9. The ability to develope major leaguer's from your late draft picks?Originally Posted by laxtonto
Also, to add on to #7, another thing you can do with a strong farm system is use it to trade for pieces with the big league club. If your franchise has the money, sometimes the best thing to do with your minor league system is use it as a resource to buy the best players off small market teams...
oops, looks like I trip-trapped over the wrong bridge
one good thing that I can say about dougdirt is that at least he's not a troll
Last edited by princeton; 01-10-2008 at 07:57 AM.
It would seem to me that luck wouldn't be a factor in scoring the strength of a farm system. While it definitely has a hand (probably the most determining factor of them all), it's not something that can be controlled by the organization. As a matter of fact, the organization is trying to control the other seven (or eight, if counting the one added after Laxtonto's initial post) factors in order to help your farm's luck out. For the most part, if you look at the odds of a draftee making it to the big team, it seems like bad luck is the overall theme of developing your own talent.
Creating a rating system shouldn't take into account luck, because if a club is doing most of the other things right, luck is more than likely going to be on their side. That doesn't mean luck shouldn't be discounted entirely, in that if a farm system is still failing although they seem to be doing everything right then if all other explanations are exhausted then you still have bad luck. Just one lurker's opinion, though.
Maybe "Luck" isnt the best way to rate it, but it should be easy to do an attrition based upon injury to determine which teams have poor injury prevention, scouting or have a high risk based drafting philophsy
Well you can help control injuries by avoiding risky ivestments such as a HS pitchers. Organizations that draft a lot of HS pitchers are going to be considered unlucky when it is partly themselves to blame...
HS pitchers are about as risky as college pitchers, especially over recent years.
By risk I didn't mean to become MLBer's, I meant injury risks. I could be wrong, but surely 18 year-olds have higher injury risks than 21 year-olds that have gone through the college grind...
Maybe.... havent really looked into that, but elbow injuries dont concern me much given the advancement in surgery these days. Shoulders are still another issue though.
Only a theory by a BP writer in 2002, so it's a bit dated. I thought it might be interestingI suspect that the fallout rate for pitchers, especially those drafted out of high school, may be more than just the matter of injury risk. There may also be a substantial risk that the pitcher won't master the mental game of pitching at the big-league level.
It's also possible that self-discipline may be a factor. A guy who will face three years of college may be more likely to have the discipline to keep himself on the sort of rigorous physical conditioning program needed for long-term major-league pitching success (Roger Clemens is the current leading example). A guy who's in a hurry to sign a contract may be less likely to put in the long-term effort needed to reach his career goals.
I'm not saying that high-school pitching draftees are necessarily lazy idiots--Greg Maddux being an obvious counterexample. It's just a matter of general tendencies. One interesting study would be to see if pitchers who signed out of high school in spite of good grades and test scores do any better in the majors than pitchers who were poor students. Good luck getting the necessary data for that one.
The 18 yr old vs 21 yr old argument isn't complicated. At 21, you've been both healthy and good enough to keep pitching for 3 more years than you had at age 18. Period. Thus, from a risk profile perspective, absent a measurement of talent, older is better.
Of course, the flip side of that coin is development. The 18 year old has 3 years in which he can improve his ability, whereas the 21 year has already gone through those years.
As I see it, there are 4 basic factors:
1.) How good is he right now?
2.) How good might he be someday?
3.) How long will it take to go from #1 to #2?
Given two identical pitchers following the same development trajectory, you pick the 21 year old every time. Every year carries both the risk of injury and the risk of development. If you can lock in both good health and positive development towards potential , without sacrificing maximum potential, that's the best of all worlds.
Attrition can come from a number of things, including injury, disinterest/lack of effort, poor instruction, inability to learn, etc. The more that you can avoid the possibility of those things, you do.
Last edited by RedsManRick; 01-10-2008 at 04:46 PM.
Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote