Two part Melewski interview with AM about international operations.

[El Gordo]

Carlos Martinez, STL, around $1.5 million

Miguel Sano, MIN, around $3 million

Ronald Guzman, TEX, around $3.5 million

have been my favorites going back to last July.

Question for you, if Guzman and Hernandez were given their "crazy" bonuses from Texas based on "batting practice" then why are there quotes from their scouts on each's ability to recognize pitches and differentiating between in-game power and BP power right now?

And I guess it must be true that it wasn't Guzman playing at the nationally televised Under Armour All-America Game and in the Dominican Prospect League -- some sort of body double maybe? -- since we know the guys getting multi-million dollar deals in Latin America only take batting practice and refuse to play in any organized games...

Love to read these quotes, do you have a source?

[Stotle]

Love to read these quotes, do you have a source?

My word not good enough? I don't have pitch ID quotes in print, but a two second search of the Baseball America prospect blog led me to full reports on all the top players:

Though he doesn't do it in batting practice, Hernandez has a tendency to leak open with his front knee and open up his hips too early in games.

Unlike Elier Hernandez, Guzman is not a quick-twitch athlete. Scouts have questions about his bat speed, which is why he doesn't usually show pull power in games.

His game speed is slower, though, with below-average times going from home to first. Scouts are mixed on Becerra's bat. He has good size and strength, and some scouts consider him one of the best righthanded hitters available with good plate coverage and projectable power. Others say he's better in tryouts than game situations, where his swing tends to get long with an uphill stroke where he gets around the ball.

Lugo, a 16-year-old from Bani who trains with Victor Franco (known as Mula) and plays in the Dominican Prospect League, is one of the better hitters in Latin America.

The question most scouts have is how much Ruiz will hit in games. He can get into a groove in BP, but in games his stroke can get long and he pulls off the ball.

That is a statement on each of the top 5 position prospects, according to Baseball America, that either directly comments on game action, or states that the player participates in the Dominican Prospect League.

$5 million for batting practice, huh?

[El Gordo]

My word not good enough? I don't have pitch ID quotes in print, but a two second search of the Baseball America prospect blog led me to full reports on all the top players:

That is a statement on each of the top 5 position prospects, according to Baseball America, that either directly comments on game action, or states that the player participates in the Dominican Prospect League.

$5 million for batting practice, huh?

I would assume a scout would have the opportunity to observe a rule 4 player from ages 16 to as much as 21 in both game sutuations and workouts. How much opportunity would a scout have with a DR player? How much oportunity would he need to make a definitive assessment of his probable worth, re: a 1.5-5M signingh bonus?

[MrOrange82]

I would assume a scout would have the opportunity to observe a rule 4 player from ages 16 to as much as 21 in both game sutuations and workouts. How much opportunity would a scout have with a DR player? How much oportunity would he need to make a definitive assessment of his probable worth, re: a 1.5-5M signingh bonus?

I think you raise a good point. Problem is, you have to have adequate personnel in the region for long enough spans of time to make reasonable assessments in either direction, pro or con.

Relative to the majority of the rest of baseball, the Orioles under AM have had their metaphorical hands over their eyes. And that doesn't qualify AM to make much of an assessment...of any kind.

[El Gordo]

I think you raise a good point. Problem is, you have to have adequate personnel in the region for long enough spans of time to make reasonable assessments in either direction, pro or con.

Relative to the majority of the rest of baseball, the Orioles under AM have had their metaphorical hands over their eyes. And that doesn't qualify AM to make much of an assessment...of any kind.

Does any one know how many scouts we have in the DR and how long tey have to observe these players and in what situations. How long were Guzman and Martinez etc. playing in organized competition before they were 16? A year?

[Stotle]

I would assume a scout would have the opportunity to observe a rule 4 player from ages 16 to as much as 21 in both game sutuations and workouts. How much opportunity would a scout have with a DR player? How much oportunity would he need to make a definitive assessment of his probable worth, re: a 1.5-5M signingh bonus?

Players aren't generally actively scouted from age 16 to 21. Not enough time. Area scouts focus almost exclusively on the players that are draft eligible that year. So, they see them, best case, a few times over the summer, during fall workouts, and for their spring season.

