Why I Don’t Trust Rookie-League Numbers
Tue, Dec 4, 2007
by Geoff Young
I spent most of Monday piecing together the minor-league chapter for the Ducksnorts 2008 Annual. Mainly I worked on the pitchers — Mat Latos and a whole lot of strike throwers with minimal upside.
Part of what I’m doing is trying to provide context for individual players. When you look at a stat line, you need to know something about the environment in which it was produced in order to make sense of it.
Comparable Players
To that end, I’m playing around with comparables for key position players in the Padres organization (haven’t decided if I’ll do the same with pitchers). These have no predictive value but hopefully give some indication of how well a player performed relative to his current league.
For example, Cedric Hunter hit .282/.344/.373 in the Midwest League, which seems really low until you consider how much his league suppressed offense in 2007. If we compare Hunter’s numbers to league average and then find big leaguers who fared about the same relative to MLB norms, we get names like Shawn Green, Kenny Lofton, and Shane Victorino.
In other words, when someone asks how good Cedric Hunter was in 2007, we might respond that he was the Midwest League’s version of Victorino. Note that I’m not saying this is the type of player I expect Hunter to become. We’re looking backward here, not forward. We’re simply providing context.
Sample Size, Playing Conditions, and How Runs Are Scored
The trouble comes when we start digging way down to the lowest minor-league levels. There are a few issues at work in all of the short-season leagues, but particularly at the Rookie level. For the Padres, that means the Arizona League and Dominican Summer League.
- The first issue has to do with sample size. Teams in the Northwest League (better than Rookie ball but not quite at the level of full-season Class-A leagues) played only 76 games in ‘07. Teams in the AZL played 56, while those in the DSL played 64. Hard to make a judgment based on such a small amount of data.
- The second issue deals with the playing conditions of these leagues. I don’t know how things work in the DSL, but I got a real eye opener back in July when I caught part of an AZL game on my way to Cooperstown for Tony Gwynn’s induction into the Hall of Fame. Among many other oddities, uniformed players operated the scoreboard.
- The third issue is that runs aren’t created in quite the same way at lower levels as they are at higher levels. One reason for this is that defense down yonder isn’t what it is up here. Players are younger and less experienced, playing conditions aren’t as good, etc.
Unearned Runs at Lower Levels
To that last point, here is a brief look at defensive numbers for each of the leagues in which the Padres have a team:
| League | FPct | UER/9 | ER/R |
|---|---|---|---|
| Statistics are courtesy of Baseball-Reference and ESPN. | |||
| MLB | .984 | 0.36 | .925 |
| PCL | .978 | 0.56 | .894 |
| TEX | .980 | 0.50 | .896 |
| CAL | .971 | 0.80 | .858 |
| MWL | .967 | 0.73 | .839 |
| NWL | .965 | 0.93 | .824 |
| AZL | .952 | 1.23 | .787 |
| DSL | .950 | 1.26 | .741 |
This isn’t earth-shattering stuff, but what we see is a pretty straight progression in terms of fielding percentage, unearned runs per 9 innings, and percentage of all runs that are unearned. At lower levels, we see inferior defensive play, which contributes to a more troublesome relationship between offensive output and the scoring of runs (the league-average batting line in the AZL was .264/.350/377; there’s no way that should translate to 5.66 runs per game).
Again, this isn’t surprising and, as noted above, it’s not the only reason to be skeptical of short-season-league numbers. Still, even the obvious needs to be confirmed every now and then.
Picking up where last year's version left off, the Ducksnorts 2008 Baseball Annual provides in-depth analysis of and commentary on the San Diego Padres. Get your copy today.
December 4, 2007 at 10:21 am
Wow all is quiet on the Ducksnorts front.
December 4, 2007 at 10:32 am
I’m waiting for CM to read my HOF/Trammell post; after he does I expect things to warm up considerably.
December 4, 2007 at 10:38 am
In case you doubted whether Towers BSs much: The name Darin Erstad was dropped in the North County Times this morning as a possible CF name.
