Organization: Drafting vs Development

by Jgaztambide on Nov 11, 2007 10:16 PM EST Comment 12 comments

This topic has been on my mind for a while, so I decided to throw it out to the community in hopes of generating some discussion

How does one differentiate between an organization's ability to draft and identify talent vs their ability to develop talent?

For example, it seems as though the Dodgers went through a period where they had a lot of very good pitching prospects. Did this happen because they just happened to draft better, or was it because the prospects took a step up once they became a part of the organization?

Similarly, the Indians of the mid-late 90's were a hotbed for young offensive talent, between Manny, Sexson, Alomar, Giles, etc. So did the Indians acquire top notch talent or develop it?

Is it even possible to identify the difference between the two? How do you know if a team found a diamond in the rough or just developed the player?

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

i apologize for making this the first response...

but for the sake of accuracy, both the alomar's came up through the padres system

and in response to the motivation of the thread, i'm not sure we as fans have access to the type of information we'd need to differentiate between good talent evaluation and good development, however obviously you'd need both to produce successful major league players

by nyybaseball99 on Nov 11, 2007 10:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

My take

Identifying talent:
I think this goes for drafting "polished players" and which prospects to acquire through trade. Most college players are expected to thrive in the minor league settings and some are rushed to do already possessing talent.

Developing talent:
I think when you have a guy who has a lot of potential, developing talent is a need. This goes for a lot of highschool players. Highschoolers can choose development through the college system or through a major league team.

It's always a mix of identifying talent and developing it. First you find someone with potential then you harness it. The prospects with talent are usually the top picks in the draft while the rest is development imo.

Go Jays!!!!

Allan's World

Blue bird Banter

by achengy on Nov 11, 2007 10:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

What if it goes hand in hand

What I've noticed with the Yankees, is that since they have Nardi Contreras, they have the midas touch with raw RHP. Whoever they take in the draft, he fixes their mechanics in a jiffy and they're suddenly blowing them away and rising up through the system.

Todd Frazier for President

by FrazierFan on Nov 12, 2007 1:14 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Re: Nardi

Nardi Contreras is exactly the guy I was thinking of when I posted this

If I remember correctly, Nardi's speciality is teaching righthanders a Power Curveball which is pretty repeatable. Does that sound about right? I haven't read about him since last offseason

For people who follow other organizations, does your team have a similar figure, a roaming instructor or pitching coach with a great reputation for developing players?

I can't think of one off the top of my head for the Red Sox

by Jgaztambide on Nov 12, 2007 9:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cuellar?

I believe the Twins AAA pitching coach and now AA manager, Bobby Cuellar, has been credited with teaching Santana his change-up and helping Liriano.

by cooper7d7 on Nov 13, 2007 2:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a good question

And it's one that I've thought about a little bit. I think that the main thing is that you look for trends. If you see a team where many of it's prospects improve by leaps and bounds each year, then I would think that alot of credit has to go to the development staff. But, it really tough for the average person to notice, let alone someone who is in the business.

The two are very much linked. If a team drafts badly, how can you expect any good prospects to come from the farm. And to some extent, it has to do with how much the scouting and development staffs are intune with each other. If the scouting staffs knows the types of prospects that the development staff has had good success with they know what to look for.

by parrot11 on Nov 12, 2007 2:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Cardinals

Have a lot of high-level draft picks in the past few years that haven't lived up to expectations (I'm looking at you, T. Greene). The message boards are full of people ranting and raving about how the evaluation program needs to be fixed, etc., but I always just wonder - do they maybe just have a bad instructional system that can't figure out how to tailor their adjustments to different athletes? I mean, the Braves seem to cultivate this never-ending stream of often-unheralded talent - and the Cards give us 1st Rounder after 1st Rounder that just doesn't pan out.

I'm exagerrating a little (yes, I've heard of Colby Rasmus), but my point still holds, and I think this diary is provocative.

"...our commish was set on one very special person. Amazing resume..." -JSCA, showing that Fantasy Baseball has gone big-time. CVs, anyone?

by siddfynch on Nov 12, 2007 3:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Reyes

I agree this is a provocative diary, and one that's worth exploring in some detail, though it is hard for us to get true visibility into the various systems from the outside.

IMO, another recent example of St.L.'s developmental failures (to date) is Anthony Reyes.

What in the @#$%&* happened to Anthony Reyes? Perhaps we can find fault with his stuff, his head, the innings he logged in college, and so forth, but I honestly feel like St. Louis did a pretty p*ss poor job of teaching Reyes the skills he needed to succeed at the major league level.

by Yakker on Nov 13, 2007 1:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

maybe its the player this time

Duncan is reputedly one of the best at his job, I don't know anything for sure but maybe Mr. Reyes doesn't listen well. It happens, a lot w/ younger ones.

And sometimes people don't mesh. E.g. - Mazzone for all his prodigies has some kids he could never turn around despite all their supposed talent, and a few kids that pitched better once they left his org.

Mulder: Babe Ruth was an alien? Arthur Dales: sure; all the great ones were aliens.

by dew on Nov 13, 2007 6:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Braves

In my mind, the Braves do an excellent job of developing talent. I think one of the ways that you see that is in the type of player that has come out of their system in recent years, especially on the pitching side. When you see a similar "style" of pitcher coming out of the system year in and year out, I think that's a fairly good indication that the system is developing that player effectively.

Although I'll echo what someone said above, which is that the best farm systems do both: ID (and nurture) top talent and draft and develop mid-level talent.

by Yakker on Nov 13, 2007 1:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

more than a few coaches & scouts

have told me that a player's make-up is becoming the single most important thing anymore. It seems easier to find kids who can throw, run, etc. (esp. overseas) but finding the ones whose possess the sole desire and determination it takes to handle all the bus rides, crappy motel rooms, etc. for yrs and remain focused on their game is getting harder. Maybe off subject a bit but I'd wonder how many teams (maybe all) employ various "personality tests" before signing even lower level prospects. Perhaps this part of scouting needs to be constantly revamped, and whoever is doing the best job at this is pulling up the best talent???

Mulder: Babe Ruth was an alien? Arthur Dales: sure; all the great ones were aliens.

by dew on Nov 13, 2007 6:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Millenials?

60 Minutes did a piece on the generation being called "Millenials". They were born between 84 and 95. They have never failed, expect to be treat as such and have "helicopter" parents.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/08/60minutes/main3475200.shtml

I believe John did a segment about personality being the next big /currently undeiscovered facet of scouting.

by cooper7d7 on Nov 14, 2007 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs