Jacobs & Davis

[viper]

First off, a Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Last season I bought into both Davis & Jacobs. Fortunately I actually only had Jacobs on one of nine teams. Both were major failures. Both were similarly skilled players in that they were coming off good years providing power but with very low batting averages. Neither is likely to be drafted for anything but the bench this year. Mastersball was anti-Jacobs while Shandler's site was pro-Jacobs. As I recall, both sites liked Davis for the power he was supposed to provide and both agreed he would hurt average.

Was there something is each players makeup that should have been seen? And who are this year's version of these players?

[Todd Zola]

This is a question I suspect Gary would like a crack at as we used Davis to take a good look at some aspects of our projection model. He is better able to discuss the details from a more detailed sense.

I'll take a more mainstream approach and say STRIKEOUTS ARE BAD and GUYS THAT STRIKEOUT AND RELY ON A HIGH BABIP TO RETAIN RESPECTABILITY are a BIG RISK.

You know, someone like Mark Reynolds.

[WillRoy]

I think Davis' upside is much more than a bench player. He's also extremely young and has only played a year and a half. I think 21 HR in 391 AB is something that screams BUY! Especially for someone younger than 26 (I think he was 22 last year).

Plus, Didn't he have an amazing Minor league profile? Especially power-wise? He's not a contact hitter but I can't imagine him ever leading the league in K's. I just double checked this one and his K's are a bit more than I thought. I'm a little surprised Ryan Howard has a better K rate. Funny since that didn't stick out in my head (Then again, I'm a fan of Mark Reynolds having drafted/Auctioned him in 3/5 of my leagues last year).
All that said, it does depend on league depth and type of league. And I can see how someone could make an argument to not want a risk/reward guy starting.

I just froze Rickie Weeks instead of Jacobs in one league so I'm certainly with you there.

Oh and this years versions... Hmm... I'm thinking (minor leaguers at least): Mike Stanton/Grant Desme/Corey Brown.

[Todd Zola]

As Russell Branyan continues to remind us, you need to have a few more hits than just homers to remain in the lineup and give the homers a chance to accumulate.

What drove Davis' MiLB success and even his initial success with the Rangers in '08 was an unsustainable BABIP. In AA it was .380, then .375 in AAA and .353 with the big club in '08. That falling in 2009 along with an increase in an already bloated K% led to his demotion.

Reynolds has an extremely high BABIP, not supported by his LD% so I personally feel he is at risk as opposed to someone who has a special skill of being able to maintain a high BABIP despite a normal LD% -- especially since he is not a ground ball hitter.

YEAR AB BABIP LD%
2007 366 .386 20.0
2008 539 .329 19.1
2009 578 .341 17.4

[WillRoy]

On my boy Chris Davis Line Drive rate:

Reynolds: See Todd's Post... It's gotten ugly.
Branyan LD% last 3 years: 19,20,19.
Davis' LD%: 25 in 2008, 21 in 2009.

I tend to think with Age and Profile (Power and LD%) that Davis is a nice Buy.

Todd, I have a question for you: Would you say that Davis' HR/FB has a place in this discussion?
Perhaps as either a warning sign or OTOH a positive? Seems kinda low to me, though I'm no expert on GB/LD/FB Rates by any stretch of the imagination!

Here are Davis'

2008 13.5%
2009 14.9%

Just for a reference I checked on Branyan and it was a lot higher. How should I read those?

[WillRoy]

On my boy Chris Davis Line Drive rate:

Reynolds: See Todd's Post... It's gotten ugly.

Wow. I did a poor job reading your post. Didn't see the word normal. As I said, I know next to nothing about how to analyze those 3 important rates g/l/f.

[Todd Zola]

Consider this a more "in the neighborhood" analysis than anything you would find on Hardball Times, Fangraphs, Beyond the Boxscore, etc.

Most hitters have a LD% around 20%, give or take, mostly maybe a little lower. If I see 15%, I think "wow, that's low". If I see 25%, I think "yikes, that's high."

Though this has been argued to be not perfectly accurate, and for good reason, it is not, a RULE OF THUMB is most BABIP is about LD% expressed as a decimal + .120.

A 20% LD would be done like this

.200 x .120 = .320

The differences are because some hitters have a greater of lesser percentage of GB and FB go for hits, something I have long wanted to investigate but have yet to secure the resources or time to be able to do so.

Anyway...

