The Official 2011 MLB Draft Thread (June 6-8)

[hyper316]

which position is bluejays weakest in depth and prospect? 2B?

yeah, definitely 2nd base. After Lawrie got moved to 3rd, i don't think there's a single legit 2nd base prospect in the system, not even in the low minors.

thanks, in that case, who are the top 2B prospects in the draft?

[Schad]

thanks, in that case, who are the top 2B prospects in the draft?

Never, ever draft for need...for one thing, as there's a 3-4 year gap between the draft and the time these guys come up, you have no idea what you'll need by the time they're ready. Furthermore, the failure rate of prospects is such that you have to simply find the guy who you think will be the best, close your eyes, and pick 'em.

[WpgPage]

While I agree never draft for need in the MLB Kolten Wong (2B) one of my favorites is ranked around 40-50 on most charts while I definitely wouldn't reach for him at 35 with our pick in the 40's we could get one of the BPA and fill an organizational need.

[Schad]

While I agree never draft for need in the MLB Kolten Wong (2B) one of my favorites is ranked around 40-50 on most charts while I definitely wouldn't reach for him at 35 with our pick in the 40's we could get one of the BPA and fill an organizational need.

I doubt he lasts that long, though. This draft is thin in terms of middle infielders and 'safe' guys (while boasting a tonne of high-upside pitchers and OFs), so I'd expect someone needing a 2B to pop him before 46.

[flatjacket1]

First lets establish actual fact. Who pans out more? HS or College players?

In what given sample? What constitutes 'panning out'; are we looking at a straight up/down metric in outcomes, or weighting by production (using WAR, perhaps)? If so, are we looking at a player's career total, or perhaps only their team-controlled years? Set some parameters here.

You're throwing out selection bias and having faith in the numbers, but you're taking a pretty blasé approach for someone so concerned with the inviolability of the data here.

Data doesn't take sides, a higher percentage of college prospects end up making the majors.

College-trained players are about 50% more likely to make the majors than high school players at equivalent draft positions.

- Source: Baseball Between the Numbers: Why Everything You Know About the Game Is Wrong By Baseball Prospectus Team of Experts, Jonah Keri (Page 237)
[http://books.google.ca/books?id=VsmnfVUKJskC&pg=PA237&lpg=PA237&dq=percentage+of+highschoolers+who+make+majors&source=bl&ots=t6ZK6kyfX6&sig=0UTAsydi5SjEHNKeWysOemON4Rw&hl=en&ei=kTa2TZCpBIOltweu9rSUAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false]

The numbers seem to suggest that it is more worthwhile to draft college players, so I would hope the Blue Jays take college players.

[Schad]

Data doesn't take sides, a higher percentage of college prospects end up making the majors.

You're great at spouting aphorisms; you're bad at understanding why I asked what I did.

College-trained players are about 50% more likely to make the majors than high school players at equivalent draft positions.

The numbers seem to suggest that it is more worthwhile to draft college players, so I would hope the Blue Jays take college players.

Here's the thing...I'm familiar with Rany Jazayerli; you apparently are not. Had you read all the way to the next page, you would have seen this. Discussing hitters:

[...]From 1992 to 1999, however, the edge enjoyed by college talents slowly degrades until the two groups are almost equal, with the college set retaining a narrow and perhaps statistically questionable advantage

And pitchers:

[...]But the gap between success rates for high school and college pitcher draftees is much smaller than it once was. No longer is it a grave error -- going strictly by the percentages -- to draft a high-school hurler in the first round.

Oh, and then there's this, of course...Rany Jazayerli on the "Moneyball Effect" in drafting, in which he concludes that the trend toward drafting college players had rendered high schoolers more valuable than their four-year counterparts, possibly by as must as 40%.

Which brings us back to my initial question about parameters. Drafting in baseball tends to be prone to trends and fads, each of which create market inefficiencies. Moneyball was about this very same thing. At one time, college players were grossly undervalued; a few years later, high school players were. Sometimes it's bats, sometimes it's arms. The issue we encounter is that the effects of these trends can only be clearly discerned a few years out...we don't know precisely what is happening until that generation of players has reached the big leagues. And thus why it's important to define a time frame: if you're talking about all prospects ever, you're glossing over so many changes in the prioritization of players that you don't know a **** thing.

[flatjacket1]

you don't know a **** thing.

[-MetA4-]

The numbers seem to suggest that it is more worthwhile to draft college players, so I would hope the Blue Jays take college players.

Then explain to me why the teams that consistently boast the best farm systems and produce the most impact talent are the ones that value straight talent and spend the money required to sign said draftees with the most talent?

