The Draft Pool

Message

Matt · #1 Post by **Matt** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:37 pm

The Draft Pool. It could be more aptly referrred to as the "Dead Pool". It is taking so much more work to try to sort through these players.

What is really hard is that you absolutely have to go through the statistics on every player. Guys that scout like little leaguers sometimes have some promising numbers.

Where it really gets hard is putting the list together. Rating one guy above another. Here's what happens with me. Take starting pitchers for example. I'll find a guy that has 3 or 4 things to like, then notice he's a bit smallish at 5'10" tall. (The word tall being used loosely there). So then I have to compare him to a guy who is 6'3" tall, who maybe doesn't quite have the numbers. but has the size.

Add to that we 470 players to sort through.....

#2 Post by **John** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:01 pm

Do keep in mind that you most definitely don't have to rank all 470 players! Only the first 7 rounds are mandatory, which covers 168 players. After that, ranking players is entirely optional.

What I'm doing differently this year is spending more time sorting by statistics rather ratings. Actually, I really should have been doing this since the beginning. OOTP 8's system was equally confusing, just in the opposite way. Everyone rated highly, making it hard to distinguish between who was for real and who was just a scout's mirage. I think that system was ultimately more frustrating in that you ended up with a large number of players who very quickly were exposed as busts relative to their sparkling scouts' ratings. Here it's going to be quite the opposite: a good number of players are going to demonstrate that they're better than the scouts give them credit for. People are probably going to feel better about the latter turn of events than the former.

Now how to distinguish which ones will be the ones to take that leap forward? Ah, that's the trick. I like Matt's strategy of looking at physical attributes because I think it's an area not currently being fully explored by many owners. I personally like to look at certain personality characteristics to distinguish between two prospects I otherwise like relatively equally. I also perhaps de-emphasize certain "popular" ratings categories like Contact and HR Power a little more than some others might if I see that a player's statistics demonstrate that he can succeed in those areas. There are so many different strategies to choose from, which is one of the reasons I love the draft.

Matt · #3 Post by **Matt** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:25 pm

Well, I am trying to rank each position for my own use.

I think size is definately something to look at, i referred to this in a post last season. It's rare to see players under 6 feet have success at the PEBA level other than in the middle infield. Similiar at pitcher, though there are a couple of exceptions at about 5'10 inches. Less than that for a pitcher and I don't care how good he looks now, I am passing.

There are several intangibles worth looking at as well when sorting through players. Getting a guy who works hard or is intelligent, or even both, can sometimes be the way to go when deciding between two players.

I definately agree about discounting the scouts ratings if the numbers say otherwise. A guy who is scouting low in STUFF but racking up tons of strikeouts is a guy your scout may not have a good read on. And the other thing to remember, the younger the player, the less accurate the scouting reports. An 18 year old will scout less accurately than a 21 year old, so you really have to rely on the numbers to tell you about those younger players.

#4 Post by **John** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:32 pm

By the same token, with those younger guys it's harder to get a read on them even looking at the statistics because the level of competition they're facing is much more uneven than what the college players are facing. So you could see a hitter that's absolutely raking in the Interscholastic Federation and think, "Wow, this guy is going to be a stud!" But personally speaking, if I'm looking at that guy and a guy who is raking the USCBA, I'm probably going to go with the college guy because I have more confidence that the pitchers he was facing were relatively high quality. The high school "superstars" should be viewed as high-risk/high-reward.

Matt · #5 Post by **Matt** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:41 pm

True, if you have two guys raking, one at college and one at hs, your probably going to get more consistent results down the line out of the college guy.

But, if I have a guy who is raking in high school but doesn't scout well, and I have to decide between him and a guy who scouts similiar but is struggling at the college level, I take the high school guy.

#6 Post by **Reg** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:41 pm

Also high school players will more than likely have a longer development period as well, whereas it is possible (though not necessarily recommended) that college players can step in straight to the PEBA level or may be ready with a year.

Denny · #7 Post by **Denny** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:01 pm

Or you follow my system and take the guys with interesting names.

#8 Post by **John** » Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:04 pm

Codgers wrote:Or you follow my system and take the guys with interesting names.

Gioacchino Memmi, get ready to be a Pineapple!