29 June 2010

Depot Retro: Koji Uehara scouting report

Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008
Scouting Report: Koji Uehara, RHP, Japan
By Nick James
Before unveiling our Fall 2008 Top 40 pitchers in the 2009 Draft Class, we take a quick look at another Japanese right-hander: Koji Uehara. The 6-1 /187 lbs. 33-year old (34 this upcoming May) is looking to sign with a Major League organization this Winter, with the Orioles apparently the only team currently looking at him as a starter.
Grading Out
Motion – 50
Tempo – 60
4S Fastball – 50
2S Fastball – 55
Slider – 50
Changeup/Forkball – 55

Overall Motion – Uehara’s motion is clean with some deception and an interesting thrust upwards at the end of his high-effort delivery. As he enters his leg kick, he gets great bend in his back leg allowing him to get maximum thrust in his stride. His plant is clean and he does an excellent job of keeping his momentum directed towards home. As he releases, he drives upwards with his plant foot, giving him the appearance of rising upwards as the pitch comes. On occasion, he'll enter this thrust before the ball has completely left his hand, leaving the pitch up (though this is much more the exception than the rule). While his follow-through -- both leg and arm -- can be violent at times, it's generally under control and leaves him facing forward. Overall, there is a lot of effort, but the mechanics are clean enough to have helped him avoid serious injury over a good-sized career.

Arm Action – As Uehara splits his hands and enters his stride, he cocks his wrist pulling the ball in and towards his elbow. This action places additional stress on the elbow and is generally a red flag indicating a higher probability of elbow troubles down the line. Given that Uehara has not run into serious elbow injury in his career, it's quite possible this is a non-issue. Still, if Baltimore is looking to use him as a starter, it will be something to keep in mind with regards to pitch counts and inning counts on the season. Otherwise, Uehara's arm action is clean though he throws with some effort. There is a good amount of torque on the shoulder, but his upper-half generally works well with his lower-half, helping to ease some of that tension. His follow-through is generally smooth, though as mentioned above he can get a bit violent at times leading to recoil.
Pace – Uehara keeps a terrific pace, moving cleanly through his motion and keeping all of his parts working together. His upper-half and his lower-half are on the same page, reducing stress in his shoulder (which is key considering his generally high-effort delivery).
Mechanics Grade – B
Fastball – Uehara comes with a low-90s 4-seam fastball that is generally flat and a 2-seamer a couple of miles-per-hour slower with good arm-side run. He commands both pitches well to all four quadrants and mixes them well so as to give the batter a different look. His 4-seamer is a below-average pitch, though it plays-up a bit due to his command. His 2-seamer is an average pitch that plays-up due to the late action and has plus-potential when he is living on the black.
Slider – Uehara's slider is a tight little offering with late bite and not great depth. Like his fastballs, his slider plays-up due to his command, and he's able to keep the pitch inside against lefties and on the low corners against righties. It's an average pitch that should play well against ML hitters provided he keeps it out of the middle-of-the-plate.
Changeup/Forkball – Uehara's other secondary offering is a changeup/forkball with good depth and fade. It's most effective as a chase pitch with two strikes, though he's comfortable throwing it inside to lefties and breaking it over their knees to the low-inside corner. This fringe-plus-offering may be the key to his success or failure as a starter, as it will help keep his pitch count down and produce ground balls if he commands it well.
“Stuff” Grade – B- – Uehara is not likely to overpower anyone at the ML-level, but he has the potential to keep hitters off-balance with three solid to above-average offerings. If he can maintain his plus-command, his three pitch mix should play towards the back-end of a ML rotation. His slider and fastball are not good enough to miss with, so leaving either over the plate will get him into trouble in a hurry. He'll need to work ahead in the count and utilize his change/forkball to get some swings-and-misses or groundouts.
Nick’s Notes
Uehara could be groomed as a reliever or a starter, though it looks like he would prefer to start and Baltimore is currently the only team looking to use him in that role. Plus-command and an adequate if unspectacular arsenal could make him a solid option at the back of a rotation, though given his arm cock (pulling the ball to his elbow) it may make sense to use him in the #5 spot where he can have a couple of starts skipped as a precaution. Were Uehara to struggle as a starter, he could be used as a situational reliever, primarily as a groundball pitcher in the Bradford mold.
Prospect Grade – C+

27 June 2010

Depot Retro: Markakis Extension

What is Nick Markakis Worth?
 May 29, 2008

 A point of frustration to some may be the top brass of the Orioles dragging their feet with regard to signing Nick Markakis to a long-term contract. So far this year other teams have shown a proclivity to locking in their young players for the long-term. Detroit traded for and signed Miguel Cabrera to a 7 year deal for 140 MM. The Tigers also locked up Curtis Granderson for 5 years at 30 MM.

Toronto handed down a 6 year, 64 MM deal to Alex Rios and a 4 year, 12 MM deal to Aaron Hill. Evan Longoria was signed long-term after a handful of games. That contract has some iffy language and can be 6 to 9 years in length and 17.5 to 44 MM in worth. The Milwaukee Brewers signed Ryan Braun to an 8 year, 45 MM contract. Rockies inked Troy Tulowitski to a 6 year, 31 MM deal. The Indians, who supposedly invented this approach of committing to young talent, sign Fausto Carmona to a 4-7 year deal for 15-48 MM. So, yeah, a lot of these contracts have been signed lately, but a major question is: Why are these deals being signed?

The Players Perspective
A baseball players entire perceived worth is related to his baseball performance. In turn, this is basically related to his physical fitness. A baseball career can be incredibly short. Many players have had an amazing rookie season and then just disappeared. Stuck in the renewal and arbitration systems, their pay is undervalued in comparison to their worth to the team. A few examples would be Angel Berroa, Ben Grieve, Bob Hamelin, Jerome Walton, Pat Listach, Marcus Giles, and even our very own Craig Worthington. The retention of physical ability is a chief concern among players and it is understandable why they would want to enter into a long-term contract because of the financial stability of such a deal.

There is a counter argument. Jayson Stark's article last week listed several players who have little interest into locking themselves into a deal. The players mentioned were the Uptons, Russell Martin, Prince Fielder, King Felix, Jeff Francoeur, and the Red Sox trio of young stars (Jonathan Papelbon, Kevin Youkilis, and Dustin Pedroia). Why would they not wish to enter into a deal? The trade off of signing a long term deal is that you may undercut your own value. The thought is that these deals cost a player about 3-5 MM per free agent year bought out. That is dependent, of course, on whether the player pans out. The players listed above are some of the best in the game, so it goes to reason that they can most likely keep their level of play. If I was Francoeur, I'd sign a deal though. Extreme contact hitters are a risky projection.

The Teams Perspective
A major concern of any organization is salary control. Money isn't free . . . it obviously has a cost. This cost often is hard to see. It will be difficult to know whether Jay "Albatross" Gibbons played in effort in courting other free agents, investing in the minor league system, or improving scouting. It is to a team's advantage to be able to identify plus talent and then secure it with a low ball offer. That is where these contracts make sense. Even teams with massive amounts of cash flow engage in this. Robinson Cano's extension is an example. The issue is though that sometimes the player you locked in is Kenny Lofton and sometimes it is Carlos Baerga. For a mid to low market teams, this strategy may be a necessity as the only way to compete long-term is taking a risk on young players and securing a few free agent years on the cheap. Richer teams do it because it gives them more money to spread around and a poor decision on this level is not going to affect them as much as a poor decision on a free agent signing when the contract carries more of a premium.

The Orioles' Perspective

It appears the Orioles are in between. Dan Connolly wrote an article a week or so back in the Sun. An anonymous source in the front office called the deal absurd and was quoted:
"To give a guy a contract like that who has never done it in the big leagues, that is what I call high-risk," the official said. "This game isn't that easy to predict."
The source of those comments may have emerged from someone who thought signing Gibbons and Mora to extension was a good idea. Andy MacPhail's comments (mentioned in the story) were more general and even-handed, which is what one would want from an official statement. It seems to be more clear that the team sees themselves as having not much to gain if Markakis does become the best right fielder in the game, but much to lose if he does not. It looks to me they will wait and let the free agent market determine his value. Is this a good move if it is indeed what they are doing?

From the Orioles (and, conversely, Markakis') perspective, what savings can be gained by signing Nick right now? This study will dive back into the generalized runs created equation and shifting that to wins, which I have done in the past on many occasions. Nick's performance will be used from PECOTA's 7 year forecast. Changes in the forecast by year will be incorporated into the current 25th and 75th projectile performance projections. Valuation is my own figure with each win being worth roughly 3 MM in today's market. Over the past five years, players salary has increased roughly 10% each year. Projected worth will increase at the same rate. All of this will be tied together in terms of cumulative savings or cost. It should be stated that I considered his defense to be average. The general consensus is that he has a plus arm and average range.