December 4, 2007 at 10:45 am
3: Ha….ha….that KT, what a kidder. Right?
Geoff, I like how you put the numbers in the context of their league. It’s a good way to describe how good a player is as any. Is it possible to describe the league (as you mentioned the number of games played and league average numbers) to add a bit more details? Thanks for all your hard work, dude.
BTW, the Brewers are looking for a third baseman. I’m guessing Ryan Braun is shifting to the OF making more of a jam for that team. Might the Padres have a chance to trade for one of them?
December 4, 2007 at 11:11 am
4.
That is a good call!
December 4, 2007 at 11:19 am
Do you think the brewes would do Headley for Hart?
December 4, 2007 at 11:22 am
Re: 6 I think the Pads would also need to throw in another guy but Headley and Hart being the two main peices of the deal.
December 4, 2007 at 11:23 am
6: I doubt it, Melvin lists Hart as an untouchable. But if they’d do Bush + Gwynn Jr for Headley, I’d think about it, even not being a Gwynn Jr fan.
December 4, 2007 at 11:27 am
re: Kevin’s post about the terrible election of Kuhn into the HoF, please read this post from the link:
http://mikesrants.baseballtoas.....77398.html
Marvin Miller is definitely a HoF and his snub is one of the worst decision made by the selection committee.
December 4, 2007 at 11:32 am
Pat…I am not passionate about these guys…just making sure we look at the candidates as objectivly as possible…I don’t think Rice belongs in…I also don’t think Trammel does…and I am a Trammel fan!
Gossage is the only eligable player that I would think should probably get in…
December 4, 2007 at 11:39 am
#4: Thanks, Didi. I’m still working on that stuff, but I should be able to post something either tomorrow or early next week.
#10: Raines belongs, too.
December 4, 2007 at 11:51 am
10, 11: Blyleven belongs.
December 4, 2007 at 11:53 am
Not liking the rumor from Baseball Musings re: Dan Haren to the Snakes.
December 4, 2007 at 11:57 am
Geoff…I missed Raines…he probably should be there as well…good catch.
RE 12: No, Didi…he does not…bad Didi…bad. We don’t need to rehash all that again…
December 4, 2007 at 12:02 pm
Maybe to pick up the pace we need a nice arguments on the merits of either trading or signing Khalil…….
December 4, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Whoa, this came out of nowhere:
WFAN is reporting on a possible trade of Erik Bedard to the Dodgers for Matt Kemp and Jonathan Broxton.
via Rotoworld
I know those are two good players but it almost doesn’t seem like enough, given the Santana and Cabrera scenarios that have been thrown around.
December 4, 2007 at 12:20 pm
#13, 16: I really don’t want to see Bedard and Haren in the division. Here’s hoping those don’t materialize.
December 4, 2007 at 12:32 pm
After all the crazy prices thrown around for Cabrera and Santana, to see rumored deals for Santana, Haren, and Bedard at this cheap a cost is startling (particularly because all the teams I dislike are the ones rumored to be doing the acquiring). Do we have the prospects to match these proposed deals?
December 4, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Well, hey, at least we appear to be getting Luke Scott (presumably for cheap). KT knows where the bargains are.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/.....l#comments
December 4, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Incidentally, I’m thinking of posting one or two of my minor-league profiles next week. Any requests?
December 4, 2007 at 1:07 pm
From ESPN:
“The Padres have talked about free-agent pitchers Glendon Rusch and Shawn Estes, and are expected to make a strong effort to sign both players after Thursday’s Rule 5 draft.”
December 4, 2007 at 1:08 pm
19: That’s a nice pickup by KT. ZIPS projects Scott at .258/.348/.492 with 21 HR in 431 ABs. His numbers will probably be a little better if he platoons with Hairston.
December 4, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Having a guy like Rusch or Tomko around is going to be a necessity if the rotation includes Wolf and Prior. But dang that rotation, if everyone were healthy would rival the best years that the Braves had.
If they get Luke Scott as a 4th/5th outfielder I’m happy with it, but I don’t like it so much if he’s our starter in LF and the outfield shopping is done.
