A critique of Huntington and Company
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 12:36 PM EST
Email
PrintI've been thinking about doing this for a while now.
I firmly believe that the current Pirates front office has the correct model for long term success at the Major League level. The focus should clearly have been solely on the farm system the first couple of years and then turned into 50/50 minors and majors. The reason for this approach can be seen with the Latos and Gonzalez trades and the Rays model (ie. Matt Moore, Hellickson etc.). If we have the necessary farm pieces we don't have to compete/overpay Free Agents. High caliber free agents that command multiple year contracts can cripple a small market franchise.
With that being said, they have failed to fully maximizing their approach of building from the farm system on up. I know hindsight is 20/20 but I think it is worth noting some of the failures of Huntington and company.
I apologize if I miss any examples. I also want to point out that it seems that around 2010 the Pirates FO recognized some of their mistakes and have adjusted.
In my opinion Huntington and Company have made mistakes in three major areas.
1. Amatuer signing failures - Miguel Sano, Cheslor Cuthbert, Tanner Scheppers, 2010's draft class (specifically HS pitchers)
Imagine a farm system with Cole, Taillon, Bell, Heredia, Marte, Sano, Cuthbert, Allie, Sanchez, Scheppers, Hursh, Emanuel, Kubitza, Weiss, Kime, Grossman, Kingham, etc.
I know that each example of missed signings have their own story and I understand that teams miss out on players all the time but we need to maximize our drafts and missing out on those HS pitchers in 2010 kind of hurts. They need to get better at locking down talent and I feel they have at least honed their skills (Bell, Heredia and Allie). I am also hopeful because it appears that they are doing a better job of recognizing talent at the amateur level.
2. The 2009 draft class - I have no problems with their approach of drafting Tony Sanchez at number 4 and then spreading the wealth to the rest of the class. I have no problems with drafting Dodson, Cain, ZVR etc. What I have a problem with is the selection of Victor Black, Pounders, and Chambers. The first three rounds were protected by the compensation system (I know Black doesn't count because he was compensation from not signing Scheppers), so the Pirates should have drafted higher profile/riskier players. The first few rounds are essential to adding talent to the system and they failed to do so in 2009.
For example, these are players that we drafted and the ones we could have drafted at those positions.
49. Victor Black, 53. Brooks Pounders 84. Evan Chambers,
55. Billy Hamilton, 59. Nolan Arenado 63. Jason Kipnis, 91. Will Myers, 93. Robbie Erlin, 99. Jake Barrett, 147 Brandon Belt
While this is slightly saddening, I do think the Pirates have adjusted their approach (2010's draft with Taillon, Allie, Rojas and 2011's draft of Cole, Bell, Dickerson). It remains to be seen whether or not they will turn out but this is the appropriate strategy.
3.) Failure to hit on free agents and reclamation projects - Milledge, Clement, Bobby Crosby, Church, Iwamura, Diaz, Overbay etc. This is important because a.) it lost us more games and b.) we couldn't trade them for better prospects. I think that Bedard, Barmes and McGehee represent a better approach to this aspect (this might just be my personal opinion).
I do realize that hindsight is 20/20 and any team could look back on their mistakes. I just feel that Huntington and company could have done a better job early in their tenure. I also feel they have adjusted and are taking the necessary steps to truly "flooding" the system, which in turn will help at the major league level.
Huntington should now go out and sign Jorge Soler and Roy Oswalt.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
59 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
well
1. I don’t think you can blame them for not signing Sano. Every indication (Dejan’s articles at the time were great) was that the Pirates were aggressive and persistent in trying to sign him, and were willing to offer the most money, but someone in Sano’s camp decided he was going to the Twins. Also, Scheppers at the time had major shoulder issues, not signing him got us a draft pick back, and it still isn’t apparent he will become a productive major leaguer.
2. The jury is still out on the 2009 draft, especially since, as you mention, many of them were HS players who are moving up the system still. Although you do mention it yourself, hindsight is 20/20. It’s one thing to say “we drafted Player A at number 1 overall when Player B went number 2 and is way better,” but to start cherry picking draft picks in the 3rd and 4th round is a little silly.
3. “You can’t make chicken soup out of chicken shit,” as my grandpa was fond of saying about the Pirates. Huntington inherited very little actual talent that he could use to trade away, and when you’re the Pirates it’s nearly impossible to attract free agent talent, even when it’s “reclamation projects.”
