Is the Draft really a Crapshoot?
Conventional wisdom has said for years that the MLB draft is essentially a crapshoot. There are too many variables, and scouting is so inexact, that there is no way that any one team can be consistently successful.
Also, as a lifelong A’s fan, I’ve always thought there were a lot of former A’s farmhands playing for other teams, and I’ve thought that meant that Billy Beane really is better at drafting than others.
So, with all that in mind, and the fact that my company “displaced” me (read that as laid me off) last week, I spent some of my free time living off my my severance package looking through the draft records, etc. to try and de-mistify the draft process.
I used the USA Today roster of 2008 salaries, and then used The Baseball Cube (baseballcube.com) and compiled a list of who was drafted by which team and also what round they were drafted.
So, is it really true that the draft is a crapshoot, or are some of the team professional gamblers while others haven’t even purchased their copy of Craps For Dummies?
Here is some of the information I came up with.
Of the 854 players listed on the USA Today roster of salaries, I looked at how many players were either drafted by a team, or signed as a free agent (either undrafted or foreign free agents). If it were evenly spread out, and essentially random each team would end up with 28-29 players.
There are obvious things that will skew the numbers…compensation picks, the ability to sign as many/as few free agents as your budget allows, etc. But in general, it does seem that some teams are more successful at drafting than others. It would be interesting to compare scouting budgets to these numbers, but I couldn’t find them.
Here is how it breaks down…
36 players - Arizona
33 players – Atlanta
20 players - Baltimore
27 players - Boston
33 players – Chicago Cubs
25 players – Chicago White Sox
18 players - Cincinnati
30 players - Cleveland
32 players - Colorado
32 players – Detroit
27 players - Florida
28 players - Houston
27 players – Kansas City
30 players – LA Angels
41 players – LA Dodgers
19 players - Milwaukee
28 players - Minnesota
29 players – New York Mets
30 players – New York Yankees
36 players – Oakland
27 players – Philadelphia
32 players – Pittsburgh
29 players – San Francisco
13 players – San Diego
37 players - Seattle
22 players – St. Louis
26 players – Tampa Bay
26 players - Texas
35 players - Toronto
26 players – Washington/Montreal
In looking at the breakdown, it would appear that the Dodgers, Seattle, Oakland, Arizona, and Toronto must be on to something, while San Diego, Cincinnati, and Milwaukee, and Baltimore are just ON something.
The Dodgers, Yankees, and Tigers seem to have been the most successful (and maybe most active) at signing Free Agents, with most of them being foreign drafts.
While I was at it, I also looked at where in the draft the players were picked to see if it really matters when you get drafted. Here’s the breakdown on that information:
222 (26%) - Free Agent (both undrafted and foreign)
181 (21%) – 1st Round draft picks
78 (9%) – 2nd Round draft picks
104 (12%) - 3rd -5th Round picks
121 (14%) – 6th-10th Round picks
70 (8%) - 11th-20th Round picks
44 (5%) – 21st-30th Round picks
34 (4%) – 31st Round and above
Here are a few late round successes – Rajai Davis (Pit 38), Orlando Hudson (Tor 43), Julio Lugo (Hou 43), Mark Buehrle (CWS 38), Todd Coffey (Cin 41), Kenny Rogers (Det 39), Vance Wilson (NYM 49), Brad Ausmus (NYY 48), Scot Shields (Ana/LAA 38), Justin Speier (CUB 55), David Riske (Cle 56), Gabe Kapler (Det 57), Kyle Farnsworth (CUB 47), Jason Isringhausen (NYM 44), Jason Botts (Tex 46), and Rob Mackowiak (Pit 53)
I’ve also looked at other things, but this is already so long, I’m sure most people skipped the diary. But, if Billy Beane happens to be reading this far into it, I am available to do projects like this for you on the side…especially since I’m temporarily unemployed.
Hope this is interesting and/or useful for people. If people want me to break down the info in some special way…just ask, and I will check to see if I can answer it.
10 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think what it points up, more than anything
is the importance of not being cheap when you’re drafting.
San Diego and Cincinnati are two of the most notoriously tightfisted organizations in MLB when it comes to amateur signing bonuses and willingness to draft players with high demands. And it shows. Where would Cincinnati be if they hadn’t torpedoed about 4 draft classes in a row from 2000 onward?
