Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Baseball America's Jim Callis Visits Da Box

Baseball America's Jim Callis Visits Da Box

There are many different ways to rank the strength of the thirty minor league farm systems. Some pundits look at depth, others at how close the players are to the major leagues. Baseball America's Jim Callis looks at star potential and he doesn't see much of it in the Blue Jay system. As a result Baseball America has ranked the Jays as the 25th best, or if you prefer the 6th worst, minor league system in baseball.

If you are looking for potential stars among the Jays prospects Callis acknowledges Dustin McGowan does have star potential, although he did not explode onto the major league scene this year. Baseball America's number three Blue Jay prospect, David Purcey, also has star potential but has a huge question mark over his control. As Callis notes this same issue has plagued Purcey for several years now and the fact that he has not cured it yet reduces his future projection. In Callis's opinion that's it for the potential stars among Blue Jay prospects. Callis believes Ricky Romero, the Jays number two prospect, is a major league number three starter. BA describes a star pitcher, in the front of their prospect book, as a player who has two top quality pitches in his repertoire. With an average fastball, Romero would have to have two off speed pitches be his plus pitches and, according to Callis, he is not there yet.

The 25th ranking for the Jays is the lowest in recent memory and a far cry from the sixth best ranking in 2004. But the 2004 list shows the perils of prospect evaluation. The top six in 2004 were Alexis Rios, Dustin McGowan, Guillermo Quiroz, David Bush, Francisco Rosario and Aaron Hill. Two years later that group has not delivered as you would expect the sixth best minor league system to. To date, although there is still an opportunity for these players to develop, the number of stars in that group is zero. Another example of unpredictability is the New York Yankees, whose farm system was ranked 24th best in last year's prospect book, but Chien-Ming Wang and Robinson Cano gave them great production in 2005. Prospect evaluation is inherently an unpredictable profession, there are hundreds of top prospects who have failed to perform in the major leagues. We need only look back to 2002 when Josh Phelps was the number one Blue Jay prospect, another under performer is Kevin Cash who was the Jays number three prospect in 2003. Chad Hermansen, who played in the Jays system in 2004, was, at one time, the top ranked prospect in all of baseball. Callis acknowledges the uncertainty. "I have become much more cynical about these lists over the past several years. When I first started doing them I would be excited all through the top 100, but now when I get to number thirty I recognize that everyone after that has questions hanging over them." Callis also notes one other thing about this years crop. "I notice that there are not that many premium pitching prospects, there are maybe four, everyone else has been injured or has some doubts attached to them."

So should fans care if the Jays are ranked at number 25? Well, yes, it would be much nicer to be back at number six as the Jays were in 2004, but ultimately these ratings are an educated guess about the future. In the end what matters is how players develop after they reach the major leagues. The Jays want to find another Michael Young who continued to get better and better after he reached the major leagues. Finding another Orlando Hudson would be nice too, a low round draft choice who becomes an everyday major leaguer. One of the biggest issues impacting the Jays in 2006 will be the continued development of youngsters like Alex Rios, Aaron Hill and Russ Adams. If they each continue to develop the Jays organization, the scouts and the development system will take credit. But if they fail they will all take the blame. Success at the major league level often ventures past the tools and natural skills into the ability to make adjustments and mental strength. There are numerous examples of hitters who slug their way through the minor leagues but cannot adapt to major league pitching. Were pitchers like Josh Towers and Doug Davis ever projected as solid major league pitchers? It is never good to be ranked the sixth worst farm system but in the end it's an opinion, and an opinion that has only a loose relationship with the future.

There are several reasons for the Blue Jay's low ranking. The first is the Jay's drafting philosophy. The Jays have used their first round pick in the JP era to take the safe pick. Aaron Hill, Russ Adams, David Purcey and Ricky Romero, the Jays last four first round selections, have never been ranked as a team number one prospect by Baseball America, nor have they been highly ranked in BA's top 100 prospects. They were each selected in part for their low risk and their expected speed to the major leagues. Callis is critical of the Jays 2005 selection, he believes the Jays should have selected Troy Tulowitski. "When you have the number six pick you have to pick a guy who can be a star." Callis acknowledges that the Jays had selected Hill and Adams in 2002 and 2003 and perhaps they were reluctant to select another shortstop.

