Camden Depot: Overrated, Expensive, Central And South American Prospects

[BradyBunch]

No, that's wrong. There's a predictable relationship between draft position and likelihood of success.

No, the data used in that was wrong and will always be wrong as what's being assumed and only counted is every draft picked in the 1st round or even the first 5 picks in the 1st round make it to the majors. This is flat out ignoring data. What's basically being done here is only counting the guys who make it and ignoring the others who were drafted in that round or rounds slots who didn't make it.

So for example... 2009 draft.. the 3, 4 and 5 picks were.. Donavan Tate, Tony Sanchez, and Matt Hobgood.

Donavan Tate signed for $6.7m. He hasn't played a game in the majors yet. Tony Sanchez signed for $2.9m and has played less then 51 games with less then 1 WAR. We know about Hobgood and he signed for $2.42m. Even Strausburg the 1st pick, signed for $10.5m and got paid $15m before he was Arb eligable. That screws the numbers when you really do dirty work and math it out. Strausburg's value per war based on the model you want to peddle here looks great when you only assume a $1.5m salary per year. Problem is, Strausburg, over his 4 years (due to injury), was getting $3.8m per year while producing 12.4 WAR. With his salary during that period he had to produce close to 20 WAR to make it a good investment.

The one good thing the Orioles do isn't sign players to contracts after the draft or when they are in pre-arb. So they are getting league minimum. So that bonus money is spread out over those years as well making it less of a hit. Other teams don't do that. Bryce Harper would have been a major "steal" but the Nats gave him a 5yr $10m contract. So they over paid in the pre-arb years. This year was a pre-arb year for him.

Even in 2008 draft, Rays drafted Tim Beckham and gave him a $6.9m bonus. He's produced .5 WAR. Can he produce 7 or 8 WAR? Don't think so. He's a mess. Is Kevin Gausman gotta get to his mark in 2 years? He needs at least 5 or 6 WAR to be justified. Hell, even 2007 1st pick, David Price.. wasn't that valuable when you considered he made $9m in pre-Arb.

Everybody can be cute with their numbers but you gotta look indepth. Matthew Murphy admitted in the article (comment section) what you are paying for is a lottery ticket and that lottery ticket will not win 70% of the time. You have a 50% failure rate in the 1st round on average. That of those who make it 30% will be league average or better. So when it really comes down to it. You are over paying in hope of having a golden ticket.

[BradyBunch]

You have it partly right, partly wrong. The players after, say, the 20th round are low-probability prospects. They're overwhelmingly unlikely to amount to anything. So they're heavily incentivized to go to school rather than hang out hitting .189 in A ball and getting released without having a degree as a backup plan. The teams would just as soon not draft them because they're just filling out the back end of lower level rosters with guys who're not going to make the majors 90 percent of the time.

You keep picking out outliers, but look at, say, 2008. From round 30-40 by far the best player picked was Yan Gomes, career value of 8 WAR. Out of 300 players taken about half a dozen had a career as valuable as Ryan Flaherty.

Any one of them could be looked at as a "low risk project". But you have 20 players you bring in every year that are basically lottery tickets who you have to pay room and board and per diem and a little salary for, and you have to sort through a couple busloads of these non-prospects and decide who gets cut and who gets to be the Shorebirds' second utility player.

Half the players in all the draft are low-probability prospects because even less then 50% from the 1st round make it and only 30% of those are major league average or better. That's less then 10 of 30 on average.

Yan Gomes? He's 6.9 WAR.. but I think you are missing Jarred Cosart and C.J Cron.. Cosart is 5.3 WAR in 1 year of service time. Now these guys didn't get millions in bonuses but more likely less then $200,000. These 2 guys have returned their value already.

These low risk project cost you less then $40,000 a year all costs included. You are gonna make minimum pay in the minors. Teams are not liable for room and board outside of travel and it's $25 per diem on the road. The point of the low risk is because of the upkeep costs. Orioles upkeep costs for Dylan Bundy is massive. Orioles are paying him $1.25m a year.. Orioles have him on the 40 man roster and have to him on the 25 man at the end of ST or DL him or he is on waivers.

