International FAILURES Continue...

[Baroquen131]

The stop calling me line ruined any credibility the article/blog had.

Ummm... I think he was making the "Stop calling me Shirley" joke again...

I'd think most readers are used to Roch's humor. Doesn't make the info any less valid or credible.

[amateurfan]

This is a completely inadequate response by the club. Roch states

"The Oriole are trying to repair the huge deficiencies in their international scouting, and it's a process that won't happen overnight. If you read Dan Connolly's excellent article in The Sun that ran on Dec. 27, you know they're shorthanded. They've been at a disadvantage for too long, and that's inexcusable in my book. But it's being corrected - slowly but surely."

In the present tense they are shorthanded. That doesn't refute the ESPN article.

Second, the fact that the agents don't know who the Orioles scouts is a problem. Why? I'd imagine that developing relationships with agents is a hugely important dynamic for clubs. Why hasn't this happened?

The reasoning by the club as reported by Roch doesn't add up. In fact, Roch's report strengthens the ESPN because it backs up the fact that the Orioles don't have enough scouts at enough events.

[Tony-OH]

Unfortunately there is a lot of spin going on here in my opinion. But, if John Stockstill says there are guys checking it out then I have no reason to doubt him. He's a straight shooter and hopefully has taken a leadership role in the Dominican scouting program. If that has occurred, and he's been allowed to change "the same cast of characters," then I'll have a much better feeling about the DR scouting program.

Of course, until I see some actual talent coming from that program and not just words, I'll feel even better.

[Peace21]

This is a completely inadequate response by the club. Roch states

"The Oriole are trying to repair the huge deficiencies in their international scouting, and it's a process that won't happen overnight. If you read Dan Connolly's excellent article in The Sun that ran on Dec. 27, you know they're shorthanded. They've been at a disadvantage for too long, and that's inexcusable in my book. But it's being corrected - slowly but surely."

In the present tense they are shorthanded. That doesn't refute the ESPN article.

Second, the fact that the agents don't know who the Orioles scouts is a problem. Why? I'd imagine that developing relationships with agents is a hugely important dynamic for clubs. Why hasn't this happened?

The reasoning by the club as reported by Roch doesn't add up. In fact, Roch's report strengthens the ESPN because it backs up the fact that the Orioles don't have enough scouts at enough events.

Plus Tony's info in this thread trumps anything Roch or stockstill says.

[TGO]

The part of this that is not being overreacted to and should be is that we have THREE full time international scouts, and that is due to a very recent increase from TWO.

Boston has 14.

This operation is a joke.

[helloharv]

It's probably worth noting that agents who accuse the Orioles of not having a "regular presence" at the prospect league games might not recognize the organization's representatives due to some structural changes that have taken place. It's not the same cast of characters

----------------------------------------------

They can't introduce themselves

Sounds like spin to me !

Maybe our scouts were "laying in the weeds"

[Stotle]

Unfortunately there is a lot of spin going on here in my opinion. But, if John Stockstill says there are guys checking it out then I have no reason to doubt him. He's a straight shooter and hopefully has taken a leadership role in the Dominican scouting program. If that has occurred, and he's been allowed to change "the same cast of characters," then I'll have a much better feeling about the DR scouting program.

Of course, until I see some actual talent coming from that program and not just words, I'll feel even better.

I appreciate that Roch looked into it, and appreciate you posting your opinions. I don't know tons about scouting in the DR, but I'm curious if anyone thinks it would be odd for the buscons to be setting-up workouts for other organizations on the supposed lone day of the week that the league holds its games. And if this as happening to the point that organizations were choosing to send scouts to private workouts rather than to the league games, I'm surprised Mejia didn't mention it to Arangure. And if an organization is understaffed, it seems like a four team showcase putting 80 players on display may be a better investment of resources than traveling around to a private workout (because we're led to believe they have limited resources, I don't see how we could assume they are attending multiple workouts on the same day -- so why choose Wednesday as the day you are going to a private workout?). Maybe I'm reading way too much into it.

And I guess my final question would be isn't it in the interest of the agents running the League to constantly check in with scouts and organizations as to their thoughts on how the league is running? It still sticks out to me that one of the League's founders is under the impression that BAL doesn't show regular interest. I'd think he'd be trying to gauge every organization's interest pretty regularly. Shrug, in the end it likely doesn't matter from an acquisition standpoint, but curious that for all of his huffing and puffing about fans not defining "regular attendance" before flipping out, Roch didn't bother to have BAL define it either -- he left it at "We do have people that report to us."

I guess I'm just a "sky-is-falling" type at heart when it comes to the international scene, but the Orioles's response doesn't really seem to me to address my concerns from the ESPN article and from Tony (I know they weren't asked by Roch to respond to Tony).

