20 thoughts on “Track record for drafting pitching”

1. Nicely done!

   (didn’t Rick Helling make the MLB?)

   LikeLike

2. Using facts to make Bill Conlin look like an even bigger jackass. My day just got a lot better.

   Well done on compiling that list.

   LikeLike

3. Yeah, I missed Helling. Good catch. I’ll adjust.

   LikeLike

4. Interesting exercise. Thanks for doing the work. It seems to me though that your assessment as to who is(was) or isn’t(wasn’t) a serviceable major leaguer might be a bit too subjective, and thus maybe isn’t the most useful method of evaluation. There are arguments to be made on a lot of these guys, going in either direction. Guys like Bobby Jones, Rick Helling, and Joey Hamilton (I thought he did sign with the Padres) had several good years, but may not have ultimately been very solid major leaguers.

   This gets me wondering as to whether or not Baseball Prospectus or any of the similar statistical groups maintains some sort of comprehensive draft evaluation criteria, or database. One year of service time above replacement player value seems like a good base level statistic, though there would have to be a way of including those players who still remain prospects.

   LikeLike

5. If you want to get more indepth, go for it. I think I was generous on some of those guys (the ones I wrote reach) next to. The point of it being, in the first round, you’re supposed to be drafting elite pitchers. Most of the guys above never even achieved elite status. Something like this is going to be subjective, but I think the point remains.

   LikeLike

6. It really does go to show that it’s such a crapshoot and no team really dominates the draft, as in other sports.

   LikeLike

7. Oh, and on Joey Hamilton, Baseball-Reference says he signed in 1991 after the Padres took him, Baseballcube says that he didn’t sign, but it looks like they are wrong. Hamilton was a below league average pitcher in the bigs, so I don’t think he’d count anyway for San Diego “getting one right”

   LikeLike

8. So if Joey Hamilton doesn’t count, why should Adam Eaton or Gavin Floyd?

   LikeLike

9. Floyd doesn’t count. I bolded him, but only counted Eaton, Hamels and Myers. Tell ya what, I just added Hamilton. San Diego went from 9 to 18%. Conlin validated.

   I think some of you are missing the bigger point. You can nitpick one guy here, one guy there. Hell, I counted Chris Reitsma for Boston. The point is, drafting pitching anywhere, including the first round, is a crapshoot. I could go through this list and pick out 20 guys who’ve had major arm surgery without even looking. Hell, three of the guys on the Dodgers list have major arm trouble, and they were taken in the last four years (Elbert, Miller and Orenduff) and the Dodgers are always regarded as having one of the best systems. No one really even gets 50% of them right. However, the Phillies have only gambled 8 times, twice they’ve pulled out top of the rotation starters, and they also got major league time out of the other 6 guys. You can argue how good Eaton and Floyd are, how valuable Green and Gomes were, but a lot of teams have first rounders who never even got a cup of coffee in the bigs. Look at some of the guys the White Sox, Cubs and A’s have taken in the first round….guys you’ve never even heard of.

   LikeLike

10. please please please email that to conlin. I would love to hear his reaction.

    LikeLike

11. Someone else is more than welcome to pass it along, I’m not good at that sort of thing. The people who SHOULD read it are Bill’s editors.

    LikeLike

12. James, I do understand what you’re trying to get across. Conlin’s central argument — basically that the Phillies are somehow a unique organization, incapable of learning from past mistakes, wherein they alone continue to draft pitchers who either don’t make the hall of fame, or at some point during their career’s get hurt — is obviously flawed for more reasons than I care to go on about. As others have said below, most of what he puts out there is little more than bluster and bile, supported rarely by any substantial argument. He is both a lazy reporter, and a lazy writer, and on both counts should have been fired long ago. Yet he and Stephen A. Smith, as others like them, survive not because of their quality argumentation, or the quality of their reporting, but specifically because of their bluster; because ‘loud’ sells. I can understand people getting frustrated with Conlin, and his constant negativity, but really what’s the point of writing him angry emails, calling him fat, and egging him on? You have to take him with a grain of salt. To me, his career is more of a shame than anything else, because he’s obviously an intelligent individual, and a talented writer, but (sort of like Dennis Miller) he chooses to use his intelligence, creativity, and cultural position of influence not as a tool to enlighten other people, but to reinforce his own ego. Basically, in addition to his laziness, he’s pretty selfish, but mostly… he’s just really insecure.

    However, my point was not so much with Conlin’s article, but your response to it. I do take it generally as granted that “drafting pitching anywhere, including the first round [remains] a crapshoot”. For anyone at all familiar with the stresses put upon the human arm in its continual throwing of baseballs overhand at full exertion, or anyone the least bit objective (not hell-bent on ripping a singular ownership group) this is just common sense. You don’t really need a list of all the pitchers drafted in the first round to demonstrate it. But listing all those pitchers is interesting, to me at least, because it affords an opportunity to look at just how much of a crapshoot it is, and what teams may be a bit better than others at the craps table. You obviously put a lot of work into this, and the site in general, and certainly a lot more than Conlin puts into his paid gig. But I criticized your methodology because in it’s reliance upon your subjective gradation, it doesn’t really demonstrate anything that (to me at least) isn’t already obvious. Drafting strategies are different for every organization, and different for every round and every year within the same organization. For example, the Royals took high school right-handers high in the first round in consecutive years (Colt Griffin, then Zach Greinke) who represented entirely different risk/reward scenarios (even moreso in hindsight). I was only saying before, that what I think would be really useful, though I imagine it remains beyond you (or me, or probably anyone that either of us know) is an in-depth analysis that takes into account drafting position and quantifiable major league success over a substantial period of time organization by organization. I’ll try to follow up on this with an email to one of the stat sites.

