Fukudome, Kuroda, Kobayashi

[RShack]

The Orioles should be spending as much of their resources scoutign worldwide to find talent wherever they can.

To say otherwise is just ridiculous.

Instead of pissing away 10 million on Jay Payton, we should have hired that many more scouts and built that much better facilities all over the world.

They just need to do more.

This is just common sense....Look for the most talent possible.

It's common sense that it's dumb to spend a bunch of money on Jay Payton. It's also common sense that it's dumb to spend money looking for prospects in Outer Mongolia.

Jeez, SG, how many times have you said they need to spend money smart? Spending money smart means looking for ballplayers where the good ballplayers are, not in places where they aren't. That's like robbing a bank that's got no money in it.

I agree they should have a guy (as in "one") going to lotsa ballgames in Japan. If he wants to take a little trip to Taiwan, I don't mind. But I don't want them wasting money trying to look in places where the good ballplayers aren't.

[Sports Guy]

It's common sense that it's dumb to spend a bunch of money on Jay Payton. It's also common sense that it's dumb to spend money looking for prospects in Outer Mongolia.

Jeez, SG, how many times have you said they need to spend money smart? Spending money smart means looking for ballplayers where the good ballplayers are, not in places where they aren't. That's like robbing a bank that's got no money in it.

I agree they should have a guy (as in "one") going to lotsa ballgames in Japan. If he wants to take a little trip to Taiwan, I don't mind. But I don't want them wasting money trying to look in places where the good ballplayers aren't.

Yea because that's what people are advocating....Scouting where baseball isn't played.

[mefogus]

It's common sense that it's dumb to spend a bunch of money on Jay Payton. It's also common sense that it's dumb to spend money looking for prospects in Outer Mongolia.

Jeez, SG, how many times have you said they need to spend money smart? Spending money smart means looking for ballplayers where the good ballplayers are, not in places where they aren't. That's like robbing a bank that's got no money in it.

I agree they should have a guy (as in "one") going to lotsa ballgames in Japan. If he wants to take a little trip to Taiwan, I don't mind. But I don't want them wasting money trying to look in places where the good ballplayers aren't.

10 years ago you could have replaced the words "Outer Mongolia" and "Taiwan" with "Lithuania" and "Italy" and the word "baseball" with "basketball".

How smart would we look then?

-m

[RShack]

Yea because that's people are advocating....Scouting where baseball isn't played.

It's a matter of how much they play, and how well, and how many guys do it. And when it comes to that, there are a few places that are way, way better than most places.

You already know this. You're arguing just to argue (Me too, probably ;-)

[mefogus]

It's a matter of how much they play, and how well, and how many guys do it. And when it comes to that, there are a few places that are way, way better than most places.

I don't think *anyone* would disagree that baseball in Japan is of a higher caliber than Outer Mongolia. However, if baseball in the latter showed promise in increasing its quality of play, then wouldn't it be wise to establish a presence there and get a foothold in signing players out of there?

-m

[Moose Milligan]

Spending money smart means looking for ballplayers where the good ballplayers are, not in places where they aren't. That's like robbing a bank that's got no money in it.

Kinda reminds me of the Sam Kinsion skit...

You want to help these people? Stop sending them food. Don't send these people another bite, folks. You want to send them something, you want to help these people? Send them U-Hauls, send them luggage, send them someone like me, I'll walk out there..send a guy who'll go,

'Hey, we just drove 700 miles with your food and it occurred to us that there wouldn't be world hunger, if you people would LIVE WHERE THE FOOD IS! YOU LIVE IN A DESERT! YOU LIVE IN A DESERT! NOTHING GROWS OUT HERE! NOTHING'S GONNA GROW HERE! YOU SEE THIS? HUH? THIS IS SAND. YEAH. DID YOU KNOW NOTHING CAN GROW IN THIS? HERE, EAT SOME OF IT, TASTE IT. KNOW WHAT IT'S GONNA BE A HUNDRED YEARS FROM NOW? IT'S GONNA BE SAND! YOU LIVE IN A DESERT! GET YOUR KIDS, GET YOUR STUFF, WE'LL MAKE ONE TRIP, WE'LL TAKE YOU TO WHERE THE FOOD IS! WE HAVE DESERTS IN AMERICA -- WE JUST DON'T LIVE IN THEM IDIOTS!!"

Any day is a good day when you get to quote Sam Kinison.

[RShack]

10 years ago you could have replaced the words "Outer Mongolia" and "Taiwan" with "Lithuania" and "Italy" and the word "baseball" with "basketball".

How smart would we look then?

-m

They played basketball in Lithuania, it was a very big deal, and we just didn't notice. They don't play baseball in Outer Mongolia. And most places that people are throwing out as "emerging hotbeds" are places where they don't place baseball much.

