406 replies to this topic

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Oh now Im good. Much better. 👍🙄

[Mackus]

Oh now Im good. Much better.

 

You're gonna flip a coin ten times.  You expect to get 5 heads.  But you could get 6 heads.  Or 4 heads.  Or 7 or 1.  

 

If you repeat your set of ten flips like a thousand times, and record and plot how many times you got 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 heads the result will look like the curve above.  The peak will be at your expected value of 5 heads.  4 and 6 heads will also occur very frequently.  3 and 7 less so.  2 and 8 even less.  1 and 9 even less.  0 and 10 even less.

 

A standard deviation is basically just what it sounds like.  How much of a deviation from your expectation is standard. If its more than 1 standard deviation (or 1 sigma, sigma is that little greek letter that looks like an o with a tail) then you're getting into less standard results.  You might start thinking your coin is not a fair 50/50 coin if it comes up heads 9 or 10 times, for example.

[BSLRoseKatz]

Their plan has always been to largely develop bats (more dependable projection) and trade for arms. 
They draft more college bats not just because there is more known information (their college production), but because they are less likely to flame and give you nothing.  And nothing doesn't just mean reaching the Majors or not.  It also means MiL production and organizational depth that can be utilized in trades.

 

I've heard that before and it's hard to see it as anything other than an excuse for not feeling like they can scout amateur pitching correctly. If 50% of the player pool in the draft is off limits to you for until about the 5th round then I'm incredibly skeptical that's the smartest allocation of your draft pool but we'll see how much more they trade from their position player surplus at the deadline and next offseason. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

I've heard that before and it's hard to see it as anything other than an excuse for not feeling like they can scout amateur pitching correctly. If 50% of the player pool in the draft is off limits to you for until about the 5th round then I'm incredibly skeptical that's the smartest allocation of your draft pool but we'll see how much more they trade from their position player surplus at the deadline and next offseason. 

 

1/2 the player pool isn't pitching. 

 

And if they have a pitcher they like well enough, I'm sure they'll take him...   but it's definitely part of their evaluation in looking at a prospect.

I have no problem with them deciding that they'd rather see some other organization develop arms initially if they think the flame potential is higher earlier on. 

[TwentyThirtyFive]

You're gonna flip a coin ten times. You expect to get 5 heads. But you could get 6 heads. Or 4 heads. Or 7 or 1.

If you repeat your set of ten flips like a thousand times, and record and plot how many times you got 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 heads the result will look like the curve above. The peak will be at your expected value of 5 heads. 4 and 6 heads will also occur very frequently. 3 and 7 less so. 2 and 8 even less. 1 and 9 even less. 0 and 10 even less.

A standard deviation is basically just what it sounds like. How much of a deviation from your expectation is standard. If its more than 1 standard deviation (or 1 sigma, sigma is that little greek letter that looks like an o with a tail) then you're getting into less standard results. You might start thinking your coin is not a fair 50/50 coin if it comes up heads 9 or 10 times, for example.

Keeping it simple for the dummy. Thats more like it

[makoman]

I've heard that before and it's hard to see it as anything other than an excuse for not feeling like they can scout amateur pitching correctly. If 50% of the player pool in the draft is off limits to you for until about the 5th round then I'm incredibly skeptical that's the smartest allocation of your draft pool but we'll see how much more they trade from their position player surplus at the deadline and next offseason. 

Excuse has a negative connotation, but if you think you are better at drafting hitter than pitchers, and you do think you can identify good pitchers later, it would seem dumb to me to continue drafting pitchers when you can always trade for them. In fact maybe they do think they can't scout amateur pitching correctly, that it's too hard to project.

 

I'd also argue 3 drafts (2020 doesn't count) is still a small sample. The Angels picked all pitchers in 2021 then they were much more mixed in 2022. No idea if anything changed in their org, but If you're true to your board and you always like hitters best when your turn comes up this stuff can probably happen.

[BSLRoseKatz]

1/2 the player pool isn't pitching. 

 

And if they have a pitcher they like well enough, I'm sure they'll take him...   but it's definitely part of their evaluation in looking at a prospect.

I have no problem with them deciding that they'd rather see some other organization develop arms initially if they think the flame potential is higher earlier on. 

 

Yeah I get that but I just find it an incredibly underwhelming thought process once you get outside your first 2-3 picks that it's better to give up your closer in a playoff race than to have a slightly bigger gamble on the #80 overall pick or whatever. 

 

To use the Elias draft with the prospects that have given us the most data so far, sticking with position players for Adley/Gunnar/Stowers is certainly trending in the right direction but the next 5 picks after that were *also* position players.

 

One was Joey Ortiz, a top 100 guy and one was Hernaiz, who they just flipped into Cole Irvin. The other three were Zach Watson, Maverick Handley and and Johnny Rizer and none of them are top 30 guys currently and Rizer is literally retired. A top 100 guy and someone you already flipped for a league-average starter certainly isn't bad but if they did Adley/Gunnar/Stowers and then 5 straight pitchers I have a hard time believing it couldn't have also gone 2-for-5 producing either a top 100 prospect and/or a prospect worth trading for an actual major leaguer.  

[makoman]

Yeah I get that but I just find it an incredibly underwhelming thought process once you get outside your first 2-3 picks that it's better to give up your closer in a playoff race than to have a slightly bigger gamble on the #80 overall pick or whatever. 

 

To use the Elias draft with the prospects that have given us the most data so far, sticking with position players for Adley/Gunnar/Stowers is certainly trending in the right direction but the next 5 picks after that were *also* position players.

 

One was Joey Ortiz, a top 100 guy and one was Hernaiz, who they just flipped into Cole Irvin. The other three were Zach Watson, Maverick Handley and and Johnny Rizer and none of them are top 30 guys currently and Rizer is literally retired. A top 100 guy and someone you already flipped for a league-average starter certainly isn't bad but if they did Adley/Gunnar/Stowers and then 5 straight pitchers I have a hard time believing it couldn't have also gone 2-for-5 producing either a top 100 prospect and/or a prospect worth trading for an actual major leaguer.  

If you're expecting 2/5 (really 2/4 because Rizer was a senior sign so expect nothing there either way) of 3rd round and later picks to be top 100 prospects your expectations are way off.

[BSLRoseKatz]

If you're expecting 2/5 (really 2/4 because Rizer was a senior sign so expect nothing there either way) of 3rd round and later picks to be top 100 prospects your expectations are way off.

 

Not expected to be top 100 prospects only if they're pitchers or not expected to be top 100 regardless of which type is taken? Because if it's latter than that's probably true but if that's the case, what's the harm in taking a bigger gamble on rounds that are largely a crapshoot regardless?   

[makoman]

Not expected to be top 100 prospects only if they're pitchers or not expected to be top 100 regardless of which type is taken? Because if it's latter than that's probably true but if that's the case, what's the harm in taking a bigger gamble on rounds that are largely a crapshoot regardless?   

I mean regardless. Not counting those that didn't sign:

 

79th pick has 6 all time over 5 WAR. 3 over 10.

108th has 1 over both

138th has 2 over both.

168th has 2 over 5, none over 10.

198th has 2 over 5, 1 over 10.

 

That's close to 60 drafts. Your chance of becoming even Jay Gibbons or Tommy Hunter (both a bit over 5 career) is incredibly low. 

 

I know that's not an exact correlation to top 100 prospects but I don't have that data. I can't see how 6th round picks would generally have a good chance to be top 100 prospects though.

