PDA

View Full Version : Article: Grading In A Void



John Bonnes
06-04-2012, 10:48 PM
You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?623-Grading-In-A-Void

Seth Stohs
06-04-2012, 10:56 PM
... and in 7 years, we'll be able to adequately judge what happened today. Great article, John. Great job of laying out what we don't know.

I don't see anything cheap about their picks. I do think that we could see some negotiating strategies based on the new set up. The onlyt hink I would disagree with would be that Berrios and Bard "don't have that high bonus expectations others might have had." I would argue that they, and their representatives, will believe that they are worth, at least, the spot's slot numbers.

TwinsGuy55422
06-04-2012, 11:47 PM
As you pointed out, I think it is human nature to want to label and categorize things into neat little rankings, especially if you're a type A personality which a lot of stats people are. It's difficult to accept the unknown and that answers may not come for a while. I've tried to let go of grading things prematurely and just enjoy the process of watching the players develop.

twinstalker
06-05-2012, 12:14 AM
Drafting is not just about picking the right guy, it's about picking the right guy in the right place. Bard may surprise, but the Twins almost certainly could have taken him later and had a much better chance at a quality player with their third pick. While that is a simple concept, I honestly don't believe Terry Ryan understands the absolute basics of game theory.

clutterheart
06-05-2012, 12:29 AM
Here are some IFs:
If Bard signs for under slot and
If they draft HS arms tomorrow and
If they sign for over slot
Then we can say that Ryan was smart for picking Bard
If Bard does not sign for underslot and
If they only pick other college type guys that also sign for slot
Then we can scratch our heads and hope Twins Scouts see something in Bard others do not.

twinstalker
06-05-2012, 12:34 AM
Here are some IFs:
If Bard signs for under slot and
If they draft HS arms tomorrow and
If they sign for over slot
Then we can say that Ryan was smart for picking Bard
If Bard does not sign for underslot and
If they only pick other college type guys that also sign for slot
Then we can scratch our heads and hope Twins Scouts see something in Bard others do not.
I'm betting on the last three lines being more correct.

John Bonnes
06-05-2012, 07:48 AM
Drafting is not just about picking the right guy, it's about picking the right guy in the right place. Bard may surprise, but the Twins almost certainly could have taken him later and had a much better chance at a quality player with their third pick. While that is a simple concept, I honestly don't believe Terry Ryan understands the absolute basics of game theory.

Why would you think that the other 29 GMs are all in sync with the rankings of Baseball America, etc? I suppose one could surmise that Baseball America gleans their info from BA, but why would they share the picks they really like?

mike wants wins
06-05-2012, 07:49 AM
Slightly? So your whole post is, no need to really discuss the draft? One or both of those guys would be there in round 2. Revere was a good pick because their other picks suck? I'm not sure I understand this blog post, unless the point is, we should just trust the scouts because they have jobs. How'd that work out in Pittsburgh lately? Or for the the Detroit Lions when Millen was the GM?

TCBurgerGuy
06-05-2012, 08:33 AM
Slightly? So your whole post is, no need to really discuss the draft? One or both of those guys would be there in round 2. Revere was a good pick because their other picks suck? I'm not sure I understand this blog post, unless the point is, we should just trust the scouts because they have jobs. How'd that work out in Pittsburgh lately? Or for the the Detroit Lions when Millen was the GM?

So what should they have done instead?

I think that the point of the article was that there are a plethora of variables that go into draft picks that lay people like you and I have no comprehension of, and we are going to have to wait patiently to see if these particular picks pan out, regardless of where we think that they should have been picked.

Oh, and we don't have the Pirate scouts, or Matt Millen so your comparison of them to the Twins is irrelevant.

mike wants wins
06-05-2012, 08:43 AM
Not really. The logical argument being made is that we should trust the scouts because they have the job. I showed that isn't true, so the logic does not hold. I do not know what they should have done, but if we are going to discuss the draft, shouldn't we use the information we have to do that? Not sure what people want out of a discussion on the draft if they do not want to discuss positives and negatives.

deanlambrecht
06-05-2012, 09:51 AM
No, the logical argument being made is that there are far more unknowns than there are knowns, that draft picks more often than not don't work out, and that the people commenting at this site (and every other baseball blog in America) have less information than do the people making the draft picks. That's not "trust the scouts," it's "we're not in a very good position to know anything whatsoever so we'll see what happens perhaps not before 7 years is up."