As far as FB and GB go, I don't think there is "good" or "bad", other than I want Michael Bourn and Jacoby Ellsbury to be hitting more GB than FB and I want Ryan Howard and Prince Fielder to be hitting more FB than GB.

ROUGHLY 75% of all LD go for hits.
ROUGHLY 20% of all FB go for hits
ROUGHLY 25% of all GB go for hits

It is these percentages that can skew the LD+.120 calculation.

So back to Davis....

Fangraphs has his HR/FB at 20.5 and 19.6, quite respectable. And likely sustainable given his profile and park.

The 25% LD rate was a 'fluke'. It came down to 21% last year, more reasonable. He could hit a larger percentage of gap doubles than other FB hitters. This may also help his BABIP.

But the key to Davis is CONTACT.

He fanned in 150 of 419 plate appearances last season.

Say he made his normal contact in only 50 of them. That is about another 6 HR. Now say he makes that contact improvement and gets 600 PA. He will hit about 39 HR with a BA about .285.

THERE'S YOUR UPSIDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[viper]

posts like this are what makes Mastersball so great. Got to love it. That said, if .200 x .120 = .320 then I fear I have moved onto an alternate reality [note that Fringe is likely to be canceled after this season]

[JP Kastner]

I'm just going to switch this conversation to Jacobs, briefly. Todd and I are in the process of cross checking the projections, and we spent quite a bit of time on the Royals. You have to spend too much time on the Royals because they have too many players. They had too many players before they traded to get Fields and Getz. Teams with too many players shouldn't do 1-for-2 trades...

Not getting into Jacob's skill set, the Royals are likely to make some cuts and a logical person to cut would be Jacobs. They would like to get rid of Jose Guillen, but they owe him too much money. The only person they can get rid of easily is Jacobs. If they do, how many teams will take a chance on him? Not many.

From that standpoint, Jacobs is not a safe bet to roster.

[cwk1963]

I had some hope for Jacobs when he was traded to KC but that obviously didn't pan out.

As far as Davis goes, I'm thinking split the difference and he gets about 500 PA.

[aburt19]

With Jacobs being released by the Royals, his value is WAY down. If you're a power hitter and the Royals don't want you,
you may have trouble finding a significant role elsewhere.

On Davis, it's interesting that the rumor is that Texas may trade for Mike Lowell to play 1B. If that happens, does it mean
that Davis isn't in their plans or that he will DH a lot?

[Todd Zola]

Davis will likely DH quite a bit as Borbon is slated for CF. Also keep in mind that even though 1st base supposedly has less wear and tear than 3rd, you are moving every single play so Lowell may not be an everyday player, especially when it gets really hot.

Short term, the "loser" in terms of playing time is likely David Murphy as Borbon, Cruz and Hamilton will command the majority of the OF run.

Owners of Smoak hoping for a 2010 debut will have to wait.

[aburt19]

I'm just going to switch this conversation to Jacobs, briefly. Todd and I are in the process of cross checking the projections, and we spent quite a bit of time on the Royals. You have to spend too much time on the Royals because they have too many players. They had too many players before they traded to get Fields and Getz. Teams with too many players shouldn't do 1-for-2 trades...

Not getting into Jacob's skill set, the Royals are likely to make some cuts and a logical person to cut would be Jacobs. They would like to get rid of Jose Guillen, but they owe him too much money. The only person they can get rid of easily is Jacobs. If they do, how many teams will take a chance on him? Not many.

From that standpoint, Jacobs is not a safe bet to roster.

The projections for the Royals should get a little easier. They cut Buck, Anderson and Jacobs (although they did replace
Buck with Kendall). Right now, it looks like it will be hard to get enough AB for the Royals OF with the perinnially injured
Jose Guillen, Mitch Maier, David DeJesus and Willie Bloomquist. I can't believe the Royals are going to go into the season
without picking up someone to supplement that group. Maybe they are thinking about moving Fields to the OF, where if
my memory is correct, he's played before. The over/under on Guillen is about 90 games, particularly if they use him in
the OF too much.

[JP Kastner]

Yes, they did. I was surprised that Texas is so interested in Buck. I always thought the Rangers were deep at catcher. I guess they don't think so.

[aburt19]

I thought that Buck signed with Toronto on a 1 year contract for about $2,000,000.

[Todd Zola]

He did.

[Todd Zola]

And now we can add Podsednik to the Royals equation.

Oh joy.

[JP Kastner]

I swear the Royals hate people who do projections.

[Todd Zola]

I swear the Royals hate people who do projections.

They are having a "can you top this" with the A's.