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.
|
Post by geezergeek on Apr 22, 2016 17:44:54 GMT -5
Both players seem to have found themselves in the small sample of the current year. As typical of kids drafted out of HS it takes a year or 2 to adjust to proball. Both seem to be able to connect on fastballs and both seem to have some difficulty with breaking and offspeed pitches. Which one has the best chance adapting to non fastballs and adjust as they move higher in the organization.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Apr 22, 2016 18:12:05 GMT -5
I don't know about Ockimey. A 5th rounder? Out of Highschool? Who puts up ehhh numbers in Lowell then starts off the following year in Greenville and looks like one of the best hitters in the system.
When has that ever ended well for a Sox prospect?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Apr 22, 2016 18:16:15 GMT -5
Clever. He's in RF for the Sox now. Can it happen again?
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Apr 22, 2016 18:28:24 GMT -5
god I hope so. Everyone loves to see a Moncada or a Benintendi do well but we expect it, there's something special about a guy who comes out of nowhere and becomes an elite prospect.
Totally unfair comp on my part, so they are both 5th rounders? I bet they both wear hats too. But It is exciting to see Ockimey off to a hot start, if he rises this system will have some serious power in it between him and Devers. Chavis too!!! So nice to see him recover. Moncada, and maybe Washington add to that power potential too.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 22, 2016 19:24:08 GMT -5
Ockimey is looking great but he does have 4 errors now. That would seem to be a lot for a 1st baseman. Heh, I'll take it though considering the bat. A power bat like that would be huge for us if he continues to develop.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 22, 2016 21:37:10 GMT -5
I get the sense that Ockimey's issue in HS was the big question about his ability to develop his hit tool. He was seen as a big power upside with big K downside guy. While he's striking out a lot still, he's also producing some terrific BB numbers. His IsoD and IsoP are both very good. IMO, it bodes well for his future development, since it would seem to suggest that he's selling out contact a bit, waiting for pitches he can crush. At 20, if he follows a normal development curve of one level a year from here on out, he'll be 23/24 as an MLB rookie, depending on his cup-of-coffee status his last year. Not bad. I'm a lot less concerned with his defense...I think it will come. To me, the biggest issue with a young power hitter is that he show enough pitch recognition to make somewhat consistent contact. Chavis has come a **long** way in that respect.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 22, 2016 22:12:13 GMT -5
A couple weeks of a high walk rate in the low minors shouldn't mean much to us. At lower levels, walk rates aren't very predictive.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 22, 2016 23:40:29 GMT -5
A couple weeks of a high walk rate in the low minors shouldn't mean much to us. At lower levels, walk rates aren't very predictive. Not very, it's true. But when viewed in light of the whole picture (power, BA), it's encouraging. Obviously, it's early, and it's a terribly small sample, but it says to me that he's made progress vs last year. I'd say the same for Chavis. Hey, it's early...I'm allowed to get a **little** excited.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 23, 2016 23:10:32 GMT -5
A couple weeks of a high walk rate in the low minors shouldn't mean much to us. At lower levels, walk rates aren't very predictive. Not very, it's true. But when viewed in light of the whole picture (power, BA), it's encouraging. Obviously, it's early, and it's a terribly small sample, but it says to me that he's made progress vs last year. I'd say the same for Chavis. Hey, it's early...I'm allowed to get a **little** excited. And in fact, if you programmed his overall 2015-16 K and BB rates into a computer and just spat out random simulations, you would get a difference between the two seasons this large or larger by sheer chance once every 124 runs of the simulator. You'd get an improvement like this once every 248 simulations. Considering that we know a priori that he was working on improving this -- in fact, that would be nearly his sole focus of effort -- I think it's just about certain that some real improvement has been made. It's not like I've looked at more than one set of numbers, so we're not data mining. This is the one thing we wanted to look at. Edit: for Chavis, it's 101 / 202 simulations.
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Apr 23, 2016 23:25:31 GMT -5
And in fact, if you programmed his overall 2015-16 K and BB rates into a computer and just spat out random simulations, you would get a difference between the two seasons this large or larger by sheer chance once every 124 runs of the simulator. You'd get an improvement like this once every 248 simulations That's with an assumption that BBs and Ks are each iid events, right? Throw in some autocorrelation of outcomes due to, say, pitcher variation, and deviations of this magnitude can become much easier to generate.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Apr 24, 2016 0:24:11 GMT -5
When do we add Kyri "Boom Boom" Washington to this?
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Apr 24, 2016 2:30:26 GMT -5
Does anyone know about Josh Ockimey's opp power?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2016 8:23:18 GMT -5
Also willing to bet YTY correlations in walk and strikeout rates in the minor leagues are much lower than the majors.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 24, 2016 13:00:13 GMT -5
Also willing to bet YTY correlations in walk and strikeout rates in the minor leagues are much lower than the majors. Of course they are, because players change levels (competition strength), and are in the steepest part of their development curves.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2016 13:11:18 GMT -5
Also willing to bet YTY correlations in walk and strikeout rates in the minor leagues are much lower than the majors. Of course they are, because players change levels (competition strength), and are in the steepest part of their development curves. Right, exactly, which is why Eric's odds analysis is not particularly useful here. There are just too many changing variables. It's something to watch for sure, but I wouldn't start drawing conclusions just yet.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2016 13:13:52 GMT -5
To get back on topic, here are some nice Chavis tidbits from a recent Speier article ( link):
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 24, 2016 14:31:15 GMT -5
Of course they are, because players change levels (competition strength), and are in the steepest part of their development curves. Right, exactly, which is why Eric's odds analysis is not particularly useful here. There are just too many changing variables. It's something to watch for sure, but I wouldn't start drawing conclusions just yet. Ah, gotcha. Of course, it doesn't mean that that sort of analysis has no value, just that the odds may not jibe as that unlikely. I think it's reasonable to look at the performances of Chavis, Ockimey, and Washington and be encouraged at this point though.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Apr 24, 2016 17:03:18 GMT -5
Chavis is really seeing the ball well and he has also managed to cut his strikeout rate. Swing looks shorter and more controlled. Less swinging for the fences and more swinging to how he is pitched.
