Sometime in the next few weeks, a team will sign Framber Valdez to a long-term contract worth many millions of dollars. By doing so, they’ll affirm that they believe in his stuff and his ability to get outs and pitch effectively well into his 30s. But there will also be a subtext to that signing — you don’t hand that kind of money to someone who you think might cause problems in the clubhouse or on the field with his actions or temperament. You hand that kind of money to a leader, to a player with good “makeup.”
Makeup is a term tossed around by scouts when evaluating players at all levels of the game. What is it exactly? And how can you scout for it reliably? During this past season, we asked industry insiders around the game for their thoughts on how they scout for makeup, granting them anonymity because it relates to their organization’s scouting processes.
In the case of Valdez, unquestionably one of the most consistent and durable starters in the American League the past several seasons, his free-agency profile has not been centered on just his on-field results. It’s also included questions about his demeanor after a well-publicized incident when he appeared to have intentionally thrown at his catcher. Given that incident, interested teams will debate the implications of his past actions, and what they might mean going forward.
“I’d ask him about that day,” said a scout who works for a team that has the financial wherewithal to sign Valdez. “And if I didn’t like the answers, I’d be out.”
Framber Valdez with the Houston Astros. (Alex Slitz / Getty Images)
Perhaps those inquiries started last month, when Valdez attended the general managers meetings in Las Vegas to meet with teams. During the meetings, multiple league sources indicated Valdez’s agency shared a video and other promotional materials it had created about its client, a fairly standard practice for agencies when their high-profile clients are free agents. What may stand out about the video created by Valdez’s team, and his free-agency pitch in general, is how much of it is dedicated to analyzing Valdez’s background and character — 80 seconds into a 25-minute video, the content switches from on-field results to flushing out what kind of person Valdez is. Valdez’s results on the mound are indisputable. What his team wants to ensure potential suitors is that his makeup matches his on-field results.
Multiple free agents will arrive in Orlando, Fla., next week at the Winter Meetings to conduct the same type of meetings Valdez held in Las Vegas. It stands to reason that a few of the players will face similar questions about their makeup as Valdez did. This question-and-answer portion of the free-agent process may seem insignificant, but it is a crucial component behind teams’ major personnel decisions.
Whether it’s making a free-agent offer to an established veteran or spending draft or trade capital on a young player, teams do a lot of work behind the scenes to ensure the investments they are making in a player are wise ones. While on-field data and scouting can give organizations an idea of what a player’s physical ceiling might be, that information can leave an incomplete picture of who the player is and what he’ll bring to the organization.
One scouting executive had a three-bucket approach to defining makeup:
“Is there anything that he’s gonna do or has done off the field that’s disqualifying?” he said. “It doesn’t matter how good you are, because you’re not going to be on the field. And then the second bucket is, how is this kid as a player, how competitive is he? How hard does he work? The third bucket is: How is the player as a teammate, and that’s the bucket you typically don’t really get a good feel for until you stick the guy in the right seat.”
In an age when player evaluation has become more data driven than ever, evaluating a player’s makeup is the last inexact science in scouting. How teams approach it — and how much time and effort they put into it — could be the difference from drafting or signing well and making many expensive mistakes.
When teams consider signing free agents long-term, they have to think about how that player will be received within the team’s clubhouse. Not every player has to get along, but teams don’t want to introduce personalities who will disrupt the flow in a 162-game season. One major-league manager said projecting how a player will fit in a clubhouse might be the most difficult and one of the most important aspects of scouting makeup.
His definition of a player with strong makeup starts with that player’s pregame work.
“It’s someone who is willing to put in all the preparation, all the work for themself in order to go out and perform for their team,” he said. “It’s selflessness, in a way. Someone who cares more for their teammates’ success than their own, but they are willing to put in the work to elevate their game to help their teammates.”
While videos like the one Valdez’s team produced aim to tell interested teams about their clients’ makeup, teams naturally will do their own background research on players, often talking to former coaches and teammates to get a sense of what makes a player tick and how he fits into a team culture.
“Some guys like to sit behind the fence and watch a player do everything from get off the bus to get back on the bus,” noted a scouting executive. “I’ve tried to go in big on outside sources — I tried to get at least three different opinions about the player, you got some teammates, and then just general reputation from people in their community, however you can gather that information.”