DAM DC Twins Fans
06-05-2012, 10:00 AM
I think the original premise of the article was correct...we can discuss all we want...we will know the results of this draft in 2017. There will be busts, there will be injuries, somebody picked later than round 10 will be a superstar. Do we know who any of these will be?? NO!!!

When I was a college kid many years ago, the NY Mets had a chance at a 5 tools OF with the first overall pick of the draft. They didnt take him. They went with a catcher instead to fill a need--there was also an argument about being cheap. Did the NY Mets make the right choice?? NO!!! Their catcher--Steve Chillcott got hurt and did nothing. The 5 tools OF turned out to be Reggie Jackson. The Mets fans were split on the choice...we just have to wait and see.

I hope Buxton turns out to be Kirby or Torii or at least better than Revere. But we need to wait. Would I have picked him?? NO!! I would have gone with Appel--we need good pitching...but lets wait and see.

John Bonnes
06-05-2012, 10:04 AM
I do not know what they should have done, but if we are going to discuss the draft, shouldn't we use the information we have to do that? Not sure what people want out of a discussion on the draft if they do not want to discuss positives and negatives.

That's the point of the story. Given next to no information, and given the need to discuss this, we take what little info we have, add to it broadher perceptions about the organization, and create a reality behind the scenes.

For the record, I have no problem with doing this. In fact, I like to do this. I just think that after we do this we need to acknowledge the mine-sized grain of salt it should come with. We're basing our view of reality on almost nothing. It's far more likely to tell us something about ourselves than about the team.

Jim Crikket
06-05-2012, 10:09 AM
I find it highly entertaining that so many fans just assume Baseball America and other similar sites know more about every draftable ballplayer than the teams do. Seriously... why should teams even employ scouts? Just draft based on BA's rankings, right? Oh... and of course factor in bloggers' rankings, too.

nicksaviking
06-05-2012, 10:11 AM
Then perhaps we need to see a new thread detailing the 06-08 drafts seeing that the theory is that we have had enough time to evaluate those players. Just a guess but pretty sure the tone for that thread would be as negative if not more so than the current mood of this forum.

DAM DC Twins Fans
06-05-2012, 10:16 AM
I find it highly entertaining that so many fans just assume Baseball America and other similar sites know more about every draftable ballplayer than the teams do. Seriously... why should teams even employ scouts? Just draft based on BA's rankings, right? Oh... and of course factor in bloggers' rankings, too.

Amen to that.

It always amazes me the press the socalled draft experts like Mel Kiper JR get--but nobody looks back to see 5 years later to see how bad Mel's choices were.

mike wants wins
06-05-2012, 10:17 AM
I'm (I won't talk for others) not assuming BA or ESPN know more than the Twins' scouts. I'm assuming they know more than I do, or anyone else on this site does. Since the Twins are not willing to share their analysis and decision making with us (rightly so), the only data I have is the data from BA and ESPN (and similar sites). So I base my thoughts on the draft on that information. I suppose I could change my personality, and just go "well, we won't know for 7 years, so I won't even think about it", but that's not likely to happen. At this point, I'm really done talking about whether or not we should analyze the draft or not, it's not going to change anyone's mind one way or the other. If there are threads talking about how well we think the Twins did, I'll comment on those, continuing to do so based on what little knowledge we are able to scrape up on the interwebs and tv and radio. It's really no different, imo, than talking about whether or not we think Hicks will ever be good or not, or whether or not the trade for Scott Diamond was a good idea at the time it was made.

mike wants wins
06-05-2012, 10:19 AM
IN defense of "so called draft experts", they do usually do an article or three assessing how well they did 2-4 years ago. Absolutely those articles are on web sites, every single year. Kiper does it, others do it. It simply isn't fair to accuse them of not talking about their past mistakes, because they do.

Paul
06-05-2012, 10:26 AM
That's the point of the story. Given next to no information, and given the need to discuss this, we take what little info we have, add to it broadher perceptions about the organization, and create a reality behind the scenes.

For the record, I have no problem with doing this. In fact, I like to do this. I just think that after we do this we need to acknowledge the mine-sized grain of salt it should come with. We're basing our view of reality on almost nothing. It's far more likely to tell us something about ourselves than about the team.

Ahhh...A kindred spirit.

Paul
06-05-2012, 10:32 AM
...the only data I have is the data from BA and ESPN (and similar sites). So I base my thoughts on the draft on that information...

