Sabermetric Brown and the Case of the 2007 Draft
As far as towns go, the town of Mudville was not particularly notable. It didn't have any great museums, or interesting landmarks, or natural features that would make it stand out from dozens of other small towns in America.
So, it is not what Mudville offered, so much as who was living there, that made it such an interesting place to visit. You see, Mudville was the home of Sabermetric Brown, a sneaker-wearing, baseball enthusiast who had a knack for solving mysteries. More so than any adult in town, or anyone else for that matter, you could count on Sabermetric to get to the bottom of any type of mind-boggler. The remarkable thing was that he was only ten years old!
Sabermetric's father was Mr. Brown, a journalist who covered major league baseball. Mr. Brown was proud of his writing skills and analytic ability, and had a loyal group of readers who enjoyed reading his weekly column. But every now and then, Mr. Brown would come across a story or topic that he couldn't quite understand. That's when he'd turn to Sabermetric for help.
One particular evening, Mr. Brown was sitting at his desk in the study, rubbing his forehead, when Sabermetric and Mrs. Brown entered the room.
"Oh, Sabermetric, I'm glad you're here," Mr. Brown stated. "I came across a story that`s got me puzzled."
"This doesn't have to do with the HGH scandal, does it?" Sabermetric said. "Because we solved that last week."

This doesn't have to do with the HGH scandal, does it?
Mr. Brown shook his head. "No, fortunately, that's over and done with. Unless Congress can come up with another $36 million, that is."
Mr. Brown pointed at an article on his computer monitor. It was from Baseball Prospectus, a website Mr. Brown frequented often for interesting facts and story ideas.
"I can't figure it out. They're reviewing each team's minor league system," Mr. Brown furrowed his brow. "I thought the Royals were improving, but according to this they've dropped 13 spots!"
Mrs. Brown put her hand on her hips. "Oh, Harold, you know that they graduated both Gordon and Butler to the majors. A drop was only natural."
Mr. Brown looked up at Mrs. Brown in bewilderment. "That's what I thought at first, too. But teams graduate players all the time. Not to mention that the Royals dropped more than both Seattle and the Tigers, two teams that traded away half their farm this offseason."
"Wow, that really is queer," Mrs. Brown blurted. "What could it mean?"
"Oh, it's not so odd when you think about it," Sabermetric said. "In fact, it seems pretty obvious."
The two looked at Sabermetric in amazement. Sabermetric had solved the riddle again.
WHAT DID SABERMETRIC KNOW THAT HAS PARENTS DID NOT?
"It's simple logic," Sabermetric explained to his family. "If you want your farm system to rate high, you have to draft well."
Sabermetric took the mouse from his father, and navigated to the Baseball Cube website.
"The Royals did something unique last year," Sabermetric continued. "See if you can guess what it is."
Both Mr. and Mrs. Brown peered over Sabermetric's shoulder at the website. Mr. Brown shook his head again.
"Beats me, Sabermetric," he said. "I'm stumped."
"There's something peculiar about their draft strategy," said Sabermetric. Based on his parent's expressions, he could tell that they still didn't understand.
"Okay, I'll give you a hint." Sabermetric scrolled down to a certain part of the webpage. "There's two things of note here."
Sabermetric leaned back in his chair so his parents could get a better look.
"The first is that you'll notice nobody that they drafted played above Rookie Ball last year."
"Hmm, is that unusual?" asked Mrs. Brown.
"Only if you look at every other team in the majors." Sabermetric smiled slyly.
"It's true, Margaret," Mr. Brown said. "You'll rarely see that happen."
Mrs. Brown gave Sabermetric a look. "Okay, Sabermetric, you might be onto something there. What's the other thing we should have noticed?"
"Look at their first 10 draft picks. Do you notice any patterns?" the young enthusiast queried.
"Well, they do all seem awfully young." Mr. Brown offered.
"Exactly!" said Sabermetric. "8 out of the 10 were drafted straight out of high school."
"What's so special about that?" Mrs. Brown asked.
"Well," began Sabermetric. "If you look at every other team in baseball, they all used at least half of their first 10 picks on college players. In fact, most used seven or eight."
"It's true!" exclaimed Mr. Brown. "Why, Baltimore used all 10 on Collegians!"
"Yes," Sabermetric said, "but Baltimore is stupid."
Mrs. Brown fanned her face and slumped down into a chair, overcome with emotion.
"What does it all mean?" wondered Mr. Brown. "Did the Royals blow the draft?"