The second factor for the Jays low ranking is luck, none of the Jays recent selections have yet blossomed into a star. When a 20th round pick becomes a good major leaguer it is tough for anyone to take too much credit. The team who picked him passed over him nineteen times, all other teams passed him twenty times. Success in the draft past the tenth round, or some argue as low as the fifth, has to be viewed with some element of luck. Stars don't just come from the first round, stars can come from any round and the Jays have not had a lower pick bloom into a star for some time. Six of the Jays top ten prospects were drafted in the first or second rounds, only Vince Perkins was drafted after the fourth round. This might also link back to the safe selection methodology. The future development of high school players is much more unpredictable as they have three or four more years of growth compared to college players. The Jays focus on 22 and 23 year olds in the draft reduces the chance of a later round pick surprising with their development.

Finally the Jays have promoted or traded five of last years top eleven prospects. Aaron Hill, Russ Adams and Gustavo Chacin were promoted while Zach Jackson and Gabe Gross were traded. Few systems can survive unscathed in those circumstances.

On the positive side the Jays top ten prospects are heavily loaded to the top end of their system. Eight of the top ten played at AA or AAA in 2005, and the other two, Adam Lind and Ricky Romero, will be in AA in 2006. In a dream season for the Blue Jays farm system all ten could play for the parent club this year, but all have questions. Callis likes Adam Lind, the Jays number four prospect, but wonders if he will hit with enough power for a DH or first baseman. Callis is not convinced Lind can play the outfield and he currently profiles more like a Lyle Overbay kind of first baseman, one that hits more doubles than homers. Callis sees Josh Banks and Casey Janssen as a lighter version of Ricky Romero, average all round, and he is uncertain how they will fare with major league hitters. Callis likes Curtis Thigpen and acknowledges a lot of improvement in 2005, but he still wonders if Thigpen will be an everyday catcher in the majors or if he will end as a super sub. Callis is not a big fan of Brandon League, he notes that League has never been able to consistently fool hitters.

Having the 25th ranked system in baseball cannot be viewed as a positive in any way. Because of the lack of a strong correlation between the rankings and ultimate success the 25th ranking is not as big a negative as it seems. 2006 will be a make or break season for most of the Jays top ten, can they continue to advance and thrive, or will they flame out? With the large commitment of payroll to new players in the off-season, the Jays are counting on the farm system to deliver three or four everyday players for 2007.

Other Player Comments

Sergio Santos would have been in the top ten had the trade with Arizona been made earlier. I asked Callis if he buys the "started slow and never got untracked" story about Santos' hitting in the 2005 season. "No I don't, Santos was young for the PCL and his defense improved but I don't fully buy the slow start then pressed. When I did the PCL top 20 review most managers felt there was something wrong with his approach at the plate. They questioned his plate discipline and felt he did not make adjustments. Remember too that the Arizona A, AA and AAA teams play in good hitters parks."

"Eric Fowler made the list in the bottom half but he profiles as another average lefty, similar to many of the other Jays pitching prospects, Fowler's fastball is average although he has a developing slider."

"Rob Cosby is in the middle of the rankings, he is a good defender, has a good bat and could be a good major league third baseman."

Dustin Majewski came to the Jays in the trade. "Majewski is another good physical specimen, but he was old for his league last year and didn't make the top 30."

"Chi-Hung Cheng is in the middle of the rankings, he has a good breaking ball but he is still too wild with it and his fastball is fringy."

The Jays had more players from their Dominican and Venezuelan farm teams in North America in 2005. Some looked promising but none made the top 30. "You usually have to wait until the Latin players turn 20 to figure out what you have," says Callis. Callis was not aware of the players the Jays recently signed in Latin America but notes he does not think the Jays are outbidding the wealthier teams for Latin talent.

I asked Callis about Box favourite Davis Romero who has excellent strikeout numbers but the Jays did not put him on their 40 man roster this off season and Romero was passed over in the rule 5 draft. "This is a good case of where the stats might not tell the full story," says Callis, "Romero has not pitched above A ball and in A ball, if you can control your breaking ball, you can get strikeouts with players chasing it out of the zone. Hitters are more disciplined at AA. Romero has fringy stuff, but the bigger issue is that he is inconsistent, plus his size and stamina probably mean he is headed for the bullpen.