“You’d be surprised what people’s teammates say about them,” he added.
Outside opinions can be dicey, however, as the people in a player’s orbit may have their own motives when talking about that player, especially when a player is an amateur draft prospect. A coach may want his player drafted high despite having private reservations about him. A teacher might be a fan of the interested team. A teammate may not want to open up and be seen as a snitch.
“You have to weed through the B.S. and find comments and sources you trust,” agreed one scout.
Few inside the Astros’ clubhouse have ever questioned Valdez’s work ethic. Though his cross-up of catcher César Salazar did create some uncomfortable moments, Valdez remained a well-liked teammate throughout his Houston Astros tenure.
Astros manager Joe Espada often highlighted Valdez’s extreme competitiveness as an endearing trait, even if it sometimes produced eyebrow-raising moments. The cross-up generated obvious headlines, but one month earlier, Valdez questioned Houston’s outfield positioning during one of his starts.
“(Valdez) is someone I want to go on the battlefield with,” Espada told “Foul Territory” last month. “I understand the reputation because of one event. People might reach conclusions (from) that. But I’ve been around him for six, seven years. If I’m going into a dogfight, I want him to be right there next to me.”
Espada isn’t likely to receive his wish — but not because of Valdez’s makeup. Under owner Jim Crane, the Astros have never guaranteed a starting pitcher more than $85 million. Valdez’s next contract should double that.
Whether it is a free agent like Valdez or a potential trade target or draft pick, there is no exact guide for scouting makeup, though some teams have tried to build systems to bring consistency to the process. For example, one MLB front-office executive has devised a framework for measuring makeup.
“Authenticity, connectedness and relentlessness,” he said, noting that those characteristics are the pillars of his team’s approach to it.
Of course, veterans like Valdez are in a much different position than young players when it comes to their emotional maturity. Younger players have less experience managing their emotions and a shorter track record scouts can use to evaluate makeup. That prompts most to take care when evaluating the emotional characteristics of an amateur player.
“You’re taking a scalpel to a teenager,” said one scout. “Be careful.”
“Makeup changes!” texted a scout.
“People grow up,” texted another executive.
Valdez, for example, began working with Dr. Andy Nuñez — one of the Astros’ sports psychologists based in the Dominican Republic — at the beginning of his major-league career. The strides Valdez made with Nuñez are immeasurable, according to multiple people who were with Valdez throughout his Astros tenure.
Nuñez taught Valdez several ways to calm himself down during starts, be it through breathing exercises or taking a walk around the mound in tense situations. Valdez kept in constant contact with Nuñez, including on the days of his starts.
Valdez’s willingness to make adjustments — both mental and physical — are examples of what many teams would consider positive makeup when evaluating a player.
“Most of what I value in good makeup is baseball aptitude, maybe 75 percent,” said one scout. “How well does a player make adjustments? Which is fairly easy to see over time.”
Some aspects of the information gathered from evaluating makeup are more likely to translate into better performance on the field. One high-level analyst with a team explained that when analyzing the makeup of other teams’ players, he looks for those who are playing significantly above their talent level. The process can be difficult, but many teams find it worth doing because a player’s makeup can mean the difference between that player reaching his ceiling and falling short.
“Easiest mistake for a scout to make is to meet a very charismatic player who charms you in a conversation and think that means he’s got 70 or 80 makeup (out of the 20-80 scouting scale),” said a scout. “The quiet guy who’s still a good teammate and absolutely crushes the weight room, pregame prep like band work and arm care, and is locked in in hitter/pitcher meetings, etc., has better makeup than the great dude who teammates like who doesn’t actually go hard in the weight room or challenge himself to make major swing or bat adjustments when needed.”
Those front offices that rely heavily on data to evaluate players may shy away from factoring in makeup, fearing that it would introduce noise into their player analysis. One front-office executive pushed back on that idea.
“This is a too-clever-by-half type thing,” the executive said. “This is why people should get a liberal arts education.”
One of the biggest potential pitfalls of analyzing the makeup of an amateur player is that often one personality (the scout) is interacting with another (the player), which can produce unwanted outcomes if the two personalities don’t click — or click so well the scout misses potential red flags.
