Baseball Toaster: Mike's Baseball Rants : Gone With the Draft

Gone With the Draft

2005-03-29 21:39

by Mike Carminati

As I await an other season of mediocrity in the land of the Phils, I am left wondering where the team would be if they could develop a modicum of decent pitching.

The Phils have three potential starters who came from the organization—Randy Wolf, Brett Myers, and Gavin Floyd. Wolf has shown flashes of being a capable frontline starter and has on occasion drawn comparisons to Tom Glavine, but his career ERA is 4.13, just 4% better than the park-adjusted league average, and his career record is slightly better than .500 (59-56).

The best that can be said of Myers is that he won 14 games two seasons ago. He owns an abysmal 4.84 ERA (14% worse than the park-adjusted league average) in two and one-half seasons.

Floyd looked good in a brief call-up at the end of last season (3.49 ERA, 125 ERA+ in 28.1 IP), but it took a Padilla injury to secure him a spot in the rotation. Of course, that may be more an indictment of the Phils' decision makers than of his abilities.

Then, there's Cole Hammels, who is sure to be a midseason callup in 2005. And of course staff savior Ryan Madson who rescued many a failed start as the long reliever last year. The Phils' future relies on these young pitchers, but given their history, I'm not sanguine.

Whether it's Jim Wright, Randy Lerch, Marty Bystrom, Dickie Noles, Pat Combs, Don Carman, Bruce "Roughed Up" Ruffin, Charlie Hudson, Tyler Green, Carlton Loewer, Mike Grace, Jason Grimsley, "Starvin'" Marvin Freeman, Brandon Duckworth, David Coggin, Mike Mimbs, Matt Beech, Mike Maddux, or Brett Myers the Phils seem to find the biggest flashes in the pans possible. In fact, other than a few like Larry Christenson and Kevin Gross, who have enjoyed some sustained success with the Phils—about one per generation—, the handful that found success, found it elsewhere. Those are guys like Cy Young winner Mark Davis, Andy Ashby, and Mike Williams. Dick Ruthven only enjoyed success as a Phil after developing as a Brave. Then again, the Phils' history is riddled with decent pitchers traded away before reaching their prime. Ferguson Jenkins, Bucky Walters, and Pete Alexander come to mind.

But this is all anecdotal evidence. Are the Phils actually worse than other major-league teams at developing pitchers? Can it be quantified?

I thought it would be interesting to compare them using the transaction data from Retrosheet. First, I had to determine which types of transactions were important for the study. The obvious one was the amateur draft, but there were others that could weigh in the decision.

The draft wasn't instituted until 1965. Prior to that teams were free to contract with young unsigned players. Therefore, the second type of transaction deals with amateur free agents (and so-called "bonus babies").

The last category deals with how well teams scout other organizations for prospects. They include Rule V draft picks, minor-league draft picks, first-year waiver picks, and first-year draft picks.

Using Win Shares Above Baseline (WSAB), how well have the Phils done in each of these categories?

First, let's look at the draft. Here are the franchise totals prorated per draft class:

