There was recently some discussion on twitter about the use of the #hpgf tag (I believe cariocacardinal was involved – you are like my muse this month!), also known as Hyperventilating Prospect Geek Fraternity. That phrase was coined by St. Louis Post-Dispatch’s Joe Strauss as a way to rip on us prospect watchers and our habits to over-valuate (in his opinion) the young players that are in the Cardinals system.
I was not aware that it still had a negative connotation attached to it, I had thought that we had co-opted the use of it here in a positive way. What do you think? Is it still used as a negative attack in places outside of Future Redbirds? Or is it positive?
Entries (RSS)
I do enjoy this site and I consider myself a prospect watcher.
However, Strauss is right in the fact their are a huge contingent that does overvaluate, or at the very least overproject prospects. I think many fans loose perspective. The simple reality is that that most are going to fail. Where fans get ciritized is when they assume that any player can simply step in and play at the major league level. Also, there is value in releif pitchers, end of rotation starters, average players and role players.
A common argument for fans is that prospect A should be on the team over a veterern in a reserve roll. The same contignent of fans will then argue that Prospect B is not successfull because they don’t receive enough playing time. They contradict themselves and don’t even realize it.
I point out the Aaron Miles factor. I can’t beleive how many fans were hating this guy and all he was doing was actually succeeding. Its best for young players to receive more than 12 abs a week.
What is going to be interesting is see how people react because the cards system is getting better.
Prospect watchers were only a small part of the Aaron Miles hatred in the Cardinals online fan community. That came more from the sabermetric contingent, which is much larger and more vocal than the prospect hounds (although erik is one of the better saber analysts in the fan community, and he founded Future Redbirds, so obviously, there’s some carry over). It should be noted that Strauss does not think much of sabermetrics, either, now matter how successful those methods have been over the past decade or so in developing players in other organizations.
Also, you’re simplifying the “common argument” by generalizing. Most of the discussion about prospects here and at Scout.com is very grounded for the most part, talking about specific prospects at their current levels and discussing more their possible upside than anything else, and if you bothered to dig up those discussions, you’ll see that there’s a solid take on how weak the system was from most posters and bloggers. LaRussa and his coaching staff favor veterans over young players–just a statement of fact, not saying whether that’s right or wrong–and with the organization focused on winning rather development at the MLB level, it’s natural that (a) a long-running debate will be whether that is healthy or productive in the long-term for the organization and (b) some frustration will occur when a prospect apparently on the cusp doesn’t get a real opportunity. That’s understandable, and pointing figures saying that “there’s a huge contingent” is hyperventilating in itself.
I respectfully disagree there is a “huge contingent” of Cardinals’ minor league followers who overvalue prospects. I think a lot of people misinterpret our overt interest in these players.
A few years ago, I remember people wondering out loud about what to do with Yadier Molina *when* Bryan Anderson takes his job. Some may have went too far with that one, but it was a decent conversation in a bubble.
On the other hand, people like Strauss don’t value *any* prospect until he proves himself in the majors. And then, of course, they seem to forget that Pujols, Molina, Rasmus, Garcia, Schumaker, McClellan, and many others were once lauded by the Hyperventilating Prospect Geek Fraternity. We don’t get any credit for talking about players who make it. We only take [expletive deleted] for talking about the players who don’t.
Strauss is an average sportswriter. He doesn’t really care about prospects. That doesn’t make him a bad person or a bad beat writer. It’s just an awkward fit for people like us who happen to care a little too much about everything Cardinals-related.
Joe Strauss says that some of us overvalue our prospects.
I say Joe Strauss overvalues his reporting. Some of his late-night “scoops” would embarrass a high school news editor.
Get lost, Droopy.
I think we should accept the moniker as, I think, we generally have, with good humor and recognition of the half truths that it reveals about both us and the name callers. Obviously we tend to assume a grandiose postition when we state that a farmhand’s major league projections clearly prove that he should replace a certain player on the roster. We also are sometimes right, just like other people who harangue about managerial strategy or trades or contract negotiations. It’s all part of the joy of being a baseball fan and we are, in fact, operating from a more defensible position than most other armchair GM’s. Also, in comparison with the guy who coined the phrase, we are much more knowledgable about the farm system side of baseball and have a perfect right to our opinions. It’s just one more fun and stimulating way to appreciate the game and the HPGF label doesn’t bother me at all.
Its funny. Strauss talkes about how many over hype prospects and those feel the need to turn it into personal attacks.
