[DC 86]

I don't want to create a page-long post but this is a second response to Mick's "analysis" of Bailey:

Since you continue to perpetuate falsehoods and misleading statements I will again take up the task of correcting your misinformation, which I'm sure is getting boring for most readers (if there are any). But in the conclusion there is an important point which seems to be lost in all this, covered in the last paragraph for anyone who prefers to skip to the important part.

1. You said "It's $400,000 less. You're pretending it's insignificant. Would you walk away from $400k?  I wouldn't". Whether I would walk away from that amount is irrelevant (and you don't know my financial situation anyway). Obviously any amount of money has to be considered in context. 400k is a fortune to a homeless man and pocket change to a billionaire. You said that Bailey was drafted in the first round (despite being a 3rd/4th round talent) because compared to the slot value assigned to the pick he was signing "for much less money" (your words). Again, it's less than a 10% saving. That's not "much less" in this context. "Much less" would be the difference between third (or fourth) round slot money and the slot value assigned to the 13th overall pick, as you were clearly implying until I corrected you and you changed your wording. It's barely 15% of Harrison's bonus, not insignificant, but still far from "much less" which implies that Bailey's discount was a substantial factor in signing Harrison.

2. You said "$4.197 million is 11.042105% more than $3.8 million." So what. That's not how you calculate savings. If you buy a $100 shirt for $90 you have saved 10%, not 11.1%. I have repeatedly referred to "discount" and "savings" so you either don't understand what those terms mean or are again trying to mislead.

3. You said "I discount college OPS almost completely. Anyone can hit for power with aluminum bats against college pitching in the ACC ..." False. Bailey was in tenth in the league in OBP (which accounts for about 75% of OPS and doesn't measure power at all) and he was eighth in the league is slugging percentage, which wouldn't be the case if "anyone" can hit for power; he hit for more power than all but seven players. If anyone could slug .685 then they would do so, obviously very few do.

4. You said "... the ACC, the 3rd/4th best NCAA league." False. Based on conference RPI the ACC is the second strongest league this year, was the second strongest league last year (2022) and has been ranked between first and third every season for the last two decades, never lower than third. You can use something like ISR (arguably more accurate than RPI) and reach the same conclusion.

5. You said "More to the point, Bailey can't make contact. He hit .288 as a junior and .296 as a senior in a hitter's league." False. You seem to be under the impression that batting average is the same as contact rate. In fact his contact rate in college was 81% and his K/BB ratio was 93/86 which are both very good numbers for a someone who hit 29 home runs in only 477 at bats. [btw he was drafted after his junior year so you were referring to his sophomore and junior years, a relatively insignificant error but again inaccurate.]

6. You said "He hit much better as a frosh. In other words, he regressed in hitting ability." FALSE in capital letters. Freshman OBP .419, Junior OBP .466. Freshman SLG .604, Junior SLG .685, K/BB ratio, XBH rate, HR rate, GIDP rate, etc all superior as a junior. The metric in which he posted an inferior number was in your beloved batting average, which has almost inconsequential predictive value. It's incredibly misleading to boldly state that he "regressed in hitting ability" based on a single metric without acknowledging all the others so that readers can decide for themselves.

7. You said "he proved he couldn't hit much when he hit .185 in high A" The 2021 batting average in Eugene is a fact, but again deliberately misleading as you cherry pick one small piece of information in order to support your narrative. He indeed hit .185 in 33 A+ games as a rookie. He hit .225 in 83 A+ games last year. Overall he's hit .247 in 165 minor league games. He's continued to get on base consistently (.355 OBP overall). Has he ht well? no, but it's dishonest not to at least present the whole picture and to base your conclusion on a small sample consisting of the worst stretch (by far) of his career, again focusing exclusively on one metric.

