Worst MLB Scouting Department

by batonball on May 22, 2008 8:05 AM EDT Comment 30 comments

It's no accident that the Royals have been one of the worst MLB squads for years, from 1992 thru 2001 these are the players they selected. It's hard to make that many consecutive "bust" selections if you tried. lol

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)

0 recs | Comment 30 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

This system....

has so many flaws in its evaluation process, I don’t even have time to go over them.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on May 22, 2008 8:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

20/20 is good

But, the draft is a hard thing to do. For example….

Yankees…

They’re picks from 1993 to 2003

= did not play in Majors

1993 – Matt Drews* (Derrek Lee and Chris Carpenter were the next picks. Varitek was later)
1994 – Brian Buchanan – 767 ML AB (Troy Glaus)
1995 – Shea Morenz* (Carlos Beltran)
1996 – Eric Milton – 5.01 career ERA (Jimmy Rollins)
1997 – Tyrell Godwin* (Chase Utley)
1998 – Andy Brown* (Adam Dunn)
1999 – David Walling* – (Carl Crawford)
2000 – David Parish* – (Adam Wainwright)

It’s not that hard to make bad picks. It’s hard/lucky to make good picks. The Braves had a pretty terrible record for 1st round picks too, and their scouting dept. was supposed to be tops in the Majors.

by Francois on May 22, 2008 8:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

That was a bad run too

I would have to say baseball is the toughest sport for team management to select the best future talent in.

The other sports have their share of busts but nothing compared to Baseball.

by batonball on May 22, 2008 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And let's not forget the whole Brien Taylor thing.

Every team misses when it comes to bad picks. Some do miss more often than others, though.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on May 22, 2008 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Taylor

I’m not a Yankees fan, but from a pure talent perspective, I’m not sure that I can argue with the Brien Taylor pick. He was in the early stages of his minor league career when he got into the bar fight and tore his labrum. His stats before the injury look decent (although his walks were pretty high). It would have been interesting to see what he could have developed into. Not saying he could have been a Cy Young winner, but he might have developed into a good pitcher.

If you’re referring to a character issue with Taylor, you may be right. To be honest, I don’t know if he had any negative character issues in high school.

by kosmo99 on May 22, 2008 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Part of it, I'm sure, was the whole Boras influence

Basically, the money the Yankees (thanks to Steinbrenner) shelled out to Taylor helped put Boras on the map. I don’t doubt Taylor’s talent was there but whatever the reasons, the fight included, he never got it together to make it to the majors.

You can see what the Royals were focusing on with most of the above picks, but whether it was scouting, good picks gone bad or whatever, the players they selected just didn’t pan out. Happens more often with some teams than others, though everyone gets duds.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on May 22, 2008 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Odds are stacked against the teams from the start

Early (from my study of the draft), with the top 5 picks overall, you have about a 45% chance of selecting a good major league player, but it drops to about 25% by picks 6-10, and 10% by picks 21-30 overall. Obviously, even worse as you go deeper in the draft, about 2-3% by round 3.

So, if you are trying to make a team look bad, you can usually bring up some prospect superstud selected after your pick – because there’s usually one somewhere in the haystack – and list them all.

And if you want to make one team look bad vs. another, you compare the team you want to look bad with a team that had a lot of top 5-10 picks recently. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

I would also note, about the Yankee example, that those are the picks right after Brian Sabean left the Yankees to join the Giants. He didn’t do so well with the Brien Taylor pick, but Carl Everett and Derek Jeter were the other two, so not so bad. Of course, it helped that the three were top 10 picks overall.

Adoptive parental unit of Kevin "Most Spectacular Pitcher" Pucetas.

"I'm a Giant now... I like watching the ball get up there" - Wendell Fairley
"I'm really proud to be on this team." - Nate Schierholtz

by obsessivegiantscompulsive on May 23, 2008 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

TINSTAAPP rears it's ugly head

The Royals tried for years to improve pitching through 1st round picks, and this was the result. A handful of these guys had arm injuries that derailed promising careers, while others were more projection that never panned out.