And again, the issue isn't "which is more efficient use of money". We have all agreed the Rule 4 is the best "bargain". But there is limited opportunity to select talent there, so what is the argument against making use of another opportunity on the IFA market?

Let's be honest. You have made your mind up about this and unless you see some in depth report that proves beyond any doubt that IFAs are excellent investments you will continue to take the stance that MacPhail is outthinking the vast majority of MLB, who are actively participating in this market. Fine with me. But you now waive right to complain about any shortcomings in the systems or lack of trading pieces.

[Stotle]

I think you raise a good point. Problem is, you have to have adequate personnel in the region for long enough spans of time to make reasonable assessments in either direction, pro or con.

Relative to the majority of the rest of baseball, the Orioles under AM have had their metaphorical hands over their eyes. And that doesn't qualify AM to make much of an assessment...of any kind.

Brick wall, sir. This is an area where Gordo has his mind made up. MacPhail is one of the few GMs taking the correct approach on the international front and unless you have a detailed piece of research to prove otherwise, Baltimore is the one ahead of the curve here. The best part is their ability to save money by not throwing it away on IFAs is they have extra money to sign Ohlman and Coffey (way safer investments if you are looking to spend around seven figures), not to mention ML relief arms and bounce back candidates like Atkins.

[El Gordo]

Players aren't generally actively scouted from age 16 to 21. Not enough time. Area scouts focus almost exclusively on the players that are draft eligible that year. So, they see them, best case, a few times over the summer, during fall workouts, and for their spring season.

And again, the issue isn't "which is more efficient use of money". We have all agreed the Rule 4 is the best "bargain". But there is limited opportunity to select talent there, so what is the argument against making use of another opportunity on the IFA market?

Let's be honest. You have made your mind up about this and unless you see some in depth report that proves beyond any doubt that IFAs are excellent investments you will continue to take the stance that MacPhail is outthinking the vast majority of MLB, who are actively participating in this market. Fine with me. But you now waive right to complain about any shortcomings in the systems or lack of trading pieces.

Not at all. I don't know enough about the ins and outs of scouting DR prospects to have formed an opinion. But I suspect neither do most of the people here who have now accepted as cant that spending big money in the DR is the team's salvation and failure to do so is MacPhails folly. It seems to me that it is reasonable to be reticent to spend 1.5-5M on 16 YO players who have not been seen very much in any setting, unless you are like the MFY's with virtually unlimited funds. It's not like we aren't scouting or spending anything, we are simply being cautious. In the absence of any real evidence to the contrary why is that unreasonable? I think it is true when AM says most people judge what is being done in the DR in terms of big money expeditures. He simply doesn't feel there is a suitable opportunity to make a good assessment that would justify that kind of spending. Also the majority of DR players who have made it big time were not the big bonus babies, but rather the less expensive kind of players he seems to be targeting. You cite reports that refer to Guzman's tendencies in BP and game situations and then admit that they are only referring to a limited number of opportunities to observe the players in either setting. So maybe he is a phenom for a 16 YO, if indeed that is his age, but most likely he won't be. Is that worth a 5M gamble, just because other teams are doing it? (and we are only talking about a handful of teams, most teams choose not to offer that much, if at all). Even if it is, it is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things. Without knowing the total budget of the team it is difficult to judge the level of priority this should be given, but if the Yankees are spending 5M, then the O's spending only 1.18M doesn't seem like that big a deal.

[Frobby]

The article I cited that shows the Orioles have the lowest number of international players in their top 30 prospects, also made this observation, which to me seems pretty important:

Perhaps more interesting though is that teams with the most international signings in the Prospect Handbook tend to have the best farm systems. In fact, just knowing how many international signings a team has made from the Prospect Handbook is a better predictor of farm system health than the quality of an organization's recent drafts.

This impact is something we can quantify. For international signings, I simply took the numbers from the chart above. For the draft, I used our draft grades in the Prospect Handbook for each team's 2007-2009 drafts and calculated a GPA for each team. I tried weighting the draft grades more heavily for recent years and then vice versa, but it had a negligible effect on the outcome.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2011/03/evaluating-international-signings-points-to-farm-system-health/

I'm afraid this is where the rubber meets the road. While it seems theoretically possible to build an excellent farm system by allocating a greater than average percentage of resources on domestic talent instead of foreign talent, in practice the results show that to do it that way, you'll have to beat long odds.

