4F485E56584F08047D5A505C5451135E52503D0 wrote: I don't think any percentage is a crap shot. MLB spends a ton of money and time evaluating measurables. There is nothing like that (to my knowledge) in craps.
And while few players from the draft ever end up in MLB, they all can play. The draft is not a game like craps where you either have a player or you don't. The draft is set up to find the very best players. One player may wind up with a hole in his swing, but it doesn't mean he wasn't "right there". Maybe a different organization could have solved the problem.
The draft has all kinds of factors that a pure game of chance has nothing in common with.
It sounds like the disagreement is over the definition of "crap shoot" than anything else. If it were as strict as you are saying, you would never hear the phrase "crap shoot" unless we were talking about a literal crap shoot. It would have never come into common usage.
If we're discussing whether there's a more random factor in BB draft than other sports, the answer is yes and I am not sure how anyone could say otherwise. Not totally random, and scouting and team development is super important, but not a certain thing either just due to the nature of it.
People in the business knew future stars like Sidney Crosby or Gretzky or Lebron are going to be special when they're 12 years old (you could say Bryce Harper is a case of this for baseball but they are more rare). Of course sometimes a guy will fail anyhow in any sport. Mike Trout was considered the 25th best prospect the year he was drafted, apparently; and I doubt that's because 24 teams have moron GMs. I mean scouts give their grades based on a range because it can't be certain. I knew we all know this but I think people are going off course with the nature of the original question. It's just a phrase.
That is a fair assessment. The question about the Pirates becomes one of talent evaluation or talent development? There seems to be something lacking as we aren't hitting on enough high end talent.
If we we're talking about an element of absolutely uncertainty then you're right. But my point is to rebuke the idea that uncertainty in the draft is Random chance. I think a lot of people think a lot of this is just random. That I don't agree with.
Unlike other sports, MLB has what, 30 or 40 rounds? That means the teams are not even drafting for MLB for the most part. Baseball is unique with the farm system , each level needing 25 guys.
Then, as Notes points out, each organization will have different development results. I'm also beginning to think the main problem is the Pirates development. Let's face it, players come through the Cardinals system a lot more often then Pittsburgh. I'd say they know how to evaluate and develop much better. That removes the crap shot element in my mind.
The only true crap shot, it seems to me, is an injury. But yes, it is a true that the odds are any one person drafted probably won't make the majors.
I think it has too be development. As VA pointed out just take a look at an organization like the Cardinals. They seem to be able to fill holes consistently via their farm system. Another aspect is something discussed here often. This team at the MLB level always seems to have fundamental issues! Base running is always an issue. We have players throwing the ball too the wrong base consistently, pitchers struggling to put down bunts, etc. Player development seems lacking too me.
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
Teams still can't polish turds. They have to see something in the players they are drafting.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
-
rucker59@gmail.com
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
616A626E6B6A713432457C646D6A6A2B666A050 wrote: Teams still can't polish turds. They have to see something in the players they are drafting.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
48495243551512260 wrote: I don't think any percentage is a crap shot. MLB spends a ton of money and time evaluating measurables. There is nothing like that (to my knowledge) in craps.
And while few players from the draft ever end up in MLB, they all can play. The draft is not a game like craps where you either have a player or you don't. The draft is set up to find the very best players. One player may wind up with a hole in his swing, but it doesn't mean he wasn't "right there". Maybe a different organization could have solved the problem.
The draft has all kinds of factors that a pure game of chance has nothing in common with.
It sounds like the disagreement is over the definition of "crap shoot" than anything else. If it were as strict as you are saying, you would never hear the phrase "crap shoot" unless we were talking about a literal crap shoot. It would have never come into common usage.
If we're discussing whether there's a more random factor in BB draft than other sports, the answer is yes and I am not sure how anyone could say otherwise. Not totally random, and scouting and team development is super important, but not a certain thing either just due to the nature of it.
People in the business knew future stars like Sidney Crosby or Gretzky or Lebron are going to be special when they're 12 years old (you could say Bryce Harper is a case of this for baseball but they are more rare). Of course sometimes a guy will fail anyhow in any sport. Mike Trout was considered the 25th best prospect the year he was drafted, apparently; and I doubt that's because 24 teams have moron GMs. I mean scouts give their grades based on a range because it can't be certain. I knew we all know this but I think people are going off course with the nature of the original question. It's just a phrase.
