David Laurila has a Q and A with Jeff Luhnow over at Baseball Prospectus. It’s free!
DL: How, and to what extent, do you utilize statistical analysis within scouting and development? And is the preference you’ve shown to drafting college players directly related to that philosophy?
JL: We look at past performance as an indicator of future performance across all categories of players. All clubs do this. How we each do it differs… As for college players, I’d be interested to know why you think we have a preference for drafting college players? In both 2005 and 2007, our first pick in the draft was a high school player. In 2005 we selected 17 high school players, including Rasmus, Anderson, Herron, and Garcia. We took several in 2006 including Pham, Edwards and Additon. In 2007 we took Zawacki, Hooker, Blazek, Hage and others. Far more college players are taken in the draft overall for many reasons that go beyond individual club preference. We continue to look for the best players, independent of source.
Matt Eddy at Baseball America recently looked at sources of talent for their top 30s, and only the A’s have more college players in their top 30 then the Cardinals with 17. 7 of the Top 30 were high schoolers, which is more then the Padres, Diamondbacks, Astros, Mets, Yankees, Pirates, Blue Jays, Rangers, Giants, Mariners, A’s and Cubs. In other words, that puts them in the middle of the pack. While I know the Cardinals are willing to look at players regardless of where they come from, the tendency towards college players seems pretty strong to me. The question has validity.
Luhnow isn’t totally forthcoming on some issues, understandably on some, but a good job by Laurila and some interesting answers from Mr. Luhnow.
Filed under: Jeff Luhnow
erik
azruavatar
fewgoodcards
roarke49
theredbaaron
Erik, which answer of Luhnow’s did you find interesting?
Speaking as a journalist, I found nothing there that any one of us couldn’t have gleaned from information that’s already available.
It seemed like Luhnow went into the thing determined not to offer readers any insights into the way he thinks and the way he operates.
I’m not saying that was a bad decision on his part — after Moneyball, I don’t blame any executive for being reluctant to let an outsider read the blueprints — but it was, I thought, remarkably uninformative.
I feel the same Lou. Of course, when you ask the Cardinals VP of scouting and player development how you think HE does scouting and developing players, I think he will give a fairly optimistic assessment(after all, he drafted the players he’s talking about).
What I do find noteworthy is the fact that Luhnow is willing to give interviews. I feel that between the interviews he has given andalong with other interviews with front office employees (eg. Sig Mejdal), it gives the fans the feeling that the team has nothing to hide. If he weren’t speaking about our system, then I feel its time to be worried.
Lou-I found his answer regarding eliminating tension between scouting and development interesting. i shared your disappointment with some of his responses, and i felt he was pretty guarded and even a little snappish when he was asked about shedding labels. I guess I just find Luhnow a fascinating guy. Think about the pressure he faced coming into the situation, and now some think he’s the reason Jocketty was fired. To put up with what he’s done, and to get the farm system turned into a better direction, and a much different direction makes him just an interesting dude all around.
“there are more big league players in our system than there ever could be spots for them in St. Louis.”
Reality or hype?
reality. just look how many potential relievers we have, there is no way you could fit all the guys that could pitch in the major leagues on the same roster.
Erik, interesting point about his defensiveness — Walt is a very popular guy around baseball. In Baseball America, one of their columnists regularly takes shots at the Cardinals for their ingratitude toward the former GM.
Personally, though, I’m wondering more and more what was going on in Jocketty’s mind when he resigned Spiezio after 2006, knowing about his personal demons. Or why he signed Edmonds to a two-year extension, instead of just the one year. Or what was wrong with Kennedy that left him a shell of his former self when the Cards signed him.
Were the Cards under Jocketty not doing due diligence on these guys? Were all these simultaneous collapses of veteran ballplayers completely random, or would a harder-working, more diligent front office have seen them coming?
The Cards tied up a lot of money on bad contracts, and I don’t see how any sober fans could look at those events and think there was any option other than firing the GM.
A few bad contracts (e.g. Spiezio, Carpenter, probably Edmonds–although, look at what fellow CF’ers Torii Hunter & Aaron Rowand just got in the open market) were sorta bound to happen immediately after winning a World Series. Call them “gratitude contracts,” I guess.
Walt Jocketty, on the other hand, was never one of the 4 or 5 highest-paid GMs, despite the Birds having a terrific run for several years. So the charge of ownership ingratitude seems pretty valid to me.
As far as Luhnow’s interview, I was hoping for a question or two about the aggressive expansion of the Cardinal international operation. Moreover, I’d like to know if the Cards would consider adding an additional club at the Low-A level (Sally League, anyone?). As the more talented DSL & VSL guys advance over the next couple of years, it looks like there could be a logjam of 19/20 yr. old players–a great problem to have, but a problem nonetheless.