You say that, “a) it lost us more games.” Did it? As compared to who, Brian Bixler and other rejects? Who would you have replaced Laroche, Milledge, Clement, and Iwamura with? As far as “b) we can’t trade them for better prospects,” obviously, but like I said, if you start with shit, then trade it for shit, it’s hard to trade that for something good. Huntington didn’t do great with what he was given, but I didn’t expect him to be able to do much with it anyways.
by titanlord91 on Jan 20, 2012 1:09 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
"if you start with shit, then trade it for shit, it’s hard to trade that for something good"
Except for this guy. New GM?
by KentuckyPirate on Jan 20, 2012 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
but if you put chicken shit
in a garden you will get wonderful vegetables.
by yellowpotbelly on Jan 20, 2012 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
easy to look good...
when you’re trading with Dave Littlefield.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 20, 2012 1:55 PM EST up reply actions
Aside from the very cool old WHYGAVS post
I thought this
Instead of ending up with a house or the week in Phoenix, we got Ty Wigginton (a blue paperclip, instead of the red one), and Jose Bautista (which was like trading the snowmobile to get the pen back, in terms of trade value at the time).
was funny. It just reasserts the fact that Joey Bats, who today is more valuable than Howard or Wright, he was long thought to be nothing more than a cool “pen.”
by KentuckyPirate on Jan 20, 2012 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
I wasn’t necessarily focusing on Sano but more of missing out on a bunch of opportunities. I fully understand that the Sano thing was both the Pirates’ and his agent’s fault. He just needed to be included in that section. I also think that they learned a hard lesson from the process.
I think the 2009 draft could still be very helpful but I am just looking at the important rounds when they went after Black, Pounders and Chambers. I feel they should have gone after better players. Pounders was clearly overweight and had solid but not excellent stuff. I would have rather gone after a Will Myers. Evan Chambers also doesn’t strike me as someone we should have targeted in round 3. My main point was that we should be targeting the Bells, Dickersons, Scheppers, Allies, Kinghams etc. in the earlier rounds, especially if you draft a Tony Sanchez early.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 2:35 PM EST up reply actions
Not sure this is totally fair
Out of the amateur signing “failures” Sano’s story was well publicized and to this day strikes me as odd. Maybe it was the Pirates fault maybe it was the shady agent…it sucks but I’m not convinced you can blame the Bucs. Scheppers just was not healthy enough to give him the money he wanted either. He was throwing 75 mph. I can throw 75 mph (at least I could at one point). Of course I’d like to have him now (although I’m not a huge fan) but again I’m not sure he’s a huge failure. The Pirates’ 2010 draft class was a record for draft spending at the time IIRC. Not signing MORE players doesn’t strike me as a failure any more than not signing Albert Pujols to fill our hole at 1B (on a much smaller level of course).
I’ll agree that the players you listed are obviously less talented than, say, Wil Myers, but I think there are 28 other teams that kinda kick themselves on moves like those. Having said that, those three picks are disappointing considering how high they were taken.
The reclamation projects were lottery tickets. The 2010 Pirates were going to suck and the team figured that if they got 5 lottery tickets, one might hit and it would be worth it to suffer through a crappy season. Plus, that crappy season got them the #1 pick and Joel Hanrahan (kinda).
I agree with Soler and think he fits the organization’s strategy. Would love Oswalt but don’t see it happening, and would like to see them pursue Brandon Allen if the price is right.
I understand the 28 other team argument. But considering we cannot be players in the FA market we should look to draft better players in the early/protected rounds. Also, Huntington and company have continually said they needed to build through the draft etc and in my opinion did it in a half ass manner until 2010.
I also feel like the Pirates learned their lesson and the following two years went out and drafted Allie and Bell. Even if they don’t turn out, the Pirates FO followed the proper strategy.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
With regards to the 2010 draft class, I know we spent alot of money on the draft that year but I still wish we wouldn’t have missed out on so many of the HS pitchers. Either they should have ponied up more money or drafted at least a couple of guys who would at least be willing to sign.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
I think it's possible
that the Pirates took some of those other arms you mentioned (in ‘10) as insurance in case they couldn’t sign Stetson Allie. I would assume that they were uncertain what it would take to get Allie when they drafted him and if he held firm on $3M (for example) and the Bucs wouldn’t go that high, they could have spent the extra money to sign guys like Kime. As far as 2009 goes, I’d agree that it would be nice for them to have started their “target the unsignable 1st rounder in the 2nd round” strategy a year earlier but it’s not like everybody else was doing it and they were late to the party. They still took an unusual approach, they just didn’t start doing that until 2010.
