Originally Posted by princeton
you're kidding, right?
your numbers show that the Reds produced three pretty good ballplayers, when the Royals had absolutely none. That's a huge difference. That's hope vs. hopelessness
Here's an exercise. Take 350 first round draft picks over 10 years. Assign them randomly to 30 teams. See how many teams end up with how many good major leaguers.
If you assume a 25% success rate for first rounders become decent major leaguers, the chances of getting no decent major leaguers is .75^11.7 (350/30) = 3.5%. That means if players were assigned randomly, you'd likely get at least 1 team with no good major leaguers. The average team will get 3.
Now, I understand that the Royals tended to pick in the upper half of the draft. I also understand that talent evaluation and development is hardly random. However, I think understanding that if it were random, at least 1 team would probably get nobody of value is an important point. It's a real crapshoot out there.