    LikeLike

13. I got ya, it’s cool. Here’s the thing. I didn’t plan on this becoming a huge deal, but some people felt that I was just talking out of my backside, and Conlin was on the money. I was pretty sure he WASN’T right at all, that’s why I kept arguing, and that’s why I went digging today. I had no intention of actually making it a ranking type thing…and you’re right, all of that is subjective. I think you only need to look at the lists to get the point I was making. Conlin’s premise was that the Phillies were poor when it came to selecting pitchers. As you can see from the list, if the Phillies are poor, so are the rest of the teams.

    I know that Bryan Smith, I think that’s his name, did profiles on all the current scouting directors around draft time over at Baseball Prospectus. He’d probably be the guy you want to get in touch with.

    LikeLike

14. Conlin ignores how much the problem is in the system, with the CWS after the draft there was ample opportunity to draft a healthy pitcher and have him show up hurt. I don’t see how you can blame the scouts for this. It would make sense to move the draft a month later.

    LikeLike

15. Davis Aardsma, Nate Bump, Jason Grille all still in the league, all pitching middle reflief, what gauge are you using to monitor success. They are all in the majors, that’s an accomplishment in itself.
    But the fact I’m reaching shows how asinine the story from Conlin is. A better example to show how bad the Phillies Draft is to see where they picked in each draft and compare their pick what was available at that pick.

    1990 Mike Liebersmall next pick was Frank Thomas
    1991 Tyler Green two picks later Manny Ramirez
    1992 Chad McConnell(who) Ron Villone next pick
    1993 Wayne Gomes why draft Chris Carpenter
    1994 Carlton Loewer two picks later Scott Elarton
    1995 Reggie Taylor just 3 picks later Roy Halladay
    1996 Adam Eaton was best possible pick!
    1997 JD Drew, Phillies blew it! Jon Garland, Vernon Wells, Troy Glaus, Lance Berkmann all drafted afted the bust Drew!
    1998 Pat Burrell or Mark Mulder, C.C Sabathia or Brad Lidge
    1999 Brett Myers best available pick!
    2000 Chase Utley Best 2nd basemen in baseball!
    2001 Gavin “deer eyed” Floyd next pick Mark Texiera, pitcher Jeremy Bonderman
    2002 Cole Hamels Great Pick! Took the chance and paid off!
    2003 No Pick Tim Moss 3rd round
    2004 Greg Golson two picks later Phenom Philip Hughes
    2005 No Pick Costanza 2nd round

    Now judge!

    2002

    LikeLike

16. I agree with a lot of bp’s post, but would note that just because a point is already obvious to him doesn’t mean it’s already obvious to the rest of the world.

    Conlin is a decent-enough stylist as sportswriters go, but he doesn’t have much substantive knowledge about the topics he covers. And as for his personality, “insecure” is a good way to describe it. In a lot of ways, he’s someone to be pitied more than hated. It’s tough not to respond angrily to an intentionally offensive person, but I guess that really is the best approach.

    LikeLike

17. PhuturePhillies, I think a better research topic would be to see how many teams drafted 20 game winners as far back as when the draft began. I know the Phillies have none. I wonder if any other team is this fruitless at pitching.

    LikeLike

18. Walt — what would be the point of such an exercise. This seems classic Phillies fan woe is me approach. We’ve got 10,000 losses. Horrors! There might be merit going back to the start of the Giles era. More reasonably, comparisons within the timespan of the Arbuckle era seem to make the most sense. That is the crew we are evaluating. When the draft began, 20-game winners were also much more common than today. Judging your draft by counting 20 game winners seems like a very poor metric. WInning 20 games depends on more than a pitcher’s ability — things like quality of the team’s pen, offense, and glovework.

    No pitcher won 20 wins last season. In 2005 four pitchers did. That includes young pitchers like Willis and Carpenter who are not guys you would want on your staff today.

    LikeLike

19. Allentown, the point would be maybe they should look at another way of drafting pitchers. Afterall, the Phils still use the same methods since the draft’s beginning, nary a change. No matter what time period you start looking at, it’s still the same results, no matter who’s in charge of drafting.

    LikeLike

20. I’m not at all sure what you mean by ‘the Phillies use the same methods since the draft’s beginning’. I think we have had a significant swing from college to HS pitching with the primo picks, Savery being an exception, and are not quite as in love with height as an absolute virtue. We also have been a lot more willing, I think spurred by our bonus constraints and draft position, to consider guys with an obvious red flag as we have done with Hamels, Drabek, and to an extent Savery. So not at all sure why you think nothing has changed.

    LikeLike

Comments are closed.