by KentuckyPirate on Jan 20, 2012 2:53 PM EST up reply actions
All your comments are valid. I’m just trying to critique them on their actions. They probably did have a couple of those guys as insurance for Allie. Personally, I think they should have at least signed two more/drafted two more different players that they could have actually signed. Hindsight is 20/20. I’m just trying to say on the whole, in the first couple of years they missed out on too much talent. Of course they aren’t going to sign all of those guys but in order to truly flood the minors they needed to capitalize on a few more opportunities. I also believe they have realized this problem and have turned a corner in the signing amateur talent department.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
I think that's fair
this is also one reason I’d love to see them go after Soler. He represents a big addition to the MiLB system which seems to match up with their organizational direction.
by KentuckyPirate on Jan 20, 2012 3:33 PM EST up reply actions
Completely agree
Soler is a highly talented amateur. He could eventually replace a starter in Pittsburgh, be traded, or allow someone else to be traded (McCutchen, Marte, Tabata, Grossman, Presley) in the near future.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 3:38 PM EST up reply actions
could have spent the extra money to sign guys like Kime
They had an an agreement in principle with Kime, but he backed out because he didn’t understand that the commissioner’s office slow-pedals approval on above-slot signings, and claimed he was worried that the team was going to withdraw its offer.
Kind of dumb, but whatever, it’s his life.
Now that you mention it
I do remember reading that. Thanks for the refresher
by KentuckyPirate on Jan 22, 2012 6:53 PM EST up reply actions
Good and fair stuff
Curious as to if anyone else has been bothered by the fact that NH has gotten zero extra picks via free agency compensation. The Rays, for example, have done well to work that for years. Yes, they got picks via losing Crawford, etc, but also guys like Brad Hawpe. If you click his name it shows that the Rays got a compensation pick for him for this past draft. The Rockies cut him in 2010 and the Rays picked him up on waivers, where he was for eight days, signed him to a minor league deal, brought him up in September, and got a pick for it.
The Pirates should have could have done the same day. Hell, he could have just started for us in mid-August (when he was waived). It was 2010, who cares. Yes, I understand the Rays for sure had a under-the-table deal, but why didn’t we? Clearly, we could have. Instead, NH is busying trying on a reclamation project of Jeff Clement. That’s me just voicing my frustration; I understood and agreed with getting Clement at the time. It’s just that NH not being more creative in trying to acquire minor leagues bothered me. I’d rather search the scrap pile for guys who we can turn into picks rather than search the scrap pile for has-beens who once had upside. That actually is essentially what happened with Lee. We freaking managed to trade Aaron Baker for a supplemental pick. That’s a gold mine. It’s just taking NH too long to figure that out. Plus, I think its probably he traded for Lee because we were in contention and the pick was a by-product. We should have been trading for guys like Lee in 2008, 2009, and 2010 just to get picks. It’s low risk, high reward. Not now, but trade deadline 2010, someone would have given a comp guy up for Tim Alderson I’m sure.
I mean, I know this is dumbing it down, but I don’t understand why the Pirates couldn’t have done the following every year. Aggressively targeted guys with a solid chance to hit type B status in the offseason with one year left on their contract and a solid chance to not accept arb for whatever reason. Get 2 or 3 or even 4 of these guys every July, presumably giving up guys like Aaron Baker, or hell, I’d give up a guy like Gorkys Hernandez or Diego Moreno or even an Evan Chambers, decent prospects. Offer every player arbitration. Those who accept, sign them, and trade them to someone who will eat the salary for organizational filler. Rinse and repeat.
Putting into real life context. In 2009, there were 17 comp picks in the supplemental round from type A/B free agency. Type B guys included: Marco Scutero, Chone Figgins, Gregg Zaun, Marlon Byrd, Mark DeRosa, Jason Marquis, and Brandon Lyon. I’m sure there were other players too who were type B who wouldn’t have accepted arb but their team didn’t offer. In addition, there were type B guys who either would or did accept arb.
Now, all these players wouldn’t be available at the deadline because some were useful pieces on contenders. I’m not going to sort through that right now. For sake of argument though, lets say the Pirates traded for Gregg Zaun and..oh wait, they didn’t have to trade for Zaun? He was picked up off waivers by.. gasp… Andrew FREAKIN GENIUS Friedman. Ugh. Anyway, so they pick up Zaun on waivers (and trade some no-name guy like the Rays did), trade for Mark DeRosa and Jason Marquis… Let’s look at who the Pirates could trade using our top 20 prospects from 2009 list in the ‘others category.’ Let’s say we trade Quincy Latimore for DeRosa and pick up all the salary and then we trade Jamie Romak and Brian Bixler for Jason Marquis. We also trade Jeff Sues and Rumulo Sanchez (our #16 prospect!) for player X.
We then offer arb to all 4 guys. The first three decline. We have three freakin draft picks now for… Latimore, Romak, Bixler, Sues, and Sanchez plus some cash. Player X, gasp, accepts. So we pay him 2.9 million dollars in arb. After he’s officially ours, we call him team Anybody, and offer player X and a prospect for the hell of it, say Brent Klinger, for a bag of balls and that they eat 2 million of the 2.9 million dollars. Wa-la, we win.
/end rant.
Again, good stuff.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 20, 2012 1:43 PM EST reply actions
Why is it bad that he’s gotten zero picks from free agency? That means he is proactively trading those players away likely getting multiple players of known quantity rather than a mystery H.S.or college kid.
by Blyleven Curve Ball on Jan 20, 2012 1:55 PM EST up reply actions
Yes
but bascally everything he’s traded has been homegrown and was here when he got here. Bay, Nady, McLouth, Jack Wilson, Ian Snell, Freddy Sanchez, Nyjer Morgan, etc. The only real notable exception was Dotel. My point is, he hasn’t gone out of his away to acquire veterans who could have brought back picks.
The two obvious examples are Gregg Zaun and Brad Hawpe. The Rays gave up Rhyne Hughes total for those two, and got two comp picks for it. It’s clearly evident in how we (hopefully will) end/ended up with the pick for Derrek Lee. We traded Aaron Baker. In the 2009, 2010, and 2011 draft, it should have been easy (in my mind) to have had an extra say two picks yearly in the supplemental round. I outlined that.
Here is a list of players drafted in the supplemental rounds over that 09-11 time period.
09
Tyler Skaggs
Garrett Richards
10
Anthony Ranuado
Noah Syndergaard
Taijuan Walker
Nick Castellones
11
Trevor Story
Joe Musgrove
Dwight Smith Jr.
Henry Owens
Keenyn Walker
Ya, that would have cost more and maybe we wouldn’t have signed late round guys like ZVR, Cain, Holmes, etc, but maybe not. In 2010, we gave over 800K to Dan Grovatt and Drew Maggi. I liked the decision, but would have preferred to draft Taijuan Walker and pay him that 800K. Yes hindsight is 20-20, and maybe we would have selected Peter Tago instead, who’s been a bust, but odds are with 6 extra picks and our penchant to spend, we would have landed one or two of those top 100 prospects i listed above (under 09 and 10)
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 20, 2012 2:11 PM EST up reply actions
aw c'mon cutch
I don’t really disagree with you, but to get an idea of the value of a supplemental pick we need to look at something more than the ten sexiest supplemental round picks over the last three years, plus the guy whose post-first round bonus record Josh Bell broke.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 20, 2012 3:16 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
but I think if we had had 9 picks in three years, we would have managed to grab one of those top 10 sexiest players. Could also have the chance to have 4 or something like that and the top farm system in baseball.
Even if you don’t like the balls out philosophy, we should have been trying to get Gregg Zaun and Brad Hawpe.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 21, 2012 3:50 PM EST up reply actions
I think this is pretty fair
And it puts the focus where it really belongs, instead of the endless obsession with the f’ing trades.
Occupy MLB! Down with Seligula!
I think this is mostly fair
but I still have to snipe at the way you criticize the 2009 draft above. As KentuckyPirate says above, every team may be kicking themselves for not nabbing Wil Myers. If you look at the best guys who were taken after that pick — even within twelve picks or so — most picks will look bad, because you’re comparing one guy to twelve. And in the case of Brandon Belt, you’re really stretching; obviously no team thought he was worth picking in the third round, or even the fourth.
I think a fairer basis for comparison is looking at the next five players picked — since Black and Pounders were picked within five players of each other, look at the next ten players after Black. This allows for some bias, if one of the teams picking after the Pirates was drafting particularly poorly, but I think it’s more or less the best way to answer, “who might the Pirates have picked, if they hadn’t picked the actual guy”? And we should look at all the picks, not just the best one. This isn’t going to make NH look good, but I think it’s a fairer comparison.
So, by pick number, with a little info gleaned from John Sickels’ site:
49. Black
50. Jeff Kobernus Sickels grade C; seems like a can’t-steal first type.
51. Rich Poythress Not great so far; a 1B who hasn’t hit much outside High Desert
52. Everett Williams An ‘other’ prospect. Missed almost all of 2011 with an injury, yet to hit in full-season ball.
53. Pounders
54. Mychal Givens An “other” for the O’s, didn’t hit in 2011
55. Tommy Joseph <a href=“http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/1/2/2676259/san-francisco-giants-top-20-prospects-for-2012>B-/B from Sickels
56. Blake Smith ”http://www.minorleagueball.com/2011/12/5/2612837/los-angeles-dodgers-top-20-prospects-for-2012">C+ from Sickels
57. Billy Hamilton B+ from Sickels
58. Andrew Oliver B from Sickels; has already reached the majors (though hasn’t succeeded there yet)
59. Nolan Arenado A- from Sickels. Want.
60. Eric Smith. Stupid jerks with stupid unsearchable names; but his minor league numbers don’t look good.
So, there’s four players out of these ten who I’d really like to have, and Blake Smith still shows some promise, whereas I wouldn’t say the other five are that much better than Pounders, who we did flip for an asset of sorts. Still, this doesn’t look great for NH.
The comparison class for Evan Chambers doesn’t look as bad. I’m not going to do individual write-ups, but I think the first four picks after him are all “other” prospects for Sickels and the fifth, Wade Gaynor, isn’t even an “other.” Wil Myers was picked seven picks after him — but he also got a $2 million bonus, I think, which means going after him would’ve meant changing their draft strategy considerably. Third rounders just don’t seem to hit at that high a rate.
Now, this doesn’t mean I disagree with your conclusions — I agree with them. I think that the Pirates should be going after upside guys earlier (as they did with Bell and Allie); there might have been better bonus babies available at those earlier rounds, and they’d almost certainly have done better to pick Myers with one of those picks and not grab as many high school arms. In addition, the Sanchez pick looks bad by this mark. Picks in the 50s just don’t seem to hit that often, which makes it more important to hit at the top. One of the rationales for going slot Sanchez and then grabbing a bunch of lottery tickets was that there were no sure things past Strasburg and Ackley, but if we look at the next five picks (Hobgood/Leake/Minor/Zach Stewart/Jacob Turner, not in order), they all bid fair to work out except Hobgood, who was also a stretch. So a more traditional draft strategy probably would have been a better idea, though we really have to wait to see how the high school pitchers turn out.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 20, 2012 3:10 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I mainly just included a few other options as a reference point for my argument. I just remember question why we drafted Pounders and Chambers when we drafted them. Victor Black was rated around 50 or so by BA before the draft. Pounders and Chambers profiles (if I remember correctly) around draft time weren’t that exciting, especially if we were going with the Tony Sanchez approach up front.
Rounds 1-4 (which year stands out as the worst year based on talent?)
2008 – Alvarez, Scheppers, Mercer, D’arnaud
2009 – Sanchez, Black, Pounders, Chambers, Dodson
2010 – Taillon, Allie, Rojas Jr., Kingham
2011 – Cole, Bell, Dickerson, Brewer
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 3:36 PM EST up reply actions
yeah I agree, those guys weren't even exciting at the time
The “we could have had X” argument is a pet peeve of mine, and I thought it was only fair to ding you on it when I went hard after McBomination for it, but I agree that the 2009 draft is light at the top. Though I still hold out hope for Sanchez and Dodson.
Part of what i was trying to do was to show that a less hindsighty argument still doesn’t make the Black/Pounders picks look good, and that the third round seems to be a crapshoot at best.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 20, 2012 4:12 PM EST up reply actions
Fair enough
I agree that the “we could have had X” argument is flawed and I was simply trying to point out that there were better/more highly touted options out there when we drafted those guys. I think by drafting Pounders, Black and Chambers we stunted the growth of our farm system.
I also still think Sanchez has a great shot at being productive and I really like Dodson. I would have rather they went after a higher upside HS pitcher than Pounders and would have drafted someone with higher upside or safer projection than Chambers.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 4:27 PM EST up reply actions
I went back and looked at BA's top 100 draft preview
It had Will Myers ranked 31, Kipnis at 61, Andy Oliver at 21 (just to name a few). Pounders and Chambers were not in the top 100 (May 27, 2009).
It is not a case of we could have drafted player “x” but we could have drafted more highly touted players with early round picks.
I also understand that BA is not the be all/end all prospect grader.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 4:45 PM EST up reply actions
It's fair to criticize the 2009 draft, but
Black was sort of a special case, and his nemesis seems to be injury. Pounders and Chambers seem and seemed a bit of a reach, but Dodson is not out of the picture. The real question is whether the strategy of waiting until rounds 4-12 to go after high risk, high reward talent was a good one. My sense is that NH would say today that he did not stress ceiling enough in 2009 until he got to round 4.
