This year I included the full set of columns to show a little bit of what my process looks like. I also left the ratings for the players I drafted in order to help provide context.
Columns like "OSA +/-" are researched manually. For that one in particular, "!" means that a player's OSA ratings are significantly higher than my scout's. "*" means they are mostly the same and "-" means OSA is much lower on the player.
The stats were pulled fairly quickly after the class was published, which is an unfortunate limitation of this process.
I'm thinking I might try to do the whole thing in S+ next year to see how much time it saves.
A few observations:
- As mentioned on Slack, I think Chicago had an outstanding draft - especially their first three picks
- Anecdotally, it seems like there was a lot of agreement between my scout/list and those of Vista, Greenville, and St. Louis
- Apparently, I'm valuing middle infielders much more highly than most right now
- I used to prioritize work ethic and intelligence very highly but I'm trying to see how much impact it has. I'm wondering if I might be able to swipe some better talent because of poor intangibles. Or as a trendy nerd would say, I'm trying to see if this is might turn out to be a market inefficiency
Even though I dump the maximum amount of cash into scouting and have one of the best heavily tools-oriented scouts in the league, I could still be way off. As always, it'll be interesting to see how this holds up in a few seasons.
Sorry about the formatting. You'll probably have to zoom in to view specifics.
And once again, big thanks to Dave for S+ and the improvements it made to the draft this season.
No comments:
Post a Comment