Top prospect success rates applied to Royals in BA's top 100 list

buzz kill

It wouldn’t make the Royals contenders on its own, but it would help a lot. The farm system contains a lot of talent that didn’t make BA’s top 100 (Crow, Eibner, Sal Perez, Giavotella, Jeffress, Melville, etc) that will likely produce some MLB contributors, and in the upcoming years, the Royals will also have a lot of money to spend on FA’s and extending their current good players. A path exists for the Royals to become a successful franchise this decade, but we’re still counting on Moore to make smart decisions in the next couple years.

Greinke 9.4 WAR
DeJesus 3.3 WAR
Bannister 2.9 WAR
Callaspo 2.3 WAR
Olivo 2.0 WAR

clearly, I have no real ability to do any of what I am suggesting, and I really like reading your work (so thank you for doing it), but it does for me beg some questions about how to parse the data differently to get at why prospects fail in this list.

1) Are there certain profiles of player (beyond the position player/pitcher divide) that have higher levels of success?

a) we know the BA list really values things like tools and projected ceiling, so are there large variations between BA ranking, performance, and/or scouting profiles that might explain “risk classes” for position players (ex: minor league walk rates, etc.)

b) for pitchers, BA will sometimes rank guys who have great fastballs, but only one or two decent pitches overall (i.e. fireballers might have a higher bust rate than command pitchers, or even the other way around).

2) I also wonder about the bust rate of draft vs. international players that make this list — does the ability to see these high ceiling players at a young age make them more prone to put them in the top 100 based on potential, with less high minors experience under their belt. There could also be a difference between HS and college drafted players that make the list (especially the ones thrown up there before they have a year of competition).

Anyway, actually answering these questions would probably take too much work (comparing different types of data sets of both qualitative and quantitative measures) and may not yield interesting results, but it seems clear to me that teams have a philosophy about this. When it comes to pitchers, it seems pretty clear from that the Royals seem to prioritize pitch variety and command over raw velocity. They also seem to value some MiLB production over tools in mid-level trades (Pina, T. Smith, W. Smith, etc.), though that might be a function of the opportunities available.

do have 10 C+ prospects as well. Given the relative flat line of prospects in the last 60 or so top 100, it is reasonable to assume that thier fail rates will not be much lower then the bottom half of the top 100 rankings, or in other words, we should get about two contributers and two average players one being a star out of those 10.

If the first wave of prospects pans out as projected, GMDM will be fired, right? My feeling of living in the area is that just about everyone expects the Royals to contend in 2012 or 2013.

According to your study, Lamb and Monty have a 22.2% chance at a superior level, not a 9.9% (if you break it down by quintile).

By decile, it’s 18.7%.

So there is a 63.8% chance overall that the Royals have a star pitcher.

Right?

I would be very interested in finding out the bust rate by minor league level at the time the ranking occurred.

Someone please check my math but I believe there is an 8.9% chance that none of these players becomes a star and therefore a 91.1% chance that at least one of these players becomes a star. There is a 6% chance Homser, Moose, and Myers all become stars.

Assuming at least one of the 3 position players becomes a star (78% chance of happening) there is an 85.3% chance another player (including the two remaining Top 20 position players) will become a star.

On the other end, if one of the three lower ranked pitchers becomes a star (17.8% chance of happening), there is still approximately a 90% chance another player will become a star.

that is what they have done in the minors. A players ranked about the same doing it v AA or higher competition has a much higher success rate than a similar ranked prospect playing in A or lower.

there is a 26.4% chance exactly one player with be a star. There is an 8.9 chance no one will be a star, so there is a 64.7% chance at least two players will be stars.

The math on the overall odds for exactly 2 or more gets a little confusing so don’t take these figures as gospel.

I calculated there being approximately a 33.7% chance that exactly 2 players from the above group is elite.

That means there is a 31% chance 3 or more players will be stars.

There is an overall 20.5% chance none of the players qualifies as average (but not a star). There is therefore a 79.5% chance at least one qualifies as average.

There is a 35.8% chance exactly one player qualifies as average, therefore there is a 43.7% chance 2 or more players qualifies as average. There is a 27.5% chance exactly two of these guys are average so there is a 16.2% chance 3 or more are average.

There is a 9.8% chance none of the players qualifies as below average (i.e. a contributor). There is a 26.0% chance exactly one player qualifies as below average, and therefore a 64.2% chance 2 or more players qualify as below average.

The odds of exactly 2 players qualifying as below average are 30.7% so there is a 33.5% chance of 3 or more of the players qualifying as below average.

Given the above stats, I’d expect the probability of 3 players being worthless to be high, 4 players to be likely and 5 to be somewhat unlikely.

Averaging 2.5 WAR over your first 7 seasons is pretty hard. That’s the standard, right?

Butler will have to average 3.7 WAR over the next 3 years to meet the bare minimum on that standard.

Yadier Molina would be classified as an average player because he fell a full 3.7 WAR short over his cost controlled years from the requisite 17.5 WAR to be declared a star player. Obviously, that’s impacted somewhat because Yadi is a catcher, but the point remains that 2.5+ WAR over your first 7 seasons is achieved by few players .

Like duh, right? But I mean this seriously. The twins’ method works. They target a certain type of pitcher and plug him in and repeat. They have an offense built around two stars, two or three good players and a bunch of average to sub average guys.
 In the next three years we’ll know whether Moore’s method works. Average players (particularly pitchers) are critical, which again is why the system’s depth is so heartening. A team in the central can make repeat postseason visits with one great starter and four average starters. I can’t wait to see whether this crop of players can produce that.

I’m less concerned about offense because I believe that butler + one young stud is a strong core and the other two star prospects only need to be above average for the offense to be above average. The complementary pieces can either be acquired or could also come from within.

It does meaningfully change the data and given it’s on the front page, I think it should be right. I understand the tables are a pain but I think it would be appropriate to note your numbers and your conclusion about the number of expected successes and failures are incorrect.

It is more likely than not the Royals will have 2 or more “stars” out of this group, contrary to your statement.

Feel free to use my figures.

I have read quite a few of the posts on this site, and I am just curious. Are any of you Royals fans? There are alot of you that disect the statistics so far that it doesn’t even sound like you like the team. You just like the numbers. Have any of you actually played baseball? Or do you just like numbers so much that, that is why you follow baseball?

I know Moore has had some bad signings, but he has also had some bad luck. Guillen and Jacobs were not good moves, but Meche and Coco have had some pretty decent seasons when healthy. Maybe you guys think these contracts were for too much money or too many years, or he should have know they were injured.

This farm system really can’t be compared to any other farm system. There will definitely be some busts, some injuries, and some players that just don’t quite live up to expectations. But this is the BEST FARM SYSTEM EVER!! I know the team can’t entirely be built around prospects and home grown kids, but the Greinke trade and Butler signing shows that Moore is building a winner.

There is a 0.02% chance all the prospects succeed (become average or star players). There is a 0.6% chance all the prospects fail. There is a 4.5% chance only one prospect succeeds. Therefore there is a 94.9% chance two or more prospects will succeed.

There is a 14.3% chance exactly two prospects will succeed. Therefore there is an 80.6% chance three or more prospects will succeed.

I calculated a 25.14% chance exactly three players would succeed, therefore, there is a 55.45% chance 4 or more players will succeed.

whatd you do to piss them off?

its funny how critical some of them were about certain things like not defining success when you outlined it very clearly in the article.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=281&f=2054&t=7247873