A's drafts: Why aren't they better?

[colbyjack]

Jim Callis has something pretty harsh comments towards the A's and GM Billy Beane in his latest Ask BA:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/askba/265412.html

 

That last Ask BA dealt mainly with the ramifications of trades that involved prospects, and this edition will as well. But one question I didn't get asked that I want to address is my take the two Athletics deals, which sent Dan Haren to the Diamondbacks and Nick Swisher to the White Sox.

 

Both Haren and Swisher are young and productive, and they're signed to easily affordable long-term contracts that lock them up for at least the next three seasons. In short, they're exactly the type of cornerstones a rebuilding club would want to rebuild around. But Oakland's farm system had fallen into such a state of disrepair that the A's decided they had to shed Haren and Swisher to bring in some minor league talent for the future.

 

Billy Beane has proven himself to be one of the game's best general managers, but how he escapes blame for the collapse of his farm system is beyond me. Yes, big league promotions have thinned out Oakland's store of minor league talent, but with 19 first-round or supplemental first-round picks in the last six drafts, there's no excuse. Funny, I seem to remember reading a book a few years ago about how the A's were revolutionizing the draft.

 

Secondly, there's no guarantee that prospects will pan out. I love prospects as much as the next guy, but unless the three best pitchers Oakland acquired (Brett Anderson from the Diamondbacks, Gio Gonzalez and Fautino de los Santos) all pan out, I don't think the trades will significantly upgrade the A's in the long run. And we all know what injuries and attrition can do to pitching prospects.

 

Callis tone aside, as he has always had some issues with the whole "Moneyball" phenomena, he makes some very good points about how the A's have had a ton of extra, early picks in recent years and yet don't have the prospects in their system to compete. Beane has received praise for dealing some of his top pitchers in recent years in an attempt to recycle talent, but at what point in time does he load up and try to go for it as opposed to just conceding the AL West to the Angels?

 

I don't really mean to bring this up to rip on the A's, because I'm not anti-A's or anti-"Moneyball" by any means. I bring this up more to point out that it is one thing to have a bunch of early picks, it's another to use them wisely to select future big-league impact talent.

 

Insert the usual praise for Jack Z. for assembling the talent he did without extra picks and without much of a presence in Latin America. Just like the A's, who don't seem to be the same team they were a few short years ago, the need to procure talent is constant and the Brewers need to make sure they continue to develop talent that will someday replace some of the talent they currently have that at some point in time will leave for big(ger) money.

 

This is especially pertinent since the Brewers for once will have so many extra, early selections.

[Brian the Automator]

I'm a big A's fan and generally a Beane supporter, but Callis is right regarding the lack of talent in the A's farm system coming into the fire sale. While consistently running with college picks early in the draft really paid off for them at the beginning, I'm wondering if it's finally starting catching up with them. When you don't take that chance on the uber-stud toolsy player coming out of high school, you're settling for more mediocre talent often. I also think that GM's have started taking pages from his playbook, and college players that might have normally been there when his picks have rolled around have gotten snapped up.

 

 

 

Couple this with the "problem" that the A's have consistently had good records and haven't had top-5 type draft picks, sprinkle in some injury bad luck, and it's not too hard to see what's going on. I'm sure the A's will come roaring back and some point with the next new crop of core players, but their upswing cycle probably lasted longer than it should have because of good luck and a mediocre AL West.

[TooLiveBrew]

I posted in another thread that I hope the #1 priority short of our big-league Crew is re-stocking the farm system with our extra picks. It's a crucial time imo to re-load on BPAs and get some top-tier talent back into the minors. With many of the young fellas likely moving on in 4 or 5 years, better have some others ready to go. Hopefully Jack Z will still be around at this time next year, but I remain highly skeptical.

[mothershipconnection]

It may simply be that they went from drafting guys who were under-valued and flying under the radar to drafting guys who were properly appraised and valued by other teams after they saw the A's success. The guys Beane scored on just may not be there anymore since other teams realized they were passing on superior talent and better odds by insisting on upside too often.

[igor67]

Revenge of the low ceiling player perhaps. He had a lot of picks some years, but even back then you had to get the impression that they were really forcing themselves into a small box trying to keep that under budget.