Franchise	First	Last	Post Career WS	Post Career WSAB	WS Team	WSAB Team	Team %
Chicago Cubs	1965	2001	91.86	40.95	34.30	15.36	38%
Toronto Blue Jays	1978	2000	81.30	33.57	40.16	19.19	57%
Boston Red Sox	1965	1999	68.37	32.00	37.17	18.77	59%
Kansas City Royals	1969	2000	70.25	28.84	38.74	17.57	61%
Los Angeles Dodgers	1965	1996	68.09	28.72	21.41	9.33	32%
Cincinnati Reds	1966	1998	75.24	28.18	33.33	13.48	48%
Montreal Expos	1969	1997	70.62	28.17	34.72	14.35	51%
Seattle Mariners	1977	1997	72.90	28.05	28.47	10.29	37%
Anaheim Angels	1965	1999	62.20	26.74	34.11	15.85	59%
San Francisco Giants	1965	1999	74.14	26.66	29.72	11.45	43%
Minnesota Twins	1965	2000	62.81	25.61	33.03	14.87	58%
New York Mets	1965	1998	61.65	25.26	24.19	9.47	37%
Chicago White Sox	1965	1999	57.71	22.83	33.09	13.22	58%
Oakland Athletics	1965	1999	57.77	22.54	36.93	16.90	75%
Texas Rangers	1965	1999	57.69	22.23	18.95	5.56	25%
Atlanta Braves	1965	2000	54.03	21.67	29.68	12.64	58%
Pittsburgh Pirates	1965	1998	60.50	21.26	24.00	7.91	37%
Baltimore Orioles	1965	1999	50.91	20.46	24.03	10.30	50%
Cleveland Indians	1966	2000	53.29	20.37	19.31	7.05	35%
Milwaukee Brewers	1969	1999	56.68	19.68	35.17	12.52	64%
St. Louis Cardinals	1965	1999	55.34	19.49	29.14	10.48	54%
Houston Astros	1966	2001	47.47	17.83	29.38	12.75	71%
San Diego Padres	1970	1999	49.40	15.63	26.30	8.66	55%
Detroit Tigers	1965	1999	44.83	14.97	26.57	10.20	68%
New York Yankees	1965	1998	33.12	13.65	10.08	4.62	34%
Philadelphia Phillies	1965	1999	47.83	12.91	16.68	3.63	28%
Colorado Rockies	1993	2000	26.38	6.50	16.59	3.96	61%
Arizona Diamondbacks	1998	1998	27.00	6.00	26.00	6.00	100%
Tampa Bay Devil Rays	1998	2001	13.75	3.50	8.75	1.25	36%
Florida Marlins	1993	1999	13.71	2.29	8.12	1.43	63%
Average			59.61	23.18	28.25	11.51	50%

So there it is: the Phils are the worst at drafting and developing pitching talent in baseball except for the last four expansion teams for which the data are limited.

Not only that. The Phils retain only 28% of the pitching prospects Win Shares Above Baseline. That's the second lowest.

That's a killer combo: do a bad job at developing pitching talent and trade away what you do develop. The facts back up the anecdotal evidence. The Phils are abysmal at developing and retaining pitching talent.

Now, let's look at the other categories. How do the Phils do in signing amateur free agents?

Franchise	First	Last	Post Career WS	WSAB Post Career	WS Team	WSAB Team	Team %
St. Louis Cardinals	1938	1996	54.97	29.05	29.77	16.66	57%
Los Angeles Dodgers	1944	1997	57.59	27.26	32.50	17.52	64%
Arizona Diamondbacks	1998	1999	50.00	27.00	28.87	17.60	65%
Philadelphia Phillies	1944	1997	47.69	22.76	23.78	11.45	50%
Atlanta Braves	1940	1998	44.93	22.12	24.35	12.91	58%
New York Mets	1962	1999	42.58	21.71	18.07	10.16	47%
Baltimore Orioles	1944	1996	45.30	21.57	25.74	13.53	63%
Cleveland Indians	1942	2000	42.00	21.12	17.72	9.50	45%
Detroit Tigers	1945	2001	41.37	20.00	16.13	7.69	38%
Pittsburgh Pirates	1948	1997	48.34	19.82	24.75	10.94	55%
New York Yankees	1947	2000	40.61	19.74	25.21	13.29	67%
San Francisco Giants	1949	1996	40.58	19.65	19.08	10.02	51%
Oakland Athletics	1948	1995	41.19	17.29	21.48	9.55	55%
Cincinnati Reds	1944	1997	27.61	12.89	15.49	7.46	58%
Boston Red Sox	1945	1998	30.46	12.30	16.39	7.06	57%
Florida Marlins	1993	1996	29.50	11.75	6.78	0.96	8%
Minnesota Twins	1937	1997	23.82	10.61	11.07	4.78	45%
Chicago Cubs	1947	1997	24.14	10.22	11.04	4.69	46%
Chicago White Sox	1948	1991	14.77	5.70	8.53	3.85	68%
Montreal Expos	1972	1992	13.33	5.57	9.46	4.32	78%
Texas Rangers	1961	1997	12.76	5.08	4.65	1.54	30%
Kansas City Royals	1969	1998	10.53	4.67	7.04	3.65	78%
Toronto Blue Jays	1979	1998	13.80	4.55	6.47	2.43	53%
Houston Astros	1962	1997	8.47	3.75	7.61	3.50	93%
Anaheim Angels	1961	1998	8.11	2.97	4.88	1.95	65%
Seattle Mariners	1977	2000	5.63	2.29	3.58	1.46	64%
Milwaukee Brewers	1969	1995	8.56	1.67	6.43	1.11	67%
San Diego Padres	1983	2000	5.17	1.56	1.10	0.06	4%
Colorado Rockies	1993	1993	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0%
Tampa Bay Devil Rays	1998	1998	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0%
Average			32.94	15.31	17.01	8.40	55%