I asked Callis if he believed either of the Jays players lost in the rule 5 draft (Steve Andrade to San Diego, or Jamie Vermilyea to Boston) would stick with their respective teams? "I don't think Vermilyea will stick, the Red Sox have a lot of young guys who would fit in the pen and in addition they signed Julian Tavarez, Guillermo Mota and Rudy Seanez. I haven't checked the competition in the San Diego pen but Andrade has a better chance, he always looked like a guy who slipped through the cracks."

The Baseball America prospect book is due back from the publisher this week, a few weeks earlier than last year. It could have been earlier still but Jim lost a week with a bad back. Jim hopes to get the book out earlier again next year. in substance the book is the same as previous years except that this year there are 902 prospects in the book, two more than the normal 900. Baseball America added Mike Pelfrey and Justin Upton after they signed pro contracts. As always the Baseball America Prospect Book is the gold standard for prospect analysis. You really should buy a copy.

Batters Box would like to thank Jim Callis for sharing his comments and opinions with us. Finally, if you want a retrospective, Jim also joined us last year.

Posted by Gerry on Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 09:00 AM EST.

Baseball America's Jim Callis Visits Da Box | 40 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Jordan - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 10:20 AM EST (#140159) #

Finding another Orlando Hudson would be nice too, a low round draft choice who becomes an everyday major leaguer.

Ryan Roberts might be that guy, though the 18th round is still light-years ahead of the 43rd round, where the O-Dog was selected.

Callis is critical of the Jays 2005 selection, he believes the Jays should have selected Troy Tulowitski. "When you have the number six pick you have to pick a guy who can be a star."

I have the growing feeling that this is correct. I think (I hope) that Romero can be more than a #3 guy, but it's also quite possible that Romero would have lasted till the middle of the first round had the Jays not selected him. I hope this isn't one of those come-back-to-haunt-you picks.

Callis likes Adam Lind, the Jays number four prospect, but wonders if he will hit with enough power for a DH or first baseman. Callis is not convinced Lind can play the outfield and he currently profiles more like a Lyle Overbay kind of first baseman, one that hits more doubles than homers.

Even an Lyle Overbay clone would be a great asset to find in your own system, and I have a feeling Lind will add a little more power than he's currently projected. As for his position, if the Jays are seriously thinking of sticking Eric Hinske in left field, they can more than live with Adam Lind.

"Romero has not pitched above A ball and in A ball, if you can control your breaking ball, you can get strikeouts with players chasing it out of the zone. Hitters are more disciplined at AA. Romero has fringy stuff, but the bigger issue is that he is inconsistent, plus his size and stamina probably mean he is headed for the bullpen."

Fair comment. We'll see what Romero can do at New Hampshire. The fact he went unclaimed in Rule 5 is probably not a good sign.

Having the 25th ranked system in baseball cannot be viewed as a positive in any way.

Indeed not, and it will be seen as an indictment of the front office when the book is released. The Jays aren't going to get much help from the draft for a while yet either, since they ought to finish in the Top 15 teams for a few years to come and (if I recall correctly) they will have neither a 2nd- nor a 3rd-round pick in June. Now that they have more money to spend, they may have to rely more heavily on international signings -- and if so, they need to get better production than what Leance Soto gave them in 2005. The farm system will have to start producing more major-league successes over the next couple of years. But for better or for worse, I suspect that the eventual verdict on Ricciardi's draft and farm system has already been mostly compiled.

eeleye - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 10:27 AM EST (#140160) #

I don't buy it. Superstars pop-up with relative randomness, while quite often a top-10 or first draft pick becomes medicore. The following players weren't even drafted: Geurrero, Tejada, Soriano, Ortiz, Jorge Cantu. Godzilla Matsui, Ichiro Suzuki, Melvin Mora, Miguel Cabrera, Johan Santana, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, etc. Some of the top hitters now were once top-10 picks, like Alex Rodriguez and Mark Texiera, but for each one of them, per year, there seems to be about 9 B.J. Surhoffs and Jason Kendalls. Then look at a guy like Albert Pujols, who is on pace to be the greatest hitter of all time, and was selected in the 13th round. Dontrelle Willis was selected in the 8th round.

