The Draft Pool in OOTP23

[tejdog1]

default ML game.

According to MLB Pipeline, there's 79 players with a 50 FV in this draft class
According to OOTP...


This is with scouting turned to 100%, 1-100 scale.

[MathBandit]

79 players in one draft class whose median result is being an average MLB big-leaguer seems absolutely bonkers lol.

[WIUPIKE]

Do you have relative ratings on?

[tejdog1]

Originally Posted by WIUPIKE

Do you have relative ratings on?

I do.
I *think* that's how MLB_P measures players, too.

[tejdog1]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

79 players in one draft class whose median result is being an average MLB big-leaguer seems absolutely bonkers lol.

This is supposed to be a super deep draft class*

*of course, half the pitchers have TJS already so lmfao

[PSUColonel]

You need to turn on 20-80 by 5’s and see what it looks like

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by tejdog1

This is supposed to be a super deep draft class*

*of course, half the pitchers have TJS already so lmfao

Keith Law (I think it was him, might've been someone else) says it's one of the worst drafts he's seen in the last 20 years.

It's definitely not super deep at any rate.

Fangraphs has one 50 grade player: https://www.fangraphs.com/prospects/...rt=-1,1&type=0

Not that Fangraphs is not a bit extreme too, but MLB's 79 50 grade players is looney tunes, given most drafts have 15-20 guys in the whole draft that put up even 10 career WAR.

There's still a lot more to do with rating the draft prospects in the next month or two, but in the end we'll probably end up splitting the different between MLB's irrationally exuberant projections and Fangraphs (possibly equally irrational) pessimistic projections.

Today's beta patch has 26 (iirc) 50+ FV guys and I guess we'll most likely end up right around 20-30 guys 50 or above even as guys move up or down over the next month or two.

EDIt: and yes, as PSUColonel mentions, you need the 20-80 by 5's on anyway to get the accurate 20-80 scouting type comparative ratings.

[Dave Stieb II]

I am happy to hear this. I agree with all of what you said and your solution seems like a logical path to take.

[tejdog1]

81 now, btw
https://www.mlb.com/prospects/draft/...lbrandt-703596

I have no idea how they get to that, if it's flawed, if it's best case, or what, but yeah.
https://www.mlb.com/prospects/draft/...beavers-687637

Looks like everyone from their 20th to their 81st ranked prospect is a FV 50.
19 and higher is FV 55s+
8 and higher is FV 60s+

As a player of a video game, I much prefer that, it just... generates more... happy feels? drafting a bunch of 50s, 55s, and then just having them gradually get weeded out up the ladder. Rather then drafting a bunch of 40s in the first round.

[MathBandit]

I have to imagine MLB must be using 90% percentile outcomes or some other form of 'peak' value to have numbers anything even remotely approaching that. If you told a team with the 30th pick you could give them a player who will likely have an average MLB career they'd be doing cartwheels, not thinking "Well yeah, everyone in the first 3 rounds will do that".

[Dave Stieb II]

I have always turned to fangraphs first but I find their rankings of the 2022 draft class more absurd and extreme than those from MLB pipeline.

This might be an historically poor draft, I don't know so I'll defer to the Keith Law's of the world, but even so fangraphs is projecting only one player in the entire draft has the potential (future value) to be an average major leaguer. And just an average major leaguer at that. (50 FV)

Think about the implications of that for a moment?

If that is true, how badly are they projecting the quality of play in the majors is going to deteriorate over the next five years?

Roughly 1,200 players will don big league uniforms this season. And fangraphs is projecting that if that is still the case in five years, only one of the 1,200 will be an average big leaguer from the 2022 draft class. I sure hope the rest of the world is producing projectable average major leaguers because I don't know who will fill MLB uniforms come that time.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by Dave Stieb II

I have always turned to fangraphs first but I find their rankings of the 2022 draft class more absurd and extreme than those from MLB pipeline.

This might be an historically poor draft, I don't know so I'll defer to the Keith Law's of the world, but even so fangraphs is projecting only one player in the entire draft has the potential (future value) to be an average major leaguer. And just an average major leaguer at that. (50 FV)

Think about the implications of that for a moment?

If that is true, how badly are they projecting the quality of play in the majors is going to deteriorate over the next five years?

Roughly 1,200 players will don big league uniforms this season. And fangraphs is projecting that if that is still the case in five years, only one of the 1,200 will be an average big leaguer from the 2022 draft class. I sure hope the rest of the world is producing projectable average major leaguers because I don't know who will fill MLB uniforms come that time.

I mean, there's another 24 players at FV 45 (including a few at 45+) who will also also be regular contributing players, putting up ~1-1.5 WAR per season for their first 6 years.

I think there's an underappreciation for just how good a 60 FV player is. Carlos Correa put up 3.86 WAR/season for his first 6 years (including normalizing 2020 by multiplying it by 3). That's on the *low* end of what FanGraphs projects for a 60 FV hitter, which would be 3.4-4.9 WAR/season for those years.

[Dave Stieb II]

We can use comps and WAR all we like. Correa's WAR has been severely impacted by his inability to stay on the field - it is not indicative of his overall ability.

An average big leaguer is an average big leaguer. 50 on a 20-80 scale is average. And at this moment, fangraphs is projecting that only ONE average big leaguer will come out of the entire 2022 draft class.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by Dave Stieb II

We can use comps and WAR all we like. Correa's WAR has been severely impacted by his inability to stay on the field - it is not indicative of his overall ability.

