Gauthmann44

Vladimir Guerrero Jr. - 3B TOR

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, daynlokki said:

So was Buxton AND Moncada lmao.  

 

 

No they werent. Even buxton and moncadas biggest supporters realize that theyre bat isnt their best tool. Both those guys had high strikeout rates in the minors, while Vlad has a generationally good eye; he walks as much as he strikes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, daynlokki said:

How is it a terrible argument?  Some teams just cannot develop more than AAAA guys.  Snider and D'arnaud were both lauded as franchise saving, can't miss prospects by the same organization who is developing Vlad Jr.  Both guys hit extremely well, albeit not at the level as Vlad, in the minors.  Both completely and totally flamed out in the majors.  Just because you don't LIKE the connotation, doesn't mean that it's a terrible argument.  A terrible argument is when you have zero facts for anything and so just post that an argument is terrible.

 

We can agree that a terrible argument is when you have zero facts for anything.... that's precisely why you argument is terrible; because youre saying a bunch of nothing. Snider was a top 10 bat, yes, but that is where the comparison ends... and quite frankly it's lazy to do so. Snider wasnt a number 1 prospect doing the thing that vlad is doing as a teenager in the minor leagues. Sure, some top 10 prospects fail, but id venture that more often than not top 10 guys will provide value in the big leagues. The thing about vlad is that every single indicator as a prospect points to him being a very high impact big leaguer: his tools (power especially), his plate discipline, pedigree, performance at every level where is younger than everyone else. He has been the minor league hitter of the year two years in a row AS A TEENAGER! This is unheard of.

 

D'arnaud was a good prospect because he was a hitting catcher, and injuries eventually killed his development. Not even remotely close to Vlad. 

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/elegy-for-18-toronto-blue-jays/

- you cited zips to help your argument; again, WRONG! Zips basically says vlad is the greatest hitting prospect of all time. Symborski also goes on to say that if vlad is not even a good player... it would be one of the biggests busts of all time.m

 

So because two jays prospects failed, we should ignore everything else that states he will be a star?  Oh and yeah, those prospects were under different regimes with blue jays management.... so yeah, terrible argument is terrible. Just stop posting nonsense in this thread.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, daynlokki said:

Also, if you want a laugh, look at the ZIPS projections for 2019 for Vlad on rotochamp.  453 abs, 60 runs, 14 hrs, 60 rbis, 8 sb (how?), .247 average, .320 obp, .400 slugging. It's weird that fangraphs and their ZIPS projection is completely and totally different.

 

fake news

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, daynlokki preaching caution with prospects is great and warranted, but criticism of a prospect just for the sake of criticism isn't. 

 

Where would you rank Vlad in redraft/dynasty as a 3b and as a 1b? Who are guys you'd put in the same tier in both formats?

 

Gotta put your money where your mouth is and make a specific call on Vlad. Put it on tape so we can look back and see who was right and who was wrong. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

15 hours ago, tonycpsu said:

I'm not going to weigh in on the underlying dispute here as it appears that both sides abandoned a presumption of good faith many pages ago, but to the extent that my post on player raters has any bearing in this discussion: Yahoo's player rater had a 0.84 correlation with ESPN's player rater for the 2017 season.  I haven't run any of the same numbers for 2018, but I'd imagine the results are similar, with the same tendencies / biases  I noted in that thread.

 

I strongly disagree with the position that because the player raters disagree a bit (0.84 is actually a pretty strong correlation considering the number of different things you have to account for) that they can't be useful at all for making an argument about player values.  You just have to be careful how you do it, and aware of the biases of each site's rankings.

 

One thing I can say is that I found no evidence of a positional bias in the ESPN or Yahoo player raters, so I'd like to see a cite for that claim.  I can *maybe* see the case for a positional adjustment for strength at weaker positions or for multi-position flexibility, but that would be highly contingent on the format, how deep the pools in those positions are each year, etc. and in all likelihood would probably take away from the value of the ranking algorithm rather than enhance it.

