In Defense of Tony Sanchez
The Pirates were pilloried for “playing it safe” with their selection of Boston College catcher Tony Sanchez as the 4th overall pick on draft day. Most draft gurus and pundits seemed to think a bigger reach could not have been made if Neil Huntington had Go-Go Gadget arms. But was it really so terrible?
One rainy day I took the time to compile the first 6-year WAR totals for all the first round picks drafted in the 1990’s. (6 years because that’s how long a player is under team control). I’ve shared some of the findings elsewhere, but I wanted to revisit the research with respect to the Pirates’ first round pick. Just getting down to brass tacks, college hitters, on average, are worth 1 WAR per season while under team control. What Bucco fans seemed to have wanted was another pitcher, but if any fanbase should know the risk of drafting pitchers in the 1st round, it should be Pittsburgh fans.
While it’s true the strength of this draft was in arms; the problem is that historically first round pitchers have been less valuable than position players. In my study, high school pitchers on average contributed .4 WAR per year during his first 6 years in the majors. College pitchers were only a little better, averaging .5 WAR a season. Furthermore, very highly drafted pitchers seldom become stars, even though most make a contribution. The knock on Sanchez is that he’s hardly a superstar in the making, but then again neither are most the pitchers selected at or near the top of the draft.
So what sort of a big league future do scouts envision for Sanchez? In a nutshell, they see a defense-first catcher with slightly above average hitting skills. Being a catcher is about as physically and mentally demanding job as you can imagine, making them harder to come by. That’s why they get a +12.5 run adjustment when figuring their WAR. And most catchers really suck at hitting; the average regular catcher posted a .315 wOBA last year. Say Sanchez meets expectations by being good for a .320 wOBA and half a win on defense every season. We’re talking about a 2, 2 ½ win per season player. Is that really so awful?
After playing it safe with their highest and most expensive pick, Pittsburgh then loaded up on some high-upside arms, including some potentially tough to sign players. Seems to me Huntington executed a well-laid out plan. Play it safe first with a college position player, then load up on pitching when the distinct advantages disappear.
Now if he can bring Miguel Angel Sano into the fold, the Pirates will have one heck of a farm system.
Print This Post
Didn’t really think of it that way. I guess it’s just kind of hard for a team that’s looking for change and real impact players (something their farm system has lacked for years) only for your team to go Jeremy Brown-picking on you from a college that was finally kind of good last season.
Then again, the draft is highly overrated, sometimes it’s better to bring in a guys whose skills are far less likely to erode at the pro level; defensive catchers fit that bill nicely.
I think you have characterized the Pirates philosophy correctly and I personally like the strategy. However, knowledgeable Pirate fans didn’t want another pitcher, they wanted a position player that had a higher ceiling than Sanchez. There was tons of discussion about the topic over at Bucs Dugout if you wanna check it out.
Bobby Borchering is an interesting bat but may need to move from 3B to 1B. I’m not a real big Grant Green fan. His low BB% and ISO at the college level is pretty disturbing, and I’ve heard mixed reviews on his defense. If Green can’t stick at SS, his value really sinks. I think the hitting class after Ackley was pretty sparse, so taking a defensive whiz behind the plate isn’t too bad considering the options, IMO.
The problem is that he’s a 2, 2.5 win player IF he pans out. He doesn’t have much room for error, and picking #4 you can’t be *hoping* for a 2, 2.5 win player.
It would be interesting to see if your assessment of WAR for draft picks selected this decade holds. From everything I have heard, player evaluation and scouting has gotten much stronger in the last 5-10 years and it makes the draft much less a game of chance – at least in the first couple rounds. Though pitchers are undoubtedly more volatile assets, we have also seen a good number of recently drafted pitchers who came into the league and put up impressive stats immediately in the recent past (Lincecum, Verlander, Miller, Porcello, etc.)
Also, in a draft with a fairly flat talent level after the first few picks (as this draft was purported to be), it somewhat makes sense to not spend big early where the actual talent gain vs additional cost is not particularly favorable.
Yeah, that makes sense, and I actually kind of like the Pirates’ strategy. The problem is that you can’t say things like “Play it safe first with a college position player, then load up on pitching when the distinct advantages disappear”–college hitters aren’t a better bet; first-round college hitters are, and merely taking Tony Sanchez in the first round does not make him a first-round college hitter.
Oops. 1st round is what I meant.
The conclusion that 1st round position players are more valuable than first round pitchers may be correct, but you have the causation arrow backwards. Just because a player is drafted in the first round does not MAKE that player more valuable. If Tony Sanchez was really a third round talent, his being drafted in the first round is not going to make him 1st round valuable.