Rate the Draft.

[FVBrewerFan]

Quote:

---

The college guy will be here 3 years of his life in his late 20s and not his mid 20s. I would always rather have a player here between 26 and 29 rather than 23 and 25.

---

 

Hoffy, a big part of your argument seems to be this idea that the Brewers will only have this draft pick for 2-3 years in the majors. No matter how many times someone points it out that you're wrong, you keep going back to it. The "don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument" syndrom.

 

Regardless of whether you draft a college or HS pitcher you havehim for SIX YEARS. Not THREE. Finally, why do you believe it will take Rogers 5 years to get to Milwaukee? (As you mention above with the 23-25 yr old)

 

Talent is what matters. If this guy is a great pitcher 4 yrs from now, it's better than a very good pitcher 3 years from now.

[emunney]

I'm not sure when people will figure out that dropping names is a really ugly and inconclusive way to approach an argument.

 

Only marginally more valid will be my forthcoming tactic: citing statistics I believe to be accurate but which I may be too lazy to look up. Actually, I'll pose my theory first, then post it, then look it up, and if anybody happens to know it to be true or false, post your eminent knowledge in the meantime.

 

It seems to me that most truly great big league careers start at a very young age. This does not mean that guys won't slip through the cracks in high school and go to college and go on to have excellent careers, but I think that most great players break in about the time they'd be graduating from college, if not before. This doesn't preclude them from attending college, of course, but I think it's more reasonable to expect a HS player to reach the majors in 4 years than a 3 year college guy to make it in 1, or a 2 year college guy to make it in 2, etc. Now, I'm not saying that this is always the case, that every HS player is better than every player who plays ball between HS and the minor leagues, but I think that a tendency exists, and this tendency is the reason for drafting the cream of the HS crop with high draft choices. I mean, you can point out Paul Molitor, but there's nothing in that name that proves that he's not more of an exception than he is the norm. And of course if all you mention is Molitor and Yount, hey, it looks pretty even, and maybe college comes out ahead. But when we widen the frame a little, I think we'll find that people draft HS players for very legitimate reasons, and in the case of HS pitchers, the extra 20% failure rate is probably not offset by enough additional success to warrant taking them, but the allure is, and I would suggest that more great pitchers come straight out of HS than college, despite the difference in failure rate.

 

Alright, off to my research.

[gregmag]

Erik, I'm actually a fan of HS position players. They still have the unpredictability issue, but they don't have the high likelihood of injury that pitchers have. Your point that most great players start out young sounds right to me, but not when applied to pitchers. I'm using the same methodology you used -- rough memory -- and it seems to me that pitchers who have major success before age 21 end up with high flame-out rates (the rough memory I'm fixating on is Gooden).

 

That's a big reason I hate drafting HS pitching -- I generally don't WANT a talented pitcher in my rotation at 21. I'd rather protect him from the pressure of big league expectations until he's 23. If the team could keep young pitchers in the pen for a few years, this wouldn't matter so much, but of course you aren't going to burn a potentially great pitcher's pre-arby years in long relief. Hoffy is wrong about the age-time specifics, but the age of a pitcher during his pre-arby/pre-FA years is an important consideration, in terms of both his likelihood of staying healthy and what he'll give you if he stays healthy.

 

Greg.

[emunney]

Alright, I've decided to use baseballreference.com's HOF monitor, and I'll use the players who are not yet eligible for HOF consideration for the analyses. Hope this works out.

 

Just to keep things nice and even, I'll take the top 50 pitchers and the top 50 hitters. You can find them at www.baseball-reference.co...itor.shtml

 

First thing I'll do is divide them up into where they were drafted from. For simplicity, I've grouped all college players together, regardless of how long they stayed. Perhaps later I'll break this down further.

 

Batters:

 

HS: 13

JC: 2

College: 20

Int'l/FA: 14

Uncertain: Willie McGee. Anyone know?