"Yes and no," Sabermetric explained. "One could say they were too unconventional with their draft, relied too much on unproven talent, and now are paying for it."
"That sure sounds crummy," sulked Mr. Brown.
Sabermetric continued, "On the other hand, maybe Dayton Moore was wise enough to see that all of the other teams were drafting guys out of college, and took advantage of inefficiencies in the market, so he focused on high schoolers instead."
"So, you think maybe Dayton was looking for the next Andruw Jones?" Mr. Brown asked.
"Inefficiency in the what now?" Mrs. Brown cried. "I don't understand, dear."
"Are you sure I'm not adopted?" Sabermetric smirked. "What I'm trying to say is that maybe the Royals made the right choice. Maybe all the good college players were being scooped up, leaving a bunch of prime 18 year olds for the taking..."
"Wow, that's a relief," interrupted Mr. Brown.
"...or maybe Dayton Moore is just retarded," finished Sabermetric.
"Oh, my!" gasped Mrs. Brown. "That is some mouth you have on you."
"It sure is, Sabermetric," glowered Mr. Brown. "Are you sure you're not adopted?"
Mr. Brown grabbed Sabermetric by the ear and led him to the doorway. "Up to your room, son, to think about what you just said."
"Ah, jeez," Sabermetric pleaded. "Don't you want to know if the Royals made a mistake with their draft?"
Mr. Brown looked at his son sternly. "Too late, Sabermetric. It looks like we'll just have to let the readers decide."
0 recs |
42 comments
Comments
I kind of like that strategy
High school draftees, in my opinion, have the highest risk and highest reward of any draftees. So I don't really mind the Royals drafting many of them so that maybe one or two will become genuinely good major leaguers, as opposed to drafting more "safe" picks so that a handful of them can become mediocre major leaguers.
by NYRoyal on Mar 1, 2008 3:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Wow
I like the strategy too, although I'd be wary of going too far in going with young'uns. Like stocks, its probably best to hedge your bets and diversity the profile of draftees. While HS kids may be higher upside, there is of course higher risk. You may want to mitigate some of that risk with "safer" collegiate picks.
If I were to devise a strategy, I might go with best player available in the first round, regardless of high school or college, college in the first couple rounds afterwards (rounds 2-5), then try to lean towards high schoolers after round five or so, and even grab a few guys with "signability" issues like we did with Keaton Hayenga.
by RoyalsRetro on Mar 1, 2008 5:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hats off to you marbotty!
by royaldaddy on Mar 1, 2008 10:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Genius man
As far as general rant about the draft. This is my draft for the Royals last year. We'll see how it turns out.
Round #. Player Royals took(Player I would have taken)
1-2. Mike Moustakas(Matt Wieters-C, 5, Orioles)
2-2. Sam Runion(Sam Runion)
3-2. Dan Duffy(Dan Duffy)
4-2. Mitch Hodge(Nolan Gallagher-RHP, 11, Mariners)
5-2. Adrian Ortiz(Jeremy Hefner-RHP, 23, Padres)
2006 review
1-1. Luke Hochevar(Tim Lincecum-RHP, 10, Giants)
2-1. Jason Taylor(Josh Butler-RHP, 3, Tampa Bay)
3-1. Blake Wood(Brennan Boesch-COF, 6, Detroit)
4-1. Derrick Robinson(Bryant Thompson-RHP, 11, Arizona, though in retrospect, had I been aware of Marcus Lemon, he'd be my pick)
5-1. Jason Godin(Scott Sizemore-2B, 6, Detroit)
by playingwithfire on Mar 2, 2008 4:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Similar thoughts
What are you looking at for 2008? Smoak looks pretty good, but I seem to recall there being a hitter in the Big 12 who put up near identical numbers to Alex Gordon. Don't know much beyond that, though.
by marbotty on Mar 2, 2008 5:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I do that yearly
2006:
1- Brad Lincoln- RHP- Houston
2- Brett Anderson- LHP- HS (Ok)
3- Stephen King- SS- HS (Fla)
4- Whit Robbins- 3B- Georgia Tech
5- Jordan Newton- C- Kentucky
2007:
1- Josh Vitters- 3B- HS (Cal)
2- Nevin Griffith- RHP- HS (Fla)
3- Kyle Blair- RHP- HS (Cal)
4- Eric Farris- 2B- Loyola Marymount
5- Michael Taylor- RF- Stanford
Blair didn't sign, so the theoretical Royals would be getting an extra pick after the third round this season and I'll factor that into my Sickels-style shadow draft this June
by JM Barten on Mar 2, 2008 11:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Buuut...
