SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Update: Red Sox sign Napoli for one year, $5m
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2012 11:44:09 GMT -5
Even in a skewed distribution you can do so. Let's say that a you have an outcome that is three standard deviations away from the mean in a skewed distribution. Even in a skewed distribution this will be a very rare occurrence. I don't think that assuming an event occurs 3% of the time as opposed to 2% of the time really changes the analysis.
It's not the most eloquent of articles but he is basically saying is that outliers should be thrown out if they do not represent the players true skill level and kept if they do.
I've presented reasons for assuming that this season did not represent his true skill level and thus wasn't a normal value.
#1 High BABIP relative to his career norm.
#2 A followup season in line with the rest of his career.
#3 The age of the player when the season occurred.
#4 The Texas Rangers, a well regarded organization didn't feel he was even worth $13M over 1 year and they don't have a great 1B, or big time 1B prospect.
#5 No other team appeared interested in giving Napoli the type of deal that Red Sox gave him.
#6 The Red Sox other free agent signing, Victorino had the rest of the league, laughing at them according to CBS Sports.
The only reason I've seen given thus far that has some meat behind it as to why this season should be treated normally was a low BABIP against lefties in 2012. I've argued that such a season could be randomly expected, but more importantly it's not material. If you normalize his BABIP over lefties you add .003 to his career W/OBA. Also, his performance is STILL significantly lower than 2011. Given this I don't see how this is reason to treat the 2011 season as a normal value.
Yes it's true, it's possible that Mike Napoli will come back and have at least one year that is in line with what he did in 2011 and if he does, he'll be well worth what they are paying him. Yet given the risks involved that you previously stated, $39M seems like a large bet on an unlikely outcome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2012 13:25:30 GMT -5
Napoli has never had a season where he played the large majority of his at bats at 1b. The one season where he got more at bats at 1b than catcher was still essentially a 50-50 time share. You don't get a clean slate on the random days you get at 1b, catching is a cumulative grind over the course of the season. The fact is he's never had the opportunity to be a real first baseman. I think it's silly to ignore the logical benefits of avoiding catching just because he didn't hit better at 1b while he was splitting time between the positions. Even if his performance isn't significantly effected, it should allow him to play more and create less stress for his body. If you catch three days in a row and then get placed at 1b for a game, that random game at 1b isn't predictive of how you'd play if you avoided catching entirely (or almost entirely). Again great in theory but not backed up by statistical evidence. The study that bluechip referred to did not study for this effect and I'm not sure there are enough players in baseball history that have done this to actually study if there is such an effect in the way you describe above. FWIW I distinctly remember this same narrative being associated with Victor Martinez and the end result was that there was not a statistically significant change in his performance. Either way I don't think it's responsible for the team to pay for something like that without some real evidence that there's a going to be a material effect. Oh and for the SSS crowd, Napoli has played a significant amount of games at both 1B and C. Certainly large enough to show a statistically significant difference if indeed one existed.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Dec 6, 2012 13:39:15 GMT -5
Napoli is a good signing considering the alternatives. And we have seen over and over again that catchers often wear down in the 2nd half of the season to be near worthless in some instances. It is more likely that his yearly performance will improve if he is primarily a 1st baseman. Beasley has some salient points in that regard and we have the examples of several recent Redso catchers which appeared to experience major 2nd half swoons due to fatigue.
I'm not saying Napoli is a great #4. I'm saying he may well be our #4. As in Ellsbury, Pedroia, Ortiz, Napoli...Or would you slot Middlebrooks at #4? It works well left/right and unless they move Ellsbury to #3, I don't see anyone else on the current roster who would be a better #3 or 4 then Napoli.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Dec 6, 2012 13:41:48 GMT -5
All this changes should they sign Hamilton and trade Ellsbury, which is possible folks. It's possible. That would make the Victorino trade look a lot more reasonable. I'm not saying it's likely but I think it is conceivable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2012 13:41:54 GMT -5
JJoh. This is a very interesting question and yes we can test for that....so keep watching this space and I'll have an answer for you.