ESPN actually had a big snafu about the positional bias a few years back and had to change their algorithm for PR.  I've gone rounds with ESPN personalities over this in many fantasy leagues.  If the analysts who work FOR ESPN refuse to use PR that should tell you all you need to know.

 

3 hours ago, NoHablaIngles said:

 

No they werent. Even buxton and moncadas biggest supporters realize that theyre bat isnt their best tool. Both those guys had high strikeout rates in the minors, while Vlad has a generationally good eye; he walks as much as he strikes out.

So did Robbie Grossman lol.  

 

1 hour ago, treat88 said:

Again, daynlokki preaching caution with prospects is great and warranted, but criticism of a prospect just for the sake of criticism isn't. 

 

Where would you rank Vlad in redraft/dynasty as a 3b and as a 1b? Who are guys you'd put in the same tier in both formats?

 

Gotta put your money where your mouth is and make a specific call on Vlad. Put it on tape so we can look back and see who was right and who was wrong. 

Go through the posts, I've already said his offense is already MLB ready, albeit you have to take MiLB numbers with a grain of salt.  Full redraft, he's maybe a 6th or 7th rounder for me.  He could be up early enough to make his value more, but he also could be kept down longer (I hope he isn't).  Dynasty we all know he is going to be a top 10 pick and I won't pick him there for the same reason I never draft Bryce Harper.  Too many questions.  As a 1b his value drops even farther.  Top 1b is probably Freeman and he usually isn't going in the first round or two.  Value wise overall, incorporating age into the discussion for a dynasty his overall value is probably closer to around 20ish.  I'd rather have Soto and Acuna personally as I've already seen them handle MLB pitching and have to make those adjustments.

 

3 hours ago, NoHablaIngles said:

 

fake news

Not really, someone posted Fangraphs ZIPS projection earlier stating it was the highest ever.  Well, it's weird that ZIPS for another site has him so low.  Seems like a bias on one or both sites.

Edited by tonycpsu
daynlokki, if you're going to take on all comers and do this rapid-fire response thing, please use the multi-quote feature.
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

I've gone rounds with ESPN personalities over this in many fantasy leagues.  If the analysts who work FOR ESPN refuse to use PR that should tell you all you need to know.


It doesn't, actually.  Who you play in leagues with and what they think about the ESPN player rater is completely non-responsive to my counterargument about your claim that there is positional bias.  Either you're throwing this out there as a shiny object to distract from a debunked claim, or you just think that if some allegedly smart players don't like the tool, then the tool has no merit.  I find neither of these arguments convincing.

 

The fact is that ESPN's current player rater algorithm (assuming it hasn't changed significantly since I last ran the numbers after the 2017 season), tracks with my own built-from-scratch implementation with a 0.98 correlation, with no hint whatsoever of positional bias.  As far as I can tell, this whole tangent arose from a disagreement between you and brockpapersizer about the strength of the corner infield spots.  If you won't accept a pure standard deviations above replacement approach of measuring players in roto that has no apparent positional adjustment as an argument for whether a position is strong or weak, then I don't see any argument that will convince you at all.

 

Putting my mod hat on for just a moment: I think this rhetorical approach of yours where you respond with non-sequiturs and don't bother engaging with the strongest counterarguments is rubbing a lot of folks here the wrong way and making people question whether you're engaging in good faith.  Early on in this conversation I thought you were on solid ground with some legitimate concerns about Toronto's organizational philosophy, the different factors they had to weigh in their decision on when to promote him to the big club, etc.  Then some people weighed in with strong rebuttals, few of which you bothered to respond to.  When you did, you basically went after the low-hanging fruit.  Garlando and Baur10 in particular made some compelling counterarguments in the early going, and I think brockpapersizer makes valid points here about 1B vs. 3B being a toss-up in recent years.