I don't want them flying scouts all over creation just because they might find some grade-C pitcher once in a blue moon. The scouts should mainly be places where they play baseball a lot. Evidently, the O's suck at that, so that's the main thing they need to fix. That's way more important than having scouts flying all over so they can snoop around in Australia or Holland or Fiji or Estonia. Exactly what about this do you disagree with?

[mefogus]

I don't want them flying scouts all over creation just because they might find some grade-C pitcher once in a blue moon. The scouts should mainly be places where they play baseball a lot. Evidently, the O's suck at that, so that's the main thing they need to fix. That's way more important than having scouts flying all over so they can snoop around in Australia or Holland or Fiji or Estonia. Exactly what about this do you disagree with?

Outer Mongolia was simply a name used as a place-marker for "land-of-emerging-baseball". Perhaps I should have used a different name, but I thought it was clear.

As SG has said... no one wants to scout somewhere where baseball is not played -- although it would probably be a good idea to spread it to those places as well. However, scouting and developing talent in emerging markets is wise... it's what most good companies do.

-m

[RShack]

However, scouting and developing talent in emerging markets is wise... it's what most good companies do.

-m

But good companies don't pick places just because of a general idea. Good companies target things very carefully, looking hard at the cost/benefit ratio based on projections about how much a possible emerging market is gonna matter, how long it's gonna take, and what the pay off is likely to be. They don't just say, "Oh, emerging markets are good, so let's send people and money everyplace that might possibly be one." Good companies don't do that. They're careful and methodical and focused about it. They pick and choose. And they only focus on emerging markets *after* they've got their act together in the markets that matter the most, not before.

[TommyD4207]

The Japanese Leagues are somewhere between AAA and major league quality. If you rate the major leagues as 1.00, AAA as .90, the Japanese Leagues would be, like, 0.93 or 0.95.

The translations aren't as simple as saying a 2.13 in Japan is a X.XX here. You need to take into account a lot of variables, like the run environment of the league and park a guy came from, and where he's going. You have to account for how different component stats translate between Japan and the US.

I don't have all the information at my disposal to do this well. But Clay Davenport, Nate Silver, and Baseball Prospectus does and did. Matsuzaka's 2007 PECOTA projections went like this:

% 	W 	L 	SV 	G 	GS 	IP 	H 	BB 	SO 	HR 	GB% 	BABIP 	Stuff 	WHIP 	ERA 	PERA 	ERA 	H9 	BB9 	K9 	HR9 	VORP 	WXRL 	WARP90o 	16 	6 	0 	31 	31 	206.3 	185 	52 	191 	19 	44% 	.287 	32 	1.15 	3.02 	2.99 	2.90 	7.0 	2.2 	7.7 	0.7 	66.0 	8.1 	8.075o 	15 	6 	0 	30 	30 	197.3 	182 	52 	180 	19 	44% 	.292 	30 	1.18 	3.28 	3.19 	3.15 	7.2 	2.2 	7.6 	0.7 	56.9 	7.2 	7.160o 	13 	7 	0 	28 	28 	184.0 	178 	50 	164 	19 	44% 	.300 	28 	1.24 	3.68 	3.49 	3.52 	7.6 	2.4 	7.4 	0.7 	44.4 	5.8 	5.850o 	12 	7 	0 	28 	28 	177.0 	175 	50 	156 	18 	44% 	.304 	27 	1.27 	3.89 	3.65 	3.72 	7.7 	2.4 	7.3 	0.8 	38.4 	5.2 	5.240o 	12 	7 	0 	27 	27 	172.3 	173 	49 	150 	18 	44% 	.306 	26 	1.29 	4.04 	3.77 	3.86 	7.9 	2.5 	7.3 	0.8 	34.2 	4.7 	4.825o 	10 	8 	0 	26 	26 	160.0 	168 	48 	136 	18 	45% 	.313 	23 	1.34 	4.42 	4.06 	4.23 	8.2 	2.6 	7.1 	0.8 	24.4 	3.7 	3.810o 	7 	8 	0 	22 	22 	122.3 	145 	41 	97 	16 	45% 	.333 	15 	1.52 	5.65 	5.00 	5.38 	9.2 	2.9 	6.6 	1.0 	0.9 	1.0 	1.3Weighted Mean 	13 	7 	0 	29 	29 	183.3 	180 	51 	162 	19 	44% 	.302 	27 	1.26 	3.83 	3.60 	3.66 	7.7 	2.4 	7.4 	0.8 	38.7 	5.5 	5.5

His weighted mean ERA was a tick under 4.00. He just about nailed his 25% projection on rate stats, but around 90% in durability. He wasn't off the bottom of the chart, he wasn't miles off of where anyone expected him to be. He underperformed some... it happens. Maybe with a year in a 5-man, and a year in the US he'll bounce back.

Like I said, his ERA was heavily more weighed to the second half of the season. That can reveal that the league was catching up to HIM. You can't have it both ways, that he's having a tough time adjusting but the league takes him like any other pitcher. If baseball were played in a vaccuum, sure, but it's not.

