In the midst of awards week, we remind you what awards we're missing.
While looking toward the future with our comprehensive slate of current content, we'd also like to recognize our rich past by drawing upon our extensive (and mostly free) online archive of work dating back to 1997. In an effort to highlight the best of what's gone before, we'll be bringing you a weekly blast from BP's past, introducing or re-introducing you to some of the most informative and entertaining authors who have passed through our virtual halls. If you have fond recollections of a BP piece that you'd like to nominate for re-exposure to a wider audience, send us your suggestion.
Think awards week is already long enough? Think again as you consider Derek's suggestions for even more awards, which originally ran as a "Breaking Balls" column on September 19, 2002.
How well do the players on the Golden Era ballot stack up to Hall of Fame standards?
The Hall of Fame's Golden Era ballot has been out since November 3, offering 10 familiar names from the 1947-1972 era for Cooperstown consideration. This isn't the Veterans Committee anymore; when last year's reforms were announced, the words "Veterans Committee" were conspicuously omitted from all press releases. Rather, it's the second of three Era Committees to get its turn at bat, following last year's Expansion Era Committee, which voted on players from the 1973-1989 period and managers, umpires, and executives from 1973 to the present. Theoretically, next year’s panel will consider candidates from the Pre-Integration period (1871-1946), but the Hall has changed the rules so often lately that all bets are off.
A fictionalized take on one scout's day of despair and grasp at redemption.
This cup of coffee was brewed in the early 1970s. It’s my third cup and I can taste the era of its inception on my tongue; it’s vocal and disillusioned, with a bitter aftertaste from the marijuana, cigarettes, and traces of powder in its finish. Since cup number two, I’ve been staring at the peeling soft peach wallpaper that casually blankets my surroundings, pondering the psychological meanings in the selection of the color. The paper itself looks like it smells, like potpourri and human age, not the calming and delicious peaches that the hue suggests. This room is trying to manipulate me. I’d lick the walls (again) to prove my point, but the rogue counter girl is already suspicious of my presence and I doubt I have a long leash at this hour. I’m somewhat over-caffeinated and teetering on a manic episode thanks to the complimentary swill available in the lobby after the standard activities of the lobby have longed ceased. I’ve been up since 8AM for the seventh day in a row. I have to finish this report. The date is June 2005, just days before the 2005 Rule Four Amateur baseball draft. I am more of a number than a name. I work in the scouting department for a major league team. I’ve been tasked with revisionist busy work. I’ve been tasked with my own evaluation, my own execution.
(Notes) Draft Recommendations from 2001-2004 by XxXxXxX
2001: Draft Notes: Crosschecked talent; highest possible tier; must haves; five players with assorted thoughts. Please let me back in.
The rest of this article is restricted to Baseball Prospectus Subscribers.
Not a subscriber?
Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get access to the best baseball content on the web.
One of BP's co-founders returns to reveal an important amateur draft inefficiency.
Everyone missed on Mike Trout. Don’t get me wrong: Trout was a well-regarded player headed into the 2009 draft, a certain first-round talent. But he wasn’t—yet—a phenom. Everyone liked Trout; it’s just that no one loved him. Baseball America ranked him as the 22nd-best player in the draft. No one doubted his athleticism or his work ethic; a lot of people doubted the level of competition he faced as a high school player from rural New Jersey. The Angels drafted him with the 25th pick overall, and they’ll tell you today that they knew he was destined to be a special player. What they won’t tell you is that they had back-to-back picks at #24 and #25, and they announced Randal Grichuk’s name first.
With the regular season complete, we take a look at the BP fantasy crew's votes for a variety of awards.
With the fantasy season coming to a close this past week, each member of the BP Fantasy team cast their votes for a variety of categories. Today, I'm here to hand out the theoretical hardware. After seeing who we thought had the best, worst, and most interesting 2011 seasons, be sure to tell us who you think deserved some recognition in the comments section.
I am not strictly opposed to a player on a non-contender winning the award, which has happened on occasion (think Alex Rodriguez of the last-place Rangers in 2003) although I admit that's a tougher one for me since the word valuable suggests that the players' achievements did not go for naught and actually helped a team play into October…
…[S]ince the award is for mostvaluable player, and not most outstanding, the effect a player had on the pennant race should be vital. If someone else wants to interpret most valuable as synonymous to best, they can. And if someone else wants to interpret it as being valuable to a particular team, they can, too. But there is plenty of precedent to suggest it means valuable in the league.
A look at how the fantasy trade market is currently valuing Joe Mauer, Alex Avila, J.J. Hardy, Jhonny Peralta, Ben Zobrist, and Darwin Barney.
Since my weekly stint on Value Picks deals with the land of up-the-middle defensive positions, it seems only fitting that my article in this week's BP Trading Post also deals with the valuing of trades involving some of the top names in terms of catchers, second basemen, and shortstops. Here are a couple of names at each position who have performed radically different than their preseason expectations, along with how fantasy owners are treating them trade-wise as the season winds down. For the sake of reference, the details about the cards and what they mean have been copied from Derek Carty's inaugural piece and pasted below.
Trading Post Card Explanation Each player discussed in Trading Post will receive a “Trading Post Card.” This card will be jam-packed with useful information about each player’s trading profile. It will list information about the player himself, look at every trade the player has been involved in over the past two weeks and every player he’s been traded for, and give information about the average player he’s been traded for. Hopefully these cards will be self-explanatory, but if you’re not sure what anything means, here’s an explanation of everything:
In this new column, BP's fantasy expert discusses the rookie middle-infield crop and the values of various players on the trade market.
Today, I’m proud to announce a brand new BP Fantasy column that has been in the works for quite a while that I’m incredibly excited about. Trading Post will offer insight heretofore unavailable to fantasy baseball players. Using a unique combination of PECOTA rest-of-season projections and CBS’ archive of every fantasy baseball trade that every player has been involved in this season, Trading Post will delve into the value you can expect to receive via trade for the players on your fantasy squad. It will also be able to tell you which players are being undervalued on the trade market and make for good targets. While some fantasy analysis will look at a player’s cold streak and slap a “Buy Low” tag on him, Trading Post will be able to say whether you can actually buy the player low and, if so, will be able to quantify just how “low” he can be bought.
Trading Post Card Explanation
Each player discussed in Trading Post will receive a “Trading Post Card.” This card will be jam-packed with useful information about each player’s trading profile. It will list information about the player himself, look at every trade the player has been involved in over the past two weeks and every player he’s been traded for, and give information about the average player he’s been traded for. Hopefully these cards will be self-explanatory, but if you’re not sure what anything means, here’s an explanation of everything:
Shortstop is a huge weakness on many major-league teams, but is there about to be an infusion of talent through the pipeline?
I’m going to curb my desire to craft a cute narrative about the importance of the position. (As is often the case, I’m going to satisfy my desire of cuteness delivery by assembling cute prospect tiers.) If you read Baseball Prospectus, you are already ahead of the baseball knowledge curve, so I don’t need to get didactic about the inherent skill set required to play the position, or the overall value a quality shortstop brings to the table. If you really want to read my take on what it takes, you can always check out my “U Got the Look” series and read 12,000 words of meandering scouting patois presented with a perfectly striped bow of instability.
For this exercise, I turned a blind eye to the substance offered by the middle-class prospects at the position, focusing instead on those with high ceilings, those with flashy leather and questions with the stick, and those who find themselves the targets of positional deficiency whispers. The tiers are self-explanatory, but not comprehensive; it would take three more editions to include all the names in my notes, and frankly, you don’t want to read four articles discussing every shortstop prospect in the minors. Actually, I take that back. You probably do. Let me rephrase: I don’t have the sanity it would take to write four articles breaking down every shortstop in the minors. I have to monitor my sanity reserves; after all, I’m heading back to Arizona for a lengthy scouting trip. Give me strength. Let’s get started.
How the Cards can cope with the abdication of Prince Albert (and its implications for his payday), a Barton in hand becomes one in the bushes, and the D'backs, Braves, and Giants pursue blasts from the past for their benches.
In the final installment of the series, there's a look at rating the speed tool, a player's makeup, and the misuse of scouting jargon.
This article is a hodgepodge, a collection of sediments left at the bottom of the wine glass (or coffee cup, if you so desire). I’ll jump from the on-the-field identification and evaluation of the speed tool, discuss my definition of makeup and how it influences the developmental process, and I’ll put a bow on the baby with a brief criticism of those that misuse scouting terminology. It’s a pastiche of subordinate thoughts, but I would be remiss to let them float in the ether. Potpourri Prospectus!
The Need for Speed Speed is the preferred tool of the baseball pest: a player that uses a specific physical attribute to affect the chemistry of the on-field action. Speed can propel a player into professional baseball, and can disguise the overall effectiveness of that player while in the throes of the developmental process. Speed is not required for major-league success, but that isn’t to say speed is detrimental to a skill set; obviously, speed is a tool that is beneficial to possess. But speed is a secondary tool, a catalytic tool, and the evaluation of that tool, while tangible and painless to scout, often clouds the painting of the prospect in question. Speed is a tool with psychotropic properties.