The Pete Alonso Conundrum

[roger_that]

every player is different. And CF gave examples of other older players who were productive in his post.

 

 

Yes. Every player is different.

But the list I provided is of the ten MOST similar players to Pete in MLB history. Some of the players on CF's list are of players less similar, or not similar, to Pete. To compare Pete to Ted Williams is a silly exercise, unless you're out to humiliate Pete. https://stathead.com/baseball/versus-finder.cgi?player_id2=willia002the&player_id1=alonso000pet&request=1&utm_id=alonspe01&utm_campaign=2023_01_wdgt_player_comparison&utm_source=br&utm_medium=sr_xsite

Why pick players who AREN'T similar to Pete when we have a handy list of players MOST similar to him? That list changes a bit over the years but what doesn't change is the failure rate of the players on the list in their mid-30s. Many are in their early 30s when they can no longer hit.

[duan]

I have no idea what Pete Alonso will get.

I find it hard to believe that he's going to get a 4/5 year deal at a high AAV.

Hey may get '2/3 more years' at his current AAV. Which would be a big enough bump from one year 24 million that was left on his option.

[roger_that]

I have no idea what Pete Alonso will get.

I find it hard to believe that he's going to get a 4/5 year deal at a high AAV.

Hey may get '2/3 more years' at his current AAV. Which would be a big enough bump from one year 24 million that was left on his option.

 

Really depends on the value the Yankees place on winning the back pages of the Post for the next year or two, doesn't it? If the Mets go three, I can see the Yankees going four.

And if the Mets go four, I can see them going five.

[Centerfield]

What is the argument about the comparables?

My post was meant to suggest that most players decline during that 32-35 window. Most of the time sharply. There are outliers that age earlier, some that age later.

 

Well, yes, it's obviously the case that the vast majority of players decline after age 32. (Obvious to some, anyway.) My point about Pete's comparables in particular (see link on previous page) is that they decline very sharply (to the point of being out of baseball entirely) in almost all cases, and are horrible choices to expend a long-term contract on for big money.

I looked up the current 10 most comparable players. They all stunk the joint out after age 32, except those who are still playing at around Pete's age. (Olson)

Similar Batters

Khris Davis (937.3)

Jim Gentile (919.3)

Glenn Davis (905.0)

Rhys Hoskins (901.3)

Nate Colbert (900.6)

C.J. Cron (898.0)

Christian Walker (897.4)

Dick Stuart (897.4)

Matt Olson (892.6)

Paul Sorrento (890.9)

 

I see. I've always known that there was the concept of sim scores, and I read the formula that KC posted. I don't know if I'm fully convinced that this formula is the best way to come up with similar players. For instance, looking at that top 5, Khris Davis had a 4 year peak from age 27-30. Is that similar to Alonso, who has produced for 7 years? Rhys Hoskins has topped 30 HR twice in his career, and missed all of 2023 with a torn ACL. Alonso tops 30 HR every year, and never misses games. I have never heard of Nate Colbert. But he declined after his age 26 season. When he was 30, he hit .178 with 2 HR. I don't see how that makes him comparable to Alonso, who just hit 38. Is Colbert, a guy who hit 14 home runs at age 28, and played in the early 70s, a better comp than say, Paul Goldschmidt or JD Martinez?

And to be clear, I'm not saying sim score isn't accurate, just that I don't know enough about it to know how much weight to give it.

But certainly I agree with you, that these sim scores should give pause to anyone thinking to give a long term contract to Pete Alonso. Or really, anyone on the wrong side of 30.

[metsmarathon]

I would surmise that similarity scores on bbref have very little predictability value.

[whippoorwill]

Ted Williams was pretty dang special.

I would not sign Pete for more than 3 years at this point.

I think he’s awesome sauce and I hope the Mets can keep him but there’s the little matter of his agent. Plus does Pete feel valued here? I myself made fun of his hair.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Well, then if he leaves we'll know who to blame!

[Edgy MD]

Great numbers from centerfield. The problem is, of course, there is always someone certain that they are smarter than the numbers.

Sometimes, they are even right — or, at least, sometimes they are luckier than the numbers.

[roger_that]

I would surmise that similarity scores on bbref have very little predictability value.

 

I can't defend their predictive value, mainly because I don't understand how they're computed.

But I will defend their objectivity. These aren't players specially selected to put Pete in a bad light.

And there are more than ten of them. Maybe 12 or 14, going back a few iterations of sim scores, and all show the same trend.