 

You say why not take a bigger gamble on pitching if the chances are already so low? I say why not take the thing you are better at because the chances are so low. Getting anything at all in MLB out of these spots is a win so a better chance is a better chance. A pitcher isn't necessarily higher reward, just higher risk (if they are in fact not as good at drafting pitchers). If pitching was so highly valued that no one was willing to trade it I'd dislike the philosophy, but that doesn't seem the case so I think they should focus on what they're good at (again, assuming that's what they're doing). 

[mweb08]

There is no need for me to back anything up. What Ive said is true. Hes likely a Top125 most places and more to the point if you wont which you fail to recognize he has the same FV grade as guys that are 125. Im like Mack when it comes to the tiers. You can prefer number 125 over 180 but if they both have FVgrades of 45 they are essentially the same quality prospect

It's remarkable that you think you can put out some speculation, do nothing to support it, and then conclude that what you said is true.

And you really have to make up your mind if you care about the 125 thing or not because it was the meat of this bump of yours and everything else from you other than when you've said it's irrelevant has screamed out that you care a whole lot about it.

[BSLRoseKatz]

I guess that gets me to the big picture question "why isn't every front office this adverse to drafting pitching?" 

 

Like if they believe hitting is easier to draft than pitching and/or lower risk then why aren't other teams that are generally regarded as smart front offices also totally skipping pitching until several rounds into the draft?

 

The Guardians have probably one of the best track records of developing pitching in the past 10 years and have used a first round pick on a SP 4 out of their 6 first round picks in the same time frame as the Elias drafts. Are they better at scouting and developing pitching than the Orioles by such a wide margin that they can do this and we can't?

 

I'm happy with the results of taking position players in the first round so far but idk I'm just having a hard time buying that being this adverse to drafting pitching where it means you need to sell at the deadline in a playoff chase is a great idea when it hardly seems like it's the consensus position of other well-regarded front offices for player development. 

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Im good. I said likely Top 125 in most other rankings. Stand by it. If there were an easy way of knowing beyond 100 I would link it. As far as I know there isnt. My guess is some of these guys go deeper than 100 in a yearly handbook or behind a paywall. Not going that far to prove Im right so call me out for speculating I guess

[mweb08]

Logic points to it being extremely unlikely that anyone that has him 13th or 14th in the organization would also have him in the top 125. But hey, maybe 6 or 7 of that next 25 are O's. Let's hope so!

[BobPhelan]

Its not that they don't think they can develop pitching its that they're going off of the belief that the positional talent drops off earlier and that they can still get pitchers in the later rounds that fit what they like and do think they can develop. There are exceptions (Carlos Tavera, Trace Bright, Carter Baumler) but look at rounds 11-20 the last two drafts, very pitcher heavy.

 

Justin Armbruester was a 12th round pick in 2021, now a top 30 prospect. Noah Denoyer was an undrafted free agent after 40 rounds in 2019, now a top 30 prospect. Ryan Watson was an undrafted free agent in 2020, now a top 30 prospect. Brandon Young was also an undrafted free agent in 2020 and was a top 30 prospect before getting injured early last season. Plenty of promising arms taken in the 7th round on in 2022.

 

Plus I just don't think it matters whether you draft or trade for pitchers. Just get them in the system and get success out of them. They're developing international arms too. Time will tell if their gambit pays off but they have a strategy, they're not just throwing darts at the wall.

[Mike B]

Its not that they don't think they can develop pitching its that they're going off of the belief that the positional talent drops off earlier and that they can still get pitchers in the later rounds that fit what they like and do think they can develop. There are exceptions (Carlos Tavera, Trace Bright, Carter Baumler) but look at rounds 11-20 the last two drafts, very pitcher heavy.

 

Justin Armbruester was a 12th round pick in 2021, now a top 30 prospect. Noah Denoyer was an undrafted free agent after 40 rounds in 2019, now a top 30 prospect. Ryan Watson was an undrafted free agent in 2020, now a top 30 prospect. Brandon Young was also an undrafted free agent in 2020 and was a top 30 prospect before getting injured early last season. Plenty of promising arms taken in the 7th round on in 2022.

