Uncover the truth about Astros Rookies and their impact. See how the 2024 rookies compare to past prospects and what to expect from them.
I have a few general principals with regard to Astros Rookies. I recognize that these are my principals and that a significant percentage (the part that I would label as irrational that is not likely to follow nor read me anymore) of the Astros fan base does not follow these principals.
I do NOT dismiss what the broad scouting community thinks about Astros prospects. I do not generally think they all just hate the Astros and therefore are incapable of being objective. Why do I think this? Because generally their grades of the long-term viability of Astros prospects have been pretty accurate. To review that system here is the definition from MLB.com (Link)
Scouting grades have been a staple of MLB.com's prospect coverage for years, and they generally match how clubs grade players as well.
Players are graded on a 20-80 scale:
20-30 is well below average
40 is below average
50 is average
60 is above average
70-80 is well above average.
When discussing prospects, the most important number is the future overall grade, an all-encompassing number on the 20-80 scale that signifies what each player is projected to ultimately be in the big leagues.
A future overall grade of 65 or better is for a player who could develop into a future impact Major Leaguer, perhaps an All-Star-caliber standout. (Note: Some clubs use a 2-8 scale -- as opposed to 20-80 -- which is basically the same thing but without half-grades.)
I do NOT expect prospects to show their true talent level upon arrival. Yes, there are freaks like Yordan Alvarez that produce immediately. There are Hall-of-Famers that did not. This lack of expectation allows me to be patient and actually evaluate the peripheral statistics as well (Exit Velocity, Lauch Angle, BABIP, xwOBA vs. wOBA) to see if the underlying metrics are more indicative of future success.
I trust the peripheral statistics far more especially early in their career to indicate a player's long term prospect value. I believe there is a far greater level of luck in baseball than most fans. Sample sizes of less that 200 PA should not be trusted for any definitive judgements. I would say that number may be more like 600 PA for a rookie.
I believe (this is more of a working theory) that we can project future MLB performance based on MiLB performance with a similar accuracy than we project MLB performance from previous MLB career data. I believe that most players that "make it" will have offense metrics that model 80-95% of the AAA metrics.
I do not state young players who are still in their development stage suck. This is probably my biggest pet peeve with irrational fans. It has gotten scores of them blocked and me blocked by them. If you MUST say a player sucks (instead of labeling his PRODUCTION as sucking or more accurately lacking), then reserve it for the players like Jose Abreu in 2024, or Martin Maldonado's batting most of his career. Reserve your fan anger for players that have failed you for multiple seasons not just a week.
I tend to favor younger players over older players. However, I do NOT fall in the trap I see many others fall into in assuming the next player up who has raked in AAA will immediately have a huge impact. With that being said, I also do not dismiss every prospect as irrelevant as some do as well.
Again, these are my principles. I know it sounds like I am telling you how to fan. I am not. Fan however you want. Just don't expect to interact with me if you fan irrationally. If I use these principles to guide my rookie expectations, I have found that I have not been incredibly surprised.
Why am I giving you this long intro to the topic of the current Astros rookies? Well, Astros have had six rookie position players so far by 8/18/24. You may consider this normal. In some ways it is and in other ways that we are about to explore it isn't.
The Astros have been a development machine for most of the past decade. Ask any Astros fan and they will tell you stories of prospect after prospect stepping in and playing a role in the dynastic run. This is somewhat true but probably exaggerated in fan's mind.
Here are the team statistics for rookies in the dynasty era.
The Astros actually will have one of the least impacted years batting by rookies in 2024. The prospects have not yet shown who is really ready to assume bigger roles and the WAR shows it.
Every year seems to have significant contributions. Those rookie WAR contributions consistently have come from one (sometimes two) player(s). Here are the 1.0+ WARs for the Astros rookies 2016- 2023.
The top rookie in these seasons is generally providing nearly all of the WAR produced by rookies.
Many of these good rookie years came from prospects who were at or near the top of the Astros prospect rankings with grades 55-65. Meyers ascended rapidly in 2021, so I am struggling to find his prospect grade, but I think it was likely 50 or 45. Gurriel was a special case as he came to the MLB from Cuba a mature and developed player.
Let's look at the same data differently to ask a simple question. Have all top prospects delivered production in this era?
This table includes the prospects rated 55 and above. You will see two names you might have forgotten or at least tried to forget- Reed and Fisher. Both were very high prospects in the Astros system and neither really reached their projected potential. Even Kyle Tucker had challenges when called up in 2018 which led to a longer time in the minors in 2019. In reality, Tucker's BABIP and wOBA gap would indicate he was just terribly unlucky in 2018.
Overall, the message here is that highly rated prospects are MORE likely to succeed but are not guaranteed to succeed. Non-highly rated prospects can produce rookie years like Chas McCormick or Tony Kemp and Taylor Jones.
The 2024 Rookies- Who are They?
All of this sets the stage now to have a realistic view of the 2024 Astros Rookies and ask who they are in comparison to the other rookies that have come before them.
The 2024 Astros rookies far more resemble the non-highly rated rookies than the highly rated rookie group.
As shown, this does not mean they are going to be bad, BUT it does mean that assuming this group yields the next franchise player may be projecting a bit too far.
Overall, I would tend to believe the Fangraphs projections for the rest of the season.
If true, you can see why the Astros were willing to trade Loperfido since Dezenzo and Whitcomb have projections in the same ballpark.
In summary, the current Astros position player rookies can be expected to provide limited production. They do NOT project to be the superstar prospects that team has promoted during this run. They should project between 75 and 95 wRC+. This is not bad. I will soon show you IF they can get 75-95, that would be an upgrade in some key spots.
Check out the Astros woes at the bottom of the lineup here.
Comments