[dadofandrew]

With an unlimited budget, I'm sure they would have had better drafts. When you are limited by cash, you are really forced into reaching a bit.

 

 

 

Callis knows that. Some are just uncomfy with Beane building a winner for half-a-decade on pennies.

[colbyjack]

I think you're giving the A's a little too much credit. This is a team after all whose drafting philosophies led to a book being read about it, a book that made it seem as though the A's could do no wrong.

 

 

 

And they have spent plenty of money on the draft, so you can't use the budget excuse either. Every year you see teams with extra picks on a limited budget. Some teams still try to find a way to sign a high ceiling player or two among those picks, and actually IMO it is a better opportunity to do so, as with extra picks you can take a chance on a player or two.

 

 

 

Bottom line is that the A's talent base has dropped significantly the past couple of years, and Beane as the team's GM has to take a fair chunk of the blame for that.

[GagneCY03]

I think the 2004 draft was pivotal for Beane and it really hasn't panned out. Aside from Street, none of the other 6 players drafted in the first 2 rounds have made a significant impact on the big league squad. Kurt Suzuki looks primed to take over as the starting catcher, but Landon Powell, Richie Robnett, Danny Putnam and Michael Rogers have been huge disappointments.

 

 

 

And from the 2003 draft, only two players have made the majors and both (Omar Quintanilla and Andre Ethier) have reached the majors with other squads. That's why the draft is so important, especially to lower budget teams.

[ILuvDaBush]

Perhaps they should have taken the fat kid from Florida or the Greek God of Walks...

[Gopher74]

I think you're giving the A's a little too much credit. This is a team after all whose drafting philosophies led to a book being read about it, a book that made it seem as though the A's could do no wrong.

I can only imagine what other GM's around the league feel about the praise that was heaped upon the A's with the moneyball phenomenon. Frankly, I'm sure they're a bit tired of hearing about it.

I mean, it's a great tool, but people act as if it's gospel, or a strict mathematical equation. Baseball and drafting is still about watching a player and really guessing how good you think he can be, how much you think he can grow and how good you think he can turn out. So yea, I'd be curious to hear what the GM's in the league who don't necessarily subscribe to those ideals or who are more old school happen to think about the entire Moneyball/Billy Beane thing.

 

[Brian the Automator]

I can only imagine what other GM's around the league feel about the praise that was heaped upon the A's with the moneyball phenomenon. Frankly, I'm sure they're a bit tired of hearing about it.

I mean, it's a great tool, but people act as if it's gospel, or a strict mathematical equation. Baseball and drafting is still about watching a player and really guessing how good you think he can be, how much you think he can grow and how good you think he can turn out. So yea, I'd be curious to hear what the GM's in the league who don't necessarily subscribe to those ideals or who are more old school happen to think about the entire Moneyball/Billy Beane thing.

 

The thing about moneyball though really isn't about OBP or sabermetrics, it's about finding whatever is undervalued in the marketplace and exploiting it. That's always going to be the way to success for small market teams, regardless if we're praising Scott Hatteberg and Chad Bradford, or whatever next bargain player is out there. Who knows, maybe team speed and Whiteyball will be the next moneyball.

[ILuvDaBush]

I actually thought the NEW Moneyball would have been the DFE process before it got expunged from the draft. Then again, if the Brewers were to be a Moneyball-type team, that would have been our creedo.

[danzig6767]

Haven't a couple of Beane's right hand men been hired elsewhere?

 

GM's generally get the credit when their team wins and for the most part they should, but when it comes to the draft, it seems to me the scouts who travel the country and scouting directors often get overlooked. Maybe i'm wrong, but i question if 6th round pick Tim Hudson was watched multiple times in college by Beane. That goes for all teams. Doug Melvin isn't traveling the country watching the 18 year old high school kids that end up getting drafted in the 11th round.

 

GM's do deserve the credit though for spotting and hiring bright scouts and/scouting directors that the GM's count on so much when drafting 40-50 kids each year. Dean Taylor was a terrible GM, but he made a franchise changing move when he hired J.Zduriencik.

 

I have no idea if Beane personally made the call on all 19 of though high draft picks or if he was mostly just taking the advice of those in his scouting department. Same goes for when they were drafting well instead of drafting poorly like they have been lately.