|
|
|
Post by honkbal on Dec 6, 2012 13:45:51 GMT -5
Oh and for the SSS crowd, Napoli has played a significant amount of games at both 1B and C. Certainly large enough to show a statistically significant difference if indeed one existed. Platoon splits don't stabilize until 1,000+ PA against each hand. What makes you confident that Napoli's 414 PA as a 1B are enough to show a statistically significant difference between his hitting at 1B and C?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2012 18:52:46 GMT -5
Oh and for the SSS crowd, Napoli has played a significant amount of games at both 1B and C. Certainly large enough to show a statistically significant difference if indeed one existed. Platoon splits don't stabilize until 1,000+ PA against each hand. What makes you confident that Napoli's 414 PA as a 1B are enough to show a statistically significant difference between his hitting at 1B and C? Correction, you can't measure the SIZE of the difference in most cases but you CAN tell if there is evidence for one existing at all. By saying that the sample size is too small, you are implicitly saying that there is or could be a statistically significant difference in performance at the two positions but by random chance the player still performed worse when he did not catch to the degree that he did. The probability of this happening is around 8%.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2012 18:59:28 GMT -5
JJoh. This is a very interesting question and yes we can test for that....so keep watching this space and I'll have an answer for you. Okay looked at this and found that Napoli's numbers are better, by about 20 points of W/OBA when he had not caught the previous day. Interestingly enough this has happened roughly 60% of the time. So it could be that the Angels and Rangers tried to give him extra days. Last year Napoli had the lowest percentage of PAs in which he had not caught the previous day of his entire career. The difference represents roughly 1 standard deviation over the sample so say a 15-20% chance that this is a random event. Interestingly enough the difference was most pronounced in 2012.
|
|
|
Post by welovewally on Dec 8, 2012 4:15:27 GMT -5
I have been trying to get on board with Napoli being the 3/4 or 5 hitter on this team and seen that he hit 24 home runs in 352 at bats last year. He hit 15 solo shots, 6 two run shots & 3 three run shots accountant for 36 of his 54 RBI in 24 ABs. But in his other 328 ABs he had only 18 RBI. Now I know I've read here several times not to use RBI as a way to evaluate a player but, is 18 RBI in 328 ABs really the player this team needs hitting 3/4 or 5? Is that stat that easily dismissed? I know last year he had most of his ABs batting 6th in that awesome Texas line up so I'm sure it wasn't for lack of opportunities with men on base.
The more I look the more I hate this signing. I hope Ben is not done trying to acquire another bat to hit 3/4 or 5 so that Napoli can be moved down to the 7th spot where he belongs because now we're stuck with him.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 8, 2012 8:30:59 GMT -5
INow I know I've read here several times not to use RBI as a way to evaluate a player but, is 18 RBI in 328 ABs really the player this team needs hitting 3/4 or 5? Is that stat that easily dismissed?Yes. I just dismissed it and encountered little to no resistance in doing so. The more I look the more I hate this signing. I hope Ben is not done trying to acquire another bat to hit 3/4 or 5 so that Napoli can be moved down to the 7th spot where he belongs because now we're stuck with him. Maybe Ben can create a time machine to go back to 1998 when our expectations for what a 3/4/5 hitter looks like were set. Seriously, who else is he gonna get? The guy who's 32 next year, who cost a hundred million plus, who rarely stays healthy, who might have a small crack addiction problem, and who will be 34 by the time this team is seriously contending again? Ok, that's one possibility... who else? Braun and Longoria and Votto are all signed, you know.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Dec 8, 2012 8:54:52 GMT -5
I have been trying to get on board with Napoli being the 3/4 or 5 hitter on this team and seen that he hit 24 home runs in 352 at bats last year. He hit 15 solo shots, 6 two run shots & 3 three run shots accountant for 36 of his 54 RBI in 24 ABs. But in his other 328 ABs he had only 18 RBI. Now I know I've read here several times not to use RBI as a way to evaluate a player but, is 18 RBI in 328 ABs really the player this team needs hitting 3/4 or 5? Is that stat that easily dismissed? I know last year he had most of his ABs batting 6th in that awesome Texas line up so I'm sure it wasn't for lack of opportunities with men on base.The more I look the more I hate this signing. I hope Ben is not done trying to acquire another bat to hit 3/4 or 5 so that Napoli can be moved down to the 7th spot where he belongs because now we're stuck with him. Wally, I am in your camp here. Napoli, a power hitter has his two top rbi seasons at 75 and 68....and these, as you note, with a team flush with offense. When Ellsbury batted in 105 runs as a lead-off hitter, people were abuzz. For his career Napoli sports the following stats in support of your position: With bases empty:
BA .271 SLG% .549
With runners on
BA .243 SLG% .455
With Risp
BA .218 SLG% .429Based on the above statistics and if Middlebrooks continues to develop, I would not be surprised to see Napoli dropped in the order as the year evolves. If Napoli meets his career stat averages, he will be a nice addition. But, as a #4, #5 hitter in our lineup, he will remind few of even Manny lite.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 8, 2012 9:02:56 GMT -5
Curtis Granderson had a career high 74 RBI before he came to the Yankees. But by all means, let's continue to fret over discredited, archaic statistics.