I'd bet money on them. In fact, I have.

[Edgy MD]

The main problem with sim scores is that they are not corrected for season-to-season and ballpark-to-ballpark run-scoring environments.

[roger_that]

The sim scores do raise an interesting theoretical question: assuming you don't buy into their predictive value at all, is there a degree so extreme that you would concede that there's something scary there, or would you insist on your theoretical lack of faith in sim scores? For example, if I showed you that literally every one of Pete's top 20 comparables, say, ALL had put up terrible numbers after age 31, but Pete had an excellent year at age 31, would you insist "Nah, doesn't scare me. Pete's the exception"? Or would you concede, "Maybe there's something to it"?

[Centerfield]

I think there is enough evidence of players declining after age 31 to be cautious with Pete, regardless of sim score. It's well documented, and there is nothing to suggest Pete will be an exception.

As to the sim scores, looking at that list, I don't see what makes these players more like Pete Alonso than any of the others listed in this thread. When I see the list, nothing jumps out at me as "wow, these guys are just like Pete". And I've read the explanation, and still don't see the connection. The only way I'd be convinced, is to learn the methodology behind the sim score. And frankly, I don't care enough to spend the time to do that.

As to expanding the list. Even if there were 20 players listed, who all fell off after 31, I wouldn't be convinced until I took the time understand the methodology. And again, I don't care to spend that much time to do it. Would I think there could be something to it? Sure. There's always a chance. But it wouldn't change my thinking on Alonso, since I'm already cautious with him, regardless of sim score.

[metsmarathon]

Hold up.

Wait.

You’re looking at the similar batters table, and NOT the similar batters through age 29 table?! (I guess bbref doesn’t update the charts until the offseason)

Mark McGwire (966.0)

Matt Olson (958.3)

Chris Davis (948.2)

Cecil Fielder (942.8)

Richie Sexson (936.2)

Glenn Davis (914.9)

Tony Clark (904.7)

Ryan Howard (904.0)

Tino Martinez (902.4)

Nate Colbert (902.2)

Sure, many of the same names show up, but damn if that ain’t a rosier picture! McGwire went on to do some things (asterisk) and Olson is doing pretty well.

But look. I’m gonna throw a whole lot of cold water all over this exercise. A name popped up that intrigued me, looking at these sim scores. I hope this name causes you yourself to question this approach as well.

At age 26, Pete’s lost similar batters table was shohei ****ing Ohtani. Would you think them to be remotely similar players, pitching aside - of course.

Sho’s current list of similar hitter includes the following names:

Ryan Howard (921.5)

Fred McGriff (912.4) *

David Ortiz (910.3) *

Carlos Delgado (905.0)

Willie McCovey (903.0) *

Matt Olson (902.5)

Richie Sexson (901.2)

Mo Vaughn (900.8)

Pete Alonso (888.7)

Albert Belle (878.5)

Now. You’re telling me that the same tool you’re using to say, woah, Pete’s destined to break down just like these guys, is also telling you that shoei is going to turn into an overweight black guy with really bad knees.

There ain’t no similarity between sho-time and David ortiz, Ryan Howard, Albert belle, or mo Vaughn, other than that if you add up all their cumulative stats you end up with about the same numbers.

It’s a curiosity at best, that can maybe be useful in seeing what other guys had similar production through their careers.

Here’s the explanation of how they get it:

 

To compare one player to another, start at 1000 points and then subtract points based on the statistical differences of each player.

Batters

One point for each difference of 20 games played.

One point for each difference of 75 at bats.

One point for each difference of 10 runs scored.

One point for each difference of 15 hits.

One point for each difference of 5 doubles.

One point for each difference of 4 triples.

One point for each difference of 2 home runs.

One point for each difference of 10 RBI.

One point for each difference of 25 walks.

One point for each difference of 150 strikeouts.

One point for each difference of 20 stolen bases.

One point for each difference of .001 in batting average.

One point for each difference of .002 in slugging percentage.

 

There’s nothing predictive in ANY of that.

But, yeesh. Sorry about Ohtani. Looks like we dodged a bullet there.

[metsmarathon]

Also, it’s clear that you’re using data that’s already a year old. (We both are) it doesn’t include his age 30 season, which was pretty good, and likely changes some of the similarities. Expect Colbert to drop off, probably.

If you want to look at freely available projections go over to FanGraphs and peep their zips projections. Also a year out of date, but much more predictive value.