An average big leaguer is an average big leaguer. 50 on a 20-80 scale is average. And at this moment, fangraphs is projecting that only ONE average big leaguer will come out of the entire 2022 draft class.

I guess it doesn't seem that weird to me? A career of Sonny Gray (the player FanGraphs explicitly cites as an example of 50 FV) seems like a better-than-expected result for anything but the very very top prospects. My guess is there aren't too many pitchers picked in a given year (if any) where the picking team would decline an offer to get Sonny Gray's production from that pick.

[Dave Stieb II]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

I guess it doesn't seem that weird to me? A career of Sonny Gray (the player FanGraphs explicitly cites as an example of 50 FV) seems like a better-than-expected result for anything but the very very top prospects. My guess is there aren't too many pitchers picked in a given year (if any) where the picking team would decline an offer to get Sonny Gray's production from that pick.

What a young player becomes and what he is projected to become are two entirely different things. If a draft contains one - and only one - projected Sonny Gray - either a pitcher or a comparable hitter - not both - then the MLB product in 5 or 6 years will not be nearly the same quality as it is today. The numbers simply don't add up. By default, fangraphs should have more than one 50 FV on their draft list, since they are projecting the MLB product will not be nearly as good given their own projections.
Sonny Gray was a 27th round pick in 2008 who became a 50 value pitcher.
Tim Beckham was the 1st overall pick that year. Buster Posey went 5th. Gerrit Cole went 27th. ad nauseum.
Again, this has nothing to do with what players become, it is about how they are projected. And if a draft class is projected to have only one Sonny Gray then the game is in huge trouble.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by Dave Stieb II

What a young player becomes and what he is projected to become are two entirely different things. If a draft contains one - and only one - projected Sonny Gray - either a pitcher or a comparable hitter - not both - then the MLB product in 5 or 6 years will not be nearly the same quality as it is today. The numbers simply don't add up. By default, fangraphs should have more than one 50 FV on their draft list, since they are projecting the MLB product will not be nearly as good given their own projections.
Sonny Gray was a 27th round pick in 2008 who became a 50 value pitcher.
Tim Beckham was the 1st overall pick that year. Buster Posey went 5th. Gerrit Cole went 27th. ad nauseum.
Again, this has nothing to do with what players become, it is about how they are projected. And if a draft class is projected to have only one Sonny Gray then the game is in huge trouble.

FanGraphs is absolutely not saying only one player from the draft will be a 50, nor are they saying the MLB product will be worse. They're saying there's only one player who very specifically will more often than not be a 50. There could be 100 players who each have a ~30% chance of becoming MLB average players. That would lead to 30 such players coming out of this draft, but not any individual player being projected to do so.

The fact that Sonny Gray ended up being a very good pitcher does matter, since we're talking about how good he actually was, not how he was projected. It's quite rare for a prospect to be so good that before they're drafted, turning into Sonny Gray would be considered meh or a bust.

[1991Twins]

Fangraphs is saying that there isn't a generational talent in this year's draft. Within any situation, some players will develop and rise to the top. A few examples off of the top of my head are: Mike Trout was the 25th pick in the 2009 draft, while in 1988, Mike Piazza waited until the 62nd round to be selected.

I honestly think that the draft here is more realistic. It is possible that this year has a lot more guys projected with a high floor but a lower ceiling. Some years just don't have as much elite, top end talent....while in other years they are very top heavy without a lot of depth. When teams pick in real life, they look for translatable skills. What talents and attributes stand out to you (instead of just an overall rating)? I bet you can still find guys who will stand out. I've actually turned the overall ratings for current and potential because I do believe it can blind me into not looking at individual skills. I also feel that the draft pool would be lower since the overall rating is heavily influenced by defense. Most players in the draft pool aren't fully developed as a defender, which would also limit their projections.

Bottom line: Players will always rise up to the challenge. MLB is not going to fall off of a cliff.

[rburgh]

MLB Pipeline is historically crazy optimistic about prospects, FG crazy pessimistic. If you average the two ratings you are probably in the ballpark.

[Dave Stieb II]

Originally Posted by rburgh

MLB Pipeline is historically crazy optimistic about prospects, FG crazy pessimistic. If you average the two ratings you are probably in the ballpark.

Thank you. That is all I am saying - or trying to say.

1. Regarding the post just prior to yours - nobody suggested there is a generational talent in this year's draft or even anything close to it. I haven't seen one post alleging that. Myself? As I posted earlier in the thread, I will defer to the Keith Law's of the world and accept that this might be an historically bad draft in terms of premier talent.

2. Regarding the post just prior to the post just prior to yours - we can argue semantics all we like. Fangraphs absolutely HAS posted that at this time they project only one player in the 2022 draft to have a FV of 50, which is major league average. That is an absolute - the link to their site is posted earlier in the thread. Those are their projections, not mine. Saying that they're not saying this or that or are saying this or that is pure conjecture on the poster's part. I know what I read. I don't read between the line. As of now, they are projecting one average major leaguer to come of of the 2022 draft. Period.

And I find THAT ridiculous, even in a bad draft year.

[SirSaab]

Just as a RL observation, I thought that, up until pretty recently, Dylan Lesko was considered a cut above the rest of this draft class? What happened there? Did he have a TJS (somewhere in my mind that sounds right)?