 

If you're not going to engage with these responses, and are just going to stick to your guns and keep repeating your premises, I do not think this will be a productive discussion, and I'd encourage you to try a different approach or move on to other topic.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NoHablaIngles said:

 

We can agree that a terrible argument is when you have zero facts for anything.... that's precisely why you argument is terrible; because youre saying a bunch of nothing. Snider was a top 10 bat, yes, but that is where the comparison ends... and quite frankly it's lazy to do so. Snider wasnt a number 1 prospect doing the thing that vlad is doing as a teenager in the minor leagues. Sure, some top 10 prospects fail, but id venture that more often than not top 10 guys will provide value in the big leagues. The thing about vlad is that every single indicator as a prospect points to him being a very high impact big leaguer: his tools (power especially), his plate discipline, pedigree, performance at every level where is younger than everyone else. He has been the minor league hitter of the year two years in a row AS A TEENAGER! This is unheard of.

 

D'arnaud was a good prospect because he was a hitting catcher, and injuries eventually killed his development. Not even remotely close to Vlad. 

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/elegy-for-18-toronto-blue-jays/

- you cited zips to help your argument; again, WRONG! Zips basically says vlad is the greatest hitting prospect of all time. Symborski also goes on to say that if vlad is not even a good player... it would be one of the biggests busts of all time.m

 

So because two jays prospects failed, we should ignore everything else that states he will be a star?  Oh and yeah, those prospects were under different regimes with blue jays management.... so yeah, terrible argument is terrible. Just stop posting nonsense in this thread.

 

Again, read previous entries.  Someone posted Fangraphs ZIPS, I countered with another site using supposedly the same algorithm with completely different results.  If nothing else, that should give you a little bit of pause to look farther instead of just citing the same projection from Fangraphs again.  With Snider, you know what he even said most affected his ability in the majors?  Being rushed.  He was in rookie ball in 2006 and got his first cup of coffee in 2008, even hitting over .300 during it.  In an interview, he stated that he felt like he NEEDED to have big numbers at the major league level in order to help his team.  This isn't the first player in the Blue Jays organization to say similar things.  I only went with the two hitters off the top of my head but you could add in Drabek too, who projectionists LOVED from the minors. Who are you going with for your MiLB player of the year?  Last year, Baseball-America had Acuna as the winner, not Vlad. They also had Moncada win it the year before showing that it doesn't necessarily mean success at the MLB level.  Wasn't USA Today either as they ALSO had Acuna in 2017, so without a citation you are just spewing nonsense which hurts your overall message.  As they say in debate, if one of your facts are wrong, they are ALL wrong.  Also from the ZIPS you keep bringing up: 'There’s no guarantee for Guerrero — skewness of risk essentially means there are a lot more things that could make him fall short than exceed his projections.' He also goes on to say in Trout's rookie year he was off on his projection by 6 WAR... 6...  This last year, his projections had Alford as the 2nd best Toronto outfielder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tonycpsu said:


It doesn't, actually.  Who you play in leagues with and what they think about the ESPN player rater is completely non-responsive to my counterargument about your claim that there is positional bias.  Either you're throwing this out there as a shiny object to distract from a debunked claim, or you just think that if some allegedly smart players don't like the tool, then the tool has no merit.  I find neither of these arguments convincing.

 

The fact is that ESPN's current player rater algorithm (assuming it hasn't changed significantly since I last ran the numbers after the 2017 season), tracks with my own built-from-scratch implementation with a 0.98 correlation, with no hint whatsoever of positional bias.  As far as I can tell, this whole tangent arose from a disagreement between you and brockpapersizer about the strength of the corner infield spots.  If you won't accept a pure standard deviations above replacement approach of measuring players in roto that has no apparent positional adjustment as an argument for whether a position is strong or weak, then I don't see any argument that will convince you at all.

