Is Elias/SIGBOT and crew really good at drafting and development after the 1st round?

[Tony-OH]

14 hours ago, RZNJ said:

I did start a thread in the Draft Section regarding his drafts and we touched on this exact thing.  I do think they need to take a look and think about doing things differently.   In a way, they did with Lord and Baumeister.  We'll see with this draft but we haven't gotten much from round 2-4 with college position players since 2020.

They certainly changed their philosophy a bit in the 2023 draft and I think that's because of the issues I pointed out. I truly think that they thought they could just take guys with good pitch shapes, velocity, and movement and develop them into major league pitchers.

But they found out there's a reason those guys are still available in the 6th round or after, and especially in the 10th round and after.

Same with the hitters. I think they relied on EV too much without taking into consideration the holes in the hitters games that resulted in less than stellar numbers in college. 

Now I know we both get that there are going to be many more misses than hits, but as I showed, the philosophy may need to change on hitters too and maybe take some chances on some high risk/high reward high school hitters and pitchers.

For me, I'd prefer a balanced approach where they took some college and high school guys. Even if the High School guys burn out quick or fail immediately. That's ok. It's going to happen. 

I mean Willems is a good example of a guy that is high risk and high reward. There is some talent in there, but also some holes (especially hitting off speed). But the upside makes him interesting still. 

[Aristotelian]

3 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

100% Gunnar was obviously a fantastic pick as the "1st" pick of the 2nd round. Of course, that was not my point of this piece. The point was the fact that the college hitter approach has not really paid off and they have yet to draft and develop a major league pitcher after 5 drafts.

Ah, based on the thread title I misunderstood your point here. I agree, their big successes in the later rounds have been Gunnar and Mayo. They should learn from that.

I wonder if the focus on college players had to do with that phase of the rebuild and perhaps prioritizing guys who might be MLB ready sooner. They no longer need to do that. 

[UMDTerrapins]

We obviously have a lot of guys who have young and talented replacements behind them (Santander, Hays, Mullins, Mountcastle/O’Hearn). The conventional wisdom is to trade some of them for pitching help. Fine, but I think our organization needs lower level depth. It won’t be popular in the clubhouse and even with some fans, but we should be both buyers and sellers at the deadline. We need to create opportunity for our top prospects and our system is becoming thinner. It’s a shame these guys we’re talking about aren’t doing much to increase their trade value. 

Edited June 5 by UMDTerrapins

[Tony-OH]

9 hours ago, CaptainRedbeard said:

It’s a fair question, although I don’t think you can discount the first round success. Rutschman was the only slam dunk gift at 1:1. It was definitely off consensus to go with Holliday over Jones, and Cowser and Kjerstad were both underslot overdrafts that look good now. And of course the competitive balance picks are still technically first rounders, but getting guys like Gunnar and Westburg there is far outpacing expectations for those picks. 

All good points, and I certainly gave him his credit for his early selections that you mentioned. The point though is the drafting philosophy of focusing on college hitters over pitchers or high school players after the 1st round has not paid off in any significant way to this current run besides Ortiz being used to get Burnes. 

 

[wildcard]

I think Elias may be trading Hays and Mullins this off season looking to get prospects in return.   Much like he sis with Mancini and Lopez getting Cano, Povich, McDermott and Johnson.

[Tony-OH]

9 hours ago, nvpacchi said:

excluding last year's draft Elias had only drafted 7 pitchers through the first 10 rounds excluding McLean. Close to 50 picks with less than 15% being pitchers, they deserve more leash on pitching because

 

1. I remember a rates and barrels podcast with Eno interviewing a Rangers front office guy. One part of the convo was centered around how much easier it is to overhaul hitting development, because there is far less personalization involved. bat speed is bat speed and swing decisions are swing decisions,  easier to develop an org philosophy. looks like they've obviously done that,  the results speak for themselves, so they can move onto pitching,  and it seems pretty clear they're tinkering and trying things out with the 2023 class to see how to infuse pitching customization for individual pitchers- the harder step in turning around a dysfunctional development system.

2. I think about a Kyle Boddy tweet frequently where, I'm paraphrasing, each pitcher has a skill set that can play at the major league level,  you just have to crush the development for each pitcher. You can be bad until you aren't as a pitcher, especially when you're trying to find the perfect mix of pitches that compliments your arm slot, fastball shape, athleticism,  etc. Guys with good shape metrics just have a head start in finding the ideal pitch mix, so I don't really have an issue preselecting for those characteristics, as it'll just make crushing the development easier. 

Pitch level data for Os minor leaguers would be fun, sadly we don't have it, as it would be the clearest way to determine what tweaks are working throughout the year that have staying power. Id say the positive starts for Baumeister Forret and Young ready to pop top 100 lists is an encouraging sign.

The Orioles definitely have their philosophy and metrics they look for in hitters and pitching. The results have spoken on the pitching side so far and as I showed, there is  not a ton of successes, especially lately with drafting college bats after the first round.

While I have no opinion of Boddy's knowledge of pitching development, at the end of the day, where are the results? You can look at a computer screen and compu-data all day long, but until you start developing real major league pitchers, it's just data babble.

We've had all this technology and not a single pitcher has suddenly become an outstanding major league pitcher. Heck, not one has made it yet.

I've watched guys and see guys with some good pitches, but they struggle with consistency. Now most minor league pitchers struggle with consistency which is why they are in the minors, but it would be nice to have a few guys that you could point to and say, see, we developed that guy into an impact major league reliever.

It's been 5 years of drafting and the closest pitcher Elias has drafted to the major leagues is probably Kade Strowd (though Brandon Young could be interesting at some point this year in the pen -Note Young was a 2020 COVID free agent signee vs a draft pick, but would have been drafted).

 

[DrungoHazewood]

15 hours ago, capyy said:

No one is hitting on picks after the 1st round or 2 at a high rate.

Of the current top 35 prospects, almost all of them were taken in the 1st round or were an international signing. A handful were taken in the 2nd. 

In fact there is only one player in the top 35 prospects who was not 1st/2nd round pick, or an international signing. Coby Mayo (4th)

Elias/Sigbot are great.

Randomly pick a year, any year:

2010, round 3. JT Realmuto is the only 2010 3rd rounder with a career value over six wins. Of the 34 picks in that round, 30 of them have a career value under three wins.

2007, round 2. Freeman, Stanton, Zimmerman and Cozart were good to great. But Josh Fields (1.8 WAR for his entire career) was the 6th-best player taken that round. About half never appeared in the majors at all.

2013, round 4. Bellinger and Kiner Falefa are over 10 wins. But just six players got a single win in their careers. More than half never appeared in the majors at all. Jonah Heim, the O's pick later traded for Steve Pearce, with a .682 career OPS is the 4th-most valuable player taken in that round.

2015, round 2. Brady Singer (7.6 WAR) is the best player taken in that round. Scott Kingery is the only player from the round who's played 300 MLB games.

2005, round 2. Yunel Escobar and Chase Headley had good careers. Nobody else made 10 wins. More than half never appeared in the majors.

1995, round 4. Russ Ortiz and Adam Everett are the only players who had a career over replacement level.

1989, round 3. Pretty great round with Olerud, Salmon, Neagle, Shane Reynolds, and Phil Nevin. But even with that 19 of the 25 players taken were worth 2 wins or less, with the majority never appearing in the majors.

You could keep going like this forever... A majority of 2nd rounders have little to no career value in the majors, and that number goes up with each succeeding round. If a team is getting some kind of value out of a 2nd or 3rd rounder every few years they're doing better than most.

 

Edited June 5 by DrungoHazewood

[Sports Guy]

16 minutes ago, UMDTerrapins said:

We obviously have a lot of guys who have young and talented replacements behind them (Santander, Hays, Mullins, Mountcastle/O’Hearn). The conventional wisdom is to trade some of them for pitching help. Fine, but I think our organization needs lower level depth. It won’t be popular in the clubhouse and even with some fans, but we should be both buyers and sellers at the deadline. We need to create opportunity for our top prospects and our system is becoming thinner. It’s a shame these guys we’re talking about aren’t doing much to increase their trade value. 

The good news is that we still control all of these guys, outside of Santander, beyond this year.  That’s good because it allows them to trade later if needs be.

But I agree. I would be shopping some of these vets for help now and the future. 

[Tony-OH]

46 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Ah, based on the thread title I misunderstood your point here. I agree, their big successes in the later rounds have been Gunnar and Mayo. They should learn from that.

I wonder if the focus on college players had to do with that phase of the rebuild and perhaps prioritizing guys who might be MLB ready sooner. They no longer need to do that. 

Yes, I'm not trashing Elias at all, in fact, I'd love to hear he signed a 10 year contract here. I'm just bringing up some facts and concerns about their focus of drafting college hitters and their inability to draft and develop pitching.

Elias and company absolutely put the Orioles where they are with the drafting of Rutschman, Gunnar, Westburg and Cowser to a lesser extent. All of them have contributed mightily to the Orioles success and Ortiz got the team a year of Burnes which also will help.

But we can't turn a blind eye to the Orioles struggles in the bullpen right now and not look at why there is no real help in the system from the pitching side that they drafted and developed.

I just thought it was worth a conversation.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

Another way to look at this is picks by franchise/round.

The Dodgers' last significantly good 3rd round pick was Phil Nevin, in 1989. In the 21st century they've yet to have a 3rd rounder reach five wins.

The Yanks last got five wins from a 2nd round pick when they drafted Al Leiter in 1984. And being the Yanks they traded him at the age of 23 for the last few years of Jesse Barfield's career, so they really got almost nothing out of that.

The Red Sox drafted Jonathan Papelbon in the 4th round of 2003, and he was worth 23 wins. Aside from that they haven't gotten any significant value from a 4th rounder since 1990.

