Who loses/gains the most if advanced stats come 20 years earlier?

[jej]

There is no doubt that stats are an important art of baseball. If they aren't informative then what are they. They are just another tool. Stats can't tell you what's inside a guy or his desire. Thus all the questioners that are sent out to prospective draft picks. I am very much aware of the role of stats in baseball, but why send scouts to watch A kid ,Just email their stats in. That would go over really well would it not. Stats can't tell a scout if a kid had a good swing that will transfer into a good prospect. Stats can't tell you about a kids foot work, knowledge of the game or his desire to play. Correct me if I am wrong, but arm speed,leg speed, swing and bat speed are tools that scouts look at. Not to mention they watch their actions and want to know what kind of person they are. Not sure stats can give you all of that. Sure. At higher levels. There is cost analysis and stat comparison, but before a trade don't the send a scout to watch them play? In high school we use pitching and hitting charts and know where to position def players etched. So yes stats are important,but
I personally don't need them to tell me a guy has talent or not. That is called experience

All of your gripes were pretty much addressed by Jeffy.

I don't care as much about how well his swing looks if it works. I hate when people try to change someone's stance when it works as is. Production is what matters.

Didnt you say you care about what actually happens? Well that's why stats tell you. Looking at his swing and wondering how it will translate is a guess, not what really happened.

Guys like Youk and Pence wouldn't be where they are had people looked at them and not strongly analyzed their stats.

[Halladay]

The scouts job is to find players they believe will project good stats at the major league level. A players desire is irrelevant to me so long as he's putting 40 home runs a year. A guy like Adam Dunn comes to mind. The reason you send scouts out is because college and high school stats don't reflect the end result which is stats at the major league level. Lower level stats are extremely watered down so you can only take them with a grain of salt. A prospects characteristics come second to everything else. Ty Cobb is seen as a great player first, a racist second.

[old blue]

All of your gripes were pretty much addressed by Jeffy.

I don't care as much about how well his swing looks if it works. I hate when people try to change someone's stance when it works as is. Production is what matters.

I agree, a friend of mine whose son was a first round draft pick a few years back had a beautiful swing. Didnt need stats to see that--- but any way after a year in the minors they totally re- did his swing. Dont know why they did that. The scout that worked with him in the off season was really shocked that they did that. But they did. to this day I dont know why

Didnt you say you care about what actually happens? Well that's why stats tell you. Looking at his swing and wondering how it will translate is a guess, not what really happened. how would you evaluate eric davis' swing--- he hit the piss out of the ball early but had to make adjustments as he got older. That is a point I am trying to make--- people knew he hit the piss out of it but as he got older he would need to make and adjustment or he would struggle and he did.

Guys like Youk and Pence wouldn't be where they are had people looked at them and not strongly analyzed their stats.

I would be willing to bet that a some point in their swings they are all in the same location or points in their swings. Was is Counsilman (sp) who looked all screwed up- but at a given point his hands, his feet etc were in a picture perfect position. YOu can look at all the great hitters and find they are all in similar positions at one point in their swing and they all have to make adjustments--- stats dont tell you that but a a good camera man can


I will close my discussion on this and just say that you do need stats and you do need the personal touch on things. Don't go into anything with less than all the facts and info you can get. If I am going to make a trade or acquire a player,yes I am going to look at his stats and yes I am going to go see him play and then make my decision.

[Jeffy25]

I would be willing to bet that a some point in their swings they are all in the same location or points in their swings. Was is Counsilman (sp) who looked all screwed up- but at a given point his hands, his feet etc were in a picture perfect position. YOu can look at all the great hitters and find they are all in similar positions at one point in their swing and they all have to make adjustments--- stats dont tell you that but a a good camera man can


I will close my discussion on this and just say that you do need stats and you do need the personal touch on things. Don't go into anything with less than all the facts and info you can get. If I am going to make a trade or acquire a player,yes I am going to look at his stats and yes I am going to go see him play and then make my decision.