Here the Phils excel. So as long as they don't draft the pitchers, the do pretty well. This is also part of the anecdotal evidence: the Phils fall in love with their shinny high draft picks and are mesmerized by them as they flounder. The lower expectations for amateur free agents seems to allow these players to develop more thoroughly.

So does this translate into scouting other organizations?

Franchise	First	Last	Post Career WS	WSAB Post Career	WS Team	WSAB Team	Team %
Florida Marlins	1993	1995	38.67	13.33	11.00	5.00	38%
Seattle Mariners	1984	2000	13.18	4.53	2.88	0.88	19%
Chicago White Sox	1947	1998	11.12	4.40	1.68	0.48	11%
Milwaukee Brewers	1981	2000	10.40	4.35	1.47	0.20	5%
Chicago Cubs	1949	2001	8.51	2.92	2.44	0.49	17%
Boston Red Sox	1951	1995	5.73	2.56	1.34	0.39	15%
Detroit Tigers	1949	2002	5.69	2.44	3.20	1.61	66%
Cincinnati Reds	1948	2001	4.94	2.33	1.44	0.74	32%
Pittsburgh Pirates	1948	2000	5.62	2.26	4.36	1.81	80%
Toronto Blue Jays	1982	2002	7.05	2.05	2.56	0.43	21%
Houston Astros	1962	1999	5.39	1.82	1.56	0.61	34%
Minnesota Twins	1946	1997	5.48	1.81	3.45	1.25	69%
Anaheim Angels	1962	2000	3.87	1.44	1.74	0.46	32%
Texas Rangers	1961	1990	5.77	1.30	4.64	1.17	90%
Cleveland Indians	1947	1984	4.71	1.05	0.70	0.14	13%
Oakland Athletics	1949	1998	4.24	0.98	1.70	0.38	39%
St. Louis Cardinals	1954	1995	3.43	0.98	1.77	0.60	61%
Philadelphia Phillies	1948	1997	2.94	0.90	1.84	0.60	67%
Montreal Expos	1969	1990	4.86	0.86	2.74	0.45	53%
Baltimore Orioles	1947	1995	3.73	0.76	2.11	0.37	49%
Los Angeles Dodgers	1949	2001	2.87	0.66	0.42	0.02	3%
Atlanta Braves	1946	1998	2.15	0.42	0.97	0.17	41%
San Francisco Giants	1946	1965	1.55	0.30	0.65	0.10	33%
Colorado Rockies	1994	1997	4.00	0.25	3.75	0.25	100%
Kansas City Royals	1970	1994	1.40	0.08	1.04	0.08	100%
New York Mets	1962	2000	0.77	0.00	0.59	0.00	0%
New York Yankees	1951	1994	0.14	0.00	0.14	0.00	0%
San Diego Padres	1971	2001	0.97	0.00	0.55	0.00	0%
Average			4.81	1.60	1.89	0.57	36%

Not much to see there. But what they hey, I'm a completist.

Anyway, given the Phils' past performance, I am not so optimistic about this season or the further development of the Phils youngsters. I hope they surprise me.

Comments

2005-03-30 07:39:15

1. mattapp

Interesting.. and depressing... study. One quick question, however: in terms of signing amateur free agents, how much do the signings of Robin Roberts and Curt Simmons play into the Phillies success. Without any sort of research, I have a gut feeling that the track record there looks a lot worse without them.

2005-03-30 09:06:03

2. Mike Carminati

Mattap,

That's a good question. Maybe exploring the categories will yield some interesting results. I'll keep you posted.