Nick Markakis Projection
Markakis' year has been a bit peculiar. He is on pace for 26 home runs, but is also on pace for 16 doubles. It is a peculiar line. His rates fall in at 253/374/424. His PrOPS place him at 280/396/492. His 2007 50th percentile PECOTA projection places him at 356/470, so PECOTA is right there in the middle and I am going to run with that. PECOTA's projections require a subscription, so I don't feel right publishing them here. What I will show is his 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile projections convert to runs created per 162 games. As you can see, he 25th percentile condition shows him being roughly replacement level as a right fielder (RL-RF is 348ops/413slg) for his career. The 50th percentile places him slightly above league average (Avg-RF is 360/465). His 75th percentile has have as significantly better than league average. Perhaps the strangest thing about these projections is how consistent they have Markakis' level of performance over these next 7 years.

Performance Valuation By Year
Although his performance is projected to remain relatively constant over the next seven years, salaries will climb as more cash flushes into MLB. Over the past five years, salaries have increased about 10% each season. Each win over replacement level player performance was multiplied by 3 MM in 2007, 3.3 MM in 2008, 3.6 MM in 2009, etc. Markakis' current performance is worth about 12 MM to the Baltimore Orioles, but he is being paid 0.455 MM. You can probably understand why he might be a little annoyed about the renewal system. If he was a free agent (ignoring his age and potential breakout ability), he would be worth that 12 MM. Compared with other players in that range it falls right on the nose. Jose Guillen is getting paid 13 MM and he was the 2007 league average right fielder (I'm still not sure how he did not get pay docked for the PED aura).

Cumulative Earnings Gained or Lost
This leads us to the bottom line. I think a proper correlative to Markakis would be Alex Rios. Toronto signed him to a 6 year, 64 MM contract this past offseason. That would be similar to what we would expect it would take to sign Nick this upcoming offseason. I assigned him a 6 year, 66.01 MM contract for simplicity and avoidance of numbers with dreadful connotation. The cumulative costs for the 25, 50, and 75 projections are based on three arbitration years and three years of free agency with the cost set by performance valuation of the prior season. For instance, in the 50th percentile I predicted arbitration worth as 5MM in 2009, 7MM in 2010, and 11MM in 2011. The next three years were then dictated by the valuation of his 2011 performance, which comes to 18 MM per season. That comes to a cumulative cost/earnings of 76 MM.
Out of the scenarios considered here, the Orioles would lose money only if Nick hits his 25th percentile projections. The Orioles would lose 16.5 MM over the course of 6 years. Of course, this is based on the free agent market and may overvalue his worth as there may be 0-3 year players capable of this performance. If you consider that possibility, it might be a loss of 50 MM or so over that time period. If Markakis hits his 50th percentile, the Orioles would have saved 10MM over 6 or 1.7 MM each year. The 75th percentile would be a savings of 37 MM over 6 years or about 6MM per year.

 It is understandable why the Orioles might be reluctant to secure Markakis for the long term. If he falters it be a costly mistake (about 50 MM). If he stays the same as he is now, he basically get what he would have gotten anyway. If he breaks out . . . then he will cost a lot of money and years. That is basically what it comes down to. If you are sure that he is going to be a premium player, then you should lock him up in order to maximize your cash efficiency for other players on your roster. Ideally, the only time you pay a premium is when you bring players into your organization via free agency.

I think signing Markakis should be a priority and it will be fine to lock him in for 6 years at 66.01 MM. Perhaps a bit smarter of a contract would grant him 4 years at 40 MM and 2 team options years for 13.005 MM a piece. That way, he would still get a great deal of value for his first 4 seasons of the contract and the team would have an out if he completely crashes. I think Nick is not a high risk player. As opposed to the previous players mentioned (i.e., Craig Worthington, Ben Grieve) is not someone who relies on two tools. Markakis has plus ability in all skills and I think that makes him an easy one to bet on. Of course, this assumes Nick wants an extension. He certainly wants to be paid more, but I am not sure he wants to be lock in long-term. If he buys into the hype (Rob Neyer predicted that over the next 5 years he would be the best RF in the game), then he would be foolish to sign long term. Time will tell.

Though perhaps the biggest lesson is the savings attributed to developing young talent. Looking at Nick Markakis' 75th percentile projection, what we see is that over the next 6 years is that he could earn 103 MM if he goes the arbitration and free agency route. In turn, to get that much production off the free market, it would cost 157 MM. Even with respect to the average RF, you get a savings of 22 MM over 6 years. This is probably the lesson we have learned over the last decade or so: 0-3 year players are worth a lot of money. So, the next time you get excited by your team acquiring an established player (i.e., Bedard) for a collection of prospects (i.e. Adam Jones, Chris Tillman) . . . remember that with the extra 20-30% savings your team may be making, you can extend your own guys or pay the premium for the specific free agent talent to get you over the hump.

26 June 2010

Depot Retro: Infield Age Curves

Infield Defensive Age Curves

A major consideration for any team when it comes to offering a player an extension or signing a free agent is often boiled down to his offensive production over the length of the new contract. Another consideration that is often overlooked is where the bat will play. For instance, signing a 28 year old Miguel Tejada to a 6 year contract to play shortstop is actually a very smart move. His bat played well over expectations for a SS and would become league average by about his final year of the deal. Likewise, Tejada's defense was astounding and very much under-rated. A typical age progression would have showed him to be an average to slightly below average defensive SS in his final year.

In hindsight, we now know he was two years older than admitted. This shifts the projection in the wrong way. His 5th year is now as an average offensive SS and an average defensive SS (very good hands, but no range outside of his zone). Next year should result in a precipitous decline in defense, but you cannot shift him to third base or first base. Why? You can easily find bats that provide more offensive output than Tejada for the same defense. For the Orioles, thankfully they shipped him off and at least got a serviceable left fielder and some potential arms. They also helped add to Ed Wade's long list of bad, but not life threatening trades.

Here we will try to quantify typical infield age curves for fielding. When it comes to fielding there are two main considerations when it comes to generating outs: the ability to field "cleanly" and range. Fielding cleanly or fielding efficiency is a skill that maximizes when the player has had experience at the MLB level. Aging will affect efficiency, but not to a great extent. Range on the other hand is heavily affected by aging, or that is what I would assume. As a player ages, he should experience decreased ability to cover the same territory or have his reaction time slow.

How will fielding be measured?

Revised Zone Rating (RZR) will be used as a surrogate for fielding efficiency. This metric assumes there is a given territory that a defender should be expected to cover. Of all the balls that pass through this zone, outs are recorded and compared to the number of chances. This is not ideal as RZR will be effected eventually by decreased range, but it should be rather representative because players are typically moved off positions if they are so unable to defend this standardized area.

Out of Zone (OOZ) Plays will be used to represent range. These plays are those that are made outside of the zone designated to the position. Again, there are potential issues. If a defender is playing next to a player who has great range then the number of OOZ plays he can accrue will probably be reduced. The resulting effect may not be great because several players seasons will be used to determine the aging curve line.

The data was collected from the Hardball Times fielding statistics. Fielding performance was recorded from 2004-2007. Out of Zone plays for each player was divided by the number of innings played and normalized over 162 9 inning games. Ages were then determined and applied to the seasons. Ages with less than three data points were removed from consideration. Only full time players were considered.

First Base

The curves depicted to the right show the effect of age on fielding efficiency (orange) and range (black). Each horizontal mark represents one run for both y axes. For instance, if a player moves upward ten lines then he has prevented ten runs from scoring in comparison to the year before. Ten runs is roughly worth one win. For first basemen, each play is worth about 0.798 runs.

Based on the age classes we have on hand (at least three data points had to be available for each age included), we see absolutely no acclimation for range from 24 onward. Range basically plateaus between age 30 and 31 seasons. For first basemen, fielding range is maximized in the early 20s and immediately declines until about age 30. First base is not considered a defensive position, so when a 1B ages it is typically met with a shrug. Fielding efficiency maxes out at 26 or 27 years of age and then goes into decline. It could be argued that the decline is fueled largely by the decline in range. It should be noted that efficiency, for a short period, does increase as range decreases. The reduced ability to field effectively is most likely due to age and range. A simple regression found correlation between range and RZR to be an order of magnitude greater than age and RZR.

Second Base

Just like the previous graph, the curves depicted to the right show the effect of age on fielding efficiency (orange) and range (black). A single play is worth about 0.754 runs for a second baseman. Fielding efficiency maxes out around age 28 or 29. Range is maximized at age 26 or 27. Ages 27 to 29 are when fielding ability is greatest for second basemen as their efficiency rises and their range has not been greatly compromised. Most second basemen fall completely apart in their early to mid thirties, so I did not have enough data to cover that time period.

