Originally Posted by Randar68
When using performance-based analysis of draft-eligible players, you're limiting yourself to really only college players. Doing that more than halves your draft/talent-pool. On top of that, unless you have top 10 picks every year (where the top-producing college players, especially pitchers, usually end up), you're pool of players has been greatly pulled over with a fine-tooth comb. This method is no-doubt a good way to draft players with a higher chance of making/producing in the majors and generally in a shorter period of time, but it also GREATLY reduces the chances for drafting/developing a star/stud and limits the utility gained by drafting anywhere after the top 12-15 rounds.
That is the major fault I find with applying performance-based analysis to draft-eligible players. HS players not only have the greatest opportunity for coaching and development, but finding the ones that are physically talented and mentally capable is what GOOD scouting is. There are a lot of bad scouts out there working in baseball, don't get me wrong, but you brandish your keyboard against all scouts as some kind of Excallibur, and it's patently ridiculous...
I wasn't talking about scouting high school players for the draft. Obviously there is need for scouting there. What I am talking about once a player is drafted, performace-based analysis becomes a lot more valuable then scouting reports and grows in value the closer you get to the majors. It has been 17 years since James proved minor league stats correlate with major league performance yet you don't see it application used as widely as it should till recently.
"You'll get one good pitch to hit. One good pitch. That's all. Don't count on more. So you better know the strike zone. And when you get that one good pitch you better hit it and hit it hard. Remember, just one good pitch"
-Ted Williams as told in The Teamates.