You obviously need both, it's fantastically important. More information the better.

[old blue]

The scouts job is to find players they believe will project good stats at the major league level. A players desire is irrelevant to me so long as he's putting 40 home runs a year. A guy like Adam Dunn comes to mind. The reason you send scouts out is because college and high school stats don't reflect the end result which is stats at the major league level. Lower level stats are extremely watered down so you can only take them with a grain of salt. A prospects characteristics come second to everything else. Ty Cobb is seen as a great player first, a racist second.

my point exactly--- stats for high school kids really is irrelevent. Maybe more important in college but extremely important at the pro level.

[Jeffy25]

my point exactly--- stats for high school kids really is irrelevent. Maybe more important in college but extremely important at the pro level.

A few things that are important stat wise for kids.

BB rate and K rates. These are things that usually project. Kids that walk 2-3% of the time and never take pitches may struggle to ever carry a league average walk rate. But kids that walk 20% of the time in high school and are seeing 4-5 pitches per PA will likely carry good walk rates with them forever.

ISO. Isolated power, it's just slugging percentage minus batting average. .160 for instance is the MLB league average. It gives you an idea if a kid is showing any extra base pop/power. If they are hitting all singles, or if they are driving the ball, even if it isn't for home runs. Sometimes that can be fixed in balance etc. But it's important to know. Some of the best home run hitters today were strong doubles hitters when they were younger, ISO shows that.


There are others, for pitchers it's not that necessary. BB rates drop as they age, and K rates fluctuate with velocity and off-speed pitch-ability.


Overall slash lines, and pitcher stats are basically worthless in that you can't project what they will do from high schoolers to the big leagues. But the relatable stats have context as there are correlation stats that have shown consistent truths, like walk rates.

[old blue]

These are all really neat stats and cool to look at and use to evaluate. But I dont need to stat sheet to tell me if the kid is a stud or not. Saw Jared Parker in High school and didn,t need to stat sheet to tell me that he was pretty damn good

[Jeffy25]

These are all really neat stats and cool to look at and use to evaluate. But I dont need to stat sheet to tell me if the kid is a stud or not. Saw Jared Parker in High school and didn,t need to stat sheet to tell me that he was pretty damn good

Pitchers and hitters are not the same. And 'stud' is different. Scouts aren't only looking at first round talents and saying 'yeah, he is special or not'


What about the 20th rounders and on? A lot of kids are drafted, and scouts have to consistently scout kids all throughout the minors, and regionally and area scouts too. There are so many. The special kids will excel regardless of their numbers. But not everybody is a special first round talent.

[jej]

These are all really neat stats and cool to look at and use to evaluate. But I dont need to stat sheet to tell me if the kid is a stud or not. Saw Jared Parker in High school and didn,t need to stat sheet to tell me that he was pretty damn good

So you have two possible ratings? Stud and not stud? Lol.

You need to stats to tell you what they did. The changes that need to be made in the swing, or whether they actually need to be made, is based on what they do. If it ain't broke don't fix it. On top of that, that is the coaching that was talked about before. It isn't smart to evaluate a guy just based on what you see. You can't see every single thing he does.

You may see him on a bad game where he Ks twice and made an error. But the stats could tell you that that was a fluke and that's not a consistent thing. It all has to come down to stats because that is the best way to evaluate a player. Yes you need both, but that doesn't mean one isnt better than another.

You say you can see stud or not by watching (which I don't necessarily agree with). Well I can see awful, poor, average, good, great, and amazing with the stats.

Unless you watch every single play of every game, you can't get the whole, or even most of the story. And even then, you will be looking at how he hits or pitches or catches, and will be thinking about the stats in your head.