Second base appears to be a position suffers a great amount of physical degradation, but also is one of the later ones in terms of reaching a high point for efficiency. It takes several years before fielding efficiency is optimized. Taking this data into consideration, defensive second basemen are hurt by free agency for the most part (or the organizations who sign them). After the renewal system and arbitration cycles take their turns, defensive minded second basemen hit free agency with their better days behind them. It is more likely that the dropoff is far more severe than depicted on these curves due to older 2B neutralizing the aging effect.

Third Base

For third basemen, a single play is worth about 0.8 runs. This position has the most costly plays barely nudging out first base. It should be noted that the reason why the corners are so costly as because those fair balls slicing down the first or third base line often result in extra bases or a difficult throw to nail an advancing runner. Plays at these corner positions are about 7% more valuable than those in the interior. Balancing that is that there are far more plays in the interior than on the corners.

Of all of the positions, we have the most information for this one in terms of different ages. Third base and second base have some similarities in terms of how long players take to develop peak efficiency at these positions. Third basemen take a little bit longer as they peak around 30 or 31. The reason for both of these might be due to learning a new position. A significant number of second basemen and third basemen are often shifted off of shortstop. This switch may take years for a player to develop properly and achieve his highest level of performance.


For shortstops, a single play is worth about 0.753 runs.

Based on the age classes we have on hand (at least three data points had to be available for each age included), we were only able to include ages 22 to 32 on this graph. As opposed to the 2B curves, these have similar apexes, but differ with where they end up. Shortstop appears to take more skill and athletic ability to play effectively. This comes as no surprise. Also, range deteriorates much more quickly than efficiency, which agrees with the 2B study. Fielding lifespan is much shorter for a SS than a 2B though. Range for a SS seems to peak around 26/27 and fielding efficiency peaks 27/28.

A quick check on Google and I find that Tom Tango did something similar in February. His findings basically agree with my own even though we calculated these in different ways. His calculations predict a decline twice as rapidly as my own. For instance, we both find the same peak, but he finds a decrease of -35 plays from peak to age 32. I find it to be -18 plays. I am not sure which is more appropriate. Perhaps considering my findings and Tango's as a range would be a good idea. That range is worth about one win. Regardless, this trend seems more unmistakable.

Points to Take Home

If these curves are accurate depictions of player ability it should be noted that there are some immediate declines for all positions at the time for extensions or free agency. A typical first baseman will lose 1.3 more games in his age 32 season than his age 28 season. Third base is more resilient as only 0.3 games lost in that transition. This retention has a lot to do with the fact that players with the ability to stick at third base will stay there while those who lose range or skill will be shifted to first base. Looking at the middle infield, A second baseman and shortstop will lose 1.5 and 1.4 more games using that same comparison, respectively.

As can be seen, a major issue with free agency is that it is rarely a source of middle infielders. This is something that most teams have figured out as you will rarely see anyone sign a middle infielder for much money these days. Your typical second baseman and shortstop will be quite useful at their natural positions until they reach about age 32, then that bat that was so useful there pales with a position change.

25 June 2010

Depot Retro: Brian Roberts Interview and Brian's Bracelets

Interview: Brian Roberts, 2b, Baltimore Orioles
Brian Roberts answered some of our questions about his "Brian's Bracelets Program", baseball and what Orioles fans can do to help with this worthy cause. Brian's Bracelets are available exclusively online only at www.briansbracelet.com ($10.00).
brian_roberts_game2CamdenDepot.com: When you were five, you underwent surgery to alleviate a heart condition. How has that experience affected your desire to impact social issues?

Brian Roberts: I spent a lot of time in the hospital after my heart surgery.  I was little but I remember missing the normalcy I had at home.  With Brian's Bracelet Program, and with the help of GameWear, we're helping ensure that kids at the University of Maryland Hospital for Children (UMHC) feel a little more at home.  Even at such a young age, the surgery instilled in me the importance of helping others. 

I'm really proud to have partnered with GameWear for this important Program.  I wear my bracelet all of the time - look for it on my wrist at our next game. 

CD: When people purchase Brian's Bracelets, the money goes toward University of Maryland's Hospital for Children charity fund. In what ways will these donations be used to help patients?

BR: The money from Brian's Bracelets will help fund children's programs that will make kids' stays a little more comfortable.  Funds support programs like the Pet Visitation Program, where specially trained animals visit young patients to cheer them up, and Reach Out and Read, a pediatric practice-based program that gives children access to books early in their lives.  So when you buy a bracelet, you're money is directly impacting how children play and cope during their hospital stays. 

CD: Are there any specific stories you would like to share from your charity work?

BR: There are so many stories really. Every encounter at the Children’s Hospital touches you in a way that’s hard to explain. I’ve been inspired by so many kids and what they’re going through that I honestly can’t single out one story. I guess if I had to give one story, I would say last year when I got together with a bunch of teammates, Baltimore City Police and Fire Departments and the Orioles to give a shopping spree to several needy Baltimore area families at Wal-Mart for the Holidays. I love watching the video tape seeing the reaction of the families when we tell them what they were there for, it was all a surprise. I literally had to cover my ears they were yelling so loud.

CD: That sounds like a wonderful experience - being able to see your impact on the community up close. One fascinating aspect about Brian's Bracelets (and other charities such as Lance Armstrong's "Live Strong" campaign (Lance Armstrong Foundation) or Coach Weis's "Hannah & Friends") is you see physical proof that a community is taking up a cause. How does it feel to see people walking around with the Bracelets, knowing that you've encouraged others to take up this worthy cause?

BR: It's so amazing to see people wearing Brian's Bracelet.  For fans, the Bracelets are a perfect way to stay connected to the game and connected to an important cause at the same time.  Seeing a group of kids wearing the Bracelets makes me proud and happy that the community is coming together to help put smiles on the kids’ faces.

CD: In the future, what plans do you have with University of Maryland Hospital for Children or other charities?

BR: Right now, I'm focused on helping the kids at UMHC.  I will continue to be dedicated to improving the quality of life of seriously ill children through helping provide and fund hospital programs that distract them from their pain and keep their head in the game. In the future, I’ll always be looking out for organizations and charities that I can help in any way. I’ll always enjoy working with kids and promoting the sport of baseball, and I’m sure I’ll continue to come across and be approached by various organizations that I can get involved with.

CD: Well, the "Brian's Bracelets Program" is a wonderful charity and we have no doubt that our readers will join you in supporting the kids at brian_roberts_game1UMCH, if they aren't already. On to baseball -- many of our readers are interested in the progression of a player from draftee to Major Leaguer. Tell us a little about your path from draft day to your first Major League game. What were some of the more difficult hurdles in adjusting to professional ball and developing as player?

BR: Let’s see. 1999 I got drafted. I played about half a season in [LoA Delmarva] in ‘99 and then went to [HiA Frederick]. I began the season in 2000 in [Frederick] where I encountered my first obstacle when I hurt my elbow after the first couple games and sat out 10 weeks. I came back later in the season and did okay, finishing still in [Frederick]. 2001 I started the season in AA [Bowie] for about three weeks, went to AAA [Rochester] for a month and half and got my first call to the Big Leagues at the end of the season and stayed there for a few months. I honestly thought I was going to remain with the Orioles for the 2002 season, but I ended up starting [back in Rochester]. Once you get a taste of the Major Leagues and the competition level, it’s difficult to go back but I just tried to remain focused. Eventually I got called back up in 2002 and played in 40 or so games. The toughest thing was being in competition for playing time with Jerry Hairston who was one of my closest friends. We were constantly pushing each other to improve and internal competition is always good for a team. 

CD: In 2001 you began making the switch from shortstop to second base. You have obviously embraced the switch, but did you question the move at first? What did you have to work on by switching to the other side of the infield and how difficult of a transition was it?

BR: Yea, it was hard at first. I didn’t like it since I played SS my whole life really. I questioned it and was upset at first, but I knew it was best for the team. Turning double plays from other side was one of the most difficult things to learn.

CD: Despite a few hiccups recently, this 2008 Orioles team has been a pleasant surprise and a lot of fun to watch. Can you feel a change in the clubhouse? In the organization?

BR: Yea, I think we can all feel like we’re headed in the right direction. We made some moves for the future and I think we exceeded a lot of expectations this year, while we are still in what some consider a rebuilding stage. I think there’s a positive energy in the clubhouse and that leads to winning games and the fans have been really supportive overall.

CD: It seems like Baltimore is a lot closer to being competitive in the AL East than many in the media indicated at the beginning of the season. Considering the handful of true difference-makers available this upcoming offseason, how would you sell this year's upcoming free agent class on joining the Orioles?

BR: If we can convince the right people at the right position, I definitely think there are some areas we can improve. We could probably use another starting pitcher or two, but for the most part we have a great team for next year and we have to remember [former closer] Chris Ray and [set-up man Danys] Baez will be back from injury and our bullpen is already solid. Offensively, we’ve been able to produce and [Nick] Markakis and [Adam] Jones are only going to continue to develop into All-Star caliber players. I guess I would sell the team on the direction we’re headed, the city itself and the incredible fans. Realistically though, it is a business and some free agents might make financial decisions based on what’s best for them and their families, but I’ll always do what I can to help promote and sell the organization to the players that can help us win games and provide leadership.

brian_roberts_braceletCD: It’s certainly an exciting time to be an Orioles fan. Any final thoughts you would like to share with the fanbase?

BR: I can't stress enough how important it is to help others in need.  The kids at UMHC are really great and by purchasing Brian's Bracelet, you know that you're helping give them the comforts of a normal, healthy lifestyle.  All you have to do is visit www.briansbracelet.com to purchase a bracelet.  Such a simple act really makes a huge impact.

Depot Retro: Effect of Defense on Run Production to Maintain Average Performance (Part 2 of 2: catcher and OF)

Effect of Defense on Run Production to Maintain Average Performance
(Part 2 of 2: Catcher and Outfield)

January 21, 2009by Jon Shepherd

In Part 1, we generated several illustrations to indicate how much offensive production is required to wind up with an average infield player given certain levels of defensive aptitude. Part 2 continues with the previous analysis, but focuses on the outfield and catcher.

The methods have been set forth in part 1. The average OBP and SLG used in this Part 2 are listed in the table to the right. Examples of players are given for the outfield positions, but not for the catchers. It is uncertain to the author how exactly to quantify catching defensive worth. I would also like to explicitly mention something again that some found confusing in Part 1. All I am doing here is providing a connection between offensive production and defensive production using OBP and SLG. What someone needs to do to use these graphs is figure out how many runs on defense a player saves or costs. The examples I use in this article are based on last year's offensive numbers and a qualitative approximation of defensive value based on a consensus of UZR/150, Dewan, my system using RZR, and scouting reports.

Catcher is probably the position with the most difficult scenario to determine defensive worth. The ability to throw out ball players, prevent chances being taken for stolen bases, prevent wild pitches and passed balls, calling a game, and technique around the plate on throws home. I'm not aware of a useable format to collapse all of these variables. It probably exists somewhere. Some form may be available to the public. I am not aware of it though. So, in light of that . . . to the left is a chart depicting what type of production would be needed with respect to defensive prowess.
Left Field
This corner outfield position has lately become a slot where teams stick poor fielders not relegated to 1B/DH due to footspeed or further defensive ineptitude. One such outfielder is Adam Dunn. He is one of the worst left fielders in baseball and costs his team about 20 runs. His bat though has been solid enough to result in a total player who is slightly above average. If he is able to continue hitting like he has been and not have his fielding degrade anymore . . . he is probably worth about 12-14MM a year. Of course, if he suffers any degradation of talent, his value will collapse. Baltimore's Luke Scott is being used here as representative of an average fielding left fielder. His season last year was also quite average offensively. His overall value will take a slight hit as it appears he is headed toward being a DH with Baltimore's recent acquisition of Feliz Pie. Finally, Jacoby Elsbury played a stellar left field as he saved over 20 runs last year if you project his left field performance over the course of the year. With that level of defense, even if he maintains a 720ops, he rates as an above average left fielder. If Jason Bay reverts to a -10 run defense, he is more valuable than Elsbury as a left fielder. If his -15 run defense degrades more, the Red Sox may think twice about extending him. Although, his bat probably will sustain 4 or 5 years at DH.
Center FieldOffensive production from center field is similar to what is expected from second base. Of course, this position is typically more difficult to play. Aaron Rowand signed a nice contract last year after a surprising year in Philly. His offense in 2007 over-compensated for his defensive deficiencies. In 2008, his offensive numbers dropped more in line with his career average, exposing him as a below-average center fielder. There are 4 years and 48MM left on that deal. Ichiro rates as an average center fielder these days and his bat also rates as average. Finally, Carlos Gomez played a great center field last season for the Twins. His bat was pretty dreadful and he rated out as below average as a player. He was only 22 last year, so his hitting should get a little better and his defense should maintain this high level for a few seasons.

Right FieldThe last position in this series is the position with the second most run production, trailing only first base. An example of a great outfielder is Randy Winn who has been performing well the past two seasons in the Giants's right field. His offensive numbers are rather average for a right fielder, but his defense is so good it makes Winn two wins better than average and one of the better right fielders in the game last year. Another player who is worth about two wins more than average is Nick Markakis. His defense rates as about average, although with his arm he probably saves about 8-10 more runs a season. Assuming he is just average in the field, he still rates out as one of the best right fielders in the game. Finally, Bobby Abreu is our example of a defenisvely inept right fielder. The Yankees just might have known what they were doing when they decided not to offer arbitration as he is almost 10 runs worse than average based on this metric system.

ConclusionAlthough not explicitly discussed in this section, the numbers here in general agree with the valuations over at FanGraphs. The method developed here is a bit more simplistic than what is done over there. The purpose here was to provide a quick set of illustrations to determine how a player rates with respect to his fielding and offense. Perhaps one of the more interesting aspects of this study is recognizing that defensively adept center fielders may be utilized as a left fielder and deliver above average performance by buffering his bat with his glove.

21 June 2010

BORT Chat Monday at 8pm: Leaving it all open

Today's chat has no specific topic at the moment.  Feel free to show up tonight and give us structure . . . or, perhaps, I'll figure out some things to talk about.  I always seem to have an opinion.

20 June 2010

Trade Market Options: AL East Edition

This is a continuation of a series exploring options in the trade market for the Orioles. The Orioles most useful available talent (i.e. Millwood, Guthrie, Wigginton, Scott) could probably net a return of one B level prospect and some C level secondary prospect. This series will review the teams arguably in contention and how well they match up with what the Orioles have and what the Orioles would want.

NL East
NL Central
NL West
AL East
AL Central
AL West

AL East after the jump...

19 June 2010

Depot Retro: Effect of Defense on Run Production to Maintain Average Performance (Part 1 of 2: Infield)

The following article is a piece we published in January of last year at one of our old web addresses.  As we settle back into our old home here, occasionally we will reintroduce some of those pieces that still have some degree of relevance.  The first I want to post is a study I did assessing what would be average value for each position based on 2008 levels of offensive and defensive performance.

 January 19, 2009

A player's worth can be defined as the sum of offensive and defensive production. In other words, a player adds to his value by contributing to put runs on the scoreboard and to prevent the other team from scoring. Most work has been accomplished on the offensive side of this equation. This is primarily due to the majority of offense being well characterized by single events, such as a home run or a walk. Defense has been more difficult to analyze as a simple single event requires a good deal of qualification. For instance, a play in the outfield needs to be qualified as to the type of hit (fly ball, line drive, ground ball), where the ball fell, where the fielder started, what is the accepted range for that position, and the resulting effects (as in did a runner tag up or was the batter able to stretch the hit into a double). This requires meticulous analysis and, therefore, most of these methods are proprietary metrics that are often not shared with the general public. The ones that are shared are typically well encapsulated, so the whole process is a black box where you have to trust the statistician. My own transparent method uses the Hardball Times's "balls in zone" data, which entrusts them as knowing what is considered in a fielder's zone.

Recent events have made it obvious that teams are changing the way they evaluate a player's worth. This current offseason, many of have been surprised at how few players were offered arbitration. Pat Burrell made a shade over 14MM last season and now will be earning 16MM total over two seasons in Tampa. This is a bit shocking in that in years past, Burrell would be expected to receive a deal worth about 48MM over 4 years. Now, it seems teams are more strongly considering defense (though the current recession cannot be ignored as a possible contributing factor in the decreasing free agent salaries). An interesting side note in Burrell's worth is that FanGraphs pegs his worth as 11.6MM last year as the Phillies's left fielder. If you shift his position to a full time DH, he was worth 12.5MM, which may show that DHs are currently undervalued in this market. Now, understanding that defense is probably more of a quantifiable contribution toward characterizing the worth of a player, this work aims to determine what levels of offense are required to achieve average production and to present in a quick and easy-to-digest format. For instance, if a left fielder makes 24 less plays than the average left fielder (~20 runs), how well does he have to hit to rate as an average player? How much must his offense compensate for his inability to field relative to his peers? This article will be broken down into two parts. This first segment will focus on the infield and the second will concern itself with the outfield and catcher.