Whatever happened to all of us wanted the Red Sox to get back to their high-OBPing, Bill-Jamsien ways? I could have sworn that this was what everyone was demanding, but now that they're doing exactly that, it's not good enough?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 8, 2012 11:09:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Dec 8, 2012 12:27:47 GMT -5
I dont think someones Career average is a statistical anomaly. Napoli was a terrible signing.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 8, 2012 12:28:46 GMT -5
You've mentioned that, thank you.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Dec 8, 2012 13:03:28 GMT -5
Curtis Granderson had a career high 74 RBI before he came to the Yankees. But by all means, let's continue to fret over discredited, archaic statistics. Whatever happened to all of us wanted the Red Sox to get back to their high-OBPing, Bill-Jamsien ways? I could have sworn that this was what everyone was demanding, but now that they're doing exactly that, it's not good enough? Well, I don't think we have the rough equivalent of 'discrediting' the Ptolemaic view and replacing it with the Copernican model. RBIs are given less importance than in yesteryear because it is recognized that they are in part contingent on other factors such as the batting order position and the performance of other players in front of the batter in question etc. But, at least intuitively, we've always known this. So, it's not as tho a revolutionary scientific principal has been magically unveiled. The fangraph's article appears to say that Napoli, over his career, is the second worst performer in baseball with runners on base versus his average with the bases empty. Now maybe this means only that he would otherwise have 3-5 more hits/season so what is the overall impact. I just believe that certain players, as with people generally where stress/pressure is involved, perform better than others in those same situations. So, I still believe in the rbi stat. Perhaps it is extant but not extinct. As to the note re Bill James....hey, I love high OBP guys. Hopefully Napoli will score 100 runs. But I don't think he will approach in rbis what we have come to expect from our middle-of-the-order bats even if he bangs 30.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 8, 2012 13:13:45 GMT -5
2011, the year Napoli drove in 75 runs, he did it in 369 at bats. The league leader in RBI that year was Granderson, who drove in 119 in 583 at bats. They had exactly the same RBI/AB rate.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 8, 2012 13:23:19 GMT -5
2011, the year Napoli drove in 75 runs, he did it in 369 at bats. The league leader in RBI that year was Granderson, who drove in 119 in 583 at bats. They had exactly the same RBI/AB rate. And as FTHW mentioned, Granderson's career high in RBI's before joining the Yankees was 74. He's averaged 112+ over the past two seasons. I guess if you still believe in RBIs as some important measure of value you won't change your mind now. We should really have a discussion about the value of lineup construction, I keep hearing this importance of the 3-4 combo, as if stacking your 3-4 is somehow more important than assembling a strong 1-9 lineup.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 8, 2012 13:54:43 GMT -5
The fangraph's article appears to say that Napoli, over his career, is the second worst performer in baseball with runners on base versus his average with the bases empty. And the two players right behind him were Robinson Cano and Matt Wieters, both of whom are regarded as middle-of-the-order hitters and both of whom have subsequently had high RBI seasons (Cano had 118 in 2011, Wieters had 83 in 2012 despite catchers' at bats). Clutch hitting is not a repeatable skill. Given the small sample sizes involved, it's almost always just random noise and is certainly not predictive. If Napoli stays healthy and hits fourth this year, he'll break 100 RBIs.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Dec 8, 2012 14:16:10 GMT -5
If Napoli gets 500 AB's I think he gets 100 RBI's. The hope is he gets an extra 150 or so at bats by playing 1st base. That in itself could add an extra 10 homers on to his record noting his high hr/AB ratio.
Mike Napoli is not perfect, but, for the life of me, I couldn't see many better options going forward. He does give us a lot of positional flexibility, and..........a scary hitter in Fenway.
If he gets 500 plate appearances minus walks, would you all say over or under for Mike Napoli having:
35 homers and 100 RBI??? I think its about right!
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Dec 8, 2012 14:31:44 GMT -5
2011, the year Napoli drove in 75 runs, he did it in 369 at bats. The league leader in RBI that year was Granderson, who drove in 119 in 583 at bats. They had exactly the same RBI/AB rate. Awwww, it's a statistical anomaly! Of course Napoli did have a career year hitting .320 some 60 points above his lifetime average. Great year tho...no doubt. I'll take the bet that Napoli drives in 100.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Dec 8, 2012 14:40:50 GMT -5
Who the heck cares if he drives in 100 or 1,000 or 75. It has no barring on whether he is is a productive hitter or not, it depends of other factors that are out the control of Napoli having a productive season.
