THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

So in other words, the answer remains “they are either irrational, or just stupid.”

Tango, there are too many Howard threads.

Anyway, one of Matt’s arguments is that the Phillies know more about Howard than we do such that he is likely to age better than the average of all those historical players that Tango cites (and certainly ALL players in 2010 will age better than players in the 1950’s and 60’s, etc. I would think).

So that rather than using all of those historical comps for Tango’s analysis, you would have to use some subset of those players who were expected to age well.  Of course, we don’t know who those players are and we can’t just use those historical players who DID age well, since those include players that just got lucky as they aged and players who were not necessarily expected to age well, but just did for whatever reasons.

So basically if we believe Matt’s premise that Howard is likely to age well given that he was signed to a multi-year contract by his own team, we cannot really do any historical analysis other than perhaps to choose the players in that historical sample who aged the best (say the top 50% in “aging") and use that to establish the upper limit of Howard’s value.

Duke is Snider right?

Is it possible that as teams become smarter about spending money to lock up younger players and not signing average players to fairly large contracts, the top 50 or so players (when available as FA) will receive higher contracts than they are actually “worth”?

For example, if a team has several 1.5 WAR players at low-level contracts, and they are looking to upgrade without making a trade. If they sign three 2 WAR players it will cost 27 million (2009 value). They just upgraded by 1.5 wins and now have three extraneous players who either need to be traded or can be kept but will take a roster space and produce less value due to a decrease in playing time. One 4.5 WAR-player would cost them 20 million and result in an upgrade of 3 wins. They then only have one extraneous player, spent 7 million less and ended up with 1.5 more wins. If that is the case, then the 4.5 WAR player may be worth more than 20 million dollars to that team and they would offer more than that player produced in value according to WAR.

That does not excuse a team from signing a player to a long term contract two years before free agency at the easiest defensive position to find solid offensive production, but I suppose it is possible that players who produce at the higher levels may be worth more to their signing team than we may think.

MGL: Howard had an average of 16 WAR in his last 4 seasons.  The comps I’m using averaged 22 WAR.

So, I’m ALREADY am going to give Howard a great aging curve.  The guys with 22 WAR averaged 11 WAR in the 5 years in question. 

Proportionately then, Howard should count as an 8 WAR for the 5 years, and I’m giving him 11 WAR.

That’s a pretty good aging curve I’m giving him.  I’m being over backwards to be optimistic to him.

CJE/4 - that is the same argument as saying that $/WAR is non-linear, which we all know isn’t true. Teams will always have spare roster spots, can move players around, or will trade wins back to the market.

Matt first BPro MORP article covered that point very well I thought:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10629

I think you are going about proving the Phillies right the wrong way.  Obviously it’s hard to make a case for Howard being worth 125 million by projecting his WAR out over the next 5 years and dividing by dollar per win.  There are other factors in play, such as revenue stream by playoff appearances (and the payoff of wins is decidedly nonlinear), revenue stream from “Howard is a nice guy and a hometown hero”, the effects of inflation lowering the value of 125 million dollars…

I personally agree with the FanGraphs commenter than the LOL reaction from basically every analyst within hours of the deal is somewhat disappointing.  It’s like people don’t realize that they are not criticizing someone’s Fantasy trade but rather the moves of a multi-million dollar franchise with a ton of smart people behind the scenes and a vested interest in making a rational decision.

Tango, there is something weird about your selection criteria.  Both Ruth and Bonds had over 34 Rally WAR from age 27-30.  I think in the previous thread you mentioned a 2400 PA cutoff, which they both barely missed (Ruth missed a lot of time in 1925, and Bonds had the strike).  Given how small this sample is, I’m pretty sure including the two best players ever would skew the projection you get up by a lot.

Nick/7

What did you think after the Astros signed Carlos Lee? As I recall the sabermetric reaction was equally damning.

Although I DO agree with your point that given the sums of money at stake we have to assume there is some logic behind the extension.

However on your first point about revenue playoff appearances the counter to that is that equivalent wins could have been bought in 2012 for likely a similar or lower price, so I don’t think the MR revenue argument is a good one.

Perhaps Howard sells the most shirts or the Phils can use his image rights to get more revenue so he is worth it. That’s plausible I suppose.

But when you do comps with Mauer, Verlander, Hernandez, Holliday etc - who all signed, probably, for what will turn out to be less $/win. Also some of those if they signed for the Phils would probably bring in as much ancillary revenue as Howard.

And as Matt keeps reminding us perhaps the Phils have insight on Howard’s aging that no-one else does. Or perhaps the Phils expect inflation to take off (if so they should ink Werth to a deal soon too).

Tango presents it well. There is a 50-60% chance that this deal works out okay for the Phillies. Ideally you’d want 50% above 50% below. Here your probably 20% win, 30% break-even, 50% lose. So not a great deal but maybe okay ...

I think that’s a pretty balanced view - don’t you?

Right, I did use the 2400 PA cutoff.  And, no, it won’t change things “alot”, if I go from 101 to 103 players, I’ll be adding say an extra 40 wins or so more than I would have otherwise expected, or less than 1 win per player.

I think the 161 player sample didn’t limit it to 2400 PA.

I also am removing anyone who had less than 4 WAR at age 31-32, which I should not really do either.  This benefits Howard.

Also, since Howard is a 16 WAR player, I should select guys with 12-20 WAR, not 16-40 WAR, as I’m doing.

Basically, the group of players I’m selecting already puts Howard at the bottom of the group, but I’m treating him as if he’s in the middle.  Asking me to add Ruth and Bonds will make the situation worse, not better.

I believe the ONLY reason we are having this discussion is because of HR+RBI = $$.

"Although I DO agree with your point that given the sums of money at stake we have to assume there is some logic behind the extension.”

The “logic” is that there is absolutely NO WAY that anyone in the Phillies organization thinks that Howard is the 57th best player in baseball right now, as Rally’s projection database suggests.  And I am pretty sure that Oliver, me, Pecota, etc., has him NOT in the top 25 if not the top 50.  If you told ANYONE in the Phillies organization that Howard was not a top 25 player, they would laugh you out of the room.  If you told them that he was not a top 50 player, they would have you committed.

THAT is the logic of the signing!

When I first joined the Carinals in 2004, they were a fairly progressive and open-minded organization, although they did not yet have a foray into sabermetrics.  Everyone in the upper echelons of management other than the owner thought I was a laughing stock.

Obviously we are 6 years later and many more teams are using sabermetric analysis for all kinds of things. But basically, that is the way many baseball teams still operate.  Anything that is not in their comfort zone is considered a joke.  I have not heard anything about the Phillies that suggests that they are a sabermetric-leaning organization in any way, shape, or form.

It is a GIVEN, a guaranteed a priori probability that they would heavily overvalue a player like Howard, just like HOU, another non-sabermetric organization, heavily overvalued a player like Carlos Lee.  You have the classic case of a player being overvalued.  A first baseman, because non-sabermetric teams do not understand positional adjustments, an older player, because some teams do not understand aging curves, and in no way, shape or form, think that players peak at 27 or so, a popular player both in and out of the clubhouse, because some teams put too much weight on chemistry, a high HR and RBI guy - I don’t have to explain that I hope - and a relatively low OBA guy, because some teams still undervalue OBA.

I can’t believe that there is any argument that, “The Phillies must know what they are doing and analysts are missing something.” There are not too many things that I am certain of.  That that statement is patently false is one of them.

And I am not talking about knowing something about his character and work ethic or believing that he has extra value because of the his popularity with the fans.  I’ll give him .5 win per year for that, and we can then do the analysis.  Of course once you do that, you better not change Tango’s analysis since he already gives Howard 22 future wins rather than 16, which presumably takes into account the fact that Philly might know that Howard is going to age well (and again, I don’t buy that thesis in the first place).

These are my WAR forecast entering 2010:

8 Pujols
6 Longoria, Mauer, Hanley, Utley
4.5-5.5 11 guys
3.5-4.5 27 guys

That’s 43 guys so far.

3.0-3.5 15 guys

I have Ryan Howard in the middle of that group of 15.

FWIW, I have Howard as #133 in my projection database for 2010.  He is +20 (per 150) in batting runs, -5.25 in base running, +1.12 in turning the DP, and +.9 in defense, and -12.5 for a positional adjustment.  That makes him around 2.5 WAR per 150. I don’t see much wrong with that.

Here are some of the luminaries that are projected higher than Howard that would cause me to be committed as quickly as possible by ANYONE in the Phillies’ front office:

Elija Dukes
Kelly Johnson
Maicer Izturis
John Bowker
Asdrubal Cabrera
Julio Borbon
Chris Coghlan
Kyle Blanks
Cameron Maybin

and dozens of other players who no one cares about.

He is not even as good as Jeter, who is ranked as number 82, below the likes of:

SCHIERHOLTZ, NATE
AVILA, ALEX
POWELL, LANDON
SUZUKI, KURT
MARSON, LOU
PHELPS, JOSH
STUBBS, DREW
GERST, KENT
LAFOREST, PETE
SHOPPACH, KELLY
JASO, JOHN
MAYBIN, CAMERON
REYNOLDS, MARK
STEWART, IAN
BLANKS, KYLE
DOUMIT, RYAN
ESCOBAR, YUNEL
HANIGAN, RYAN

Sorry, my comment was poorly worded.  By “a lot”, I was referring to this entry, with only ten players, where it would have a large effect.  And by “projection”, which was a really poor choice of word, I didn’t mean one’s projection of what to expect from Howard, but rather what the expectation should be be for an all-time great talent, assuming one buys this method.  I don’t disagree with anything you have said about Howard.

MGL/11

I’ll bow to your greater wisdom on these matters - you’ve got the major league experience so you have a far better insight as to how these guys think.

Two comments though:

1/ I would (and do) find it astounding if in the Phillies front-office (or any front office for that matter) when putting down $125M on a player someone isn’t running a whole range of different scenarios on Howard’s future production and worth. That’s not to say it’s not happening - it probably is - but it boggles the mind.

2/ If 1, above, is true as you say then the whole debate about profit optimization changes right. No way the Phillies are remotely interested in optimizing profits without understanding what drives economic value in their organisation. You could argue it may be their intent but they’re not even close. In fact they aren’t really running a business.

"No way the Phillies are remotely interested in optimizing profits without understanding what drives economic value in their organisation. You could argue it may be their intent but they’re not even close. In fact they aren’t really running a business.”

John, that is a gigantic can of worms and a very complex issue. Some teams are intended to be run as strictly a business, some teams are run as a hobby by the owners and some are in between.  Baseball is NOT like other businesses.  Not at all.  To pretend that it is is folly.

Some owners care about winning and/or pleasing the fans and the media, at the expense of profit, and some owners don’t.  About what other industry can you say that?  There is no particular reason why an owner has to run a baseball team unlike he would “run” any other hobby he might have, like collecting cars or paintings, or traveling in style all over the world, spending millions of dollars. Some owners would rather win a WS and make 30 million dollars than come in last and make 60 million dollars.  Some owners in their brain want to run their team like a business and to maximize profit, but cannot find it in their heart to do so. Some owners are incompetent just like there are plenty of incompetent owners in other businesses who don’t make as much money as they could or run their businesses into the grounds.  Some owners put all of their faith in their GM’s and other executives and their GM’s have many other motivations besides making a profit for the company, not to mention the wide range of competence among GM’s. When was the last time you heard of a GM profit sharing like in almost any other business on the planet?

I mean, 30 or 40 years ago, a team couldn’t evaluate a player if their life depended in it, right?  Yet, there were people and metrics who could do a job 100 times better then they could using what we would consider fairly rudimentary metrics.  Do you think owners and GM’s back then ran their businesses optimally or rationally?  Do you think that teams all of a sudden caught up to the curve in terms of the knowledge gap between them and the statistical and sabermetric world?

I hope I shed some light on your comments and questions.  Thinking that teams all or most teams act even close to optimally as far as valuing and evaluating players and making decisions in general is extremely naive and not even close to being true.  Why would it?

This is a slight tangent to the issue at hand, but my question is --- who are the current sabermetric-leaning teams, the semi-leaning teams and the “what is sabermetrics?” teams?

WAG:

Sabermetric

SLN
BOS
OAK
CLE
SEA

Semi

ARI
NYN
NYA
TBA
PIT
SDN

Very little
ARI
CIN
MIL
TEX

Not at all
ATL
CHN
COL
FLO
HOU
LAN
PHI
SFN
WAS
ALA
BAL
CHA
DET
KCA
MIN
TOR

Obviously I could be wrong about these, and in fact, I am probably wrong on about 20% of them.

MGL - thank-you - very informative

MGL - on your list doesn’t Tango doing some work for Toronto at least put them a little further up?

Nick, ever since the new Phillies regime went through that Ibanez/Burrell fiasco, they lost me. No way am I giving them the benefit of the doubt on understanding aging curves better than MGL.

MGL, you have ARI listed twice. Your rankings seem to reflect public opinion, but I’m very surprised you’re not saying the Rays are “very.”

Sure, TOR could be a little or even very.  As I said, these are wild-ass guesses.  And I am not surprised that they reflect public opinion.  I don’t know much more than the general public does - maybe a little, but not much. The only reason I did not put the Rays on the “very” list is because I hate Maddon as a manager, so I may be unfairly biased in that regard.  Did I say that I hate Maddon?

MGL/18:
I think Washington definitely does some sabermetric stuff.  I read in article in the Washington Post a while back where they talked about how they were using defensive metrics to identify Nyjer Morgan and other good defensive players.

Jeremy/21:
Check out Burrell’s 2009 and tell me that the Phillies didn’t have some sense he was going to fall apart after years of treating his various minor injuries.  I hated the moves at the time, ranted about it, and found myself very humbled when I watched his season in 2009 hoping it would prove me right.  Ibanez had a nice year, actually.

MGL - The Rays definitely have to be sabermetric, they employ at least two former Pitch f/x writers.  I think there are many other teams that are sabermetric that you are not giving credit to.  Most teams just try to keep stuff concealed. 

Jeremy - Per FanGraphs, Ibanez was 4.3 WAR better than Burrell last year.  I know that such an analysis has huge error bars to it, but that’s pretty strong evidence that the Phillies either knew something about Ibanez or Burrell or both.  That’s a very strange example for you to pick to criticize the Phillies front office. 

MGL - Are you really arguing since the Astros and Phillies are both non-sabermetric teams and the Astros signed and overvalued Carlos Lee, the Phillies must be overvaluing Howard?  That’s an incredibly weak argument, and the Phillies shouldn’t be compared to the Astros of all teams given the difference in performance over the past few years. 

Look, the Phillies have been one of the best defensive teams over the current Amaro regime.  They consistently have one of the highest OBP and a strikeout heavy staff.  While they may be decidedly un-sabermetric, they clearly know how to value talent and I really can’t remember the last really bad or cringeworthy move they had made (Moyer was bad, but was not a particularity large contract). 

I think that you can’t just assume that the Phillies see RBI + HR = $$ just because they aren’t a sabermetric team.  Their track record shouldn’t earn them more respect.

Are you guys really defending that Ibanez/Burrell move? I’m not sure how to respond to that. I get that the Phillies are a successful team, but that doesn’t mean their decisions are infallible.

"MGL - Are you really arguing since the Astros and Phillies are both non-sabermetric teams and the Astros signed and overvalued Carlos Lee, the Phillies must be overvaluing Howard? “

What in the world are you taking about?  I’ve been accused of make an argument that I at least considered or mentioned in passing.  This one never even crossed my mind.

MGL, thanks for the list!  Knowing it is a WAG list (first time I saw that acronym, love it!), I’m a little surprised by the inclusion of the Mets in the “Semi” category.  I would hope a “Semi” team with their resources would be better at using them.  Maybe I am missing something and maybe it was just injuries that killed them recently.

Oh, I’m also surprised by SLN in the Sabermetric group, especially given MGL’s experience there.  I guess they’ve changed over the years?  Was this due to the new GM (dont’ know his name) and Jocketty leaving?

MGL - echoing Matt, I know the Nats have a SABR stats guy with staff. I do not know how much upper management works it into their decision making, but they have the info.

I’m sure if we pooled out knowledge and opinion, we could come up with a pretty good list. I was just going by what I read and how I perceive the team is managed (on and off the field).  One of the “problems” is that even the most sabermetric leaning teams tend to leave their manager alone, and their really aren’t any saber managers, so you still see a lot of questionable (or at least a lack of sabermetric creativity) things going on during the game.

I don’t see how you can not defend the Phillies acquisition of Ibanez.  His deal, 3/30, necessitated between 2.5 and 3 WAR on average in 2008 dollars, so probably a little less for 2009 dollars. 

http://www.tangotiger.net/salary2008.html

Ibanez going into 2009 was .356, .356 and .359 in wOBA over the previous three season.  Park and league adjust that and account for regression and aging and you get to somewhere around a .355 wOBA.  That’s +15 batting runs per 700.  Subtract 7.5 runs for position, add 22 runs for replacement, divide by ten and multiply by .85 and you get 2.5 WAR.

That’s assuming league average defense.  Obviously, the main problem people had with the deal was that UZR rated him very poorly during his time with the M’s.  However, the Phillies had said that there scouts thought he was much better than UZR gave him credit for and a much better defender than Burrell.  Last year he was + 4.9 according to the new UZR, and with the exception of 2007 was roughly an average defender every other year of his career. 

This analysis from Seidman is what you would typically get of the Burrell/Ibanez situation last year.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/replacing-burrell-with-ibanez/

Really?  Marcel’s wOBA, not even accounting for the fact that Burrell played in the NL in a hitter’s park and Ibanez played in the AL in a pitcher’s park?  No possible deference to the idea that the Phillies might have known more about Burrell’s health and expected aging skill set than a computer generated algorithm? 

How do you guys think we should judge GM’s?  I could see the argument for judging them by how well they do on a dollar per projected WAR basis, but only a really small sample size.  Over time, what you really care about is how well the signings have actually worked out for them because that allows for the fact that each team has spent a lot more time and resources considering each signing than just heading over to Fangraphs and averaging out Marcel’s, CHONE and ZIPS. 

If we are judging the true talent level of players we don’t judge them by how well they look - that’s the whole point of moneyball and objective analysis.  We judge them by how well they actually play.  Why should we judge GM’s by the opposite criteria?  Currently, we (referring to the majority of sabermetric commentators) are rating GM’s based on how well we like their process, not based on there actual success.  You don’t see the irony in that?  That’s why FanGraphs ranked the Mariner’s as the 6th best organization in baseball last year behind other teams with more successful front office’s such as the Cardinals, Phillies and Rockies.  Because Jack Z has made a ton of moves that FanGraphs authors advocate for (picking up Jack Hannahan, trading Yuni, etc.) and FanGraphs likes the way the front office thinks.  Meanwhile, the Phillies and Cardinals have been incredibly successful over the past few years and are blowing through their division this year.  The Mariner’s have had one better than .500 season under the Jack Z era and are 11-14 this year with one of the most patchwork assembled teams you are bound to see.

Note, this rant is obviously not about the Howard situation at all.  I agree with Tom’s analysis that it’s hard to see how this could be a good deal for the Phillies.  I am disagreeing with MGL’s comments

It is a GIVEN, a guaranteed a priori probability that they would heavily overvalue a player like Howard, just like HOU, another non-sabermetric organization, heavily overvalued a player like Carlos Lee.

Because the Phillies have shown that they are NOT like the Astros, besides the fact that the two are not sabermetrically oriented.  The Phillies have made it to the freaking world series back to back years while the Astros haven’t finished better than 3rd place in their division since 2006.  That would be like comparing a talented sportswriter like Bob Ryan to an idiot like Bill Plaschke just because they are mainstream.

"I really can’t remember the last really bad or cringeworthy move they had made”

Cliff Lee.

Rally/32:
I didn’t like the Cliff Lee move, but it should be noted the Benny Looper was the Asst GM of the M’s when Aumont/Ramirez/Gillies were brought in, and now he’s the Asst GM of the Phillies.  More inside info can’t be ruled out.  Even more, also, since I’m not quite sure if the Phillies thought Lee might be injury prone or if that was luck, but I don’t think it’s quite guaranteed to be bad yet.  That said, I think the market should have gotten them at least another prospect out of the M’s for Lee, even if the 3 prospects they got were underrated.

"I am disagreeing with MGL’s comments.”

Well, then you ought to be the first one to jump on my offer.  You won’t because you DO believe the Phillies overvalued Howard. I am not saying that it was a good or bad signing and I am not saying that teams cannot and do not know things about players that we don’t. In fact, if you read my post about the “hierarchy” I am saying that they definitely do and that it will show up in the performances.

I am asking a simple question.  Did the (greatly) Phillies overvalue Howard or not?  Of course we will never know the answer for sure.  But, if you “disagree with my statement,” which you said you did, then you ought to be able to tell me where you think the Phillies rank Howard as compared to other position players in terms of on-field contribution for the next 3 years in runs/wins. 

Very simply question.  You won’t answer it because if you did, one of three things will have to happen: One, you will have to be dishonest and say that you think the Phillies probably rank Howard as around the 40th or 50th best position player in baseball, two, that they rank him in the top 10, maybe even top 3, and that Rally, me, Oliver, Pecota, Marcel, and all the other projection systems are complete garbage (since we have Howard ranked around the 100th best player, including base running, as they should of course), or three, that the Phillies think he is top 10 and he is actually nowhere near that, which means that you CANNOT disagree with my statement that the Phillies are heavily overvaluing him.

So which one is it, Nick?  One, two, or three?  Simply tell me where you think the Phillies rank Howard and where you think his true rank should be, in terms of on-field projected performance (say, for the next 3 years) in terms of theoretical wins/runs in batting, base running, and defense.  You can’t or won’t answer that - neither will Matt - because if you did it would render other things you said not true (e.g. that you “disagree” with my statement that the Phillies heavily overvalue Howard), you would have to lie about how you think the Phillies rank him, or you would have to reject sabermetrics, at least with regard to their player projections.

"I think the Phillies would rank Ryan Howard as somewhere around the 10th current best position player in baseball based solely on onfield value.”

OK, you already answered that question, and I think you are full of crap.  There is no way that you believe that the Phillies would name 9 other players better than Howard.

But let’s assume that it is true.  So for them not be overvaluing him, you must believe that he is somewhere near the top 10, right?  Remember you disagreed with my statement that, “It is a given that the Phillies will overvalue him.” Now, if you are only disagreeing that “it is a given” and you agree that they did overvalue him, that is another story. I have no problem with that.  But if you think that they did not heavily overvalue him, then please take my offer and I’ll take 25 players and if they don’t beat him with their combined, average value, in base running, batting, defense, and positional adjustment (we’ll have to decide if we want to use rates or total value, including playing time - I favor rates because if someone gets hurt, it will not be that fair, especially if Howard gets hurt - so you ought to want rates too), I’ll pay you whatever you want, as long as you pay me if he does not beat my 25 players.  Deal?

I answered your question on the other thread MGL.  I said 3 things:

1) I think the Phillies value Howard around the 10th best position player in baseball. 

2) I think he is in actuality around the 35th best position player in baseball. 

3) I don’t think that the Phillies think Howard is worth 25 million per year base on his on field value, regardless of whether or not they overrate him, so I think they are basing the contract on other variables that all of these analyses (with the exception of Matt’s) have not considered. 

Such variables are:

1) Off field value.  Howard is a nice guy who is heavily valued by the fans because he gets a lot of HR’s and RBI’s.  I will bet you the standard internet fair that he has one of the highest fans drawn to actual on field value ratios in the majors. 

2) Inflation + performance based rise in payroll.  I tend to agree with Matt that the Phillies will lock up Werth and/or Rollins and go all in with a stud team for the next 4-5 years.  They will be overpaying for sure, but if inflation hits like it should and the Phillies can win 90 - 95 games and a world series or two, they will still make a profit. 

3) Aging curves.  I do think Matt makes a good point that the Phillies should have a more accurate aging estimate than the ones employed by the projection systems.  Even if you don’t buy Matt’s research, the Phillies are an exceptional scouting team and scouting is going to be more important in estimating aging than in almost anything else. 

The part of your statement I disagreed with is comparing them to the Astros.  The Astros are, in all likelihood, a dumb team, while the Phillies, in all likelihood, are a smart team.  Because neither are sabermetrically inclined, they may both be prone to overvalue high RBI/HR players, but not to the same magnitude and in the Phillies case it wouldn’t be the sole reason for the overpay.

MGL, you’re trying to win an argument on your own terms.  Neither Nick nor I are being disingenuous or contrarian about our arguments.  We readily accept that the Phillies may be overvaluing Howard (though without hit f/x, given how all of Howard’s ground balls are hard hit ground balls to the right side, it’s kind of ridiculous to speak about Howard’s baserunning runs with that much confidence that you knock him down from #60 to #100 or whatever), but we also think that they have a better sense of his aging curve.  So rather than taking your bets, how about you answer the following two questions more seriously:

1) State where you rank your knowledge of Ryan Howard’s health among all human beings in the world.  You’re very good with aging curves, so does that make you personally number one?  If not, state which medical tests you would conduct over the last five years you would run that you would help you have a more thorough knowledge of Ryan Howard’s health.

2) How many people do you think have a better understanding of what the Phillies marginal revenue of a win is in 2012 better than you do?  Or do you have a better sense of that?  Because of course that matters here.

3) State the marginal revenue of Howard, excluding the value of the wins Howard adds directly.  It’s not zero.  I have a Howard t-shirt and I wasn’t short of Phillies shirts, so there’s $20 right there in extra value.  Tell me what you think that number is, and how many people in the Phillies organization have a better sense of that number than you.

And an easier question:

4) I want you to estimate the number of players who make more than $25MM AAV on their contract going into 2016.

Just give me what you think that number 4) is, since you’re obviously going to think Questions 1) 2) and 3) are baiting, which of course they are, just like your question is.

(Also, echo Nick that comparing the Phillies to the Astros is ridiculous.  I lived under the reign of Ed Wade for nearly a decade, and the Gillick/Amaro era of decision making is nothing like that at all.  You’re just lumping in all non-SABR GMs.  It’s like comparing your research to the worst SABR-aware blog out there.)

