

I'm not quite sure how these numbers are generated.  It appears that in
a neutral park Bo's HR and slugging tend to drop (he actually loses two
home runs).  Or do they?  What is "equivalent average?"

One thing, when looking at Bo's stats, is that you can see that KC took
away some homers.  Normally, you expect some would-be homers to go for
doubles or triples in big parks, or to be caught, and for that matter you
expect lots of doubles and triples anyway.  But Bo, despite his speed, 
hit very few doubles and not that many triples.  So I would expect his
value to have risen quite considerably in a neutral park.  


Felix Jose has been a .350/.440 player in a fairly neutral park.
I would offhand guess the `89-`90 Bo at around a .330/.530 player.
Maybe .330/.550 .  Not even close.


I'd put him about there too.  

Note: I hadn't realized the media had hyped him so much.  I thought he
was always viewed by them as a better football player, and only so-so 
at baseball.  He did only have one 30-hr, 100-rbi season, and KC wasn't
winning.

Note 2: I maybe have harped on this a bit in the past, but there is a
mistake being made (by the SDCN's, as they are known, on this group)
with respect to players like Bo and Deion and Lofton (and perhaps others).

We find, that if you look at a large group of players, their past major
and minor league numbers will predict their future numbers fairly well.
Their are some caveats: the younger they are, the less good the prediction;
the lower the minor league, the less good (I imagine), the more recent
the player has left college ball, etc.

Now of course, this prediction involves quite a bit of "error."  Sometimes
a player with poor MLE's (Dave Justice, the 1990 Ventura) becomes a star.
Some hitters develop (Shane Mack, Brian Downing), some don't (Oddibe
McDowell, Mickey Brantley).  This error involves real things: there are
real reasons why Oddibe didn't hit and Shane did.  It may (who knows)
involve parks and batting coaches and wheaties and injuries and lifting
and so on.

But still, you have this big pool of players, and things work pretty well.
One of the reasons for these predictions accuracy is the common background
of the players.  One thing we know about professional baseball players is
that all of them (or almost all) have spent a good deal of time playing
ball.  Their backgrounds are similar.

What hasn't been established is what happens when you encounter a player
with a different background?  Is there some reason to believe that a
Bo, or a Deion, or a Lofton, or a Tony Gwynn (?), or an Ainge, or so
on, has such a different background, that the standard model and standard
assumptions fit this person slowly?

It hasn't been established that you can use MLE's with two-sport players.
(It hasn't been established that you can't, but then statistics is, after
all, an art).  I personally think otherwise lucid individuals continually
make completely nonsensical statements about Bo and Deion and Lofton.
"Look at those good-but-not-great minor league numbers," they say.  Well,
what happens if those numbers simply don't mean what they usually mean?
It might mean that Ken Lofton suddenly has a better year in Houston than
Tuscon.  It might mean that Deion suddenly has a better half-year in
Atlanta than Greenville.  

Then again, it might not.  Ken and Deion might go right back in the tank
this year, live up to those poor MLE's.  But you guys DON'T KNOW.  What's 
worse, you don't know that you don't.  And you don't know that there are 
other players you won't know about -- injuries and lifting and wheaties 
again.  You seem to think that the model is perfect and eternal.  It's not.
It's got some error.

Oh well.

Bill Guilford