Draft Day
June 9th, 2009 | Published in Daniel Gettinger, Padres, baseball, draft | 23 Comments
by Daniel Gettinger
Today is draft day. The Padres pick third. They won’t get Stephen Strasburg, and they probably won’t get Dustin Ackley (although I am still holding out hope that the Mariners shock everyone and take a pass). Other than that, nobody really knows what the Padres will do. Some mocks think the Padres will select Donovan Tate. Others believe Aaron Crow will be the selection. And some buy into the rumor that the Padres are interested in Mike Minor. There are about half a dozen other guys the Padres could select without shocking anybody.
Personally, I am not going to make a prediction. There is really no point. In a few hours we will find out who it is the Padres actually select. Furthermore, no matter what the Padres do with the pick, I will praise the selection.
The main reason I will blindly support the pick is that the Padres have better scouting and analytical information at their disposal than we do. If the Padres think Donovan Tate is better than Aaron Crow or any of the other top non-Strasburg arms, then they will probably take him. From what I have read online, I personally prefer Crow, but I realize the publicly available information is incomplete, and unlikely to be as complete as the Padres’ information. It seems silly to whine about the Padres potentially passing on “my guy,” when the information I used to determine “my guy” is not as good as the information the Padres are using to determine “their guy.”
I will support the Padres even if they select Mike Minor, or some other “cheap, polished, low-upside” player. Management probably has a budget devoted to the draft and international signings. The baseball operations guys may decide not to spend a huge proportion of the budget on the first pick, and instead use it to take (and sign) pricier guys later in the draft, or sign a top international player.
Hypothetically, the Padres could have decided that they prefer the combination of one of the young international players and Mike Minor to anybody at the top of this year’s draft class. However, due to budgetary constraints, signing a player like Crow or Tate would preclude them from signing the international player that they like better. In that case, the Padres would be better off selecting a cheaper option like Minor at number three, and using the savings to pursue the international player they like so much. Of course, if Major League Baseball allowed teams to trade their picks, this sort of dilemma would never present itself.
Okay, here are today’s takeaways:
- I have no idea who the Padres will pick in the draft.
- The Padres have a budget (whether or not we like it). They also have better information about all of these players than pretty much any of us. Therefore, I will blindly support whoever it is the Padres select…
- …Even if that selection is Mike Minor.
June 9th, 2009 at 12:00 pm (#)
The North County Times had better health information on Dykstra than the Padres did last year. Kids on his high school team knew more about Matt Bush than the Padres did. Carlos Gomez knew more about Nick Schmidt’s delivery than the Padres did.
How many years of poor drafting does a team get before the “they know better” wears off? At some point it’s fair to judge based on success, and under the Fuson drafting strategy there has been very little success. Teams like KC, Pittsburgh, Houston, and Baltimore have scouts, too. Do they get a pass?
Even then, feeling unqualified to critique the decision is not the same as praising the decision. Saying “They’re doing the best they can” is okay, even though it’s a pretty sad state of affairs. Praising a pick that, like Minor, has very little chance of doing anything in the majors besides arriving isn’t support. It’s abdication.
June 9th, 2009 at 2:23 pm (#)
I don’t think it is fair to say that the Padres are unlucky in all of their previous first round picks. The Padres have had trouble drafting for a long time. This is a chance for redemption and they should choose the best player available. I know it seems like common sense but if the padres are not going to be aggressive in the free agent market then they need to be aggressive in the draft. If not what is the point?
June 9th, 2009 at 2:33 pm (#)
Kevin: Agree with both points.
1. Luck is the residue of design.
2. The Padres should be able to pick up arms like Minor — subpar stuff, throws strikes, has a chance in a big park with a decent defense — on the cheap. They’ve done it a few times the last few years. The draft is the chance to get players you can’t get (or get affordably) in other ways, like free agency or in trades.
June 9th, 2009 at 2:47 pm (#)
Tom and Kevin-The Padres have access to all publicly available information in addition to their own proprietary research. Since we only have the publicly available info, it only makes sense that they have more.
A few other things to keep in mind:
1) The draft budget is not irrelevant. By most accounts, the baseball ops people wanted to draft Stephen Drew, but ownership would not sign off, hence we got Matt Bush.
2) There is more to a draft than the first round pick. Why should we only talk about the success and failures of first round picks? Perhaps the team purposely spends less on first round picks so that they can spend more on their other selections.
3) I feel the farm system has greatly improved over the last year. Doesn’t the team deserve some credit for guys like Latos, Decker, Blanks, etc…?
June 9th, 2009 at 3:08 pm (#)
I agree some with Tom and some with Daniel here. Tom, I think your response sort of illustrates Daniel’s point. Sure, those other people with more knowledge of the draftees or more baseball knowledge in general were in position to make a judgment on the quality of the pick, but Daniel (and I, and I assume most internet sports fans) really has no extra knowledge about individual players.
