Scout's honor

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
Knot Hole Gang Vet
In perpetuum
Posts: 1464
Joined: April 21 06, 4:15 pm
Location: Monterey, California

Re: Scout's honor

Post by Knot Hole Gang Vet »

obucard wrote:Albert was pick #402. Every team passed on him a dozen times.
Mike Piazza was pick #1390.
The Mets in 1966 used the #1 pick on a catcher that never saw time in the majors (the #2 pick that year was Reggie Jackson).
Of the 47 players drafted ahead of Cal Ripken in 1978, 24 never wore a major league uniform.
The Cards took Dmitri Young with the #4 pick in 1991. Cleveland would use #13 on Manny Ramirez.
The 1981 Draft saw the Yankees use #52 on OF John Elway (yes, that John Elway). San Diego then spent #58 on Tony Gwynn.
15 pitchers (and 15 position players) were taken in 1984 before the Cubs took Greg Maddux. 7 more pitchers (and 8 position players) were taken after that before Atlanta took Tom Glavine.
1985 had the Cards taking Joe Magrane at #18, one of 16 pitchers picked ahead of Randy Johnson.
8 of the 16 players picked before Roy Halladay in 1995 were pitchers.
7 of the 9 catchers (and 58 of 112 players overall) picked before Yadier Molina in 2000 failed to reach the majors.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Thanks for that post,obucard, really eye opening numbers. When I finished reading it, a tune was running through my mind from one of my favorite musicals- Guys and Dolls:" Luck be a lady tonight."

User avatar
MrCrowesGarden
'Burb Boy
Posts: 23630
Joined: July 9 06, 11:33 am
Location: Out of the Loop

Re: Scout's honor

Post by MrCrowesGarden »

The CT thread on the article is quite the doozy.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50608
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Scout's honor

Post by jim »

What does it mean to take a more analytical approach to drafting? Are they doing things like coming up with VORP for the SEC conference, or the Pac-10, or HS > 2,000 kids? Stuff like that? Projections like PECOTA etc...?

This talk about trying to reinvent scouting with number crunching, I just don't buy it at all. Scouting always has and always will be done with a skilled set of eyes.

User avatar
robbotis
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4849
Joined: April 18 06, 7:05 am
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Scout's honor

Post by robbotis »

Did the Cards sign the Dominican teenager, Mateo? I heard they were about to, for a large sum of cash, but didn't hear if it was officially done.

User avatar
The Third Man
It rubs the lotion on its skin.
Posts: 8933
Joined: July 17 06, 1:00 pm

Re: Scout's honor

Post by The Third Man »

robbotis wrote:Did the Cards sign the Dominican teenager, Mateo? I heard they were about to, for a large sum of cash, but didn't hear if it was officially done.
He's eligible to sign on July 2nd so it will be a while before we find out. We have apparently lined up to offer him a $4+ million signing bonus.

User avatar
ghostrunner
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 28724
Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm

Re: Scout's honor

Post by ghostrunner »

jim wrote:What does it mean to take a more analytical approach to drafting? Are they doing things like coming up with VORP for the SEC conference, or the Pac-10, or HS > 2,000 kids? Stuff like that? Projections like PECOTA etc...?

This talk about trying to reinvent scouting with number crunching, I just don't buy it at all. Scouting always has and always will be done with a skilled set of eyes.
It seems to me a good portion of Moneyball was about this topic. I think it just means paying more attention to the trackable stats that are available for those players, vs. leaving it only to a scout's judgement of body type, "tools," etc....


On an unrelated note, the movie's coming out next year. I hope it does a bit more justice to the scouts than the book did.

greenback44
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 11671
Joined: June 26 06, 8:54 pm
Location: In a Small Town with Jack and Diane

Re: Scout's honor

Post by greenback44 »

jim wrote:What does it mean to take a more analytical approach to drafting? Are they doing things like coming up with VORP for the SEC conference, or the Pac-10, or HS > 2,000 kids? Stuff like that? Projections like PECOTA etc...?

This talk about trying to reinvent scouting with number crunching, I just don't buy it at all. Scouting always has and always will be done with a skilled set of eyes.
You give me (well, Sig Mejdal would do it much better) any set of numbers, and I can spit out a five- or ten-year PECOTA-like projection for a player. The input doesn't have to be VORP or BA/OBP/SLG. The inputs can be simple things like height, weight, space between their eyes (this may matter for hitters)... and more to the point, it could be based on scouting evaluations of tools. Guy has a 40 fastball, 65 change-up and a 40 curve... look in my historical database for comps, and I come up with a projected WAR of 10, plus a World Series victory, over his first five years. The going rate in the draft for 10 WARs will be $1.5 million... blah blah blah.

You will put a number on the guy when you select your draft pick and then when you decide how much to pay him. There's no getting around this.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50608
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Scout's honor

Post by jim »

That's different than putting a projection based on past results. I don't see how you can give any more than a superficial glance at an amateur players past results. Small sample size, huge differences in league difficulties, impossibility to even define league difficulty in some(most) cases ...

User avatar
TheoSqua
Next Gen Wart
Posts: 8894
Joined: April 22 06, 6:53 pm
Location: St. Louis
Contact:

Re: Scout's honor

Post by TheoSqua »

jim wrote:That's different than putting a projection based on past results. I don't see how you can give any more than a superficial glance at an amateur players past results. Small sample size, huge differences in league difficulties, impossibility to even define league difficulty in some(most) cases ...
This is why obucard's post is true. Even scouting is an inexact science. You put together the best information you can on players, and still 15 teams are going to be wrong.

User avatar
UK
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4273
Joined: December 10 06, 6:41 pm
Location: Baseball Purgatory.

Re: Scout's honor

Post by UK »

jim wrote:That's different than putting a projection based on past results. I don't see how you can give any more than a superficial glance at an amateur players past results. Small sample size, huge differences in league difficulties, impossibility to even define league difficulty in some(most) cases ...
As far as HS, if you're looking at a hitter and he's facing one of the best pitchers in the state, you might look at that matchup more closely than other games. You might look at the season totals of HS players as it is another piece of info., but it likely wouldn't factor at all b/c what you like in that player will likely be the same tools that will make him one of the best players in state both talent and productionwise. I don't recall a kid that had subpar numbers at the HS level that was drafted and signed, there might be one this year, but I doubt it.

Post Reply