 

Plus I just don't think it matters whether you draft or trade for pitchers. Just get them in the system and get success out of them. They're developing international arms too. Time will tell if their gambit pays off but they have a strategy, they're not just throwing darts at the wall.

I am a pitching first guy, because IMO, if you have mediocre pitching, it is very unlikely that you are ever going to be the last team standing.  That said, I think we will need to wait to see who develops and if there is a stud that every serious contender needs.  I do think the draft is only one way to build a staff. 

[dude]

 

 

[dude]

Time will tell if their gambit pays off but they have a strategy, they're not just throwing darts at the wall.

 

I'll come back to some of this Lopez craziness, but wanted to comment here.

 

Awesome.  Note a joke, seriously.  My question is why can't we do this with better pitching Talent.  We're turning straw into gold.  We're making Cs out of Fs.  Why can't we make an A out of a B?  You're saying the strategy doesn't rely on early picks for pitching, but we don't really have any pitching success.  It will be interesting to watch if the gains of last year are sustainable by a handful of guys, but we had 3 years without any real success.  Now we're going to claim victory after year 4, but we may want to give it some room to prove itself.

 

The Astros were absolutely burned by drafting pitching early (Appel-2013, Aiken-2014, Whitely-2016, Bukauskas-2017) so you can understand why Elias is hesitant to burn high picks on these guys.

 

...but again are you suggesting there isn't better pitching Talent available in the draft to leverage before the 7th round? 

[BobPhelan]

Of course there is and I’m guessing they will continue to make exceptions like mentioned above, maybe increasingly so, but the increased injury risk particularly in HS pitchers plus what I mentioned above is why I think they’ve decided to operate this way.

I agree time will tell if they can consistently make it work or if they adjust their strategy at some point.

[JeremyStrain]

I'll come back to some of this Lopez craziness, but wanted to comment here.

 

Awesome.  Note a joke, seriously.  My question is why can't we do this with better pitching Talent.  We're turning straw into gold.  We're making Cs out of Fs.  Why can't we make an A out of a B?  You're saying the strategy doesn't rely on early picks for pitching, but we don't really have any pitching success.  It will be interesting to watch if the gains of last year are sustainable by a handful of guys, but we had 3 years without any real success.  Now we're going to claim victory after year 4, but we may want to give it some room to prove itself.

 

The Astros were absolutely burned by drafting pitching early (Appel-2013, Aiken-2014, Whitely-2016, Bukauskas-2017) so you can understand why Elias is hesitant to burn high picks on these guys.

 

...but again are you suggesting there isn't better pitching Talent available in the draft to leverage before the 7th round? 

You've read Moneyball by now right?

 

Some front offices march to the beat of their own drum, and the one this one marches too is built around certain pitching metrics that the whole of MLB doesn't really embrace yet. You're only competing with a small handfull of clubs that look for the same numbers, so you can get much more value by taking hitters higher in the draft, and swiping pitchers with these markers, then developing them into higher end prospects.

 

You know the saying no two draft boards are alike, well the O's may look REALLY weird to us, because of how much stock they put in those certain data points, they believe those are the true keys to MLB success. And watching what they are doing with middling picks and prospects, they haven't been proven wrong yet. Kinda like our not being happy with their two FA selections. But if they really believe they can get more out of their performance by leaning into those data points that they are already good at, they could get $100m production for a fraction of that. The problem is that it's still kind of a hypothesis, and they have to get it to actually perform in real life. If they do suddenly get really good performance out of those two, you better believe the whole league will be tearing apart their approach and poaching every exec they can hire. One could say it takes a LOT of ego to bet on themselves like that. Or another could say thinking outside the box may be the only way to compete if they aren't willing to go dollar for dollar with the big guns.

 

I have no idea. I'm still in watch and see mode. But I get most people are over watching and seeing, which is why I really don't give people who are fed up a hard time either.