December 4, 2007 at 1:13 pm
20: Inman and Blanks.
21: Urgh, and I hope only to a minor league contract.
December 4, 2007 at 1:15 pm
If the Dodgers get Bedard that cheap, it’s a tremendous deal for them. KT would need to be in the Baltimore room within minutes, offering them Headley and a couple of B pitching prospects for Kemp.
December 4, 2007 at 1:16 pm
I’m okay with Scott/Hairston platoon at LF. That would be pretty good.
Still doesn’t solve the CF hole and 2B place holder.
December 4, 2007 at 1:17 pm
23: I like Scott as a platoon with Hairston in LF/CF as long as another bat is coming also (Fukodome?); but I agree, if he’s the answer for this offense, it might be a long 2008.
December 4, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Re: 21 It really is starting to feel like the Pads are just going for every bargain out there and hoping something sticks, normally it’s a good idea to do this with two or three guys but this is getting out of hand. Is Luke Scott really they guy we want to play LF? If Antonelli is not ready are the Pads really going to go with Robles, Stansberry, or E-Gon at 2B? are the Pads really going to go into the season with 5 or 6 guys in the 4th and 5th starters roles and hope to patchwork it together throughout the season. At this point I would not mind seeing Cameron and Barrett accept arbitration and coming back next year.
I know its only the 2nd day of the winter meetings but I’m really not liking what I’m hearing so far, the padres have some major holes and they are talking about trying to catch lighting in a bottle for all of them at this point.
rant over…
December 4, 2007 at 1:18 pm
25: Good thinking, TW.
December 4, 2007 at 1:21 pm
24: Second both the prospect requests and the urgh.
December 4, 2007 at 1:22 pm
24 - Didi, you scared the **** out of me. I thought for a second (until I referenced #20) that you were saying we traded Inman & Blanks for Scott…
December 4, 2007 at 1:28 pm
28: I know what you’re saying; I could never be a GM because I’d be signing free agents to fill all my holes the day after the world series ended. I think all these small moves to fill in small holes are a prelude to a Fukudome deal and maybe bringing in vet like Loretta on a one year deal to fill the Blummer role and as Antonelli insurance.
I have to agree with KT that a lot of these reclamation projects are better bets than the healthy FA pitchers out there. I’d rather take my chances with Wolf, Prior, Rusch, Estes and maybe Clement than dump all that money and more on Carlos Silva.
All the little moves (and hopefully one big one) are going to add up to a much stronger team next year.
December 4, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Im not saying go out there and sign a bunch of FA, just go out there and look like you have a plan. Luke Scott does not look like a plan to me, neither does Robles, Stansberry or E-gon. Im ok with Wolf and Prior being the 4 and 5 guys but Estes, Tomko and Rush? The Pads have a ton of bullpen arms why are they even looking at these guys? If Wolf or Prior (who they still may not get) gets hurt I would rather see Gemano, or Hensley out there.
December 4, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Wow. Jose Guillen got paid by the Royals.
Dodgers rumored to offer 2 years to Andruw Jones.
December 4, 2007 at 1:42 pm
33: Why are they looking at them? Because they’re cheap (virtually free in the case of Rusch and Estes) and you can never have too many arms. I think Hensley is going to be our #5 starter and Germano may end up in a trade.
Of course I’m not privy to Towers’ thought process but I would imagine he’s had his eye on Scott as someone who can mash and not cost much and if he’s going to spend the dollars on Fukudome then he needs to fill out the outfield on the cheap. Now if we end up with Cameron back in CF, or a bottom of the barrel option like Steve Finley or Darren Erstad then that’s a different story.
I think the plan has been pretty clear: grab as many low cost arms as possible, spend the bulk of our available money on the most cost effective solution in CF, hope Antonelli is ready and keep some AAAA types around in case he isn’t.
Don’t forget we still have Headley in the 3B/LF mix, or as trade bait for a David DeJesus type CF.