[allstar1579]

Not at all. I don't know enough about the ins and outs of scouting DR prospects to have formed an opinion. But I suspect neither do most of the people here who have now accepted as cant that spending big money in the DR is the team's salvation and failure to do so is MacPhails folly. It seems to me that it is reasonable to be reticent to spend 1.5-5M on 16 YO players who have not been seen very much in any setting, unless you are like the MFY's with virtually unlimited funds. It's not like we aren't scouting or spending anything, we are simply being cautious. In the absence of any real evidence to the contrary why is that unreasonable? I think it is true when AM says most people judge what is being done in the DR in terms of big money expeditures. He simply doesn't feel there is a suitable opportunity to make a good assessment that would justify that kind of spending. Also the majority of DR players who have made it big time were not the big bonus babies, but rather the less expensive kind of players he seems to be targeting. You cite reports that refer to Guzman's tendencies in BP and game situations and then admit that they are only referring to a limited number of opportunities to observe the players in either setting. So maybe he is a phenom for a 16 YO, if indeed that is his age, but most likely he won't be. Is that worth a 5M gamble, just because other teams are doing it? (and we are only talking about a handful of teams, most teams choose not to offer that much, if at all). Even if it is, it is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things. Without knowing the total budget of the team it is difficult to judge the level of priority this should be given, but if the Yankees are spending 5M, then the O's spending only 1.18M doesn't seem like that big a deal.

Maybe not, but some of us who do understand it have a huge problem with him staying away from it, and it seems like you just want to blindly trust the guy in the higher position. While a lot of times, I'd agree with that approach, I mean they worked to get to that position, this is one I won't agree with because it is a personal philosophy that is getting in the way of making the team better. Because HE doesn't believe in allocating the funds to int'l signings, the team won't do it (now in fairness, the HE there COULD be either Andy or Angelos, but until someone steps up and says one way or the other we'll never know).

Also, there shouldn't be any comparison between the rule 4 and IFA, they are apples to oranges. In the rule 4 you are limited to who you have the draft picks to acquire, and then sign them based on their demands. In IFA it's the wild wild west, it's like FA in the sense that you could sign the entire top 20 and no one could stop you. That is where my problem comes in. If you don't have the resources to draft the entire first round in the rule 4, then you get the best you can and supplement that with as many well regarded international prospects that you can. In order to do that you hire and place some scouts out there, who will get longer and better looks than in "BP" if they are out there, and you can make more informed decisions.

Apparently it's better for the future of this team to sign an aging RP that would put up similar numbers to any one of a dozen players from AA/AAA we already have, to a $6m+ per year contract than it is to invest $6m each year in international signings. No one is saying to go spend $6m on one guy and call it a day. A lot of these prospects sign in the low 6 figures, and even more in the tens of thousands, but he would know that if it wasn't completely ignoring that avenue of talent acquisition. Even if you only hit on one per year, and got a top 100 prospect once per 15-20 kids you signed each year. That's another top 100 prospect some other team like TOR or the NYY are going to be using against us for at least 6 years.

It's just inexcusable to put your head in the sand and make excuses as to why you won't go near international signings when other teams in your division are developing these same players and using them to perform better than you are because you don't feel like it's worth the effort. He wants proof that he should be signing them? Mariano Rivera, David Ortiz, Miguel Cabrera, Johnny Peralta, Felix Hernandez, Rafael Soriano, Micheal Pineda, Robinson Cano...do I really need to keep going?

[Tony-OH]

I think guys like Stotle, Frobby and allstar1979 said it all, but the only thing I would add is something I was told during my interviews last year prior to my piece where MacPhail basically said the same thing that he's reiterating with MASN. Someone very close to the situation told me point blank that Angelos does not want to invest in the DR. He saw it as ridiculous to throw away money on these raw players. For years this organization had a $20,000 bonus cap for signing Dominican players and Carlos Bernhardt was the only scout they employed in the DR although David Stockstill has gone down for years as well.

I don't doubt for a second that MacPhail's answers are not his own philosophy, but they certainly agree with Angelos'. At the end of the day the organizational philosophies start at the top. Although MacPhail was given more leeway to do things that really no other GM under Angelos has been able to do, let's not forget who ultimately calls the shots.

