Ranking draft "prospects"

infielddad, Dustin Pedroia is a very good prospect. Where he gets drafted would only be a guess on my part, but he will get drafted quickly and get an opportunity to play pro ball. I have watched him since he was in the 10th grade and he has a couple of tools that are outstanding......he can really hit and is an outstanding fielder. He has a great make up and has a feel for the game that not many players have that will take him a long way.

I don't know who the other player is you mentioned, so I can't comment on him. If you PM me with the info, I could then comment on him too.

Publications get info wherever they can, but in 20 years, I have never had one call and ask my opinion, so I take what they say with a grain of salt.

"Baseball America" and "Collegiate Baseball" are two fine rags that promote and rank hundreds of prospects at each publication. What people fail to realize is that even at those levels only a few are truly outstanding. Just think how many sports writers were touting various MVP and batting champs. It sells paper. Does anyone have the data on how many kids go on from college or HS and what is the average length of stay. I would have to say that I do not believe the tenure is more than a few years for the majority.

Steve

First of all they are not "rags"

Secondly there are more than just a few outstanding players on these lists.

Why the cynicism ????

TRhit

infielddad

Baseball America and PG do a great job looking, and ranking players, but it is just their oppinion. Anyways their oppinion is based on a lot of scouting hours , and asking to differents scouting sources, showcases, etc..
The most important thingh is that they always are very accurate in their predictions. Always will be an slipper or any surprise that nonbody may guess, by usually they are very close to reality. PG is the organization that Baseball America trust for this work, and Baseball America is the one that Major League Baseball do, so I think that they know what they are doing.

"Peace is, the respect for the other people's rights".
Benito Juarez

TR,
"rag" is (affectionate) slang for publication - no dis

IFdad, I saw Jecman throw last summer in Ohio & I'm not an expert, but at 6'9", 230# it was apparent to a blind man (me) that something special's there.

I guess there could be a variety of reasons that things have not come together for him in college yet, but I saw bullpen work that was impressive.

It looks as tho my kid will be catching him this summer, and if things are still falling into place for him the summer tandem of coaches Shapiro/Schoonover have a history of "putting it together"





lefties? - - - they just aint right!

BEE

In my book "rag" is a term for a "bad" publication, one that prints material that is sensational to sell copies-- do you call the NY/LA Times or Wall Street Journal a "RAG"?

TRhit

TRhit, rags is a term of endearment to the publication. I read and enjoy both of them.

I stand by the "just a few" as great is relative to where you set the barIMHO.

No cynicism intended, my question remains the same:
"Does anyone have the data on how many kids go on from college or HS and what is the average length of stay. I would have to say that I do not believe the tenure is more than a few years for the majority."

Overall professional baseball is a rough road to hoe on $900/ month for the majority.

Like most slang terms, the emphasis varies from one section of the country to another.

Since "rags" are used in the manufacturing of paper in order to give it strength, it's a common term for any print medium, particularly in the South, where a lot of the pulp paper industry is located.

It's also shorter to type and easier to spell than magazine or newspaper.

In NYC it means the Daily News and the Post

Not The NY Times or Wall Street Journal

TRhit

TR-Then NY Times would certainly fit your definition of "rag"!

Moc1

My oh My, let's see if we can further discuss ranking draft prospects and leave rags out of thread

I'll start. Lately it has been evident that PG Cross-Checker's lists are very good to peruse and have value for scouts, recruiters and others.

Ranking draft prospects has become big business and several are well-respected. Several sports management groups rely on these lists as well.
With this in mind, wouldn't it be advantageous for HS/college pro prospects to gain as much exposure as possible to try and move up those lists?? Wouldn't this include attending as many showcases and events as possible run by those who compose these lists? Wouldn't this increase slot money in most cases if drafted by MLB team? Wouldn't it be easier to negotiate amount of acceptable money offered by MLB team taking into consideration these lists? Wouldn't an agent find it easier to negotiate acceptable amount if player moves up lists? Just a few questions that make me go Hmmmm.....Shep's scratching his chin peace

Infielddad,

Generally speaking - I think BA/PG does an OK job with the college kids. I think they are much stronger on the prospect stuff than they are on the performance stuff though. I also think that if you arent a Div 1 player - you can pretty much forget about them talking performance - with rare exception.

Let me give you an example in this years NYCBL summer league. (Keep in mind that they rank this league in the lower tier of collegiate summer leagues - so it probably doesnt get as much scrutiny as the others.)

They had a couple kids - good players - that made the BA/PG Summer League All-Star team. Like 5th team or something. This was about performance now - not potential. It was not a prospect list.

One of the kids that made it played about 17 games - or about 30% of the season. I kid you not. The other kid had statistics that were good - but not great.

The class performance for a position player - with statistics to prove it - was Justin Wright.

And a kid named Ryan Jablonski was right there as well. Remember - this was a performance list.

Neither kid was mentioned anywhere.

You have to be either blind - or just not paying attention to overlook these players.

No slam on BA/PG - they do a great job on most of their stuff - but they miss a heck of alot as well. IMO.

Every year there is a report card. It comes in the form of the June draft. It again shows up in the recruiting classes. These results can be followed by anyone who cares to check them out.

If anyone can rank players in exact order without missing a few, they would not only be in demand... They would be the only thing that counts.

For the record... PG has never ranked college players before this year. Allan Simpson now does that for PG and his information is based on his many contacts throughout scouting.

This June we missed three out of the top 136 picks (top 4 rounds). We did not have them ranked in perfect order but they were all listed. Only one of the three was a high school player.

We take a lot of pride in these lists and don't waver from our opinions even if we hear the draft will go differently. That is why we ranked Beckett #1 in high school. It's also why we ranked Kazmir #1 in high school. Results are the only thing someone should argue about. If we were continually wrong would anyone pay attention?

There are many who claim we only rank those who attend PG events (or pay us)! A little research could allow someone to prove this rather than just make accusations. I would challenge someone to do the research... Use the report cards.

There are parents on this site who have had talented players who did not attend PG events. Yet they were ranked in the position we thought they should be placed. Were we correct? Not always... But we did NOT miss them! On the other hand we have missed some... just as the draft misses some each and every year. There is no perfection involved.

We know for a fact that the player rankings are followed closely. How do we know??? An Area Scout told us that his Scouting Director sent out a directive to follow our rankings. He ordered his scouts to not miss a player we have listed. Another way we know... When we enter a new player (name) in the rankings... our phone and email goes crazy with questions from recruiters and scouts... Who is this guy??? In one case some of you may be familiar with we entered a player (RHP) at #26 in the country. His very next high school start had over 40 scouts including 10 scouting directors. The start before the rankings were released there were absolutely zero scouts. Word travels like wild fire in baseball!

Some might think this is bragging or something. I call it the facts! If someone can prove the facts are different just prove it. But don't try to prove it based on opinion... Prove it by the actual results and the numbers. We make mistakes but we take it way too serious to make very many of them.

Every year people bring up how wrong these rankings are. This has gone on forever. Then in early June each and every year no one ever mentions this topic. Believe me... we have naysayers who would like nothing better than to shove the results down our throat. But this topic is always silent come every June! I think that can be checked as well.

Sorry, but we take player rankings very serious. If others don't that is fine!

I dont think there are many people that would question PG rankings (unless of course they think their kid should have been ranked - LOL - but that parent stuff will never stop IMO)

As PG says - the proof is in the pudding every June. And PG seems to get almost all of the top round guys nailed down - every year.

As for the folks that complain about having to go to a PG event to get ranked - that is pure BS. I know for a fact that PG ranks players that have never attended a PG event. So that stuff is just nonsense IMO.

I also believe it is very hard to cover 280 D-1 colleges - so you can bet that it is even harder to cover the rest (D2,D3, etc).

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to ranking players, PG is it.

As far as collegiate performance review - I think BA/PG has alot more work to do. Just my opinion as a paying subscriber.

I do remember when I complained to Jerry about the NY High School coverage several years ago.
I didnt do it to be a jerk - or for any selfish reasons - I just did it. LOL

What I have seen since then - the last 3-4 years - is vastly improved coverage of that region by PG.

Hopefully - the collegiate performance reviews will improve with time as well.

Interesting that infielddad started this topic over two years ago and it is still kicking. Must be one heck of a topic

Look, here is some anecdotal information on the rankings. I never heard of Jeremy Sowers until PG mentioned him here as a prospect several years ago. Everybody in Cleveland now knows who the kid is because he has been sensational in his rookie campaign. They are going to let him have one more start this season and then shut him down since he has already pitched over 200 innings between minors and mlb this season. For whatever it's worth

CD,

LOL - I didnt even realize that until your post. This topic was started in 2004.

Talk about being oblivious - or old?

LOL

its,

We do want to be as good as possible. As you know we spend most of our time with high school stuff. The College stuff is new to us, but not new to Allan Simpson. In fact, he has been recognized as the foremost expert in that area. His contact list is phenomenal. The college league lists are compiled using these contacts which include league managers, scouts and college coaches. But when it comes to high school kids we listen to everyone, see as much as possible and then do what we think is best.

I can guarantee you that when I hear a player mentioned as a prospect we take notice. (including here on this site) I appreciate input from others because we have the ability to check out a player anywhere in the country on short notice. In the end it will be our decision as to where we think that player ranks. (right or wrong but honestly)

Complaints are welcome, but often they are from parents who feel their son has been slighted. It is possible that a player can get slighted, but not intentionally. The parents don't always understand just how many players we see and can compare vs those they see. I've always said "We can afford to be wrong and will be at times... We can not afford to be wrong on purpose!"

I do get furious when I read those players paid to get ranked comments. There are thousands of people who know that is untrue! I consider that an insult!

Seems like we skipped 2005 on this thread!

However, I'd bet there was a similiar thread in 2005.

PG,

I dont think you have to worry much about parents that make those type of silly accusations. I think those folks disappear pretty quickly - and rarely if ever are taken seriously. Its just plain stupid. IMO.
Then again - I also am not on the receiving end of that nonsense - so it is easy for me to just shrug it off as stupidity or bitterness. LOL

As for covering high school - college - and pro baseball - it is a monumental task IMO.
I think most folks just look at the micro view - and concentrate on what interests them at the time. The macro view - on the other hand - reveals what a large undertaking it really is.

When people (like me) actually take the time to follow the prospect lists - year after year - it becomes readily apparent that the accuracy rate is something special. IMO - if some people dont want to accept that - that would be their problem - not yours.

All that being said - you know that I always speak my mind (respectfully I hope). In this case - it had to do with performance based issues in the NYCBL this summer - not prospect lists. If you do mention this to Allan Simpson - dont tell him I said that - I dont want "itsinthegame" hammered by him in Baseball America. LOL (Only kidding)