The posts about Bobby Borchering below have generated a lot of comments, and there seems to be one theme that keeps creeping up that we also saw a lot of very early in the season when the Silver Hawks were struggling. (This post isn't so much about Borchering as it is about top picks versus the rest of the pack -- but he's the one that triggered all this conversation).
The basic argument is that the top draft picks get catered to and get more opportunity than guys that weren't drafted in the first round (or first few rounds). And that top draft picks are always picked as top rated prospects over the lower rated guys.
My response: DUH! OF COURSE THEY ARE!
First of all, these players (Borchering, Owings, Davidson, Belfiore, Pollock, Upton, etc.) were first round picks for a reason. They have talent that was identified by scouts as being better than everyone else's. That's not to say that at this very moment they are better than everyone else, but they have the necessary skill set to be big time players in the major leagues.
Because they were identified as the premier talent, they were drafted in the first round.
Because they were drafted in the first round, they got a higher signing bonus.
Because the Diamondbacks (or any other MLB club) has more money invested in these players than some of the others, it's more important for the "high dollar" players to succeed.
Is this fair to the guy who was a 28th round pick that might make it to the majors too? Probably not, but it's life. I don't know where people got the notion that everything in Minor League Baseball has to be fair to everyone. No where in sports is the playing field level.
Let me ask you this: If you run a radio station, and you have Company A paying you $100,000 a year to advertise on your station and Company B pays you $500 a year to advertise on your station, which one is getting more commercials?
Answer: Company A
That doesn't mean company A is more important than Company B in the grand scheme of things, but to that radio station making the money and playing the commercials, Company A is a big time sponsor.
Oddly, most of the time people compain about this system, they don't give specific examples. However, one commenter did talk about how AJ Pollock got selected to the Arizona Fall League team over Paul Goldschmidt. The argument was that Goldschmidt had a better year, and Pollock didn't play, so it should have been Goldschmidt. However, since Paul was an 8th round pick and AJ was a 1st round pick, the Diamondbacks went with Pollock.
First of all, Goldschmidt had an amazing year -- nobody is disputing that. But do you realize teams are limited to just 7 or 8 players each, and they have to pick the players that they feel need the experience and also fit into the overall team (which they have to combine on with three other MLB teams)? Pollock missed an entire year due to injury and this is a great chance for him to get some work. Goldschmidt destroyed the competition and doesn't really need extra at-bats to prove anything this fall. It's not like they are cutting Goldschmidt, they're just getting Pollock some much needed work.
And your argument about not catering to lesser draft picks holds no water. Here are the Diamondbacks representatives on the Arizona Fall League and their draft rounds:
Josh Collmenter - 15th Round
Marc Krauss - 2nd Round
AJ Pollock - 1st Round
Konrad Schmidt - NOT DRAFTED AT ALL
Bryan Shaw - 2nd Round
Daniel Stange - 7th Round
Bryan Woodall - 21st Round
So there are as many players from the 15th round or later (3) as there are from the top two rounds (3).
Again, I'm not trying to defend certain players or put down others. But this whole mindset that it is unfair for the Diamondbacks to cater to their top draft picks is laughable. Baseball has worked this way since its inception, it's not going to change now (nor should it).
I know I posted in the previous thread:
ReplyDelete"Jarrod Parker (Tommy John Surgery) and AJ Pollock (Screw in his elbow) are listed as top prospects, that is a big concern of mine."
I can totally understand that they want to invest more time and attention to players who they believe have major league value. I also believe that each player should be able to get the same instructs which will strengthen the organization all around.
In regards to Konrad Schmidt, someone in the organization has had their eyes on him since atleast 2008. Half a season in SB, Half a Season in Visalia before heading to instructs. I talked to him about that back then. Based on what I know, Scouts are happy with his body type, that he is durable.
But yeah, ultimately, it's up to the player to improve. such is life. An organization will take what they put into it.
Everyone knows life's not fair. You're missing one of the main points. There is a reason why some franchises consistently finish at or near the top and it's not just payroll. Maybe you don't care but I get frustrated with the Dbacks being a bottom-dweller. I'm not saying I know the reason but there is a reason. Maybe it's the scouting or maybe it's player development or maybe it's management or probably a combination of factors. Hopefully you agree that something needs to change or at the very least, something needs to improve. Last year, the Dbacks minor league teams had a losing record. (They did improve a little this year so that is encouraging.)
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that all teams cater to the higher paid players, teams vary in the degree to which they do so. (And they don't all follow the same system.) The Dbacks seem to be at the higher end of the spectrum. Yes, the higher paid players should get more playing time at the lower levels, but maybe 60-70% instead of the current 80-90% would be better. That way all players would get significant playing time and more opportunity to learn and improve. And at some point, opportunity and advancement needs to be based on results, not on potential or profile. How many major leaguers have been missed because of profiling or not given a significant chance to prove themselves? You can't measure attitude and heart by body type.
And besides, just because "we've always done it that way" or "everybody's doing it" doesn't mean that it is the best way to do it or that it can't be improved. Something needs to change. Historically, the Dbacks have done better with free agency than with player development within their own organization.
I responded to your blog a few day ago because it hit a nerve. These are just my observations as I've spent more time studying and observing the minor leagues these last few years. I was not just whining and complaining. I am just frustrated and wanted to express my opinion as to one possible area in which improvements can be made.
Thanks for your time.