December 4, 2007 at 1:43 pm
33: Luke Scott’s hit 273/366/516 in the majors, slightly better in the minors. It’s not just hitting in Houston or the NL Central, either, he’s got a career 293 EQA.
I do not see any value in signing Estes or Rusch to anything but minor league deals, and even then there’s a risk that Black falls in love with the grizzled vets and it takes 6 weeks for reality to set in. But Scott’s an awfully good buy.
December 4, 2007 at 1:46 pm
33: I’d rather not see Germano get shelled again like the second half of last season. The upside of all this small pickups is that if Hensley ended up being a pitcher again (a very big IF) he’ll not be held up by the prices paid.
I think the FO does have a plan and it just may not be to our likings…yet.
Man, when is Cesar Carillo going to be pitching again?
December 4, 2007 at 1:50 pm
I just hope Jason Lane is not the Padres’ fallback plan for CF.
BTW, I think it’s funny that the White Sox ended up with Carlos Quentin after trading Chris Young to the Snakes a couple of seasons ago.
December 4, 2007 at 1:51 pm
According to ESPN the Cubs are going to offer Fukudome Garry Mathews Jr money, so im not holding my breath to see him in a Padres Uni.
Im not saying Scott is a bad hitter, to me he’s a younger Geoff Jenkins. He had a good 06 but I think came back down to earth in 07. I take his minor leauge numbers with a grain of salt because he was old at every level he played at.
December 4, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Has anyone heard what the Pads are planning on doing with Ensberg and Lane? Are they going to tender both and have them be bench players along with all of the backup 2B’s?
December 4, 2007 at 2:02 pm
Plans for 2008 might have to go out the window if the Dodgers and D-backs follow through on their reported trades. The Dodgers are reportedly trading for Eric Bedard, giving up Matt Kemp and Johnathon Broxton. That doesn’t seem like enough to me but would be entirely consistent with the Orioles management philosophy. The D-backs are offering Conor Jackson, Carlos Gonzalez along with two other players (probably good ones as Jackson isn’t very good) for Dan Haren. If both of these trades go through obviously the Padres would be in some trouble. They would probably be picked for 4th in the division and outside of some major offensive acquisition they wouldn’t have much hope to make the playoffs. Again, this goes back to their incredibly poor drafting over the past few years. I hate to keep going back to this but if they took Porcello instead of Schmidt they could include him in any trade (after waiting a year) for an established player (and therefore wouldn’t even have had any risk in drafting him, they would have just had to pay an extra $2m for his bonus). It just shows the incredible short-sightedness of their player development and drafting personnel.
December 4, 2007 at 2:07 pm
I think Scott is basically Brian Giles insurance with the microfracture surgery and all. They expect him to ready to go but I am sure he is going to require plenty of days off this year. I don’t want to doubt OG but with his knee coming off this type of surgery he isn’t going to be that iron man type guy he has been the last few years. Scott should provide some decent depth at little cost. I’d love to see a move for maybe Anthony Reyes. So Cal kid only 26 and might be able to learn a thing or 2 from Maddux and Peavy. Petco wouldn’t hurt him either.
December 4, 2007 at 2:12 pm
I’d be stunned if Bedard and Haren both ended up in the NL West. Whoever loses the Santana sweepstakes is going to come hard for those guys and the Mets are still looking to make waves. Even if the Dodgers get Bedard it’s not the end of the world. Kemp is a stud and Broxton is no slouch either. It may or may not be a net win for the Dodgers but by no means is that going to win them the division.
December 4, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Re 20: Mike Ekstrom
December 4, 2007 at 3:04 pm
SAN DIEGO (AP) — When he returns from a hunting trip, NL Cy Young winner Jake Peavy will bag the biggest contract by far in San Diego Padres history.
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/ne.....;type=lgns
December 4, 2007 at 3:38 pm
MLB.com is reporting that the Tigers are going to trade for Cabrera and Willis, surrendering Maybin, Andrew Miller, catcher Mike Rabelo and 3 other prospects. I guess that it’s good he’s going to the AL. BP is reporting that Johan to the Red Sox is a done deal, with Jon Lester, a center fielder, Justin Masterson and Ryan Kalish returning (you would think the CF has to be Ellsbury). Either way, that’s not much return for the best pitcher (by far) in baseball which also shows that even if the Padres traded Peavy instead of resigned him, they weren’t going to get **** for him. If the Santana rumor is true, I’m shocked that’s all they got for him.