8. You said "And as far as the NCAA goes, that doesn't crack the Top 700 hitters." Again, you are referring strictly to batting average, based on your statement that on-base percentage and slugging percentage are worthless. Fine, but here is the bigger and most important point:

Bailey is an elite defensive catcher. He was regarded as a "no doubt" catcher as a draft prospect and he won the catching gold glove for the entire minor leagues last year. That ability combined with very strong OBP and SLG made him a premium prospect coming out of college. But even if batting average is your exclusive metric, the brobdingnagian flaw in your argument is that those 700 hitters are mostly comprised of first basemen, designated hitters and corner outfielders. Catchers on the list tend to be "bat first" types who may or may not be able to handle defensive duties in pro ball.

Last year there were 29 MLB catchers who recorded over 300 plate appearances.

- only 6/29 had a batting average above .255, 17/29 hit .250 or below, 4/29 hit under .200.

- only 12/29 had an on-base percentage above .305, 10/29 had an OBP under .285, 2/25 had OBP under .250.

- only 12/29 had slugging percentages above .400 (only one above .500), 9/29 had slugging percentages under .350.

And those are the starting catchers, not the backups! The offensive bar has never been lower for catchers.

Given his defensive bona fides if Bailey can get on-base even 28% of the time with any power at all he will be in the major leagues for 10-15 years and provide positive value. Given his platoon splits it seems probable that at a minimum he could do that in a part-time role. Disregarding positional value and evaluating offensive production in a vacuum is extremely foolish. Obviously if he was a 1B/DH/corner OF he would be in bust territory. But he's not, he's the opposite of that (elite at a premium defensive position that is currently suffering from extreme scarcity) and that's why he's on every single Giants top-ten prospects list despite below average batting numbers. Positional value has never been more important as offensive production at the catcher position has declined so dramatically.

Giants fans should actually feel sanguine about Bailey. If he turns out to be an excellent defender and below average hitter (admittedly the most probable outcome) that has value in today's game. If he manages to fix his hitting from the left side (not impossible) than he would represent a clear win. The range of outcomes is still broad, but on the whole he's still a good prospect. "He hit .185 in 33 games in 2021 so he's a bust" is a terrible counterargument.

[DC 86]

I don't want to create a page-long post but this is a second response to Mick's "analysis" of Bailey:

Since you continue to perpetuate falsehoods and misleading statements I will again take up the task of correcting your misinformation, which I'm sure is getting boring for most readers (if there are any). But in the conclusion there is an important point which seems to be lost in all this, covered in the last paragraph for anyone who prefers to skip to the important part.

1. You said "It's $400,000 less. You're pretending it's insignificant. Would you walk away from $400k?  I wouldn't". Whether I would walk away from that amount is irrelevant (and you don't know my financial situation anyway). Obviously any amount of money has to be considered in context. 400k is a fortune to a homeless man and pocket change to a billionaire. You said that Bailey was drafted in the first round (despite being a 3rd/4th round talent) because compared to the slot value assigned to the pick he was signing "for much less money" (your words). Again, it's less than a 10% saving. That's not "much less" in this context. "Much less" would be the difference between third (or fourth) round slot money and the slot value assigned to the 13th overall pick, as you were clearly implying until I corrected you and you changed your wording. It's barely 15% of Harrison's bonus, not insignificant, but still far from "much less" which implies that Bailey's discount was a substantial factor in signing Harrison.

2. You said "$4.197 million is 11.042105% more than $3.8 million." So what. That's not how you calculate savings. If you buy a $100 shirt for $90 you have saved 10%, not 11.1%. I have repeatedly referred to "discount" and "savings" so you either don't understand what those terms mean or are again trying to mislead.

3. You said "I discount college OPS almost completely. Anyone can hit for power with aluminum bats against college pitching in the ACC ..." False. Bailey was in tenth in the league in OBP (which accounts for about 75% of OPS and doesn't measure power at all) and he was eighth in the league is slugging percentage, which wouldn't be the case if "anyone" can hit for power; he hit for more power than all but seven players. If anyone could slug .685 then they would do so, obviously very few do.

