BA article about power

AVG/HR only hitters don't produce much "wins" unless they have a ridiculous year.  But it's surprising that the #1 picks in the draft two years in a row were guys who are avg only/good fielders.  

hsbaseball101 posted:

AVG/HR only hitters don't produce much "wins" unless they have a ridiculous year.  But it's surprising that the #1 picks in the draft two years in a row were guys who are avg only/good fielders.  

I think the teams project moniak and swanson for at least fringe average power or so (15 hr or so). Especially moniak still has room to grow physically. Doesnt necessarily project as above average but 15+ wouldnt be surprising if he gains some weight.

I also think that teams are more confident to improve the power of a contact plus D guy then teaching a big power hitter to field a position. 

Contact guys learning power in their mid to late 20s by using more of an uppercut and raising launch angle was the trend of was the trend of 2016 (murphy, altuve).

I think batspeed and swing plane are easier to improve than contact and barrel control.

If I was an mlb scouting director and I couldnt pick high I would pick guys with good batspeed and contact but a downward swing plane and teach them an uppercut (ideally of course a guy with good swing plane but those are drafted high and might be off the board by then)

The data in the article shows that power overall in the game is basically static compared to twenty years ago, but the distribution of power across the entire lineup is more balanced.  What role do PEDs and the steroid era have in this data in terms of how it has evolved over the past twenty years?  Certainly that era had numerous "outliers" who skewed numbers way upward for certain positions (Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, Rodriguez for SS, Etc. etc. etc) while baseball in the last five-plus years has seen fewer outliers relative to power numbers.    

Teams have also realised the floor defense provides in the OF. Billy hamilton is the worst hitter in the Majors but he still is around a 2.5 WAR Player (basically the same value as a Chris carter or mark trumbo).

of course hamilton can't make really well contact either so his hitting is even worse (no power with mediocre contact skill = really bad hitting) but if you take a guy with Speed, defense and contact he basically is a league average Player with a 90 OPS+ or so and if he then developes some Pop he is a star Player.

the no defense OF basically Needs to hit really well to even be an average Player. if he hits like bonds that doesn't matter but if he hits .240 with 20 HR and below average D you have a 1 win Player or less and that is really bad.

defense alone doesn't get you there but it provides a floor of automatic value. I think Teams are trying to minimize risk and they do that by spreading it out. if the guy has 50 Tools across the board but nothing really outstanding the risk is not as high as if you have a 1.5 tool Player with an 80.

that 1.5 tool Player (gallo maybe) can become a star but the risk is high that he has a fatal flaw (strikeouts in his case). So by chosing Players without a real weakness (ok power, solid contact, good D and Speed) you have some Kind of cushion if one of the Tools does not quite his ist ceiling.