Will_L]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

I have to ask, "why?"

I feel like the production for B would be slightly better than A.
Give them both a shot and let's see how it goes.