4. You said "... the ACC, the 3rd/4th best NCAA league." False. Based on conference RPI the ACC is the second strongest league this year, was the second strongest league last year (2022) and has been ranked between first and third every season for the last two decades, never lower than third. You can use something like ISR (arguably more accurate than RPI) and reach the same conclusion.

5. You said "More to the point, Bailey can't make contact. He hit .288 as a junior and .296 as a senior in a hitter's league." False. You seem to be under the impression that batting average is the same as contact rate. In fact his contact rate in college was 81% and his K/BB ratio was 93/86 which are both very good numbers for a someone who hit 29 home runs in only 477 at bats. [btw he was drafted after his junior year so you were referring to his sophomore and junior years, a relatively insignificant error but again inaccurate.]

6. You said "He hit much better as a frosh. In other words, he regressed in hitting ability." FALSE in capital letters. Freshman OBP .419, Junior OBP .466. Freshman SLG .604, Junior SLG .685, K/BB ratio, XBH rate, HR rate, GIDP rate, etc all superior as a junior. The metric in which he posted an inferior number was in your beloved batting average, which has almost inconsequential predictive value. It's incredibly misleading to boldly state that he "regressed in hitting ability" based on a single metric without acknowledging all the others so that readers can decide for themselves.

7. You said "he proved he couldn't hit much when he hit .185 in high A" The 2021 batting average in Eugene is a fact, but again deliberately misleading as you cherry pick one small piece of information in order to support your narrative. He indeed hit .185 in 33 A+ games as a rookie. He hit .225 in 83 A+ games last year. Overall he's hit .247 in 165 minor league games. He's continued to get on base consistently (.355 OBP overall). Has he ht well? no, but it's dishonest not to at least present the whole picture and to base your conclusion on a small sample consisting of the worst stretch (by far) of his career, again focusing exclusively on one metric.

8. You said "And as far as the NCAA goes, that doesn't crack the Top 700 hitters." Again, you are referring strictly to batting average, based on your statement that on-base percentage and slugging percentage are worthless. Fine, but here is the bigger and most important point:

Bailey is an elite defensive catcher. He was regarded as a "no doubt" catcher as a draft prospect and he won the catching gold glove for the entire minor leagues last year. That ability combined with very strong OBP and SLG made him a premium prospect coming out of college. But even if batting average is your exclusive metric, the brobdingnagian flaw in your argument is that those 700 hitters are mostly comprised of first basemen, designated hitters and corner outfielders. Catchers on the list tend to be "bat first" types who may or may not be able to handle defensive duties in pro ball.

Last year there were 29 MLB catchers who recorded over 300 plate appearances.

- only 6/29 had a batting average above .255, 17/29 hit .250 or below, 4/29 hit under .200.

- only 12/29 had an on-base percentage above .305, 10/29 had an OBP under .285, 2/25 had OBP under .250.

- only 12/29 had slugging percentages above .400 (only one above .500), 9/29 had slugging percentages under .350.

And those are the starting catchers, not the backups! The offensive bar has never been lower for catchers.

Given his defensive bona fides if Bailey can get on-base even 28% of the time with any power at all he will be in the major leagues for 10-15 years and provide positive value. Given his platoon splits it seems probable that at a minimum he could do that in a part-time role. Disregarding positional value and evaluating offensive production in a vacuum is extremely foolish. Obviously if he was a 1B/DH/corner OF he would be in bust territory. But he's not, he's the opposite of that (elite at a premium defensive position that is currently suffering from extreme scarcity) and that's why he's on every single Giants top-ten prospects list despite below average batting numbers. Positional value has never been more important as offensive production at the catcher position has declined so dramatically.

Giants fans should actually feel sanguine about Bailey. If he turns out to be an excellent defender and below average hitter (admittedly the most probable outcome) that has value in today's game. If he manages to fix his hitting from the left side (not impossible) than he would represent a clear win. The range of outcomes is still broad, but on the whole he's still a good prospect. "He hit .185 in 33 games in 2021 so he's a bust" is a terrible counterargument.