Jonathan Villar New York Mets

Age: 30 (May 02, 1991) | 6' 1" | 215lbs. | Bats: Both 2B-25 SS-21 OF-2 CF-2 DH-6 PH-13 PR-1
Tm Lg YEAR G AB R H BB SO 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BA OBP SLG BB% SO% BABIP G/L/F % $4x4 $5x5
MIL A 2017 4 13 2 8 1 3 1 1 0 6 0 1 .615 .600 .846 7 20 .727 n/a
MIL NL 2017 122 403 49 97 30 132 18 1 11 40 23 8 .241 .293 .372 7 31 .330 57/21/22 16 14
MIL AAA 2018 3 10 4 6 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 .600 .636 .900 9 9 .625 n/a
MIL NL 2018 87 257 26 67 19 80 10 1 6 22 14 2 .261 .315 .377 7 29 .355 63/21/16 12 11
BAL AL 2018 54 209 28 54 22 58 4 0 8 24 21 3 .258 .336 .392 9 25 .319 48/18/34 16 13
BAL AL 2019 162 642 111 176 61 176 33 5 24 73 40 9 .274 .339 .453 9 25 .341 49/20/31 39 35
TOR AL 2020 22 69 3 13 9 22 1 0 0 6 7 0 .188 .278 .203 11 28 .271 62/21/17 8 6
MIA NL 2020 30 116 10 30 10 32 4 0 2 9 9 5 .259 .315 .345 8 25 .337 59/18/24 18 15
NYM NL 2021 129 416 60 106 43 115 16 2 18 40 13 7 .255 .329 .433 9 25 .311 48/21/31 16 15
Career 9yrs 960 3290 454 850 326 969 153 17 98 323 231 66 .258 .327 .405 9 27 .336 n/a
Welcome! You are invited to wander around and read all of the comments that have been posted here at Patton & Co., but as soon as you register you can see the bid limits that Alex, Peter and Mike propose for each player, and you can post your own comments. Registering is free, so please join us!

Jonathan Villar.....your thoughts on your page being a political sounding board. ;)

van wilhoite LVW
Nov 13 '16

To follow Eugene, Nate Silver was clear all along that Trump's chances weren't all that bad.  As LynchMob notes, many just misinterpreted what 538 was saying.

Mike Landau ML-
Nov 13 '16

"All national polls are irrelevant."

Bingo. This is just a simple math problem. If you take Hillary's 4 biggest states vs. Trump's 6 biggest states, the popular vote goes to Hillary by around 4 million votes. But in those states, Trump gains 10 electoral votes total.

The tech guy in the back room at Fox said that big blue states tend to 'run up the score' (NY, Cal, Ill, NJ), and that he believes that a 3-4 point lead in the polls by the Dem is essentially an electoral tie.

But the real reason, in this election, that most polls were irrelevant is that the Trump voter was less likely to honestly give their opinion to pollsters, due to the scorn they knew they would receive.

I'll bet there are a million plus wives/girlfriends in this country who are certain that their husbands/boyfriends voted with them for Hillary, when in actuality they voted for Trump.

Keith Prosseda andypro
Nov 11 '16

Actually, that poll was wrong.  All national polls are irrelevant.  For example the popular vote.  Once CA's total comes in, HRC will have won by close to 1M votes and approximately 1% of the total ballots cast.  The problem was with state polls that had her +3 in PA and similar in MI, +4 in WI, +2 in FL, etc.  While many were within the margin of error, sampling only "likely voters" based upon past voting record over three elections, is likely not the best group.  Moreover, I think there are problems with the sample size of many polls.  I've seen polls as few as 700 participants.  That would make some demographic groups very small.  For a poll to be robust, I think 1,200 participants are necessary.

Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Nov 11 '16

Well said, Eugene ... my favorite 538 article = The Cubs Have A Smaller Chance Of Winning Than Trump Does ... from Oct 30th ... we were warned :-)

Also, not *all* the polls were wrong

I think the key to understanding 538's analysis is that they will be "wrong" 30% of time that an election is as close as this one was ... and not because they are wrong, but because folks are misinterpreting what they are saying.  If they aren't "wrong" 30% of time, *that*s when something has been wrong.  Am I right?

Howard Lynch LynchMob
Nov 11 '16

Minor defense of Nate Silver.  He had trump over a 1/3 probability of winning.  All of the other projective models had Trump at <5% and a couple were less than <1%.  If anyone, he had a sufficient "error bar" as Peter frequently calls it, to explain what we saw.

Also, remember, all of the projection systems rely on poll accuracy.  The polls were all bad.  They either included people who didn't vote or failed to include a lot of people who did.  My brother who does GOTV and has for several presidential elections, a senate primary and general, and several dozen house races and local elections, didn't think there was any chance in OH, GA, or IA, the three states he worked in this election.  Yet, they kept him in IA for the last six weeks and spent a lot of time/money in OH and GA and very little time/money in WI and MI.  NC/PA was a different situation.  

There's a lot of blame to go around, but I'm not sure Nate Silver is the person to blame.

WRT PECOTA, since Nate left BP, it's less successful than ZIPS and a few others, including CHONE, which disappeared from public view when the author went in-house.  

Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Nov 11 '16

The power came out of nowhere. 2013 thru the first 162 AB in 2016 751 AB....11 HR. Last 427 AB of 2016.....18 HR.

I traded him 1 for 1 for Eugenio Suarez the last day before he started his HR spike because I needed HRs and had an insurmountable lead in SB even in mid may. I traded Villar mid May and Starling Marte at the ASB and still finished first in SB by 31 over 2nd.

van wilhoite LVW
Nov 11 '16

May I, because I'm just now coming up for air?.  What a travesty, and not just because BP's former expert, whom I followed quite closely, was far off the mark.  I finished next to last this year, in part based on stuff like this:

"Jonathan Villar went to the Astros in the Roy Oswalt trade, and all these years later, it's still the most interesting thing about him."  And that was in the Brewers' write-up.  Well, maybe, but isn't there some predictive device a bit more accurate (perhaps his 2012 minor league season in half the at-bats)?

Read through BP in past years, and it's right about as often as it's wrong, always based on predictive models steeped in past instances.  But, isn't the idea of good analytics and good predictions to think outside the box and anticipate changed behavior and performance?

I always liked the Patton analytics in the 90's because he did just that:  so you think Barry Bonds was great?  Let's look at Greg Maddux (when no one else was thinking that Maddux was more valuable than Bonds, even before ped's).

Is this all just laziness?  Do we need to go to minor league games?  Do we need to see the rustbelt with so many Trump signs in front yards to understand?

I don't know, but what do we rely on in the future?  It can't just be ourselves as individuals.  In whom, in the regular world, do we place our trust?

Sorry -- just had to vent a bit.


 

Thomas Rosenthal TommyR
Nov 11 '16

Even if he doesn't make it, one of the truly amazing performances of 2016.

Peter Kreutzer Rotoman
Oct 2 '16

Needs one HR to become the 4th member of the 20HR/60SB club joining Rickey(3 times), Morgan(twice), and Eric Davis.

van wilhoite LVW
Oct 2 '16