Drafting a college closer

[colbyjack]

If the Brewers were playing well enough in early June, would you support the idea of drafting a college closer? The bullpen seems to be the biggest area of concern on the team, and having a fresh arm added to the organizaiton with the possibility of being called up in September for a potential playoff push is an interesting thought.

 

It probably doesn't support the best player available scenario, but really the final goal of the draft is to procure big-league talent, and of course, win it all. And the 2007 crop is a good year for college closers, with two lefties (Daniel Moskos, Cole St. Clair) and one righty (Josh Fields) that could find themselves being taken in the first round.

 

In theory, the team could also save a few hundred thousand dollars in the process, which along with the lack of a second-round pick could free up close to a million dollars for another late-round steal, or possibly more activity on the Latin American market. The team also has two rather large-profile DFEs that could eat up some $$$ should they step up this spring.

 

Just a thought as I'm putting together the results from the top prospect fan poll.

[filthyfrog]

That's a good question. If our pick was number 15 or something like that, I'd be all for it. But at number 7, it seems like there should be some impact players too good to pass up in favor of a closer prospect. So I would wait on that strategy until next year, when we hope to be picking much lower.

[fewgoodcards]

not a brewer fan, but i think it is a good question. while we know that the rankings now will look nothing like the rankings when all of this gets sorted out, looking at your rankings, most of the guys are high school pitchers. after taking guys like rogers and jeffress recently, it would seem to make sense to take someone who would move faster. i don't think the brewers would really like the idea of taking another high school pitcher, so you may not be taking the "best player available" anyway. if fields dominates and stays healthy this year i would see nothing wrong with reaching a little bit to take him. you don't draft for need, but it seems like you guys are pretty much set in the rotation and have some very solid prospects on the way. you are also pretty young in the field. a guy like josh fields could be that electric 8th inning guy that puts you over the top.

[bjkrautk]

Has drafting a college closer really worked?

 

Craig Hansen (Bos): '05 - 6.0 ERA (3 IP); '06 - 6.63 ERA (38 IP).

 

Ryan Wagner (Cin): '03 - 1.66 ERA (21.2 IP); '04 - 4.7 ERA (51.2 IP); '05 - 6.11 ERA (45.2 IP); '06 (Was) - 4.7 ERA (30.2 IP)

 

I'm sure that there are other guys to this comparison, but those were the two that came to mind immediately. It was Wagner's 2003 season that popularized the idea of using early draft picks on college closers. Unfortunately for Mr. Wagner, he hasn't been able to come close to that level of success ever since.

 

A year or two ago, I would have been in favor of drafting a college closer for the reasons that have been laid out. With hindsight being 20/20, I'd have a hard time recommending such a move.

[Herm]

If a team is in need of short-term bullpen help I'd suggest it would be better to draft the best available college pitcher (typically a starter) and convert to a bullpen role, rather than drafting someone who served as their college's closer. I just think generally speaking the best pitchers with the best stuff are starters. Plus with heavy use of a college pitcher in the spring months going to the bullpen for part of first pro season might make sense. Of course those that can make the college to pro jump with immediate impact are few and far between.

[colbyjack]

Thanks for the responses so far.

 

i don't think the brewers would really like the idea of taking another high school pitcher, so you may not be taking the "best player available" anyway.

 

I'm not so sure anything will sway the Brewers away from drafting prep arms. I hope they have learned from past mistakes, but I just don't get the sense that they intend to change their philosophy one bit.

 

Has drafting a college closer really worked?

 

It worked for Chad Cordero and Huston Street, incredibly well actually. I agree that more was expected from Wagner and Hansen, although the Red Sox are still very high on what Hansen can do.

 

And of course, every grouping of players has the good examples and the bad ones. In suggesting the Brewers take a college closers, I'm hoping they take the right one http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif .

 

I just think generally speaking the best pitchers with the best stuff are starters. Plus with heavy use of a college pitcher in the spring months going to the bullpen for part of first pro season might make sense.

 

Typically I agree with this, as in general I'm not a huge fan of nitpicking needs in the first round, such as drafting a college closer or drafting for immediate need.

 

However, as shown with my examples of Street & Cordero above, it is possible to get a very good, accomplished closer in the draft who can pay off immediate dividends. And sometimes starters with good stuff don't always translate into good closers. I do believe their is a mental aspect to closing, which made me feel as though Street was tailor-made for that role. As you point out, college closers' arms are relatively fresh, and there is less concern about over-working them, and at the professional level it is more likely that they will be used even less since many college closers often pitch more than one inning, similar to how closers were used in the early-80s.

 

A lot of people have questioned the Brewers commitment to winning (although I don't think those people bother viewing the draft forum), and I think drafting a college closer could be a perfect way to procure a fresh arm that may be able to contribute by the end of the year should the team be in the midst of a playoff chase.

