Change? Only if an outside GM is hired.

I am curious to see what the WAR chart would be all the way back to 2000. In that way the focus moves from just Deron Johnson as scouting director to the entire group of scouts. It may be that the problem is much deeper than one man--who might just be a figurehead anyway.

I do find it curious as to what does happen to the millions spent on draft picks, some of those millions going to a few players who never pan out. Amazing what major league baseball spends on the possibility of hitting it bigtime and giving money to players that never see the light of day.

The above numbers should also be palced in the context of when a team drafts, with all those high draftpicks the Twins got for half-a-decade.

Looking back on past Twins drafts, the number of players that made it to the majors with the Twins (or with other teams) or those that even made it to AA/AAA ball can be rather pathetic, at times. Especially for an organization that doesn't play the free agent market and would be the perfect place for drafted and developed players to rise and shine.

And that is the crutch of Twins drafting. This year, 31 players have signed and are in the system. But let's look a few years away (say 2020) and how many of those will have lasted more than three years in the system and how many make it to the big leagues, and how does the international draftees work into the mix, and would a team just do better "grabbing" players from other teams as their minor league careers progress.

In the real world, prospects replace players eligible for free agency on a cycle in which the organization constantly drafts for need vs. depth for best-all-around. But how soon does that best-all-around turn into fluff.

How would the Angels look if not for their 2009 draft?

I appreciate your work. When I see stuff like this questions abound in my mind.

I wonder why 10 rounds? Why not all rounds? Why not 6 rounds? What is special about 10?

I would guess the Twins had a below average draft position from 2008-2011. I wonder about the draft positions of the teams below them. I also order how much of the WAR above was generated by players drafted before the Twins or any specific team had an opportunity to select. Finally, I wonder if a focus on high school players vs college players would skew the results.

The chart shoes the value of getting the one player of the draft

08.09.10. and 11 are the valid comparison years as you really should have the players at least either mature, or have a few seasons to judge by. That is sort of the problem with trying to assess drafting, it takes a quite a few years. 2011 draft, number of high school players having played a full season not drafted in the top 10? Does that mean the scouting director did poorly? You do not have the data to know if solid players were picked. It seems like more and more players are not hitting their stride until 25 except for the exceptional player. The 2009 high school draftees would be in that group, 2011 college players.

What is presented is showing that it pays to be lucky to draft the exception player near the top of the draft. Any team with a big number more often than not had an early draft pick. Valid research, once again a wrong conclusion from the author

Nice work, thank you. And if you take away the numbers, and look at the players? In those 7 years the Twins have developed what? If you go by AS, Dozier is it. Some of that was from a blistering half of a year, and some from "someone has to go"! The rest were pre '08 picks, or obvious "has to go". So while 7 years does not allow for many AS selections, what of the day to day product. So far Kepler is the jewel. Sano could/would be if he decides he wants to put in the actual effort. I think Buxton will eventually succeed, I would be stunned if he does not. CF'ers seems our specialty. Pitchers, catchers, and middle IF are largely absent. For years, a team which publicly stressed pitching and defense, has not fielded a team with good pitching, catching or middle infielders. And what are supposed to be the core of our youthful pitching languishes in MiLB. It boggles my mind. Almost all team sports are won with defense. Yet we seem to continue to value offense disproportionately.

How would the Angels look if not for their 2009 draft?

better than the Twins if not for their 2009 draft

I appreciate your work. When I see stuff like this questions abound in my mind.

I wonder why 10 rounds? Why not all rounds? Why not 6 rounds? What is special about 10?

I would guess the Twins had a below average draft position from 2008-2011. I wonder about the draft positions of the teams below them. I also order how much of the WAR above was generated by players drafted before the Twins or any specific team had an opportunity to select. Finally, I wonder if a focus on high school players vs college players would skew the results.

I started looking at all rounds but quickly after the 10th round I got into players who were drafted by one team in that draft and did not sign, drafted by another team and signed with that.  I wanted to give credit to the team that did draft and sign the player.  Most of the players who are selected in the top 10 rounds (with some exceptions, like Gaussman) sign with their teams.  Just a way to minimize manual work looking at whether each player has singed.  If I had a database, I could actually do a better job.  Very few players who were signed after the 10th round give value, but, you are correct, there are some and teams should get credit for it.

I started looking at draft positions (and about half of the teams below the Twins did better than them,) but it gets really complicated when teams were awarded draft picks for type A and type B FAs and, like the Twins in 2008, had 3 first round picks (and they took Hicks, Gutierrez, and Hunt). 

What is presented is showing that it pays to be lucky to draft the exception player near the top of the draft. Any team with a big number more often than not had an early draft pick. Valid research, once again a wrong conclusion from the author

Actually what is wrong is the assumption that the best players in the draft are the earliest picks.

Data:

5 (or so) Highest WARs in draft by drafted position:

2008: 5 (31.6), 135 (18.3), 117 (17.5), 16 (15.2), 96 (14.2)
2009: 25 (44.4), 246 (27.4), 82 (21.9), 63 (18.3), 1 (18.3), 59 (18.0)
2010: 13 (29.4), 3 (22.3), 1 (21.5), 70 (19.2), 23 (12), 272 (11.5)
2011: 172 (13.1), 14 (13.1), 18 (10.3), 11 (9.6), 1 (9.4), 6, (9.1),

As a mater of fact, the first picks rarely were among the top 5 players in that draft, and 24 teams, including the Twins, passed on the best player drafted in that time period.

Nice work, thank you. And if you take away the numbers, and look at the players?

The problem with that approach is that it will be a subjective opinion.  Numbers are objective

I would probably remove the first round picks from 2012 to 2015 to make it a little more fair. A team like the Twins that drafts a series of 18 year olds will get penalized here, Buxton, Berrios, Gordon, and Stewart. I suppose a few HS guys like Correa are here from the 2012 draft, but not for very long.

I don't anticipate a huge jump by the Twins. Maybe a spot or two.

The problem with that approach is that it will be a subjective opinion.  Numbers are objective

I would probably remove the first round picks from 2012 to 2015 to make it a little more fair. A team like the Twins that drafts a series of 18 year olds will get penalized here, Buxton, Berrios, Gordon, and Stewart. I suppose a few HS guys like Correa are here from the 2012 draft, but not for very long.

I don't anticipate a huge jump by the Twins. Maybe a spot or two.

I thought about that.  On the other hand removing those drafts will penalize the teams that drafted players and got help from them already in the majors. 

The Twins were close last season.  Imagine where they would have been if they drafted Alex Wood instead of Melotakis in the second round of 2012 (and I am not even going into Wacha over Buxton,)  or Jake Lamb before the Dbacks got him on the 6th round, Kendall Graveman in 2013 before the Jays got him in the 8th round, or one of Nola or Comforto instead of Gordon in 2014.

They didn't.  They made the choice to draft players who can help them in 4+ years, while they had a horrible team, instead of players who can help them in 1-2 years to turn this thing around quickly.  And they should be penalized.

I thought about that.  On the other hand removing those drafts will penalize the teams that drafted players and got help from them already in the majors. 

 

The Twins were close last season.  Imagine where they would have been if they drafted Alex Wood instead of Melotakis in the second round of 2012 (and I am not even going into Wacha over Buxton,)  or Jake Lamb before the Dbacks got him on the 6th round, Kendall Graveman in 2013 before the Jays got him in the 8th round, or one of Nola or Comforto instead of Gordon in 2014.

They didn't.  They made the choice to draft players who can help them in 4+ years, while they had a horrible team, instead of players who can help them in 1-2 years to turn this thing around quickly.  And they should be penalized.

A perfect and more manual process would be to adjust the WAR tally based on high school players versus college players. Start accumulating WAR totals a year after the draft for college players and maybe 3-4 years for high school players.

Because right now the Mariners are being rewarded for Mike Zunino, who has accumulated 2.8 WAR. That alone is more than 22 teams entire value for the 2012 draft. He has a .616 OPS, is 25, and arb eligible next year. At #3 overall it is hard to call that a good pick. I am guessing he could be had for Byron Buxton if we wanted to trade them straight up.

At the end of the day a team drafting Byron Buxton over Mike Zunino is not trying to accumulate the most WAR a year from now. They are looking over the next decade.

At the end of the day a team drafting Byron Buxton over Mike Zunino is not trying to accumulate the most WAR a year from now. They are looking over the next decade.

Correct.  And that is part of the problem with the Twins.  They are looking to help themselves in 5+ years vs the next couple.  And it would have not been that much of a problem if they were going after top free agents.

Who is better off after the 2012 draft?  The Twins or the Mariners? 

Some of these interpretations are skewed by one or two players.  I am not sure how you would account for that because it probably does not reflect on the long term abilities of the scouting department.  Examples are the Angels drafting Mike Trout.  Washington stands out for being able to draft 2 years in a row Harper and then Strausburg.  These were no brainer picks.  Almost any GM would have taken those two.  

You would expect the data for the Twins to be bad.  We have not drafted an MVP or CY candidate since  Mauer and Morneau.  Too many first round picks that did not make it.  Some were total busts.  

Correct.  And that is part of the problem with the Twins.  They are looking to help themselves in 5+ years vs the next couple.  And it would have not been that much of a problem if they were going after top free agents.

Who is better off after the 2012 draft?  The Twins or the Mariners?

Yeah, the obsession with athletic high school players. No question.