18 June 2010

Expansion Draft Side Project

As you may have remember, I have been toying around with an expansion team concept that I began two years ago. Prior to the draft, here is the shadow expansion team's minor league system.

Here is the minor league system top 20 prospects so far:
1. Aroldis Chapman P A-
2. Roger Keischnick OF B-
3. Ryan Flaherty INF B-
4. Max Stassi C B-
5. Jordan Danks OF C+
6. Matt Davidson 3B C+
7. Madison Younginer P C+
8. Miguel Jean OF C+
9. Todd Glaessman OF C+
10. DJ Mitchell P C+
11. Ian Krol P C
12. Clayton Cook P C
13. Scott Gorgen P C
14. Chris Herrman C/1B/OF C
15. Adrian Nieto C C
16. Kyle Jenson OF C
17. Graham Stoneburner P C
18. Kendall Volz P C
19. Luis Domoromo RF C
20. Carlos Perez P C

As you can see the system lacks middle infield and some polished pitching. With these ideas I entered the draft.  Since this is the first year the team plays, the pick remains as the final selection in each round.  The picks after the jump.

16 June 2010

2010 Orioles Elias Update

The graph below shows how each of our veterans are doing with respect to their estimated Elias Free Agent Classification as determined by MLB Trade Rumors.  As you can see, both Miguel Tejada and Kevin Millwood have decreased from their initial value this season.  That said, neither are doing well enough to offer arbitration.

15 June 2010

Most managers in a single season for baseball: Part I - AL

With Juan Samuel reaching his 10th game and managerial veterans like Bobby Valentine and Eric Wedge casting their shadow over Camden Yards, the Orioles might do something that has been done fewer times in Major League Baseball than perfect games pitched. In fact, it is something the franchise has done before, but as the St. Louis Browns. This feat? To have at least three managers rack up 10 decisions or more in a single season.

Today is the first part of a two part series looking at the oddity of single seasons with multi-manager teams. Some of these events were caused by illnesses, extended interim managers, unique ideas, or an impatient front office.

After the jump, we will start of with the Baltimore Orioles history . . .

14 June 2010

BORT Chat Monday at 8pm: Draft Review and Things

Case for claiming Jake Fox

Susan Slusser tweeted last night that the Oakland Athletics can no longer afford to be patient with Jake Fox and are designating him for assignment.  This is a move to take him off the 40 man roster, so every other team in baseball will have a shot at him.  The Orioles have the first right of claim.  The Athletics need to do this because Fox is out of options.  His has been somewhat miserable at the plate this year with a 591 OPS.  He has played left field, catcher, and backed up a few games at third base.  In the minors he has also had some experience with first base.

What I am suggesting is pretty simple . . . the Orioles need to claim Fox and designate Garrett Atkins.  At this point, Atkins has not shown any improvement at the plate and looks stiff over at first base.  Taken along with his three year precipitous decline, I see absolutely no upside to keeping him.  He cannot hit and he cannot take the field.  Jake Fox is actually hitting better than Atkins.  He has also shown good power as well.  He has shown some ability to play catcher and first base, which would be very valuable to the Orioles.  Fox is also right handed just like Atkins, so he fills that role as well.  At 27, Fox is not an up and coming prospect, but he could, maybe, just maybe, have some upside in either his bat or his ability to catch.  These are unknowns to explore.  Everything about Atkins we know and none of it has been very useful.

Now, I am not going to kick and scream if the Orioles pass on Fox, but it would be disappointing.  Why?  Because I think it will be a sign of embracing a player, Atkins, not because of his abilities, but because of his salary.  The cost is sunk and no one is going to take him off the Orioles' hands.  It should be time to own up to that and take chances on the waiver wire.

12 June 2010

Trade Market Options: NL West Edition

This is a continuation of a series exploring options in the trade market for the Orioles. The Orioles most useful available talent (i.e. Millwood, Guthrie, Wigginton, Scott) could probably net a return of one B level prospect and some C level secondary prospect. This series will review the teams arguably in contention and how well they match up with what the Orioles have and what the Orioles would want.

NL East
NL Central
NL West
AL East
AL Central
AL West

NL West after the jump...

Trade Market Options: NL Central Edition

This is a continuation of a series exploring options in the trade market for the Orioles. The Orioles most useful available talent (i.e. Millwood, Guthrie, Wigginton, Scott) could probably net a return of one B level prospect and some C level secondary prospect. This series will review the teams arguably in contention and how well they match up with what the Orioles have and what the Orioles would want.

NL East
NL Central
NL West
AL East
AL Central
AL West

NL Central after the jump...

Trade Market Options: NL East Edition

NL East
NL Central
NL West
AL East

AL Central

AL West

After the jump, a list of B level prospects for each team in the NL who PECOTA projects as having at least a 10% chance to make the playoffs.

10 June 2010

Orioles and the 2011 1st overall selection . . .

Just a graph today, looking on to next year.

This is based on the PECOTA updated season projections and then apply a binomial distribution to the resulting data.

Onward and upward.

09 June 2010

Thoughts on the Orioles 2010 draft.

I doubt I am going to hear I name I recognize today, which is sad for me. Yesterday was full of moving into a new apartment. After figuring it all together, I climbed 164 flights of stairs. That is more vertical distance than the Sears tower while carrying things all greater than a 30lb rucksack. Anyway, I digress.

What does the draft, so far, mean to me? After the jump, I go pick to pick and have a short write up for each that I am aware of . . . I'm somewhat limited in my knowledge.

08 June 2010

Shadow Draft: Round 3 through Round 10

Camden Shadow Draft only had one pick yesterday, Chipley HS (Fla.) RHP Karsten Whitson.

Today we get eight picks, one in each round from 3 - 10:

3:3 - Josh Rutledge, SS, Univ. of Alabama
4:3 - Garin Cecchini, SS/3B, Barbe HS (La.)
5:3 - Tyler Holt, OF, Florida St. University
6:3 - Tony Thompson, 3B, Univ. of Kansas
7:3 - Robert Aviles, RHP, Suffern HS (N.Y.)
8:3 - Mario Hollands, LHP, Univ. of California - Santa Barbara
9:3 - Jordan Cooper, RHP, Wichita St. Univ.
10:3 - Matt Roberts, C, Graham HS (N.C.)

We'll do a full recap, but some quick thoughts:

1:3 - Love Whitson up top; expect him to be signable in the Zack Wheeler range
3:3 - Rutledge is the advanced middle-infielder we were hoping for at 3:3
4:3 - Couldn't pass on Cecchini here; will take around $1.5 million to sign, but legit Top 2 Round talent (may be shifting to 3B)
5:3 - In hindsight now a little nervous about signability giving how far down he went in the real draft, but we have some extra jingle in the budget
6:3 - I (Stotle) had a "big corner bat" on my list and Thompson certainly qualifies; might shift to 1B but potential for plus power
7:3 - "Dream Draft" was Aviles in the 9th, but couldn't risk him dropping futher (good thing because he was picked in this round in the actual draft!)
8:3 - Needed to get back to signable picks and Hollands was a favorite of Craw's
9:3 - Another college arm that could fit in the pen or slot in as a back-ender
10:3 - Tough sign, but wanted to take a stab at a prep catcher; likely headed to UNC

07 June 2010

After Day 1: Crawdaddy's top 35

Orioles have the 35th pick tomorrow. After the jump, my top 35.

1. Stetson Allie, rhp, St. Edward HS, Lakewood, Ohio
2. A.J. Cole, rhp, Oviedo (Fla.) HS
3. Brandon Workman, rhp, Texas
4. Austin Wilson, of, Harvard-Westlake School, Los Angeles
5. Brett Eibner, rhp/of, Arkansas
6. Chad Bettis, rhp, Texas Tech
7. Yordy Cabrera, ss/rhp, Lakeland (Fla.) HS
8. Jesse Hahn, rhp, Virginia Tech
9. James Paxton, lhp, Grand Prairie (American Assoc.)
10. Ryan LaMarre, of, Michigan
11. A.J. Vanegas, rhp, Redwood Christian HS, San Lorenzo, Calif.
12. Micah Gibbs, c, Louisiana State
13. Kevin Gausman, rhp, Grandview HS, Centennial, Colo.
14. LeVon Washington, of, Chipola (Fla.) JC
15. Jarrett Parker, of, Virginia
16. Jedd Gyorko, ss, West Virginia
17. DeAndre Smelter, rhp, Tattnall Square Academy, Macon, Ga.
18. Sammy Solis, lhp, San Diego
19. Ryne Stanek, rhp, Blue Valley HS, Stilwell, Kan.
20. Jordan Swagerty, rhp, Arizona State
21. Aaron Shipman, of, Brooks County HS, Quitman, Ga.
22. Addison Reed, rhp, San Diego State
23. Hunter Morris, 1b, Auburn
24. Austin Wates, of, Virginia Tech
25. Derek Dietrich, ss, Georgia Tech
26. Tony Wolters, ss, Rancho Buena Vista HS, Vista, Calif.
27. Jacob Petricka, rhp, Indiana State
28. Kevin Chapman, lhp, Florida
29. Drew Cisco, rhp, Wando HS, Mount Pleasant, S.C.
30. Will Swanner, c, La Costa Canyon HS, Carlsbad, Calif.
31. Tyler Holt, of, Florida State
32. Jared LaKind, 1B/OF, Cypress Woods HS TX
33. Stefan Sabol, c/of, Aliso Niguel HS, Aliso Viejo, Calif.
34. Andrelton Simmons, ss/rhp, Western Oklahoma State JC
35. Marcus Littlewood, 3b, Pine View HS, St. George, Utah

2010 1st Rd Open Thread

During the first round and supplement rounds, I'll be keeping a loose open post.