I mean I'm not that well versed in stats but are people really arguing about RBI? come on.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 8, 2012 15:30:29 GMT -5
We should really have a discussion about the value of lineup construction, I keep hearing this importance of the 3-4 combo, as if stacking your 3-4 is somehow more important than assembling a strong 1-9 lineup.Look at the Yankees last year. Only Robinson Cano really had a dominant offensive performance, but they had arguably best offense in the league because everyone else (except Russell Martin) was at least above average.
|
|
|
Post by pbgallag on Dec 8, 2012 16:16:16 GMT -5
I see them moving Salty and Keeping Lavarnway/Ross/Napoli together on the roster. Lavarnway as your "everyday" catcher, napoli catching 40-50 games, Ross catching occasionally/platoon type They've already said Ross will catch more than the standard backup C. If all three are on the roster, I'd actually expect Ross to catch the most games between the three, by far. Disagree. Napoli was signed to play 1B. He will likely be used as a 3rd/emergency C other than maybe interleague play to keep Ortiz in the lineup. They said Ross will catch more than the standard backup which probably means 50-60 games instead of 30. That still leaves 80-90 games for whoever they choose between Salty or Lavarnway to be the regular C.
|
|
|
Post by feez732 on Dec 8, 2012 16:48:35 GMT -5
I have been trying to get on board with Napoli being the 3/4 or 5 hitter on this team and seen that he hit 24 home runs in 352 at bats last year. He hit 15 solo shots, 6 two run shots & 3 three run shots accountant for 36 of his 54 RBI in 24 ABs. But in his other 328 ABs he had only 18 RBI. Now I know I've read here several times not to use RBI as a way to evaluate a player but, is 18 RBI in 328 ABs really the player this team needs hitting 3/4 or 5? Is that stat that easily dismissed? I know last year he had most of his ABs batting 6th in that awesome Texas line up so I'm sure it wasn't for lack of opportunities with men on base.The more I look the more I hate this signing. I hope Ben is not done trying to acquire another bat to hit 3/4 or 5 so that Napoli can be moved down to the 7th spot where he belongs because now we're stuck with him. Wally, I am in your camp here. Napoli, a power hitter has his two top rbi seasons at 75 and 68....and these, as you note, with a team flush with offense. When Ellsbury batted in 105 runs as a lead-off hitter, people were abuzz. For his career Napoli sports the following stats in support of your position: With bases empty:
BA .271 SLG% .549
With runners on
BA .243 SLG% .455
With Risp
BA .218 SLG% .429Based on the above statistics and if Middlebrooks continues to develop, I would not be surprised to see Napoli dropped in the order as the year evolves. If Napoli meets his career stat averages, he will be a nice addition. But, as a #4, #5 hitter in our lineup, he will remind few of even Manny lite. I like how you listed average and slugging while selectively excluding his on base percentage. You also listed his career iso (218) with RISP instead of his actual batting average (243). His correct splits are actually [avg/obp/slg (babip)]: Bases Empty: .271 / .358 / .549 (.314) Runners On : .243 / .354 / .455 (.282) RISP : .243 / .375 / .460 (.275) Notice that his career on base percentage is actually higher with runners in scoring position than with the bases empty. We're also looking at a 39 point difference in his babip between RISP and bases empty. The babip difference accounts for the entire difference in batting average, although I would assume that has something to do with the quality of pitches he's seeing with runners on (especially given the way his walk rates sky rocket). The fangraph's article appears to say that Napoli, over his career, is the second worst performer in baseball with runners on base versus his average with the bases empty. And the two players right behind him were Robinson Cano and Matt Wieters, both of whom are regarded as middle-of-the-order hitters and both of whom have subsequently had high RBI seasons (Cano had 118 in 2011, Wieters had 83 in 2012 despite catchers' at bats). Clutch hitting is not a repeatable skill. Given the small sample sizes involved, it's almost always just random noise and is certainly not predictive. If Napoli stays healthy and hits fourth this year, he'll break 100 RBIs. Not to mention the article being referenced is only looking at Napoli 2006-2010. In both 2011 and 2012, Napoli actually hit significantly better with runners in scoring position than with the bases empty or a runner on first.
|
|
|