December 4, 2007 at 3:46 pm
6:20 p.m., from Peter Gammons
• The Tigers have won the Miguel Cabrera sweepstakes. Detroit will get Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis from Florida for six players — Cameron Maybin, Andrew Miller, catcher Mike Rabelo and three minor league prospects.
December 4, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Take a look at the Tigers roster if they actually make that trade.
http://detroit.tigers.mlb.com/.....p?c_id=det
That has to be the best team in baseball I would think, even if the Red Sox get Santana. No holes at all except for 1B and closer which could be fixed if Zumaya comes back healthy.
Sigh….and that could be the Padres with an owner more aggressive to spend money and better drafting.
December 4, 2007 at 3:49 pm
I think Luke Scott is a great addition.
Fukudome in CF? If we can get him for $10-$12/year why not.
It looks like Sinisi, Robles and Myrow are making their best bid to make the ‘08 squad.
I’d like to see us get both Towers and Prior. Towers can be a swingman if everyone else is healthy. Not that he’s great, but he’s better than seeing the rag-tag group we used last year towards the end.
BTW Geoff, we signed Adam Bass, not Brian Bass.
December 4, 2007 at 3:50 pm
45:
While Jake is out hunting, I hope he stays away from Carlton Loewer’s tree.
December 4, 2007 at 3:52 pm
wow this deal could really come back and bite the tigers on the *** in a few years if they cant sign Cabrera.
December 4, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Ah, CM, that’s no fun. I was hoping we’d have another great discussion on the merits of Trammell. And I am seriously interested in why you don’t think he belongs. Statistically he’s right in the middle of the roughly 20 SS who are in the HOF. No, he’s not in the elite with Wagner, Vaughn and Ripken, but surely there is room for more than just the Gods of the Game. Just how small a Hall do you have?
Also, I thought after last year you were much more open to Blyleven. Didn’t we pretty firmly establish he is comparable to several of his peers (Carlton, Perry and Jenkins) who are in? Just cuirous because your reply to Didi surprised me.
December 4, 2007 at 3:52 pm
I saw that trade…Wow. There is serious talent getting moved!
December 4, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Am I missing something on Hart from the Brewers? I don’t see how he really helps us fill CF since he appears to be an atrocious defender. Yes, he looks like a pretty good bat, but that’s in Miller Park, not Petco. Are people looking at him as filling LF and then possibly RF after Giles is gone? That could make sense, but I’m just much more concerned about and focused on CF. Pardon my myopia.
December 4, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Field 39…Nice pull…there is a memory for you…not a good one either.
Pat…I am so wrapped up in EOY business stuff, I don’t have time to get into it too much…I don’t recall ever being convinced that Bly belonged in, but I will have to go back to the posts from back then and review where we left it…
As far as who gets in, I am really a big proponent of it is a place for the Greats, not the very goods…Trammel (again, I was/am a fan) was very good, not Great…Rice, very good…Bly, very good…Bill Maz, oh never mind…
December 4, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Re: 54 I was thinking LF this year RF next year for Heart. There was no Rumor I was more thinking out loud with that.
December 4, 2007 at 3:59 pm
46: **** for him? … Ellsbury (if he’s in it), Lester, Kalish, Lowrie, and Masterson. IMO, that’s a LONG way from ****. The Twins are getting a lot of players with a lot of years under contract who will have cheap salaries for a while … I like the deal for them, if that’s the deal, and I’m a Red Sox fan (along with a Padres fan).
December 4, 2007 at 4:01 pm
57: err, scratch Lowrie according to Carroll’s brief update.