 

Putting my mod hat on for just a moment: I think this rhetorical approach of yours where you respond with non-sequiturs and don't bother engaging with the strongest counterarguments is rubbing a lot of folks here the wrong way and making people question whether you're engaging in good faith.  Early on in this conversation I thought you were on solid ground with some legitimate concerns about Toronto's organizational philosophy, the different factors they had to weigh in their decision on when to promote him to the big club, etc.  Then some people weighed in with strong rebuttals, few of which you bothered to respond to.  When you did, you basically went after the low-hanging fruit.  Garlando and Baur10 in particular made some compelling counterarguments in the early going, and I think brockpapersizer makes valid points here about 1B vs. 3B being a toss-up in recent years.

 

If you're not going to engage with these responses, and are just going to stick to your guns and keep repeating your premises, I do not think this will be a productive discussion, and I'd encourage you to try a different approach or move on to other topic.

 

So what you are saying is that 5 categories, 1 of which is skewed GREATLY for 3b compared to 1b (SB) is enough for you to say whether a player or position is good?  In that case, there are way more 'good' SS then there are 3b, 1b, or 2b in the game currently.  The fact is, Yahoo, ESPN, Fantrax and every cite use differing numbers for what to consider a standard deviation, and only putting forth ONE of those as support for an argument undercuts your argument as you are cutting out the majority of the rest.  Would you make a research paper only using 25% of available data or would your professor called that flawed thought?  Citing that your personal PR matches up with ESPN doesn't add anything to the argument either, I bet I could make a PR right now that would not, in any way, shape or form, match up and it would ALSO have zero bearing on any of this.  Overall, 1b and 3b may have been a toss up, I posted the differences and the fact PR gives a large decrease for SB for pretty much all 1b.  The fact is, any system that only has 5 data points will give you skewed ratings as it is.  At least show me a PR that includes other major stats such as 2b, 3b, OBP, Slugging, something.  You don't rate players on whether they are only good at HR, SB, AVR, RBI, and R when 1 of those is extremely position dependent (almost no 1b get SB and so they get downgraded) and 2 of those are extremely team dependent.  That creates false correlation and you would be fired from any scientific job if you tried to base conclusions off of data such as that.  Which makes the data unreliable in more than a cursory examination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, daynlokki said:

At least show me a PR that includes other major stats such as 2b, 3b, OBP, Slugging, something.

 

Have you just totally lost the plot here?  The discussion here is about Vlad as a fantasy commodity, specifically in 5x5 rotisserie, which is the default here unless people specify otherwise.  A player rater is the most mathematically sound way to try to assess value in these formats where value is determined not by doubles or, triples, or SLG, but by production in the scoring categories of the fantasy league.  If you're making an argument about real life performance, points leagues, roto leagues that count SLG, or whatever else, then you need to make that clear.

 

Stolen bases count for 20% of the scoring in 5x5 rotisserie -- you can't just ignore them.  Saying that one position has more SB than the other doesn't change the fact that the positions grade out about equally in roto.  If you believe that other player raters show something significantly different, then the burden of proof is on you to make that case.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ ED NOTE: 4 rapid-fire comments merged.  @daynlokki, this is my final warning about rapid-fire posting.  Take some time to make your points in a single post or you're going to get a timeout. ]

 

 

9 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Have you just totally lost the plot here?  The discussion here is about Vlad as a fantasy commodity, specifically in 5x5 rotisserie, which is the default here unless people specify otherwise.  A player rater is the most mathematically sound way to try to assess value in these formats where value is determined not by doubles or, triples, or SLG, but by production in the scoring categories of the fantasy league.  If you're making an argument about real life performance, points leagues, roto leagues that count SLG, or whatever else, then you need to make that clear.

 

Stolen bases count for 20% of the scoring in 5x5 rotisserie -- you can't just ignore them.  Saying that one position has more SB than the other doesn't change the fact that the positions grade out about equally in roto.  If you believe that other player raters show something significantly different, then the burden of proof is on you to make that case.

OK here we go.  If the positions grade out about equally in roto and one position comes with a 20% disadvantage, wouldn't that position then be considered deeper overall?  

 

Even more fun, take out SB and tell me how close those positions are since that would be a better gauge overall since it takes out a skewed stat.

 

If you wanna keep it in, then know you will need to downgrade Vlad, he won't be running in the majors at all IMO.  He doesn't have the feel or the speed on the basepaths.  As a 3b without speed, using the ESPN PR, he's middling at his position as his power stroke isn't there yet either.  He's probably around a cap of 25 HRs this first year, if that.  He hasn't hit one in the AFL yet, despite an average over .500 and extreme hitter-friendly parks. 

 

In fact, in 5x5 with the Blue Jays being a bottom tier offense WITH him, you also need to reign in his RBI and R production too, which would lower him even farther.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

OK here we go.  If the positions grade out about equally in roto and one position comes with a 20% disadvantage, wouldn't that position then be considered deeper overall?  

 

No, because stolen bases count in standard 5x5 rotisserie baseball.

 

1 minute ago, daynlokki said:

Even more fun, take out SB and tell me how close those positions are since that would be a better gauge overall since it takes out a skewed stat.

 

I am not taking out SB, because stolen bases count in standard 5x5 rotisserie baseball.

 

I'm just really lost as to what it is you're on about here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tonycpsu said:

 

No, because stolen bases count in standard 5x5 rotisserie baseball.

 

 

I am not taking out SB, because stolen bases count in standard 5x5 rotisserie baseball.

 

I'm just really lost as to what it is you're on about here.

What I'm 'on about' is using flawed data to support your argument.  90% of fantasy users don't use PR and the people who use it to try and get more value for players in trades get laughed at.  It is one of MANY different data points you should use in CONJUNCTION with each other, otherwise it's flawed.  Ken Rosenthal laughs at the overall use of PR on ESPN lol.  Did you know their standard deviation for average is 50 points?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

Again, read previous entries.  Someone posted Fangraphs ZIPS, I countered with another site using supposedly the same algorithm with completely different results.  If nothing else, that should give you a little bit of pause to look farther instead of just citing the same projection from Fangraphs again.  With Snider, you know what he even said most affected his ability in the majors?  Being rushed.  He was in rookie ball in 2006 and got his first cup of coffee in 2008, even hitting over .300 during it.  In an interview, he stated that he felt like he NEEDED to have big numbers at the major league level in order to help his team.  This isn't the first player in the Blue Jays organization to say similar things.  I only went with the two hitters off the top of my head but you could add in Drabek too, who projectionists LOVED from the minors. Who are you going with for your MiLB player of the year?  Last year, Baseball-America had Acuna as the winner, not Vlad. They also had Moncada win it the year before showing that it doesn't necessarily mean success at the MLB level.  Wasn't USA Today either as they ALSO had Acuna in 2017, so without a citation you are just spewing nonsense which hurts your overall message.   As they say in debate, if one of your facts are wrong, they are ALL wrong.  Also from the ZIPS you keep bringing up: 'There’s no guarantee for Guerrero — skewness of risk essentially means there are a lot more things that could make him fall short than exceed his projections.' He also goes on to say in Trout's rookie year he was off on his projection by 6 WAR... 6...  This last year, his projections had Alford as the 2nd best Toronto outfielder.

 

You really cant be this dense. I'm convinced you are trolling at this point. 

 

What does Vlad have left to prove in the minors? You think he's being rushed? 

 

Drabek wasnt even a top 10 prospect; he had TJS two times. These comps you are throwing around are not close.

 

Again, both from a different jays management group (who have major philosophy differences).

 

If you just clicked a few buttons, then you would realize that the ZIPs projections you are citing that are ""different"... are his 2018 projections. SMH

 

And the fact that you cherrypicked the one sentence in that article that didnt praise vlad is hilarious. Put the whole quote. That sentence was merely a disclaimer that anything could happen... Heck, mike trout could be below-replacement level player next year. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by NoHablaIngles
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

What I'm 'on about' is using flawed data to support your argument.  90% of fantasy users don't use PR and the people who use it to try and get more value for players in trades get laughed at.