Watching the Royals draft like this growing up has ingrained in me the philosophy of taking position players with your 1st and most expensive pick, then loading up on projectable arms later in the draft. Too much can go wrong with pitchers at a young age, so it doesn’t make much sense to invest heavily in one. Just draft a bunch and throw them against the wall to see what sticks.

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on May 22, 2008 10:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

TINSTAAPP is wildly overstated

There is such a thing as a pitching prospect, just like there’s such a thing as a hitting prospect. Sean Burroughs didn’t flop because he was a pitcher. Flops just happen. Look back at John’s reviews of his old top prospect lists. He had plenty of misses that weren’t pitchers. There’s no such thing as a sure thing and drafting is hard. You just have to hope there’s a good methodology there.

by aap212 on May 22, 2008 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not really

The point of TINSTAAPP is that pitchers are extremely volatile based on the fact that they put a ridiculous amount of stress on one part of their body day in and day out for years. Some guys hold up, some guys don’t, and you don’t know which camp a guy falls in until he gets seriously injured and his career is threatened. The poor KC drafts of the 90’s are perfect examples of why pinning huge hopes on an individual pitcher is a risky strategy.

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on May 22, 2008 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

LeBron

It sounds like they were on the right track in 1995. Too bad he turned down the Royals for basketball, but I think that turned out alright for him.

The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.

by Savoy on May 22, 2008 11:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

That's what KC gets

for drafting a 9-year old.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on May 22, 2008 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can't blame them

he oozed tools and projection.

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on May 22, 2008 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pirates...

1993- Charles Peterson
1994- Mark Farris
1995- Chad Hermanson
1996- Kris Benson
1997- J. J. Davis
1998- Clint Johnston
1999- Bobby Bradley
2000- Sean Burnett
2001- John Van Benschoten
2002- Bryan Bullington

More recently:

Paul Maholm- could be a decent mid-rotation guy, but very inconsistent
Neil Walker- looking at his AAA numbers this year, could be another bust
Andrew McCutchen- Should be solid
Brad Lincoln- ???
Daniel Moskos- Not exactly impressing anyone right now.

by calig23 on May 22, 2008 11:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why'd you leave out Beltran?

Also, ownership is partially to blame here. The Royals were set to take Berkman before ownership came down and said they had to take a pitcher.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on May 22, 2008 1:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Come to think of it

Beltran was a 2nd round pick. I think.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on May 22, 2008 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Draft

Can’t you do this for just about any team? I don’t think that is a reflection on the current status of the Royals. Alex Gordon, Billy Butler, Luke Hochevar, and Mike Moustakas all have good potential. That’s four years in a row of what initially looks like success. People can say what they will about Hochevar going #1 and the Royals bypassing Lincecum. Hochevar does not look like a bust and still looks like a good pick to me (even if there were better options).

I believe the Dodgers had a string of Ben Diggins, Bubba Crosby, Jason Repko, Brian Pilkington, Damian Rolls, and David Yocum. This is a list from th late 90s and it’s not like you can say the Dodger scouting department sucks because of this.

by count sutton on May 22, 2008 1:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The Royals have relatively new personnel making these decisions now

Dayton Moore took over 2 years ago and things seem to be a little bit better now. At least better than the Baird years.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on May 22, 2008 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thing is

Baird is highly-regarded in his current capacity with Boston. You have to think ownership was a factor in a lot of those decisions.

by number_twentyone on May 22, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Baird

Personally, I think he is a great scout and front office guy, but was overmatched in the GM role. Ownership did have a lot to do with the issues in KC, but Baird contributed.

Nevertheless, Baird did draft Billy Butler and many people criticized that move. In the end, Baird was right on that one.

by count sutton on May 22, 2008 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Butler

Did anybody ever question whether Butler would hit? Weren’t most of the concerns the legitmate ones over his defense? Those are legitimate, as he’s not even a competent 1B at this point. I can see why people would shy away from a 22-year-old who is already basically a DH.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on May 23, 2008 12:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

First base

Seen him play?