For 2nd half splits, he had:

5.19 ERA, 8.25 k/9, 13 HR, 1.86 k/bb, 1.45 WHIP, 348 OBP against, 782 OPS

It's not unfair to say that the league might have caught up to him. I'm not saying that with any level of certainty at all though. Maybe next year he'll come back strong and adjusted. Maybe he'll never make the adjustment. Ichiro came over to a very new environment and flourished. Kaz Matsui is only just now showing a heartbeat in MLB. It's way too early to tell, and quite frankly, I wouldn't want to spend $103M at this point to find out. That's my point.

[Sports Guy]

Like I said, his ERA was heavily more weighed to the second half of the season. That can reveal that the league was catching up to HIM. You can't have it both ways, that he's having a tough time adjusting but the league takes him like any other pitcher. If baseball were played in a vaccuum, sure, but it's not.

For 2nd half splits, he had:

5.19 ERA, 8.25 k/9, 13 HR, 1.86 k/bb, 1.45 WHIP, 348 OBP against, 782 OPS

It's not unfair to say that the league might have caught up to him. I'm not saying that with any level of certainty at all though. Maybe next year he'll come back strong and adjusted. Maybe he'll never make the adjustment. Ichiro came over to a very new environment and flourished. Kaz Matsui is only just now showing a heartbeat in MLB. It's way too early to tell, and quite frankly, I wouldn't want to spend $103M at this point to find out. That's my point.

Or maybe throwing every 5 days instead of 6 started to catch up with him as the season went on.

Either way, his first season was only midly disappointing and he still has many years left on his contract.

[mefogus]

But good companies don't pick places just because of a general idea. Good companies target things very carefully, looking hard at the cost/benefit ratio based on projections about how much a possible emerging market is gonna matter, how long it's gonna take, and what the pay off is likely to be.

So clearly you've done this analysis, which is why you are so against the idea correct?

-m

[RShack]

So clearly you've done this analysis, which is why you are so against the idea correct?

-m

Huh? Of course I haven't. I'm not an MLB club. You don't need a detailed analysis to conclude that it's crazy to look everywhere. The last thing I want is for them to go from doing a lousy job in a few places to doing a lousy job everywhere.

What idea do you think I'm so against? I'm not saying they should look in the DR and no place else. But I am against the idea of them trying to scout everywhere. Some places matter more than others. What they should do is have AM be his methodical self, carefully pick a just a few places, and do those places right.

[Flip217]

May I offer a parallel?

I'm a salesman (no need to get into what I sell...) and have 11 accounts in my territory. 4 accounts make up about 60% of my revenue. Me, and all my competitors, spend the majority of our time at those accounts, because if we score there, we score big. But the other accounts have potential; some are growing rapidly and might someday supplant one of the Big 4. And those that aren't growing still provide a decent return on my investment of time and energy (and schmoozy dinners).

Sure, the O's need to have a presence in the places where there is an abundnace of talent. But you do so at the cost of competition (the Yanks and Sox will be there, too). The O's could put some resources in places that aren't seen as baseball hotbeds (yet), but they do so at the cost of smaller returns.

But I bet we could all agree that whatever their current approach is, it needs to be improved in one way or another.

[RShack]

May I offer a parallel?

I'm a salesman (no need to get into what I sell...) and have 11 accounts in my territory. 4 accounts make up about 60% of my revenue. Me, and all my competitors, spend the majority of our time at those accounts, because if we score there, we score big. But the other accounts have potential; some are growing rapidly and might someday supplant one of the Big 4. And those that aren't growing still provide a decent return on my investment of time and energy (and schmoozy dinners).

Sure, the O's need to have a presence in the places where there is an abundnace of talent. But you do so at the cost of competition (the Yanks and Sox will be there, too). The O's could put some resources in places that aren't seen as baseball hotbeds (yet), but they do so at the cost of smaller returns.

Good metaphor.

So, let's say that you just got hired as the director of the O's scouting operation, and you can bring in some guys to work for you. Let's say you've inherited those 4 "major accounts" (places where they grow lotsa good young ballplayers) and another couple minor accounts that don't matter much now, but are maybe worth paying some attention to because they may (or may not) pay off someday. Let's say AM is your boss. (OK so far?)

Let's further say that your predecessor made a mess of things with the 4 major accounts, so the major part of the business is way way down, and the company is suffering because of that. In addition your predecessor also completely ignored the couple of minor accounts. What is AM gonna tell you to do?

• Is he gonna tell you to increase your focus on the minor accounts that maybe will or won't "emerge"?
• Is he gonna tell you to *add* a whole slew of new minor accounts that may or may not amount to much?
• Or is he gonna tell you buckle down and pay attention to those big accounts where all the business is now, fix those accounts pronto, keep you eye on that ball for about 80 hours per week, no screwing around and no lame excuses, just fix 'em; and then, once that's accomplished, then get back to him about the issue of adding new minor accounts?

What do you think he's gonna say?