We can evaluate trends and look big picture: do soft tossing lefties with pitchability and questionable stuff make good first round picks? Are toolsy high school athletes with questionable hitting ability good picks? Do the Padres screw up their picks consistently and from this should we be more skeptical when they deviate from conventional wisdom? But I personally at least am completely incapable of judging players on the individual level. Within the toolsy high school athlete category, there are awesome successes and huge failures. It’s the front office’s job to sort those out, and I’m completely incapable of doing so.
So I would be upset if they pick Mike Minor because I believe the trend of the Padres failing when they buck conventional wisdom and the poor performance of previous pitchability lefties suggests Minor would be less valuable than other top picks. But, hey, many soft tossing lefties have gone on to great success in the big leagues, and I have no way of distinguishing whether Minor is more Tom Glavine or Jeremy Sowers. (Although Glavine is a very high ceiling and Sowers is a far more likely outcome for any draft pick).
June 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pm (#)
Daniel: More information doesn’t mean that it’s good information or that the decision-making based on that information is solid. The OJ Simpson jury had more information that I did.
The draft budget affects what the baseball ops team can do, but the fact that Kevin Towers couldn’t convince Moores that other players were worth more than Bush is not a point in Kevin Towers’ favor. A fat guy with BO and a stutter can make that argument convincingly. Towers should have been able to.
We can talk about the later rounds all you want. Our farm system is currently ranked 29th by BA and generally low by other evaluators.
They’re not spending less on first rounders to grab “drops” in later rounds. I can count on one hand the number of players the team has gone over-slot for in the last few years. They spent a lot internationally last year, but most years they have not.
In 2008 Baseball America ranked our farm system 12th. This year it’s 29th. Many other evaluators downgraded us as well. That’s some improvement.
We do have some interesting prospects — like most teams do.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:38 pm (#)
Unfortunately I didn’t have time this weekend to clean up my spreadsheet and get a top college hitters list available and posted here. The little free time I did have I devoted to toying around with the Pitch Flight graph that Harry Pavlidis made available. Sorry, Daniel.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:48 pm (#)
Tom (comment 5)-All good points. Doesn’t change my opinion, but valid nonetheless.
Ben-Sorry your comment got caught up in the spam filter, but I got it up now…well said.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:50 pm (#)
Oh, Tommy boy. . .quick, someone start talking about intangibles and get him REAL fired up!!!
Can all Padres sites ban Tom Waits? He already managed to eliminate the message board at Ducksnorts.
June 9th, 2009 at 7:26 pm (#)
I think the Matt Bush pick has left a wound for Padres fans that will take many years to heal. It has also made it difficult for us to ever trust our team’s ability to draft. But, Chargers fans recovered from the Ryan Leaf pick (although that one was certainly justifiable), so hopefully we’ll get our hopes back up eventually.
June 9th, 2009 at 7:39 pm (#)
Mark-Agreed.
Also, for those interested, here is a link to a thread on the Union Tribune Padres Board where a few people were not a big fan of this article. One commenter wrote “Tom Waits comment kills Friarforecast. I am not a fan of that site.” Fair enough…
http://forum.signonsandiego.com/showthread.php?t=98656&page=3
June 9th, 2009 at 8:26 pm (#)
I could be totally wrong here but I believe I am still alive. I dont think anyones comments have ever “killed me” there have been those that I have disagreed with but nothing that spelled death. If anything I love comments because it lets me know that people read what I write.
Also not thrilled with the Tate pick, I would have preferred a pitcher at #3 (Crow or Matsuk). Padres pick again in 10 picks from now, I am hoping they go the pitching route and draft either Oliver or even Scheppers if he is still available.
June 9th, 2009 at 8:43 pm (#)
fwiw, I think that same guy at the UT board has made comments like that before. I’m not sure what his problem is with this blog, but being subjected to my blogging for almost two years, I almost can’t blame him … ; )
I very much agree with Daniel’s premise here. Often times, I struggle with the idea that I really have anything enlightening to add, especially with the draft. When I think about all the resources the Padres have, the scouting reports, the behind the scenes guys nobody even talks about like Chris Long, Stein, etc., I just can’t see how I can criticize them.
At the same time, I don’t *want* to blindly support every move. I can see Tom’s points, too.
But, I guess, unless I’m really out there scouting these guys, or doing detailed analysis, it’s hard for me to make anything more than what really amounts to superficial commentary.
June 9th, 2009 at 9:44 pm (#)
Sorry to go off topic here, but I have to put in a good word for Friar Forecast and Tom Waits. Although I disagree with much of what is written in this article, I appreciate the fact that Daniel has gone to the trouble of considering the issue and setting forth a cogent argument. He has given us good food for thought, for which I am grateful.
“Can all Padres sites ban Tom Waits? He already managed to eliminate the message board at Ducksnorts.”