That is a fair assessment. The question about the Pirates becomes one of talent evaluation or talent development? There seems to be something lacking as we aren't hitting on enough high end talent.
If we we're talking about an element of absolutely uncertainty then you're right. But my point is to rebuke the idea that uncertainty in the draft is Random chance. I think a lot of people think a lot of this is just random. That I don't agree with.
Unlike other sports, MLB has what, 30 or 40 rounds? That means the teams are not even drafting for MLB for the most part. Baseball is unique with the farm system , each level needing 25 guys.
Then, as Notes points out, each organization will have different development results. I'm also beginning to think the main problem is the Pirates development. Let's face it, players come through the Cardinals system a lot more often then Pittsburgh. I'd say they know how to evaluate and develop much better. That removes the crap shot element in my mind.
The only true crap shot, it seems to me, is an injury. But yes, it is a true that the odds are any one person drafted probably won't make the majors.
I think it has too be development. As VA pointed out just take a look at an organization like the Cardinals. They seem to be able to fill holes consistently via their farm system. Another aspect is something discussed here often. This team at the MLB level always seems to have fundamental issues! Base running is always an issue. We have players throwing the ball too the wrong base consistently, pitchers struggling to put down bunts, etc. Player development seems lacking too me.
Yeah, really good point.
How can a baseball player come up through a system and still not know where to throw the ball? How can a player get to AAAA before a hole in the swing is "suddenly" a concern (I realize the pitching increases at each level, but there are no ways to evaluate a kid's approach?).
Take Polanco. A lot of people say his swing is too long. Well, it didn't become too long all of a sudden. Surely there are ways to identify this even in the initial scouting.
So why is it, that Polanco gets to the majors before anyone suddenly "discovers" his long swing? How come no one talked about his defense that resembles a Bugs Bunny cartoon before he got to Pittsburgh?
Was Polanco always a crap shoot, or did the Pirates fail to start correcting his fundamentals? I don't know. What I do know, is the draft and prospects look a whole lot more like a crap shoot with the Pirates than other organizations.
(if the Pirates had the Cubs system four years ago, would the Pirates have won the WS)?
This combination of evaluation and development makes for a VERY difficult job. But the fact some teams can do it better than other teams, by a wide margin and consistantly in some cases, makes baseball beautiful, and very hard. But not a crap shoot in MHO.
A team like the Pirates - no way to really make up for poor drafts. So they better draft really well. In fact, the Pirates draft very poorly as has been discussed. That circles back to a pretty big Q: "how did Neal get a four year extension?"
And while few players from the draft ever end up in MLB, they all can play. The draft is not a game like craps where you either have a player or you don't. The draft is set up to find the very best players. One player may wind up with a hole in his swing, but it doesn't mean he wasn't "right there". Maybe a different organization could have solved the problem.
The draft has all kinds of factors that a pure game of chance has nothing in common with.
It sounds like the disagreement is over the definition of "crap shoot" than anything else. If it were as strict as you are saying, you would never hear the phrase "crap shoot" unless we were talking about a literal crap shoot. It would have never come into common usage.
If we're discussing whether there's a more random factor in BB draft than other sports, the answer is yes and I am not sure how anyone could say otherwise. Not totally random, and scouting and team development is super important, but not a certain thing either just due to the nature of it.
People in the business knew future stars like Sidney Crosby or Gretzky or Lebron are going to be special when they're 12 years old (you could say Bryce Harper is a case of this for baseball but they are more rare). Of course sometimes a guy will fail anyhow in any sport. Mike Trout was considered the 25th best prospect the year he was drafted, apparently; and I doubt that's because 24 teams have moron GMs. I mean scouts give their grades based on a range because it can't be certain. I knew we all know this but I think people are going off course with the nature of the original question. It's just a phrase.
That is a fair assessment. The question about the Pirates becomes one of talent evaluation or talent development? There seems to be something lacking as we aren't hitting on enough high end talent.