[DrungoHazewood]

No, the data used in that was wrong and will always be wrong as what's being assumed and only counted is every draft picked in the 1st round or even the first 5 picks in the 1st round make it to the majors. This is flat out ignoring data. What's basically being done here is only counting the guys who make it and ignoring the others who were drafted in that round or rounds slots who didn't make it.

So for example... 2009 draft.. the 3, 4 and 5 picks were.. Donavan Tate, Tony Sanchez, and Matt Hobgood.

Donavan Tate signed for $6.7m. He hasn't played a game in the majors yet. Tony Sanchez signed for $2.9m and has played less then 51 games with less then 1 WAR. We know about Hobgood and he signed for $2.42m. Even Strausburg the 1st pick, signed for $10.5m and got paid $15m before he was Arb eligable. That screws the numbers when you really do dirty work and math it out. Strausburg's value per war based on the model you want to peddle here looks great when you only assume a $1.5m salary per year. Problem is, Strausburg, over his 4 years (due to injury), was getting $3.8m per year while producing 12.4 WAR. With his salary during that period he had to produce close to 20 WAR to make it a good investment.

The one good thing the Orioles do isn't sign players to contracts after the draft or when they are in pre-arb. So they are getting league minimum. So that bonus money is spread out over those years as well making it less of a hit. Other teams don't do that. Bryce Harper would have been a major "steal" but the Nats gave him a 5yr $10m contract. So they over paid in the pre-arb years. This year was a pre-arb year for him.

Even in 2008 draft, Rays drafted Tim Beckham and gave him a $6.9m bonus. He's produced .5 WAR. Can he produce 7 or 8 WAR? Don't think so. He's a mess. Is Kevin Gausman gotta get to his mark in 2 years? He needs at least 5 or 6 WAR to be justified. Hell, even 2007 1st pick, David Price.. wasn't that valuable when you considered he made $9m in pre-Arb.

Everybody can be cute with their numbers but you gotta look indepth. Matthew Murphy admitted in the article (comment section) what you are paying for is a lottery ticket and that lottery ticket will not win 70% of the time. You have a 50% failure rate in the 1st round on average. That of those who make it 30% will be league average or better. So when it really comes down to it. You are over paying in hope of having a golden ticket.

Thanks for your opinion.

[Stotle]

Donavan Tate signed for $6.7m. He hasn't played a game in the majors yet. Tony Sanchez signed for $2.9m and has played less then 51 games with less then 1 WAR. We know about Hobgood and he signed for $2.42m. Even Strausburg the 1st pick, signed for $10.5m and got paid $15m before he was Arb eligable. That screws the numbers when you really do dirty work and math it out. Strausburg's value per war based on the model you want to peddle here looks great when you only assume a $1.5m salary per year. Problem is, Strausburg, over his 4 years (due to injury), was getting $3.8m per year while producing 12.4 WAR. With his salary during that period he had to produce close to 20 WAR to make it a good investment.

The one good thing the Orioles do isn't sign players to contracts after the draft or when they are in pre-arb. So they are getting league minimum. So that bonus money is spread out over those years as well making it less of a hit. Other teams don't do that. Bryce Harper would have been a major "steal" but the Nats gave him a 5yr $10m contract. So they over paid in the pre-arb years. This year was a pre-arb year for him.

Everybody can be cute with their numbers but you gotta look indepth. Matthew Murphy admitted in the article (comment section) what you are paying for is a lottery ticket and that lottery ticket will not win 70% of the time. You have a 50% failure rate in the 1st round on average. That of those who make it 30% will be league average or better. So when it really comes down to it. You are over paying in hope of having a golden ticket.

None of this analysis has been relevant since 2012 when MLB and the MLBPA did away with major league contracts for draftees. And your analysis as to what is and is not a good investment is incorrect, as well.