3. A Tale of Two Prospects

In the first installment, we set out the motivation for this series and why it was worth exhuming, three years after the initial study. In Part 2 we looked at pairs of players who had been ranked similarly as minor leaguers and who had turned out to be very different big leaguers, and tried to determine what factors may have contributed to their paths diverging.

This time around, we put the microscope on two individual prospects whose careers didn’t necessarily turn out the way we might’ve expected given their minor league numbers and their pedigrees. And in so doing, we are reminded once again that although statistical evaluation is an extremely valuable tool in searching for answers, it is not infallible…

I like looking at stats to try and evaluate young players. I also like poking holes in the theory that numbers are all that matter. They do matter, no question; but they’re not, in and of themselves, the answer to anything meaningful. Here’s an example of the dangers of relying solely on statistical output to predict future greatness in prospects. The following two players spent the 1995 season in Double-A:

    Age Pos   AB   BA  OBP  SLG XBH BB  SO
JC   21  2B .440 .293 .379 .464  44 58  98
MC   22  CF .350 .249 .355 .429  36 54 104

John Sickels gave JC a grade of B, and MC a grade of C+. For kicks, here is what they did the previous season, at High-A ball:

     AB   BA  OBP  SLG XBH BB  SO
JC  464 .252 .324 .392  33 46  98
MC  468 .248 .343 .391  38 60 101

Okay, so here they look to be a little closer in terms of performance. But JC is still a year younger at the same level. Also, it may be helpful to note that JC was taken in the fourth round of the 1993 draft, out of college, while MC was taken in the 18th round in 1990, out of high school.

Who is the better prospect: The 22-year-old center fielder who has hit .243/.330/.361 in 1566 minor-league at-bats, or the 21-year-old second baseman who has hit .270/.349/.428 over 1084 at-bats? The numbers would suggest that it’s the latter.

If you’ve been here before, it probably won’t come as a shock to you that MC overwhelmingly has been the better big-leaguer. Here are their career stats through 2004*:

      AB   BA  OBP  SLG XBH  BB   SO
JC   596 .250 .304 .369  48  44  119
MC  4021 .248 .340 .440 413 529 1113

What happened? Simple: One kid developed, the other didn’t.

Why did it happen? Not so simple. My guess, and a cop out of sorts (or a way of saying I have no freakin’ idea), is that this is where non-quantifiable factors such as work ethic, attitude, opportunity, and the like come into play. Analytical types hate these things because we can’t measure them according to any obvious statistical output.

But intangibles do make a difference. It’s irritating that we can’t (or don’t know how to) plug them into a formula like we can other variables. Baseball would be so much easier if we could. Come to think of it, so would life.

But I’m not sure it would be as much fun…

*For the record, JC is Jay Canizaro and MC is Mike Cameron. Of the 515 prospects Sickels gave letter grades to in his 1996 book, only 11 players had more win shares through 2004 than Cameron: Derek Jeter, Scott Rolen, Bobby Abreu, Brian Giles, Vladimir Guerrero, Andruw Jones, Nomar Garciaparra, Jason Kendall, Johnny Damon, Jorge Posada, and Edgar Renteria. All but Giles (B) and Posada (C) were given grades of B+ or better.