 

Well, not only did college players far outnumber HS players, international players did as well, though nominally. The College guys are highlighted by a Barry Bonds and Tony Gwynn, and then a slew of slugging 1b including Frank Thomas, Mark McGwire, Palmeiro, Bagwell, Helton, Thome, Giambi, and Mo Vaughn. The two JC players are Pujols and Piazza.

 

I have no problem being wrong, but I'm not sure we've gotten to the bottom of this yet. A lot of the names, as I went through, didn't strike me as a the caliber of player I was thinking of (Dante Bichette, Paul O'Neill, Tony Fernandez, etc.) when I set out. Perhaps I could set some more accurate standards for what defines a great player, or just come to some sort of internal mind-consensus.

 

Preliminarily, though, my suppositions were terrible, and I'm glad I've set myself straight (somewhat). I don't want to go through the pitchers, as I'm tired of scouring the web, so I'll do that later, once I've come up with better criteria for research. Maybe we could set up a HS vs. College thread where we could compile vast amounts of research on the topic rather than arguing aimlessly. Maybe not.

[emunney]

Greg, I totally agree with your point about young pitchers. I was against bringing up Neugebauer at such a young age, and I was even against bringing up Sheets. They need to stay in the minors until they're ready to be... well... valuable. And not only that, but they probably shouldn't ever throw 100 pitches in a game until their bodies are through developing, maybe at 24 or so for most, later for many. I don't have a problem with keeping Mike Jones (or Rogers for that matter) in the minors, babying him all the while, until he's ready to be an actual major league starter, where he'll be able to go at least 6 innings every start and pitch the Brewers to some wins. We don't need to use the big league club to develop starters, and it seems the current regime recognizes that with its younger pitchers, though the proof will be in how they handle their prospects in the next 2-3 years.

 

My argument is that there is nothing forcing the Brewers to, for instance, push Mike Jones past high A. Were our high school pitchers to simply pitch one year each in Helena, Beloit, High Desert, Huntsville, and Indy, they'd arrive about the time you want them to. Add another year in Arizona and they'd get there when I think they're ready. If such a system could just be implemented, I think we'd get a much more consistent idea of how guys progress, how prospects look in relation to previous players, and, as a bonus, we'd have their pre-arby years closer to the 23-26 that we're hoping for. It seems to me that a team like the Brewers (read: a team with anti-money) HAS to operate this way to make the most of their assets, though it would probably over time hurt their ability to sign high school pitchers.

[gregmag]

There's one other consideration, although I don't know enough to know how important it is: Rule 5. At some point, guys have to go on the 40-man, and at some (other) point, you can't clog up the 40-man with guys who you're planning on keeping in the minors for several more years. In extreme cases, like the guy we just drafted who wasn't 17 yet, even the 6-year FA threshold might come into play -- although I seem to remember a rule that extends a team's control over minor leaguers who are drafted especially young.

 

Greg.

[emunney]

After three years, though, you should have a much better idea of who you want to keep around, and who you'll lose. Losing some guys you want to keep is the price you pay for having a great farm system, and generally if they're really worth having, you'll be able to mitigate your loss by trading them before you lose them. The 6 year FA thing shouldn't be a concern for the guys who are going to make it, either. What I'm banking on is the ability of our system to accurately evaluate the talent not only in amateur ranks, but also within our system. We have to keep the right guys, and if we do that, who we lose won't matter.

 

So, yeah, I agree Rule 5 and 6 year FAs are a concern, but they don't overwhelm the possible benefits of babying these guys in my opinion.

[Big Reed]

my thoughts on college verses high school is if the player is good on the field, he will get promoted fast track whether he is a college player or not. there are too many examples of where a player produced and was fast tracked. Neuge was on track to arrive to the major leagues just as fast as Eldred and Sheets were before injuries delayed his arrival.

 

jenkins went to college. pods did not. who is the better player? who went through the minors quicker ? who arrived to the major leagues at an earlier age. it doesn't really matter! They are both integral parts of our team.