 

Maybe Colby could answer that? I could be wrong, but it seems from the outside that Melvin pretty much leaves the draft to Zduriencik. Not that Doug has no involvement or isn't informed, but he leaves the final call to Jack Z. If i'm right about my perception on how the Brewers run their draft, is that how most team run theirs?

[colbyjack]

You're absolutely right danzig, Beane is the general manager, and he looks a heck of a lot better when he has the right people in place making good decisions while making Beane look good. We know this from the simple fact that everyone around here (or most everyone) is not shy about praising Jack Z. for the talent he has provided to the system.

 

However, Beane did frequently receive the credit when talking about the talent the A's used to have and still have to a certain degree. If he receives credit for building a good team, at the same time he should draw skeptism for having his team drop off talent-wise.

 

Grady Fuson was the A's scouting director that was reponsible for many of the A's shrewd draft picks. He's also the guy that took prep righty Jeremy Bonderman that supposedly led to Beane throwing a chair against the wall, or something to that effect. While a lot of people out there think Fuson is an amazing SD, he didn't do that great of a job procuring talent in Texas, and so far in San Diego the reviews are mixed (the Padres had a ton of early picks last year, of which they used to take a bunch of college guys with limited ceilings).

 

To answer one of your other questions, yes, GMs frequently will travel to see players that are being discussed for the team's early picks. I believe Melvin went to Brevard County last year when the Brewers had LaPorta work out for them. Jack Z. gets the final call of course but he's a smart enough guy to know he should invite his boss to check out the player(s) the team is about to drop a lot of money on.

[EdgarDiazRocks]

Patrick,

 

The Padres were harshed pretty badly by BA last year for taking "low ceiling" guys like Antonelli, Headly and Goldstien always goes out of his way to savage the toolsy Cedric Hunter for some reason, but it seems that Fuson knows how to find those lower budget guys with upside that everybody knows about, but won't take risks on and also isn't afraid to gamble on a guy like Hunter at the same time. Were not the results last year of those "low ceiling" guys encouraging enough to have rumors of them being traded all over the place last winter?

 

Who that they took in 2007 really disapointed in on the field performance? Like Antonelli last year, can anyone really say that they are a bust yet?

 

Other than Swisher and Blanton, have the A's produced anybody of real value since he was canned?

 

Texas always seemed like a power play between he and Hart. Vince Sinisi doesn't sound like a Fuson choice. Ian Kinsler on the other hand.

 

I have always championed that at least half of Beane's reputation belongs squarely in Sandy Alderson's lap. I still stand by that.

[colbyjack]

I like Antonelli and Headley (and Hunter for that matter), but neither was a part of the 2007 draft class, and no doubt, the A's haven't done much since he has moved on, which is part of the reason this thread started.

 

I just felt the Padres 2007 draft was pretty blah. No risks, and a relatively low ceiling for all of those guys. The system got a big boost just from the simple fact that they had so many early picks, but even the Blue Jays were more aggressive with some of their early guys (as were the Rangers). I know the Padres may have limited funds, but they signed all of those guys for slot value, and it's debatable whether or not some of them (Luebke, Payne) were worth the high of a selection.

 

I don't know, but when I think of the best SDs in the game, Grady Fuson isn't one of the first 10 guys that pops in my head.

 

I have always championed that at least half of Beane's reputation belongs squarely in Sandy Alderson's lap. I still stand by that.

 

Good point, I can definitely agree with that.

[Gopher74]

I posted in another thread that I hope the #1 priority short of our big-league Crew is re-stocking the farm system with our extra picks. Hopefully Jack Z will still be around at this time next year, but I remain highly skeptical.

Where is he going from now until then? It's not like a team fires it's GM before the draft next year, and even if they do, his work will have been done. PLUS, I think that as good as he is, a little more credit has to go to Melvin. He built a great farm system in Texas, and clearly he knows what he's doing.

 

And I can't imagine when our number 1 priority other than the big league club WOULDN'T be drafting and stocking, or re-stocking as it may be the farm system. That's kinda a no-brainer, isn't it?

