Jump to content

Doesn't this team ever draft position players?


Recommended Posts

Seriously this is ridiculous! Obviously you need good pitching, but year after year our farm system is way too weak regarding position player prospects. Plus it's been proven that position players are twice as likely to make it to the majors as pitching prospects due to pitchers vulnerabilty to arm injuries. So they're basically wasting draft picks on players that are far less likely to ever set foot on a Major League field.

This grow the arms, buy the bats crap has to stop. MacFail passed on Mike Trout to draft some overweight HS pitcher.

What has drafting 90% pitching done for this organization? Have the O's produced any pitcher that's anywhere close to being an ace?

In another thread I mentioned the O's farm system hasn't developed a single impact position player since Ripken jr. I guess that's because they never draft them in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously this is ridiculous! Obviously you need good pitching, but year after year our farm system is way too weak regarding position player prospects. Plus it's been proven that position players are twice as likely to make it to the majors as pitching prospects due to pitchers vulnerabilty to arm injuries. So they're basically wasting draft picks on players that are far less likely to ever set foot on a Major League field.

I would very much like to read the study that proved this.

This grow the arms, buy the bats crap has to stop. MacFail passed on Mike Trout to draft some overweight HS pitcher.

What has drafting 90% pitching done for this organization? Have the O's produced any pitcher that's anywhere close to being an ace?

In another thread I mentioned the O's farm system hasn't developed a single impact position player since Ripken jr. I guess that's because they never draft them in the first place.

Nick Markakis? Brian Roberts? Melvin Mora (traded to O's as a prospect, I suppose)? Jon Schoop's looking OK, so's Manny Machado, though it's far too early to tell.

Unless by "impact player" you mean "1st ballot Hall of Famer." Then, sure.

Edit: Not to mention the players developed by the O's who became good elsewhere, like Jayson Werth. If we give the Mariners drafting/development credit for Adam Jones (and we should), then the O's get credit for Werth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would very much like to read the study that proved this.

Nick Markakis? Brian Roberts? Melvin Mora (traded to O's as a prospect, I suppose)? Jon Schoop's looking OK, so's Manny Machado, though it's far too early to tell.

Unless by "impact player" you mean "1st ballot Hall of Famer." Then, sure.

Edit: Not to mention the players developed by the O's who became good elsewhere, like Jayson Werth. If we give the Mariners drafting/development credit for Adam Jones (and we should), then the O's get credit for Werth.

Markakis is a .285-290 hitter w/below average power. Roberts was only good for hitting doubles for a couple years. Mora was via trade and he wasn't all that. Wieters isn't nearly the offensive juggernaut everyone thought he would be. Jones is the only player you listed who's elite and we got him in a trade. Gillick did draft Werth, but another organization developed him. He even said he was glad to get out of the Orioles orgnization when he was traded.

Oh and BTW;

http://www.royalsreview.com/2011/2/14/1992424/success-and-failure-rates-of-top-mlb-prospects

It's rather lengthy and he doesn't discuss the chances for success of position player prospects vs. pitching prospects until several paragraphs into the article, but here's what I was referring to;

As with the breakdown by decile, we see huge differences between position players and pitchers. Top 20 position player prospects succeed at a rate more than 50% higher than their pitching counterparts. The differences between higher ranked position players and pitchers is of a smaller magnitude but it is still significant and it is consistent. Higher ranked position players succeed at around a 30% rate, while similar pitchers succeed only about 20% of the time.

•Position player prospects succeed much more often than pitching prospects.

•About 60% of position players ranked in Baseball America’s top 20 succeed in the majors.

•About 40% of pitchers ranked in the top 20 succeed in the majors.

•About 30% of position players ranked 21-100 succeed in the majors (with the success rate declining over that ranking range from about 36% to about 25%)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are about a hundred things wrong with that study to evaluate draft picks but the most obvious one is that it only counts players ranked in BA's top 100, which is a pretty huge problem for a number of reasons that should be readily apparent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Markakis is a .285-290 hitter w/below average power. Roberts was only good for hitting doubles for a couple years. Mora was via trade and he wasn't all that. Wieters isn't nearly the offensive juggernaut everyone thought he would be. Jones is the only player you listed who's elite and we got him in a trade. Gillick did draft Werth, but another organization developed him. He even said he was glad to get out of the Orioles orgnization when he was traded.

OK, so you do mean 1st ballot HoF. Just checking.

