- Article: Major Protests Expected This Weekend And This Is Why...
Yesterday, 10:27 PM
- Griffen named NFC Defensive Player of the Month
Yesterday, 08:34 PM
- TACO NIGHT at The Cassel's!
Yesterday, 06:00 PM
- Article: Fantasy Football Week 9 Rankings
Yesterday, 04:24 PM
- Harnish done with a Lisfranc injury in his foot
Yesterday, 03:32 PM
- Article: Fantasy Football Pants Party Podcast - Week 9
Yesterday, 02:39 PM
- Report: RGIII to get the start versus the Vikings
Yesterday, 09:32 AM
- This Week in the NFC North - Week 9
Oct 29 2014 08:02 PM
- Cassel Staying Active With Team While on IR
Oct 29 2014 11:35 AM
- Barr named NFC Defensive Player of the Week
Oct 29 2014 11:02 AM
Question about BA and ESPN vs MLB scouting departments.
Posted 07 June 2012 - 10:24 PM
Posted 07 June 2012 - 10:45 PM
In the interest of encouraging a stimulating discussion, I was trying to downplay my own bias... but I couldn't find the right words, so here it is anyway!
During this draft (and others), I always wonder why we get upset with the Twins for taking Baseball America's 49th rated prospect with the 32nd pick. I love BA and all that, but how many of their 'scouts' are in actuality just reporters. And how many of these people would jump at the chance to join a major league scouting program?
I guess what I am saying is that the Twins have a scouting staff of over 20 people, and get further input from the various coaching staffs and affiliated personnel like Tom Kelley and Paul Molitor. So am I in the minority in thinking that the Twins, and EACH of the other 29 teams, have a better scouting department than Baseball America? If BA is better, why wouldn't a deep-pocketed team like the Yankees just buy the info as was done with STATS, Inc. data? BA is run on a shoestring budget, so it probably wouldn't be all that expensive.
What do others think about the relative size and quality of the BA scouting department in comparison to a MLB team?
Yeah, none of that really matters. That said, we often rely on those places to note which players to follow and whatnot since we don't have MLB teams' scouts notes. That is probably why people often note the discrepancy and say "what the hell?" So I don't blame people for that initial frustration since we don't have that kind of true insider information.
I work with sports journalists, but also think about those we read or see on television . . . it's a job that is difficult, sure, but so much of it is really not truly EXPERT analysis or anything. (which is why I think the Pardon the Interruptions of the world annoy me so much)
Looking at the draft, I think the Twins did a pretty good job getting quality arms. They then drafted a bunch of catchers. They did not draft third basemen, but maybe it is possible that some other grand scheme involving that position is in the works (whether it is FA or next years' draft).
Posted 07 June 2012 - 11:50 PM
Bill (KC): Jim, I'm curious about something and I'm sure a lot of others are as well. We see a list of 500 prospects. From a talent perspective, how big are the separation gaps on the list? How much separates prospect #354 and #475? On a related note, for guys ranked in, say, the bottom 200, how many detailed reports are you getting on these guys to rank them where you are?
Jim Callis: There is not a huge difference between Nos. 354-475. When I describe prospects, I tend to think of them in groups of first round (1-30), sandwich round (31-60), second-third round (61-120), fourth-seventh round (121-240), eighth-12th round (241-390), with players in each group roughly comparable. Hope that made sense.
Posted 08 June 2012 - 02:10 AM
Our Takes, Your Takes, TwinsTakes
Posted 08 June 2012 - 02:36 AM
Billy Beane: Okay! Okay. My turn. You don't have a crystal ball, you can't look at a kid and predict his future any more than I can. I've sat at those kitchen tables with you and listened to you tell those parents 'When I know, I know! And when it comes to your son, I know'. And you don't. You don't!
Our Takes, Your Takes, TwinsTakes
Posted 08 June 2012 - 07:19 AM
Posted 08 June 2012 - 07:30 AM
Posted 08 June 2012 - 07:35 AM
Posted 08 June 2012 - 08:13 AM
Posted 08 June 2012 - 09:36 AM
As far as scouting goes, I would agree with your assessment.
The thing that BA has going for them is that they have connections with all of the clubs. They talk to the clubs' scouts and compile lots of opinions. In their handbook, you'll often see them say "people inside the organization" or "scouts outside the organization", etc. It also doesn't appear that those guys are seeking jobs with MLB teams, so I would assume there are levels of trust that organizations probably have with BA that they don't necessarily have with Keith Law, who obviously is seeking jobs (interviewed for Astros GM job last offseason).
Obviously, these are just my opinions, so I could (and may) be way off.
this is correct. the reason baseball america has the most credence is because they're a compiler of information. they talk to scouts from many different organizations and try to get out to see the players as much as possible so what you're often looking at is an objective vantage point as opposed to just one team's. their writers aren't scouts, although some of them have been hired away by organizations, just writers who live and breathe baseball.
Posted 08 June 2012 - 11:23 AM
Posted 08 June 2012 - 11:57 AM
Posted 09 June 2012 - 11:14 AM
Will someone please accept this gentleman's offer to engage us? I'm dying here!
My parents gave me great advice once: Never ask a question unless you are willing to listen to an answer that does not agree with your going in opinion......
I don't think anyone (at least I'm not) is saying that BA or ESPN "know more/are smarter" than any team's scouts. But if you really want to have a discussion about how we talk about the draft, and offer opinions, post a reply saying you are. But, so far, ime on this site, it just isn't true. There is a camp that believes one thing about this discussion, and a camp that believes another thing. And people on both sides are irrationally emotional about how the discussion takes place. But if you'd really like to get a contrary answer to your question behind the question, I'm happy to do have that in this thread.
Posted 09 June 2012 - 11:48 AM
Posted 09 June 2012 - 02:54 PM
Posted 09 June 2012 - 03:36 PM
Posted 09 June 2012 - 05:16 PM
Posted 10 June 2012 - 02:58 AM
Posted 10 June 2012 - 12:19 PM
Posted 10 June 2012 - 02:57 PM
Posted 10 June 2012 - 09:07 PM
Just to add to this,
11 Rogers - 277
12 Muren - 295
13 Knab - 338
14 Proctor - 288
17 Hicks - 400
18 LaMarche - 401
26 Jones - 381
27 Grundy - 351
31 Robinson - 153
36 Marvel - 206
It'll be interesting to see if the Twins use their extra money to sign a guy like Robinson or Marvel.
Thanks for adding, got tired so I stopped @ 10.....after round 10, they can only sign for 100K unless they have $$ left from the original 12m pot for picks 1-10. Signability could be why they dropped