The Inexact Science Of Putting Value On Prospects

Almost everyone outside the baseball industry overrates prospects. Nobody more than the sabre kids when looking at their own team's chances. They speculate wildly on this draft choice or that choice without ever seeing them play, understanding who they are, or any other factor that comes with, you know, actually playing the game.

They like to act like Baseball Scout Studs and use words like projectable when really they have absolutely no idea what a young player is likely to do. They slap their own personal, biased algorithm on the player and they're off and speculating.

The percentage of drafted players who make the majors is so tiny that even Las Vegas wouldn't let you bet on it. The odds are slightly better than the lotto.

Obviously there are players that don't fit into this category like the Harpers, the Trouts, the Kershaws. But everyone else it's worse than an absolute crap shoot.

Still, i'm very interested in the math or lack there of the teams use when they make the prospect trades. I can never really figure when someone is overpaying or not because I don't really KNOW the prospects. But the bottom line is in the history of trading prospects few of them hit big. You know about the ones that hit big or fail big because they are forever on that GM's resume. And of course people like to beat dead horses because it's easier than thinking.

Along those lines I'd like to present a prospect-oriented Dodger trade for your perusal. Just something to talk amongst yourselves about.

Lindblom or Tolleson, Webster, Gould and Wall or Van Slyke for Josh Willingham and his 3-year contract at approximately $7 M a year. Tolleson is rated No. 8, Webster No. 2, Gould No. 10, Wall No. 16, Van Slyke No. 17 on the Dodger's milb prospect list. So four players for one. Minnesota gets two choices between players.

Now the Sabre kids are going to automatically say "He's going all Carlos Santana on us. The world is ending." Maybe. But none of these guys have all-star written in their scouting report. In the meantime Josh W. has about the same stats as Ethier but is about $10 Mil a year cheaper. And under control. Chances are his contract won't look so good in three years but his contract is disposable.

Terry Pruett had this interesting observation at DodgerThoughts:

Terry PruettCollapse

To clarify...I think Willingham would actually be worth the original trade you suggested. I'd do it tomorrow...I just don't know if the Twins would ask for that much.

And that's it. The Twins might not ask for that much. The Sabre kids would say it's too much. I say make the deal because it fills in a currently decrepit offensive lineup, makes a financial transaction that's legit and you're not giving up anyone that's going to be an all-star any time soon or at all. I wonder what the Twins think. If I'm the Twins it would come down to is Webster a legit No. 2 prospect or not. I dunno. It's a risky business.

Three excellent reads at Grantland on Youk, Billy Beane and the MLB Power ratings. PS Somebody finally salutes C Cap without using the word regression. Yea!


 NEW FEATURE


I'm calling this one TRAGIC HERO. Tragic after Mike Scoscia's Tragic Illness and the chat room there for sabre kids. Hero because every once in awhile you can read something intelligent or truthful/accurate there. Can't make this a daily feature because, well, never mind. Congrats EePhus but who didn't know that.

EephusBlue 1534 pts

 DavePomerantz I'll be honest, I know next to nothing when it comes to evaluating swings or pitching. I just know Uribe looks horrible.