Oh and BTW;

http://www.royalsreview.com/2011/2/14/1992424/success-and-failure-rates-of-top-mlb-prospects

It's rather lengthy and he doesn't discuss the chances for success of position player prospects vs. pitching prospects until several paragraphs into the article, but here's what I was referring to;

As with the breakdown by decile, we see huge differences between position players and pitchers. Top 20 position player prospects succeed at a rate more than 50% higher than their pitching counterparts. The differences between higher ranked position players and pitchers is of a smaller magnitude but it is still significant and it is consistent. Higher ranked position players succeed at around a 30% rate, while similar pitchers succeed only about 20% of the time.

?Position player prospects succeed much more often than pitching prospects.

?About 60% of position players ranked in Baseball America?s top 20 succeed in the majors.

?About 40% of pitchers ranked in the top 20 succeed in the majors.

?About 30% of position players ranked 21-100 succeed in the majors (with the success rate declining over that ranking range from about 36% to about 25%)

I'm very familiar with the Royals Review article, and I'm a big fan. I was inspired to work on my own project by that particular story.

However, it doesn't say anything like your original post, which was "position players are twice as likely to make it to the majors as pitching prospects."

According to the article, Top 20 position players succeed 1.5x more than Top 20 pitchers. 50% more is not the same as "twice as likely" - that would be 100% more. Also, that's for Top 20 players, not all prospects, as you implied, and it's for success, not making the majors.

Those are huge differences, and extremely relevant when it comes to a consideration of a draft of players who are of necessity lower-level prospects at best. A BA Top 20 consists mostly of high draft picks, not the guys you are upset about the Orioles picking this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Posts

    • Notwithstanding age and position, I think I'm still on Team Adley for priority 1. One of the management talking points is around avoiding the risk of "creating complacency" when a ballplayer good enough to rate it gets their forever fortune. I think the other side of that being too stingy is "creating resentment" in your labor force. Burnes is an interesting cat as he's taken some actions that real world illustrate how created resentment looks in the cliches only constrained world of ballplayers and clubs interacting with media. I think Elias/Sig modeling a healthy respect for the opportunity Burnes has just about earned himself might help even if they know today their recommendation to ownership is an aggressive chase that already has the green light.     Information how Burnes fares the next 4-5 months is valuable, especially how his stuff plays against the best of the best once he's 30.     Fun fact ALCS Game 7 could fall 10.22.2024 precisely on Burnes' 30th birthday.   
    • Is Rich Hill an option? I believe he was looking to sign with someone mid year. Would we consider him?
    • They bring them up because we need to have guys on the bench available to pinch hit, pinch run, substitute for injured players, or give somebody a rest.   It's not a matter of not believing in them.  Some will get chances to start and some won't.   Just because a guy is starting every day in AAA doesn't mean he should get a chance to start every day (or even most to the time) in the majors.
    • My source for the dates of the options is the Orioles.com transactions page.  I'm going to retract what I said about the 20 day rule, as I had misremembered it.  What it actually says is:  "If a Player is optionally assigned for a total of less than 20 days in one championship season, the Player shall be credited with Major League service during the period of such optional assignment(s); provided, however, that a Player shall not be credited with Major League service under this provision if the Player had zero days of Major League serv ice in the current season prior to the optional assignment and after the optional assignment was unconditionally released or assigned outright and not subsequently added to the Active List for the remainder of the championship season." So forget what I said about that.  Now, what I am not sure about is whether Vespi's recall to be the 27th man in St. Louis due to the suspended game counts towards his option total.   The answer to that isn't found in the CBA, but in a document called "Major League Rules" that used to be public, but apparently no longer is.   I am not talking about the document that describes the rules of play, but another document that contains, for example, the details of the "Rule 4 draft" and the "Rule 5 draft."
    • And is it fair to say 10-15 runs equates to about 1 to 1.5 wins? (Again, that's in a worst-order scenario.)
    • It’s a definite probable no for me. I don’t say that to split hairs.  So let me explain.    There is no way that the Orioles come out on an investment like the one it will take to extend Burnes. But would I, given his age and the likelihood of injury?  No.    Unless….I was prepared to spend twice that or more to land another pitcher on top of Burnes. The idea being if you’re in you’re in.    I cannot speak to the finances of the new ownership but the only way I would purchase someone like Burnes would be to buy 2 in hopes of having one. While still knowing the advantage if you have both and the risks of both are hurt.    Could the Orioles afford $600M? I don’t know.  Should any team?  No. But we live in a world where the Dodgers are spending Billions. 
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...