Unsigned draft pick Austin Adams flashing great stuff

Really neither here nor there, since the Brewers failed to sign Adams after drafting him in the 27th round last year (and as a shortstop no less), but I remembered his name and found it interesting:

"When he’s not starting or playing shortstop, Adams often closes for Faulkner, with reports of him hitting 98 mph and sitting at 93-96 with a power breaking ball in the low 80s when he comes in as a reliever.

He has given up 47 hits in 43 innings this season, walking 21 and striking out just 39. He’s a 5-foot-10 righthander, and frankly scouts don’t know what to make of Adams. With his quality stuff, he should be dominating NAIA competition, but he hasn’t."

about 3 years ago battlekow 9 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

WHIP of close to 1.75?

i can’t divide, nor add

by PagsBrewCrew on Apr 30, 2009 3:55 PM CDT reply actions

I get 1.58

:) + Suppan = :'(

by Noah Jarosh on May 2, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions

A project I'll probably never get around to

submitted for everyone else’s consideration….

…what happens to guys who are drafted but don’t sign? Obviously there are a lot of different categories:
1. high schoolers who want to go to college either for the experience or to boost their draft stock
2. juniors who want to finish college and figure the pro ball opportunity will still be there
3. juniors (and some seniors) who want more money

We hear quite a bit about (3), but I wonder what percentage of guys in (1) and (2) end up getting what they want. I was thinking of this because Dabrowiecki, who just debuted with the Rattlers, was drafted out of high school, pitched D-1 for four years, but wasn’t drafted again. Between injuries and ineffectiveness, there must be quite a few guys like that.

I also wonder how accurate scouts are when telling kids where they stand. I remember in a few of bk’s interviews last year, the player said that the scout told him he’d go in round x, but he ended up going in round x+5 or so. If you’re expecting to go in round x, the disappointment might make it more likely to go back to school and hope for better next time around.

Also, cheese.

by Jeff Sackmann on Apr 30, 2009 5:05 PM CDT reply actions

interesting question...

but it gets quite complex once juxtaposed with those guys who did sign…how many kids signing out of high school have already washed out four years later (either by injury or lack of ability), or are on a clear path to nowhere, such that they probably wouldn’t be drafted if they were available again at that point in time?

by Zeyes on Apr 30, 2009 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions

sure

I actually wasn’t thinking so much of the ultimate value of the player (i.e., does the high school kid have a shot at the majors four years after graduation) as whether the kid gets the thrill of signing a pro contract and playing in the minors. Given how extraordinarily high the washout rate is (1500 players drafted per year, hundreds more signed, ~100 MLB debuts per year), I assume most guys are on a clear path to nowhere.

Also, cheese.

by Jeff Sackmann on May 1, 2009 6:58 AM CDT up reply actions

Which begs the question

Why are there so many players drafted and playing minor league ball? The NFL and NBA certainly don’t have that, though their development curves are much more compressed. Does the number of 22nd round picks making major league appearances really justify the system?

Is it a matter of fairness? I suppose if they cut it to 10 rounds and left everyone else as undrafted free agents, the Yankees could just sign 100 of them every year and create their very own minor league.

by ecocd on May 1, 2009 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions

Complicated question, but a good one

The easiest answer is: The market. There is a huge, huge market out there for live baseball, and there has been for decades. Before TV, there were many times more minor leagues out there than there is now, and many more affiliated teams and leagues, as well. MLB teams don’t make money on their affiliates directly (I think if you take away the benefit of training their players, they lose money, but that’s a gorilla-sized “if”), but MLB wants minor leagues to be “within the fold” rather than independent.

You hit part of it on the head with development curves. There are basically five rungs of minor league ball (you can separate out rookie and short-season, but they are significantly different), and some high school draftees move steadily through five. Tons of players spend significant amount of time in four of those levels. Compressing them more would be kind of like creating a two-room schoolhouse for a small K-6 elementary. Only in baseball you can’t have independent study.

And comparing to basketball, anyway, my “independent study” joke is another reason. You pretty much have to have a 20+ man roster to have minor leagues. If you’re going to separate out the levels enough to provide meaningful development for players, you need to have a LOT of roster fodder. Essentially, college football serves that purpose for the NFL. (Plus, the NFL has really deep rosters—I don’t know a ton about the intricacies there, but you could make an argument that an NFL roster is equivalent to an MLB roster + the affiliated AAA roster.)

And finally, there’s this:
“Does the number of 22nd round picks making major league appearances really justify the system?”
…maybe not. But if you figure the system is going to be close to what it is anyway, I think it’s a big enough bonus to tilt the scales. Partly because the appeal of baseball is that the players are closer to everyday guys. When Brian Shouse or Danny Ray Herrera makes it, it emphasizes that baseball is the normal-guy sport.

Oh, and one more:
“Is it a matter of fairness?”

Kinda, yeah. More accurately, it’s a matter of teams competing against one another. If one team thinks it’s worthwhile to have 300 players under contract (including Latin American academies), other teams will probably do the same, or at least come close. If the Yankees did sign an extra 100 guys and let them all play in a league against each other, they would get a “free” impact player now and then, and that would be enough to spur the other teams to match their efforts.

Also, cheese.

by Jeff Sackmann on May 1, 2009 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions

…unless the Yankees just signed everyone, period.

"I didn't realize his velocity was that high," said Macha, noting that radar readings aren't flashed during exhibition games.

by battlekow on May 1, 2009 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions

And then there are also dynamic aspects to consider...

If some type of change resulted in more players signing out of high school, there would probably be fewer opportunities for those who were going to sign all along. :) Some late-rounder who really is just signing for “the thrill of signing a pro contract” as he realizes he has a minuscule shot of making it might be pushed out of a spot by more promising guys who would otherwise have signed as juniors (with some of them already washed out by that point).

At the risk of hijacking the thread: I’ve actually been wondering about similar questions in my other favourite sport, sumo, which even has three distinct recruiting tiers (at age ~15 after junior high, ~18 after high school, ~22 after college), though more in the context of aging curves and injury rates, primarily because there’s not really a possibility to get rejected for not being good enough; there’s not enough of a supply of interested youngsters to be too choosy.

by Zeyes on May 1, 2009 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

NL Central Standings

	W	L	PCT	GB	STRK
St. Louis Viva El Birdos	23	19	.547	0	Won 1
Cincinnati Red Reporter	22	19	.536	0.5	Won 3
Pittsburgh Bucs Dugout	20	22	.476	3	Won 1
Houston The Crawfish Boxes	19	23	.452	4	Won 1
Milwaukee Brew Crew Ball	17	25	.404	6	Lost 1
Chicago Bleed Cubbie Blue	15	27	.357	8	Lost 7