4(115) Zack Dodson, LHP, Medina Valley HS, Castroville, TX, pitched at three levels with an ERA of 3.10, 8.8 hits per game, 0.6 home runs per game, 2.1 walks per game, and 6.4 strikeouts per game. That’s half of the walks per game of 2010. Unfortunately, after getting off to a strong start, Dodson injured his hand, so he missed almost three months at West Virginia. Post injury reports were that Dodson was throwing 88-91 MPH, and touching 93, which is pretty good for a young left handed pitcher.
5(145) Nate Baker, LHP, Mississippi, pitched at Bradenton with an ERA of 3.34, 9.2 hits per game, 0.4 home runs per game, 3.1 walks per game, and 6.4 strikeouts per game. He’s pitching in the AFL now, which would seem to suggest that he’s a prospect.
6(175), Zack Von Rosenberg, RHP, Zachary (LA) HS, pitched at WV with an ERA of 5.73, 10.2 hits per game, 1.4 home runs per game, 1.6 walks per game, and 8.2 strikeouts per game. To quote Charlie, “Von Rosenberg is struggling to command his fastball right now, so while he seemed to be pretty polished for a high school pitcher when he was drafted, he now looks like sort of a lottery ticket.”
7(205) Trent Stevenson, RHP, Brophy Prep, Phoenix, AZ, had the sort of year that makes Von Rosenberg’s look OK. At WV and SC he had an ERA of 6.46, 12.5 hits per game, 1.2 home runs per game, 1.7 walks per game, and only 3.9 strikeouts per game. This sort of performance can get you released in spring training. Like Von Rosenberg, he was elevating his fastball.
8(235) Colton Cain, LHP, Waxahachie (TX) HS, pitched at WV with an ERA of 3.64, 7.8 hits per game, 0.5 home runs per game, 2.6 walks per game, and 6.9 strikeouts per game. He stayed healthy, but looks a lot like Dodson in terms of performance (although the final numbers mask that he had an ERA of 3.16 as a starter). He didn’t throw nearly as hard as Dodson.
9(265) Brock Holt, 2B, Rice, played 98 games at second and 33 games at short for Altoona. He hit 0.288 with a wOBA+ of 104. Holt handled the jump to AA well, with a strong on-base percentage, but he lacks power. He’s got plenty of speed and can handle short well enough to be a utility player. Not too shabby for a ninth rounder. He’s in the Arizona Fall League now.
10(295) Joey Schoenfeld, C, Santiago HS, Garden Grove, CA, has had a grand total of 102 at bats in three years. He was released at mid-season.
11(325) Aaron Baker, 1B, Oklahoma, got us Derrek Lee for a month.
12(355) Jeff Inman, RHP, Stanford, pitched 36 innings (mostly at Bradenton) with an ERA of 2.00 and 7.0 hits per game, 1.5 walks per game, and 4.5 strikeouts per game. Were it not for that troublesome elbow, we might be getting excited about Inman. He’s in the Arizona Fall League now.
Viva Clemente!
Yeah I said Black was an acceptable pick based on pre-draft projections. Although it seemed like he projected as a relief picture from the very beginning. I have no problems with their approach from round 4 on up. I just think they could have better capitalized on rounds 1-3 (especially because they were protected, except for Black).
In fact, I think Dodson has a real chance to be a great pitcher (along with the usual Cain and ZVR projections). The main problem is that the early rounds clearly have the most talented players and the Pirates went after guys, who in my opinion were not high ceiling players. I also mentioned in the post that I think the Pirates recognized their mistake and fixed it with the subsequent drafts (Taillon, Allie, Rojas, Kingham then Cole, Bell, Dickerson, Brewer (?)).
In my opinion, the failure to target better projected players in 2009 greatly hindered our farm system and its rankings/ability to help the major league team.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 5:26 PM EST up reply actions
I just typed a longer, less coherent version of what WHYG typed above about the 2009 draft
Take his comment, add some witty “Wow, not a great collection of talent early” comment, reiterate the “It’s still early” disclaimer.
I thought Gayo was basically delivering Sano and was a little surprised to see him go to Minnesota. Josh Bell and Petey Alvarez make me hesitant to question how aggressively the FO chases amateurs they really, really want to sign.
I’m not against the reclamation projects because they’re generally cheap lottery tickets. Looking back on the past 5 Pirates teams, there’s really not a player that NH hit big on speculating in the FA market. He’s also picking from the bargain bin; I don’t know how much upside those players had (Clement, Overbay; those guys’ ceilings seemed to be “serviceable”… which they still weren’t).
Alex Anthopoulos really struck gold in the “acquire a guy just to get the picks” market. I was under the impression that the new CBA was supposed to be cracking down on that.