 

I haven't seen anyone doing this in this thread.  I assume anyone who's reading a Vlad Jr. thread on a fantasy sports forum in the middle of October is enough of a fantasy baseball junkie to not be so foolish as to use pure 5x5 statistical value as the only thing they look at in valuing a player.

 

The question was about 1B vs. 3B depth in roto leagues, not Vlad's value, or the value of any player in particular.  When you're looking at a particular position in aggregate, you need a simple way to compare overall roto production.  Player raters do just that.  They do not take into account age, injury risk, team context, doubles, hard hit rate, HR/FB%, or anything else that might help us assess an individual player, but as a tool for a coarse but useful comparison between how much two players contributed to a rotisserie baseball team in a given season, they're quite useful.

 

If you want to make the comparison more complicated by incorporating other factors, then the burden of proof is on you to make a compelling case.

 

9 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

 

 

Did you know their standard deviation for average is 50 points?

 

The standard deviation of a particular statistic is not something set by the person who builds the player rater algorithm -- it's something that is calculated from the data itself as an interim step to coming up with the total z-score across the 5 categories.  I have no idea why you think the value of a particular st. dev for a single stat matters, but it really does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using a stat where they base it off standard deviations from the mean, and have ONE stat that can skew so much more than any other is a flawed concept.  SB is flawed for PR.  in 2014, Dee Gordon scored 7.52 points on the ESPN PR just from SBs.  The leader overall that year for points was 14... half his value was purely from SB.  Nobody got into the 4s for RBI, R, AVG or HR, THAT'S why it's skewed and wrong as a datapoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

Using a stat where they base it off standard deviations from the mean, and have ONE stat that can skew so much more than any other is a flawed concept.  SB is flawed for PR.  in 2014, Dee Gordon scored 7.52 points on the ESPN PR just from SBs.  The leader overall that year for points was 14... half his value was purely from SB.  Nobody got into the 4s for RBI, R, AVG or HR, THAT'S why it's skewed and wrong as a datapoint.

 

 

Stolen bases are scarcer, therefore, more valuable in roto leagues.  Gordon was properly valued by the PR for his very rare ability to steal that many bases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, daynlokki said:

 90% of fantasy users don't use PR and the people who use it to try and get more value for players in trades get laughed at.

 

Well I agree that most people don't use the PR on ESPN. 

 

If someone is a top 10 player on the player rater for the first half of the season, I am not suggesting they should be valued as a top 10 player going forward, just that they were a top 10 player for that half a season. I would not draft Blake Snell in the first round next year despite being a top 8 roto player this year.

2 hours ago, tonycpsu said:

 

No, because stolen bases count in standard 5x5 rotisserie baseball.

 

 

I am not taking out SB, because stolen bases count in standard 5x5 rotisserie baseball.

 

I'm just really lost as to what it is you're on about here.

 

 

The Irony is this discussion is about Vlad, and if we just took out SBs as a category and 4x4 was the standard we went by, Vlad's value would be significantly higher and it would matter even less what position he played at.  His lack of speed and the fact that he's probably getting bigger leaves his margin for error in HR/AVG so small for him to be an elite asset in 5x5 dynasty. Vlad is the #1 prospect for most people, but for him to have the year someone like Mookie Betts just had without steals is nearly impossible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you value him as a 6th/7th rounder in redraft and a 20ish overall player in dynasty daynlokki, I'm really not sure what all the discussion is about. 

 

That is one hell of a valuable rookie either way.

 

I think mentioning him in the same breath as Soto an Acuña is fair and I really don't think he carries significantly more risk than either of them.

 

Seems like a lot of minimizing Vlads talent and value for just saying he's a awfully nice fantasy asset at the end of it all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now