Great blog entry, he said exactly how I feel.
While watching the Yankees gain on the Red Sox and restore karmic balance to the AL East, I was struck by New York’s trio of rookie pitchers. Not that they sprang from the minors to stabilize a rickety rotation. No. The thought I couldn’t shake about the young guns was this:
They could have been Cardinals.
This is not some what-if, some speculative reporting tethered to rumors and guesses. This isn’t revisionist writing or even historical fiction. It isn’t hindsight. (OK, OK, it’s a little bit of hindsight.) But the Yankees are charging into the postseason with help from three rookie pitchers — Ian Kennedy, Philip Hughes and Joba Chamberlain – and all three could be part of the club’s rotation next year. Meanwhile, the Cardinals are tossing out TBA after TBA
Something has got to change. Folks can blame the ownership for being cheap, or Jocketty for not signing the best free agents but if the scouting department doesn’t do their job in locating aces and passing over premium talent for safe picks, then things are going to stay ugly. One quibble I do have with DG is that the Cards have taken some gambles on higher upside players in Jones and Pham to name a couple, and they have been duds.
Filed under: Uncategorized
erik
azruavatar
fewgoodcards
roarke49
theredbaaron
I thought it was an awesome article too. Also you might like this article about the springfield CIF duo http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070918/SPORTS02/709180369/-1/BLOGS01
Did the brain trust ever give a reason for not signing Porcello besides signability? If money was the only factor, that would be a shame.
we didn’t sign rusell b/c of money. we didn’t draft porcello b/c of a whole lot of money.
the cardinals cookie cutter drafting philosophy since 1999 has been college righthanders early and often. here are all the college righthanders drafted in the first 3 rounds every year since 1999.
1999
Chance Caple (1)
Nick Stocks (1s)
Josh Pearce (2)
B.R. Cook (3)
2000
Blake Williams (1)
2001
Justin Pope (1)
Dan Haren (2)
2003
Dennis Dove (3)
2004
Chris Lambert (1)
2005
Mark McCormick (1s)
Nick Webber (2)
2006
Adam Ottavino (1)
Chris Perez (1s)
Gary Daley (3)
2007
Clayton Mortensen (1s)
David Kopp (2)
Jess Todd (2)
now obviously it is way too early to know what we got in the last few drafts, but the results from earlier in the decade are not good. out of the 9 pitchers drafted between 1999 and 2004 we got one all-star in danny haren, and 2 cup of coffee relievers in josh pearce and dennis dove. now obviously haren is a stud and makes up for a lot of bad picks, but that is terrible production from early round picks. 5 of those pitchers were drafted in the first round, and to this point none of them have appeared in the major leagues. this is from a demographic that is supposedly the safest in the draft. if i remember correctly, something like 60% of college first round picks at least reach the major leagues. you almost have to try to go 0-5. it seems like they could have brought a random guy in off the street and he could have gotten at least 1 major leaguer with 5 first round picks.
wouldn’t you think they would go away from this strategy since it is apparent that it has worked out terribly for them?
Yeah I still don’t understand the college arm philosophy. Especially after the Mark Texeria trade between Texas and Atlanta. Texas got a lot of value out of having just one succesful pick. Not only did the get Tex for 5 years they will also get Salty for most of five years. That is potentially equivelant to over a $100 million in contracts based on performance at a minimal cost. If you look at it that way you could sign 14 Rick Porcello’s at $7 million and only need one of them to succeed to come out ahead.
Granted 2004 was a bad draft (though if Hoffpauir makes the team in spring training, it immediately goes from “Bad Draft” to “decent draft”) but we had great success (Haren) in 2001, got Brad Thompson out of 2002, potential success in 2003 with Dove, Reyes, Barton (traded too early), and Brendan Ryan (and our second overall pick in 2003, Stu Pomeranz, was a HS pitcher). Ty Herron (4th rd, 2005) was picked out of HS. In fact, 2005 looks like a very good draft so far because of Rasmus, Herron, Anderson, Stavinoha, and maybe Maiques. I’m not saying that the organizations draft strategy is the best or even very good, but Goold’s level of criticism is premature imho. Ottavino could very well be as good as Kennedy in the long run and Perez is very likely going to be Izzy’s replacement- that’s some pretty good value. And I’m expecting Mortensen and maybe even Kozma to fast track.
Maybe we should have thrown first-round money at the high school pitcher who was the 425th overall pick, but I think there would have been much eye-rolling had that happened.
Also, Lambert “topping out as a AAA reliever” may or may not be true; he could very well go on to have success with the Tigers, just as Hughes could be a pitcher with a 5.33 ERA for the Yankees for the rest of his career and end up a middle reliever. It’s just too early to tell.
