Under the radar guy, Chad Tracy?

[GotowarMissAgnes]

Yeah, and all those OBPs were inflated by his high average, which, given his age relative to the league(s), I don't think he will repeat quite as high. Maybe .310ish at best. When I say OBP skills, I mean walking skills.

And 144 HR's is pretty decent

Comparing past minor league stats to project a player's future isn't very accurate. i.e. Eaton is not going to turn into Jason Schmidt. I severely, severely doubt Tracy is going to become an Edmonds type offensive force.

And I think you need to look at these two players closely.

Edmonds never had great walking skills as a young player. Never had more than 60 BB before age 30. First 908 ABs in MLB from ages 23-25, Edmonds had 83 BB. In Tracy's first 984, he had 80 BBs (ages 24-25).

There's really not nearly as much a difference between these two as you argue.

14 HRs was Edmonds' tops in the minors

I'm not just comparing past minor league stats. The BBref comparison is based solely on major league stats. Pecota uses minor league, and I would argue they are certainly a fundamental part of any player comparison, if done appropriately.

As I said at the beginning, Edmonds is a top end comparison. Tracy would have to retain the power, and then add the OBP skill that Edmonds did at age 30. But, it's not a bad comparison, as any close look at the numbers would show. Tracy probably only has a 10% or so chance of reaching edmonds level, but it's not an unreasonable possibility

[brandnew]

I'm saying that you shouldn't predict Tracy will develop better on base skills just because Edmonds did.

It's very rare for a player who never really walked all that much in the minors to suddenly be taking 90-100 BB's a year in the majors. I'm just saying it's kind of misguided to be predicting that for a player when it's so rare.

EDIT: NVM, I read your last sentence again, appears we're on the same page.

[GotowarMissAgnes]

I'm saying that you shouldn't predict Tracy will develop better on base skills just because Edmonds did.

It's very rare for a player who never really walked all that much in the minors to suddenly be taking 90-100 BB's a year in the majors. I'm just saying it's kind of misguided to be predicting that for a player when it's so rare.

EDIT: NVM, I read your last sentence again, appears we're on the same page.

And, I'm saying that you should look at the range of possibilities for a player. Tracy's range of possibility includes something like Jacque Jones at the bottom, regression to a slightly above average player. It includes Ordonez in the mid-range, the most likely possibility, of a solid player definitely above average. But, it also includes a career like Edmonds. That's not the most likely prediction, but it should certainly be included as part of the prediction. Tracy has been very similar to Edmonds so far, so to say he won't be like him in the future, simply denies the facts that we know to this point.