Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Sometimes I wonder if the entire system for evaluating prospects needs to be scrapped. I know baseball is an unpredictable sport, but prospect evaluation still seems completely random. e.g., the discussion yesterday re Bogaerts. He may well turn out to be an elite player, but it's still pretty incredible that Caleb Joseph has been two wins better than Bogaerts this year.
But isn't that begging the question? The issue is that the top ten prospects miss so frequently.
I'd like to know what skill set the stat heads missed about Kole Calhoun that now make him a valuable player
I'd like to know what skill set the stat heads missed about Kole Calhoun that now make him a valuable player, and whether there are any other non-prospects with similar skill sets that are also being missed. A good GM could make a killing by cherry picking these kinds of guys late in the draft, or from other organizations that haven't recognized their own players' potential yet.
Was it the stat heads or the scouts who missed on Calhoun? or both? His minor league stats are good.
A theory I've had is that physicially attractive prospects tend to be overrated (meaning facial symmetry et al, rather than build), and vice versa.
Matt Wieters is NOT physically attractive.
Sabermetric analysis puts a lot of importance on prospect age, and I've never seen anything to suggest that this was incorrect. But late bloomers will happen. The question is how you distinguish the Kole Calhouns and Matt Carpenters from the guys without a future. I suspect that it's pretty tough to do, statistically.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (0 members)
Page rendered in 0.4535 seconds, 37 querie(s) executed