And they really underestimated Pete’s age 30 season. 26 doubles, 32 homers, 242/335/466 slashes.

Even with that, Zips, last year, projected Pete to net 2.2 and 1.6 war in his ages 31 and 32 seasons, with 30 and 26 homers respectively. I’d expect those numbers to go up when they re-run it.

A decline ahead, sure, but not quite so disastrously.

Yes it could all go wrong and age could catch him in a hurry. It gets us all if we’re lucky. But you’re using the wrong tools in the wrong way to asses how risky bringing Pete back truly is.

[roger_that]

Hold up.

Wait.

You’re looking at the similar batters table, and NOT the similar batters through age 29 table?!

 

Why would you look at similar batters through age 29? Pete's turning 31 in a few weeks.

As to McGwire, are you under the assumption that Pete's getting away with taking steroids? I'm convinced he's not.

[metsmarathon]

Oh. Actually FanGraphs has done the job for us.

There’s a projection for his next five years, per Zips.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/looking-ahead-at-this-offseasons-opt-out-candidates/

With a table and everything.

It predicts the following war totals:

3.4, 2.7, 1.8, 1.2, 0.7

The bottom line is that yes, there’s concern about how a bat-first righty 1b will age, but he’ll do better in free agency this year than last, and could get into the low 100M contract strata.

[metsmarathon]

Hold up.

Wait.

You’re looking at the similar batters table, and NOT the similar batters through age 29 table?!

 

Why would you look at similar batters through age 29? Pete's turning 31 in a few weeks.

As to McGwire, are you under the assumption that Pete's getting away with taking steroids? I'm convinced he's not.

 

Your table has data comparing what Pete had done through his age 29 season, to what other players had done in their entire careers. Mine was at least comparing apples to apples.

As to McGwire, I’m just saying clean Pete is most similar to dirty Mac, based on that chart.

And if that’s a problem, hey, I’m not the one using similarity scores to try to make a point.

[roger_that]

It predicts the following war totals:

3.4, 2.7, 1.8, 1.2, 0.7

 

 

Getting into WAR, Pete doesn't look good at all. Actually I was surprised by how little WAR he got in 2025 with his 38 HRs and league-leading 41 doubles: 3.4.

That's pretty piddling, considering. Bret Baty came in at 3.1, in hundreds of fewer plate appearances.

BTW, is the 3.4 you cite as the first prediction a prediction or a description of his 2025? Those other numbers look pretty sad.

And I don't understand why you're clinging to McGwire as a good thing for Pete. Since he was juiced (and achieved some big numbers in his thirties), doesn't that suggest that Pete would require massive injections of steroids (which he will not be able to get) in order to match McGwire's performance in his thirties?

[Centerfield]

I think what it comes down to, is sim score measures how similar players are according to certain criteria. But we don't know if this criteria says anything about how fast a player will age.

 

Batters

One point for each difference of 20 games played.

One point for each difference of 75 at bats.

One point for each difference of 10 runs scored.

One point for each difference of 15 hits.

One point for each difference of 5 doubles.

One point for each difference of 4 triples.

One point for each difference of 2 home runs.

One point for each difference of 10 RBI.

One point for each difference of 25 walks.

One point for each difference of 150 strikeouts.

One point for each difference of 20 stolen bases.

One point for each difference of .001 in batting average.

One point for each difference of .002 in slugging percentage.

 

In looking at these criteria, are the number of games played indicative of how fast that player will age? Do the number of ABs indicate how fast that player will age? Runs scored? Hits? Doubles? Some combination of these stats?

At the end of the day, we don't know. Because we have no idea what criteria affects how fast a player will age. And so no matter how similar Pete Alonso may be to the players on this list, we don't know if the criteria being measured are indicative of aging curve.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I don't think number of at bats in multiples of 20 affect how a player will age as much as diet and genetics, among many other things.

[MFS62]

At the end of the day, we don't know. Because we have no idea what criteria affects how fast a player will age. And so no matter how similar Pete Alonso may be to the players on this list, we don't know if the criteria being measured are indicative of aging curve.

 

This.

Later

[roger_that]

I think what it comes down to, is sim score measures how similar players are according to certain criteria. But we don't know if this criteria says anything about how fast a player will age.

.....

In looking at these criteria, are the number of games played indicative of how fast that player will age? Do the number of ABs indicate how fast that player will age? Runs scored? Hits? Doubles? Some combination of these stats?

