Rany Jazayerli's Draft Rules

[TruffleShuffle]

I was going through some old BP stuff today and came across Rany Jazayerli's excellent research on the MLB draft. One of the most interesting things, to me, was the success rate of various positions broken down into whether they were high school or college draftees. The numbers represent a return on investment - for example, teams got 113% more in value from the college first basemen than they spent to sign them. To summarize:

 

  1984 – 1999           1992 - 1999
Pos     Overall       Pos     Overall

COL 1B  +155.3%      COL 1B   +113.1%
COL 2B  + 41.0%      COL 2B   + 55.6%
COL SS  + 37.9%      COL 3B   + 55.2%
COL 3B  + 24.4%      COL C    + 49.8%
COL C   + 12.5%      COL SS   + 45.1%
COL OF  + 12.5%      COL OF   -  5.3%

 

  1984 – 1999           1992 - 1999
Pos     Overall       Pos     Overall

HS 3B   -  1.7%       HS 3B   + 31.1%
HS SS   -  6.7%       HS  C   + 17.2%
HS OF   - 31.4%       HS SS   - 16.3%
HS  C   - 41.5%       HS OF   - 31.8%
HS 1B   - 54.5%       HS 1B   - 52.9%
HS 2B   - 84.0%       HS 2B   - 89.7%

 

  1984 – 1999           1992 - 1999
Pos      Overall      Pos      Overall

COL LHP  + 15.2%      COL LHP  +  8.0%
COL RHP  +  4.5%       HS RHP  -  6.4%
HS LHP  -  8.4%      COL RHP  - 22.5%
HS RHP  - 30.7%       HS LHP  - 45.2%

 

and the rules that he came up with:

 

Draft Rule #1: The greatest difference in value between consecutive draft picks is the difference between the first and second picks in a draft.

 

Draft Rule #2: College players are roughly 50% more likely to reach the major leagues than high-school players of equal draft caliber. This advantage has not changed over time.

 

Draft Rule #3: In a year where there is a clear superstar talent available in the ranks of high school hitters, it is a perfectly acceptable--if not mandatory--draft strategy to select that player with the #1 overall pick.

 

Draft Rule #4: While college players returned almost exactly double the return on investment that high school players did between 1984 and 1991, that advantage dropped dramatically, to approximately 25%, between 1992 and 1999.

 

Draft Rule #5: The increase in value of high-school players relative to their college counterparts occurred even though teams were more likely to use top draft picks on high-school players in the 1990s than in the 1980s.

 

Draft Rule #6: The overall value of draft picks dropped about 15% from the 1984-1991 era to the 1992-1999 era.

 

Draft Rule #7: College hitters enjoy a sizeable advantage over every other class of draft pick, in both eras, and in every round.

 

Draft Rule #8: There is virtually no difference whatsoever in the value of the other three groups of draft picks. In particular, it is no longer apparent that high school pitchers, even in the first round, are significantly riskier than either high school hitters or college pitchers.

 

Draft Rule #9: There is no evidence either way to suggest that Junior College draft picks fare better or worse than traditional college or high school picks.

 

Draft Rule #10: The long-held bias against high school catchers is no longer appropriate.

 

Draft Rule #11: Among high school hitters, players on the left side of the infield are the most valuable selections, and players on the right side of the infield are--by far--the least valuable selections, with outfielders and catchers ranking in the middle.

 

Draft Rule #12: College first basemen are the most valuable group of draft picks by an enormous margin. College first basemen selected in the first round have gone on to have Hall of Fame-caliber careers approximately one-third of the time.

 

Over the course of the entire draft study, college first basemen have returned a ridiculous +144% in draft value. Thirteen first basemen were selected in the first 30 picks between 1984 and 1999, including Frank Thomas, Mark McGwire, Will Clark, Todd Helton, and Lance Berkman. John Olerud was a first-round talent who slipped to the third round because he was considered a tough sign.

 

Draft Rule #13: Among college hitters, after first basemen there is almost no difference between the other infield positions, including catcher. Collegiate outfielders trail all other positions by a significant margin, probably because of an overemphasis on “tools” guys with great athleticism but underdeveloped bats.

 

Draft Rule #14: There are minimal differences in the value of left-handed vs. right-handed pitching. Left-handed pitching may be slightly more valuable at the college level, particularly in the second and third round. Right-handed pitching may be slightly more valuable at the high school level, particularly in the first round. The differences are so slight that they’re best off being ignored.

 

Draft Rule #15: It is too soon to tell whether the strategy of drafting college relievers is a wise strategy or not. Drafting one in the first five picks of the draft is probably a bad idea.

 

 

I liked #12 the best. apparently if there is a college first baseman worthy of being picked in the first round, go get him, because he's probably gonna be good.

[craig]

Truffle, thanks for a very interesting pack of ideas.

 

The college 1B idea isn't that surprising: good power-hitting hitters are invaluable at any level. And you don't get drafted as a college 1B unless you can really hit. Those dudes are drafted for their bats, not for projection stuff. So probably easier to scout who can and who can't.

 

Question: how old is this article?

 

It's interesting that it doesn't support a number of formerly widespread axioms: don't draft HS pitchers among them.

 

The other interesting thing, to me, is how much a reevaluation of the 90's data versus the 80's data gave some very different pictures and "rules".

 

The problem is that any such studies need always be made many years after the actual drafting. By the time the data is in, the drafts analyzed are so ancient that the scouting industry has very likely left the practices far behind and the relevancy for forthcoming drafts is questionable. Old "rules" that were based on 80's drafts, the actual drafters seemed to have largely already solved those problems by the time the 90's drafts rolled around. Likewise, might it be possible that some of the problems leading to rules based on the 90's drafts are likewise no longer applicable?

 

Second, I wonder if the data isn't heavily influenced by a small sample of impact players? One Utley can maybe change the data on college 2B's. There aren't that many top-ten catchers; a Mauer here and a Wieters there (if he's successful) and the data on catchers looks way different that formerly. HS pitchers had a bad rep, then suddenly WS teams are crawling with Hamels and Kazmir and Beckett etc. and maybe the data on HS pitchers isn't so bad after all?

 

It may also be that some of the HS/college pitcher data has changed because development people are a little smarter, and the abuse ratio between college and HS pitchers has shifted some?

[Mephistopheles]

this study nearly breaks down to nothing once if you take away the assumption that each draft class is the same.

[TruffleShuffle]

this study nearly breaks down to nothing once if you take away the assumption that each draft class is the same.

 

well it's a good primer until you publish your comprehensive draft research on the NSBB front page.