[hoosiers]

The reasoning by the club as reported by Roch doesn't add up. In fact, Roch's report strengthens the ESPN because it backs up the fact that the Orioles don't have enough scouts at enough events.

What does it mean to "strengthen" the ESPN report? ESPN only quoted one person as saying we do not have a "regular" presence - not that the Os are absent in scouting the league.

When Roch and Dan Connolly say it takes time to build an international presence - why is that discarded so quickly?

IMO, it's the way people pick and choose what to believe and what to attack from these reports that doesn't add up.

[freethebirds]

I've been to the O's DR Academy, spoken with their scouts. They are very active.

[Mackus]

When Roch and Dan Connolly say it takes time to build an international presence - why is that discarded so quickly?

This is an interesting question.

I am fully accepting of the fact that it could take a substantial amount of time to set up an international scouting department inthe DR. To improve upon the weak foundation they had in place.

But I'd really like to know why it is so difficult. Why is it so much different than just hiring 5-6 scouts, giving them a travel budget, and letting them go do their thing? I know that a lot of other scouts are entrenched there and have connections to towns, players, and the buscons, but hiring more people has got to yield better results, right? Even if its not a dollar for dollar improvement, 7 scouts has to be better than 3, right? Why does it take so long to hire more scouts? If it doesn't, then why do they feel that 3 scouts is sufficient? Can they cover the whole country close to as well as the 14 or whatever Boston scouts?

I'd love to read a comprehensive article about what the Orioles are doing in the DR, what they hope to do in the future, and what their reasoning is for thinking that those steps will be enough. Based on past history, I don't think its unfair to err on the side of "the O's are screwing up down there" when reading articles and reports about their scouting. Its a situation where I think the O's have the onus to prove to us that they are finally doing things right. Just saying "we're doing it right, but it takes time to see results" isn't enough for me to feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

[Baroquen131]

I actually read the Roch entry before I saw this thread, and it sounded like spin to me. I mean, I believe the club when they say it takes time to build things down there, and to create a presence. And I believe Tony when he says Stockstill is a straight shooter. But however you cut it, it sounds like our efforts are not comparable to most other clubs, and we're still playing "catch-up". Not encouraging.

Add that to other blemishes to the club's image (like the Spring Training facilities/fields situation) and it's depressing. There's a difference between an underdog (versus the AL East "Big Boys") and a club that fundamentally has problems in its organizational operations... it's tough to root for a team that can't even get the 'behind the scenes' stuff right in order to give us our best chance on the field.

Maybe just pessimism on a cold morning.

[jdmyprez]

By the end of the year we will see a handfull of mediocre DR prospects signed just to shut us up.

[Three Run Homer]

JOHN Stockstill is not part of the problem. He is just part of the hopeful answer in the future. He is doing what he can under a fairly strict budget, but he has very little to do with the DR.

Please note: Tony's posts are case sensitive!

[Baltimore Chop]

I've been to the O's DR Academy, spoken with their scouts. They are very active.

Can you elaborate more on this?

[TGO]

This is an interesting question.

I am fully accepting of the fact that it could take a substantial amount of time to set up an international scouting department inthe DR. To improve upon the weak foundation they had in place.

But I'd really like to know why it is so difficult. Why is it so much different than just hiring 5-6 scouts, giving them a travel budget, and letting them go do their thing? I know that a lot of other scouts are entrenched there and have connections to towns, players, and the buscons, but hiring more people has got to yield better results, right? Even if its not a dollar for dollar improvement, 7 scouts has to be better than 3, right? Why does it take so long to hire more scouts? If it doesn't, then why do they feel that 3 scouts is sufficient? Can they cover the whole country close to as well as the 14 or whatever Boston scouts?

I'd love to read a comprehensive article about what the Orioles are doing in the DR, what they hope to do in the future, and what their reasoning is for thinking that those steps will be enough. Based on past history, I don't think its unfair to err on the side of "the O's are screwing up down there" when reading articles and reports about their scouting. Its a situation where I think the O's have the onus to prove to us that they are finally doing things right. Just saying "we're doing it right, but it takes time to see results" isn't enough for me to feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Right - the quantity of scouts we have is what really bothers me.

Personally, I don't even care if they're in the D.R. If the O's made a convincing argument that the island was oversaturated by other teams who got there first and the payoff just wasn't there, I could probably buy that. But then you better have scouts in every other overlooked Latin American nation and occasionally hitting Australia, Japan, Korea, China, Taiwan, and some parts of Europe. It sounds like this is what we're doing but we aren't doing it enough and with enough people.

I know you have to hire scouts you trust and that can take time, but how much time? Money shouldn't be that big of an issue here. The standard of living in a lot of these places is not very high and scouts do not make all that much money (relative to the amount of hours they put into the job).