Prospects and Position Changes

Originally Posted January 10, 2008

If you aren’t prepared for it, watching your top prospect change positions can be maddening. If you picked Billy Butler as a 3rd baseman a couple of years ago, you’ve seen him shuttled into every corner where the Royals think they can hide him from batted balls. And now he’s going to be a 1st baseman or DH. The writing was always on the wall for this, but for less obvious candidates can you predict it, prepare for it, and, more importantly, do positions really matter?

In this tussle, Chris and Joe cordially discuss their differing views on this sometimes-stressful topic:

Chris goes first:

Joe, if we were playing a simple game, you’d be able to get a stud-hitting prospect and lock him in at one position. Then you could plan for the future on that basis. It stinks when you clear the way for a prospect and your efforts are rewarded with an unceremonious position change. The way to protect yourself from being blindsided is to read reputable sources and see if experts think that your bluechipper is headed for a new position. Baseball America is good, and so are the prospect chats on ESPN.com. Often, you can see position changes coming from miles away. Recent position changes from guys like Billy Butler, Neil Walker, and Brandon Wood were anticipated by a number of sources, so if you are paying attention, you will know what’s going on.

Point two is that sometimes position shifts just don’t matter. This is fantasy. A bat is a bat – and a great bat will play from any position. Sometimes it’s best not to draft for position. Go for the bat, not the position and draft based on offensive potential. Some variety is good, but it’s rarely a good idea to take a player knowing that you don’t expect much from him because he plays a position that you need to fill. Don’t take a 2nd baseman just because you want to have a prospect at every position. Embrace the studs and give yourself an embarrassment of riches.

If a guy projects as a 35 home run a year player, with a good eye and a hint of speed, it won’t matter if he’s playing catcher or right field. And, the younger the draftee, the less weight you should put on his position. If you’re drafting an 18-year-old shortstop (Mike Moustakas, for example), don’t count on him to replace Derek Jeter in 4 years. Moustakas is an extreme example of course, essentially only the Royals and Scott Boras think that he can stick at SS. Stranger things have happened, but Moustakas will probably end up at third in a year or two, and that might not be the last time he changes positions.

But, realize that Moustakas projects as an excellent hitter. Good enough that he was the 2nd pick in the MLB draft. Take him as a hitting prospect because of his tremendous potential, and don’t worry about his future position. I recommend that you take a player because you think he’ll help your team no matter where he ends up playing on the field.

It’s rare that I take a player specifically to fill a position. Sometimes I will pick a catcher. It’s very difficult to find a good one, so like Brett Favre, sometimes I’ll close my eyes and throw it out there. Some guys aren’t able to meet the demands of the position, or they get shipped out to protect their legs and bat. Hank Conger might end up in the infield. And even a star like Joe Mauer is rumored to be moving out from behind the plate because he’s too good as a hitter.

Here are a few possible position change candidates among prospects:

Catchers (yes, all of them)

Chris Marrero, LF, Washington Nationals

Travis Snider, RF, Toronto Blue Jays


Joe responds:

Chris, there are many approaches that you can take when trying to compare players (who could change positions before they reach the majors) to determine who has the highest value. For my approach you’ll need a piece of paper, a writing utensil, and a calculator (or use a spreadsheet like Microsoft Excel). That’s right boys and girls, today we’re going to do math! But be warned, mathematical models are only as good as the numbers you put in them, and this is just an example of the type of model that you might choose to use when evaluating prospects. Remember that you control the parameter values when you create your model, and that any biases inherent in those parameter values will be reflected in your prospect ratings.

Let’s focus on hitters, as their situations are, in my opinion, often more complicated than pitchers. Let us assume that we have four players, all of whom currently earn their living in the minor leagues as catchers. After you have evaluated these four players and have assigned them a value on a scale of 0-100 (assume that a player of 100 would be the perfect fantasy player, regardless of position, who contributes in the top 5% of all of your fantasy league categories), you’ll need to predict their ability to stay behind the plate as a major league ballplayer (I only make the prediction for the first five years of the player’s career-by that time the development of the player will probably necessitate a reevaluation of talent and another position analysis). For analysis purposes only, we’ll use these four (very generic) catching prospects seen in the table below.

Overall Value (0-100) Probability he remains a catcher
Prospect A 70 10% (0.1)
Prospect B 66 50% (0.5)
Prospect C 62 75% (0.75)
Prospect D 59 100% (1.00)

Now, we need to evaluate how important a person’s position is to us. I’ve assigned each position a standard modifier of 1, and adjusted values by subtracting tenths of a point (0.1) from positions we value less in fantasy baseball and adding these fractions to the positions we value the most. I’ve separated the outfield positions in this analysis, but you should adjust this to your league set-up and your own preferences. We are going to be multiplying the players’ actual value by these modifiers, so be careful that you do not overcompensate for position (David Ortiz is clearly much more valuable than Brad Ausmus even though one is a first baseman/utility player and the other is a catcher).

Position Relative Value
Catcher 1.2
First Baseman 0.8
Second Baseman 1.2
Third Baseman 0.9
Shortstop 1.1
Left Fielder 0.9
Center Fielder 1.0
Right Fielder 1.0
Utility only 0.7
Multi-Position Eligibility 1.2

Now, putting this all together in one table, and assuming what I’ll call the Brandon Inge corollary (that a failed catcher will be moved to third base), we can determine the value of all four catchers in the table above. Note that we find the modifier value by multiplying the probability of staying a catcher by the positional value and adding the product of the probability of becoming a third baseman and the positional value of a third baseman. The modified value is the new “overall” value of the player (including the probability he stays at his current position).