Even Hall of Fame-caliber players can be misjudged when they are beginning their careers. Before he was established, Zack Greinke had to deal with concerns about his makeup. Remember the idea that he couldn’t handle the bright lights of a big city? That narrative ended up being wrong, and he was a consummate competitor who craved big moments. If any team passed on signing him because of his unique personality — Greinke had dealt with some social anxiety and didn’t always enjoy interacting with the media or teammates — the team missed out for no good reason.
Zack Greinke pitching with the Royals in 2022. Denny Medley / Imagn Images
A more recent example of a misevaluation of a player’s demeanor can be found with Washington Nationals All-Star James Wood, who since his amateur days has had to fight a perception that he is too laid back. When he was in high school in the Washington, D.C., area, multiple scouts cited Wood’s on-field demeanor and comments in scout interviews as evidence that he wasn’t ready for professional baseball. Other reports claimed Wood was more interested in going to college than turning pro.
The Padres weren’t dissuaded by those reports and took him in the second round of the 2021 MLB Draft. Since Wood turned pro, members of the Padres’ and Nationals’ organizations have raved about his work ethic and comportment, and it took him just three years to reach the big leagues despite being traded in the middle of his first full professional season.
Scouts’ skepticism of Wood as an amateur is in stark contrast to positive evaluations of players who may be more demonstrative on the field, even if that emotion isn’t always indicative of how a player truly competes.
“Any reliever who screams ‘Let’s f———g go’ after a big strikeout can get an automatic ‘fiery competitor’ stamp from scouts … yeah but what’s his compete like when his back’s to the wall and he’s got to dig out of it instead of just an easy 1-2-3 inning where he blows smoke by people and screams?” a scout said.
When scouting for makeup, teams have to be aware of their own personal biases, either conscious or unconscious. The interaction of race and culture with scouting has cast a long shadow over player evaluation for much of the sport’s history. Researcher Rob Arthur found that there has been “persistent bias against Black and Latino players since 1950, preventing them from playing at certain positions and rising through the ranks of the minors.” In the study, when judged completely off minor-league headshots, players with darker complexions were sent to the outfield and the infield and catcher positions were historically reserved for players with lighter skin tones.
“The scouts that are the most open-minded and aware of their limitations and biases and are willing and secure enough to ask people who are closer to that culture or that player’s background what they think, they get a more accurate representation of what the player actually is,” said an executive. “And that takes some humility and it takes some recognition that we are different and people act in different ways and sometimes it’s not a negative.”
In Latin America, culture, race and the maturity of prospects being scouted in their early teens can make evaluating makeup precarious. Scouts have to take great care and dive deep to get to know the players they are scouting.
Valdez himself had to overcome scouting biases when he was trying to find a team to take a chance on him as an amateur in the Dominican Republic. In the aforementioned video created by his agency, it pointed to Valdez’s difficult journey to professional baseball as a sign of his mental makeup and resiliency.
“Framber is as genuine a person as you’ll ever meet and as resilient as anyone could ever aspire to be,” says the video before framing some of his perceived flaws as part and parcel of a tough upbringing. “It’s also true that in the heat of the moment he may not be the most eloquent of speakers, always smile for the camera or produce the best PR-tailored responses. But like you or me, Framber is a product of his environment, one that he has had to overcome with sheer discipline, grit and a relentless belief in himself.”
While scouting makeup still remains one of the most inexact areas of player evaluation, it’s still worth trying to do — our respondents all agreed that assessing makeup was one of the most important things scouts could bring to the appraisal process, especially when it comes to evaluating younger players. Given that it takes a healthy dose of introspection, and equal parts skepticism and empathy, we might all want to take any makeup grades we hear with a grain of salt — whether they be positive or negative.
That’s a lesson for teams currently undergoing the process in appraising a veteran like Valdez, as well. One incident or video can’t capture the entirety of a person. Scouting makeup is a difficult process, but a valuable one when done right, and it should help teams better understand the intense personality that has produced one of the best starting pitchers in the game. At the core of the process is listening to the people around the player.
“I’ll tell you what,” Espada said. “If I’m the manager of a team, I want him on my team.”
— Keith Law contributed to this report.