“Looking back on the past 5 Pirates teams, there’s really not a player that NH hit big on speculating in the FA market.”
If you truly meant FA market then Clement doesn’t apply and Huntington is basically 1/3 (Dotel, Overbay, Correia). All other signings were bench players or middle relief. If you meant acquired in general then you have to add guys like Meek, Snyder and Hanrahan as well.
ive been saying the same thing for months
Overbay is the only FA position player that NH has signed to be a STARTER, and he was a late signee as well, which shows me that NH wanted other players instead of Lyle.
Barmes and Barajas are now 2 and 3.
Friedman
beat AA to the “acquire a guy just to get the picks” department. Look at Gregg Zaun and Brad Hawpe.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 21, 2012 3:58 PM EST up reply actions
These are points that are fair or could become fair with a decent probability.
I’m not ready to get upset about the 09 draft class yet, some of those kids are still 21 years old if they were picked at 18 during that draft. In my opinion, it takes at least 5 years to analyze a draft class, if not longer.
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
I understand that it is too early to grade the 2009 class. My main point is that the Pirates should have went after better players in the first three rounds.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 20, 2012 5:19 PM EST up reply actions
The thing is many that you have listed are better players now, but were they more highly regarded in May of 2009?
It’s all hindsight unless you’ve got multiple sources dated before the draft that year which were naming the players you listed as better than what Huntington picked. I don’t remember seeing posts on BD asking why we didn’t pick the above players back in 2009. Your point still remains a decent one but the criticism of Huntington comes off as if it was something we all knew at the time, and I do not believe that is the case.
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
Here’s the thread. No one was super-excited about Black or Pounders; haven was really grumbling about them and BadAndy seemed to be pushing for Oliver. So that’s a little bit of evidence for Cain’s point.
This is why I like to look at the next 5 picks, though; that gives you an idea of who really was regarded as appropriate picks around then.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 21, 2012 10:14 AM EST up reply actions
Thanks for the link.
Anything from pro scouting sources?
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
by Kosstic518 on Jan 21, 2012 12:11 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I mentioned early in the comments
that BA had a few guys ranked pretty highly that we passed on for Black, Pounders and Chambers. All I’m saying is that the first three rounds are essential to stockpiling a farm system and during the 2009 draft the Pirates front office went with Tony Sanchez (which was fine in my opinion) but should have went after players with higher ceilings than Pounder and Chambers especially. Scouting reports on both players left little in regard to projection. Pounders was big and had a solid all around repertoire and Chambers was said to have already been muscularly filled out and short.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 22, 2012 12:13 AM EST up reply actions
BA had Chambers as the #181 player in their top 200. The last sentence of their writeup on him is as follows: “Scouts that think Chambers will learn to lay off breaking balls out of the dirt could push for him in the first five rounds, leaving those who doubt his bat—and have him turned in as a sixth-to-10th rounder—missing their chance.”
BA rated Pounders as the #39 player in California (the first one outside the top 200 nationally), and said that he “has split scouts more than any other player”. Their writeup said that he was polished, but lacked projection.
MLB’s pre-draft scouting report on Pounders is here. They didn’t write one for Chambers.
Agreed
entirely. If you check out my signature, I have a post I just wrote titled “A Gross(man) Lesson.” (/shameless self promotion)
Summarizing a bit, I just point out how Grossman was a prospect afterthought before this season. He had just put up an OPS under 700, and John Sickels (one ‘expert’) didn’t even have him in his top 20. Since I know some aren’t big fans of Sickels, I would point out that he was right about Grossman at the time. If he was in the top 20, it was 15-20. Now, after his breakout year he’s unanimously in the top 6.
However, it seems the chic thing to do to write off ZVR, Cain, and Dodson (I will write off Stevenson.. 3.9 K/9 last year and a fastball still in the 80’s and no real breaking ball…). That makes no sense to me. All three are arguably in a better position than Grossman, and they will be going into their third full season like Grossman did last year. Give them another year in my opinion, at least.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 21, 2012 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
Well said
I like ZVR a lot still.
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
I don’t like this. The logic seems a little wonky to me. Criticizing for not signing certain players, and for not hitting on lottery tickets? The odds were against them in most of those situations. I believe you praise a team for beating the odds, not criticize them for not beating them.
1. Sano and Cuthbert were pursued by every team in the majors. Did Sano want to be a Pirate? Yes. Did that mean the Pirates absolutely should have signed him, and had a perfect opportunity to do so? Not necessarily. As fans, we don’t know how the negotiations went, but people talk as if someone asked NH “Do you want Sano?” and he went “Nah.” There were 29 other teams after these two players. I’m not going to assume my team should sign them when everyone is competing.