This year, I'm really high on Smoak and Beckham with Alvarez and Alonzo trailing close behind.
by JM Barten on Mar 2, 2008 11:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
still think we should take a crack
by playingwithfire on Mar 2, 2008 2:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
by NYRoyal on Mar 2, 2008 3:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
who's our best pitching spec now?
by playingwithfire on Mar 2, 2008 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good pitching prospects
In addition to them, Duffy, Wood, Pimentel and Rosa are all good pitching prospects. They all have some realistic projection to be at least decent major league pitchers with upside potential much better than that. Unfortunately, right now only Moustakas projects to being a good major league hitter. I don't think you could say that about any other Royals position player.
In the Royals system, the pitching is way, way in front of the hitting. The hitter shortage is much, much bigger than the pitcher shortage (and there really isn't much of a shortage at all).
by NYRoyal on Mar 2, 2008 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
NY
by FireBell on Mar 2, 2008 5:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course not
by NYRoyal on Mar 2, 2008 6:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was the #1 overall pick...
And while his BB/K stats at AA ball were excellent, his BB/K ratio at Omaha took a huge nosedive.
None of this is to say that Hochevar won't turn out to be an excellent #2/3 starter in a year or two. And he is not a genuine bust (when I think of big time #1 pick bust, I think of someone like Matt Bush). But the Royals passed on some serious pitching talent in the 2006 draft to take Hochevar, and that context has to be considered when evaluating Hochevar holistically.
by DarthYoshi on Mar 2, 2008 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hochevar is a very good pitching prospect
And yes the Royals passed on other pitchers to get Hochevar. Are they all better than him? Brad Lincoln has spent most of his time on the pine with a serious injury. Andrew Miller was very uneven in the minors before being rushed to the majors and failing. It certainly isn't clear that he's better than Hochevar. Everyone complains about Lincecum as if it was clear at the time that he was obviously the best pitcher in the draft. That was anything but clear. There's a reason that nine teams passed on him. One of the big ones is that his size and mechanics make it unclear if he'll be able to stay as a starter and also give rise to some injury risk.
It is very easy to say "pick X was bad" a year or two after the draft because one or two players drafted later are doing better. That always happens. Was it a reasonable choice at the time? Yes. Can he still be a good player for the Royals? Definitely.
by NYRoyal on Mar 2, 2008 11:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed that Hochevar is a good prospect
Sure, the Royals passed on Lincoln, Miller, and Lincecum, but, for instance, they also passed on Clayton Kershaw, who has been phenomenal in minor-league ball in the Dodgers' farm system. He was considered the top HS arm in the draft, and while we all know the risks involved in drafting HS pitchers, the Royals have proved plenty willing to take that risk in the past. Miller's flameout I am more willing to attribute to the Tigers' complete mismanagement of his minor-league career than him being a better or worse pitcher than Hochevar. I'd like to think that Dayton Moore would've treated Miller with much more caution.
by DarthYoshi on Mar 3, 2008 12:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pitchers and draft spot
It only has to be taken into account when you're talking about how fans feel about a prospect. If he's a good prospect, he's a good prospect, regardless of where he was drafted. If he sucks, it also doesn't matter where he was drafted. He's a good prospect, period.
I'm willing to bet that we'd feel way less bad about Chris Lubanski if the Royals didn't spend a #5 pick on him.
I couldn't care less that he was #5 pick. He's a mediocre, prospect period. I'd consider him a low-ceiling mediocre prospect if he were the #1 pick or a 45th round pick.
Sure, the Royals passed on Lincoln, Miller, and Lincecum, but, for instance, they also passed on Clayton Kershaw, who has been phenomenal in minor-league ball in the Dodgers' farm system. He was considered the top HS arm in the draft, and while we all know the risks involved in drafting HS pitchers, the Royals have proved plenty willing to take that risk in the past.
How is this different from any other draft post mortem? With every draftee, you can look at it a year or two later and say that we should have drafted another player, drafted later, who performed better, or is currently considered a better prospect. So what? I mean really, why should I care? No one was seriously saying at the time that Kershaw should have been drafted #1. No one. There were many possible reasonable choices for that pick and the Royals made one of them.
Miller's flameout I am more willing to attribute to the Tigers' complete mismanagement of his minor-league career than him being a better or worse pitcher than Hochevar.