At the end of the day, we don't know. Because we have no idea what criteria affects how fast a player will age. And so no matter how similar Pete Alonso may be to the players on this list, we don't know if the criteria being measured are indicative of aging curve.

 

I guess we differ on that. I place a lot of my sense about sim scores on their reliability, and don't worry about the methodology so much. I find it remarkable that, for a system that puts no emphasis at all on physical dimensions and positional history, it's come up with a list of huge slugging first-basemen as Pete's comparables. Coincidence? I think not. There's something in these sluggers' histories that link them together, and when a pattern forms, like career length, I feel the need to show that a certain respect, in the absence of any easy verbal explanations.

Why did Jim Gentile suddenly stop hitting at age 31 or 32 or whatever age he was, following his monster 1961 season? You can ask ten baseball experts and they'll each give you a nice logical explanation--put on weight, started seeing more curveballs, lost his job to BooG Powell, whatever. But the point is he--and all the sluggers on Pete's comparables--just flat out stopped slugging, and beyond a point it doesn't really matter why, when you're trying to figure if signing Pete to a long-term contract makes sense. Your only other option is to argue that this is all a big coincidence.

[metirish]

[TWEET]

[/TWEET]

 

Looking for 7 years , good luck on that

[Centerfield]

So. If marathon can find the 5 year projection on Alonso I’m guessing an actually MLB GM probably has that info too.

7 years. lol. But then again, it only takes one…

[metsmarathon]

It predicts the following war totals:

3.4, 2.7, 1.8, 1.2, 0.7

 

 

Getting into WAR, Pete doesn't look good at all. Actually I was surprised by how little WAR he got in 2025 with his 38 HRs and league-leading 41 doubles: 3.4.

That's pretty piddling, considering. Bret Baty came in at 3.1, in hundreds of fewer plate appearances.

BTW, is the 3.4 you cite as the first prediction a prediction or a description of his 2025? Those other numbers look pretty sad.

And I don't understand why you're clinging to McGwire as a good thing for Pete. Since he was juiced (and achieved some big numbers in his thirties), doesn't that suggest that Pete would require massive injections of steroids (which he will not be able to get) in order to match McGwire's performance in his thirties?

 

Sorry. I keep thinking I’m being clear, when clearly I am not.

3.4 WAR was the zips projection at the end of 2024 for Pete’s fWAR in 2025. He actually had 3.6. Brett Naty had 2.3. Bbref has different numbers. 3.4 war for Pete, and 3.1 for Baty. They REaLLy like his fielding over there. But I tend to mostly use FanGraphs war.

I don’t have the newly updated projections that account for Pete’s pretty good 2025, but expect them to tick slightly higher. Once they are created and released by the guy who makes them.

I’m not hanging my hat on any Big Mac similarity.

I’m rejecting similarity scores altogether.

Unless you’re really going to tell me that shohei Ohtani is destined to age like Ryan Howard because when you add up the number of doubles and triples and homers and other stuff you get kinda the same number.

Similarity scores are a somewhat fun way to look at what kind of player a guy WAS. They have very limited value in looking at what kind of player a guy WILL BE.

[roger_that]

Similarity scores are a somewhat fun way to look at what kind of player a guy WAS. They have very limited value in looking at what kind of player a guy WILL BE.

 

I think this is a foolish ignoring of a very useful tool. When I've used sim scores in the past to speculate on future performances, they've done me very well.

What people are saying about Pete Alonso now, without using sim scores, pretty well agree on what the sim scores show: he should be good for another year or two, but after that watch out.

Remind me where you're seeing Shohei Otahni in Pete's sim scores, please?

[Edgy MD]

I think it is more unwise to misuse a tool and act on a false impression.

[The Hot Corner]

MLB Mets news is reporting that Pete is looking for a 7 year deal. If that turns out to be his market, then more power to him.

As a Mets fan I say, "Thanks for the memories, Pete. It was nice while it lasted."

[Frayed Knot]

During the discussion on this thread a year ago I was saying that if someone offered Pete five years then the Mets should be willing to walk away.

So now that it's a year later, the same argument applies except that the number should revert to four years as opposed to five.

Pete had a better '25 season than he did in '24, but he never got an offer close to seven years then and I don't know he'll get one now.

[Edgy MD]

Well, of course he is looking for seven years. The most surprising thing about that is that is is not eight or nine years.

It is October, and his free agency has not even begun yet. Any agent worth their 10 percent is going to be setting the bar at the highest it can go.