LOL I get it. Let's just ignore the initial stats, which support his comment. Nothing you have shown disproves his comment. It is yours that is unsupported.
You mean there is actually a stat that says "player X's" first step towards a ball is 8 (or whatever out of 10 or whatever)? I've looked for the first step stat and cannot find it.
Would you look at that? Statistically the best catch by an Astros player since statcast starting tracking the data.
With a better first step, he would have been in position to catch that ball standing up with his back to the wall.
Still trying to figure out the fangraphs comment… it’s as if the pundits may not be right on every prospect?? what is this wizardry???
I’ll be honest, I had virtually no idea that Myers was capable of this. I kept hearing about the system not being too good, and I didn’t expect internal help at this level from within the system. We’ve seen our share of AAA(A) players, so obviously wasn’t going to get too excited about guys crushing in AAA. None of the pundits even uttered Myers name, I don’t think he was even highly rated in the Astros top 30, who none were on the top 100. Shoot, I was thrilled Straw was doing his thing, even without power, at least he was getting on base enough to make a difference. But Meyers I was not expecting to see what he’s doing. Why wasn’t he ranked in the top 25-50 in MLB prospects? The defense is legit, and the offense looks sustainable. Astros are doing something real special graduating prospects into the MLB, regardless of the team they ultimately play with.
Bryan De La Cruz is another that came from our system and is off to a fast start with the Marlins. https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=delacr000bry
Prospect evaluators weigh pedigree very heavily. It makes sense, as draft position and signing bonus are the most concrete data points that we have to judge how front offices (who are extremely likely to be the best evaluators of talent) value prospects. As a 13th round pick Meyers has no pedigree, and his early pro stats were mediocre. Then, what would likely have been his breakout season was wiped out by the pandemic. There was smoke out of the alternative site that Meyers had taken a big offensive step forward; I suspect that if there’d been a 2020 minor league season Meyers would have crushed AA and AAA and entered this season ranked in 10-20 range on Astros prospects lists, and that by now he may have been getting some mid-season Top 100 love. Instead he was hidden while he broke out.
Yep, FanGraphs did not rate Meyers highly who they didn't see play (or very sparingly) in 2020, and obviously his bat improved a lot during that time. The 2021 offseason lists are a lot worse than normal because of the pandemic. Though what is funny is that after a month into the season they said Meyers should get a look soon at starting CF. Granted, they had inside information by then that was not in their offseason list.
I agree with your sentiment on all points, but I do believe that that the prospect lists would still have him drastically under rated because they ARE overly biased towards the pre existing opinions of a prospect, the draft position and the age of a player. Even now, there are lists that are supposedly fairly recent that don't have him in the Astros top 10 prospects.... through it all, none of these publications or pundits bothered to really listen to what those in the position to evaluate Jake were saying....... The Astros are not an organization that lavishes praise on their minor leaguers often and they typically have been accurate when they do discuss it.... The Astros were pretty open that Jake already was a high level defensive player, that he had changed his body, and that the changes he made in his approach and swing were rending the type of results that typically translate across levels..... They were clearly very high on him.... yet that wasn't taken into account. The same thing happened with Chas (to a lesser extent) and with Framber as well. Part of it is that these pundits are covering 30 teams and not one. Some of it is that they have a general formula that works in general terms but is cookie cutter. The fact that the Astros are elite at player development wasn't taken into account. Pundits don't consider that the Astros saying a young player is really good means MORE than when a team like the Angels say it. No team is perfect, sometimes players personalities get in the way (Martes/Singleton/White).... sometimes injuries happen and sometimes it takes a player a little longer......... but I can say that when I hear the Astros say "This kid can play, and here is why he can play", I tend to believe them because of their recent track record.
He makes me think of Jeff Francoeur. Francoeur had a much higher pedigree, but burst onto the scene as rookie and was basically going to be a huge star, except he had a terrible BB:K ratio. His value was so dependent on having a very high BABIP, something most players can't do year in and year out. Jason Lane feels like the most relevant Astros player. Meyers may just need more time to start showing better plate discipline. At least he makes good contact almost ever time, which is pretty impressive.
Having a break-out type player and pitcher almost every year is something we take for granted. Obviously our farm system is really good at finding and developing talent. Alvarez, Tucker, Meyers Urquidy, Valdez, Garcia
There are a lot of players in the minors, high school, and college. I don't think the pundits get Statcast data on the minors directly, and I don't think the pundits rely on stats enough for upper level guys. They are going miss guys that improve quickly over a short period time (or when they aren't able to see them) as there are too many players to watch to see if short term stats are improvement or just randomness. I pay attention to FanGraphs the most as I think they probably do the best job. That said, here are their weaknesses that I see: - Slow to react to a change in skill. - undervalue high level guys that aren't likely to be stars with limited pedigree. - overvalue raw power versus contact. - undervalue pitchers pitching in tandem. - undervalue bat first prospects. - they are a little too scared of reliever risk in my opinion. - catchers are very difficult to evaluate. - undervalue being able to make the majors. I find the information useful, but I use data with noise that isn't close to perfect a lot. When I look at season projections or create my own using public data, it seems injuries (or lack there of) to veterans add a ton more error than the cumulative error on the evaluation of a team's farm system.
@Joe Joe @Snake Diggit I appreciate the insights y'all offer. It's easier to read your stuff than digging through articles or googling. Is this a hobby for y'all or do you do it 'professionally'?
Purely an odd, unproductive hobby for me. I am FAR from a pro at evaluating baseball prospects, but I spend enough time reading about and analyzing the players in Houston’s system that I assume there are very few people who know more about those players than I do who are not professionals. The last few years I have maintained a model using fangraphs data along with my own inputs that has been pretty good at predicting which prospects will succeed (at least much more accurate than publications rankings/grades), and I do think that if I had access to all the data that front offices do, I would be a pretty good pro as I have a solid business/analytics background. That is not at all to say my opinion is the end all be all; there are several posters just on this site who are extremely sharp and informed and whose opinions should carry as much if not more weight than mine. That’s why I spend so much time on the site as opposed to a place like TCB (although there is one poster there clack that is very sharp as well).