I can easily name 7 other position players who I think the Phillies value higher than Howard:

Pujols, Mauer, Utley, Hanley, Longoria, A-Rod, Teixeira

And 5 other players who I think they value on the same scale:

Holliday, Gonzolez, Prince, Braun, Youkilis

And as I have said, multiple times, I am not disagreeing with your statement that the Phillies are overvaluing Howard, but with your statement that they are to the extent that the Astros overvalued Lee. 

I even said that in my post on the other thread.  To have only read the quoted part above without reading the whole post is, like, wtf?

Nick, I disagree with a few of the points you’re making in these threads.

I particularly don’t see the logic behind this statement: “The Phillies aren’t going to acquire Joe Mauer or Albert Pujols or Hanley Ramirez so I fail to see how there respective value has anything to do with Howard’s contract.” And I fail to see the irony in “rating GM’s based on how well we like their process, not based on there actual success.” Also, this: “The Mariner’s have had one better than .500 season under the Jack Z era and are 11-14 this year with one of the most patchwork assembled teams you are bound to see.”

And I guess the Mariners and Rays weren’t privy to the same information on Ibanez and Burrell as the Phillies? I can accept a 2-2.5 WAR projection for Ibanez, but Burrell would’ve had to have been projected for something like half that to justify a three-year deal over an arbitration offer.

Jeremy

I particularly don’t see the logic behind this statement: “The Phillies aren’t going to acquire Joe Mauer or Albert Pujols or Hanley Ramirez so I fail to see how there respective value has anything to do with Howard’s contract.”

If you are rating how good this acquisition is you should be rating it in the context of players that can actually be gotten by the Phillies. If the Phillies can identify 5 possible replacements for Howard, then his salary is only relevant compared to what those other guys would cost.  If those replacements are two guys of similar talent (Prince and A-Gon), and then three lesser teir players (Laroche, Kotchman or a prospect, these are just WAGs) then you have to do the whole analysis of Howard’s contract in the context of those players.  Could you get A-Gon or Prince for same or a lesser deal when they are free agents after 2011?  If you can’t then would the dropoff in value from Howard to Kotchman/Laroche be worth the drop in salary considering all things such as inflation/performance levels of the team, off field value, better information on Howards health compared to those two? 

And I fail to see the irony in “rating GM’s based on how well we like their process, not based on there actual success.”

Say that Rally was doing a projection of GM’s.  Well then he would do some sort of weighted average based off of recent team success, farm system ranking and other objective data. 

When we rank GM’s we don’t do that.  We usually pick guys who have made a couple of really awesome moves (picking Cashman for his offseason) or guys who employ Tom Tango or who pick up a lot of F.A.T in the offseason.  Essentially we rank GM’s based off how well we like them rather than how well they actually do, which kinda goes against the entire basis of sabermetrics. 

My point is not that Jack Z is a bad GM, it’s that the fact that he acquired guys like Jack Hannahan and trade Silva for Bradley and traded Yuni does not immediately make him a good GM.  Only the Mariner’s success under his reign will determine how good he has been as a GM. 

I remember reading that Burrell would likely have gotten somewhere near 14 million in arbitration in 2009.  I don’t know if that’s true or not, but that’s what I remember reading.  If the Phillies thought that Ibanez was around a 2.5 WAR player and they thought that Burrell’s health/aging profile was not going to be very kind at all, it makes sense that they would have signed Ibanez to 3/30 rather than Burrell to 1/14.

Benny Looper’s era of greatest prominence in the Mariner organization (the Gillick era, which is why he’s in Philly right now) saw the team completely burn a farm system to the ground and have quite possibly the worst series of drafts in the history of major league baseball.  In three years, they took one real MLB player, Jason Hammel, and they didn’t sign him. 

If you guys want to evaluate a guy on the results of how well he’s spotted players, Benny Looper is a big net negative, and any team that is actively taking his advice should be severely downgraded.

I wouldn’t make that argument, but it’s the logical extension of the “look at the results and then assume the decision maker knew what was going to happen” philosophy.

Nick, I still don’t at all follow the first part about Howard. Maybe a failure on my part.

I might be missing something, but it would appear you are contradicting yourself with regards to how you would like to evaluate GMs and how you are evaluating Jack Z. They had 61 wins the year before he took over, and 85 the year after. I personally wouldn’t use that as evidence that he’s a good GM, but is that not what you’re suggesting? As for me, focusing on the process rather than the results is one of my favorite parts of sabermetrics, so I guess we’re diametrically opposed.

Explaining the Phillies point of view in the Ibanez/Burrell decision doesn’t really help us in deciding whether the move was right or wrong. Obviously they believed they were right. Obviously I do not. I’m interested in what you and Matt think. I guess if you’re giving me 2.5 WAR as Ibanez’ projection, you also need to give me Burrell’s 2009 WAR projection, and the likelihood that Burrell was going to accept arbitration.

David, I’m less familiar with the Mariners organization than you obviously, but I do know that the Mariners were by far the best team in the AL when I did “The No Turnover Standings” for 2007-09.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10257

That was basically getting the production of all draft picks and amateur signings by each team for each year.  How long was Looper with the Mariners?  Does it correspond to the years where players who played so well in 2007-09 were doing so?  I’m really not sure myself because I don’t have the dates of Looper’s Mariners days handy, but I’m just making sure since I do know that Mariners draft picks and amateur signings as a unit did very well.

Nick, #36, I agree on all points.

I did NOT mean for the mention of Lee and Howard in the same sentence to imply in any way, shape or form that the Phillies are like the Astros or even that the signings were like one another!  I merely meant that both players were the same type of high RBI, high HR, no defense slugger, and thus they were both prime candidates for being overrated by a non-sabermetric team.  I have always said that a slugging corner outfielder or first baseman will always be overrated by non-sabermetric teams.

I am a little skeptical that the Phillies would rate those 7 players higher than Howard, but I can live with that…

Matt,

Take the international players out of the picture, and it will change dramatically.  The Mariners international scouting department, led by Bob Engle, has been the source of almost all of the homegrown talent the organization has developed in the last 10 years. 

It’s not hard to see this from looking at the roster now - the only players Jack Zduriencik retained from the roster he inherited were Felix Hernandez (Venezuela), Jose Lopez (Venezuela), Ryan Rowland-Smith (Australia), and Ichiro Suzuki (Japan). 

During Gillick’s regime, the Mariners laid waste to the farm system, doing a terrible job of drafting and continually moving young players for old.  When Bavasi took over, the team was ripe for a fall, and there was nothing he could do to avoid the huge collapse that was coming.  Benny Looper was a key decision maker in the front offices of the Mariners that were ruining that farm system. 

