Jump to content

2019 GCL Orioles


Enjoy Terror

Recommended Posts

I made a similar thread about the DSL Orioles, showing that 2006-2018 (where we have stats available to us), that only 3% of any players starting in the DSL go on to become MLB players. The Orioles contributed the fewest to those numbers, with only two players in that time frame (Schoop, EdRod).

This thread breaks out the four domestic rookie leagues in a similar fashion. I used Fangraphs data and cut any player whose first season in Domestic Rookie ball was over 24 years of age (to eliminate things like rehab assignments; pretty common in the rookie leagues). What I'm showing is that about 9% of Rookie ball players will go on to play in the majors. I'm also showing that the Orioles (like their DSL teams), between the GCL Orioles and former Bluefield team, not only contribute the fewest players to the majors, but even the percentage of total players that played in the GCL and made the majors is the worst. Nevertheless, I think it's interesting to show that while DSL Orioles failure to produce players could be blamed on lack of international investment, I'm not sure what to say about out the GCL Orioles.

iWbbo1a.jpg

Here are those 29:

Chance Sisco, Dariel Alvarez, Eddie Gamboa, Eduardo Rodriguez, Hayden Penn, Jason Gurka, John Means, Jonathan Schoop, Josh Hader, L.J. Hoes, Manny Machado, Mike Ohlman, Mike Wright, Mychal Givens, Nolan Reimold, Oliver Drake, Parker Bridwell, Pedro Beato, Pedro Florimon, Randor Bierd, Ryan Adams, Ryan Meisinger, Stefan Crichton, Stephen Tarpley, Tanner Scott, Tyler Wilson, Xavier Avery, Zach Britton, Zach Clark

Methodology: Download FanGraphs .CSV files of batters and pitchers for split seasons in each of the four leagues; combine all 8 into one sheet with age, team, ID, year. Sort by youngest age, eliminate duplicate IDs preserving youngest age first. Eliminate players over 24. Run pivot table with Team and Name as Rows, and ID as a Counted Value. Do it again for IDs that show MLB status.
 

  • Upvote 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great research.    Keep in mind that most DSL players who eventually make the majors go to stateside rookie ball as their next stop.   So, the fact that we had almost no DSL guys feeding into our GCL team directly affects the output of the GCL team as well.    

Also, some major league teams have both a GCL team and a team in an intermediate league like the Appalachian League.   The O’s used to, and now they don’t.   The different approaches can affect the percentages, since the more teams you have, the higher percentage of players on those teams will be filler.

Lastly, a lot of our better prospects go straight to Aberdeen, especially the college guys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I think it shows that we either don't draft well, don't develop well or don't assign guys with ML upside to the GCL very often. I wonder if most of our college guys have started at Aberdeen? 

It could be that. You might note that only 22 MLB franchises have Short Season teams. In every case of a team not having a SS team they have 2 or 3 Rookie teams. The Orioles, of course, only have the one right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Also, some major league teams have both a GCL team and a team in an intermediate league like the Appalachian League.   The O’s used to, and now they don’t.   The different approaches can affect the percentages, since the more teams you have, the higher percentage of players on those teams will be filler.

I should point out that the above information includes the GCL, Appalachian League, Pioneer league, and the Arizona League. There are six seasons of Bluefield in this data. I originally didn't have the percentages in my data, but I got to the end and realized... hey maybe they only have 29 players make the majors because they only have one Rookie team (the Pirates, Yanks, and Royals each have 3!). But adding the percentages just made it look worse for us-- it wasn't about lack of players, we didn't adequately develop the ones we had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

I should point out that the above information includes the GCL, Appalachian League, Pioneer league, and the Arizona League. There are six seasons of Bluefield in this data. I originally didn't have the percentages in my data, but I got to the end and realized... hey maybe they only have 29 players make the majors because they only have one Rookie team (the Pirates, Yanks, and Royals each have 3!). But adding the percentages just made it look worse for us-- it wasn't about lack of players, we didn't adequately develop the ones we had.

Yeah, that part is kind of complicated to analyze.   But the simpler part is the lack of DSL graduates on our GCL/Appy League teams compared to other franchises.    It looks to me like only 2 of the 29 players you listed played DSL ball for us (EdRod and Florimon).    For most teams the percentage would probably be 20-30%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

I should point out that the above information includes the GCL, Appalachian League, Pioneer league, and the Arizona League. There are six seasons of Bluefield in this data. I originally didn't have the percentages in my data, but I got to the end and realized... hey maybe they only have 29 players make the majors because they only have one Rookie team (the Pirates, Yanks, and Royals each have 3!). But adding the percentages just made it look worse for us-- it wasn't about lack of players, we didn't adequately develop the ones we had.

The fact that this went on so long is troubling and nearly 95% of the ones that did make it were marginal, at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Yachtsman said:

The Orioles need to consider adding advanced A at this point. Well researched post by the way.

