Cautious Optimist - The Confidence Game: Projecting Talent (Part 2)

  

Yesterday and Today

Yesterday, I argued that one key to creating evidence-based confidence in projecting performance at the major league level is to do one's initial shopping where the talent is, where identifying it involves low search costs, sorting it happens relatively quickly and developing it to an acceptable baseline level is also relatively inexpensive.

The IFA market -- especially the LATAM region of it -- is a sweet spot for the Mets organization.  Shopping sprees should be matched by comparable investments that strengthen relationships with those on the ground, further reducing the costs of initial assessments and talent development. 

Today's post focuses on what I call the 'performance environment.'  If the goal is to increase the reliability of judgments projecting future performance, and if the basis of those judgments is to be current and recent performance, then those performances that form the basis of projections must occur in an environment designed to that purpose.  

Designing for purpose 

(1) In order for current performance to be a reliable predicate on which to project performance at the next level, the performance environment must approximate as closely as possible those that define play at the next level.  

How can this be done? 

One cannot control for many variables -- including the urgency or meaning of each game, the speed of the game or the intensity at which it is played.  One can control much of the roster, however.  

What the Mets are doing in constructing their Syracuse roster is instructive in this regard.  Those following the team cannot help but notice how many ex-major league players the Mets have signed to minor league or two-way contracts. 

These signings serve two purposes. The first is to provide depth at key positions as insurance against injury (and the occasional unexpected surgery) as well as disappointing performances from some who have made their way to the opening day roster. This form of insurance is designed to maintain a competitive level of performance at the major league level while also protecting top tier projects from being forced too early into service they are not yet prepared for, while saving the 'options' that may be needed later.

The second purpose is the role these players are expected to play in creating the right kind of performance environment for assessing the performance of top tier prospects.  Here's just one example.  Suppose a prized prospect is a sinker ball pitcher who induces a lot of ground balls.  One question is whether those ground balls are more likely to turn into hits or outs. The answer depends in large measure on the fielders playing behind him. 

You are more confident in judging whether those ground balls lead to hits or outs if your infielders are well positioned, experienced and adjust their positioning depending on the count, the hitter, whether there are baserunners, and so on.  In other words, if they play the game the way major league veterans would.   This is true for virtually every position and every potential at bat.  Surround the talent with a high baseline of professional level performance.  If you do that, then the performance they exhibit at this level is more projectable to the next. 

There is a further collateral benefit as well.  Suppose the same pitcher with the same stuff is backed by inexperienced infielders leading to ground balls more often turning into hits than they otherwise would.  It's not unreasonable for the pitcher to respond to the relative lack of successful outcomes by looking  for more strikeouts or by pitching away from contact.  Neither is desirable  and may well be counterproductive in every way.  Too many walks, too many pitches, not enough sinkers, and, worst of all, losing his faith in his best stuff.  That's the opposite of what you want to see.  You want to evaluate players at their best, throwing their best stuff at the most crucial moments.  That is what you want him to throw in the majors, but you can't project how successful he will be doing so if he is inclined to go away from his best pitch in the minors. 

(2) To increase confidence in performance projections it is important that the major league team and the affiliated minor league teams play the game the same way.  If the team at the major league level is built on speed and versatility, emphasizes bat to ball skills and putting pressure on the opposing team's defense, then this is the way all the affiliated teams should play -- to the extent doing so is possible.  

Every organization would benefit from having a characteristic way of playing the game that is coached throughout the organization.  This system-wide approach has become the norm in the NBA, where G-league affiliates run the same offensive and defensive schemes as does the NBA club.  In baseball, during Whitey Herzog's tenure, the St. Louis Cardinals were known for a distinctive 'Cardinal' way of playing the game.

If their recent drafts are any indication, the Mets are moving in this direction.  The drafts are heavy on shortstops, centerfielders, athletic catchers and starting pitchers. athleticism, positional versatility, bat to ball skills, speed, defense. The Mets favor a style of play built around athleticism, positional versatility, bat to ball skills, speed and defense: one that pressures opposing defenses while providing an offense capable of generating runs throughout the line-up.

Performance in the same scheme is a more reliable indicator of performance at the next level.

Again there is a collateral benefit.  Too often in the past Mets minor leaguers who are promoted to the majors seem lost and underprepared for the moment.  When teams throughout the organization play the same style there are fewer surprises a newly promoted prospect must face.

(3) The great unknown with players who have been successful all their playing lives is how will they respond to failure?  Failure takes many forms but is inevitable.  Helping a player emerge from failure is partially the responsibility of the coaching staff.  At the end of the day, however, only a player can lift himself from failure. 

Part of constructing a performance environment designed for purpose includes creating a space for failure and emergence from it. Oddly, perhaps, what one is looking to provide for players on the way up is what parents are looking to provide for their children as they move into and through their formative years. You want your children to experience failure in the safest of circumstances, surrounded by support, where the consequences are relatively minor: a place in which they can face failure, accept it as inevitable, emerge relatively unscathed by it, and if possible better for it.

I believe that under Stearns' leadership the Mets want to avoid their players facing meaningful disappointment or failure for the first time in the majors, where the stakes are at their highest, the stresses are greatest and most consequential.  At bottom, setbacks at what one believes they do best, and most closely identify themselves with, and finding the way back, rebuilding confidence, is a personal journey. Displaying it in the public eye and on the back pages of newspapers should be avoided if possible.

I may be in the minority, but I believe that Stearns' reluctance to promote McLean, Sproat and Tong to the majors last season had nothing to do with the financial implications of doing so or the possibility of securing an additional draft choice should one of them win Rookie of the Year honors in 2026.

The failure of the major league's starting rotation forced his hand. Left to his own devices, i imagine he would have preferred they made their major league debuts under less stressful circumstances. 

Always bet on those who take pride in their craft and joy in what one does

The best athletes see themselves as craft-persons, not merely as athletes or entertainers. They take pride in what they do, hone their craft, seek  advice and develop a deep but quiet confidence in themselves. They can handle the moment, and understand their relationship to the organization and to the fanbase.  They understand that being able to compete at the highest levels is a blessing, that the fans they perform in front of are also among those they perform for. 

These are traits of personality and character that need to be nurtured as much as any physical skill needs to be developed.  If they are, then players who emerge from the organization, whether they reach the majors or not are better for having spent some of their formative years in the Mets organization.  Other things being equal bet on the player who finds joy in the game, its challenges and opportunities, and takes pride in his craft.

There is no way to ensure the degree of success in projecting talent that every organization dreams of having. Projecting performance with well earned confidence that is the result of looking in the right places for talent, developing it well and under conditions that approximate those that they find at the next level, providing a safe place for experiencing and emerging from inevitable bouts of lost confidence, while working to build character, pride and the ability to experience joy when coming to the park every day and competing is reason enough to have faith in the process. 

There's no path to certainty, but there is a path to rational confidence.

The precepts outlined above and in the previous post provide some of the steps an organization can and should take to reduce the guesswork while increasing confidence in one's ability to project future performance.  This is the last hurdle that must be overcome -- the one the Mets have shown the most interest in and invested the most resources in overcoming -- in order to design a rational approach to roster construction capable of sustained success, a team the organization and the fanbase can be proud of and one that all of us will easy to root for.

One in other words that will mend our (too often) broken hearts.

Of that, I'm (more or less) certain!