Overall Value/Probability (C)/Positional Value/Probability (3B)/Positional Value/Modifier/Modified Value
Prospect B 66 0.50 1.2 0.50 1.0 1.1 72.6
Prospect A 70 0.10 1.2 0.90 1.0 1.02 71.4
Prospect C 62 0.75 1.2 0.25 1.0 1.15 71.3
Prospect D 59 1.00 1.2 0.00 1.0 1.2 70.8

This table shows us that Prospect B is more valuable than any other because of his high unmodified value as well the significant probability that he will stay at catcher.

Had we assumed the Ryan Garko corollary (that a failed catcher will be moved to first base), the table would look like this:

Overall Value/Probability (C)/Positional Value/Probability (1B)/Positional Value/Modifier/Modified Value
Prospect D 59 1.00 1.2 0.00 0.8 1.2 70.8
Prospect C 62 0.75 1.2 0.25 0.8 1.1 68.2
Prospect B 66 0.50 1.2 0.50 0.8 1.0 66.0
Prospect A 70 0.10 1.2 0.90 0.8 0.84 58.8

In this scenario, Prospect D was the most valuable, despite his “low” unmodified value. The difference in the modified value can be attributed to the decreased value of the fallback position.

You could, of course, create a hybrid Brandon Inge/Ryan Garko corollary table that takes into account the probability of the player moving to third base or first base (if moved). The mathematical possibilities are endless, but for the sake of simplicity, let us assume that if a player moves from catcher, they have a 50% chance of becoming a first baseman, and a 50% chance of becoming a third baseman (making the positional value 0.9). This table looks like:

Overall Value/Probability(C)/Positional Value/Probability (1B/3B)/Positional Value/Modifier/Modified Value
Prospect D 59 1.00 1.2 0.00 0.9 1.2 70.8
Prospect C 62 0.75 1.2 0.25 0.9 1.125 69.75
Prospect B 66 0.50 1.2 0.50 0.9 1.05 69.3
Prospect A 70 0.10 1.2 0.90 0.9 0.93 65.1

Again, Prospect D looks like the best choice, although there is little difference statistically between the top three options, especially considering all of the parameter values that we’re having to estimate.

Now, let’s look at a specific example so we can see this model at work. In this example, I will compare four Texas Rangers catching prospects (or just graduated prospects): Chad Tracy, Taylor Teagarden, Max Ramirez, and Jarrod Saltalamacchia. Remember, I’m comparing these players to the collective pool of fantasy hitters, regardless of position. The following table is my attempt to quantify the potential of these four prospects with respect to their fantasy potential (standard 5 X 5 categories). The maximum possible value in any category is 20 (think Ryan Howard in HR or Jose Reyes in SB).

Name Highest Level Average Runs Home Runs RBI Stolen Bases Total Probability (Catcher)
J. Saltalamacchia MLB 16 10 10 10 1 47 0.50
M. Ramirez High A 16 9 14 12 1 52 0.05
C. Tracy Low A 7 6 10 10 7 40 0.35
T. Teagarden AA 14 9 10 10 1 44 0.75

Gone now, obviously, are your dreams of a catcher with a 70 overall ranking, but remember that a score of 50 indicates that a player would be an average contributor to your fantasy team, regardless of position. Now, taking position eligibility into consideration, and assuming the Brandon Inge/Ryan Garko corollary, we will see the most valuable player of these four, regardless of their proximity to the majors.

Overall Value/Probability (C)/Positional Value/Probability (1B/3B)/Positional Value/Modifier/Modified Value
T. Teagarden 44 0.75 1.2 0.25 0.9 1.125 49.5
J. Saltalamacchia 47 0.50 1.2 0.50 0.9 1.05 49.35
M. Ramirez 52 0.05 1.2 0.95 0.9 0.915 47.58
C. Tracy 40 0.35 1.2 0.65 0.9 1.005 40.2

Wow! This model predicts that Taylor Teagarden will likely be slightly more valuable than Jarrod Saltalamacchia in these selected fantasy categories in his first five years of MLB service time. Max Ramirez, in my research, has the most raw fantasy talent (especially power) of all four players, but his defensive limitations will probably relegate him to another position, thus reducing his overall value. Chad Tracy’s value is significantly less than the other three prospects as he has showed limited ability to hit for average and is likely to be moved if his bat does develop. Note that because these players are in the same system, the probability they all stay at catcher is very low.

So, would I pass on Jarrod Saltalamacchia in my 2008 fantasy drafts? Not a chance! In fact, I would draft him much earlier than I would most established (but mediocre) catchers, despite the numbers in the table above. We know for a fact that, in most (if not all) leagues, Jarrod Saltalamacchia is catcher eligible for both this year and next year and will likely play enough behind the plate to keep eligibility for 2009. If he does eventually get moved, we will have likely received significantly above average production out of our catcher position for two or three years before his value decreases because of a position change.

I would, however, handcuff your selection of Jarrod Saltalamacchia by using a minor league draft pick on Teagarden. Handcuffing is a common practice in fantasy football (you select the backup running back on your starting running back’s team in case he misses time due to injuries, controlled substances violations, dog fighting charges, or gambling rings) and, to my knowledge, is not part of the standard practice in fantasy baseball. Protecting your investment by drafting a qualified prospect from the same team to “back-up” your fantasy stud at a position of scarcity can insure that you have a reliable option at that position if your starter is faced with one of those “unceremonious position changes”.

Well, there we go again, Chris. I think we’ve given our readers two interesting approaches on how to address the possibility of prospects changing positions before they reach the major leagues. Remember, it’s not always the plan that you select that will ensure your fantasy baseball success, but the fact that you have a plan.