As far as Scheppers is concerned, it was mentions that he was throwing in the 70’s. If you want to take huge risks on every injured player in the draft, go for it, your career as a GM will probably not last very long. It was worth a shot to see how he was throwing, not worth the risk to sign someone who can’t throw.
These are only three examples, and the only one I feel is even remotely valid is Sano, since the Pirates were seen as favorites there. Even then, I don’t think the amount of criticism the front office gets is fair.
2. You can’t draft the highest upside player with every pick. There’s a reason that nobody in the league does that. It’s simply not feasible. If the draft were as simple as “take the highest upside player”, maybe the Pirates would have been decent at some point in the last 20 years. But it’s not, and that’s why you see every team taking lower ceiling, affordable players in the earlier rounds sometimes (with the exception of last year when the Pirates and Nationals went crazy). Using hindsight to criticize a team for not taking the highest upside guy every time is bull. Say they took Myers, and he completely flamed out in the system. People would be complaining just as much, if not more, for “wasting” that pick.
3. When I go buy a lottery ticket, I don’t get upset when I don’t win. Especially when instead of paying for the ticket, all I have to give up is some of my old clothes. What should they have taken for Jack Wilson? Some C prospects? Kept him and gotten nothing? I have no problem with taking a swing in the dark, and I’m not going to get upset when I miss.
As far as free agents are concerned, yes, the signings have been poor and the organization needs to do a better job of evaluating talent. However, I had no complaints at the time with the majority of things you listed, and I’m not going to have them in hindsight either.
by thecheeseisblue on Jan 22, 2012 2:19 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
I would also like to mention that, though I may come off as harsh, I believe most criticism is valid and necessary. Also, I appreciate this criticism for focusing on what are probably more realistic criticisms than the trades, though I may have my disagreements with some of it.
by thecheeseisblue on Jan 22, 2012 2:37 PM EST up reply actions
In response
1. I am not criticizing them for any one individual failed signing but rather the fact that they have missed out on too many. Especially, when they made it clear they were focusing on rebuilding the minors. Regardless of what exactly happened in each situation, they still failed to sign numerous players. I also mentioned numerous times that I think they have learned from their mistakes and have gotten the job done in the past year or so.
2. It is true that you can’t draft the highest upside pick every time but with the first three rounds protected the Pirates should have. Failing to capitalize (only in 2009), stunted the overall growth of the minor league system. I also understand that players don’t make it, however, once again, the Pirates should be drafting the highest upside players in the early rounds and if they flame out at least they used the correct strategy. Your argument about taking low ceiling players does not make sense after they drafted Tony Sanchez. I have no problem with Tony Sanchez/lower ceiling/affordable pick being used in this situation but the Pirates should have then immediately gone after higher upside players in the protected rounds. My only criticism of their draft strategy of late has been with rounds 1-3 of the 2009 draft (except for Sanchez).
3. I am not upset with the lottery pick approach to free agency. I am strictly looking at the facts and they failed to sign free agents that would help them win, or bring them draft picks, or get traded for prospects. They simply failed to do so.
by Cainyoudigit on Jan 22, 2012 3:39 PM EST up reply actions
protected picks
Mostly OT, but this is something that has been bugging me a little for a while: I don’t think that there should be much of a difference between protected and unprotected picks.
The rationale is that if a protected pick doesn’t sign, you get a pick next year, but if an unprotected pick, you get bupkis. So you need to go for signable guys with unprotected picks. But if a protected pick doesn’t sign, your pick next year is unprotected — meaning by this logic you’re forced to take a signable guy anyway! If that means you’re getting a worse overall player, then you shouldn’t have gambled with the protected pick.
Maybe it doesn’t apply to the Pirates’ situation, since Black was only considered a slight overdraft, but still I think the notion of a protected pick is somewhat overplayed.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 22, 2012 6:38 PM EST up reply actions
FWIW
I choose not to nitpick picks or presume to know why a particular player was or wasn’t signed by the FO. What I am most anxious to see is how players will be developed. To me, that is the key to the team’s future. Implementation of a “Pirate’s Way” of playing baseball (whatever that might be) much like the Baltimore Orioles of the 70’s and 80’s or the Atlanta Braves of the 90’s to the present. A method of teaching skills and instilling a confident and winning attitude will be proof to me that the FO is really on track and that there will be a consistent winner in the ’Burgh.
by lambert58 on Jan 23, 2012 12:04 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Well said.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jan 23, 2012 12:34 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