#2JBrumfield - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 10:36 AM EST (#140161) #

Dustin Hermansen, who played in the Jays system in 2004, was, at one time, the top ranked prospect in all of baseball

I think you mean Chad Hermansen. Otherwise, great feature Gerry.

eeleye - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 10:38 AM EST (#140162) #

Ironically, here is an article on why a prospect is not a sure thing. http://bluejays.scout.com/2/492262.html

Mike D - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 10:53 AM EST (#140163) #

Eeleye, the success of many of the undrafted superstars you mention is not as random as it may appear from their absence from the draft board. A worldwide draft, like those in the NBA and NHL, has yet to be adopted in baseball; only North American prospects are eligible to be drafted.

Consequently, ballplayers from all other parts of the world are free agents and must be negotiated with individually. For instance, Ichiro and Matsui, and Kenji Johjima this year, were all major stars in Japan that were able to command top dollar to come over to play in the bigs. There are no guarantees, as you point out, and as Jordan notes, the Jays' most recent international signing was Leance Soto, who had an abysmal season in Pulaski.

But don't be under the impression that the Miguel Tejadas of the world get passed over on draft day. It comes down to who's willing to trust the instincts of their international scouts, and who's willing to offer the money to get the deal done.

Gerry - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 11:07 AM EST (#140165) #

Thanks #2. Fixed.

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 11:55 AM EST (#140166) #

Davis Romero has been remarkably consistent for a young pitcher. He's got a nasty and well-controlled curve and an 88-92 mph fastball. He is short and thin; his durability has perhaps rightly been questioned. We'll see how he does in double A, but for now, I like him a lot more than Rosario. Rosario throws 95, but has been inconsistent since his surgery.

Baseball America does generally prefer power pitchers who have arm troubles over control pitchers with good K rates. Hence, the preference for Adam Miller over Jeremy Sowers in the Indian system. Others, such as Mike Emeigh and John Sickels, would probably take a different view.

The Sox, by the way, have always liked Vermilyea. The Jays drafted him immediately before the Sox were intending to, according to Chad Bradford in Chasing Steinbrenner. If Mota is part of the rumoured Coco Crisp trade, that will improve his chance of sticking.

It's interesting that Jim Callis mentioned Troy Tulowitzki as the player that the Jays should have taken instead of Ricky Romero on the basis that Troy had more potential, in his opinion. I had thought that Baseball America had a higher opinion of Maybin's potential than Tulowitzki's, but perhaps that was not as clear cut as I had understood.

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 11:58 AM EST (#140167) #

Oh, yes, and thank you again to Jim Callis for visiting us.

MatO - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 12:01 PM EST (#140169) #

Thoughts:

- #26 or #6 whatever, it doesn't mean much as the past has clearly shown
- I would have preferred they took a hitter with the #6 pick but I wasn't enthused at what was available, maybe they should have took Maybin
- on the other hand, according to reports when he was drafted, Romero throws in the low 90's which would make him well above average for a lefty (harder than Zito for example) with good control
- Romero is also very young as he just turned 21
- Soto was a big mistake
- the concerns about Purcey are warranted
- the Star in an article last fall wrote that the Jays had made a renewed commitment to Latin America (eg. they signed a 16 yr old Venezuelan OF for $225,000 whose name I don't remember) which was evidenced by the large promotion of Latin player to NA last summer, the result of which had to be more Latin signing to fill spots in the DSL
- because of the promotion of the Latin players fewer of the late round drafted players were signed than in the past
- this likely means than Mr. Rogers has thrown more money in the player development pot for international signings (hinted at in the Star article)

Pistol - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 02:11 PM EST (#140173) #

How many �stars� are there in baseball right now? Obviously it�s very subjective, but 50 sounds about right to me (there�s 60 All Stars each year and maybe about 10 that you probably wouldn�t call stars). Most of these players will have long careers, but always won�t be stars. Let�s assume that they are stars for 7 years. That means that each year you�ll get 7 new stars. With 30 teams that means there�s a little less than 1 in 4 chance of getting a star player each year, all other things being equal. Now if you have more star potential players your chances are obviously better.

The price these days of an average starting pitcher is $7 million. A star starting pitcher will cost a little less than double that. An average position player is in the $5-7 million range. A star position player is in the $12-15 million range.

Since two league average players cost about the same as one star player I would argue that two prospects that have league average potential are just as valuable as one prospect that has star potential.