Speaking as the person who eliminated the “message board” at Ducksnorts, let me assure you that this is dead wrong. Tom Waits has been and continues to be a valuable contributor to the Ducksnorts community and the online Padres fan community.
Oh, and I love the picks of Tate and Williams. It’s nice to see the powers-that-be try a different approach.
June 9th, 2009 at 9:44 pm (#)
I don’t think anyone questions Tom’s knowledge or opinions. . .his takes are usually informed and at least semi-intelligent. It’s his personality that drives message boards to implosion.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:30 am (#)
Lets try to lay off the personal attacks. I don’t like to moderate the comments (other than filtering out spam), but will if things digress any further from baseball or the thread topics.
June 10th, 2009 at 6:42 am (#)
First 3 picks: Fantastic. Two premium CF talents and a better arm than is usually found in the 3rd round. Both CF aren’t slap-hitting speed-only types, which is sometimes what “5 tool player” means. Neither is a lock to hit, but nobody is, and they both have substantial power potential.
Daniel/Myron: MB, great to see you back. And I completely agree that our knowledge is limited and that our conclusions should be likewise throttled. But as I said, more information does not necessarily equal better decision-making. Accepting that the Padres know more about the draft pool, and therefore passing on the analysis of their picks, treads dangerously close to the Appeal to Authority fallacy. We can find hundreds of examples in all fields of endeavor in which people with lots of confidential information still made poor decisions — decisions that were flawed in the making, not decisions that turned out poorly.
Implosion: First, thanks GY and Ben. Second, it strikes me as ironic that this claim has been made twice in the last year (I’m willing to bet by the same person), both times in the context of long, spirited discussions. It cropped up in the midst of a 200+ comment thread on Ducksnorts. I don’t often post here at Friar Forecast, but I’d venture that this thread, and an earlier discussion with Ben Davey about the farm system, include more than a normal amount if comments. Neither Padre RunDown or Paul DePodesta’s blog have suffered fatal injuries from my contributions. Padre web sites should be paying me to kill them with that kind of increased traffic. Along the way I ruffle some feathers. I have an 80 feather-ruffling tool that shows up in games, it’s not just BP power.
June 10th, 2009 at 6:47 am (#)
Tom-Maybe you’re on to something. Your comments coincided with one of our most trafficked days ever. Definitely a causal relationship!
June 10th, 2009 at 7:21 am (#)
Daniel, I don’t mean to take primary credit for it. People certainly aren’t visiting sites for my commentary; just like Ducksnorts or DePo’s blog, it’s the content that attracts readers. But clearly, whatever personal issues “Fryguy” might have with me, I don’t murder discussion forums. It’d be hard to show I even commit battery on them.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:26 am (#)
Haha, I never thought you were taking credit for it. I was just joking around (guess it wasn’t that funny).
Seriously though, I do like the discussion you started. Sometimes I say stuff that people don’t agree with. That’s okay. I like hearing the arguments for why I am wrong. Sometimes, the arguments enlighten me and cause me to change my mind (though not in this case). More importantly, the discussion helps foster greater thought about the issue.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:48 am (#)
No, I didn’t really think you did, but I didn’t want anyone getting the idea I’m too big for my britches. Then again, I buy really big britches.
It may be easier to see the problems with “They have more info” if we move outside of baseball. There are thousands upon thousands of examples of people, or groups, who make poor decisions based on ample information. Morton Thiokol knew more about the o-rings on the space shuttle solid rocket boosters than anyone. Those of us who couldn’t build a flight-worthy o-ring to save our lives can still recognize that it was a poor decision to gloss over the safety concerns.
It happens in less serious fields, too. I’ve never published a novel, and Stephen King knows more about getting paid for his writing than possibly anyone in history. I can still construct a well-supported argument that the last 3 books in his Gunslinger series were bloated, self-indulgent tripe that largely betray the lean, fierce promise of the earlier novels. Undoubtedly King KNEW what he wanted to do with those last 3 books, he had a vision of his characters and stories that I can’t possibly match, he has a greater facility with language than me, and he sold several million copies of them. But those last 3 books are still 90% crap.
Of course we can bring it back to baseball, too. As I said yesterday, other teams with poor draft records also have pro scouts and reams of data. If we take the Padres out of consideration, because our rooting interest clouds our judgment, then it’s clear that more information does not necessarily lead to better decision-making. This phenomenon could be called “The Daniel Moskos Theorem.”
June 10th, 2009 at 12:11 pm (#)
Oh, I like big britches and I cannot lie… You know what else I like? The draft so far. Did anyone see this coming? Seriously, like… wow. I couldn’t be more impressed by what the Padres are doing.
June 10th, 2009 at 1:20 pm (#)
22: You and me both, brother. On the britches and the draft.
Sampson’s a huge potential get. Massive. Gigantic.