I think the question is irrelevant. Whether or not we “project” a prospect correctly is unimportant. Straus just like to diss on you guys. The fact of the matter is that no one knows which prospect is going to make an impact in the majors. Not Luhnow, not Vuch, not Straus, not you or me. Remember, Albert was passed by almost 390 times before he was picked by; the Cards (12 times by the Cards themselves), and a year later he was tearing up the majors.
That’s not the point of what you do. Sites like this one introduce minor league players to the rest of us. It add depth to rooting for the Cardinals. I learn about new players (to me, at least) all the time at this site. I can guess how a player will do and watch to see if I am right. Right now, I’m interested in Tommy Pham. He represents all the athleticism and facing a steep learning curve on channeling that to being a good baseball player. I hope he does. I doubt he will. I don’t know the percentages, but I would think players of this ilk tend to stall somewhere in the minors. Who knows?
Anyway, keep on keeping on! This website performs a service for those interested (like me). Straus needs to think he knows more ’cause he is paid and we aren’t. [moderator: edited for politics]
I used to think it was funny, just to sort of wear the label that Joe Strauss throws out there rather than get irritated about it. But it’s run its course by now.
Pretty sure it was Goold that brought up on twitter that it had a negative connotation. However, the only one I know that tries to use it a negative context is Strauss and it appears to have backfired and I believe it now is generally worn as a badge of honor by those who like to follow the prospect world. Either way (whether used negatively or positively) I think most people take as good natured ribbing either way. Pass me a paper bag!
Speaking as someone who’s subscribed to Baseball America since at least 1990 (that’s the earliest Almanac I have on my shelf), I don’t think we necessarily overvalue prospects. I think the more we learn, the more realistic we are about which guys have a legitimate shot.
The toughest part of prospect watching is that most of us can’t actually watch these guys, so early on we may have underrated defense-first guys like Yadi and Brendan Ryan.
My opinion:
Not to go all “grassy-knoll-in-Dallas” here, but the Cardinal organization has had an interesting history in the past 5 or 6 years. Cardinal teams of the mid-decade past were veteran and very successful. Inevitably, of course, that team began its entropy. In time, ownership removed a popular G.M. who had had no qualms about leveraging minor leaguers for veteran players. It was the “old school” way of doing things.
The organization turned to a new G.M. with his own cohort (Luhnow) to implement fundamental changes to the farm system and overall organization. It was a new business model. There was resentment to this change for a long time from field management who had had an enduring and fruitful relationship with Walt Jocketty. Sometimes it was quiet grousing, sometimes it was more overt. Ultimately, I believe, this is what had happened, overtime, to cause the firing of someone like Marty Mason. He was, if you will, the last sacrificial lamb to the overall sea change that had occurred and the past was, finally, in the past.
How does this relate to the HPGF tag discussion?? I believe someone like Herr Strauss was merely reflecting a schism that has/had always been there since the regime change. Luhnow was resented, and it was expressed in things like seeing the glass half empty when it came to talking about the farm system. Only a year or so ago Dave Duncan made disparaging remarks that became public about the farm system (infighting you don’t typically see made public from a major league organization). And, of course, the system WAS pretty barren and bereft for a long while. No doubt.
So anyone allied with “new management” was seen as someone likely to over-value the youngsters and the changes being made. To me, the people paid to cover the Cardinals in the media day-to-day were merely reflecting the opinions of people they were talking to and interviewing every day. The HPGF tag grew, in part, out of that dissent.
I think that is a good assesment.
The comment on the minors/veterans I think is an chicken or the egg argument. Did they rely so much on veterans because the minor leauges produced nothing, or did they produce nothing becasue they were more focused on using veterans? I don’t know, but I suspect the former since Jockety went something like 10 years without developing a #1 draft pick. These were they Shawn Boyd, Justin pope, calvin Hayes, Chris Lambert days.
You can really see something changed in 05, and especially 06. 06 netted:
Ottavino, Perez, Hamilton, jay with the first 4 picks. It also includes Allan Craig, PJ Walters, David Carpenter, Luke Gregerson. That is 6 guys who already contributed in the majors.
of course part of what changed was extra FA compensation draft picks.
Agree with general thesis of your post but disagree with this point: “The organization turned to a new G.M. with his own cohort (Luhnow) to implement fundamental changes.” Luhnow was not a protégé of JMo. If anything, there has been something of a low level power struggle between JMo and Luhnow over control of the minor league system since JMo has been made GM. Certainly the rift between JMo and Luhnow is no where in the same league as Walt v. Luhnow but I wouldn’t exactly call them allies who came up through the ranks together (if I am correctly reading that intention into your words).
I think you may be right about some of that. I’m rather spouting opinion from memory rather than cross-checking for historical data, I suppose. Pity, that.
As I recall, I do remember that as ownership made the change at G.M., they emphasized that Luhnow’s work, and young player development in general, would have a growing emphasis within the organization.
And, actually, I think LaDunc got their noses out of joint quite noticeably in the initial phases of the brave new Cardinal world.
And now, as time has gone on, I think the casual Cardinal observer/fan may have noticed occasional friction between Mo and Luhnow (which may, in fact, have been there all along). I guess I looked at Mo and Luhnow as part and parcel of the new order vs. resistance from field management and framed the combatants in my mind that way..
As it relates to the “hyperventilating geek” crowd, though, I still think some of that organizational flavor came from the post-Jocketty schism and all the foregoing. And I think Mason’s dismissal may have been the last casualty of that old cold war situation.
If I recall correctly, Mo was a protégé of Jocketty, but unlike Walt toward the end, he had no issues with working with Luhnow and his people. He really wasn’t heavily involved in player development at the time everything went down; he was more involved with contract negotiations and minor pro scouting and acquisitions (one of which turned out Ryan Ludwick).
I don’t mind the HPGF tag, but I do think the meaning changes depending on who is saying it, and in what context. It’s kind of like how someone from Oklahoma can call their friend an “Okie” but if an outsider does it, it can have a negative connotation.
I really don’t mind Strauss. I think he likes playing the role of salty old school beat writer, and he likes baiting the fans with things like the HPFG tag. He does the same thing with Blues fans, poking fun at them after losses. He can come off as a jerk, but I really just think he’s having fun with it.
That said, I’m a frequent reader of the site, but an infrequent commenter, so I could see how someone who writes on this site, or just comments often, could be more sensitive to criticism about overvaluing prospects.
Keep up the good work!
Couldn’t agree more. Same here.
Strauss clearly intends to condescend to us with use of the phrase, past and present. The fact that we have embraced the term does not lessen the intention by Strauss. Here are thoughts on the matter from Tom S over at vivaelbirdos.
http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2010/9/4/1666523/suck-it-joe-strauss
Very stated points by Tom. The Strauss article Tom links to has been scrubbed from the archive by stltoday.com. I tried hard to pull it up. My search turned up a link inside stltoday.com but no article.
I would consider myself in the HPGF if I wasn’t so realistic with hints of pessimism. But, I think I am going to point out the innacuracy of this article.
Tom S. pulled one phrase to take issue with:
–”Agreed, the minor-league system has provided Rasmus and Garcia the last two years. But to argue Jay, Craig, T. Greene, B. Anderson & Co. make this self-sufficient for next season is insane. Simply put — again — the player development system is not mature enough to support a contending club despite what “third-party publications” may have boasted in 2009.”–
Actually, Strauss has a valid point. The players he listed, though important, are not everyday players. Strauss was onboard the Rasmus and Garcia bandwagon. So you do have to seperate the cream from the rest.
Right now, the cards probably have one of the strongest pitching system in baseball, but lack positional prospects. (i would take that all day long. Afterall, the cards have winningly proved its easier to find second baseman and RF than pitchers).
Now while the HPGF wants to point out the wins (probablyDavid Carpenter), that same group rarely admidts their missfires (Hoffpair). But I think that has to do with the fact that the cards system was so bad for so long, people might have tended to get a bit over excited.
But like I mentioned before, the cards are starting to build talent so it will be interesting to see who jumps on the HPGF bandwagon.
“Unicorns protect us from rumors, midnight tweets, conjecture, and general Joe Strauss asshattery.”
Posted by RiverRat on Mar 12, 2010 @ vivaelbirdos
http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2010/3/12/1369353/two-starters-well-be-seeing-three (see comments)
I’m not taking the bait zuke and rehash all the shallow prospect analysis spewed by Strauss over the years. Don’t even get me started on faberge eggs. I respect your opinion as a fellow Cardinal fan but see Strauss in a different light after having read him in the Post and his more pernicious tweets at length. It’s his attitude more than anything that rubs me the wrong way. Yes, he has access the general public lacks but displays no more knowledge of baseball than an interested fan. It’s easy to see the difference when reading Goold and Strauss side by side.
Staruss is in no way my favorite PD personality and probably one of my least favorie.
