Longerhagen on past O’s pitching development

[Frobby]

Guest: What sort of overall star/ok/bust distributions an org should be happy with given the collection of prospects they have.  As a weird example, how about the Baltimore pitching collection several years ago – Matusz, Britton, Arrieta, Bundy, Gausman.  Five very highly rated prosepcts, produced one elite reliever, one briefly elite starter for a different team, two ok starters, and a bust.  Was that an organizational success or failure?

Eric A Longenhagen: failure. Gotta think the baseline has some busts, but those outcomes were below the baseline

[Frobby]

Also this, on an unrelated point:

Balto: Does Kjerstad’s ranking compared to other 2020 draft picks mean that, at least at the moment, you think Baltimore’s gamble was a poor one?

Eric A Longenhagen: no, because it enabled them to get Mayo and Baumler.   https://blogs.fangraphs.com/eric-longenhagen-chat-2-26-21/

[Can_of_corn]

I'm irrationally annoyed that he didn't correct the guest that called one of the five a bust.

 

[ArtVanDelay]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm irrationally annoyed that he didn't correct the guest that called one of the five a bust.

 

It’s kinda amazing how bad #4 overall picks have been over the last 25 years but I still have no problem with labeling Matusz as a bust. 

[Frobby]

12 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm irrationally annoyed that he didn't correct the guest that called one of the five a bust.

 

I’m not sure I agree with Longenhagen in any event.   There have been 56 no. 4 picks — Gausman ranks 15th in rWAR among them, Bundy 17th and Matusz 26th.   Britton was a 3rd rounder who has the highest rWAR of anyone drafted in the 3rd round that year; he was the 85th pick overall and ranks 3rd overall among 85th picks.   Arrieta was a 5th rounder, 159th overall and he’s the top 5th rounder chosen that year and the third-best 159th pick.

For me, the only real big disappointment there was that we were unable to unlock Arrieta’s talent and he had his success after being traded.   
 

[LookinUp]

I don't know man. History aside, I feel like if Tampa got their hands on the same guys, the careers would have been much more successful.

[murph]

3 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I don't know man. History aside, I feel like if Tampa got their hands on the same guys, the careers would have been much more successful.

Agreed, but at the respective time.  I am so hoping that in 10 years they will be writing an Astroball type book on this organization from this rebuild.   

[tOadly]

We might start to move away from assigning so much value to the pick's number, and instead consider bands, or waves, or the like... The increasing flexibility in draft position/selection suggests to me that any given pick should be nested in and evaluated by a range of possibilities.  Granted, any statistical analyses are then confounded by criteria, and (in this case) aren't they all... But the whole pick X, on average, has produced Y just anchors subsequent analyses to an increasingly inconsequential point of reference.  I'd rather we consider those bands (or waves, or collections, or whatever can be made distinct empirically through discontinuities) to then evaluate success.  And we'd then see real variation; that is, the difference in sophistication, efficiency, and efficacy among some clubs relative to most, and certainly the worst. 

[ChosenOne21]

Yeah, Brian Matusz is basically the median outcome for a #4 pick. Definitely less than we hoped he'd be, but he had a major league career most prospects would kill for

[Frobby]

10 hours ago, ChosenOne21 said:

Yeah, Brian Matusz is basically the median outcome for a #4 pick. Definitely less than we hoped he'd be, but he had a major league career most prospects would kill for

$13.75 mm, on top of his signing bonus.    I’d take that over whatever’s behind Door No. 2.   

[jabba72]

12 hours ago, ChosenOne21 said:

Yeah, Brian Matusz is basically the median outcome for a #4 pick. Definitely less than we hoped he'd be, but he had a major league career most prospects would kill for

Yeah but outside of one good season starting he spent the bulk of his career as a lefty specialist. He was seen as close to MLB ready when he was drafted too. Just kind of hoping for more when your picked #4. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

$13.75 mm, on top of his signing bonus.    I’d take that over whatever’s behind Door No. 2.   

And a ring.

[Beef Supreme]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

$13.75 mm, on top of his signing bonus.    I’d take that over whatever’s behind Door No. 2.   

If I'm Matusz, I take the $13MM.

If I'm the Orioles, I would take Door #2

[NCRaven]

18 hours ago, Frobby said:

I’m not sure I agree with Longenhagen in any event.   There have been 56 no. 4 picks — Gausman ranks 15th in rWAR among them, Bundy 17th and Matusz 26th.   Britton was a 3rd rounder who has the highest rWAR of anyone drafted in the 3rd round that year; he was the 85th pick overall and ranks 3rd overall among 85th picks.   Arrieta was a 5th rounder, 159th overall and he’s the top 5th rounder chosen that year and the third-best 159th pick.

For me, the only real big disappointment there was that we were unable to unlock Arrieta’s talent and he had his success after being traded.   
 

When I read his chat, I immediately thought of your past comments on this.  He is definitely off base with his comment there.

[Can_of_corn]

57 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

If I'm Matusz, I take the $13MM.

If I'm the Orioles, I would take Door #2

You get Hobgood.