Who knows? Who knows how good he is. Most prospects, even most top prospects, fail. Miller might, Hochevar might, Kershaw might, Lincoln might. Lincecum might blow out his shoulder this year and never be right again. Remember when the next can't miss guaranteed lock pitching prospect was Edwin Jackson? So far, he's had five seasons of unrelenting major league failure, along with three crappy AAA seasons. The list of top pitching prospect failures is a mile long. The jury is still out on all of the above pitchers (except for Jackson).
by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2008 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
blah, subject lines, blah
And I quote you on the BP rankings thread: "Small market teams like the Royals can't afford for first round draft picks to fail very often." Where you draft someone does matter, because of the intrinsic risks involved of using such a relatively valuable draft slot.
"How is this different from any other draft post mortem? With every draftee, you can look at it a year or two later and say that we should have drafted another player, drafted later, who performed better, or is currently considered a better prospect. So what? I mean really, why should I care? No one was seriously saying at the time that Kershaw should have been drafted #1. No one. There were many possible reasonable choices for that pick and the Royals made one of them."
Strike my mention of Kershaw in the Dodgers' minor-league system and nothing that I said was based on hindsight. People were saying then that Kershaw was the top HS pitcher in the draft and among the top 5 pitching prospects (Brandon Morrow barely counts...even then, people were seeing him as a potential reliever rather than a starter). He was one example of a reasonable choice the Royals missed out on, that's all I'm saying.
"Who knows? Who knows how good he is. Most prospects, even most top prospects, fail. Miller might, Hochevar might, Kershaw might, Lincoln might."
Well, yeah. But it is a lot easier to take when your 50th-round pick fails than when your #1 pick does--which was the basic point of my original post to begin with.
And again, I don't think of Hochevar as a bust. But I don't think it is unreasonable for his stock to have gone down since the start of 2007.
by DarthYoshi on Mar 3, 2008 1:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Subject line
Right, the Royals need first round draft picks to succeed. If your first round draft pick turns into a good prospect, then you're doing well. It's not like #1 overall has to be great, but #10 overall only has to be very good, while #20 overall only needs to be good. You need first round draft picks to succeed, period. Hochevar is still looking good. We'll see how he progresses over the next few years to see if he stays on track.
Strike my mention of Kershaw in the Dodgers' minor-league system and nothing that I said was based on hindsight.
Yes, and what you said was, "the Royals passed on Lincoln, Miller, and Lincecum." Yes, they did. And the majority of commentators, "experts," etc. were saying that Miller should be the #1 overall pick. He hasn't exactly done better than Hochevar so far, so we can't say right now that the Royals screwed up by passing on him. Lincoln has been sidelined by injury. Nice pass there. Lincecum looks very good so far, but he fell to #10 because of fears that his size and delivery either wouldn't allow him to stay as a starter, or that he'd go down with injury. Those risks are still there. We'll see what happens.
He [Kershaw] was one example of a reasonable choice the Royals missed out on, that's all I'm saying.
Yes, the Royals passed on him. At the time, no one suggested that the Royals should sign Kershaw. So how does this affect the evaluation of Hochevar? If any pitcher drafted after Hochevar is currently a higher ranked prospect than Hochevar, then it was a bad pick? I think that's pretty silly.
Well, yeah. But it is a lot easier to take when your 50th-round pick fails than when your #1 pick does--which was the basic point of my original post to begin with.
If your basic point is that it feels worse as a fan when a #1 overall pick fails, then I agree with you. Thankfully Hochevar isn't failing. It would have been great if he dominated both AA and AAA, but he didn't. Even polished college draftees aren't usually immediately major league ready. It is also tough to dominate when you aren't allowed to through your best secondary pitch.
And again, I don't think of Hochevar as a bust. But I don't think it is unreasonable for his stock to have gone down since the start of 2007.