So given the number that actually become stars and the cost of stars relative to average players I think BA�s team rankings are skewed too much towards star potential and shortchange depth. I�d be interested in how the Jays depth stacks up against other teams (and I wish I had thought of that a couple weeks ago). I think their depth is fine overall, although heavy on the pitching side and lean on the positional side, but I obviously don�t look at other teams as closely as I do the Jays.
--

Many thanks to Jim and Gerry.

Ryan C - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 02:19 PM EST (#140174) #

The subject of player projection always intrigues me. Has anyone ever done a study on how accurate some of the rankings are? Im not trying to besmirch BA or anyone else, but I think it would be interesting to look back at the rankings for say 1997 or so, and compare the ranking then to how we might rank them today in hindsight. It would also be interesting to do this for past "draft grades" as well.

And of course, great interview.

Jim - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 02:27 PM EST (#140175) #

' I think BA�s team rankings are skewed too much towards star potential and shortchange depth'

They might, but they also rank the Dodgers ahead of the Diamondbacks on depth.

The problem for the Jays is they have neither.

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 02:30 PM EST (#140176) #

Depth on the pitching side is more important than for position players because there is a more predictable relationship between the quality of the prospect and the chance of major league success for position players than for pitchers.

I agree that the Jays' pitching depth is not adequately accounted for in the BA ratings. The farm system is a little below average rather than one of the worst in the majors.

Anders - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 02:39 PM EST (#140179) #

Since two league average players cost about the same as one star player I would argue that two prospects that have league average potential are just as valuable as one prospect that has star potential.

The only problem with this is you can't win with a team full of league average players - not really anyway. No matter how you frame it - every GM in the game would rather have one of the Upton's than two guy who looked like they were going to be average major league players. Plus teams control salary rights for a long while. Im sure the Cardinals feel less bad about paying Albert Pujols 100 million over seven years, given that they paid him 1.8 million for the three years when he hit .330 with 100 home runs and 370 rbi's

Rob - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 02:40 PM EST (#140180) #

Very nice, Gerry. I agree that the ranking is too low, but it really doesn't matter in practice if they are 26 or 20 or 14.

Soto was a big mistake

Come on, he's played in 42 Rookie ball games. Granted, none of them were any good, but still...at least wait until he reaches a league with an "A" in its classification before you label him as a failure.

MatO - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 02:52 PM EST (#140182) #

If Soto was 17 then I wouldn't have made the comment but he was 20 and playing in rookie ball. Offensively and defensively he was beyond horrible.

MatO - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 03:21 PM EST (#140183) #

BA ranked the Tigers 2001 draft as the best but last year ranked the Tigers as having the worst minor league system. The Blue Jays were ranked among the best in both 2002 and 2003 drafts yet are 26th this year. John Sickels had David Bush ranked as the 23rd best pitching prospect prior to the 2004 season. I'd say that 19 of the pitchers he ranked ahead of him were decidedly worse in 2004. At least Sickels reviews his picks from the previous year. This is not a shot at BA or Sickels, they do valuable work, but it just goes to show you how difficult it is to project most players.

Pujols is a great illustration of the problem. Here's a guy that every team, including the Cards, passed on 12 times in the draft yet at this stage of his career he's looking like a potential HOF'er.

Jim - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 03:22 PM EST (#140184) #

'I agree that the Jays' pitching depth is not adequately accounted for in the BA ratings.'

I don't think it's an issue of not valuing depth, from what I've read they just don't think highly of the quality of the depth. The last Callis chat on espn.com he pretty much comes out and says that. He clearly didn't like the Romero pick and doesn't like Janssen or Banks behind him.

They value 1 star potential player over 2 MLB-regular potential players because even if none of the 3 are stars, the most likely to be a solid contibutor in the end is the one who started with star potential.

I doubt there is much of a difference between 22 and 25 or so, but I think it's pretty clearly where this system belongs. Some of that is the graduation of Hill and Adams but most of it is just the fact that they don't have position players who project to be major leaguers beyond Lind. When you spend as much time talking about Ryan Roberts as Battersbox does, that tells you just how thin the system is.

R Billie - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 03:23 PM EST (#140185) #

Maybe they got the wrong Leance Soto. I guess we'll see what he does this year.

I think the Jays got a bit shortchanged here as well. When your tenth best prospect is Vince Perkins who profiles as a #3 starter or plus reliever, that's not bad. I figure the Jays might be lower middle class.