 

I should note that I admired the Detroit Tigers last year for not only being so good, but for taking the best player available in Andrew Miller. Miller is expected to move fast, and of course the Tigers didn't really have any questions with their bullpen given the emergence of Zumaya and Rodney.

[bjkrautk]

I knew I was forgetting someone with that quick list; of course, it would be a good closer like Street.

 

(I'd have had to remember that Cordero was a college closer in order to have forgotten him from my list.)

 

Even then, I'd point out that Huston Street didn't pitch in the majors in 2004 (the year he was drafted). Cordero did pitch in the majors in 2003, pitching 11 innings and tallying one save in 12 games.

 

From a ROI perspective, I could still make a case for a college closer over a HS arm in the first round, since they're almost certain to reach the major-league level, but I'm still a bit wary.

[GagneCY03]

Is Derrick Turnbow still the Brewers' closer?

[fewgoodcards]

cordero is the closer now

[Brew Man Dan]

Im not a fan of it, simply because of the draft the best availble player idea. Even if we draft a player at a position where the MLB club is solid, we will have a good problem(like ATL with McCann and Saltamacchia, or the brewers in the '05 offseason with prince and overbay), we could trade that player. Its not like these draft picks will be in the Majors in 5 months, especally under the current philosphy, at best you could expect your closer up in 2009.

[colbyjack]

Its not like these draft picks will be in the Majors in 5 months, especally under the current philosphy, at best you could expect your closer up in 2009.

 

That's not true, and if it were, it defies the point of this entire post. The only reason I brought up the possibility was because college closers often make a brief appearance towards the end of the season, and that really has nothing to do with a team's drafting philosophy. That's not something you bank on, but again, it's a possibility for a fresh arm.

 

And again as a disclaimer, I'm not agreeing with the notion, just tossing it out there for discussion.

[Brew Man Dan]

Good point colbyjack.

 

Ive got three other reasons why i don't like this idea.

 

1. In the case of Hansen and Wagner, there many other players that were still avaible that i would rather had drafted(In each case, the next 5 out of 10 picks are either MLB players or top prospects)

 

2. If you do pick a closer, then your basically flipping a coin, hoping he will pan out, because it seems like drafting a closer works have the time. I think that it wouldn't be worth the Brewers 7th draft pick, because i think they can get a Braun - like player.

 

3. I don't think the brewers need a closer as much as anyone thinks, the brewers really only have two spots in the pen that need fixing up, in wise and aquino but we have outfielders to trade, and minor leaguers like Stetter and Dillard that might be future pen guys so i don't see a need for a closer anyway.

[colbyjack]

1. In the case of Hansen and Wagner, there many other players that were still avaible that i would rather had drafted(In each case, the next 5 out of 10 picks are either MLB players or top prospects)

 

It's easy to make that assessment now. At the time of the draft I wasn't a big fan of the Wagner selection, not so much in that I didn't like Wagner, but felt the Reds were pretty foolish to be choosing such a specific need.

 

Hansen on the other hand was being tossed around as a possible top-10 pick. His numbers at St. John's and on the Cape the summer before he was drafted were absolutely sick, and he has a filty fastball-slider combo that is perfect for the closer role. I know the Red Sox haven't given up hope on him, even if he has struggled during his brief stints at the big-league level. He actually fell in the draft, and the only reason he did was because of his advisor, Scott Boras. The Mets were rumored to take him where they eventually took Mike Pelfrey, and the D-Backs even had Hansen on their short list as a possibility for the first overall pick. That's how highly he was thought of at the time.

 

2. If you do pick a closer, then your basically flipping a coin, hoping he will pan out, because it seems like drafting a closer works have the time. I think that it wouldn't be worth the Brewers 7th draft pick, because i think they can get a Braun - like player.

 

Having half of a certain grouping pan out is actually a pretty good ratio, so I'll take those odds every time if it came down to that.

 

Your second point is what I agree with the most (being able to draft a player like Ryan Braun, or Prince Fielder, who was the 7th overall pick in 2002), and would be the biggest reason why I wouldn't draft a college closer.

[DHonks]

I would most definitely endorse taking a college closer as long as he is arguably the best player available. I say arguably, because let's not look at potential, but rather look at polished/best.

[Mass Haas]

Free podcast from Baseball America discussing this subject:

 

www.baseballamerica.com/t.../podcasts/

[colbyjack]

I broke down the top draft-eliglbe closers in my Crack of the Bat column two weeks ago:

 

www.pgcrosschecker.com/cr...e_closers/

 

(The COTB collumns have been moved over to PGCC, although they still can be found on PG's homepage).

 

Either Allan Simpson or David Rawnsley commented in their column a week or two ago that Clemson's Daniel Moskos is expected by many to go within the top five picks of the draft, while Brett Cecil is now considered a first-round lock as he continues to show his mid-90s heat and mid-80s slider this spring.