If we we're talking about an element of absolutely uncertainty then you're right. But my point is to rebuke the idea that uncertainty in the draft is Random chance. I think a lot of people think a lot of this is just random. That I don't agree with.
Unlike other sports, MLB has what, 30 or 40 rounds? That means the teams are not even drafting for MLB for the most part. Baseball is unique with the farm system , each level needing 25 guys.
Then, as Notes points out, each organization will have different development results. I'm also beginning to think the main problem is the Pirates development. Let's face it, players come through the Cardinals system a lot more often then Pittsburgh. I'd say they know how to evaluate and develop much better. That removes the crap shot element in my mind.
The only true crap shot, it seems to me, is an injury. But yes, it is a true that the odds are any one person drafted probably won't make the majors.
I think it has too be development. As VA pointed out just take a look at an organization like the Cardinals. They seem to be able to fill holes consistently via their farm system. Another aspect is something discussed here often. This team at the MLB level always seems to have fundamental issues! Base running is always an issue. We have players throwing the ball too the wrong base consistently, pitchers struggling to put down bunts, etc. Player development seems lacking too me.
Yeah, really good point.
How can a baseball player come up through a system and still not know where to throw the ball? How can a player get to AAAA before a hole in the swing is "suddenly" a concern (I realize the pitching increases at each level, but there are no ways to evaluate a kid's approach?).
Take Polanco. A lot of people say his swing is too long. Well, it didn't become too long all of a sudden. Surely there are ways to identify this even in the initial scouting.
So why is it, that Polanco gets to the majors before anyone suddenly "discovers" his long swing? How come no one talked about his defense that resembles a Bugs Bunny cartoon before he got to Pittsburgh?
Was Polanco always a crap shoot, or did the Pirates fail to start correcting his fundamentals? I don't know. What I do know, is the draft and prospects look a whole lot more like a crap shoot with the Pirates than other organizations.
(if the Pirates had the Cubs system four years ago, would the Pirates have won the WS)?
This combination of evaluation and development makes for a VERY difficult job. But the fact some teams can do it better than other teams, by a wide margin and consistantly in some cases, makes baseball beautiful, and very hard. But not a crap shoot in MHO.
A team like the Pirates - no way to really make up for poor drafts. So they better draft really well. In fact, the Pirates draft very poorly as has been discussed. That circles back to a pretty big Q: "how did Neal get a four year extension?"
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
696E78707E692E225B7C767A7277357874761B0 wrote: Teams still can't polish turds. They have to see something in the players they are drafting.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
60525E5E4A785B525F5A5552330 wrote: Teams still can't polish turds. They have to see something in the players they are drafting.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
I think the HS draft makes my point even more clear - if you're just looking for the best "chance" for a return, I'd pick the college kid every time: college kids have proven they can play at a higher level than a HS kid has proven. If I have the choice between rolling a 7 or a 4, I'm picking the 7 every time.
But teams pick the HS school kids as much as the college kids. Teams must believe their analysis can make up for lack of having advanced one additional round.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
I think the HS draft makes my point even more clear - if you're just looking for the best "chance" for a return, I'd pick the college kid every time: college kids have proven they can play at a higher level than a HS kid has proven. If I have the choice between rolling a 7 or a 4, I'm picking the 7 every time.
But teams pick the HS school kids as much as the college kids. Teams must believe their analysis can make up for lack of having advanced one additional round.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
3532242C2235727E07202A262E2B6924282A470 wrote: Teams still can't polish turds. They have to see something in the players they are drafting.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
I think the HS draft makes my point even more clear - if you're just looking for the best "chance" for a return, I'd pick the college kid every time: college kids have proven they can play at a higher level than a HS kid has proven. If I have the choice between rolling a 7 or a 4, I'm picking the 7 every time.
But teams pick the HS school kids as much as the college kids. Teams must believe their analysis can make up for lack of having advanced one additional round.
Thus making the draft more of a, dare I say it . . .
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
I think the HS draft makes my point even more clear - if you're just looking for the best "chance" for a return, I'd pick the college kid every time: college kids have proven they can play at a higher level than a HS kid has proven. If I have the choice between rolling a 7 or a 4, I'm picking the 7 every time.
