Son, you've been drafted.
Some of the other Sox blogs - and other baseball blogs - as well as the traditional mainstream media (and by that I don't mean Oprah), have spent some time (albeit small amount of time) covering the recent MLB amateur draft. I wonder why. Unlike fooball and basketball, the baseball draft is a completely different beast for several reasons (which is why no one cares, and it's pointless to cover):
1) none of the players drafted will have an immediate impact on their new team. Even the likes of Dwight Gooden (and Brandon McCarthy) have to toil away in the minors for at least 2-3 seasons minimum before even getting to the show. That is not the case for basketball (immediate impact player - LeBron James) or football (John Elway).
2) while there have been huge busts in basketball (Ralph Sampson ) and football (the Boz, Archie Griffin), baseball is a total crapshoot.Here's a list of the #1 draft picks from 1979 to 2002 (lets give the 03 and 04 players some time to fail).
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/history/draft/index.jsp?feature=number_ones
Sure, there are some big names, but compare that with football
http://football.about.com/od/nfldrafthistory/l/bl_draftfirst.htm
or basketball
http://www.insidehoops.com/nba_draft_toppicks.shtml
The majority of top draft picks make it to the pros in those two sports. And for every top pick in baseball who fails to live to the hype (Van Poppel - rd. 1 but 14th overall) there are 10 guys picked really late who make it huge (like Piazza - 62nd round).
3) I'm not a huge fan of Beane Ball, but when it comes to the draft, I side with Billy's philosphy of not drafting a high school kid. I also agree that Sabermetrics, as opposed to traditional scouting, is a better tool to exploit for superior draft pick performance. I think Moneyball did a good job of illustrating that most old school baseball scouts "eye" for talent is a myth.
How pointless is the draft? In 1993 our fair team from the Southside drafted a woman - Carey Schueler.
So, if you want pointless Sox draft coverage, find it someplace else.
posted by EasyW @ 9:21 PM
8 comments
8 Comments:
"I side with Billy's philosphy of not drafting a high school kid."
I won't argue the point, but I hate seeing colleges turned into minor league systems for the pros. A topic on which R. M. Hutchins was about 50 years ahead of his time . . .
Got an alternative?
Well, yeah, letting the pros pay their own player development costs (e.g., through minor or other developmental leagues), and not expecting the colleges to do it. Of course, as long as colleges *will* do it, then the pros will, understandably, let them. I suppose it's been this way too long to expect anything to change (which was probably one of the points, a good one, of your response).
Are you still looking for blog writing ideas, or are you set with them? I've had some ideas, though I don't know your interest in or time for them . . .
Uh, the pros already do that. Baseball has the most extensive minor league system of any major sport. They draft a lot of high school kids. Problem being, it is a lot more difficult to evaluate baseball talent at that level. Michael Lewis outlines this point extensively in "Moneyball."
Basketball gets their talent from a variety of sources - colleges, high schools, international leagues, and a small minor league system.
Sounds like you've got a beef with the pro teams not absorbing the cost of player development, and letting the colleges do it insstead? Then take aim at football. There is no draft for high schoolers, and no minor league system. Recently, the NFL has created a small developmental league (NFL Europe) and occassional pick a player out of the arena league (Kurt Warner) of the CFL (Warren Moon).
In many cases, players need a few more years to mature. College lets them achieve that goal. And for the 99% of college atheletes that never play in the pros, they do get an education out of the deal, one which, had they not been an athelete, they might not have gotten.
I'm all open to new ideas... whatcha got?
You're right football is the biggest problem here, and that baseball isn't all that guilty, but I suspect it's getting worse in baseball (i.e., that baseball is relying more on colleges). The problem may be diminishing in basketball, given the growing importance of other sources of talent you mention.
Was it Joe Paterno who said the athlete who took advantage of the education was getting the best deal around and the one who didn't was getting the worst? He may have been on to something . . .
I've no great ideas; what I have may be worth less than you're paying for it (i.e., less than nothing), but it'd be nice to see
--some historical stuff (e.g., what happened to the '51 Sox, the only other Sox team to win 40 so quickly, that went on to finish a mediocre 81-73?)
--more on the bars
--anything cultural on the South Side that might be undercovered elsewhere
--anything on writers not covered elsewhere (I liked hearing about Leslie Stella)
--how well have some South Side writers fared over time (I liked reading your thoughts on James Farrell's baseball book); I'm thinking historical perspective here (e.g., like Ebert's reviews of great movies), not "where are they now," though do that, too, if you'd like
--you've some interesting travel links; do you have any travelogue writings?
--what is Abe Books? I.e., what should we know that isn't on its website? (I hadn't heard of it until I saw your link.)
--why the interest in the Socialist Party? I'm not talking about ideology, but why your interest in that rather than something like Democratic Socialists or MoveOn?
Use, abuse, or ignore as you wish . . .
Whoops! I realized I'm sure you'll notice the topic I didn't mention. But I'm wed, so I'm not going to comment on stories of whom you bed. It's your blog; do as you'd like . . .
OK, "Anonymous", your sweaky wheels are about to get oiled:
--a new tavern review coming this week
--I've started in on the "Studs Lonigan Trilogy", so I'll begin to place Farrell (and other Southside writers) in a historical perspective and discuss their impact on society and literature.
--Abe books is THE place to buy used books.
--I dig some Socialist ideas, which are popular elsewhere on this planet. I believe in more than the 2-party system, but refuse to advertise for the "other" 3rd parties; the Reformers are history, the Libertarians are nuts, and the Greens are trendy, hypocritcs. I don't belong to any party, and never will... I don't vote across party lines - I make up my own mind.
--I'd be happy to add some interesting stories from my years on the road. In the past, I've hinted at some of the time I spent living overseas. Other than nearly getting shot in Guatamaela, most of my travels have been pretty tame.
I'll be interested in your views on Lonigan. Is it (1) a period piece, (2) a geographic piece, or (3) something more significant? I tend to think (1), possibly (3), but probably not (2). Others disagree. It's also been a while since I read it, so don't trust my memory.
The Guatemala story sounds like some good off-season filler (or maybe filler for a Contreras game!).
Don't take my suggestions too seriously; my tastes are geekier than most.
Post a Comment
<< Home