The amateur draft is a ridiculously team-friendly item. I mean, RIDICULOUSLY team-friendly. Teams could double the bonuses they pay to every single draftee and still come out of it with a profit. It’s basically a giant cash giveaway that every team in baseball gets to participate in. Given that, why would anyone ever choose not to?
There is no excuse for not taking the best player (for your organization) at a given draft slot. None. Zero. Good players are far, far more profitable than average players. So what if Rick Porcello costs five times as much to sign, when his average return is 10 times as great?
I predict that the slotting system is going to completely collapse this year, with as many as half of MLB teams ignoring it completely. The A’s can be one of them, or they can lose out on an incredibly cheap way to improve the team.
Unrelated: this also shows that drafting and winning aren’t necessarily connected. San Diego’s farm is objectively far worse than Seattle’s, and SD has a lower payroll. Yet Seattle has been much less successful. You have to know what to do with guys once you draft ‘em, too.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 1, 2008 3:37 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
You really think so?
I’d like to think teams are smart enough to realize that they should take the best player, but just last season Porcello dropped all the way to the bottom of the first round. Have teams really wised up in the past 12 months? You would think it’s obvious, but unfortunately, I’m guessing we’ll still see a coupe guys slip passed where they should be based on signability.
However, this draft doesn’t really have a “top 5” guy that will be a hard sign, does it?
If Hosmer falls to the A’s (doubtful), do you (or anyone else) think the A’s would take him? As much as I fancy the A’s one of the “smart” teams, I’m not sure they would.
The situation last year,
where some teams just totally ignored the slotting restrictions and virtually every high pick went down to the final hours before the deadline before signing, rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.
And several teams are under new management. The Pirates’ new GM has all but said “we’re going over slot, unlike the last regime.” Other teams have not been so explicit about it, but you can put two and two together here.
I hope that the A’s are one of those teams. I fear that they won’t be, because they have seemed to have an inexplicable blind spot in this area in the past. At least the “we don’t have the money” excuse is clearly no longer operable. And they’ve dropped a few hints too. But not enough to make me convinced they’ll go either way.
FWIW, the real key isn’t getting a #8 pick at #12, it’s getting a #20 pick at #500. Cf Lars Anderson. Boston’s farm system depth is almost completely the result of them getting, effectively, about 5 first round picks a year for the last 3 seasons.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
i hope someone asks beane about this
either at AN day if he’s there again, or blez the next time he interviews him.
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05
Sorry to hear about your work situation Blez
Any chance you’ll come back to Norcal?
I lost my job a little over a year ago and it has been mostly a blessing. I didn’t like the work I was doing anyway and I’ve had a chance to reassess and come with a fresh approach. Granted, I don’t have kids (just two dogs) but I have found a way to survive and I’m sure you will too.
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagines such events unfolding!" Bill King
ha - I just looked at the avatar and assumed
Blez, you should really consider moving back to Nor-Cal.
ImissHendu, well, you know
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagines such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jun 1, 2008 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry to hear about the job
I wrote an article a while back that might help you refine your data.
http://www.athleticsnation.com/2008/2/9/62530/66303
Of all the players taken after the 10th round, how many were draft-&-follows that signed for well above slot money?
The monster at the end of this blog.
The effect of the draft
The effect for the A’s of late is that we haven’t drafted extraordinarily well, forcing us to trade established players for other teams’ top prospects. Now, Beane does have a particular skill for this, and can identify top players that others have (like Carlos Gonzalez, Barton, etc.), but the question becomes: why aren’t we getting these guys in the draft when we have the chance? Granted, trading Haren for the haul we got is pretty good, but if we had drafted better in the first place, we theoretically could have Haren AND a bounty of prospects.
The A's have drafted better than average
But even drafting better than average isn’t enough to keep up with the talent drain when you have no early picks and can’t go over-slot to compensate.
Getting one of “those guys” a year is good, but if you’re losing two of them to free agency… I mean, you do the math.
Gonzalez, incidentally, was an international free agent, not a draftee.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by 
