Unrelated: I wonder if we would still have passed on Porcello if we had known he was going to sign for a $3.6M bonus? Boras was talking 7-10M before the draft, which is ridiculous and almost makes me think tampering (IE the Tigers knew something we didn’t).
sleepy…
i don’t think things like this are too early to call, few pitchers change their stripes, it’s pretty projectable. if lambert turned into an ace while hughes turned into a middle reliever, that would be pretty extraordinary, barring some injury. i think stavinoha is a platoon outfielder at best, i don’t know why you mentioned him. i don’t think it is premature to judge the 2004 draft, 2005 and 2006 certainly it is. it’s just disheartening seeing premium prospects reaching the majors while the cardinals haven’t developed a home grown pitcher in years, and that is anthony reyes who hasn’t panned out for one reason or another.
you are right, ottavino could be as good as kennedy in the long run, but kennedy posted solid numbers at three levels, ottavino finished the year with a 3.93 FIP and an alarming k/pa decline.
the point is, the scouting dept. hasn’t done the best job they could, esp. concerning developing pitchers.
“Unrelated: I wonder if we would still have passed on Porcello if we had known he was going to sign for a $3.6M bonus? Boras was talking 7-10M before the draft, which is ridiculous and almost makes me think tampering (IE the Tigers knew something we didn’t).”
That is not entirely accurate, they signed him to a MAJOR league contract with that signing bonus and a total of 7M guaranteed, so that is spending 7M on him not 3.6. So he did in effect get a that 7M signing bonus.
looking at recent drafts and the players they produced
2000
Yadier Molina
Tyler Johnson
Chris Narveson
John Gall
Carmen Cali
overall i would say it was pretty successful. we got an everyday, gold glove caliber catcher and a solid bullpen arm along with several others that played in the big leagues.
2001
Dan Haren
Skip Schumaker
Terry Evans
John Nelson
also looks pretty solid. we got an all-star pitcher and 2 4th/5th outfield types. we also drafted 2 more pitchers that reached the big leagues, but didn’t sign with us.
2002
Brad Thompson
a middle reliever and several others that could still be big leaguers, but likely no everyday players or starting pitchers. we didn’t have a first or second round pick so its hard to criticize too much, but it is not looking good.
2003
Daric Barton
Anthony Reyes
Brendan Ryan
Dennis Dove
possibly 2 regulars and a starting pitcher, but none have accomplished much so far. this draft will be remember for the 3 high school pitchers we didn’t sign that later became first round picks and a 4th that became a 2nd rounder.
2004
nothing
one of the worst drafts in the history of baseball
overall 3 of those drafts produced some solid players, but no single draft provided more than one regular. 2 provided basically nothing.
The last 3 drafts, IMO, have been very solid. I would love to see them take a high ceiling high schooler, but that may not always be for the best. We have drafted a few guys like that recently (Boyd, Pham, Zawacki). How are those turning out?
There is no way that you can say that the 2004 draft was anywhere near passable. To say that Lambert wasn’t a bust for the Cards is ridiculous. First of all, no matter what Lambert develops into (my prediction is not much)the value the Cards got out him was nothing (Maroth). Anytime a 1st round pick turns into squat the organization is going to take a huge hit, especially when you pass on higher evaluated guys (Hughes) based purely on signability (cheap). My argument for signing a guy like Porcello is basic business math risk vs. reward: The risk is wasting a large investment ($7 mil plus) on an unknown quantity, the reward player develops into an ace or all-star regular. To me the risk is kind of two fold itself- injury and player doesn’t fully develop. To me the injury risk isn’t all that warrented as teams will regularly spend $7 mil on an assortment of “established” veteran players that perform at an average statistical level for their position. Who stands the better chance of recovering from a major arm or leg injury the middle-aged veteran or the 20 year old prospect? I’d rather have the rehabbing prospect. As for the player development risk- if a top ceiling prospect doesn’t reach his full potential there is still the possibility the player could develop into an average regular or a 4/5 starter, if the player craps out you can still trade him for some sort of value merely based on the fact that a lot of clubs will think they can ‘fix’ them based on their own egos.
they didn’t pass on hughes b/c of signability (he signed for less than lambert), they passed on him just b/c he was a high school pitcher. they also passed on yovanni gallardo for the same reason.
I give the Cards a pass on the 2004 draft, just because they were in the middle of a complete overhaul of their scouting and player-development system. I’ve seen this in business — sometimes the best strategy is to scrap your system and start over. Meanwhile, you have to stay in business. So you have a draft like 2004, based more on spreadsheets than on scouting.
And after the 2000-2002 drafts, along with the chaos in their program in the DR, the Cards had good reason to start over from scratch.
The 2005-2006 drafts gave me some hope that the team had figured it out, but the 2007 draft leaves me wondering if we’re back in the wilderness. (I really hope I’m wrong about that.)
Well, you have to look at this thing overall. With some of the previous drafts, you had to just hope and pray that they got a good prospect - and it seemed to be entirely luck if they found them.
Now, with Luhnow at the helm, it seems as though they are making intelligent decisions and drafting people that at least have “quality” potential. We are also drafting some high-upside prospects (paying above slot for them) such as Ingram, Pham, Daryl Jones, Hooker, Zawacki, Reifer, etc. Some will work out, some won’t, but they are making great strides.
In addition to all of this, they have completely revamped their Latin American programs (brought them back to life for one). We now have some quality players showing up with a lot of promise. For example Jose Martinez, Andres Rosales, Ivan Castro (didn’t have the greatest debut I know), and now this Luis de la Cruz who is earning high praise from BA. They are spending a considerable amount of money down there - they just recently spent over $900K on 3 guys down there.
Going back to de la Cruz, we have a prospect there who was just ranked ahead of a first-round catcher, Mesoraco. Do we really have to keep beating on the ownership when they are now getting the equivalent of first-round picks from other avenues outside the draft.
The early returns on this draft have to at least be considered promising with Hooker and Ingram garnering such high praise already. We will see who else shows up in the BA’s league top 20’s. We may see that this “conservative” draft the Cardinals had this year, really was quite good after all. But it really won’t be til years down the road until we know for sure, as always.
Agree, KCard. I just meant I didn’t have the same excitement about this year’s picks that I had about the ‘05 and ‘06 groups. (Ingram, by the way, was an ‘06 draft-and-follow.)
But I’ve learned the hard way that the half-season following the draft doesn’t mean much for that year’s draftees. (I’ve gotten way too excited about guys who turned out to be pretty marginal.) And you’re absolutely right that some of the later-round guys, who were signed above slot, showed sleeper potential.
It’s easy to dump on the Cards for not taking big financial risks on high-ceiling guys like Porcella. But the Cards do seem to be following a strategy of paying a little extra for those late-round guys.
And frankly, if I owned a team that had flushed millions away on guys Chad Hutchinson, Nick Stocks, Shaun Boyd, and Chance Caple, I’d be reluctant to go all-in on any individual player. I’d let the current regime build up a longer track record before I trusted them to make budget-busting decisions. The owners knew they couldn’t trust the old group, which is why that 2004 overhaul was both necessary and overdue.
I think the point that needs to be included in this discussion is that the Cardinals are not a team without considerable resources. That is my primary complaint, we have the money to spend on guys like Porcello and not be put in an unrecoverable situation. The Cards have a new stadium that is bringing all kinds of new revenue, along with some pretty plush radio and tv contracts. Their payroll for the MLB team has been below the budget line the past couple of years, so it’s not like they would be “all-in” on an individual player. I am not one to say the Cards should just spend the money just to spend money, but when the NUMBER 1 high school pitcher falls to the Cards pick you HAVE to pick him unless you are team with very limited resources. It would be one thing if the Cards scouts didn’t like him for any number of reasons, but I haven’t heard the Cards say anything besides signability concerns.
The Cards have done this several times, which is the heart of Goold’s point. They did this with Chamberlein and Kennedy (whom I’m really not that high on). Joba was a projected top 10 pick, but fell due to some injury concerns and cost. No one is saying that the Cards haven’t made progress in their player development department, because they have. They have made significant investments in programs outside of just the draft. The point is that Cards have pretty much established a real cautious approach to the draft, support it or not you can’t disagree that the majority of the Cards picks of recent years have been “safe”. That doesn’t mean that there are not exceptions (Pham, Jones, etc.).
The Cards have done a great job in recent drafts of refilling a cupboard that was barren by trades and bad drafts. However, the system has replinished evidenced by the recent successes of Springfield and Quad City. It is time for the Cards to now take the next step and have the right scouts in place to find the truly impact arms and bats that will be available and sign them. I and many others just simply thought the Cards should have done that early on in the draft.
i won’t complain about porcello ever again if they step up and sign international free agent edward salcedo. i know we have spent more money than usual in the latin market this year and $3 million is a lot of money to give to a 16 year old, but landing the top prospect would be a nice way to announce our presence in the latin scene.
few, they did pony up quite a bit for a Cuban player, Ryde Rodriguez signed for 460K, though the report from BA on rodriguez is not good. 16 yr old catcher Kevin Moscatel signed for 350k and javier avendano for 100k. they made their presence known in the latin scene, but of course i’d love salcedo
I don’t know much about Salcedo, but from what I’ve heard he would be a great pickup.
I just hope for our own sanity that Porcello flames out and Kozma turns into an all-star caliber SS…oh and Henley develops into Lenny Dykstra.
How about a real big splash in the International market—–Alexei Ramirez!
I wonder if anyone has ever done a “conventional wisdom” tracker. By just comparing BAs rankings of the best players available at the draft slot (including, in hindsight what they were signed for) to actual team picks. I would guess the Cards would spend more, but get much much much more. I know you can’t do that for the full draft, but just imagine doing in in the first five rounds.
As for results, 2004 was horrible, but 2003 was good and 2005 I would grade out as outstanding with Rasmus, J. Garcia, Anderson, and a fair number of servicable players as well with high upside guys like Jones and McCormick taken a little further along in the action.
2006 and 2007 are too fresh to really have much to say yea or nea, but they both look more “conservative” than 2005 which is unfortunate…