 

[rousieboy]

Baseball is unique in the way that the draft plays into a team's fortunes. At least in football you can draft to a scheme...if you run a Tampa 2 D then you don't need great cornerbacks so you don't spend time or high picks on man-to-man cover corners...the 3-4 d's don't need great DEs so you save money there by not spending time or money on great DE picks...

 

Baseball's nature as a game doesn't produce a great way to outscheme the draft. Beane had a nice idea, but there are confounding variables that always seem to rear their ugly head. I thought for a long time that drafting pitchers and catchers in the 1st 10 picks would eventually lead to a nice cache in your minor league system to trade away for all the Brian Roberts and Edger Renterias that you could possibly want....

 

But could you imagine this team without Braun, Fielder, or Weeks?

 

Moneyball was a fun read but not without flaws...I am sure that Bonderman would look a lot better than any of the picks that followed Street and Suzuki.

 

I think the question is...could any other GM do any better in Oaktown under those circumstances?? Cashman? Melvin? or, heaven forbid...the Z man...?

 

Great thread guys...best read I have had all week...

[GagneCY03]

Speaking of the A's draft, my favorite prospect to be their pick (if he's still around) is Yonder Alonso, who had a unique stat line in Miami's 23-2 win over Wake Forest today. Alonso didn't put a single ball in play, striking out in his only official at bat. However, he walked in each of the first three innings, the third time with the bases loaded, so he recorded an RBI. On the season, Alonso has an astonishing 25 walks in 20 games, with a .567 OBP and a .750 SLG.

 

Dennis Raben has come back strong from an injury, homering today to give him 5 HR in his first 9 games with 9 walks. He should be the first college OF off the board this June. Jemile Weeks also homered today, his team leading 7th of the season, and is tied for the team lead in doubles (7) and triples (2) as well.

 

Wake Forest's Allan Dykstra again started at 3B but had a bad day at the plate, going 0 for 4 with 2 strikeouts. Still, he has 6 HR and 24 walks (but also 19 strikeouts) in 21 games. If he can stick at the hot corner, that should really help his draft value.

[TooLiveBrew]

Where is he going from now until then?

 

Guess that was clumsily worded. I just hope we are able to retain Zdurenciek through next offseason. I obviously didn't mean he'd be gone before the upcoming draft. GM heads roll nearly every offseason, and Z's a hot enough name at this point (first non-GM to ever win Exec. of the Year!) that he's got to be the #1 pick for many teams looking for a new GM.

 

EDIT: It's not like a team fires it's GM before the draft next year, and even if they do, his work will have been done.

 

But that doesn't have anything to do with whether or not he'd be hired away. And are you saying that a team isn't going to fire its GM in the offseason (yes, I'm aware two of those - StL & MN - weren't actually firings)? Doesn't make much sense. What were there, 3 vacancies this past offseason? I was worried Z would get nabbed then.

 

 

I like Antonelli and Headley

Yes, me too - and if some consider Headley 'low ceiling', that's the kind of low ceiling I'd duck my neck to get with. I'm really hoping Chase doesn't break camp with the Pads so I can get a close-up look at him in AAA.

 

Baseball's nature as a game doesn't produce a great way to outscheme the draft. Beane had a nice idea, but there are confounding variables that always seem to rear their ugly head.

 

This is a great point. However, I think in place of 'schemes' you have organizational/GM preferences - obviously. It seems there are systems that focus more on specific tools, but I think at this point it'd be largely defined by which clubs go for the position player OBP-centric strategy, and which draft more based upon physical tools/ceiling. Signability also seems to be something you can label org.'s about, as does HS arms/'no' HS arms. Colby, is there any validity to those thoughts?

 

I'd think a sound strategy would be to go for extremes early, and then worry about filling the system with OBP-minded hitters in the middle & later rounds. That is, it's probably a tad more important for the guys with lower ceilings to have good BB rates. I'm not sure the proper comparison in terms of pitching (perhaps there isn't one).

 

But could you imagine this team without Braun, Fielder, or Weeks?

 

And this, I think, is where the disconnect comes in when you compare to football, etc. There are certain players that have such extreme tools/skills that they fit in with nearly anybody's plans... but come to think of it, that can be the case in FB too. Interestingly enough, each of the three guys you used as examples has warts that turned other teams off to them.