Skip to main content

With Perfect Game thru PGcrosschecker.com is just about to come out with the top 1000 '07 rankings, how do college coaches and pro scouts use this information and how useful is it to them?

http://www.pgcrosschecker.com/rankingsnotice_06.aspx

Team One used to do ratings but have not come out with them and Baseball America has their own rankings by class.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I am just a player's parent, but we found it to be pretty accurate for several 2006 kids who were drafted. Not only in the top three rounds, but also in the late rounds.

Our boy is an 2007 and they had comments about him in a game during his regular HS Season. Kinda like Big Brother is out there watching all the time.....

We did have one Advisor tell us it was bull, but then again, he was an Advisor.
Homerun.... Rankings are very useful, but are represented incorrectly! While the top players are known by EVERYBODY, there are players that fall through the cracks. When my son was a senior I would scour the baseball rags and see if my son was rated. He never was rated, not even in the top 1000. Then draft day comes and son got drafted. The person that drafted my son was at the house 2 hours later and said that they have seen him play since his soph. year.

baseball publications, while useful don't tell the whole story. I my house they do have their place (for entertainment only)
We have ranked players for many years. Yes, there are some players who fall through the cracks. Not as many as one would think, however.

As a point of reference… Perhaps the very highest percentage of any group that subscribes are agent/advisors. Followed by College Coaches and MLB Scouts.

If a player is ranked fairly high, he will receive lots of attention from the three groups above. Anyone could check this out if they really wanted to.
Hopefully some do "fall through the cracks". I'm pretty sure my '07 son won't be ranked anywhere as the "name" players get all the buzz in this area and he had recently changed positions when he went to PG's Atlantic Coast and it showed, but he has been told by a couple of MLB area scouts they are following his progress and will be watching him at some of his HS games. One indicated he had known of him since spotting him at a camp late in his Soph year. Maybe he'll impress one of them.
I found the rankings to be very accurate. So accurate that it was almost scary. You almost felt like MLB was reading BA and PG rankings during the draft. When my son was drafted out of high school all the scouts knew who was saying what and where my son was ranked. Trust me they read all this stuff! I used these ranking as a guide to help find a fit for my son in his college search and it helped me develop a strategy when it came time to negotiate with the MLB club. I admit I followed it very closely --- BUT ---If your son isn’t on a national ranking I wouldn’t worry too much about it. After all ranking are opinions and we all know what they say about opinions. I also agree with TRHit that parents care much more about rankings and recognition than the players.
Fungo
FirstTimer I can answer that as well as PGStaff or at least validate what I know he will say because it happened to my son... The answer is NO! While most ranked players do attend PG events as part of their exposure strategy, participating (or not participating) in a PG event does not change where a player is ranked or where PG ranks them. While I'm sure PG would like every ranked player to attend at least one of their events, the two are completely separate as they must be.
Fungo
I compared PGCrossChecker's "Draft 2006 State-by-State Follow List" for Georgia with the actual 2006 draft results. I only looked at high school players. PGCrossChecker (PGCC) did pretty well in the upper rounds and, not so surprisingly, not so well in the lower rounds.

PGCC broke down its pre-draft rankings into four groups:

Group 1 -- Projected rounds 1-3
Group 2 -- Projected rounds 4-8
Group 3 -- Projected rounds 9-20
Group 4 -- "Chance draft/Player to watch"

PGCC listed one HS player (Cedric Hunter)in Group 1 (projected in rounds 1-3). Consistent with PGCC's projection, he was, in fact, drafted in the 3rd round.

PGCC listed 6 players in Group 2 (projected rounds 4-8). Four of those 6 were, in fact, drafted -- 2 in the 2nd round (Brent Brewer and Tom Hickman) and 2 in the 3rd (Nick Fuller and Torre Langley). One of the 2 who was not drafted was Michael Demperio, but Baseball America's draft blog quoted his dad as saying, "We turned down the Braves' first pick in the second round." (He went to Texas instead). Assuming this to be true, at least 5 of the 6 players listed in Group 2 were evaluated/drafted as 2nd/3rd round talents by MLB teams. (NOTE -- The other undrafted player, Ben Paulsen, had originally signed with a JUCO, Young Harris, but around the time of the draft signed with Clemson, so there may have been signability issues there as well). Thus, the bottom line with Group 2 is that PGCC may have under-rated them, but only slightly.

PGCC listed 19 players in Group 3 (projected rounds 9-20). 7 of the 19 were drafted. That seems like a decent result for PGCC, considering the signability issues with HS players in those rounds. The 7 went in the 20th, 21st, 29th, 32nd, 34th, 35th and 48th rounds, respectively. Thus, with one exception (the 20th rounder), they were all picked in a lower round than projected. The biggest "miss" for PGCC in this group was an 11th rounder, Brandon Rice, who didn't appear on PGCC's lists at all, even as a Group 4 possible "chance pick".