Since drafting Dan Haren (35 wins) in 2001, the Card's only 5-win 2nd round pick was Jon Jay (12 wins, 2006). They have the reputation of being one of the best orgs in baseball, and their 21 picks in the 2nd round since 2006 have totaled 7 wins in their careers. Or about 0.3 wins/player.

Again, you can do this all day long.

[Tony-OH]

6 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Randomly pick a year, any year:

2010, round 3. JT Realmuto is the only 2010 3rd rounder with a career value over six wins. Of the 34 picks in that round, 30 of them have a career value under three wins.

2007, round 2. Freeman, Stanton, Zimmerman and Cozart were good to great. But Josh Fields (1.8 WAR for his entire career) was the 6th-best player taken that round. About half never appeared in the majors at all.

2013, round 4. Bellinger and Kiner Falefa are over 10 wins. But just six players got a single win in their careers. More than half never appeared in the majors at all. Jonah Heim, the O's pick later traded for Steve Pearce, with a .682 career OPS is the 4th-most valuable player taken in that round.

2015, round 2. Brady Singer (7.6 WAR) is the best player taken in that round. Scott Kingery is the only player from the round who's played 300 MLB games.

2005, round 2. Yunel Escobar and Chase Headley had good careers. Nobody else made 10 wins. More than half never appeared in the majors.

1995, round 4. Russ Ortiz and Adam Everett are the only players who had a career over replacement level.

1989, round 3. Pretty great round with Olerud, Salmon, Neagle, Shane Reynolds, and Phil Nevin. But even with that 19 of the 25 players taken were worth 2 wins or less, with the majority never appearing in the majors.

You could keep going like this forever...

 

None of this has anything to do with the points I've made. Sure, some of you can stick your head in the sand and just go "The draft is a crapshoot" but then if you do, you can't give Elias credit for any of his draft picks because that means he just go lucky.

Just like I don't think they were lucky in drafting Rutschman, Gunnar, Westburg, Cowser, Mayo, Kjerstad, etc. I also don't give them a pass for not drafting and developing one major league pitcher in 5 years of drafting. 

They passed on a lot of arms to draft a lot of college bats that have not worked out. they did not balance their drafts with pitching and hitting, but went with a college bat philosophy and as I shown, they've had little success with that philosophy while there are a ton of major league pitchers who were drafted in these same drafts and passed on.

Now 2023 was a shift in philosophy on the pitching side and we'll see how that works out. Now I'd like to see them give more high school hitters shots in the early rounds.

I'd rather strike out on High school guys more often and then find a Gunnar or Mayo once in awhile, vs going college heavy and getting decent bats that are defensively flawwed like we have with Kjerstad and Norby or guys that have low ceilings.

[Sports Guy]

The funny thing about what they do, which Tony is eluding to, is take college guys that have some upside but there is a lot to unlock to get that upside.

The problem is, these guys are 21-23 years old.  If you are going to take an upside guy who needs work, why not take a HS kid who has more growth in his body and more years to learn and perhaps less bad habits to break?

 

[wildcard]

9 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

The Orioles definitely have their philosophy and metrics they look for in hitters and pitching. The results have spoken on the pitching side so far and as I showed, there is  not a ton of successes, especially lately with drafting college bats after the first round.

While I have no opinion of Boddy's knowledge of pitching development, at the end of the day, where are the results? You can look at a computer screen and compu-data all day long, but until you start developing real major league pitchers, it's just data babble.

We've had all this technology and not a single pitcher has suddenly become an outstanding major league pitcher. Heck, not one has made it yet.

I've watched guys and see guys with some good pitches, but they struggle with consistency. Now most minor league pitchers struggle with consistency which is why they are in the minors, but it would be nice to have a few guys that you could point to and say, see, we developed that guy into an impact major league reliever.

It's been 5 years of drafting and the closest pitcher Elias has drafted to the major leagues is probably Kade Strowd (though Brandon Young could be interesting at some point this year in the pen -Note Young was a 2020 COVID free agent signee vs a draft pick, but would have been drafted).

 

Elias may not have drafted them but his system did a good job is developing GRod, Bradish, Kremer and Bautista.  Povich, McDermott and Johnson could be the next wave.

Elias' plan from when he took the Orioles job has been that drafting pitchers is too risky.   Acquiring minor league pitchers and development them has been his plan.

Elias seems to believe that he can find relievers on the market/waiver wire and small purchases and turn them into cheap major league relievers.

[DirtyBird]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

If you are going to take an upside guy who needs work, why not take a HS kid who has more growth in his body and more years to learn and perhaps less bad habits to break?

 

Because you probably are much less likely to sign the HS Kid you mentioned

[Sports Guy]

Just now, DirtyBird said:

Because you probably are much less likely to sign the HS Kid you mentioned

Ehhh, that’s a weak reason. You know this going into the pick and into the draft.  Plenty of later round high school players sign deals. 

You can just punt on picks or take college relievers that you don’t even need to give slot too.  There are tons of ways to sign HS overslot kids.