Your premise is absolutely ridiculous and would be laughed at by any baseball person. Yeah; let me effectively remove half of the talent available to me, so I can limit myself and put myself in constant situations where I'm passing up more talented players in favor of lesser players? Genius strategy: dont draft the best player, draft lesser players!

[Schad]

you don't know a **** thing.

So I guess that you're not going to address the fact that the very source you cite later concluded that, by 2007, the exact opposite of what you are suggesting is true?

[-MetA4-]

The San Diego Padres spent years in which they drafted almost nothing but college players.....yeah; that front office regime isn't employed anymore.

[flatjacket1]

you don't know a **** thing.

So I guess that you're not going to address the fact that the very source you cite later concluded that, by 2007, the exact opposite of what you are suggesting is true?

No, I'm suggesting your too immature to handle a basic debate and will not respond to you.

[Schad]

No, I'm suggesting your too immature to handle a basic debate and will not respond to you.

Heh, one of my favourite rejoinders...when proven wrong, simply assert your total intellectual and moral superiority and walk away.

[-MetA4-]

Heh, one of my favourite rejoinders...when proven wrong, simply assert your total intellectual and moral superiority and walk away.

But Ricky Romero over Maybin proves it! Never draft high-schoolers!

[flatjacket1]

The San Diego Padres spent years in which they drafted almost nothing but college players.....yeah; that front office regime isn't employed anymore.

The highest drafting of HS rate goes to the Angels.

[Hoopstarr]

The San Diego Padres spent years in which they drafted almost nothing but college players.....yeah; that front office regime isn't employed anymore.

Yea, and the Mets under the past regime took that to an extreme.

[flatjacket1]

No, I'm suggesting your too immature to handle a basic debate and will not respond to you.

Heh, one of my favourite rejoinders...when proven wrong, simply assert your total intellectual and moral superiority and walk away.

No, I still stand by my point. There have been multiple studies and you only look at data from your side of the story. All you do is call names and show "Narrowing" rates which essentially means I win but by not as much. I tried my best to show you the numbers buy you won't budge. You must be mainly a member of the Raptors forum if you are that disrespectful.

Heh, one of my favourite rejoinders...when proven wrong, simply assert your total intellectual and moral superiority and walk away.

But Ricky Romero over Maybin proves it! Never draft high-schoolers!

If we wanted to draft a highschooler Maybin was the best available at the time. That isolated incident doesn't prove much.

[Avenger]

Why do you keep trashing high schoolers because of Maybin(who's not a complete bust yet) and what makes you think that he was the best high schooler available.D o you realize who was drafted with the next two picks? Two prep outfielders, one of which is already a 5 tool superstar outfielder and the other could become a two way perennial all star(if he's not already there).

The only thing you've proven the Maybin argument is to draft the right players regardless of where you're drafting them from, college or high school.

[flatjacket1]

Why do you keep trashing high schoolers because of Maybin(who's not a complete bust yet), do you realize who was drafted with the next two picks? Two prep outfielders, one of which is already a 5 tool superstar outfielder and the other could become a two way perennial all star(if he's not already there).

I'm not trashing them, I'm just saying College players are a higher percentage decision. No, not only the 4 year class but college players. There may be a situation where drafting a HS player makes more sense, but if we are talking about two guys that could go at the same pick why not take the college player?

Maybin still has a whole career ahead of him and I expect it to be good, but Romero's better.

[Schad]

The San Diego Padres spent years in which they drafted almost nothing but college players.....yeah; that front office regime isn't employed anymore.

The highest drafting of HS rate goes to the Angels.

And from their drafting of high schoolers they have gotten:

Jeff Mathis, Mark Trumbo, Howie Kendrick, Hank Conger, Peter Bourjos, Tyler Chatwood, Jordan Walden and many others...including Mike Trout, the best prospect in baseball.

No, I still stand by my point. There have been multiple studies and you only look at data from your side of the story.

I thought that data didn't take sides?

All you do is call names and show "Narrowing" rates which essentially means I win but by not as much.

Unless you follow the link I posted, where Rany states that by 2007 high schoolers were being undervalued such that they could be producing up to 40% more than college players taken at the same slot. It true that 15+ years ago, there was a massive disparity between college and high school draftees. It's also true that there isn't such a gap now.

I tried my best to show you the numbers buy you won't budge. You must be mainly a member of the Raptors forum if you are that disrespectful.

Countering an argument isn't disrespectful.

[Avenger]

Again, why do you keep comparing Maybin to Romero? Why not Bruce to Romero? or McCutchen to Romero? or Colby Rasmus to Romero? All three of them are prep outfielders drafted after Romero, your philosophy involves completely ignoring those guys.