But his promotion takes at bats away from Devers, who looks miserable at the plate this season.
|
|
|
Post by brockholtsuperstar on Apr 25, 2016 14:22:10 GMT -5
Speier just tweeted that Chavis tore his left thumb ligament. Gonna get an MRI to see if surgery is needed. Really disappointing he was on fire this season.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Apr 25, 2016 15:05:27 GMT -5
Shame about Chavis, especially since he was getting in a groove in Greenville. Hoping he can recover part of the season and restart his climb up the ladder. At least there should be no controversy about moving him to Salem and finding time for him and Devers.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 25, 2016 23:58:14 GMT -5
Also willing to bet YTY correlations in walk and strikeout rates in the minor leagues are much lower than the majors. Of course they are, because players change levels (competition strength), and are in the steepest part of their development curves. Right, exactly, which is why Eric's odds analysis is not particularly useful here. There are just too many changing variables. It's something to watch for sure, but I wouldn't start drawing conclusions just yet. jmei, would you be willing to bet even money that Ockimey's K and BB rates going forward are as bad or worse than last year? I'm guessing you'd want some kind of odds. That's essentially all I'm asserting here: the effect size is so large that we have a pretty strong sense that at least a small part is real. That is actually useful news, because there are guys who never improve their strike zone command at all. Any effect is a product of three things: the hypothesized cause, confounding factors, and sheer luck. When you have a very large effect size, you then have to ask whether the combination of confounding factors and luck could possibly have caused all of it. Having a strong a priori expectation of the cause just raises the bar. In this case, it's hard to believe that opposing K and BB rates (whose quality is indeed correlated) and park factors for K and BB (which are not much correlated, which is why I think it's more useful simply to think in terms of confounding variables in general rather than potential correlation effects between multiple dependent variables that you are treating as uncorrelated) could entirely cause a 59% improvement in walk rate and 36% improvement in K rate, even when combined with luck.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 26, 2016 0:15:13 GMT -5
Or perhaps the coaching staff actually knows what they're looking at and is in a much better position to make those determinations ? Foolish me, lol.
For me, he (Ockimey) has a hole in his approach that's unlikely to be exploited at lower levels. That also doesn't mean that he won't alter his approach when it starts getting exploited . He starts with a wide stance and ends up hitting the ball off his front foot a lot. That makes him susceptible to pitches on the lower half. Only time will tell how that goes.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 26, 2016 11:01:17 GMT -5
Also willing to bet YTY correlations in walk and strikeout rates in the minor leagues are much lower than the majors. Right, exactly, which is why Eric's odds analysis is not particularly useful here. There are just too many changing variables. It's something to watch for sure, but I wouldn't start drawing conclusions just yet. jmei, would you be willing to bet even money that Ockimey's K and BB rates going forward are as bad or worse than last year? I'm guessing you'd want some kind of odds. That's essentially all I'm asserting here: the effect size is so large that we have a pretty strong sense that at least a small part is real. That is actually useful news, because there are guys who never improve their strike zone command at all. Any effect is a product of three things: the hypothesized cause, confounding factors, and sheer luck. When you have a very large effect size, you then have to ask whether the combination of confounding factors and luck could possibly have caused all of it. Having a strong a priori expectation of the cause just raises the bar. In this case, it's hard to believe that opposing K and BB rates (whose quality is indeed correlated) and park factors for K and BB (which are not much correlated, which is why I think it's more useful simply to think in terms of confounding variables in general rather than potential correlation effects between multiple dependent variables that you are treating as uncorrelated) could entirely cause a 59% improvement in walk rate and 36% improvement in K rate, even when combined with luck. Yes, it's better that he is walking more and striking out less than the other way around, but I don't think you can draw any material conclusions about his plate discipline based on the samples we have. The difference is large in percentage terms, but it's tiny in counting stat terms. We're talking about six extra walks here. I'm fine with saying "it's encouraging, let's see if he keeps it up." I'm going to push back against "he's made real improvements in his plate discipline" (which is a paragraphing of what you said above) until we get a bigger sample or see it backed up by scouting.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 26, 2016 11:36:29 GMT -5
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the season is young enough that half of Ockimey's 14 walks came in two of his 16 games. If those two games had been rained out instead of played, he'd have half as many walks and there would basically be no improvement in his walk rate.
I'm not trying to crap on him (I gave him a pretty huge bump in my personal rankings for 5/1), but I take so much more for what he's doing to the baseball (already 1/3 of the way to what the system's HR leaders had last year...) than for what he's doing when he's not swinging so far.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,754
|
Post by nomar on Apr 26, 2016 12:29:06 GMT -5
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the season is young enough that half of Ockimey's 14 walks came in two of his 16 games. If those two games had been rained out instead of played, he'd have half as many walks and there would basically be no improvement in his walk rate. I'm not trying to crap on him (I gave him a pretty huge bump in my personal rankings for 5/1), but I take so much more for what he's doing to the baseball (already 1/3 of the way to what the system's HR leaders had last year...) than for what he's doing when he's not swinging so far. Agreed. Hopefully he just keeps mashing and limits his Ks. He's very young and came in raw, his approach isn't finished being molded. Biggest thing for me is how he's impacting the ball. I would have his stock way up too, for the little that it's worth. Hope Doc Ock keeps crushing those white things.
|
|
|