Actual Orioles Selection
1:3 Manny Machado, ss, Brito Miami Private HS

Shadow Orioles Selection
1:3 Karsten Whitson, rhp, Chipley (Fla.) HS

Comments after the jump.

2010 Camden Depot Draft Chat

After stepping through our targets for each of the first ten rounds of the Rule 4, based upon who we believe to be available and various spots, and keeping in mind the Draft Strategy piece we stepped through around a week ago, here is our "Dream Draft". No comments provided with picks, as we can discuss this and everything else "Draft" starting at 11am!

1:3 - Jameson Taillon, RHP, The Woodlands HS (Texas)
3:3 - Josh Rutledge, SS, University of Alabama
4:3 - Matt Roberts, C, Graham HS (N.C.)
5:3 - Michael Lorenzen, OF/RHP, Fullerton Union HS (Calif.)
6:3 - Brian Guinn, 2B, University of California - Berkley
7:3 - Austin Southall, OF/1B, University HS (La.)
8:3 - Mario Hollands, LHP, University of California - Santa Barbara
9:3 - Robbie Aviles, RHP, Suffern HS (N.Y.)
10:3 - Matt Bischoff, RHP, Purdue University

On to the Chat, then on to the Draft!

06 June 2010

Mining previous drafts: Dave Ritterpusch

Yesterday an article was posted on Cardinals sensation Jaime Garcia. Garcia was an Orioles draftee, but he was unable to perform well on an Orioles test that was poorly translated into Spanish. Despite the complaints by the scout who had developed a relationship with Garcia and new draft coordinator Joe Jordan wanting to sign him, the Orioles refused and the story is . . . it was based on the results of that test.

So, that reminded me of Dave Ritterpusch. He was a scouting director for the Orioles from 1973 to 1975 under Frank Cashen. He was very much intrigued by psychoanalysis and how it was implemented in corporate America. Ritterpusch idea was to take what was known from these tests and apply them to baseball players. The approach was to take a modified version of the Winslow Success Profile exam (this version is now called the Athletic Success Profile) and determine which components were applicable for baseball.

After the jump, an explanation of the Winslow Success Profile and his reintroduction in the Orioles decision making process in during the Beattie/Flanagan tenure.

Chilling until tomorrow.

The first round and supplemental first round of the draft is tomorrow. The Orioles pick third and then we can all pay attention to other things. Well, unless you are me and are actively interested in the draft and where these amateurs are going. Today, I am going to go over a few updates on the draft and go over the John Sickels community mock draft I took part in yesterday.

The team that most affects the Orioles' selection is the Pirates. Bryce Harper to the Nats is a foregone conclusion. The real question is whether hulking power pitcher Jameson Taillon or Miami prep SS Manny Machado goes second. Kieth Law flapped his wings on Friday with talk of the Pirates leaning toward Taillon and now everyone else is following. Conditional language is being used, but it would be a bit of a surprise right now if the first four picks in the draft are not:

1. Washington Nationals - Bryce Harper, c, JC of Southern Nevada
2. Pittsburgh Pirates - Jameson Taillon, rhp, The Woodlands (Texas) HS
3. Baltimore Orioles - Manny Machado, ss, Brito Miami Private HS
4. Kansas City Royals - Yasmani Grandal, c, Miami

After that, I think there is some considerable guesswork. Frankie Piliere is a good source for up to date information about the draft (Piliere used to run the site SaberScouting with current Orioles front office employee Kiley McDaniel). If you have been paying attention to what Stotle and I have been writing, we would not exactly be upset, but we would be disappointed in the Orioles selecting Machado. Stotle's board is in full view at his draft devoted site, PnR Scouting. You should bookmark that site as he will be quickly updating it close to a pick by pick basis. Very impressive.

Anyway, Stotle has Machado at 10. I have him at 6. In fact, here is my final board (and, yeah, it has changed since last week very slightly):

1. Bryce Harper, c, JC of Southern Nevada
2. Jameson Taillon, rhp, The Woodlands (Texas) HS
3. Chris Sale, lhp, Florida Gulf Coast
4. Karsten Whitson, rhp, Chipley (Fla.) HS
5. Zack Cox, 3b, Arkansas
6. Manny Machado, ss, Brito Miami Private HS
7. Deck McGuire, rhp, Georgia Tech
8. Drew Pomeranz, lhp, Mississippi
9. Christian Colon, ss, Cal State Fullerton
10. Nick Castellanos, 3b, Archbishop McCarthy HS, SW Ranches, Fla.

Now, Machado has been mentioned in the same breath as Alex Rodriguez. I think this has more to do with poor association. Both are coming out of Miami as preps, both have some power, and, honesty, I think them both being Hispanic is what is drawing those comparisons. Go through enough profiles and it becomes clear that unconscious racial associations are everywhere, but that is starting another conversation. Back to Machado, he is a big shortstop. He does have some power potential. He shows a good hit tool. I don't think he is anywhere near Arod. I think in last year's draft he would have gone about the same time as Grant Green. The year before, he easily would have gone after Gordon Beckham was selected. So, yes, Tim Beckham would have been viewed as a much better SS prospect than Machado. Why? The power that looks plus for short will be maybe above average at third base. Most disagree with me, but I just see his body filling out and that range collapsing. At third base, I see Zach Cox as a better bet to meet his potential.

That is really the problem I have. I think much of the value place in Machado is directly tied to him sticking at shortstop. The backup plan of him working at third is sustainable, but you will be paying a premium for the chance he could stick at short. Is that premium worth 3MM. The difference between Cox and Machado in signing bonus will probably be that amount. To be conservative, maybe 2MM. To me it is not worth that. So would I want Zach Cox? Actually, no. Last week, I suggested Drew Pomeranz, but now I am firmly in Chris Sale mode. Pomeranz' slight issues with command and he only has two solid pitches at the moment with his fastball and curveball. He is going to have a bake more in the minors than I thought. That changeup will have to come around. Sale has a nice 2 seamer and induces a lot of groundballs. His slider is progressing along well and I would consider it a plus pitch. He also has shown great touch for his changeup, but will need some work with his arm action to conceal it better. Sale would normally be a fringe top 10 pick in a normal draft year, but he would be my pick here and give me room to select about 3 overslots last in the draft. I would prefer something like Sale, Kevin Ziomek, Bobby Wahl, and Christian Yelich over just Manny Machado.

After the jump, summary of the John Sickel's community mock draft.

Community mock drafts are often a useless endeavor as it is more about advertising for the website than actually putting together a prediction. Participants vary widely in knowledge and predictably follow the main free list available . . . BA's draft chart. Personally, I put my draft board together by using BA, PnR Scouting, PG Crosschecker, and Keith Law as my 'scouts.' From there I draw up a composite board. I then make a likely targets list and view video and individual writeups on those players, massaging the list. So, I tend to view things differently than most on the boards. Also, some participants view the mock draft as an exercise in showing how well they can work the draft and others tend to view their draft budget as unreasonably high. So, yeah, community mocks are often worthless by ignoring budget and historical trends of certain team's scouting departments.

My picks . . .

1:3 Manny Machado, ss, Brito Miami Private HS
Shocking, eh? Well, part of the community mock experience is creating a thread on that site and taking in a consensus. Taillon was taken by the Pirates before me and the group who was in the Orioles thread felt very strongly about Machado. I would have taken Chris Sale, personally. But, I am not trying to personally outsmart the Orioles. The Orioles seem locked in on Taillon or Machado. With Taillon gone, Machado was the accurate pick in my estimation. He fills a minor league need in that he is a positional player and a middle infielder. Selecting him will mean that we would need to be more responsible in the following picks.