He also served as Bavasi’s assistant GM and one of the organization’s top lieutenants during the reign of terror that was 2003 to 2008.  While the drafting improved (almost entirely because Bavasi handed the reins to Bob Fontaine, who is pretty strong willed and a good scout), the player development (Looper’s area of responsibility) was a disaster. 

The organization instituted a push-them-until-they-fail philosophy that contributed to prospects being run through the farm system at breakneck speed, whether they were ready for it or not.  Despite having a series of high first round selections, almost all of them failed, and it’s more than fair to point to how the players were handled once they came into the system (Brandon Morrow is obviously a prime example here). 

During the time where Looper was an executive with significant responsibilities over the Mariners farm system, they were continually one of the worst in the game at acquiring domestic prospects and developing prospects in general.  The only reason your results look rosy are because of the international pipeline, which Looper had almost nothing to do with.

It’s worth noting that the only executive retained by Zduriencik was Bob Engle, as a nod to just how good of a job he has done in bailing out the organization’s travesties in other areas.

If you are rating how good this acquisition is you should be rating it in the context of players that can actually be gotten by the Phillies. If the Phillies can identify 5 possible replacements for Howard, then his salary is only relevant compared to what those other guys would cost.  If those replacements are two guys of similar talent (Prince and A-Gon), and then three lesser teir players (Laroche, Kotchman or a prospect, these are just WAGs) then you have to do the whole analysis of Howard’s contract in the context of those players.  Could you get A-Gon or Prince for same or a lesser deal when they are free agents after 2011?  If you can’t then would the dropoff in value from Howard to Kotchman/Laroche be worth the drop in salary considering all things such as inflation/performance levels of the team, off field value, better information on Howards health compared to those two?

If Howard was a FA after 2011, would it take more than 125/5 to sign him back? Which team would offer more than that?

Wait a second, wait a second, wait a second!!!

MGL said:

FWIW, I have Howard as #133 in my projection database for 2010… [SNIP] Here are some of the luminaries that are projected higher than Howard that would cause me to be committed as quickly as possible by ANYONE in the Phillies’ front office:

Elija Dukes

[SNIP]

PHELPS, JOSH
GERST, KENT
LAFOREST, PETE
JASO, JOHN”

While this is a cogent argument for why the Phillies are absolute buffoons for the Howard contract… isn’t this more proof that we have to do a validity check on the person who is supplying the argument?

Seriously??? Kent Gerst??? Gerst has a lifetime batting line of .251/.323/.339 in the minors. He’s 22, was cut in spring training and, to my knowledge, has been picked up no one. And this guy is worthy of being in the top 133 of a projection database?

The others, with the exception of Elijah Dukes, are almost as laughable as Gerst. And Dukes… well, how’s that been working out?

But, in the end, if a novice came around these parts with projections that had the above names in the top 132, my assumption is that you would all ridicule that person into oblivion. Since this is MGL, he gets a pass?

Seriously… at some point someone has to call shenanigans on at least Kent Gerst, right? I mean, maybe Pete LaForest, too… but I’ll defer to MGL’s expertise on projecting the major league stats of a 32 year old corner infielder/catcher based on his numbers in the Can-Am and Mexican Leagues.

Spike, chill!  I don’t get a “pass” because I am MGL.  My projections are annually in the same league as the best on the planet.  That is why I get a “pass.” And because I am considered one of the pre-eminent sabermetricians in the world.  You? I didn’t catch your name?

My database is just what the computer spits out.  It includes minor league players who have some time in AA and AAA and is based on MLE’s and not Can-Am or Mexican Leagues or whatever.  The positional adjustments are also based on whatever position I happen to have for a minor league player in my minor league data base.  If a player is listed as a catcher, he is probably going to be overrated especially if that isn’t his primary position.  Remember that a catcher starts off at 25 runs better than a first baseman!

More importantly, my minor league projections assume that a player plays in the major leagues, which is a very important caveat.  The “way” it assumes that is that it regresses the MLE’s toward that of an MLB rookie.  If you really want to estimate the true talent level of a minor league player (in order to compare to Howard, for example), before you find out if he gets a chance to play in the majors, you have to take his MLE’s and then regress them toward that of the average minor league player.  That makes a huge difference.

So basically, those names are not meant to be taken too seriously, especially the minor league ones.  I certainly would not disagree with you with Gerst (I never heard of him) and lots of others I’m sure.

That being said, here are some players who are legitimately ranked above Howard:

MAUER, JOE
PUJOLS, ALBERT
UTLEY, CHASE
SANDOVAL, PABLO
LONGORIA, EVAN
RAMIREZ, HANLEY
ZIMMERMAN, RYAN
RODRIGUEZ, ALEX
NAPOLI, MIKE
UPTON, B.J.
WRIGHT, DAVID
BELTRAN, CARLOS
CABRERA, MIGUEL
GUTIERREZ, FRANKLIN
WERTH, JAYSON
WIETERS, MATT
HEYWARD, JASON
JONES, CHIPPER
MCCANN, BRIAN
HOLLIDAY, MATT
SOTO, GEOVANY
SWEENEY, RYAN
GARDNER, BRETT
GONZALEZ, ADRIAN
REYES, JOSE
CRUZ, NELSON
KEMP, MATT
MARTIN, RUSSELL
CHOO, SHIN-SOO
SPAN, DENARD
YOUKILIS, KEVIN
ZOBRIST, BEN
BRAUN, RYAN
RABURN, RYAN
TULOWITZKI, TROY
WEEKS, RICKIE
BRADLEY, MILTON
GORDON, ALEX
IANNETTA, CHRIS
MCCUTCHEN, ANDREW
RASMUS, COLBY
RODRIGUEZ, SEAN
SIZEMORE, GRADY
MARTINEZ, VICTOR
SCHIERHOLTZ, NATE
AVILA, ALEX
DREW, J.D.
FIGGINS, CHONE
PEDROIA, DUSTIN
SUZUKI, KURT
VOTTO, JOEY
GRANDERSON, CURTIS
KINSLER, IAN
MARKAKIS, NICK
STUBBS, DREW
ETHIER, ANDRE
ROLEN, SCOTT
SHOPPACH, KELLY
FIELDER, PRINCE
MAYBIN, CAMERON
MORNEAU, JUSTIN
REYNOLDS, MARK
STEWART, IAN
BLANKS, KYLE
DOUMIT, RYAN
ESCOBAR, YUNEL
HANIGAN, RYAN
JETER, DEREK
PENA, CARLOS
TEIXEIRA, MARK
UGGLA, DAN
CANO, ROBINSON
COGHLAN, CHRIS
CRAWFORD, CARL
DEJESUS, DAVID
JONES, ADAM
KENDRICK, HOWIE
MOLINA, YADIER
SWISHER, NICK
ANDRUS, ELVIS
BARTON, DARIC
BORBON, JULIO
HAMILTON, JOSH
HILL, AARON
POSADA, JORGE
ROLLINS, JIMMY
TORRES, ANDRES
VANEVERY, JONATHAN
SIZEMORE, SCOTT
CABRERA, ASDRUBAL
FONTENOT, MIKE
INGE, BRANDON
ROSS, DAVID
RUIZ, CARLOS
VICTORINO, SHANE
BARTLETT, JASON
BOWKER, JOHN
GLAUS, TROY
IZTURIS, MAICER
JOHNSON, KELLY
LAROCHE, ANDY
PENCE, HUNTER
PHILLIPS, BRANDON
QUENTIN, CARLOS
SNYDER, CHRIS
BALENTIEN, WLADIMIR
BELTRE, ADRIAN
CALLASPO, ALBERTO
DUKES, ELIJAH
HOWARD, RYAN

Oliver has Howard 4th on the Phillies, 10th among 1b, 55th best batter. That’s on a 267/348/550 projection for 2010 (42 HR) 379 wOBA, -0.4 FRAA.

4) I want you to estimate the number of players who make more than $25MM AAV on their contract going into 2016.

Let’s see.  I have the the salary level of going up by 50% to 100% by 2016.  So, in 2010 dollars, that would mean that 25MM$ would be equivalent to 13MM to 16MM$.  Somewhere around there.

In 2010, there’s somewhere between 20 and 60 players signed at those levels.  So, to answer Matt, I think there will be between 20 and 60 players with a 25MM$ or better deal in 2016.

"3) State the marginal revenue of Howard, excluding the value of the wins Howard adds directly.  It’s not zero.  I have a Howard t-shirt and I wasn’t short of Phillies shirts, so there’s $20 right there in extra value.”

That’s $0.67 right there: merchandising revenue is shared equally amongst all 30 teams. And the local revenue that Howard can increase (attendance--though most of that is covered by his wins--and TV money--though I don’t know the next time Philly gets to renegotiate that) need to be discounted 34% for revenue sharing.

David/45:
That pretty much explains it.  The Mariners did actually still do reasonably well when I limit it to draft picks-- but it seems like only draft picks before Gillick.  The number of wins provided by people drafted by the Mariners in the 1990s is pretty obscene.  I think I’m going to explore this one a little more.  Thanks for filling me in!

Yeah, in the 1990s, the M’s drafted really well (okay, picking #1 in the A-Rod draft helped).  Woody Woodward was a brutal GM, but he employed some good scouts, such as Roger Jongewaard, and they were able to build a pretty solid foundation through the draft. 

Gillick came in and lit the whole thing on fire.  The organization is still trying to rebuild out of the ashes of the damage he did.

On Ibanez/Burrell, this isn’t inside information that only the player’s team could have.  Ibanez was talked about much more positively by baseball people than Burrell, even before the 2009 season started.  It is information that doesn’t go into projection systems though. 

If we had a rating, say on a scale of 1 to 5, rating each player’s dedication to conditioning I think it would be very useful to add to projection calculations.  The dilemna I have as a projector is that while I might have some sense that Ibanez is more dedicated than Burrell, for the vast majority of the 3000+ players I project I have no clue.  And my philosophy is if I can’t be consistent for all players, I leave it out of the process.

I suspect that players who condition themselves well will beat the standard aging curves, but only slightly.  After all, the aging curves are built on the survivors and we all know selective sampling is a problem to be overcome.  The ones who condition themselves poorly are probably likely to leave baseball much earlier than you’d otherwise expect.  There is value in knowing to avoid these players.

At least so far overall, the blind projections have done better in predicting how moves will work than using what teams pay as a proxy for future WAR.  What extra information teams might know about players still seems to be offset by things they don’t handle, such as park influences, looking at RBI and save totals, weighting the most recent year too heavily, position adjustments, etc.

Also on Ibanez, he was a much better value last year than Burrell would have been, but the contract could still be a problem.  He’s been a bad player from the allstar break of last year to yesterday, and is at the age where he could be done.  He’s got another year left.  The question is:  Will his contract be an obstacle that means the team does not resign Jason Werth?  Or will they ignore it next year, give Werth a megadeal, and possibly have Domonic Brown play left field with Raul a well paid bench player?

It will be interesting to see how high this team is willing to go on payroll.

I was looking at my 1B projections.  Howard is at 2.6 for the next 5 months.  I have these guys as the next level below Pujols:

M Cabrera 4.4
Prince Fielder 3.8
Mark Teixiera 3.8
Adrian Gonzalez 4.1

I think 5/125, 2 years out, for any of those guys is an overpay, but could be defensible.  I’m 100% convinced that Philly believes Howard is at least as valuable as that group, if not more, while I (and MGL, Tango, and Brian) have him more comparable to the next rung down, along with Adam Dunn and Carlos Pena.

Rally mentions teams looking at the RBI totals.

Here are my projections for Howard through 2015

YEAR  PA  BA  OB  SA wOBA HR RBI  WAR
2010 659 278 356 590  396 48 129  3.6
2011 633 268 348 558  382 42 115  2.4
2012 629 260 340 534  370 39 109  1.8
2013 624 255 336 515  362 36 103  1.4
2014 583 247 329 490  350 31  91  0.7
2015 462 238 321 455  335 22  66 -0.1

In 2014, I expect his BA to dip below 250, but he still has 31 HRs and near 100 RBI with a reduced PA total. Some people will look to that and think he is still producing - but he will have lost 80% of his WAR value from 2010. With a 350 wOBA and negative defense, he will be a below average firstbaseman. The position adjustment kills him as there are so many other sluggers at his position. Take Jeff Clement - I project 2010 at 251/319/442, 330 wOBA. If he could still catch those would be above average numbers. At 1b, it’s barely above replacement.

"At least so far overall, the blind projections have done better in predicting how moves will work than using what teams pay as a proxy for future WAR.  What extra information teams might know about players still seems to be offset by things they don’t handle, such as park influences, looking at RBI and save totals, weighting the most recent year too heavily, position adjustments, etc. “

Well said!

“The position adjustment kills him as there are so many other sluggers at his position. Take Jeff Clement - I project 2010 at 251/319/442, 330 wOBA. If he could still catch those would be above average numbers. At 1b, it’s barely above replacement.”