More information is never a bad thing. But if I had to pick one or the other, I would pick stats every day of the week

[old blue]

We would be a good scouting pair. You with your stats and me with the eyeball test. Actually have done bird dog work for some scouts over the years. Must say I have done fairly well. The full time scouting thing is just not for me. Rather be home with my family

[old blue]

[QUOTE=Jeffy25;24899348]A few things that are important stat wise

ISO. Isolated power, it's just slugging percentage minus batting average. .160 for instance is the MLB league average. It gives you an idea if a kid is showing any extra base pop/power. If they are hitting all singles, or if they are driving the ball, even if it isn't for home runs. Sometimes that can be fixed in balance etc. But it's important to know. Some of the best home run hitters today were strong doubles hitters when they were younger,



Just like mark mcquire So ISO. Tells me that as a kid gets older, better hitting skills and approach, he gets stronger And the singles turn into doubles and or doubles into hr. I can figure that out by looking at this stat. Cool

[jej]

You are just way too stuck on conventional scouting. Just cause a kid is bigger, doesnt mean he will have more power. Just cause someone has a weird or different swing, doesn't mean it doesn't work. Just cause they DO have a normal swing doesn't mean it will work.

Stats tell you what happened over any period of time. Scouting tells you that one time you saw them play. You can't judge a player by just seeing him a little. That doesn't tell you what he does.

For best results you need both. But if it was one or the other, it would be silly to pick just seeing him. If you want to fix something, then yeah you watch him. But if you want to know what he did, you look at the stats.

[old blue]

conventional scouting - conventional wisdom go hand in hand. I have been saying all along that you need both and they both have their own merit. You just keep disagreeing, which is fine. But what I do know is that I am in weekly contact with scouts and I am pretty sure I know what they are looking for. but that doesn't make me right or you right. but for your info they don't just look at a kid one time, that would be pretty stupid approach, just as I send a kids stats and expect him to be a prospect. I do believe you have to see a kid multiple times and then a cross checker will follow up a time or two. Yes the studs are easy to find---- even if they are a 20th round pick. There is no sure thing in any draft. Just gather as much info as you can and go from there.

As far a game day stats, those would be much more valuable to me as a coach. but the advanced scout ( you have heard of those I gather) Is looking for tendencies, is someones bat speed slower, are they struggling on a given pitch etc. I am sure they look at stats , but stats won't tell you if a pitchers ball is lacking velocity or movement, or if a hitters bat speed is of or there is a flaw in the swing that they can exploit. obviously their is much more, but I think you get the picture.

[old blue]

You are just way too stuck on conventional scouting.
Thanks I appreciate that

Just cause a kid is bigger, doesnt mean he will have more power. Just cause someone has a weird or different swing, doesn't mean it doesn't work. Just cause they DO have a normal swing doesn't mean it will work.

Why do scouts watch a kids swing if it is not important--- not sure what you are talking about size wise---- but they do prefer taller lanky pitchers--- but not always--- results are important too can stats tell me if there is a flaw in the swing. can stats tell me if a hitter is hot-- sure they can. can they tell me how hard the ball was hit or how good the def was--- I guess to some point it can If I see it I know for myself.



Stats tell you what happened over any period of time. Scouting tells you that one time you saw them play. You can't judge a player by just seeing him a little. That doesn't tell you what he does.


I dont think they see a kid one time unless they just think he has no chance at all. Just by looking at stats cant tell you how good a player really is just as seeing a kid play one time wont tell you the whole story.

For best results you need both. that is what I have been saying

But if it was one or the other, it would be silly to pick just seeing him. If you want to fix something, then yeah you watch him. But if you want to know what he did, you look at the stats.

That is fine with me if that is the route you would take----- If I wanted to look at what he did I would have to look at the stats or a video. Which is another story in itself? Would you watch video on a kid or just look at his stats if you were going to give him a scholarship? Personally I would look at video and if he looked good , I would invite him to camp and or go see him play. Stats are cool, but at the high school level they are meaningless. You have a much larger pool of info to look at college and MLB level so they do have more merit there.

[jej]

If i can watch a few minutes of video, then I take stats. If its unlimited video, then yeah, but I would still keep track of what he did rather than just what it looks like he did or will do.