 

In looking at the past, Seaver went to college and I doubt Bob Gibson did. who was the better pitcher ?? They were both about equal. Nolan Ryan went to college. Clemens went to college. Carlton ? I'm not sure. reggie jackson, mark mcguire, and Sal bando all went to college. jose canseco and rickey henderson did not. Mulder and Zito went to college , while Hudson did not. there are plenty of all time greats who went to college and just as many that did not.

 

in looking back, it is probably not a fair assessment to compare college verses non college for players that played before 1960. Players like Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Jackie Robinson were probably not afforded the opportunity to go to college. and players like Babe Ruth probably didn't go to college either.

 

I think a fair assessment would be to take a look at last year's all star team. That's 50 of today's best players. I would be interested in knowing how many of the players on last year's all star team were college verses non-college players. I'm predicting that there will be twice as many college players that were all stars last year than high school players. I'm very curious as to the break down of last year's all star team. I think we may be selling college players short, and over-hyping high school drafted players.

 

I know before even looking that Jenkins, Prior, Helton, Clemens, Mulder, Musina, nomar, jeter, ventura, Zito, glaus, Bonds, and giambi were all college players. posada was junior college and Soriano was a foreign player. I'll try to complete my research on last year's all star break out of college verses high school by Monday. If anybody wants to beat me to it, feel free to go ahead and do so. I think we'd all like to see the results/ break out.

[H0FFY]

A few guys here have understood my inner psyche. So I think you will cut me some slack.

 

Duluth dude, yes Superior was interesting. I did not know anywhere on earth ever got to more than 70 degrees until one day I drove to the top of the hill in Duluth and saw the sun for the first time. And in a town of 33,000 (at the time) there was only one black guy. We called him 'the black guy'. I thought the world was only full of Pols and Finns and one black guy.

 

And then, horror for Brewerfanitis, I left Wisconsin in 1978. And there was no internet or Fox. So my beloved Brewers did not exist between 1978 and about 1992. So my Brewers are those of 1970 to 1978 and 1992 to now.

 

Wo is me.

 

And Reed understands I dont want to die before the Brewers play .600 ball (bugger .500, I want .600 one year). If I need to wait until 2011 or 2012 I will wait. But if we are not winning by then...

 

I WILL BE REALLY, REALLY GRUMPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[emunney]

Did you even read my post, Reed?

 

I used the players who have produced the most but are not yet eligible for the all-star game. Guys who, like them or not, had long, established careers and won major awards. While I lament my system's imperfections, last year's All-star teams is a far less helpful sample. Think of all the one-time All-stars. My list had a number of undoubtably great players on it, and all from the last 20 years. I'll elaborate, since I still have all the names sorted, sadly:

 

HS: Wade Boggs, Cal Ripken, Jr., Alex Rodriguez, Rickey Henderson, Ken Griffey, Jr., Manny Ramirez, Derek Jeter, Chipper Jones, Jose Canseco, Gary Sheffield, Fred McGriff, Tim Raines and Paul O'Neill.

 

College: Barry Bonds, Tony Gwynn, Frank Thomas, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Jeff Bagwell, Todd Helton, Albert Belle, Barry Larkin, Nomar Garciaparra, Craig Biggio, Jim Thome, Jason Giambi, Mo Vaughn, Will Clark, Dante Bichette, Kenny Lofton, Luis Gonzalez, Matt Williams and John Olerud.

 

JC: Mike Piazza and Albert Pujols.

 

Int'l/FA: Roberto Alomar, Sammy Sosa, Ivan Rodriguez, Larry Walker, Bernie Williams, Edgar Martinez, Juan Gonzalez, Andres Galarraga, Vlad Guerrero, Benito Santiago, Ichiro, Carlos Delgado, Tony Fernandez and Omar Vizquel.

 

Uncertain: Willie McGee

 

And as to your "Who cares?" Well, there's a prominent school of thought that says if Neugebauer wasn't rushed, he wouldn't have been so often injured. Fast tracking worked like a charm for Eldred as well. And it's important whether these players went to high school or college because, if most great players in today's game actually went to college, the myth of the high ceiling high schooler is nothing more than that: myth. There are always exceptions to the rule. This is why our scouting department needs to be able to identify what we have. If we have a guy with great baseball skills struggling through injuries, we'd have to make the call on whether to keep him or not when his 6 years run out, but there will always be such calls. What we're looking for are trends and tendencies that can't be predicted by giving three past or present examples.

 

ALL THAT SAID, might I suggest running a similar analysis of 3 time all-stars in the past 25 years? Or even 2 time all-stars? We could start a poll, and each person who finds a three time (or greater) all-star could post the player's name and where he was acquired from, and then vote for the appropriate category. I'm interested to have some hard data, but I'd like to spread the work around and just find a few guys at a time.

[filthyfrog]

Some great posts in this thread. emunney, nice work. When I read your list, one thing really struck me. The general trend appears to be that the HS guys were good all around players while the College guys were strictly hitters.

 

HS: Wade Boggs (3B), Cal Ripken, Jr. (SS), Alex Rodriguez (SS), Rickey Henderson (the greatest baserunner of all time), Ken Griffey, Jr. (a great CF), Manny Ramirez (a hitter), Derek Jeter (SS), Chipper Jones (3B/OF), Jose Canseco (a hitter), Gary Sheffield (SS/3B/OF), Fred McGriff (1B), Tim Raines (good baserunning OF) and Paul O'Neill (OF).

 

College: Barry Bonds (good baserunner and OF in early career), Tony Gwynn (good all around), Frank Thomas (1B/DH), Mark McGwire (1B), Rafael Palmeiro (1B), Jeff Bagwell (1B), Todd Helton (1B), Albert Belle (terrible OF), Barry Larkin (good SS), Nomar Garciaparra (good SS), Craig Biggio (C/2B/CF), Jim Thome (1B), Jason Giambi (1B), Mo Vaughn (1B/DH), Will Clark (1B), Dante Bichette (terrible OF), Kenny Lofton (CF), Luis Gonzalez (OF), Matt Williams (3B) and John Olerud (1B).

 

Obviously there are exceptions, but most of the college guys are 1Bs while most of the HS guys played more valuable positions.

 

I'm not sure what that means. Possibly nothing. Possibly that most of the toolsy guys--guys who can succeed in multiple facets of the game--get drafted higher out of HS. A guy who can only hit would probably get drafted lower out of HS, and thus be more likely to turn down the contract and go to college.

 

It might be the case that if all you're looking for is a good hitter, you can find that pretty easily in the college ranks. But if you want good all around players who play tough positions, you should keep your eye on the High Schoolers.

 

But all this analysis ignores pitchers, which was clearly the focus of the Brewers' 2004 draft. I'd like to see more thoughts on pitchers.

[flbrewer]

Tim Hudson went to Auburn.

[BucEbadger1979]

MLB

Mike Adams

Jeff Bennett

Chris Capuano

 

AAA P

Ben Hendrickson

Pedro Liriano

Jorge De La Rosa

 

AA

Mike Jones

Dennis Sarfate

Chris Saenz

Matt Ford

Greg Bruso

Ben Diggins

Jeff Housman

 

A+

Manny Parra

Nick Neugebauer

Jesse Harper

 

Hoffy Of the named players above who would you of got rid of for Weaver being that u feel he is gonna be in the bigs within 2 years?? IMO he is gonna get hit and hit hard in the MLB with that delivery he has, prob gonna end up a RP in 3-4 years. BTW whats wrong with starting a new crop of young arms?

 

Nice core to build on with these guys IMO

 

Tommy Hawk

Brian Montalbo

Mark Rogers

Carlos Villanueva

Greg Kloosterman

Tom Whilhelmsen (IF he comes back)

Dana Eveland

Mark Rogers

Yovani Gallardo

Josh Wahpepah <- Hoping he can move up fast also

Josh Baker <- Hoping he can move up fast (Beloit?)

[emunney]

Thanks, filthy. I'll do pitching based on the same criteria later tonight. I've decided the mix of good and great modern players is pretty much what I'm looking for, and that since ultimately what makes a player valuable is the extent to which he produces in the big leagues, my criteria leaves the door open for players who produce at a decent level for a long time as well as those who kill for just a few years. It's not a terrible sample to take, to begin with, anyway. We'll see how it works out.

[emunney]

Alright, I took the top 55 pitchers on the Not Yet Eligible list.

 

www.baseball-reference.co...itor.shtml

 

HS: 14

College: 24

JC: 10

Int'l FA: 7

 

Advantage: College. But if we separate the pitchers into starters and relievers...

 

HS Starters: 12

HS Relievers: 2

College Starters: 13

College Relievers: 11

JC Starters: 3

JC Relievers: 7

Int'l FA Starters: 3

Int'l FA Relievers: 4

 

Interesting, no? Apparently you're about just as likely to score a top starter out of HS as out of college, but, failing that, if you select a college pitcher you're more likely to at least end up with a reliever. It's not the largest sample, but it's still a meaningful one. It certainly doesn't do anything to take away from the all-or-nothing reputation of a HS pick, but even with difficulties in projecting high schoolers, HS pitchers accounted for almost as many high quality starters as college pitchers did.

 

And now the names:

 

HS Starters: Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, John Smoltz, David Cone, Dwight Gooden, David Wells, Bret Saberhagen, Pat Hentgen, Al Leiter, Roy Halladay, Steve Avery and Derek Lowe.

 

HS Relievers: Robb Nen and Rod Beck.

 

College Starters: Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Mike Mussina, Kevin Brown, Orel Hershiser, Mark Langston, Chuck Finley, Jamie Moyer, Jack McDowell, Charles Nagy, Kevin Appier, Denny Neagle and Barry Zito.

 

College Relievers: John Franco, Trevor Hoffman, Rick Aguilera, Doug Jones, Jeff Montgomery, Roberto Hernandez, Troy Percival, Jesse Orosco, Dan Plesac, Gregg Olsen and Paul Assenmacher.

 

JC Starters: Curt Schilling, Andy Pettitte and Darryl Kile.

 

JC Relievers: John Wetteland, Billy Wagner, Mike Stanton, Jeff Shaw, Mike Jackson, Jeff Nelson and Eric Gagne.

 

(note: Pettitte and Gagne were signed as FAs despite attending JC in the U.S.)

 

Int'l FA Starters: Pedro Martinez, Ramon Martinez and Bartolo Colon.

 

Int'l FA Relievers: Mariano Rivera, Jose Mesa, Ugueth Urbina and Armando Benitez.

 

(further note: I classified Smoltz and Lowe as starters because, despite their successes in closing, they're more valuable as starters, and Smoltz essentially pitched a career as a starter before making the switch.)

[H0FFY]

BucE, in your list of our talent, I only think Manny Parra and/or Chris Capuano could develop into as good a pitcher as Weaver in as quick a time.

 

There are a ton of names in that list that I think are on the way out. But I dont think we needed to throw one of them away. I think we could have fitted Weaver into the system.

 

If you are correct about your opinion of Weaver, then you are more clever that most of the articles I have read. I cannot say yes or no to your feeling. I just think we should have gone down the college arm path.

 

But, I appreciate your list. We are going to need to rely on somebody from that list filling the 2 or 3 spot in Milwaukee real soon. I would guess Davis is really a 3 guy and the other guys, including Hendrickson, are more 4 / 5 guys.

 

And, of course, I like all of you, hope that Rogers kid will be here a long time and be real good. I have no doubt he was a 'talent filled' pick. But, not just at the first round 4 pick given our current state of staters in the minors.