Photo

Looking ahead to the 2013 draft...


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#41 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,373 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 02 January 2013 - 10:55 PM

I generally avoid comps but it does help when trying to get an idea of what a player looks like in terms of ability.

I was intrigued by your thoughts on Gausman by the way. No need to re-hash since you went over it 3/4 times in the chat. Prior to the draft I went back and forth on Gausman. I'm very high on him now, but wasn't so big on him towards the end of the college season.


Don't worry, I did the same thing with Gausman. I wasn't totally against him or anything but I was in love with Giolito (even knowing he was going to need surgery), and even though it was probably too high for him I was quite smitten with Stroman after I saw him live.
@JeremyMStrain

#42 JeffLong

JeffLong

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,826 posts

Posted 02 January 2013 - 11:24 PM

Don't worry, I did the same thing with Gausman. I wasn't totally against him or anything but I was in love with Giolito (even knowing he was going to need surgery), and even though it was probably too high for him I was quite smitten with Stroman after I saw him live.


I was the exact same way. There was a fling with Fried in there as well.
At the time I thought the O's should go for Giolito given his higher upside, but I think that Gausman might actually have a similar ceiling & a much higher floor.

____________

Also, curious to hear both of your insights on this:

For me, I try to take a look at what tools a guy has based on the reports from scouts I trust. Based on those tools I can make my determination on:

A. how much I like the guy
B. How I think he'll develop given the concerns brought up by the scout.

Seeing a guy in person is much easier, and while I'm not a trained scout I think my experience and knowledge of the game helps me "scout" them to some degree.

How would you guys recommend someone interprets a scouting report from you? For example, if you're giving a scouting report to a GM, how should they interpret your report in order to get as good a picture on a guy as possible.
@JeffLongBP

#43 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,373 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 03 January 2013 - 12:15 AM

I was the exact same way. There was a fling with Fried in there as well.
At the time I thought the O's should go for Giolito given his higher upside, but I think that Gausman might actually have a similar ceiling & a much higher floor.

____________

Also, curious to hear both of your insights on this:

For me, I try to take a look at what tools a guy has based on the reports from scouts I trust. Based on those tools I can make my determination on:

A. how much I like the guy
B. How I think he'll develop given the concerns brought up by the scout.

Seeing a guy in person is much easier, and while I'm not a trained scout I think my experience and knowledge of the game helps me "scout" them to some degree.

How would you guys recommend someone interprets a scouting report from you? For example, if you're giving a scouting report to a GM, how should they interpret your report in order to get as good a picture on a guy as possible.


Nick is the scouting report master, he nails details down to tiny numbers, they are pretty thorough. I've never had to write formal scouting reports (or just fill out the forms you see from ML orgs) so mine are more conversational. I try to get some of the root things covered, things like velo, movement, batting stance/swing style, the things you can see and measure, and then I try to touch on some impressions I get. The whole point of a scouting report is that you try to give a factual representation of what you see and relay that information rather than just writing an opinion that you get from seeing a guy. The more views you get, the more accurate you can be and the more trends you'll catch, but it's not a perfect world and many times you are asked to make assessments on just a view or two.
@JeremyMStrain

#44 Stotle

Stotle

    2080 Baseball

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 529 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:51 AM

I was the exact same way. There was a fling with Fried in there as well.
At the time I thought the O's should go for Giolito given his higher upside, but I think that Gausman might actually have a similar ceiling & a much higher floor.

____________

Also, curious to hear both of your insights on this:

For me, I try to take a look at what tools a guy has based on the reports from scouts I trust. Based on those tools I can make my determination on:

A. how much I like the guy
B. How I think he'll develop given the concerns brought up by the scout.

Seeing a guy in person is much easier, and while I'm not a trained scout I think my experience and knowledge of the game helps me "scout" them to some degree.

How would you guys recommend someone interprets a scouting report from you? For example, if you're giving a scouting report to a GM, how should they interpret your report in order to get as good a picture on a guy as possible.


A formal scouting report is pretty straight forward -- grades, summaries of certain info the org wants collected, and some brief explanations of grades. Usually an area scout is meeting in person with supervisors to go over submitted persons of interest, so it's more of a presentation that includes a formal report, with questions/discussion throughout.

As for how a GM or SD views reports (I'd assume this is the same for all orgs) the formal reports are filed for reference and can be looked up at any time (be it in binder or database). Valuation is ultimately determined by the specifics in all of the filed reports, the preferences of the org, and whatever formulas the org might have in incorporating stat analysis into the file.
@NickJFaleris

#45 JeffLong

JeffLong

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,826 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:40 PM

A formal scouting report is pretty straight forward -- grades, summaries of certain info the org wants collected, and some brief explanations of grades. Usually an area scout is meeting in person with supervisors to go over submitted persons of interest, so it's more of a presentation that includes a formal report, with questions/discussion throughout.

As for how a GM or SD views reports (I'd assume this is the same for all orgs) the formal reports are filed for reference and can be looked up at any time (be it in binder or database). Valuation is ultimately determined by the specifics in all of the filed reports, the preferences of the org, and whatever formulas the org might have in incorporating stat analysis into the file.


Do you think that baseball fans in general (not like, people who go to games but people on this site for example) struggle with seeing grades for a guy as opposed to just an overview of what they look like and comp to? I generally find grades to be better because it's easier to compare, but it obviously leaves something to be desired.

Random Pet Peeve of mine - Kiley McDaniel wrote something for Fangraphs saying Buxton has "90" speed because he's literally off the charts scouts use for speed (3.9 to first base). Drives me nuts. Just say he has 80 speed. Not all 80s are the same, just like two guys who are 50 for speed won't be the exact same.
@JeffLongBP

#46 Stotle

Stotle

    2080 Baseball

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 529 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 04:27 PM

Do you think that baseball fans in general (not like, people who go to games but people on this site for example) struggle with seeing grades for a guy as opposed to just an overview of what they look like and comp to? I generally find grades to be better because it's easier to compare, but it obviously leaves something to be desired.

Random Pet Peeve of mine - Kiley McDaniel wrote something for Fangraphs saying Buxton has "90" speed because he's literally off the charts scouts use for speed (3.9 to first base). Drives me nuts. Just say he has 80 speed. Not all 80s are the same, just like two guys who are 50 for speed won't be the exact same.


I think the challenge writers have to deal with in writing about player evaluation is deciding who their audience is. If you have industry folks in mind, you need to speak in their tongue (which means grades/terminology). If you want a braoder appeal, you need to be able to convey what those grades/terms mean to the average fan. In other words, if you are responding to a post by Chris, or sports guy, or rznj, or all-star, or can of corn, or tucker, or INSERT POSTER NAME HERE, are you comfortable that they all know what a 60 arm, or a "plus" arm, from third base looks like? Is it more useful to your audience to say "Machado has a plus to plus-plus arm at third," or "Machado has plenty of arm strength to make all the throws at third"?

At the end of the day, it's all about conveying info to your audience, whether it's writing for a blog or message board, or submitting a scouting report to a supervisor.

Re: "90" on the scale, in my opinion, I think it ties into the above. Stylistically, writers have their own way of conveying info to their audience. There's an area scout in my region that has more than once chuckled and said, "that's a ten" or "that's a one" when referring to a really fast/slow home-to-first or 60 time. It's probably not what I would do, but at that point we're really parsing, right? What's important is that the info is conveyed. That said, if you are annoying your audience with turns of phrase, that's probably not a good thing.
@NickJFaleris

#47 JeffLong

JeffLong

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,826 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:36 PM

I think the challenge writers have to deal with in writing about player evaluation is deciding who their audience is. If you have industry folks in mind, you need to speak in their tongue (which means grades/terminology). If you want a braoder appeal, you need to be able to convey what those grades/terms mean to the average fan. In other words, if you are responding to a post by Chris, or sports guy, or rznj, or all-star, or can of corn, or tucker, or INSERT POSTER NAME HERE, are you comfortable that they all know what a 60 arm, or a "plus" arm, from third base looks like? Is it more useful to your audience to say "Machado has a plus to plus-plus arm at third," or "Machado has plenty of arm strength to make all the throws at third"?

At the end of the day, it's all about conveying info to your audience, whether it's writing for a blog or message board, or submitting a scouting report to a supervisor.

Re: "90" on the scale, in my opinion, I think it ties into the above. Stylistically, writers have their own way of conveying info to their audience. There's an area scout in my region that has more than once chuckled and said, "that's a ten" or "that's a one" when referring to a really fast/slow home-to-first or 60 time. It's probably not what I would do, but at that point we're really parsing, right? What's important is that the info is conveyed. That said, if you are annoying your audience with turns of phrase, that's probably not a good thing.


Nick, you make some really good points about determining audience and things of that nature. Obviously, since I don't really write scouting reports those are issues that I don't think of immediately.

Thanks to both you and Jeremy for going down this rabbit hole with me, I really appreciate the insight you guys provided.
@JeffLongBP

#48 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 06:07 PM

Jonathan Mayo / MLB.com: Top 50 Prospects
http://mlb.mlb.com/m...013/#list=draft

#49 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 07:24 PM

Minor League Ball: Top 50 Draft Prospects
http://www.minorleag...spects-february

#50 Luke Jackson

Luke Jackson
  • Members
  • 386 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:54 PM

Just a quick note...

With the Brewers' signing of Lohse, this finalizes the draft order. O's pick at 22, 37, 61, 98, 129, etc etc etc. http://bit.ly/14jGulQ
  • BSLChrisStoner likes this
@BSLLukeJackson




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=