Confirmed: Harvey is bullpen only

[atomic]

I think the draft should have less value coming out of it as more players are coming from outside the draft.  But also there are more teams so there is more WAR available.  I doubt they have gotten any better.  

In baseball you have to not only have skill but determination to get better when the going gets tougher.  I doubt that analytics have even touched on the second part.  Who knows how someone will respond when you give them a multi-million dollar signing bonus.  Who's arm and shoulder can take throwing 95 mph 100 pitches a game.  

[Frobby]

51 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

For all the people who complain about WAR, this is WAR's wheelhouse.  How much value has come out of the first round in the last five years?  How much in 1965-70?  How many players in the first round never make it to the majors compared to 30 years ago?  bb-ref and WAR make these kind of questions answerable.  In 1990, no chance, it would have been mostly subjective and ridiculously hard to compile.

Not that I'm volunteering...

I may take a crack at it, but there are several factors in play:

1.    When the draft started in 1965, there were only 20 teams in MLB.    There were no comp picks, so the first five rounds were 100 picks.   Last year, with 30 teams and various competitive balance picks and comp picks, the first five rounds were 167 picks.   

2.    Also, with only 20 teams, there was only 660 WAR (approximately) to spread around the league.    Now there’s 990.    I’m not sure how that cuts when evaluating the draft, or if it matters.    

3.    I think the percentage of foreign players not subject to the draft has increased pretty significantly over time.   So really what you’d need to know to evaluate draft picks is how much WAR was available among draft-eligible players.    

 

[tntoriole]

14 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The Orioles had (easily) the best #20 overall pick of all time in Mike Mussina.

It is going to be a long decade. 

[Frobby]

16 hours ago, tntoriole said:

It is going to be a long decade. 

Is it?    I’m optimistic that the O’s will be competitive for most of it.    The 2000’s, now that was a long decade.    

[Ruzious]

24 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Is it?    I’m optimistic that the O’s will be competitive for most of it.    The 2000’s, now that was a long decade.    

This is the time to be optimistic, and I'm not.  Hopefully, the organization changes my mind by actually doing something impressive by this time next year, but so far... no.   

[interloper]

1 hour ago, Ruzious said:

This is the time to be optimistic, and I'm not.  Hopefully, the organization changes my mind by actually doing something impressive by this time next year, but so far... no.   

They've done so many impressive things already in one year. 

[atomic]

On 2/12/2020 at 5:02 PM, Frobby said:

I may take a crack at it, but there are several factors in play:

1.    When the draft started in 1965, there were only 20 teams in MLB.    There were no comp picks, so the first five rounds were 100 picks.   Last year, with 30 teams and various competitive balance picks and comp picks, the first five rounds were 167 picks.   

2.    Also, with only 20 teams, there was only 660 WAR (approximately) to spread around the league.    Now there’s 990.    I’m not sure how that cuts when evaluating the draft, or if it matters.    

3.    I think the percentage of foreign players not subject to the draft has increased pretty significantly over time.   So really what you’d need to know to evaluate draft picks is how much WAR was available among draft-eligible players.    

 

Something you would also would have to account for is more players going to college.  In 1967 the first 19 picks were high school students.  Lot easier to pick guys who are 21 over guys who are 18. 

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, atomic said:

Something you would also would have to account for is more players going to college.  In 1967 the first 19 picks were high school students.  Lot easier to pick guys who are 21 over guys who are 18. 

Good point.    I think the exercise is too complex for me to bother.     

[sportsfan8703]

I wonder if we would consider using Harvey as an opener every 2-3 games?  That would protect him a little and also allows us to get a feel of him being a “starter”. 
 

I don’t think this team is going to have too many leads in the 6th/7th innings for him to protect. 

[DrungoHazewood]

14 hours ago, atomic said:

Something you would also would have to account for is more players going to college.  In 1967 the first 19 picks were high school students.  Lot easier to pick guys who are 21 over guys who are 18. 

It is true that until roughly 1990 college players had a significant advantage over high schoolers.  When Bill James was writing his Abstracts in the 1980s one of his discoveries/rules was that you'd get more value if you just didn't draft high schoolers.  But sometime in the 90s the difference in career value between players picked coming out of high school, and players picked out of college significantly narrowed or completely disappeared

I haven't seen the data in a few years, but circa 2015 scouting and other analytical tools had made the 6-year value numbers nearly the same so the only advantage to college players is that they get here sooner.  And a high schooler just might be providing MLB value when the college guy is still in college. If Manny or Harper or Trout had spent two or three years in college they'd have missed out on 2-3 years of really good play in the majors, not to mention many $millions.

[Redskins Rick]

17 hours ago, Frobby said:

Is it?    I’m optimistic that the O’s will be competitive for most of it.    The 2000’s, now that was a long decade.    

Sadly it was started spiraling after the 2nd ACLS loss to the Damn Yankees.

 

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

Sadly it was started spiraling after the 2nd ACLS loss to the Damn Yankees.

 

The second ALCS loss was to the Indians. But I’m glad to see you’ve blocked it from your memory.     

[Redskins Rick]

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The second ALCS loss was to the Indians. But I’m glad to see you’ve blocked it from your memory.     

Your right, and I stand corrected yet again.

 

[Moose Milligan]

Apparently MASN forgot their radar gun when packing for ST.

Harvey's stuff looks electric today.  Any idea on what he was hitting on the gun?

[Frobby]

45 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Apparently MASN forgot their radar gun when packing for ST.

Harvey's stuff looks electric today.  Any idea on what he was hitting on the gun?

Topped out at 97 I heard.