Anyway, the 2004 rankings were propped up by toolsy players that Baseball America really liked (with Quiroz and Rios leading the way) so it's hard to say how much this means. No-one expected the Yankees system to produce two major leaguers who are nigh untouchable in 2005 but it did.

Chacin wasn't given much leeway (and perhaps he still shouldn't be) but he was one of the most productive starters in the AL and logged about 200 innings. Romero at this point profiles as a better pitcher than Chacin, especially if he improves from his current level. That said, I would have felt better if the Jays went with either the best bat available or spent the money to get a guy like Mike Pelfrey who appears to have Doc-like stuff.

Jim - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 03:23 PM EST (#140186) #

Didn't Soto get $225,000? Hardly the end of the world if he's a bust.

R Billie - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 03:29 PM EST (#140187) #

Star players in the draft are heavily loaded towards the front of the draft. They become increasingly rare the further down you go, although I think there's a point where you have about an equally small chance of finding them once you pass a certain round.

For success of prognostication, there are a lot of swings and misses but players towards the top end of rankings do tend to do better than players towards the bottom end. I'm sure some years will have exceptions but generally speaking, if you're not a top 50 prospect, your chances of becoming a star are significantly lower.

MatO - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 03:36 PM EST (#140188) #

Soto got $600,000 IIRC (definitely over $500K).

Four Seamer - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 03:44 PM EST (#140189) #

In a dream season for the Blue Jays farm system all ten could play for the parent club this year

That might be a dream season for the farm system, but it sounds like another season from hell for the big club!

Great article, by the way.

Jim - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 04:18 PM EST (#140191) #

I found 675k on google. That hurts a little worse.

Glevin - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 05:33 PM EST (#140193) #

"Star players in the draft are heavily loaded towards the front of the draft. They become increasingly rare the further down you go, although I think there's a point where you have about an equally small chance of finding them once you pass a certain round."

Well put. For example, the players eligible to be drafted who were in top-5 in each league in one of AVG, HR, RBI, R, OBP, SLG, or OPS by round.

There were 23 players by my count who qualify. Players were taken...
1st overall-3 players
2-10th overall-6 players
10-20 overall-4 players
rest of 1st round-2
(total first round count-15)
2nd round-3
5-10th round-1
10th to 20th round-2
20-30th round-1
30th round+-1

binnister - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 05:40 PM EST (#140195) #

This sounds like a job for 'Data Sheet'Man!!

Seriously, though, could someone point me to link that shows this to unequivically to be true? Something that says '90% of all MLB 'stars' were drafted in the first 5 rounds' or something like that.

Of course, you'd have to define what constitutes a 'star'. Is a 'Star' someone who has 2 or 3 fantastic years samwiched between 10 so-so years? Or someone who is consistanly great? How far above league average do they need to be to be considered 'Stars'? In the top 5%? Top 10%?

Geoff - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 06:13 PM EST (#140196) #

What happened to the days when the Jays could sign a Carlos Delgado when he was 16? Those were the days.

The Jays have had late-round success. Vinnie Chulk in round 12; Reed Johnson in 17; Brandon Lyon in 14; poor Bob File was a 19th rounder; Jay Gibbons in the 14th. Jeff Kent was a 10th round pick.

What I didn't realize before was that the Jays drafted O-dog twice. Round 33 in 1996 and and round 43 in 1997. Guess when you get drafted later the following year, no point in your agent holding out. Too bad the Jays couldn't sign Chad Qualls. Drafted in round 52 in 1997 by the Jays and in round 2 in 2000 by the Astros.

See here for a list of Jays draftees that have reached the majors: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/TOR/draft.shtml

Looking at that list, the Jays have done well picking a good player in the first round if you compare the guys before 1990 to those after. But Jeff Kent has to rank as the best Jays draft steal, or the guy who should have held out for a higher drafting and more money.

Jake - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 08:44 PM EST (#140197) #

I will preface this by saying I am a Baseball America subscriber and I believe they do excellent work, but they are a touch biased. They always will rate a high school player above a college player despite evidence to the contrary. As well their mistakes the last few years are numerous...Josh Hamilton, Gavin Floyd...Corey Patterson etc.

Also recently in a column on ESPN by Peter Gammons, an executive from an American League team rated the blue jays farm system as the 5th best in all of baseball.

Also, while I would agree that the blue jay may lack superstar level talent in the farm system, they do have depth. I also believe that organizations that develop those type of players don't win championships. It is a risk/reward issue. A good group of solid players seems to be the way to go...look at the '98 Yankees or even the White Sox of last year.

Just a few things to consider.

CeeBee - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 09:29 PM EST (#140198) #

I'm really glad Jim Callis isn't the Jays GM.

Nick - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 10:58 PM EST (#140199) #

With an average fastball, Romero would have to have two off speed pitches be his plus pitches and, according to Callis, he is not there yet.

When Jon Lalonde was interviewed by Rich Lederer over at Baseball Analysts last June, he described Romero as having a plus curveball and a plus changeup, a fastball in the mid 90s, and had high hopes for Ricky's slider. It seems, though, that the Jays were taken by Romero's competitive attitude and high baseball IQ more than anything. I think Jon and the Jays' brass have a higher opinion of Romero's repertoire currently and would project Romero to be a better pitcher than Callis does. Just because Callis says it does it make it so. It seems like many have fairly low expectations for Romero. I hope they're wrong because having the 6th overall pick can be a great opportunity to grab a special player. Only time will tell who is right.

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2005/06/blue_jay_way_qa.php

Glevin - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 11:00 PM EST (#140200) #

"As well their mistakes the last few years are numerous...Josh Hamilton, Gavin Floyd...Corey Patterson etc. "

These were not BA mistakes. Everybody loved those guys. Hamilton was a fantastic prospect and it's pretty hard to forsee the issues he had. Every single list will have top guys who don't make it, it doesn't mean it was a mistake to put them there. These lists are about making the best guesses possible given the information available.

"Also, while I would agree that the blue jay may lack superstar level talent in the farm system, they do have depth. I also believe that organizations that develop those type of players don't win championships. "

What? The Yankees have won more championships than anyone and they have developed a tonne of stars (Jeter, Bernie, Rivera, etc...) If you want to win by developing solid but unspectacular players, you better have a lot of money to play around with. Guys like Russ Adams or Reed Johnson are, unless Adams takes a major step forward, quite easily replacable in terms of talent. Guys like Carlos Delgado are not. The Jays won in 1993 largely because they had three offensive superstars. In 1992 they won with 4 regulars below the 90 OPS+ mark. Why? Because the other 5 guys were over 119 and could carry them to the second most runs in the eague. Depth is vastly overrated in the minors. What wins are the star players, the difference makers.

Nick - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 11:01 PM EST (#140201) #

Just because Callis says it does it make it so.

"Does *not* make it so" is what I meant to say.

A - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 11:50 PM EST (#140204) #

Not sure where it is at this point but I remember someone at Da Box (maybe Craig?) doing a boatload of analysis for each spot in the first round of the draft. He essentially went back and looked at every player taken in each round and, with an admittedly rough-around-the-edges formula, calculated the number of players at each skill level.

That's just to say that those of you who are doing all the research could save yourselves some time by looking for that in the archives.

Mick Doherty - Tuesday, January 24 2006 @ 11:59 PM EST (#140205) #

A good group of solid players seems to be the way to go...look at the '98 Yankees

I think you underestimate the talent that was on that team. It was WAY beyond "solid." Jeter and Rivera are mortal locks for the Hall of Fame. Posada and Williams were perennial all-stars and will get HOF support. The rotation included Pettitte, Cone and Wells -- that's more than 600 career wins from three guys. The two backup OF/DH types were Darryl Strawberry, who certainly had HOF talent, and Tim Raines, who probably should be, but never will be inducted into Cooperstown.

I think the point here is simple ... Chuck Knoblauch, Scott Brosius and Jeff Nelson were "solid." But the core the '98 NYY team was one of stars.

Ron - Wednesday, January 25 2006 @ 12:32 AM EST (#140206) #

I believe having franchise/all-star type prospects is always better than having solid depth in the farm system. In an ideal world you would have both though.

For example if you gave me a choice of having Upton/Drew/Jackson and 7 scrubs vs. the Jays current top 10 prospects I would take the first choice. The same argument could extent to the major league level. Given the choice would you rather have Delgado or Koskie/Hillenbrand/SS/Koch.