Mike, there's data...and there's opinions. Information can be either, but there is an important distinction to be made.

Jim Crikket
06-05-2012, 10:41 AM
Then perhaps we need to see a new thread detailing the 06-08 drafts seeing that the theory is that we have had enough time to evaluate those players. Just a guess but pretty sure the tone for that thread would be as negative if not more so than the current mood of this forum.

Good idea. I hope someone does just that. I suspect you're right that comments would be just as negative.

I also suspect what you'd find is that about 70-80% of the 2006 prospects (let's say top 20 rounds or so) have either washed out or are still buried in the organization somewhere and a handful are just now hitting the Big Leagues. If you go back a year to 2005, there should be a similar number, but maybe they have a year or two of service time under their belts. The 2007-2008 drafts probably have very few Major Leaguers yet, but a few guys getting close. That kind of time lag is what you should expect and I suspect that's pretty comparable to what you'd find if you looked at the same years for most other teams that were experiencing enough success on the field that they were drafting near the end of each round like the Twins were those years.

Some people just can't seem to get their minds around the fact that this is not the NFL or NBA draft, where the top draft picks ALL immediately make the big team. Most of these drafted players will never get a sniff of a MLB clubhouse. That's why they draft so many rounds. It's purely a numbers game. And the draft is only ONE way to acquire young players, with international signings being arguably much more important.

mike wants wins
06-05-2012, 10:49 AM
Paul, fair enough. I am going on their opinions, then.

roger
06-05-2012, 11:57 AM
John, this is one of the better articles regarding the draft I have read in some time. Thanks!

bulldogguy
06-05-2012, 03:46 PM
Thanks John for writing this. I know we love to hypothesize or project for draft picks, but baseball drafting in many ways is a frickin crapshoot. Its the one sport that the equipment changes dramatically from highschool/college to the pros (bats). I am glad I am not a GM trying to sort this out.

For anyone that is of the "jimmy Johnson" type opnion that you don't take guys in slots ahead of where other "experts" had them slotted...the big thing you are missing on is knowing what the other teams plans are. If you had a guy you loved that is slated as a fifth rounder, but you for some reason know that another team loves him and is going to draft him before then (they scouted him the same times you did, they told their coach that they planned to draft him in the fourth round) whatever it is that gives you inside information on when some other team might draft him, that will impact when you draft someone if you really value that player.

I love the dialogue, I love being able to predict what guys might do, but for god sake...we don't get paid to do this even though we think we should. I have to lean on the experts and at least trust their initial judgement on things and in 3-7 years, we can analyze all of the teams drafts and how these kids panned out in the majors to that point and make a clear cut call on whether this draft was a success or uter failure.

Terry Ryan has had more success than failure in his career so i am going to lean towards his 30+years of paid experience on this one and see what he says post draft about what their plan is for each of these players and we can revisit the results down the road.

one_eyed_jack
06-05-2012, 05:17 PM
I'm with you 100%.

I recall a hockey exec once likened the NHL draft to "trying to figure out which 6th grader will make the best doctor."

Good line, and equally applicable to MLB.

DAM DC Twins Fans
06-06-2012, 10:45 AM
Just out of curiosity--I went to the 2007 draft list--first round only dont have a lot of time. 5 Solid MLB guys from the first round of that draft:

Rick Porcello, Jason Heyward, David Price, Matt Weiters, Mike Moustakas...

3 others in MLB--Revere, Ross Detwieler, LaPorta

I may have missed one or two who have had a cup of coffee--but 5 years later that is 25% of picks got to the show...lets not look for a big return from Buxton, Young Mazilli or any of the others just yet.

Snortwood
06-06-2012, 11:33 PM
Given the time it typically takes for players to move from draft to contributor at the major league level I think the only approach to the MLB draft that makes sense is this - act as if nobody has anything, as if we're all starting from scratch. Meaning that early on i advocate you take the best player available, the guy everyone else would want to have on his team. Once you've filled out your roster you begin to pick for depth. Up front you take the best guy on the board.

All indications are Buxton is that kid - the guy everyone else would prefer to have on their team. That's good for the Twins. He was the consensus best athlete on the board from all players eligible for the draft across the nation, and he just won a state championship. Where are the negatives? Twins made the right choice (so far; we reserve the right to second guess and to have everyone forget about this post years from now if he falls flat). From here on it all depends on Buxton - his athleticism and work ethic and intelligence and, of course, good fortune.