But teams pick the HS school kids as much as the college kids. Teams must believe their analysis can make up for lack of having advanced one additional round.
Thus making the draft more of a, dare I say it . . .
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
4740565E5047000C755258545C591B565A58350 wrote: Teams still can't polish turds. They have to see something in the players they are drafting.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
I think the HS draft makes my point even more clear - if you're just looking for the best "chance" for a return, I'd pick the college kid every time: college kids have proven they can play at a higher level than a HS kid has proven. If I have the choice between rolling a 7 or a 4, I'm picking the 7 every time.
But teams pick the HS school kids as much as the college kids. Teams must believe their analysis can make up for lack of having advanced one additional round.
I agree about the high schools kids, especially picking HS pitchers. I know it is a way to get high end talent into the system but it is such a long process.
I think that is where the "crap shoot" comes in. Drafting a high school kid who dominated against lesser talent might be the best in his area, but they need to find out if he can compete with the big boys. Most of those guys don't pan out.
I am sure we all grew up with some fine ball players. How many of those guys got drafted, went Division 1?
But that's no different then football or hockey (I would think basketball is the easiest to project). Football, even if playing in Div I power 5 conference - there is an unbelievable difference in the physical game at the NFL level, how do those drafts hit so regularly? Well, I question whether they really do hit more often.
The NFL draft has something like 7 rounds. Maybe 3 or so players will make the roster. Is that any different from MLB other than having 40 rounds? In the end, on average, each draft produces something like 3 or so major league players, I think. MLB does not expect anything different; no team is expecting 10 prospects to show up in the Big Leagues. They are drafting all those player to fill a system that doesn't exist in any other sport.
I don't know what the percentage of 1st rounders making it to MLB is, but I bet the vast majority do (and the number is skewed single-handedly by the Pirates and some of their off the wall 1st round selections).
Here's another way of looking at it: if baseball only had 7 rounds, I bet the percentage of players making it to the big leagues would be pretty much in line with the NFL - it would have to. Would that mean the draft suddenly because less of a "crap shot"? No, it would mean the teams would draft differently, develop differently and still field 40 man rosters and there would be 25 men in the dugout. Maybe level of talent would be different at the MLB level (diminished), but suddenly the MLB draft would look as predictable as the NFL draft.
If MLB only had seven rounds they probably also wouldn't be picking high schoolers. But it doesn't, and they do.
I think the HS draft makes my point even more clear - if you're just looking for the best "chance" for a return, I'd pick the college kid every time: college kids have proven they can play at a higher level than a HS kid has proven. If I have the choice between rolling a 7 or a 4, I'm picking the 7 every time.
But teams pick the HS school kids as much as the college kids. Teams must believe their analysis can make up for lack of having advanced one additional round.
I agree about the high schools kids, especially picking HS pitchers. I know it is a way to get high end talent into the system but it is such a long process.
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
draft picks have value. The draft is supposed to help level the playing field for teams in signing amateur players in the US and Puerto Rico.
The first pick in the first round has more value than the 20th pick (heck it has more value than the second pick in the first round). Just because signing amateur players is an inexact science doesn't mean it is the same as gambling.
The history of the draft shows more early round picks have successful careers than those taken in later rounds.
The first pick in the first round has more value than the 20th pick (heck it has more value than the second pick in the first round). Just because signing amateur players is an inexact science doesn't mean it is the same as gambling.
The history of the draft shows more early round picks have successful careers than those taken in later rounds.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Poll: Do you think the MLB draft is a crap shoot?
416766716777040 wrote: draft picks have value. The draft is supposed to help level the playing field for teams in signing amateur players in the US and Puerto Rico.
The first pick in the first round has more value than the 20th pick (heck it has more value than the second pick in the first round). Just because signing amateur players is an inexact science doesn't mean it is the same as gambling.
The history of the draft shows more early round picks have successful careers than those taken in later rounds.
Absolutely.
But it is not as exact results as other sports.
The first pick in the first round has more value than the 20th pick (heck it has more value than the second pick in the first round). Just because signing amateur players is an inexact science doesn't mean it is the same as gambling.
The history of the draft shows more early round picks have successful careers than those taken in later rounds.
Absolutely.
But it is not as exact results as other sports.