December 4, 2007 at 4:05 pm
**** as far as getting impact players back I meant. Lester might be OK but I don’t think anyone sees him as an ace. Ellsbury is a younger Crisp who probably won’t hit much but is great defensively and the rest are a few years away from helping out. I’m not sure why they didn’t take the Yankees trade — Hughes will probably be just as good as Santana in a few years and a lot cheaper. If you are going to take bit parts (and that’s what those Red Sox players are) you should get one really good prospect in return.
December 4, 2007 at 4:07 pm
#19: Scott would be a nice acquisition. I hope it happens.
#35: Bingo. This is covered on p. 187 of the 2007 Annual. (Can you tell I’ve been immersed in the book all day?)
#49: Thanks for the fix on Bass. All better now.
#50: Solid.
December 4, 2007 at 4:20 pm
59: Yea, I see what you’re saying. But Ellsbury’s also a guy who is going to make next to nothing for a few years and probably be an average to well above average player. Same thing with Lester, maybe to a lesser degree. Masterson is a real solid prospect. Kalish, ey, a throw in but not a bad prospect at all.
The Yanks deal may have been better .. I don’t know. Anyway, I like how the Twins made out.
60: GY, when (about) is the book coming out? I know you’ve answered that before, but I forget where. I really can’t wait to pick this one up.
December 4, 2007 at 4:22 pm
#61: I hope to crank it out earlier this time — by the end of February if possible. I’m psyched; I’ve been playing around with cover ideas this afternoon.
December 4, 2007 at 4:44 pm
55: Not convinced; that’s not what I meant. You just seemed more open to him and recognized that he was not a John or Kaat but much more a Jenkins or Perry.
Sorry you’re so swamped with year end. Take it easy.
December 4, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Tim Raines is one of the top 100 players in history.
December 4, 2007 at 6:01 pm
62: Thanks, Geoff. I’ve got a feeling it’s going to be one of those books I read in a day or two (and that doesn’t happen often).
Actually, I’ve got to finish reading The Book by Tango, MGL, Dolphin soon. I got through 3/4’s of it, then stopped for a while for whatever reason. Great book. I read Moneyball and Baseball Between the Numbers in a couple of days a while back … and for some reason I liked The Perfect Storm.
Anyway, I’m hoping to pick up a couple for Christmas … mostly The Hidden Game of Baseball (and maybe Percentage Baseball … a real old one by Earnshaw Cook).
And I can’t wait to get yours when it comes out!
December 4, 2007 at 7:08 pm
65 - The Book is just fantastic, isn’t it?
December 4, 2007 at 8:19 pm
This place is getting crazy. I didn’t see Hacksaw demanding that this comment thread be “taken over” by the listeners.
December 4, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Ken Rosenthal is reporting the Luke Scott deal fell through. The Dodgers are now after Scott Rolen, hopefully they’re determined to trade Kemp/Loney/LaRoche since the Bedard thing doesn’t sound realistic.
December 4, 2007 at 8:26 pm
68:
Alderson was on the radio around 5:00 and said the Scott deal was not going to happen.
December 4, 2007 at 8:27 pm
66: definitely!
December 4, 2007 at 8:32 pm
http://www.rotoworld.com/conte.....amp;id=157
rotoworld quoting mlb.com says the padres have offered fukudome a 3 year deal averaging 8 million per. I gotta think that they are thinking of putting him in CF for this year, maybe shifting him to a corner next year or the year after. This keeps Headly as a potential solution for a corner. Probably also signifies that Cameron has said positively that he wont be accepting arbitration.
December 4, 2007 at 9:12 pm
Re: 71 3yrs/$24M aint gonna get it done unless he really likes fish facos!
December 4, 2007 at 9:24 pm
or fish tacos.
December 4, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Re 41: “Again, this goes back to their incredibly poor drafting over the past few years”
&
“It just shows the incredible short-sightedness of their player development and drafting personnel.”
I’m calling bull….