PGCC did not fare too well with Group 4 ("chance draft"). They listed 53 players in this Group, of whom 5 were drafted. That's not bad in itself. But there were 12 other players who were NOT on PGCC's list who were drafted. To PGCC's credit, the 12 were all lower round picks (i.e., rounds 23 to 50). Of those 12, 9 had never attended a PG showcase. Of the 3 who had, 2 were rated by PG as "9's" and one as a 7.5. The 7.5 player was the very last pick in the draft (#1502). According to an article on mlb.com, that player's father is a part-time scout for the Cards, which is the team that picked him. (PGCC could easily be excused for missing that one).

Looking at total numbers, PGCC listed 79 Georgia HS players as possible draft picks (including 53 "chance draft/players to watch"). 30 Georgia HS players were actually drafted, of whom 12 were not listed as even "chance draft/players to watch" by PGCC.

The morals of the story --

1) PGCrossCheckers did a very good job at the upper levels of the draft. There was not a single Georgia HS player taken in the top 10 rounds who was not identified by PG.
2) The most significant "miss" was a player drafted in round 11 who was not identified as even a "chance draft" player.
3) PG didn't do all that well below round 20. There were a number of players who were obviously on the radar screens of MLB clubs that were not on PG's list. A disproportionate number of those players had never attended a PG showcase.

Thus, to address the question that started this post -- how useful are rankings? -- as to the PG pre-draft rankings, I'd say they're useful in identifying the top 10 round talent. After that, there are plenty of players who fall through the cracks and yet get picked up in the draft.
Radioball,
There are actually multiple influences to this draft ranking accuracy. While you could say PG missed on a particular player because he wasn't drafted in the top ten as projected --- I could say MLB missed on the same player because he wasn't drafted in the top ten rounds. Understand too that all players have a say so in whether they are drafted or not. PG may have them projected in round six and the MLB club want them in round six but the player has said if I falls past round five don't draft me. The higher rounds are very dependent or a players desire to play at the next level. Clubs don't throw money at players in the higher rounds trying to change their minds so many player that COULD go in the higher rounds will pass. Too many influences to pinpoint where the "glitch" is.
Fungo

PS: I can remeber "drafting" players when I coached dixie youth baseball. While the top players were very easy to rank the weaker players were much harder to evaluate. Many times it came down to how good looking the player's mother was or if the player had a new bat he could share. Big Grin
Fungo, I agree and am not knocking PG. I think they did an excellent job with the crystal ball in projecting the top ten rounds of last year's draft.

As acknowledged in my prior post, signability has a lot to do with whether a player gets drafted and where he gets drafted. If, as in the case of Michael Demperio, the Braves call on draft day and the Demperios say, "Don't bother drafting Michael, he's not signing for that," then he won't get drafted. Likewise, if the MLB team calls and the player says -- "I don't know, I kind of really would like to go to school, ... but maybe ..." -- he may get drafted, but as a chance pick in a lower round than his talent would dictate. You obviously can't knock PG for having identified those types of players as a potential high draft picks. That probably explains a lot of the "Group 3" players who went a little lower than projected by PG.

I also recall drafting Little League teams and completely shooting in the dark in the last couple rounds. I remember wanting to pick one kid solely because his nickname on the registration form was "Sonic", which I thought was pretty cool. It's essentially the "bell curve" phenomenon. The outliers on either side of the bell curve -- the really, really great players, and the really, really bad ones -- are easy to identify. As you move from the edges of the bell curve, the players become harder to distinguish from one another.

In any event, the point of my post was not to use 20/20 hindsight to quibble with the accuracy of the pre-draft rankings, but rather to affirm a comment by Michael'sDad -- "Hopefully some do 'fall through the cracks'" in the rankings and yet are noticed by MLB scouts. There's no question that happens, maybe not in the top 10 rounds, but certainly after that.
RadioBall:

An excellent, valuable and easy to follow analysis of the draft v PG rankings compare and contrast. The results also follow the pattern of MLB scout logic. The MLB scouts I have talked to in my area say there real job is to find that "jewel" that everyone else has missed. And when they do, and he is drafted by their club, that is the "success" story they tell later. Not the Number one draft pick that they saw as a freshman in high school because everyone knows about that kid.

Again, kudos galore from me at least for putting the issue in a factual perspective. Check out the Statistics & Scorekeeping forum. We could use a guy like you.

TW344
Fungo had this little gem above...

quote:
I used these ranking as a guide to help find a fit for my son in his college search and it helped me develop a strategy when it came time to negotiate with the MLB club.


I think this is exactly how parents should use the rankings if your son happens to be in them. It is your one objective and fairly darn accurate snapshot into where your son fits and what the scouts/coaches think out of your earshot.

No, its not an absolute...but its about as close as you're going to get as a parent to the real scoop.
Last edited by justbaseball

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×