An Exercise Featuring Cody Bellinger

I recently had a trade discussion in an ottoneu league (this isn’t an ottoneu specific article, bear with me). Anyway, I was trying to sell a veteran outfielder and a top pitching prospect for Cody Bellinger. Their salaries were about equal. My sales pitch: the veteran projects for a comparable FGpts total to Bellinger. The prospect pays for the nine year age gap. The offer was firmly declined. My sales pitch was roundly poo-pooed.

Let’s see what you think.

Those are undeniably comparable batting lines. Both players were basically “new” in 2017 so this is the only relevant data available. Bellinger hit a few more fly balls and hence benefited from some extra home runs. However, we should expect his line drive and ground ball rates to each regress a modest amount. In this case, “regress” means a few more grounders and liners. That would put him on par with our mystery man, assuming we aren’t projecting batted ball regression for him too (we are).

Bellinger, it should be noted, has a 24.5 ADP in NFBC. The other guy? A 193.3 ADP. Clearly, there’s something “wrong” with our mysterious traveler. You know who it is, don’t you? How about now?

Mystery Flaw #1: Big platoon splits. He hit just .182/.270/.394 with a 8.1 percent walk rate and 36.9 percent strikeout rate against same-handed pitchers. Compared to .265/.382/.551, 15 percent walk rate, and 27.7 percent strikeout rate with the platoon advantage.

Mystery Flaw #2: He’s caught in a roster crunch. His team plans to rotate five star-quality players through four positions.

Mystery Flaw #3 (the reveal): Hit .345/.466/.810 with 11 home runs, a 17.5 percent walk rate, and 22.3 percent strikeout rate in 103 April plate appearances. Batted just .226/.335/.455 with 20 home runs, a 12.7 percent walk rate, and 31.3 percent strikeout rate over the next five months (448 plate appearances).

Yep, we’re talking about Eric Thames. By compressing so much of his production into April, he left his owners with a stale taste. I think we’re all a little confused on some level. That April probably isn’t repeatable. It has a once-in-a-lifetime feel to it. What about his September? He hit .328/.431/.574 that month. By bookending his season with two big months, he proved that his early-season surge wasn’t entirely a fluke. Well, maybe not proof, but it’s some kind of encouraging.

The platoon splits occurred in a very small sample. It’s possible he doesn’t have a platoon. It’s also possible that Bellinger, who didn’t show a platoon split last season, does actually have a split. This, by the way, is why thinking probabilistically is difficult.

However, Thames did show poorly in some indicators I track to test the potential realness of a perceived platoon – namely walk, strikeout, and ground ball rates against left-handed pitchers. Since the Brewers have the personnel to allow it, he’ll probably rarely start against southpaw pitchers. The lefty specialists he sees in the late innings will likely ensure continued struggles.

For what it’s worth, Bellinger did not show any issues with his walk, strikeout, or ground ball rates against lefties. He’s not automatically safe from platoon issues. I’m cautiously optimistic.

In most daily lineup leagues, this platoon discrepancy can be addressed through judicious use of your bench. At pick 193, you can get a seemingly more volatile facsimile of Bellinger who plays only 70 percent of the time. Cool.

Recall, injuries and fatigue clearly played a role in Thames’ mid-season performance. He complained about losing his legs in May, and other issues dogged him through the dog days. A fresher Thames, a Thames who spent the offseason better preparing his legs for the grind of MLB baseball, could very well operate at peak efficiency. That apparent volatility he showed by mashing in April and September could be a red herring.

Despite a loud coming out party last April, Thames might be the steal of the 2018 draft season.