Definitely. His stock has gone down in pretty much everyone's eyes, including mine. The fact that he had some difficulties in the minors, even without his slider, makes his stock slide. If he doesn't take a nice step forward this year, his stock will slide even more.
by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2008 3:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Miller pitched better than Hochevar last year
Miller: 2.77 ERA, 3.39 FIP, 78 IP, 7.04 K/9, 2.88 BB/9, 0.35 HR/9, 69% GB%
Hochevar: 4.86 ERA, 4.53 FIP, 152 IP, 8.17 K/9, 2.60 BB/9, 1.42 HR/9, 40% GB%
2007 AA
Miller: 0.59 ERA, 3.36 FIP, 31 IP, 7.04 K/9, 1.47 BB/9, 0.59 HR/9, 77% GB%
Hochevar: 4.69 ERA, 4.02 FIP, 94 IP, 9.00 K/9, 2.49 BB/9, 1.24 HR/9, 40% GB%
by Gopherballs on Mar 3, 2008 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's look a little deeper
To put it mildly, comparing Miller and Hochevar's above 2007 stats wasn't exactly comparing apples to apples.
by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2008 1:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
Hochevar's modest edge in strikeouts is dwarfed by Miller's extreme groundball and home run rates (which is tied directly to the groundballs). Apples to apples, Miller beat Hochevar by 4 runs of ERA and almost 1 run of FIP. That's a huge difference.
by Gopherballs on Mar 3, 2008 4:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Miller and Hochevar
Ok, how do the park factors and level of competition compare between the PCL and the Florida State League. Apples...and oranges.
Hochevar's modest edge in strikeouts
No one can seriously argue that the difference between 9 K/9 and 7 K/9 is modest.
Apples to apples, Miller beat Hochevar by 4 runs of ERA and almost 1 run of FIP. That's a huge difference.
First, you have argued vociferously that ERA is a crappy stat and you never use it to support any argument...until now. Why is it suddenly relevant? When looking at a pitching prospect, I'd much rather have Hochevar's K's and BB's than Miller's.
by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2008 4:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ERA is a crappy stat but you like to use it
As for K rate, Hochevar K's rate fell below 7.0 to 6.83 in AAA (which translates to 5.2 K/9 at the majors). Miller maintained his K/9 in the majors -- in fact, he improved to 7.88 K/9. The difference between their K skills is very modest (and Miller has the better stuff).
Miller's extreme groundball tendencies (which suppress the HR rate, Hochevar's biggest problem) makes him the better prospect.
by Gopherballs on Mar 3, 2008 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're stretching
By the way, I have a feeling that taking away Hochevar's best out pitch affected his stuff and strikeout rate.
by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2008 4:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Draft Position
Truth is..I don't care where Hoch. was drafted. Is he a prospect? Yes, he is. Let's argue that. What's done is done.
Would you rather have Zimmerman or Braun over Gordon? The numbers would sure point to Zimmerman and/or Braun, but I'm not giving up on A-God. I'm not ready to quit on Hoch after 1 year, either.
by Stook on Mar 3, 2008 12:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I like Crow, and not just because he's local. He throws hard and he's a polished collegiate. I don't think he's heads and tails above the rest, but I don't think anyone has really separated themselves yet.
by RoyalsRetro on Mar 2, 2008 8:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Drafting need
by NYRoyal on Mar 2, 2008 10:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the hitters are better
by RoyalsRetro on Mar 2, 2008 11:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And Smoak is a very cool name
by NYRoyal on Mar 2, 2008 11:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mock drafts
2006
1 - RHP Brad Lincoln - U. of Houston (jmbarten and I were both wrong on that one! He's been hurt)
2 - RHP Stephen Wright - U. of Hawaii (suffered mono his first year, was a disappointment this year)
3 - LHP Mark Weiser - Miami U. (OH) (pretty solid thus far)
4 - RHP Jeff Manship - U. Notre Dame (had signability issues but he signed and has been awesome, he's one of the Twins top five prospects)
5 - OF Shawn Scobee - U. Nevada-Reno (terrible)
2007
1 - OF Jason Heyward - Georgia HS (I'd have taken Wieters, but I don't think the Royals were going to pay him; Heyward is a hot prospect thus far)
2 - SS Charles Culberson - Georgia HS (decent)
3 - RHP Sam Demel - Texas Christian Univ (good in low A ball, terrible in high A ball in limited innings)
4 - RHP Travis Banwart - Wichita State Univ. - (very good start)
5 - LHP Effrain Nieves - Puerto Rico HS (not very good, wild last year)
by RoyalsRetro on Mar 2, 2008 8:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's spooky
http://www.minorleagueball.com/comments/2008/1/22/125832/157/9#9
by JM Barten on Mar 3, 2008 4:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
scouting guru Dayton moore
lets hope that doesnt continue
by FireBell on Mar 2, 2008 5:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Best Ever
by trueblue on Mar 2, 2008 8:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Awesome!
by NHZ on Mar 3, 2008 3:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
As of today
by ajblobaum on Mar 3, 2008 5:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 