The Mariners took a road similar to the Cubs, in that they drafted high end college talent that could arrive soon (Zunino and DJ Peterson) and married that with high end free agents (Nelson Cruz and Robinson Cano). The execution has not been as good obviously.

We went down the road of high school players and slightly less high end free agents.

Very nice work here! Nerds (me included) could pick nits about accounting for draft position, outliers, or other variables... but still this is tremendous stuff. It should be printed in Strib or Pioneer Press. 

A few questions spring to mind, since you've already compiled much of the data...

1. If you throw out the top 2 or 3 players for each team, how do the ranking look? 

2. Who is the most consistent? Who produced the most ML +WAR players? 

3. What about over/underperforming their slots? I think average WAR by draft position is available, that might be interesting? 

For the most part, I don't have much vitrol for whom the Twins have selected. I usually look at the video for many of the players we pick and many others each year, and usually think... yeah these new Twins look pretty good.

However, I do wonder how the Twins compare to development vs. other teams? Maybe the problem isn't that they are picking the wrong guys, but that they are not coaching them as effectively as other clubs? Are they doing biometric analysis, injury prevention analysis for pitchers, pitch recognition/selection training for hitters? 

Case in point... I recently watched the Fastball documentary. Very interesting, highly recommend it. One point they made that seems straightforward but has big implications was how the faster a guy throws the less his ball drops. That's why high velocity fastballs seem to ride/jump up, because they end up higher than your'e used to seeing. So, if you're facing Cabrera from Atlanta, who throws 100 mph, you need to factor this in - not just in terms of being quicker but SWINGING HIGHER. Last night Sano struck out and when I watched the replay frame by frame his bat appeared to be on time, but he was under the ball by a few inches. If that pitch was 92 he probably would have crushed it, assuming his timing was slowed down a bit. By the way, mechanically Sano's swing plane is awesome, it's deep/back and very flat which allows him to wait longer on pitches and hit them hard even if his timing isn't right on. So, the takeaway is when you're facing a guy who throws hard... obviously you have to be quicker, but you also have to make sure you swing above where you normally would. Maybe this is rube stuff and they are doing all this, in which case please tell us! 

This team has always been big on "fundamentals" which has become too vague of a term. Sure, swing/pitching/fielding mechanics are important - but so too is anticipation and being prepared. I wonder how much time/resources the Twins spend on the cerebral part of the game. Some guys maybe do better if they just react (see ball hit ball), but at this level, you should want every edge available. That means pre-thinking things, trying to pick up 'tells', knowing tendencies. As Ted Williams said... "Did I guess? Hell yes!" 

I would really like the Twins to take a look back at their strategy and analyze if it is the best one.

We have had the second pick, fourth pick, fifth pick, and sixth pick in four straight drafts. I know it is early still, but it doesn’t look like we have a single superstar.

2008 draft – Alvarez 2, Hosmer 3, Posey 5

2009 draft – Strasburg 1, Wheeler 6, Leake 8.

2010 draft – Harper 1, Machado 3, Pomeranz 5, Harvey 7

2011 draft – Cole 1, Bauer 3, Rendon 6, Lindor 8, Springer 11

From the 2012 draft you already have Correa, Gausman, and Russell in the top 11 making an impact.

Actually what is wrong is the assumption that the best players in the draft are the earliest picks.

 

Data:

 

5 (or so) Highest WARs in draft by drafted position:

2008: 5 (31.6), 135 (18.3), 117 (17.5), 16 (15.2), 96 (14.2)
2009: 25 (44.4), 246 (27.4), 82 (21.9), 63 (18.3), 1 (18.3), 59 (18.0)
2010: 13 (29.4), 3 (22.3), 1 (21.5), 70 (19.2), 23 (12), 272 (11.5)
2011: 172 (13.1), 14 (13.1), 18 (10.3), 11 (9.6), 1 (9.4), 6, (9.1),

 

As a mater of fact, the first picks rarely were among the top 5 players in that draft, and 24 teams, including the Twins, passed on the best player drafted in that time period.

take out the top ten picks in the drafts from 08-12.  look at the number of 5 b war or better players drafted by the team..  Johnson has drafted 2. Of the franchises that still have the same basic management team around or promoted how many players have the stable franchises drafted.  Tampa one, Washington one, Texas 1, Giants 4, Cards 4, Indians 4, Pirates 1, Oakland 3, Royals, none. Melvin with the Brewers in 08 an had 5 in those two years and nothing since. You can draft a lot of fringe major league players and accumulate some WAR. You can draft near the top and accumulate war  The bottom line is how many decent players do you draft? Your position was Johnson is drafting worse than other teams. In a time period that allows the better players to shine through  Johnson is not the best, he is not the worst. Other teams that changed GMs through that time period, they might have changed scouting directors, they might not have