I'm actually pretty shocked there are as many MiL affiliates as there are. Is it fair to assume that Aberdeen, Delmarva, Frederick, Bowie and Norfolk all bring in more revenue than it costs to pay the players and run the stadiums? 

Serious Q. I have no idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Legend_Of_Joey said:

The fact that this went on so long is troubling and nearly 95% of the ones that did make it were marginal, at best.

It would be interesting to look at all the players who debuted for the Orioles for the last 10 years and see how many were developed from within.    For example, last year 15 players made their major league debut for the Orioles - an extraordinarily high number.   Of those, only 7 were drafted by us, whereas 8 came from other organizations.   The 7 were Wynns, Wilkerson, Stewart, Mullins, Meisinger, Means and Hess.    Only two of those (Meisinger and Means) ever played in the GCL, and each of them only played one game there before moving on to Aberdeen.    

The previous year, we debuted 8 players (a more normal number), 5 of whom we drafted (Yacobonis, Scott, Sisco, Hays and Crichton.)   Scott, Sisco and Crichton played in the GCL.

In 2016 we debuted 8 players, two of whom we signed as older international free agents (Kim and Miranda), four of whom we drafted (Tolliver, Mancini, Hart and Bridwell).    Bridwell pitched two games in the GCL, the others never played there.    

I’ll stop there for now.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Yachtsman said:

Sorry, you are right. Rookie Advanced was called Bluefield. They need to consider adding this to their stable of minor league teams.

It’s interesting the different philosophies on that.   The Astros dropped their team at that level a couple of years ago.   The Red Sox have never had a team at that level.  The Blue Jays didn’t used to have a team at that level, then added Bluefield when we dropped them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elias also spoke about the GCL on the radio this AM. He said that they'd usually want to send college players to Aberdeen and high school guys to the GCL. However, with the heavy drafting of college guys this year, it looks like many will also have to go to the GCL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Posts

    • I don't like the idea of moving an arm we have under control for 6 years for an arm we would have under control for 3 months.  Especially since there are a ton of question marks on that arm of the 3 month rental.  I think McDermott could be a pretty special pitcher if things fall into place.  I'd hold on to that lottery ticket.  I'd look to move someone else at a position of redundancy.  
    • I thought you were talking about possible selections a team could have made.  For example, the Nats could have taken Harper and Realmuto.  Or the Orioles could have had Machado and Realmuto.  Now I see what you are saying though.  You are saying the Orioles had the best draft of the past 20 years and that draft was heavy in good position players so it was smart for them to take that tact.  At first, I thought you were arguing the Orioles got lucky because the 2019 draft was particularly strong and in no draft of the past 20 years could one team have gotten two players of the caliber of Adley and Gunnar at the positions that the Orioles chose.  
    • I completely agree with this.  Most of this damage has already been done.  Travel teams have ruined many kids and have left others far more susceptible to injury in the minors and majors.  
    • I only heard Mel Proctor when he was working the Rangers games, and I really liked him. I don’t remember whether he worked with Dick Risenhoover or Mark Holtz, but I think he worked with Mark Holtz, although he was on his own for a little while, but I really liked him.
    • Just getting caught up here, so my first reaction to trading JW is NOOOOOO! However, I think most people around baseball would have to agree that he's a dude. He's become my favorite Oriole just because of his approach at the plate and also his workman-like attitude. Leaving out my preferences and putting on my front office hat I have to admit he would be attractive to other teams for his ability to play three positions in the IF and his steady performance with the bat. And unlike Holliday, he's proven himself.  While Holliday is the more high profile guy to other teams I'm not sure he's seen as more valuable. JW can play SS-has the arm for it-and he's versatile. I think Holliday could learn to play 2B but has neither the arm for 3B or SS. He likely has more range and as earlier stated by another poster, some team may want to try him at SS. Maybe that works, maybe it doesn't.  I feel like I'm making the case to keep JW and trade JH. Back to the question, which guy gets the Orioles what they need to be the favorite going into the playoffs? Number one pick or a guy who's a ML starter right now? Let's set that aside, maybe it's either one. Can either of them get us Skubal in the right package? Yes. That's the guy who IS a ML pitcher and who will move the needle. What's the package? Elias has earned some level of baseball knowledge with the Burnes trade and the trade that sent Bundy to the Angels when Elias first arrived. That one was even more evidence of his ability to read the tea leaves. So, I trust he'll make it work. I may not like the immediate results (i.e. trading Westy or Kjerstad), but if he can get Skubal in the right deal I'd make the deal. But Scherzer is a good back up and won't cost nearly as much.
    • 39 Yacqui Rivera - he was the PTBNL in the Scott/Sulser deal along with the comp pick.  Juan Nunez - he was the 3rd piece in the Jorge Lopez trade with the Twins along with Povich/Cano/4th piece
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...