Right!  The two things that non-sabermetric teams do that often cause them to butcher evaluations are: Not understand and use properly the positional adjustments, and use RBI and HR (and BA to some extent) to value players.  What that means is that the first base and corner outfielder sluggers will tend to be overrated.  If they are high HR guys and are on a team where they get lots of RBI, that is a recipe for disaster for non-saber teams.  Howard is the perfect storm for being well-overrated by non-saber teams.  If you knew nothing about Howard getting a new contract and you were asked whether Howard would be overpaid if Philly (or any non-saber team) were to give him a new contract, the answer would HAVE to be, “Yes!” Again, that does not make Philly stupid or a bad organization, although they would obviously be better if they knew how to evaluate players better than they do (by properly employing positional adjustments when comparing players and paying zero attention to garbage stats like RBI and HR).

One thing in a first baseman’s favor for longterm projections is that 1B defense does not seem to decline with age - or at least that’s what I remember from one of MGL’s againg studies.

Even if it does, it should have less impact than other positions.  If a 1B lost the same % effectiveness that a shortstop did, they have many fewer plays for it to impact.  A SS might lose 10 runs from age 30 to 35, while a 1B who decline the same on a per chance basis might only be 4 runs worse.

Comparing to catchers, a mediocre defensive catcher who suddenly declines (think Victor Martinez) might not be able to play the position anymore.  Catchers, being slow, generally won’t fit anywhere but first.  So all of a sudden, their value can take a 20-25 run hit just on the position adjustments.

A 1B doesn’t have the risk of losing so much defensive value, since he’s so close to the defensive floor in the first place.  In the years I’ve done projections, I’ve never seen anyone who should be expected to be worse than -10 runs while just standing around 1B and catching what is thrown to them.  Even if they are worse than this, there is always the DH.

So I wonder if the rule of losing 0.5 runs per year through aging, which includes offensive and defensive value, should apply equally to all positions.

Don’t forget the contract that RBI-machine Justin Morneau got from the non-saber Twins.

Rally/59: excellent point.

Sure, 1B defense does not appear to suffer much from aging. In fact it might get better with age, although that might be because of the fairly large number of players who are new to the position in their 30’s.

Rather than giving a 1B less of a hit for aging, I think we probably underestimate the hit that other players (besides first basemen) take with age, because we usually focus on hitter aging curves and forget about fielding and baserunning.

Tango/60

I know you were just making a point about overvaluing RBI guys, but I don’t think Morneau’s contract compares to Howard’s in any way.  Morneau is a better player than Howard, will be younger over the last 3 years than Howard, and will be making just over half as much. 

I don’t know enough about the arbitration process to know if they saved any money over the past few years, but I think 14 mil over the next 3 years will be somewhere between fair and a slight overpay.

Steven/63, “Morneau is a better player than Howard”?

How do you figure?
WAR by age 25___26___27___28___29
Howard_____2.4__6.8__4.2__3.3__4.9
Morneau____1.5__4.3__2.4__3.6__3.6

(corrected)
Steven/63, “Morneau is a better player than Howard”?

How do you figure?

WAR by age 24___25___26___27___28___29
Howard_________2.4__6.8__4.2__3.3__4.9
Morneau___1.5__4.3__2.4__3.6__3.6

I like the list MGL, but which part of the Reds is a little bit sabermetric?  (I realize your post was back of the envelope, so forgive my apparent hostility...)

The part that cites attitude and “wanting to win, not just compete” as the biggest problem facing the organization and says it will only raise payroll if and when fans come out to support the team? (Castellini)

The part that left past organizations because ownership wanted them to use more data, brought in more anti-saber folks, and signed Willy Taveras and Mike Lincoln to multi-year deals? (Jocketty, Bavasi)

Or the part that puts its lowest OBP guys at the top of the lineup, a .750 OPS bat at cleanup, sacrifices a guy to 2B with it’s #2 hitter while down 2 in the 6th, considers 100 pitches a minimum for every starter in every appearance and only uses relievers in the strictest of predetermined roles dictated by the save stat? (Baker)

This is an organization built around an ignorance of, if not a hostility towards sabermetric principles.  I cannot imagine that they are more sabermetrically inclined than half of the league.

MGL/18,
I know for a fact that the Braves use plenty of sabermetrics.  It’s my understanding John Coppolella is mostly responsible for over seeing the sabermetric side of the baseball ops dept.

Squawking Baseball did an interview with John a little over a year ago, touching on the subject:

Bill Shanks wrote a book a couple of years back gushing over the Braves, which was mostly hostile to statistics and sabermetrics. Describe the culture within the Braves regarding newer, advanced stats.

The culture within the Braves is to find the best players, period.  In order to find the best players we use as much information as possible throughout the process.  That process begins with our scouts, trusting in what they see, hear, and project in, about, and for a player.  I truly believe we have the best scouts in baseball, a virtual All-Star cast of former players, managers, general managers, farm directors, and scouting directors: Jim Fregosi, Chuck McMichael, Dom Chiti, Dick Balderson, Tony DeMacio, Tim Conroy, and Jeff Wren, and that’s just our Major League scouts.

I also truly believe we have the best scouting and player development system in baseball.  The work being done by Roy Clark and his staff on the amateur side, Johnny Almaraz and his staff on in the international side, and Kurt Kemp and his staff on the player development side is nothing short of outstanding.  I can’t speak for those three individuals and their methods, but the results speak for themselves.  I can say that there is a synergy among all those departments and within our entire baseball operations group that provides us with a competitive advantage when it comes to identifying talent.

And yet that isn’t enough.  We want to continue to get better and to learn more about players and methods.  Just as we surround our organization with the best scouts we want to provide Frank with the best information to supplement the contributions made by those scouts.  To that end, we explore any and all statistics that may be relevant to a given player.  We are on the cutting edge of newer, advanced stats and have created some of our own statistics and formulas, which obviously we cannot discuss.  I think that portraying the Braves as hostile to statistics and sabermetrics couldn’t be further from the truth.

Also, I think the notion that only half (or even close to that) of the teams in MLB are using sabermetrics is off base.  If I had to guess it’d be closer to 5 than 16.

From my interactions with various front office people, as well as through publicly available articles/interviews/etc., I would say the following teams are seriously using sabermetrics:

Indians, A’s, Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, Mariners, Cardinals, Pirates, Diamondbacks.

Others who I suspect are using sabermetrics or something more advanced than just AVG/RBI/scouts would be:

Rangers, Blue Jays, Braves, Brewers, Rockies, Padres.

So about a third of the teams are pretty serious about using sabermetrics, and about half are using it in some form (that I know).  I don’t know about the other ogranizations.

"If I had to guess it’d be closer to 5 than 16. “

Well, 10 is closer to 5 than 16, so it doesn’t seem that you are really going against what people are saying if you say 10.

The number is probably somewhere around half.