I remember Mike Brown saying that missing on a high first round pick (Akili Smith, Carter) sets you back at least three to four years. This is due in most part to the immense talent level that first round picks have in the NFL and the fact that teams invest so much time and money in them as there is no minor league system in football.
My question is this does a bust in the mlb draft set a franchise back, if so how long?
If you have a losing record at Reds games, please stop going.
Failed picks always set you back some but its less of a problem because in baseball people grow and develop at different speeds and there is a minor league system that allows you to have a bigger window of time to keep your guys before they hit free agency.
Thats just me shooting from the hip though.
Not really. In the NFL a player is expected to produce right away. With the minor league system a team has many ways to get a reward or make up for a "bust" pick. It sure doesn't help but it can be made up for in other areas. Even a player like Drew Stubbs could be flipped now in a bigger trade and that alone wouldn't make it a "bust" pick. It doesn't mean the pick wasn't stupid, just means there are more options available.Originally Posted by KoryMac5
This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.
You never like to see a early round pick bust, but I don't think it's anywhere near as damning as it is in the other sports. The sheer size of the MLB draft allows for some error because there's a lot of potential to get a diamond in the rough to make up for it.
I suppose it would just depend on how strapped for cash a team is, as missing on a guy with a big signing bonus would hurt a smaller team more, but wouldn't be anywhere near the same as a blown first or second round pick in the NFL.
Just an example from ESPN.com and one that obviously does not represent all teams:
THE ROYALS SELECT...
Player Career Could've had (1st round)
27. Jim Pittsley, RHP (No. 17, 1992) 7-12, 6.02 Shannon Stewart (No. 19)
26. Jeff Granger, LHP (No. 5, 1993) 0-1, 9.09 Derrek Lee (No. 14)
25. Matt Smith, 1B/LHP (No. 16, 1994) Never reached majors Scott Elarton (No. 25)
24. Juan LeBron, OF (No. 19, 1995) Never reached majors Michael Barrett (No. 28)
23. Dermal Brown, OF (No. 14, 1996) .234, 14 HRs Eric Milton (No. 20)
22. Dan Reichert, RHP (No. 7), 1997 21-25, 5.55 Lance Berkman (No. 16)
21. Jeff Austin, RHP (No. 4, 1998) 2-3, 6.75 Brad Lidge (No. 17)
20. Kyle Snyder, RHP (No. 7, 1999 2-9, 5.64 Barry Zito (No. 9)
19. Mike Stodolka, LHP (No. 4, 2000) Never reached majors Chase Utley (No. 15)
18. Colt Griffin, RHP (No. 9, 2001) Never reached majors Bobby Crosby (No. 25)
From 92 to 2001 the Royals selected 10 players who never worked out for one reason or another this and other reasons have set there franchise back a great deal. The Pirates and Reds also come to mind because of injury problems they have had with first round pitchers. I know that the MLB having more rounds allows you to absorb some of the blow of missing on a pick. But how much did Gruler getting hurt or passing on a Linecom hurt the Reds or any team for that matter.
If you have a losing record at Reds games, please stop going.
In all fairness, Dermal Brown vs. Eric Milton netted the same result. Advantage KC?
had we drafted guys that actually succeeded, would they have then failed?
Joe Bowen's curse was a strong one
It looks to me that Kansas City needs some new scouts in the worst possible way. Imagine the team they could've had if they would've drafted some of those guys like Zito, Utley, Berkman, etc but then again the same could be said for just about every team in MLB.
In all fairness, I think you could conduct this same exercise with any team and show similar results.
Probably, although maybe not to that extent. For that 10 year period of time they didn't produce 1 regular out of their first round. I would imagine a lot of teams aren't going to be overly good with their first round pick, but 0-10 is pretty rough.
I don't.
you're just used to first round futility. I've been told that it actually doesn't occur everywhere
Not at all. I can use the internets/tubes and thus have a great deal of information at my fingertips. There are tons of failed draft picks. If the purpose of drafting a player is to acquire future major league talent (and I think we can all agree that it is) the vast majority of picks fail. All organizations fail much more often than they succeed. The Royals have been particularly inept, that's true. It's not like they are without their share of successes too, though.
The Reds haven't done all that well lately either, but the system is looking pretty good as of now. He's not who I would have taken, but I'm not willing to call Stubbs a bust...yet. I wouldn't have taken Mesoraco either, but it's way too early to pass judgment on him.
looks like for a decade, they were
certainly there are people as inept. But you can't go there for ANY team, as you asserted.
Terry Reynolds had a record like the KC debacle while with LA. Ironically, he heads to the Cincy Schleprocks, and scores the best prospect since Josh Beckett. Death of Marge floats all boats, apparently.
Wicked Witch melts, and you discover that you had a brain, a heart, and healthy shoulders all along. It's like the Wizard of Oz suddenly said, "Now what do those organizations have that you don't have? A Clean Bill of Health. So take this Bill, and throw fastballs again, team, throw fastballs without pain."
Last edited by princeton; 01-25-2008 at 02:52 PM.
Milty wasn't bad back in the day. At least before his injuries he was a reasonable starter deserving of a rotation slot. He was always homer prone, but had some value. At least far more than Brown.
Let's do this for the Reds, looking at players with solid major league careers drafted after us in the first round, including the supplemental.
Year, Pick: Player (career) - Could Have Had: Player Pick,
1989, #20: OF Scott Bryant (minors only) - CHH: Tom Goodwin #22, Mo Vaughn #23, Chuck Knoblauch #25, Todd Jones #27
1990, #7: C Dan Wilson (solid major league career) - CHH: Jeromy Burnitz #17, Mike Mussina #20
1991, #20: SS Pokey Reese (decent major league career) - CHH: Aaron Sele #23, Scott Hatteberg #43
1992, #5: OF Chad Mottola (cup of coffee) - CHH: Derek Jeter #6, Preston Wilson #9, Michael Tucker #10, Shannon Stewart #19, Jason Kendall #23, Charles Johnson #28, Johnny Damon #35
1993, #32: OF Pat Watkins (cup of cofee) - CHH: Nobody of note
1994, #9, P CJ Nitkowski (cup of coffee) - CHH: Nomar Garciaparra #12, Paul Konerko #13, Jason Varitek #14, Terrance Long #20
1995, No Pick
1996, #25 OF John Oliver (minors only) - CHH: Chris Reitsma #34, Jason Marquis #35
1997, #14 3B Brandon Larson (cup of coffee) - CHH: Lance Berkman #16, Adam Kennedy #20, Jack Cust #30,
1998, #7 OF Austin Kearns (solid major leager) - CHH: Brad Lidge #17, CC Sabathia #20
So we had more first rounders reach the majors than not (8/10), but only 3 guys who did anything of note in the majors. I think the point is made, nearly every team could look at their draft history in this way. Chances are each team will have a few good hits, a few really bad misses, and a whole lot of missed opportunities. You look at a team like the Braves and they went from Chipper Jones in 1990 until Adam Wainwright in 2000 without hitting on a single good first round pick.
You figure there are only 5-10 guys from each first round who really turn out to have decent major league careers. Doing the math, that leaves each team with 1 good first round pick every 3 or 4 years. Ouch. A team who gets a decent major leaguer every other year is ahead of the curve. What becomes notable as you look through the list of first round picks is how many superstars were passed over at least once by everybody.
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