I’m not quite sure how many hours I’ve spent over the past couple of months searching through scouting reports, videos, going to games, talking with people, and looking at stats in preparation for the Draft – which is practically only a day away. At times it can be information overload and the question popped into my head…just what am I looking for in all these stats?
I had general notions of what an elite player’s stat line looks like and a few specific fetishes – walks, OBP – but I wanted to know more specifically. So, I set out and with the help of TheBaseballCube.com checked out the college stats for every player taken in the top 50 of the draft and compared those who have had successful pro careers to those “where are they now” guys.
Unfortunately, college stats are only available for guys taken starting with the year 2000 draft, and even then the numbers are sometimes incomplete. Thanks to the multitude of factors that play into a player’s ultimate success and the relatively small sample size, I don’t feel comfortable posting concrete numbers of correlations or chiseling commandments into stone.
Since a lot of the players in this study are still just beginning their careers, limited weight is placed on their performance. I do feel comfortable coming up with a few rules to keep in mind the next time you’re perusing your alma mater’s Friday night starter’s stats, checking out a guy you want your team to draft, or looking for a leg up in your ultra-competitive fantasy team.
Lincoln’s rules for college stats
#1 Strikeouts, Strikeouts, Strikeouts
It appears that the single most important statistic in college – when looking to forecast future performance – is strikeout percentage. This rule applies equally to hitter, as well as pitchers.
While it’s intuitive that college pitchers who are destined for MLB greatness would dominate 19 and 20 year olds racking up Ks by the bushel, for a hitter an out’s an out…right? Not so much. More so than any power metric – OBP, wOBP, speed score, OPS, OPS+, or any thing else – elite college hitters who don’t strike out much have really good success rates. And really good college hitters who do strike out a lot have dizzying failure rates.
Success and failure here can be defined anyway you like; I classified players by WARP3 and EQA and ranked them accordingly. Guys who strike out more than 13% of the time in college rarely turn into good players, and guys who K% > 19% don’t make the majors.
This does not bode well for uber-prospect Pedro Alvarez who strikeout rate is down this year (13.9%) – in a smaller sample size – but in his two previous seasons at Vandy has whiffed more than once in every five at bats. I’m not saying that Pedro Alvarez is destined to top out at Double-A. I’m not saying that he can’t turn into a fantastic hitter – the kind that a championship offense is built around. I’m just saying that no college hitter taken in the last seven drafts has been struck out as often and played a big league game. Alvarez is a really unique talent but his statistical profile will make him even more unique if he succeeds – Drew Stubbs was the only player I could find taken in the top 10 who struck out more often in college.
For college pitchers, the numerical guideline appears to be 25%. While the overall success of pitchers is dependent on many things, college hurlers who strike out less than a quarter of their total batters faced, or fewer than 9 per 9 innings almost never make the show – or turn into elite prospects. And no college pitcher taken in the top 50 picks since 2000 who struck out less than a batter per inning has turned into even a mid-rotation starter.
#2 Multi-year trends
You can learn more about a player by looking at 120 or 180 games than by 60. Kind of makes sense doesn’t it?
Maybe the most surprising thing I found out was the amount of high draft picks that saw their performance take a giant leap their junior seasons. Guys who go from solid players to fantastic players tend to come back down to earth once drafted. Attention Jason Castro and to a lesser extent Reese Havens, players whose OPS rose more than 350 points in a single season tend to have had very middling careers.
The caliber of play is so high in the majors that guys who have what it takes usually make those skills known early in their playing careers. Guys who rake the whole time in college – at least as sophomores, poor freshman performances aren’t necessarily a statistical grim reaper – turn into good pros. Guys like Brett Wallace and David Cooper see their draft stocks buoyed by inclusion of underclass offensive statistics.
While the giant leap season is often an unsustainable peak, players who make smaller gains are more likely to continue to build on those.
#3 Importance of the BCS
Players from big conference schools, as well as the few small conference schools with traditional powerhouse programs are much better bets than someone from a school you only know because it was a 15 seed in the tournament last year.
The reasoning for this is pretty simple: good programs are good because they get good players. Big conference teams play better competition, allowing fewer inflated numbers.
Going to a small school is certainly not a reason to pass over a guy, in and of itself. Talent is the single most important thing, virtually the only thing that matters when prospect picking. But if you have two guys you’re deciding between, go with the better program.
Lincoln Hamilton can be reached at lhamilton@mail.com.