The Padres have a top 15 farm (from #29 last year)
(my top 10 - get the scouting reports at MadFriars.com)
1. Chase Headley
2. Matt Antonelli
3. Mat Latos
4. Kyle Blanks
5. Cedric Hunter
6. David Freese
7. Wade Leblanc
8. Will Inman
9. Chad Huffman
10. Yefri Carvajal
In that top 10, #8 came from the Brewers in the Linebrink trade and #10 was an international free agent. Each of the other top 10 came from the last three drafts. The Padres have some misses in their drafts (EVERYONE does) but overall they have drafted VERY well under Fuson. Teams are asking for Headley and Antonelli (of course) but they’re also asking for a lot of our younger, lower level players as well.
I didn’t just put together a top 10, I did a full top 30 for the MadFriars.com guys. It’s a difficult organization to rank because there is SO MUCH depth. It is a TALENTED organization not a weak one…
December 4, 2007 at 9:36 pm
well, middling.
re:70 I agree - looking at some of the other articles about fukudome, 10-12/year seems reasonable…. basically what Cameron was asking for the beginning of last year.
December 4, 2007 at 10:55 pm
I’m thinking more and more that either DeJesus or Gathright has a good chance to end up a Padre. The Royals splurged on Guillen and they offered arbitration to Emil Brown. With the two CF, Teahen at RF, Gordon at 3B, Butler at DH, it looks like the Royals would have too many OF. Unless they are going to platoon CF or move Teahen to 1B, one of those players are going to the bench.
Hmm…..anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
December 5, 2007 at 3:39 am
Dejesus would be great. I’m not ashigh on Gathright.
December 5, 2007 at 3:40 am
“as high” — two words
December 5, 2007 at 6:27 am
74: It’s a better system than it was, but we still didn’t have the prospects to even consider being involved in the big trade discussions this year. I can’t recall an offseason in which so many big names were on the block, and we’re not able to compete. Detroit’s willingness to pay over slot allowed them to land one of the 5 best hitters in the game and a fine mid-rotation starter, and they’re plenty willing to reload the farm next June.
Baseball America is not gospel, but they have not ranked any of the Fuson drafts as a Top 5 effort. The Pads are doing a better job of executing their plan, which seems to be acquiring as much college talent as possible. That’s partly because they believe college players are less risky, partly because college players are more likely to sign for slot. That plan, even perfectly executed, is not going to produce as much talent as one that allowed even one above-slot bonus per year, let alone two or three.
December 5, 2007 at 7:12 am
3/24M is not nearly enough to get Fukudome. MLBTraderumors is reporting that he’s narrowed his choices to the Royals or the Cubs. KT offering $8 million a year sounds more like they were targeting Fukudome based on what they thought would be a bargain, not that he would be a good fit in CF. I guess we weren’t serious after all. If we don’t get Fukudome I think our best case scenario is DeJesus but I still feel like we’ll see Cameron back next year, unless KT has something in the works that we haven’t even considered yet.
December 5, 2007 at 7:25 am
They are offering him less than Brian Giles money, they are not serious.
December 5, 2007 at 8:01 am
About the drafts, I think it would be helpful to try and separate what they’ve done since they hired Fuson from what was done before he was here. While the last 2 drafts could have been better(think Porcello instead of Schmidt) that doesn’t seem like a problem with the guy making the draft choices, but is a problem with the guy(s) making the draft budgets.
By the way the offer to Fuckodome is 3/30(at least) so I’m not sure where the 8M a year came from.
Additionally, probably shouldn’t believe what the article says about the Royals: they have said publicly that they won’t be bringing in another outfielder now that they signed Guillen.
December 5, 2007 at 10:42 am
82: There’s still a problem with a sizable percentage of the picks, particularly their fascination with the (college arms + marginal stuff + decent command) cohort. When the D&F was available they could occasionally land a younger high-octane arm without violating slot.
Not that a high-octane arm can’t be found in the college ranks, but they often go quick, sooner than we will hopefully be drafting in the future. There’s just no rationale for almost completely avoiding 50% of the draft-eligible players. Picking them with no intention of compromising on bonuses isn’t very different than not picking them at all.
December 5, 2007 at 11:26 am
Thanks Geoff for the numbers. This is great. Can’t wait to read them in the book.