Hasn’t hurt the team the whole year despite playing over there a lot.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on May 23, 2008 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ownership

It was certainly a factor, but it didn’t change the fact that Baird didn’t know what a pitcher looked like.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on May 22, 2008 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ok...

just got home from work, so I can tackle this now. Some points have been brought up, some haven’t.

First, you have to look at talent. Just because someone did not pan out, does not mean they weren’t the right pick at the time. Take Ryan Leaf when the Chargers drafted him. He was the consensus #2 pick, he was the best player for that team to pick. He didn’t pan out. Doesn’t mean he was the wrong guy to take. When Darko Milicic went #2 overall in the NBA draft a few years back, he was considered by everyone to be a Top 3 guy. You can’t blame Detroit for taking him when 28 other teams would have loved to have drafted him.

If David Price doesn’t pan out, should the Rays get criticized for drafting the player that every team would have drafted at that point?

Also, you can’t always blame a scouting department. What kind of instruction were they receiving? I am a firm believer that sometimes players make it because they are in an organization that is right for them. Good coaches, no one blocking them, etc. If a pitcher gets drafted, and that organization changes their delivery and the pitcher flames out… is it still his fault? Maybe if they had gone to another team, their mechanics would not have been tampered with and they could be a Cy Young winner. Can’t blame Scouting for that.

Everyone always says it takes XX number of years before you can adequately grade a draft, but they forget that you cannot toss out all the information and ratings that you had back then just because things have changed.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on May 22, 2008 5:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

If a guy gets injured out of the blue, or suddenly lose their stuff for no apparent reason, then you can say he was the right pick at the time. Ryan Leaf is a bad example though. It’s obvious in hindsight that he was the wrong pick, even at the time. Everyone just evaluated him poorly. He had some big red flags then, and they became even bigger when he became a pro. Precisely because of Ryan Leaf, NFL teams pay a lot more attention to personality than they used to.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on May 22, 2008 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

reply

I was going to post something similar to this. As a Dodger fan, I look at the Greg Miller pick. His talent was undeniable, and while he still might turn the corner, he is looking more and more like a bust due to the shoulder injury and continuing control problems.

That does not make him a bad pick though. He was the best talent available in the spot the Dodgers drafted him.

by count sutton on May 22, 2008 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree in general principle

Unless Miller (or any player) had previous injury history, such poor mechanics (for a pitcher) that injury was more likely, poor work ethic, etc. then a team can be criticized. I guess that sorta goes along with the Ryan Leaf example. If there ARE red flags and a team take a chance anyway, they can be criticized for the pick.

Sometimes I wonder how often these injuries are also the cause of bad organizations that don’t know how to properly groom pitchers.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on May 23, 2008 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

exactly

In the example above, Miller did not have a previous injury history. He became ranked by BA as (if memory recalls) the #6 prospect in baseball and then suffered an injury. I can hardly blame someone for drafting him.

I don’t have scouting reports on the guys listed above that the Royals drafted (well, most people know of Colt Griffin), but I’m sure every pick can be justified. They just didn’t pan out.

A better question is: if Albert Pujols went to high school in Independence, MO (which borders Kansas City), then how the heck did Royals scouts miss that guy? Having Pujols right there was the best luck a team can have; they just did not capitalize on it.

by count sutton on May 23, 2008 1:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

High picks

Everyone has 1st round misses. But if you are picking in the top 5 or 10 every year and none of them make, it isn’t just bad luck. Its terrible scouting first with some bad luck thrown in.

by GoldenSpikes24 on May 22, 2008 8:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

wow

ranking a system by arbitrarily selecting the best player selected after him and comparing -> this has to be the most obtuse way of looking at it.

For example in 1994 you are using the 16th overall pick to compare against the 24th pick. I’m sure a few picks before the 24th were a bust. Just guessing.

by pedrophile on May 22, 2008 9:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs