The Huge Problem with High School/College Debate

[Never Outhustled]

I have a huge problem with the whole high school versus college debate. The debate is raw high school talent versus polished college players, and BA has some interesting research on it. However, the research comes up short. This is because Juco players are included with the college players. I think we all agree that Jucos are not polished college players. Spending a year at Mannatte JC isn't like spending 3 years at Florida St. More and more of todays stars are coming from the JC ranks, players such as Albert Pujols, Roy Oswalt and Mark Mulder. I think, by 1st impression, most of us thought you get more high end, super star type players from HS, but have a higher success rate of getting average major leaguers from 4 year colleges. If the Jucos were taken out of the equation, I think thats what we'd find.

[jwaltz]

I think you are on to something. Maybe the Juco's should be listed as a third catagory. There is enough of them to do that. It would be an interesting thing to do these studies over again but this time treat the Juco's as a separate catagory.

[emunney]

read posts.

 

p082.ezboard.com/fbrewers...61&stop=65

[jwaltz]

You know, Erik you could stand to be a little more polite. "read posts" isn't polite at all. It is quite rude. We aren't here to offend people. We can respect others and be polite.

 

You did do a good job looking at successful major leaguers. I liked it. Good job.

 

We still don't know the success rates of the three groups. Which group had the worst success rate of graduating players to the majors? Which group the best? What I would like to see done is a comprehensive study on the success rates of High School vs. College vs. Juco. To my knowledge that still hasn't been done. What types of careers those that graduate have is also something to look at. Maybe they can look at ALL prospects from 1990-present or something like that. Obviously we couldn't do it ourselves. But that is what BA pays their writers to do. Hopefully someone will do it someday.

[emunney]

I'm not in a position to command anyone, so when I say "read posts" it shouldn't be taken as anything other than a suggestion.

 

Brevity is the soul of saving time.

[emunney]

That sounds like the kind of tedious task that I'd enjoy doing if I was getting paid for it. I made the suggestions in an earlier thread, but if we were all willing to get together, we could all assume just a small part of the number crunching and assemble a decently impressive study complete with informed and reasonable conclusions, I think. Is there any interest in this at all? jwaltz, what do you think? Are you up for some data scouring?

[jwaltz]

I just might be up for that, my friend. But I will have to see how my work schedule is next week. Thursday through Sunday this week I am working 50 plus hours in four days. Sucks. Thus I can't do much if anything those days. I think I might be able to get some done on Monday or Tuesday. I hope. I will know more tomorrow night. Let you know then.

 

"assemble a decently impressive study complete with informed and reasonable conclusions"

 

We should easily do better than the drivel put out by some of the so called "experts" on some other sites. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

How far back do you think we should go? The information should be available on the net. I don't have a subscription to BA so I can't do much on that site. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/indifferent.gif

[EdgarDiazRocks]

If you guys do this, please create a seperate catergory for latin players like Oliver Perez and Johan Santana.

 

I think when the whole HS v. College debate gets bandied about the non-drafted latin players who should go into the raw HS catergory IMO get left out completely.

[jwaltz]

Edgar, do you want to help too? You are a smart guy, we could use you if we can get this going. If we can get 5 or more of us, this won't too big a task. And with 5 of us putting our brains together we will be far less likely to make mistakes. And we should be able to make better conclusions.

 

Adding the latin players would be tough but we might be able to do it. An interesting question regarding latin players is: What are the rates of graduating these kids to the majors compared to the drafted high schoolers? How much money should be spent on latin american players when we look at their "graduation rates." Is the cost worth it? Interesting questions. I'm not sure if it has been looked at before or not.

[EdgarDiazRocks]

Edgar, do you want to help too?

 

Oh, god no. I just like reading data. Compiling it might be a hobby occasionaly, but going out of my way to do it doesn't sound like fun.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

One of my problems with all these studies, along with the Non-drafted players is the fact that "injuries" are just counted as "injuries".

 

I think there's a difference between Mike Jones' troubles and Brien Taylor's or Jeff Allison's troubles.

 

Ricardo Rodriguez' career is now in jeopardy after injury not from the result of poor arm action or of throwing too many pitches, but instead the result of ONE pitch lined back into his elbow. The same thing happens in the minor leagues too. Statisticaly speaking, injury is injury. But stepping back from the numbers there is a lot of sheer dumb luck involved.

 

Jose Uribe went from being an average shortstop to a terrible one because he never got over when his wife died in childbirth.But a Sabermatrician looks at his career numbers and says his OXS was 57% below league average, therefore he was a terrible player.

 

Variables happen.

 

As far as the jist of the HS v. College debate and the percentages of players reaching the bigs and thereby saying that a team should only draft one or the other I go with this stat. As soon as Greg Maddux wins his next game, there will be two 300 game winners in the Bigs. One was a HS pitcher, one was a college pitcher. Saying you should go one way or the other would rule out one..

 

You are a smart guy

 

well now that's even more debateable. there is certainly no data to support that hypothesis.

[Never Outhustled]

One of my problems with all these studies, along with the Non-drafted players is the fact that "injuries" are just counted as "injuries". Whether you say Allison is injured or just freaked out, he should count as a black eye towards high school players. Drafting a college player gives you more time to evaluate a players personality, not just his game. Of course they only been a couple of nuts like this the last few years, Allison and that D-Rays OF with all the tats whose name is escaping me right now.

[jwaltz]

The D-Ray kid is Josh Hamilton.

 

Maybe MLB needs to do more homework on potential first round draft picks.

[colbyjack]

Maybe MLB needs to do more homework on potential first round draft picks.

 

I don't think teams can do any more homework on players, especially those that are considered really high picks. Scouts & crosscheckers spend a lot of time with these players both on the field & in their homes, and do everything they can to get inside of their heads when they know they're investing a lot of money. There are a series of tests they conduct, both physical & written, and is a big reason why so many organizations place a lot of value on character & makeup.

 

And even if some character issues are discovered (not something as great as a drug addiction), teams will always take a chance on players when their talent is undeniable, like Josh Hamilton. This may not be the best example, but you deal with Barry Bonds' less than pleasant demeanor given his unbelievable production. Basically, the potential reward outweighs the risk.

 

It's really a shame that Hamilton's life has taken the turn as it has, as he was a bona-fide stud in the making. Minor League Baseball's stricter drug policy hopefully will go a long way in turning these young men away from such problems/addictions.

[jwaltz]

I forgot about the scouts and checkers. Hamilton had a very bright future before his addiction. Too bad.