I'm not sure if the Jays main reason in drafting Romero was his talent or because he was going to be easier to sign. If it's the 2nd choice, it shows a major flaw in the draft system that needs to be corrected in the next CBA.

I noticed League's stock has fallen. Looking at his stats in the minors and his "stuff", I've wondered why didn't he K more batters.

MattAtBat - Wednesday, January 25 2006 @ 03:29 AM EST (#140208) #

Perhaps a bauxite well-versed in Jays history can help out with the this one. I am VERY interested in a player the Jays drafted in 1978 named Brian Milner.

He was drafted in the 7th round in 1978 of the regular amateur draft, out of high school. Within the MONTH he was in the bigs for the Jays, making his ML debut on June 23, 1978. At the tender age of 18, he appeared in two games, hitting 4 for 9 (.444) with a triple and two RBI (OPS of 1.111 for anyone who cares). After that, he was never heard from again in the major leagues...

Milner's stats page So, I had many questions. What's the deal? Is Milner the youngest Blue Jay ever? Quickest ascent to the majors? How was it he went from high school to the majors within a month, was successful and never heard of again?

Appropriately, Jim Callis had the answer in an "Ask BA" column from a little over a year ago.

Following up on your chart listing players who went straight from the draft to the majors, what was the story with Brian Milner, the only high school position player to make the jump? I looked him up and saw he went 4-for-9 as an 18-year-old, then never was heard from again.

David R. Mark Maplewood, N.J.

I just happened to write a short feature on Brian Milner in the Nov. 10, 1991 issue of Baseball America, so let's go to the archives...
A catcher from Southwest High in Fort Worth, Texas, Milner was one of the top prospects in the 1978 draft. But he also had a scholarship to play football and baseball at Arizona State, and that and his diabetic condition caused him to slip. The Blue Jays took him in the seventh round, and were elated.
"I was involved in signing Darrell Porter when I was with the Milwaukee Brewers, and Gary Carter when I was with the Montreal Expos, and I think Brian has more raw ability than either of them," said legendary Toronto scout Bobby Mattick, who knew a little something about talent, having signed Don Baylor, Bobby Grich and Frank Robinson, among many others.
To sign, Milner received $150,000�to put that in perspective, the draft bonus record entering 1978 was $125,000�and an immediate ticket to the majors. The Blue Jays had just put outfielder Rick Bosetti on the disabled list and had an open roster spot. Milner's new teammates greeted him by good-naturedly putting a baby bottle filled with beer in his locker.
On June 23, he appeared in his first big league (and pro) game, going 1-for-4 in an 8-3 loss to Cleveland. He grounded out to shortstop in his first at-bat against Rick Waits, and collected his first hit with a single off Waits in the ninth. Milner's only other big league game came three days later, a famous 24-10 rout of Baltimore. Milner went 3-for-5 with a triple and two RBIs.
Afterward, Milner went to Rookie-level Medicine Hat, where he hit .307-4-36 in 51 games. But he also tore his stomach lining diving for a ball, the first in a string of injuries (bone chips in his elbow, a hernia, shoulder and knee problems) that would undermine his career. After he hit .138 in 37 games at Double-A in 1982, the Blue Jays released him.

If you have never heard of this guy or story before, hope I added to your edification. If this was mentioned on the Box before, I apologize for the redundancy.

MatO - Wednesday, January 25 2006 @ 09:35 AM EST (#140211) #

Just to clarify. Part of Milner's deal to sign was an opportunity to play in a few major league games before being sent down to the minors. I don't think it had anything to do with a Bossetti injury.

Mike Green - Wednesday, January 25 2006 @ 01:05 PM EST (#140220) #

In response to A's comment, here is Mike Moffat's study of 6th overall picks with links to other studies.

Jim - Wednesday, January 25 2006 @ 07:21 PM EST (#140246) #

OAKLAND, Calif. - The Oakland A's today announced that they have agreed to terms with Frank Thomas on a one-year contract for the 2006 season.

Mike Green - Wednesday, January 25 2006 @ 08:14 PM EST (#140248) #

Thanks, Jim. Here's the link. I am not surprised that it's the A's signing Thomas. I thought they had the edge in the AL West before the signing, and this won't hurt.

Baseball America's Jim Callis Visits Da Box | 40 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.