I do like DG more. And while I think Strauss tends to be too pessimistic, I think DG tend to be to optomistic. Strauss will say something negative, usually deservedly so, and the HGPF will be all over him when all he is doing is his actual job. So I can see his distaste for that contingent of fans.
And I also deeply dispise many of my cardinal bretheren that have a lack of baseball knowledge but don’t let it stop them from hiding behind usernames and throwing out inults. I see alot of this from the HPGF crowd as well. And its a real shame because this is the same group of people that chased Mo away from the online chats.
I see your point zuke of getting a balance from averaging out Goold and Strauss but my view is that Strauss has little to no knowledge of prospects below AAA other than the marquee names. Yet he bashes the Cards minor league system, witness his rants in 2010 about the failure of our minor league system to properly develop depth at 3B when Freese when down. The criticism completely overlooked M. Carpenter (then at high A but quickly to AA) of whom Strauss has in 2011 joined us in hyperventilating upon. It goes beyond lack of effort in trying familiarize oneself with the depth of the minor league system. During the Walt v. Luhnow brawl, Strauss appeared to my eyes to become a partisan tool of the Walt camp in bashing the job done by Luhnow. This fight didn’t end when Walt left the organization as the Walt holdovers continued to leak negative comments about JMo and Luhnow through the media. That upset me.
Anyway, not sure if you think I am one of those hiding behind a screen name. Just type “jjray” into google. It’s my twitter user name as well and anyone can quickly find out my identity (on top of the fact that some service, not sure who, posts my mug shot with all comments made here at FR).
As far hiding behind the screen name, i am mainly referring those on stltoday.
Who cares if some fans latch on with certain prospects….its called being a baseball fan. Methinks Strauss takes himself a bit too seriously.
Ironically, this site was where I first heard the name Matt Carpenter (well before folks like Strauss were talking about him). Is he going to be a star? Probably not. But at least the “contingent” saw him coming.
>>Methinks Strauss takes himself a bit too seriously.<<
+1
I am richer, smarter, better looking and have a longer member than Joe Strauss. His twitter tags bother me not at all.
Zuke, you need to re-read the article. One of the major points was that NO system regularly produces 4 or 5 everyday players every year. It’s patently unfair to expect the cards to produce all those players as everyday players.
I am pretty sure that jay, garcia, and freese produced more WAR than any other team’s rookies in the NL in 2010, except for SF with bumgarner and posey.
Don’t forget Atlanta, with Heyward, Conrad, Venters, etc.
[deity of your choice]! did heyward really round out the season with 5 WAR? okay, i’ll grant that one. still, third in the NL in rookie value isn’t any kind of a deficit or underperformance. nor is two years running with strong rookie of the year consideration.
What you say is just not possible. TLR hates rookies and will not play them enough to accumulate the WAR numbers you speak of.
I looked at this question a while back, using the BP VORP statistic rather than WAR, and concluded that the Cardinals came in either 6th or 7th in the majors in rookie VORP for 2010. Another team that finished ahead of them was — you’re not going to want to see this — Cincinnati. That was the result of a vast swarm of Reds pitchers who added value above replacement. (Amusingly, pretty well the whole difference between Reds aggregate rookie VORP and Cardinals aggregate rookie VORP had to do with the way their pitchers *hit*. Mike Leake provided truly extraordinary production with the bat, and he wasn’t the only Reds rookie pitcher who hit well. Take that away and it’s basically a dead heat in value added by the two teams’ rookies.)
All of which confirms your basic point: the Cardinals rookies were a valuable commodity in 2010, far beyond what one might infer from the dire predictions for their farm system at the beginning of the season. We can’t expect it to be as productive in 2011 simply because there are fewer holes to fill. (Knock on wood.)
tom s., i re-read your article and was reminded how much i appreciated it at the time. besides waino, the rookies really were the most enjoyable part of last season, which just added to the fun of being HPGF.
to the original point, i think HPGF will always have negative connotations to the uninitiated, and that’s fine. from what i can tell, those who enjoy following the cards’ minor league system (myself included) have enough of a sense of humor about themselves to realize it’s more funny than actually demeaning, and re-appropriate it.
I agree. I definitely believe it’s more funny than demeaning, but it’s also fun to take a jab at someone like Strauss who just doesn’t get it.
Strauss doesn’t bother me. He’s like that a-hole uncle who shows up half loaded on Christmas, makes fun of your aunt’s hat, calls your cousin fat, and then hands you a $100 bill on the way out the door and tells you to use it to buy some tail. It is what it is.