BASEBALL AMERICA:
DRAFT REPORT CARD

2005 DRAFT UPDATE

Q & A WITH JIM CALLIS OF BASEBALL AMERICA

Jim Callis is everywhere it seems at Baseball America. Jim recently updated and reviewed the A's 2005 draft at Baseball America. So who better to update us on Oakland A's baseball? Jim let me bother him a bit for a quick Q & A.

     How high does Travis Buck rate as a hitter to other hitters in the organization right now, and how high does he rate over the last few drafts?

     As far as a pure hitter, Buck would be up there with Daric Barton in the system and is probably the best the A's have drafted in recent years. There is question as to how much power he'll develop--which is why the A's were able to get him where they did--but little question that he'll hit.

     The A's have a knack for drafting and developing players that don't appear to have 30-35 homerun power. Is this organizational weakness due to the approach by the front office; power is over-priced and better acquired later via trades?

    Perhaps. But honestly, in a given draft, there are only a handful of players you'd project to hit 30-35 homers when they hit their prime in the majors. The A's usually don't draft high and rarely have a crack at them. My guess would be they're not avoiding power hitters so much as they'd rather take gifted hitters and hope the power will develop.

     The A's picked up a lot of High School arms and several college pitchers ended up as relievers (Brad Kilby (San Jose State), Jason Ray (Azusa Pacific) , Brad Davis (Lewis-Clark State), Jimmy Shull (Cal Poly-SLO). Was this more of an attempt to limit pitch counts and innings pitched, or are the A's looking to target some of the draft picks as relievers?

    I wouldn't read too much into how guys were used in their first pro summer, though most of those guys do project as relievers. Teams don't draft so much for roles as they search for quality arms and figure they'll determine their role with their performance.

     A lot of people, including myself, were up in arms about the A's drafting High School pitchers. An explanation arose later, along the lines of 'there was inefficiency in the market and the A's exploited it'. While other teams loaded up on college pitchers that may have been borderline, the A's took some chances. Is this explanation about the A's draft accurate or are the A's shifting focus?

    I'm sorry, I don't buy that explanation at all. "Moneyball" aside, I've done research and others have done research that shows that high school pitching isn't nearly as risky as Michael Lewis or others would have you believe. There was no great inefficiency in the 2005 market. The A's don't have many quality arms in their system, and they couldn't afford to ignore the high school pitching prospects any longer. I don't think they found any great inefficiency so much as they corrected a mistake. At the same time, I don't think they shifted their focus to high schoolers. They simply took who they thought were the best arms available when they picked, and those guys happened to be high schoolers. They still prefer college players.

     I had asked Kevin Goldstein if Justin Smoak was the one that got away and he thought the A's took a chance they could sign him as a later round pick (yes, that's a paraphrase). As an approach to a draft, why would the A's look at drafting a 1st baseman, and then a 1st baseman they more than likely would not be able to sign...also, a high schooler? Was this a gamble or a possible mistake?

    A gamble worth taking. Smoak is a switch-hitter with that 30-35 homer power you were mentioning earlier, and he would have gone in the top three rounds based solely on talent. The A's spent a 16th-round pick, on which the usual return is minimal, to try to sign him. Teams should do that more often in the later rounds.

     Now, speaking of signing a player, how long do teams have to sign a player before they are able to re-enter the draft pool? Can we expect the A's to sign any of the players they drafted?

    Teams lose the rights to players attending four-year schools once they attend their first class (usually in the fall). Players attending junior colleges can still sign after their juco season ends, up until a week before the next draft. The A's may sign a couple of guys in that category, but they usually aren't too active in the draft-and-follow market.

     Will we ever see a NFL-like combine for players in baseball, or are the logistics just impossible?

    It's being talking about as part of MLB's suggested overhaul of the draft and player development, but who knows if that will come to pass. I don't think a combine would necessarily help a lot, and I'd bet a lot of the top guys would decline to attend.

     Let's skip to Clifton Pennington. There were some opinions by scouts that Pennington might move to 2nd base as he progressed. Some are adamant that he's a shortstop. Where do you fall in this debate? Do the inklings of a move have anything to do with Bobby Crosby, or not moving, a notice that the A's might sign Mark Ellis?.

    He definitely can play shortstop. He's one of my favorite minor league prospects. Where he plays in the majors depends on whether or not he's a better shortstop than Crosby when he gets there. I think you'll see him in Oakland pretty quick.

     Speaking of middle infielders, Omar Quintanilla was also a shortstop the A's were rumored to consider moving to second base and they ended up Jose Ortiz'ing him to Colorado. Quintanilla and Andre Ethier, looking at their numbers and approach at the plate don't seem to be players in the A's mold. Though, Ethier walked a lot more than usual in the Arizona Fall League. Is there a question here? Do the A's occasionally draft players they really have no intention of ever reaching the major leagues with the organization, but rather trade them off as prospects as they move up the ladder?

    The A's aren't shy about using draftees as trade bait, but I doubt they really take many (if any) players they don't like but figure they could trade. Not every player fits the same mold, which is why you see a diverse array of talents drafted.

     With Huston Street making the jump so soon the major leagues, how irrational do you think A's fans will be with future draft picks, like Pennington and Buck?

    Oh, probably pretty irrational, but I think fans of every team are like that, thinking their prospects are the best and they'll be in the majors tomorrow. But Pennington and Buck should make it up the ladder pretty quick, probably getting their first taste of the majors by the end of 2007.

 

Jim was thanked and hopefully I can get him to answer some questions about the Pacific Coast League and Midwest League next week.