 

Boston College's Terry Doyle is another college closer to consider in the early rounds that I overlooked when I wrote my column.

[Past Member]

Quote:

---

I would most definitely endorse taking a college closer as long as he is arguably the best player available

---

 

I know that I am old school when it comes to this forum, but I believe, as do most people in the game, that closers are "made" not born (i.e. you take a guy see what he has in the minor leagues and then you make him a closer if you need him to be). I think that drafting a guy, especially within the top 10 who is a closer already is a waste. Of course now you can all respond to me by talking about Huston Street.....

[fewgoodcards]

what are your thoughts on a guy like daniel moskos who many believe could also be a starter? while you believe that closers are made, they are usually made from guys who have great stuff. moskos has great stuff, especially for a lefty, isn't he the type of guy that would typically be made into a closer?

[mothershipconnection]

but I believe, as do most people in the game, that closers are "made" not born

But if he's a 21-22 year-old college pitcher, he was probably already "made" in college.

I'm with the idea of drafting a college closer if he falls into the acceptable reaching range (i.e. if he's within a couple spots on an objective depth chart).

It all depends on who else is available, though, and at #7, you likely have the chance to take a potential big impact player. Most teams had Braun around or below #7 and Fielder was a #7. Looking at recent drafts, you also have guys like Tulowitski, Maybin, Homer Bailey, Diamond, and Markakis in the 7-10 range. I'll take the upside of those guys over a closer.

[GagneCY03]

I dont like the idea of taking closers early, much less in the first round. I dont care if you're getting a guy like, let's say, Eric Gagne. The simple fact is they're not going to contribute as much as a starting pitcher or hitter. Even in Gagne's 3 year run, he worked just over 80 innings each season. That's one inning in every other game.

 

I just dont think you can justify taking a guy that early when he'll be playing so little.

[foamboy1]

No thanks....draft for the future. If we have a need for a closer, trade a prospect and get a proven commodity and add someone with a high ceiling in the draft.

[colbyjack]

Moskos has been up to 97 this year, and as I've mentioned somewhere in this forum, there are several scouting directors that believe he'll be taken in the top five picks of the draft. Not sure if that's as a starter or as a reliever, as he has the repertoire to thrive in either role.

 

I dont like the idea of taking closers early, much less in the first round. I dont care if you're getting a guy like, let's say, Eric Gagne. The simple fact is they're not going to contribute as much as a starting pitcher or hitter. Even in Gagne's 3 year run, he worked just over 80 innings each season. That's one inning in every other game.

 

While I started this thread as more of a theoretical question, and agree that closers are made not born, it's better to get a more regular player, etc., if you know you were getting Eric Gagne, you absolutely positively have to take him. Not just with the 7th overall pick, but with the first overall pick. Not necessarily given Gagne's injuries the past several years, but I'm talking in terms of effectiveness and pure dominance. Not draft pick, first overall or 131st overall, is any kind of a sure thing. If the team was pretty confident they could get Huston Street or Chad Cordero 7th overall I would support the selection.

 

Of course, you can't guarantee any pick, at any spot, at any position, which makes a specialist like a closer a more criticized pick, but if you are closer to knowing that you are getting a tried and true big-league stud closer, any team would be foolish to pass on such a player.

[mothershipconnection]

I'm completely with Colby. Though you take a great starter or hitter over a great closer, Gagne before the injury was worth more than all but high quality starters and hitters. The difference between Gagne's best season and a guy with a 4.50 ERA over even 81 IP would be about 30 runs allowed. That's the same as a the difference between starters with a 3.00 and 4.50 ERA's throwing 180 IP.

You take a guy who could be Gagne 100 times out of 100 over a guy with the same probability of becoming Dave Bush. That said, your chance of getting a Dave Bush is much higher than getting a truly elite closer like Gagne.

[GagneCY03]

Yes, Gagne was dominant. But it was for 82 innings a year. That's not enough production for me to use a first round pick on a guy. The marginal utility of a great closer over a serviceable one is less than a great position player over a good one. Plus, lots of great closers used to be starters (Gagne for example). There's no shortage of starting pitchers to convert to close. The only way I move a high draft pick to the pen is if he just cant get it done every 5th day.

[Never Outhustled]

To put this in perspective, last year the Brewers traded there best hitter to get a closer, despite the fact that they would have gotten a 1st round pick and a sandwich pick as compensation had they held on to him for the remainder of the season. So yes, I'd consider a college closer. Obviously this only works if the closer turns out like Street or Cordero, but thats the case with any pick. Hansen, Wagner, and Aardsma (arrived in bigs the year he was drafted, now on 3rd team) are all disappointing, but all 3 still have a chance at success. I'd flip Mike Jones for any of those 3 right now.

 

As GagneCY03 mentions, there are tons of guys out there with closer stuff. What you get when you draft a college closer is a guy who has also demonstrated the mental toughness to close.