MacPhail is a throwback to the 80's type GMs. His philosophy to not shakeup the baseball establishment with big contracts is well documented and he's the perfect GM for an organization more concerned about the bottom line then winning. Angelos once was the kind of owner who wouldn't be outbid for a player he wanted (Belle) and he was willing to spend what it took to put a winner on the field. Unfortunately, the underlying issues that came with that including the nepotism, slow pace of operations in just about every aspect of running an organization, and lack of accountability has led to the 14 years of poor baseball.

MacPhail is not incompetent nor does he not care, but he doesn't have the energy or bold leadership needed to steer this organization into a successful team within the AL East. Unfortunately, unless Angelos changes his ways or sells the team, I don't really see them ever hiring someone who would have that bold leadership.

Thoughout the last 14 years I've never been hopeless. I always tried to find some type of silver lining in the stormy O's organization, but I've finally concluded that we don't have much hope in becoming a factor in the AL East any time soon. Even with all the great things Tampa has done as an organization, they are still six games back with the Yankees and Red Sox 19 and 20 games over .500 at the All-star break.

The Orioles won't even compete for international free agents because they don't think the risk is worth the reward. How are they ever going to compete on a year in and year out basis again with a Red $ox and Yankee$ when they are not better then them in any phase of baseball operations?

MacPhail said he wanted to emulate the Tampa model but it took a down year for Yankees and Red Sox for them to make into the playoffs and all they did is go back out and retooled.

Baseball has become a joke when it comes to having an even playing field but my real fear is even if it was even, the Orioles wouldn't do enough to be good in that environment as well.

[Frobby]

MacPhail said he wanted to emulate the Tampa model but it took a down year for Yankees and Red Sox for them to make into the playoffs and all they did is go back out and retooled.

Your post is great, but I take issue with this one point. Tampa finished first in the division in 2008 and 2010. If the Yankees (in 2008) and Red Sox (in 2010) hadn't had a down year, it would have been the other of them that missed the playoffs, not Tampa. Tampa deserves all the credit in the world for what it did.

Putting aside the micromanagement question of exactly where to spend our amateur talent dollars, the biggest problem is we don't seem to be spending enough overall in total. A team in our position ought to be consistently in the top 5 in combined domestic/international amateur spending, but we're not. We were 4th in our own division in total amateur spend last year.

[Gurgi]

The way things are the Redsox and Yankees can buy a player of All-star caliber skills every single off season. Sometimes several of these players. If we cant buy them ourselves we would have to draft a all-star caliber player every year. That isnt going to happen.

Tampa wont be able to keep up this level of play very long either.

I will be shocked if Baseball changes because it really is setup now to favor the big market clubs. And this is what makes them the most money.

[Stotle]

Your post is great, but I take issue with this one point. Tampa finished first in the division in 2008 and 2010. If the Yankees (in 2008) and Red Sox (in 2010) hadn't had a down year, it would have been the other of them that missed the playoffs, not Tampa. Tampa deserves all the credit in the world for what it did.

Putting aside the micromanagement question of exactly where to spend our amateur talent dollars, the biggest problem is we don't seem to be spending enough overall in total. A team in our position ought to be consistently in the top 5 in combined domestic/international amateur spending, but we're not. We were 4th in our own division in total amateur spend last year.

I generally agree. This was a year where Tampa was supposedly reloading and they are still a very solid team that would be competing for a divisional title in any other division. They have a stacked system and will once again start promoting good talent at the end of the year, next year and moving forward.

[JERSEYORIOLE]

We don't have many top prospects. One of the reasons for that is our lack of an international presence. Do you not see that connection somehow?

We do not have a lack of presence. According to Frobbys post, the Orioles spent 1.18 mil in 2010. And we out spent the Yankees by 2.5 mil in the rule 4. My point is, it does not matter where these players come from. There was a thread on here not long ago that I can't find, about he top 30 international signings all time and the results were very poor. It showed that in fact, the large contracts for international players did not pan out. I for one, would not be happy seeing us spend 8 mil signing international prospects, if it ment taking away from money we can spend on Rule 4 players.