3:3 Kevin Chapman, lhp, Florida
Relief and, particularly, left-handed relief is in dire need in our system. To quote our piece from last week:
Chapman is a hard throwing fastball/slider arm, sitting 91-93 mph with his heater and touching 94 regularly. His slider is a second potential above-average to plus offering that can be effective both in and out of the zone. He shows solid command of both offerings and has been nearly untouchable in his first full season with the Gators (TJ surgery in the spring of 2008 and light usage in 2009). Chapman has been one of the most dominant relievers in 2010, sporting a .158 BAA to go along with an 8.71 SO/9 and 1.52 BB/9. He could shoot quickly through the minors, contributing to a big league club by the end of 2011.

I do think though that the mock yesterday was reliever averse to the extreme. They lasted way too long on the boards. I wonder if Chapman will be snatched up in the second round by a team with several selections, such as the Angels or Astros.

The draft ended after the third round, but Sickels and a few of us did one more round.

4:3 Will Swanner, c, La Costa Canyon HS, Carlsbad, Calif.
You might wonder why I would go with a slightly above slot catcher when we have Wieters, Joseph, Dalles, and Ohlman in the system. Personally, I think you can never have enough catchers. Particularly, when all of these catchers I mentioned are offensive oriented. Chances are they are not long term catching solutions and will be shifted off at some point in their careers. So, you should take on several in your system and see who sticks and who shifts. The following is part of a nice writeup found over at PnR Scouting:
Swanner isn't an elite backstop, but he shows an impressive collection of tools that could be shaped into an above-average overall pro player with some further instruction. His bat projects well in the power department and he has an ability to square the ball across the quadrants that bodes well for his future contact ability. Behind the plate, he's steady in all aspects and could be above-average if he can quicken his release some. The arm strength is average, but plays-up due to his accuracy, which stems entirely from his balance and advanced catch-and-throw actions. Swanner is a well-balanced collection of tools at a position where it's often difficult to find a player that isn't heavily slanted to either the offensive or defensive side of the spectrum. If the unpredictable world of prep catchers is the stock market, Swanner represents a conservative mutual fund -- odds are he won't let you retire at 30, but you feel comfortable that your investment is going to yield solid returns in the long run. Particularly at a premium position, that's an investment worth making.

The mock draft ended there, but I did put together a top three for the next round. Having taken on a middle infield prospect, advanced left handed relief, and a HS catcher . . . we have addressed most of our need areas. I'd say we still have middle infield, power, and starting pitching as targets. With that in mind, here is my top three selections for pick 5:3.

Jared LaKind, 1B/OF, Cypress Woods HS TX
LaKind has a good, but not great arm as evidenced by a no hitter he threw. His pro future lies in his bat. He is a big guy and stands to add some more weight on his frame. From what I hear, he looks for his pitches (I would not call him a mistake hitter), gets good contact, and may have 30-35 HR potential in his future. He looks like a solid selection in the 5th round. That said, he is not in many top 200s. He is 71st on my board and would be a great value pick here.

Bobby Wahl, RHP West Springfield HS VA
Wahl would be an above slot selection. Here is an excerpt from PnR's writeup:
Wahls is a fun collection of current skill and projection and has taken a nice step forward this spring. Though his stuff isn’t as overpowering as the more highly touted high school arms, he has already seen the beginning of the jump in velo projected last November when this report was originally filed. He flashes a legit four-pitch mix and shows enough feel for pitching for his arsenal to project well across the board. In addition, he has worked this spring at adding a cutter to his repertoire. His frame has room for growth, and his flexibility and body control should help him work through the transition. Wahl is set to attend Ole Miss, should he by-pass a shot at starting his professional career this upcoming summer. Were he to log three seasons with the Rebels, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see him among the better draft-eligible college arms come 2013. His spring performance was solid and the growth in the quality of his arsenal is exactly what scouts were looking for. While he is still a ways from a finished product, Wahl is heading in the right direction and at an impressive pace.

Wahl is 102nd on my board.

Daniel Tillman, rhp, Florida Southern
Some might bristle at the Tillman here as I took a reliever in Chapman in the third. Tillman is a good talent though with a fastball that jumps into the mid 90s and he has good command of that. He also has an above average curve that flashes as plus. He had a great Cape Cod season last summer and did nothing to disuade anyone from thinking he could be a fast moving reliever. It is possible the Orioles do not see slot driven advanced relief pitchers as a need, but I think in these mid-rounds they can be high value picks. For instance, over three years you could potentially pickup six advanced relievers in the mid-rounds for less than 3MM, which is more than half of what we are paying for a single year of Mike Gonzalez. It is difficult to pick up a reliever when there might be an exciting overslot available, but it certainly is sometimes the most prudent thing to do. That said, having already picked up Chapman, I would go after the two higher players left on my board. Tillman checks in at 115.

05 June 2010

Looking at the Orioles and Rays Prep Focus

The following maps show the intensity of draft focus for the Orioles and Rays as measured by the percentage of prep players drafted from each state over the past five years.

After the jump, a comparison graft between the Rays and O's.

04 June 2010

2010 Orioles Shadow Draft -- Targets for 6:3 Through 10:3

The final preview piece leading-up to Monday's "Dream Draft", chat and (of course) the ACTUAL draft is a quick look at some targets for the last five Baltimore picks in the first ten rounds. There are some interesting names that could slot in nicely to the Shadow System, including some interesting senior signs. Keeping in mind the goals Craw and I each laid out in our Draft Strategy piece, here are our suggestions for some potential targets, Rounds 6 - 10...

Stotle’s Targets

My best guess is that out of my pre-draft "want list", the first four selections have a good chance of delivering either 1) two arms, two middle-infielders, 2) two arms, one catcher, one middle-infielder, or 3) two arms, one center fielder, one middle-infielder. For the last five slots, I see some intriguing college arms, college outfielders, and high schoolers of varying levels of signability (and closer to "cookie dough" than "partially baked"):

Target at 6:3: Matt Price, RHP, Virginia Tech
Price has a big arm, but as a sophomore with only quasi-refined secondaries he is far from a lock to go in the first five rounds. His fastball gets downhill and shows some armside life. His 76-78 curve is a soft downer that can slide over to 11/5. It's inconsistent but shows solid spin -- with his arm speed it could grow into an above-average offering. His change is generally 82-84, flashing some fade and drop, and is ahead of his curve from a consistency standpoint. Price will cost a few extra bucks to buy out of his junior year, and there is some risk his thin frame doesn't hold-up as a starter, but there is solid upside combined with a nice fallback as a potential late-inning arm.

Runner-up at 6:3: Brian Guinn, 2B, University of California - Los Angeles
Guinn is a glove-first middle-infielder that gets good reads off the bat and shows a high level of athleticism in the field. At the plate, he relies on what I call a high degree of "slapability". With some offensive growth, he could develop into a solid regular.

Target at 7:3: Matt Szczur, OF, Villanova University
Szczur, like Price, may carry some signability questions (due to his talents on the gridiron as a true "burner" at wideout). He carries that speed over the baseball diamond, where he covers huge expanses of outfield. He has the "Gary Brown's" -- that is, he doesn't strikeout but he doesn't walk, either, making him a longshot at the top of a Major League batting order. Still, there is some upside in the bat and with his speed, and he finished the spring with a not-too-shabby slash line of .443/.487/.667. He could be a valuable 4th outfielder or a solid defender in left or center hitting in the bottom third.

Runner-up at 7:3: Connor Powers, 1B, Mississippi State University
Powers stays true to his name, with "power" being the lone above-average tool in his arsenal. He has enjoyed a solid spring with MSU, slashing .379/.483/.696 and belting 16 homeruns. He's a below-average defender at first base, but could prove adequate with more reps and some pro instruction. His upside is a #5 or #6 hitter capable of .270/.350/.490, 18-23 HR seasons.

Target at 8:3: Alan Oaks, RHP, University of Michigan
A relative newcomer to the mound, Oaks resembles a taller Matt Hobgood, both in build and with a heavy low-90s fastball. He sports a compact delivery but needs some tweaking in his mechanics, as he can fail to finish and also tends to drift (rather than centering over the rubber as he reaches the apex of his leg kick). His breaking ball is a sharp downer that some call a slider but looked to me like more of a curve coming out of his hand. Either way, there is potential for it to develop into an average or slightly above-average offering. There's lots of raw talent to work with here, and Oaks offers the upside of a solid #4 innings-eater, perhaps more with some luck.

Runner-up at 8:3: Krey Bratsen, OF, Bryan HS (Texas)
Assuming the previous rounds exclude a center fielder, I'd strongly consider popping Bratsen here if he's still around. His commitment to Texas A&M and his raw approach at the plate will likely keep him out of the early rounds, but his true "80" speed, above-average arm strength (with carry and accuracy) and natural bat speed make him a potential 4-tooler, only lacking in power. I'd consider trying to buy him out from A&M and shaping him from the ground up into my future center fielder.

Target at 9:3: Steven Maxwell, RHP, Texas Christian University
Maxwell won't blow you away with his fastball, but he comes with a solid four-pitch mix and commands well to the quadrants. Questions about whether he projects to miss enough bats will likely keep him from going too early, but his advanced feel for pitching and laserbeam focus on the hill could help him to sneak into one of the last few single-digit rounds. I saw Maxwell several times this year, including live down in Houston -- video here. His fastball generally 88-90 mph, and he does an excellent job of keeping hitters off-balance with an upper-70s change-up and a slurvy breaking ball.

Runner-up at 9:3: Brett Weibley, RHP, Kent State University
Weibley had a strong summer on the Cape, punching-out 26 hitters in 22 IP while allowing just 5 BB. He's a thick 6-3/225 that sits low-90s but was gunned up in the 94-96 mph range as recent as last summer. His command is below average, in part due to a high-effort delivery, and he lacks a second put-away pitch (currently limited to a slurvy breaking ball with inconsistent bite). A two-way player at Kent State, Weibley should progress more quickly once he is focusing on solely on pitching.

Target at 10:3:
Matt Bischoff, RHP, Purdue University
Bischoff posted a highly impressive 9.00 SO/9 and 1.33 BB/9 over 13 starts and 95 innings this spring, routinely working into the late innings. He is a professional on the mound and rarely gets rattled, which should play very well out of the pen (which is the likely destination given his sub-6' frame and high-effort delivery). Bischoff is upper-80s as a starter but has the quick arm and arm strength to sit 90-92 in relief, as well as the athleticism and feel to add and subtract with his fastball (in each of my two viewings this year, this ability to add and subtract jumped out as one of his best weapons in keeping hitters off-balance). His best secondary is a low-80s slider with tilt and late bite, with his arm slot and arm action matching that of his fastball's. His small arm circle and quick arm allow his fastball and slider to get in on the hitter quickly, with a high degree of difficulty in distinguishing the two. He also mixes-in a straight change that serves as little more than a change-of-pace pitch, but he'll flash it several times over a start to remind hitters he has it. He's also fairly quick to home, clocking in around 1.25-1.32 seconds. Bischoff is a favorite of mine in the draft class and could provide excellent value and modest developmental investment in the 10th Round.

Runner-up at 10:3: Rett Varner, RHP, University of Texas - Arlington
After a solid showing in the Texas Collegiate League last summer, Varner was on display this spring with projected high-round outfielder Michael Choice manning center field, behind him. Varner is a low-90s guy that can creep-up to the 95/96 mph zone and could potentially sit 93-95 were he to switch over to relief as a pro (which is a real possibility given his current secondaries -- an average change-up and a slurve with inconsistent shape but can flash some late bite). He pitches well to the bottom of the zone but also shows an understanding of how to elevate his fastball when necessary. While it could take some time to develop him as a starter, he could move fairly quickly as a fastball/off-speed bullpen arm, capable of late-inning work down the line.

Crawdaddy's Targets

This one is an awfully long post today and one where I begin to feel my knowledge beginning to tighten up. I had a list of names I was considering at different rounds here and consulted with Nick to figure out which were likely and which were . . . less than likely. It probably is not as big a deal as I think it is because the boards for different teams at this point vary wildly from club to club. It is not uncommon for teams to later admit that they were finding players in rounds 6-10 who fit in with their assessment as second round talents. Unexpected drops and the beginnings of feeling the draft budget restricting can often cause these things to happen. That said, it would not surprise me to see a couple of our targets from the previous couple rounds still showing up yet to be drafted. I expected our first four picks will snag us two pitchers, a middle infielder, and either a catcher or an outfielder. That will leave me primarily focusing on pitchers, but also paying attention to other talents that might be available on the field and I will not address any of Nick's picks. I think all of his are good value targets, but I would like to present you with a few more names.

Target at 6:3: Phil Gosselin, 2B, Virginia

Gosselin provides some middle infield depth and at slot value. His major assets in college have been his speed and contact rate. The speed should transfer over to the pros, while his batting approach will need some adjustment. He shows some power in the college ranks, but I think the swing will need to be retooled in order to hit with a wooden bat. His defense is said to be sound, but not exceptional at second.

Runner Up at 6:3: Pat Dean, LHP, Boston College

I probably need to stop focusing on lefthanders. If the right lefties have not shown up in the previous rounds, Dean might be a guy to pay attention to. He sits around 90 and has good command of his fastball. He also manages to mix in a promising slider and an attempt of a change up. Most likely destined to middle relief if he makes the majors, there is an outside chance he might last a while in the minors as a starter.

Target at 7:3: Dixon Anderson, RHP, California

Anderson is a sophomore and might require a little more than slot to sign. He is mainly a fastball pitcher, alternating between 2 and 4 seamers, and has shown the ability to sustain a fastball in the low 90s over several innings and creep into the middle 90s. As a pro, I see him slotted as a sinker-driven relief pitcher. He has a curve that needs to be developed in the minors. He also uses a splitter, but has little feel for it. It would not be surprising to see that ditched and replaced with a changeup.

Runner Up at 7:3: Matt den Dekker, CF, Florida

He profiles as an above average defensive centerfielder with good speed. His hitting tools are highly suspect. There is an outside chance he becomes more, but a defensive oriented center fielder is a good get for organizational depth.

Target at 8:3: Mario Hollands, LHP, UC Santa Barbara

Hollands looks like he has the potential to be a big hulking power pitcher, but he usually sits around 90. Compared to last season, he has refined his mechanics and is getting more out of his fastball and occaisionally can touch the low-mid 90s. Command is a major issue as well as getting more consistency with his slider and change. I think with the developmental system in place in the Orioles system, Hollands could stand to further refine his mechanics and perhaps add a tick or two to his fastball. That difference could unlock a good bit of potential. He seems to me to be a good risk.

Runner Up at 8:3: Phil Wunderlich, 3B, Lousiville

Wunderlich shows below average discipline, but makes up for it with his contact rate and power. What is intriguing is that he does not strike out either with only 15 ks in 261 plate appearances. That is impressive. He also shows a 340 ISO and some smarts on the base paths. I doubt though he sticks at 3B much longer due to his size and he might have some trouble showing enough bat for first, but he would be a good risk here and introduce some power into the organization.

Target at 9:3: Vincent Velasquez, RHP, Garey HS (California)

Me putting Velasquez here might be confusing to some as he is a talent that some expect to go off the board much earlier than the ninth round. I have him here as a sign and follow player. Velasquez was unable to play last season after suffering an elbow injury last year. That and somewhat high bonus demands have most likely removed him from consideration on many draft boards. I think there is potential here to get in early on a sandwich talent for second or third round money here. Or higher if the summer proves him to be a valuable commodity. Velasquez has shown low 90s heat and a very advanced change up for his age. He has also shown some feel for a curve.

Runner Up at 9:3: Cole Leonida, C, Georgie Tech

If a catcher has yet to be selected, Leonida would be a good fit. He should fall in around slot here. His future as a backstop is somewhat in doubt. He is bat first and shows good power, but his defense needs a great deal of work. The bat is promising though.

Target at 10:3: Roberto Pena, C, Eloisa Pascual HS (Puerto Rico)

Pena profiles as a top notch defensive catcher. Great altheticism and good footwork to go along with a gun of an arm. The big knock on him has been his bat, which has not come along and will probably result in him falling into the 7-12 round range. As a catcher though the difference between average production and the baseline is pretty minimal, so a player like him will be given every opportunity to lean how to hit. That said, several teams that are typically in on Puerto Rican talent might be apt to snatch him up as early as the 5th round.

Runner Up at 10:3: Aaron Meade, LHP, Missouri State

Ok, so I a bit obsessed about left handed pitchers. Meade is someone who will work a 90s fastball with an average slider and an average change. He will probably be a marginal talent, but has some growth if he can refine his mechanics and increase his stamina. I like the upside and at worst, it would be nice to get more left handers in the system (I imagine Stotle might have strained something with all the eye rolling my focus on lefties has caused).

Monday (5/31) - Three Suggested Targets (1:3)
Tuesday (6/1) - Three Suggested Targets (3:3)
Wednesday (6/2) - Three Suggested Targets (4:3)
Thursday (6/3) - Three Suggested Targets (5:3)
Friday (6/4) - Quick Hits: Two Targets Each (6:3 - 10:3)

Monday Morning (6/7) - Dream Draft; Orioles Draft Chat (11am - 1pm EDT).